Sentinel947

There are many who are creating a straw man position that anti singers are trying to remove embarrassment from life. This is not accurate. Again, there is a distinction between the non-swimmer who is embarrassed about the swim test, and a troop forcing Scouts to go through initiation activities, snipe hunts or singling them out for ridicule. When going rogue gets your unit in the paper for all the wrong reasons, I won't say I told you so. Sentinel947

I found the thread in question, I cannot access it myself.

Can you post a link or a screen shot? I can't seem to see what you are looking at.

That is within your powers, and good on you for communicating your expectations up front, and not waiting until there is paperwork to be signed and then ambushing the Scout.

Why not?

MattR and Mozart: You are both conflating the issue of inflicting humiliation on people as punishment vs humiliation that comes from failure. They are not the same. In my opinion, there is a difference between embarrassment that is the natural result of a situation, and then there is intentionally inflicted humiliation. One is fine, the other is not, and it's pretty obvious where most things fall. I could create a ton of scenarios, but I think I'll pick some low hanging fruit here: To use MattR's example of A's and F's in school. It would be as if the teacher made F students go up in front of the class, and forced them to talk about why they are stupid and couldn't pass the test. Would you allow a teacher to do that to your kid? It might toughen em up a little right? Also, while I'm throwing around Leadership Psychology stuff, (That's what I study in School), one reason corporal punishment and other types of punishment via harassment is a terrible leadership tool is that it creates a power struggle. Timid, meek people will submit to the punishment. Aggressive, opinionated people like me will ALWAYS resist. What does your SPL do when he tells a Scout to do push-ups, and they tell him to get lost. What happens when your Assistant Scoutmaster tells a Scout to sing for his scout book and he says "Nah you can keep it?" In my Troop, the Scouts do plenty of singing, joking, they have a good time. Our Scouts also run around, make mistakes, get hurt. The difference is again, between natural results from the consequences of trying things, and it being intentionally inflicted. The key phrase here.. intentionally inflicted. Embarrassment is part of life, nobody can run a program involving human beings where it won't happen. Again, the difference is when a person or group in authority uses/abuses that authority to humiliate and demean others. As Fred pointed out, it being "optional" can often be false choice because of the peer pressure. The Robert Champion hazing case he cited was very tragic. Robert had two choices, give up on his dream of being in the band, or be hazed. In the case of our singing Scouts, there's either sing or be bullied for not being tough and doing what everybody else does. Again it's a false choice. Sentinel947

I agree, I'd be pretty peeved in that situation. I think I could keep harsh words to myself if it was a kid, if it was an adult. I'd probably let em know exactly what my thoughts were.

I have a very large picture of St. George slaying the dragon that I found at a garage sale. With St. George being the patron Saint of Scouting, I couldn't pass it up.

Key phrase in Catholicism scrabble, "well formed" Sentinel947

Excerpt from 2015 Guide to Advancement: “Due to concerns about merit badge counselor privacy, and since Scouts should receive the names and contact information from the Scoutmaster, unit counselor lists should not be made available to Scouts online.†7. Merit badge instruction should be small in scale Section: 7.0.3.0 What’s new: Rather than large merit badge classes reminiscent of a boy’s time in high school, the BSA encourages smaller-scale instruction. Can I get an amen?!?!

I see a distinction between a kid embarrassed that he runs slowly and will be the last to finish the race. There's a wonderful life lesson to be had there that can be brought out through the encouragement of his peers. The running Scout learns a life lesson that finishing something matters, even if you're the last one. The other Scouts learn that you need to encourage and support your teammates, not belittle them. Contrast that with making a Scout go up in front of the entire troop (In my unit, that might be 80 Scouts, 5-10 uniformed adult leaders, and however many siblings and older parents at the end of meeting announcements), and making them sing some stupid song in front of 150 people or so. The embarrassment is compounded at a summer camp, where there are now 400+ people there staring at you. Bullying is about a power imbalance, and using that imbalance to assert control of others. Humiliation is the weapon of a bully, and true leaders know that tool does not belong in a leaders toolbox. Even in the case where people say "it's voluntary" it's really not, because the consequences for not going up and singing are getting more harassment and looking weak. What purpose does making a Scout sing or dance in front of everybody serve? Does it teach them a lesson? Yes. It teaches them if they screw up, their fellow Scouts and leaders are going to make a fool out of them. That's a lesson I refuse to sanction being taught to my Scouts. We all make mistakes, and nobody deserves to be bullied for any reason, let alone leaving a possession in the wrong place. Just because something stupid and demeaning was done in the past and people turned out o.k, doesn't make it o.k now. All kids are different, and will react to things differently. Lets leave hazing practices in the past, where they belong. Sentinel947

I think the loss of an important possession and the stress that comes with it is punishment enough. IMO singing for items is hazing. I learned a long time ago to correct mistakes in private and praise good behavior publicly. I've had a few bosses who didn't under that concept.

Personally, I'm not a hunter or soldier out in the brush who needs to blend in, the color of my gear is not a consideration in my gear buying process.

The books are called the deuterocanonical books. They are Sirach, Tobit, Wisdom, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and Baruch, as well as longer versions of Daniel and Esther. They are all books from the old Testament. Catholics consider then canon, most Protestants do not and call them the Apocrypha. The decisions were certainly made by men at various councils. Some would say the councils were guided by the holy spirit in making the decisions about the books. Sentinel947 Sentinel947

Yes. You want to give the Youth Partcipants some distance and autonomy to live the patrol method, and to give the staff a break from them.

The issue there is communicating expectations between what you define as 6 months of work and what the Scouts define as six months of work.

This is the million dollar question. If there were no expectations given to the Scouts for the position, and no coaching given to them through the term, then denying them credit is unfair. Rather than looking to deny credit for advancement, we need to make sure we are coaching our youth leaders and giving them the chance to have a successful term. They'll grow a lot more that way. Often times when things like this happen, I make people uncomfortable, because I blame adults, not the kids. The kids will do what they've seen before, unless coached otherwise. If (like in my troop) there is a tradition of do-nothing POR's then the Scouts will do nothing until expectations are clearly communciated to them. Often after that everyone is impressed at how they rise to the occassion.

Agreed, I'm not sure why the BSA insists on trying to keep up the "Adults' charade with 18-20 year olds.

Negative, there are too many possibilities for the dirty mind to use that banning such things would be a ridiculously misguided policy. Reminds me of when I was a Scout. We found a Cajun spice in the Troop Spice kit called Slap yo mama. Being 11 years old, my friends and I thought this was hilarious. The Assistant Scoutmaster got tired of hearing little gremlins laughing about "Slapping yo mama." That he wrapped the container in duct tape so the label wouldn't be readable. It became inside joke. "Give me some of that slap." Now that ASM and I are the only people still around that remember that series of events. Good times... Good times....

Nice to see a familiar face!

My battle in this area is well documented on this forum ....

Sorry Stosh, I thought it was hilarious, but... I couldn't let it stay. Sentinel947

Me. Define better?

"What is your definition of the 12th point of the Scout Law?" "How do you live the 12th point of the Scout law in your daily life?"

Maybe I'm some kind of subconscious Neo Con, but I don't think asking about a Scouts religion is out of bounds in a SM or BOR. That being said, it shouldn't be emphasized more than any other part of the Oath or Law. Obviously, this topic can be abused like trying to bring Jewish Scouts to Jesus....... If a Scout gets to an EBOR and doesn't understand what Reverent means according to the BSA, then some adults have done that Scout a disservice. BP believed that religion helped young men form their character. I'm concerned as other posters are that some leaders will run through this requirement like a bull in a china shop, instead of an opportunity to help a Scout think about the topic and articulate what they think. Maybe I grew up in an impolite family, but religion has never been a taboo topic, just one that needs to be approached with respect and understanding. In short, I don't think the requirement itself is the issue, but how some leaders take it is going to be an issue. IMO I think the Cub Scout changes are much more substantial than the Boy Scout ones. Sentinel947