Gwaihir

"we'd have to kill you" I'm shocked Bryan didn't admonish him for such an unkind statement.  Far worse than pointing a water gun at another scout. 

58 minutes ago, walk in the woods said:

IDK.  Seems legit on the surface.  Point is, I hear the "We need someone like Bear" comment all the time.  This guy has been engaged for years.  I don't know if he limits his exposure to the BSA or the BSA is terrible at marketing, or both.

We have Mike Rowe.  I'll take Mike Rowe over Bear Grylls any day of the week.  

2 hours ago, ParaSloth said:

Obtaining that Eagle is a fine accomplishment that I celebrate in every boy that earns it, however it just really isn't that game-changer employers are looking for that will set you high above other candidates. 

Nope, it's not.  Maybe it was 20 years ago... it's not any longer.  The BSA marketing it as a resume item was and is a colossal misstep.  The amount of paper eagles has grown and will continue to grow to the point earning the badge really doesn't mean a thing. 

The one thing I was thinking of as I was driving, and I wager many an exec at National is fretting over this since the MeToo movement started, but with World Jambo+MeToo+Girls In Scouting+Condoms distributed at Jambo.... if there's one even slightly reasonable allegation of rape that comes out of Jambo (God forbid)... Scouting in America will be over.  The national stage, the media pouncing over any thing remotely related to scouts and girls... I don't see the organization recovering.  I hope that doesn't happen, but I have to imagine National has concerns that have been elevated since MeToo became a national movement. 

10 minutes ago, Hawkwin said:

Another piece from the other side of the pond:

http://members.scouts.org.uk/documents/EcommsDocs/MyBodyMyChoice.pdf

...................

4 minutes ago, ParkMan said:

Honestly I think this is a much better question.  Should the BSA participate in or host a WSJ if the rules in conflict with our own G2SS.

Me - I'd say yes.  The experience of a WSJ is significant enough that attending is worth the exception for these cases.  

Further, the BSA should make it crystal clear to a participant from within the BSA that the rules are different.  Make parents sign a document stating that they are aware of this difference.

 

it's the only question I've been asking, and one I think is worth discussion. 

1 minute ago, FormerProfessional said:

You miss my point of the professionals do this for a love of the program and a job.  When you work for BSA as a professional it’s in the contract that the DE has no outside employment.  DEs work 8-5 m-f plus nights and weekends.

Do you have a paying job that is not Scouting? Do you do Scouting for free, no you pay BSA to do it.  It costs you $$$$ to do Scouting.  Call it a passion, call it your ministry, call it your calling, call it whatever.  

 It’s not your livelihood, how you pay the bills.

Theres a difference.

Seems to me, the volunteers are more hard put to it, since they actually have to lose money to do this, essentially taking a pay cut from their normal careers as opposed to getting money to do it.  I'm not getting your argument, or youre presenting it poorly.  

The difference is that the volunteers are doing this for passion alone, the professionals are doing it for a paycheck... some may have passion, others may not, just like every single other job out there. 

As for work hours... this is 2018, since the advent of the internet and VPN, there's almost no job out there that doesn't work M-F 8-6, plus overnights and weekends.  

Calling it a hobby or calling it a passion matter. 

"Theres a difference."

and THAT is where your condescension comes clearly into view. 

2 minutes ago, FormerProfessional said:

Whether you have time or make time, it’s still an extracurricular activity...a hobby.  Volunteers with contempt for professionals make the career of Scouting not very enjoyable sometimes.

A hobby is done for pleasure, I don't do this for fun, I do this because I find meaning and purpose in it.  I do it so the boys (and girls) under my charge get the fun.  I don't have contempt for council professionals and enjoy working with them quite a bit,  but your condescension for volunteers is palpable. 

Just now, FormerProfessional said:

Do you think only volunteers feel this way? That professionals don’t? If you do believe that you have offended every professional that cares. There are many that care.

No, I did not say that.  You felt volunteers feel that it's just a hobby.  I was addressing this sentiment alone. 

7 minutes ago, John-in-KC said:

They are the authorizing body. BSA doesn't get a WSJ without WOSM. We want the game, we play by their rules. 

Is that really a difficult concept?

no. again, not a difficult concept.  I have repeatedly stated that what's being called into question is why we want a game that is opposite our rules in the first place.  I'm not sure why this is such a difficult concept. 

4 hours ago, FormerProfessional said:

Many, many, many vols are great people and want to help pros succeed. Just like anything there are people that arent so nice.

My experience was that there are some vols that are jealous and some that are offended that professionals get paid to do the hobby the vol does for free. There is animosity among some vols.

Only Professionals, former professionals and their families realize how much they commit and sacrifice to a volunteers hobby.

I know I’m getting under some volunteers skin but for volunteers it’s just a hobby, how much or how little time you put into it, it’s still an extracurricular activity...a hobby.

For professionals it’s their livelihood, the way they make there living and 99% are UNDER appreciated.

"just a hobby"  I'd reasonably suspect that for most volunteers... it's a purpose, one with real world ramifications and they pour their souls into the task because it means more to them then just a paycheck, it means personally affecting each and every youth they come across in ways that will profoundly change the trajectory of their lives and enrich their communities and ultimately the world at large.  I know very few volunteers that think of being a Scouter akin to playing with lego or collecting stamps. 

1 minute ago, ParkMan said:

Not knocking the perspective, but I see it very differently.

This is the World Scout Jamboree.  This is a big deal.  Having it here on our turf will allow so many more Scouts to attend.  If my son hadn't bailed on scouting, I'd have signed him up in a heartbeat.  

I can accept that the BSA made an exception and is following the guidelines of the WOSM.  It's like a host country making an exception for the Olympics.

If the BSA refused to host it because of this, I would be very disappointed.  I can deal with these exceptions so that our scouts get the opportunity to attend the WSJ.

Beyond that, I see this as the BSA showing some humility.  The USA is but one of many national Scouting organizations.  That the USA isn't trying to impose our will on other countries I find very noble.

to each their own, but I see it as the world organizations imposing their will on the host nation and not being humble or respectful of the host's wishes, not very scoutlike.  I see it as putting aside principles in favor of short term gains... (kind of like a certain STUMP, with a BUMP, that tends to CLUMP as a LUMP to look like a FRUMP). 

15 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

Making items available to deal with a situation that you know is going to occur, does not amount to endorsing, condoning or allowing sexual activity at Scouting events.  Maybe the condoms they hand out should have wrappers that say, "Don't use this until you get home, and (assuming you are of the proper age) get married, and even then, only if the precepts of your religion permit."  Then everybody's conscience can be clear.

that loophole you just drafted is big enough to drive a semi through.  Giving your scouts a 20' extension ladder at a troop meeting isn't condoning, endorsing or allowing them to climb over 6' high at scouting events.  handing a cub scout a power drill isn't endorsing, condoning or allowing power tools to be used at a cub scout activity.  You're a lawyer NJC, so you know it, but there's a spirit to a law and the letter of the law... handing out condoms torches the spirit of the law to the ground. 

13 minutes ago, John-in-KC said:

WOSM authorizes World Jamborees. Their H/S rules apply.  What's so difficult in that?

The difficulty is that the US BSA doesn't have to host an event that goes against it's own laws and policies.  If one is to take an Oath and a Law seriously, and to be loyal and trustworthy to the rules and policies set forth, one should abide by those policies even when others tell you it's ok to ignore them.  I mean, this is fundamental stuff we teach our scouts every day in the field... 

13 minutes ago, mashmaster said:

From the Girls I know that got the Gold award and being part of that process, I hold that award higher than Eagle.  The requirements are much more involved.   I have seen many paper Eagles.  Those Eagles are the one undermining the Eagle rank.

I don't disagree with you at all.  In fact, prior to national's decision, my argument to women and those who felt Girl Scouts inadequate and their top award not the same as Eagle, was that the Gold Award was every bit as prestigious and in recent years much more prestigious than Eagle Scout and the Girls scouts should be doing a better job of promoting and advertising how much of an achievement it is to earn the Gold Award.  My post was commentary against National and against those families that lamented their girls not being able to earn Eagle and having to be relegated to the "lesser" Gold award. 

9 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Mamma don't allow no hiking/camping independently with your mates 'round here ....

The real reformation: NESA extends open invites to Summit and Quatermaster (dare I say even GS/Gold) awardees.

Now you're treading on the very impetus for all this co-ed kerfuffle in the first place... 

"I want to earn eagle scout too", if you put Gold Award on the same page in the public eye as Eagle Scout... well, Eagle scout just won't be as special anymore, now would it.  Yeah, I don't see the BSA's number one marketing tool (much to my chagrin) being undermined by non-Eagle awards. 

less to do with safe spaces, more to do with it's much easier  and far more effective to train boys in an all boy environment and train girls in an all girl environment.  They learn at different rates, they grow at different rates, they take on burdens at different rates.  

I don't think anyone has suggested we create nunnery and convents... being co-ed in a wide variety of activites and social settings is good and healthy, but in the purposes of character development within a program structure, (or even in a school setting) being able to tailor lessons to a specific gender to capitalize on the biological, psychological and emotional differences of the sexes is tantamount to success. 

It's also about options and choice. There are a plethora of co-ed options for families to choose from, but the single gender options are vanishing quickly.   

I simply asked a question about where you draw a line, where there is no compromise.  I drew a conclusion from your line of debate that you draw no lines and only rely on the populous at large to decide what lines are drawn.  If that's as far as you want to take it, that's fine.  I really have no comprehension of this line of thought so I don't know what else to say. 

6 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

But isn't that what scouts was intended to be from its very beginning?    A group of boys hiking and camping and learning together?   

yep, the uniform and the structure were to give form to what boys were doing anyway.  we're going to go back to ignoring the uniform and the structure. 

3 minutes ago, cgail said:

We as a nation have determined that pedophilia is unacceptable and illegal.  I don't see anyone advocating for it except for a certain senatorial candidate (sorry moderators!)..

States set the legal age of consent however - some are younger than others.  Those that are younger would be considered children in others.  

The compromise comes in when there is a large group on either side of an issue.  All things must be adjudicated at some point - we regulate either by law or by social compact.  Otherwise we have anarchy. 

 

I don't even know where to begin. 

So if a community at large decides murder is acceptable and therefore legal,  this is a point of compromise for you and you accept it?  um, ok. 

7 minutes ago, FireStone said:

I have a hard time believeing that they really felt that way. When the BSA still banned gay scouts and units were actively kicking out gay kids or blocking Eagle applications for gay scouts, many Eagle Scouts (myself included) were appalled and vowed never to rejoin the BSA while that policy stood. Some Eagle Scouts returned their medals to National during that time. 

I would think that that was a clear indication that no group is guaranteed to support whatever National does in terms of membership policy changes. 

Perhaps, but that's what was said. 

1 minute ago, qwazse said:

 

I think some of the rush did have to do with not wanting to look like hosts with something to learn from their guests.

that's a shame, shouldn't we always be in a position to have something to learn?  And conversely, who's to say we couldn't put ourselves in a position to teach the guests something about how we do things. 

10 minutes ago, Oldscout448 said:

I have a feeling that the scouts in this area will just keep on doing AoL ceremonies for the cubs.   Just without the sashes.   

This is what we're getting from the new Scouts, it's like the reformation.  "the scouts in this area will just let their patrols go on activities together without adults, just without uniforms" "the troop in this area will just have co-ed patrols" "the lodge in this area will keep doing AoL ceremonies, just without sashes"  "the pack in this area will just have male leadership with the girl cubs because we can't get women involved" 

34 minutes ago, DuctTape said:

I did not think anyone would believe that purposely hurting others is something we should encourage. I agree with teaching victims resilience, fortitude, etc... I am not sure I agree that "anti-bullying measures" are the cause of boys lashing out. There are many factors that lead to those behaviors. Teaching boys and girls (girls are just as bad at bullying) other ways to interact appropriately instead of bullying or lashing out is part of parenting, youth development, and common culture.

I would be remiss if I did not mention that there are more than 2 actors in bullying, harassment, abuse (I keep stating all three because I see them as existing on a continuum) besides just perpetrator and victim. The others, witnesses, bystanders etc... also play a role. That role also exists on a continuum of perpetuating, ignoring, intervening. I believe we should also be teaching others to move towards the intervening end. That was basically my original point. 

I whole-heartedly agree that we should teach others to intervene.  I see this as a societal problem at large.  We are preached "if you see something, say something", "do not interfere, call the authorities", etc.  It's why we get 100 cell phone videos of someone getting assaulted, and no one (let alone 10 people) step in to stop the assault.  

In England, the horrific video of Lee Rigby being hacked to pieces in broad daylight in the middle of London, while dozens if not hundreds of on-lookers just stood by and video taped it still haunts me.  A scout is brave. 

I remember hearing something at membership meeting this year, about how national crunched the numbers and in their decision to reach changing demographics and single-mother house holds, they threw this factoid in there, that they can always count on former boy scouts and eagle scouts to be members.  It feels like these decisions were all made under the assumption that Boy scout and eagle scout alum would sign their families up regardless of what they did to change the program.  Now, I have no more to go on except that little blurb, but it certainly seems to me that the dropping of all traditions and history in lieu of a completely new scouting would seem to mesh with this theory.