Gwaihir

51 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

'A Scout is Reverent' from the BOR (and EBOR) is a pretty low, low hurdle these days. We had an Eagle who marched in and declared that he was an atheist and somehow managed to get signed off (I think his folks came pre-loaded legally). I was not there but I heard it was quite a scene. I think you can be a Druid, Wiccan, or Buddhist and get over the BSA requirement. I do think given National's spine in the face of public opinion the future of that 'G' falling is less on moral courage and more on marketing trends. Another very divisive issue. I did note at a recent High School graduation event a Senior proudly declared herself an atheist and  a growing minority at the school and about 20%-25& of the kids raised their hands. So yeah it is out there.

Meanwhile Dr. Peterson is literally reaching millions and growing and you're seeing a rebound where many young people and young adults are finding God again, so it's an interesting time we live in. 

1 hour ago, WisconsinMomma said:

Here's what I"m thinking -- we need to make strong girl Packs and Troops and help them get off the ground, so they can maintain their separation and independence from the Boy Packs and Troops.  Does that make sense?  

it makes perfect sense.  it's the right course of action.  if it's something people allegedly believe in, then pitching adults to be leaders and mobilizing girl units at the pack and the troop level should be much less difficult that is being let on... I think many are just being lazy, or at least not willing to go the extra mile. 

side note: 

One of the first duties of a Scout is obedience to authority. He must obey his orders in the first place and put his own amusement or desires in the second.

-Robert Baden-Powell
 

6 hours ago, oldbuzzard said:

Then maybe you should try to shame folks for not being obedient not trustworthy.

Our pack was originally planning on having separate boy/girl dens who did almost all joint activities, just like our multiple boy dens. But as time has gone by, we've moved to plans for full co-ed dens. I don't know what that'll look like on paper.

We aren't an early adopter pack but we are a concentrator/congregator or whatever the term is for next year, a welcoming pack that council refers girls to who can't find viable dens in other troops. Our CM and IH have discussed this with council and they know, but aren't thrilled, we are having co-ed dens. So it isn't a trust issue. It is similar to when we opted out of the gay ban in 2002, before our IH and others persuaded our entire council to do so. As an open and affirming church, pushing the boundaries to be kind and reverent trumps literal obedience.

Doing it under the table is a matter of trustworthiness and obedience, telling council and them going along with it instead of working with you to get leaders, training, etc to make single gender dens work is obedience.  I disagree that any one of the scout laws holds more weight than the others.  Many won't see it this way, I see that, but at the end of the day you're doing a disservice to the program and to the children. 

7 minutes ago, qwazse said:

One perspective is that BSA started down the road to faithlessness when it started purging adults, girls, and godless from advancement.

This attempts to restore that trust of delivering the promise of scouting ... rewarding achievement rather than identity.

I'm not criticizing the BSA with that comment... I'm criticizing scouters who purposely and blatantly disregard how the organization is laid out to be run by making co-ed dens.  

4 hours ago, an_old_DC said:

Call me cynical, but I am experienced, and as long as packs sell enough popcorn and bring in enough FOS money, the professionals will ignore packs having co-ed dens.

And as long as council and districts can grow their number of units, they wont care if its on-paper only and the troops are functionally co-ed

A Scout is Trustworthy. 

49 minutes ago, The Latin Scot said:

"Scout Me In" .... UGH. Resorting to PUNS now, are we? Could this slogan be any more unimaginative? 

I frankly despise this name change. I had anticipated the girl's program getting their own name and materials, not that we would be forced to change our name and then share a bnunch of watered down materials. This is disheartening in the extreme. 

imo, it's certainly lazy and the idea they're running with that people will be confused... is typical lowest common denominator nonsense society has peddled for many years now.  People are smart, set standards high and challenge people to rise above.  If people have some difficulty understanding, explain it to them, work with them.  This is path of least resistance... just like the continually watered down path to Eagle. ho-hum. 

8 minutes ago, cocomax said:

The general public will see all girl scout troops, dressed nice, with skorts, leggings and skirts out hiking and camping and doing scout things and will call them "Girl Scouts".

The the general public sees a group of boys in scout uniforms doing scout stuff they will think of them as "Boy Scouts" and refer to them as "Boy Scouts".

The general public will not care about the brand "Scouts BSA", to most people there are "Boy Scouts" and "Girl Scouts".

The sad thing is the groups of girls out there that are reduced to wearing a simple sash or vest as a "uniform" that are stuck doing safe things like selling cookies and doing arts and crafts .  .  .    meanwhile the Boy Scouts of America just quietly lifted their brand name clean as a whistle.

When the general public sees girl Scouts, they will think of them as Girl Scouts.

Girl Scouts started out as a mirror of the Boy Scouts. . .    now the girl Scouts are a mirror of the boy Scouts

GENIUS MOVE!  

 

 

 

I agree that the court of public opinion, regardless of what things are supposed to be called, is going to call girl Scouts "Girl Scouts" because they are girls who are scouts.  just like every single person we encounter while the cub scouts are in uniform immediately says "oh look, it's the boy scouts!"  Not a single person I've ever encountered in public when leading outdoor activities and events has ever said "it's the scouts"

24 minutes ago, ianwilkins said:

 

And democracy isn't everyone getting what they want. That's anarchy.

correct, democracy is 51% getting what they want. 

7 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

I get you are upset, but I think we should focus more on our scout program and less on names.

Maybe you don't have to face 100 parents who will be asking this question and expecting an answer, but I'd like to know the answer so I can provide it.  

The program isn't changing, so there really isn't anything to focus on other than "it's not changing" 

I don't understand why you can't provide answers, or if you don't have concrete answers, at the very least acknowledge it's something that some people will want an answer for and just allow for discourse on what the answers may be.  

This thread is literally about "names", it's not about program, it's about "names".  Asking about them seems fairly on topic. 

1 minute ago, RememberSchiff said:

Thanks for link.  Yes "I am a Scout" , but there is no mention that a scout CANNOT say they are a "Boy Scout"

 

So then what do girls call themselves?  Just Scouts? girl Scouts with a lower case g? 

Just now, an_old_DC said:

No Boy Scout troop with a long and proud history is going to drop Boy and call themselves Scout Troop Xxx

I'd bet $5 National will eventually crack down on those Boy Scout troops. 

Just now, RememberSchiff said:

No change from yesterday, despite insinuations to the contrary.

 

So boys are still Boy Scouts and girls are just Scouts since CSE stated we cannot call them Girl Scouts?  

1 minute ago, RememberSchiff said:

 

Your nonsense was this false rumor. 

 

there is a question mark at the end of that.  It is a question, not a statement of fact.  If the 11-17 program is now called "Scouting" does that change what the youth are called? 

Cub Scouts are called Cub Scouts

Sea Scouts are called Sea Scouts

Venturers are called Venturers

Explorers are called Explorers

Are male Scouts age 11-17 still called "Boy Scouts" or just scouts?  

Just now, RememberSchiff said:

Does it matter? Like I said less nonsense.

to the boys?  yes. yes, actually, it does. 

Just now, RememberSchiff said:

Not true. Less nonsense, more substance.

So boys can call themselves Boy Scouts, but girls can only call themselves Scouts?  

And it was a question, since when are legit questions considered nonsense?  

Less condescension, more kindness. 

So boys age 11-17 can no longer call themselves "Boy Scouts"? 

Just now, Eagle1993 said:

A bit more info

“What we're talking about is what we're going to call those members in a Troop -- male and female -- which will be announced tomororw at midday.”

right, so the boys in a troop will no longer be called Boy Scouts.  Superman will no longer be called a "Boy Scout", this is legal loophole wrangling by claiming the umbrella corp is still "Boy Scouts of America", but when people refer to "boy scouts" they're talking about the 11-18 Troop program... not Stem Scouts.  This is a colossal walk back. 

18 minutes ago, NJCubScouter said:

 

I really hope they stick with the single-gender concept at age 11-17.  And keep the name "Boy Scouts."

That was certainly the sales pitch for the last 2 years.  To see them walk that back now... trust in the organization would be set to zero. 

4 minutes ago, ItsBrian said:

Probably cheaper for the government to just give the money.

then the government should have never collected those taxes.  Taxes should be used for just the jobs they have to perform and nothing more.  If the private sector can accomplish the task cheaper and more effective, the government is supposed to step aside.  These are foundational principles. 

1 minute ago, Jameson76 said:

 

2 hours ago, Treflienne said:

 

Why do you think that the girls will want "girl-centric" or "girl-oriented" patches?   Their interests (especially for girls willing to join an organization called "Boy Scouts") are much broader than that.

By the way,  I am also horrified by pink tools for girls and pastel building-block sets.   If you give girls primarily that kind of stuff you are essentially saying that everything else is not for them. 

you're entitled to your opinion and may be horrified by it, but others are not.    My daughter likes "girl-centric" things, she likes pinks and purples and pastels.  If having power tools, hand tools and other maker type stuff is available in colors she likes, it empowers her to want to learn to use those things.   My wife loves to hike, dig in the dirt, get her hands dirty, but then still loves to dress to the nines in dresses, wear makeup, get her hair and nails done, etc. It's not outlandish for human girls to like "girl things",even if you find them horrific. 

1 minute ago, David CO said:

If there is an immediate danger to the public, the government should safely drain the man-made lake and then allow the camp to refill it only after they have met all of the applicable safety codes.

agreed. 

4 hours ago, Hawkwin said:

Well, I honestly thought this topic had died a natural death but then someone asked me a question and I felt it would be discourteous to not respond.

I will try to clarify my position one last time and then let the thread go into the ether. Besides, this entire thread (and my participating starting on page 3) is based entirely on hearsay from the OP. We don't know if any of this is even valid.

Most of the arguments in support of cutting the corner have relied on various subjective reasoning. If each scouter can subjectively decide what is or is not hazing/bullying, then we have no real standard - and it is wide open to abuse. If one scouter thinks it is OK because the card cost $0.19 but would object if the cost was $5, where as a different scouter would not object until the cost was $10, then we again have a subjective standard where by it will be considered inappropriate by some and OK by others. I again prefer a more objective standard when it comes to things as serious as a potential violation of YPT. If scouters of good conscience can't agree on a standard that would be "too much" then the best and only objective standard is "not at all."

your entire premise is based on your stance being proven verifiable fact.  Show me the evidence that a decades old practice has no basis for being effective. 

Also, someone posted material from the BALOO training manual that corner cutting on Whittling Chip is not allowed, so this isn't hearsay. 

On 4/25/2018 at 9:44 AM, walk in the woods said:

The problem of course is what to do with the 4H comes calling, or the PNA, or the local Catholic Parish, or.....When the government picks winners and losers we all lose.

This.  If there is a immediate public need, the gov should use tax dollars to fund whatever repairs/mitigation are needed.  Otherwise, cut taxes and let the citizens have more of their earned capital to fund whatever private orgs they wish. 

On 4/23/2018 at 9:15 PM, Hawkwin said:

 

But that being stated, NYC is investigating these women-only spaces for gender bias: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/29/women-only-coworking-space-the-wing-is-under-investigation-for-excluding-men.html

I don't mind wolf+ age children learning how to use power tools, I think that's actually a great thing... but I also think they should learn how to use hand tools too... Be Prepared, Physically strong and all that

That said,  she does look like she's pulling the trigger and if that's against the rules, risk mitigation for insurance purposes rules, she shouldn't be doing that.  

But hey, in 2018, it's established the Scout Law is: 

Loyal

Helpful

Friendly

Courteous

Kind

Cheerful

Thrifty

Brave

Clean

So whatevs 

4 minutes ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

@Gwaihir, I don't know about last night yet, but I know previous elections he was "upset" that neither his older son, nor this Scout has been elected to a POR. Older son has had the opportunity, but really doesn't seem to want the responsibility. In the past he was for term limits to "prevent the same people from getting elected over and over," and was one of the proponents of electing ASPL who moves to SPL. He was also for electing APL to move into PL, until I reminded him APL doesn't count for a POR and could actually hurt some Scouts, such as his son. That changed his mind about electing APL to move to the PL.

He tried helping him previously when he was last PL, and the Scout was his APL, but the Scout didn't want his help. My son is at the stage of his Scouting career that he no longer needs a POR, but he is too young to be an JASM. But when no one else was able or interested in running against the Scout, he jumped in. He had major concerns about the Scout being PL.

I'm looking at the vastness of Asia through a keyhole here, but from everything I've read it sounds like the CM needs to do some serious reflecting on his parenting... their lack of success seems like it's stemming directly from his lack of success preparing them to be successful.