WisconsinMomma

Yes but isn't this where the Scoutmaster guides them?   Isn't there something like -- well if you want to go to Disneyland -- how can you make it relevant to scouting, and are you willing to do extra fundraising?  

I am considering giving feedback on our recent Court of Honor.

It was OK -- it was about two hours.  It was about 1/2  hour to 45 minutes of Scout led, the rest was adult announcements, incuding a lengthy FOS presentation.

OK, if we're going to have high standards, it sucked.   I have been to a few COHs now and the pattern is the boys do their thing and then the adults go on and on informing the parents of every little thing -- calendar, upcoming fundraiser, camperships, FOS -- it really shouldn't have taken that long, but it did! The boys had to sit through all of it!   I had to sit through all of it!  Gah.   No refreshments until after the whole show. 

I think we should make a parent newsletter and cut out all of those COH announcements.  Do you think that' a fair suggestion?  (I am secretary.)    I don' t think that the boys at PLC would be willing to tell the grownups to cut their portion.  

Thanks for the discussion, this is good.  My concern with my sons' troop is that the camping coordinator tells them up front -- don't say Disney World -- on your survey about where you want to go and what you want to do.

And my thought is -- why not Disney?  Sure, it is expensive, but let them dream big and figure out how to make it happen or decide for themselves to adjust their plans. 

I am considering rattling the adults about this at our next meeting...  trying to push a little bit at a time.   

20 minutes ago, Col. Flagg said:

some egotistical district rep full of self-importance.

I will simply attest that folks like this exist,  but also acknowledge that they are far outnumbered by good Scouters.

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Monday night we had one mom post on FB that her son needed someone to sign off on some Second Class requirements. This is the same Scout who refuses sleep away from daddy. While he was working on requirements, Mom was lamenting the fact that he's been in the troop 10 months as is still only Tenderfoot (don't ask) and that he needs to be First Class by April. I had to talk to her about it is more important that he knows the skills and that a First Class Scout is not only capable of camping on his own, but is suppose to help others. Sadly I don't think she gets it.

Then again, maybe I am being a hypocrite. I've reminded middle son that he needs to get First Class by end of May so he can go on the AT trip he's been wanting to do since last summer. It's all on him.

When I first started, I did some reading about Boy Scout advancement, and all of the ins and outs.   This whole idea of first class in a year (and it's out there as an expectation) is generally unreasonable and a bunch of garbage.  But when I read online somewhere that Scouts should get first class in a year,  I worried.   Now I realize that that expectation is lame, and I am not as worried about my sons,  a 13 year old, second year, second class and an 11 year old tenderfoot (He's been in the troop 11 months, what's wrong with being Tenderfoot at 11 months??).  My oldest might make first class by his third year of summer camp or thereabouts.  One of our more experienced adults suggests that boys get something checked off once a week, but my boys have not kept that pace, they get maybe one or two things a month -- I'm not exactly sure how much they accomplish in a month.

I assumed the fundraising forms were to show a basic accounting for the income and expenses of the project.  This is in my view, for accountability, so a Scout learns to show that donations are used properly and recorded properly.   You don't want a Scout accidentally or intentionally pocketing cash donations -- so those should be recorded and noted in a way that shows that the Scout can handle donations responsibly and has a sense of integrity regarding financial management.  

12 minutes ago, Back Pack said:

There’s womansplaining too. It’s what happens every time my mom points out how my dad is doing something wrong. 

That's the truth!  

I don't think I've met any mansplainers in Scouting that I remember.   I have met a couple big-talkers, who make themselves look very important by giving very detailed descriptions of the work they do and how important it is, and whose way of doing thing is of course, the only possible right way to do anything.  Two separate examples -- giving long talks at meetings repeatedly how they handle every detail of and every single moving part,  telling all the stories of every detail of their recent accomplishments,  and generally taking up most of the air during meetings.  In another case, a Troop adult making a very big deal out of announcing in a group email that he has made the meeting room reservations.  So impressive and special.  Many other volunteers get their tasks done without such fanfare   I occasionally run into self-aggrandizing adult volunteers  (though they are rare, most adults are great) -- another female leader noticed the same thing, and she gave the nickname  "Super Scout" for this kind of braggish behavior.   I am not sure whether Super Scouts give grander performances in front of female Scouters or not.  I have a developing theory that this personality/behavior type is closely associated with helicoptering. 

Oooh, mansplaining!   It exists.  I think it's fairly rare though.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/136319-6-subtle-forms-of-mansplaining-that-women-encounter-each-day

Here's the first Google hit for mansplaining in the news.  Short story -- man at dance club is creepy to women and they get him kicked out.   To me this is mostly a case of natural consequences  -- men who are socially inept don't get many dance partners.   I don't think this story is about mansplaining at all.   In old fashioned terms if a man is being too difficult, frisky, or rough with the dance club's female members, they have every right to kick him out.  

Now, they may end up with no male dance partners, but that's another story.

http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/vancouver-swing-dancer-banned-from-club-after-mansplaining

40 minutes ago, cocomax said:

Scouts Honor, I am telling the truth. That was part of my IOLS training last year.  They also taught us that we needed prepare food over a tarp, to catch food particles and use window screen to screen the top layer of dust at the camp site to gather up all micro trash.  We also learned how to pick up human waste with a zip lock bag as well the toilet paper to pack the human waste out, we can wrap the human waste zip locks with duct tape to hide what is in there so you do not have to look at it.  I am not making this up.    

This was your training in California, right?   I'm midwestern and I don't want to pick on your state too much, but California sometimes gets a reputation for being a little ... special.

I haven't spoken with boys on this matter yet because --- we currently do not have any plans to add girl dens.  I am curious to see what our CO advises.  If they endorse girl dens, then I think we should explore how to organize things.   But boys will have boy dens, and that is their space.  I think we can minimize the impact to them while welcoming girls.   Pack meetings?  I'm not sure.  It will be interesting to see what people think and feel about it. 

ETA: I am also not sure if any girls or girl volunteers are going to show up, so I don't think I need to get the boys' all worked up over something that may not affect them.

1 minute ago, Gwaihir said:

To you, an adult woman.  

To a teenage boy, that may be different.  

It's going to be up to the adult troop leadership to help show boys with doubts that scouting is still great and there are great opportunities for them in Scouting. 

1 minute ago, Gwaihir said:

I didn't think Trump would win either, but here we are. 

conversely, telling the 15% of boys to get lost is ok?  Because that is what the policy change was saying to them (in this hypothetical scenario) 

I've heard a lot of the phrase, "not my President" and this has a similar feeling with some of the reactions -- "not my BSA"???  As if either group has much of a choice in the result.

I disagree on the interpretation of the message -- adding girl dens and troops does not equal telling the boys to get lost.   Though there may be some rogue troops doing coed, that's not what has been shared from national.

4 minutes ago, gblotter said:

But the loss of boys is viewed as necessary collateral damage to accommodate new girls?

No.

7 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

I didn't say any and all change was bad, merely that change that is proven to be bad change, should logically result in going back to how it was working most successfully, not continually pushing forward bad change.  

 

I think the hard thing is proving that a change is a bad change.  Who decides what is good change and what is bad change and the measurement criteria?  There are a lot of opinions out there.   Since this change is just beginning, it's impossible to know yet if it will be "good" or "bad". 

Just now, Gwaihir said:

Not my point... my point is, if the addition of 2% of girls results in the subtraction of 15% of boys (specifically because of the addition of the 2% of girls, rightly or wrongly)... does anyone have the bravery to tell the 2% of girls, co-ed scouting is ending in an attempt to get the 15% back, or do we just ride the bad decision train into oblivion?  

 

Would you tell the 2% of girls to get lost?   How do you think that would work out for you and for the BSA? 

17 minutes ago, Gwaihir said:

Unless of course, the ultimate answer is to change it back, because that was the best way to work the program.  A truly open mind would be tolerant and accepting of that as a possible outcome.  I still don't quite get why as a society, going back to something that worked, after something that sounded good failed, is so taboo.  

It's possible but unlikely.  The girls might not show up.  That's going to be the most interesting thing to watch.

26 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Been going downhill since they discontinued Blacksmithing, Stalking, and Taxidermy merit badges.  Those were the ones that toughened them up.

Those were all canceled in 1952.   

OK, talk to your Scoutmaster then, and ask him for a connection to an Eagle Coach.  This is part of the process.  For the fundraising,  as I understand it (and I am only on the fringes of hearing about Eagle projects, not much experience) I believe you are supposed to keep a log of all donors, so -- to the best of your ability, you should make a record of all your cash contributions that have been made.  Lastly,  I don't think you can skip any of the paperwork -- take a look at your whole Eagle packet, read the instructions very carefully, twice -- and make sure you are covering all of the specific details.

I'm sure there are other Scouters here who can help you more.  Best wishes!  Do your best!

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

Another factor that women have is the natural "mother instinct" They want to nurture and protect they children. Many cannot let go. We see it today with 26 year olds being considered children under some federal laws.  I do not know when the Guide to Safe Scouting first came out, But I can tell you many things I use to do as a Scout are not allowed anymore, and it has been since women were allowed to be SMs and ASMs, i.e. pioneering projects over 6 feet, smudge pots, etc.

I am certain that it's not only women who are helicopter parents,  there are male helicopters too, and you all probably know at least a few.  I certainly know a few. 

1 hour ago, Eagledad said:

The  BSA was so overwhelmed with un-experienced adult leaders that they had to rethink how to train them. And I think most of us who were leading Troop programs back then would say that Patrol Method has suffered greatly. Adults today don't get patrol method because training doesn't teach it well and there aren't enough experienced leaders to encourage it at Council or district level. Bringing in girls will increase the number of un-experienced unit adult leaders. If there was any hope that the program 10 years from now resembled today's program, calling it a family program killed it. Calling it a family program will add more confusion between leadership and parents. It will eventually sort itself out if scouting survives, but it won't be the same  program. 

Barry

While I agree that inexperienced Scout leaders are a potentially large problem, there is not a lot of difference between an inexperienced male and female Scouter.  In fact, we could argue whether an inexperienced male or female Scouter would pay closer attention to the training. 

1 hour ago, Eagle94-A1 said:

 

But that is CUB Scout, bot BOY Scouts. (caps for emphasis).  Most 11-18 year old males want to get away from their parents and younger siblings. They want to do things on their own. 

 

Correct.  I understand.  And I suspect that when national talks about Family Camping, they are referring to CUB Scouts, because that's where the program is currently launching.

10 minutes ago, Jameson76 said:

Then along will come the real long term plan, fully coed at all units, the reason...we have listened to "the families" and this will meet their needs.

Funny thing is, The mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.

Nothing about families here.

In Cub Scouts, family camping is great.  It's a lot of fun for the younger kids.   Our council offers scout only camps and family weekend camps, and it's nice to have that variety. 

@Pselb don't jump the gun, there may still be all-boy camp opportunities.  We need to wait and see how this shakes out, and there are many, many camps -- they might take different approaches.  I think there will be all-boy options available, and they'll likely be very popular. 

5 minutes ago, an_old_DC said:

Did National ask youth what they thought about girls in Boy Scout troops? I know some adults made sure to send the survey to several Venturers and OA eboard members who took the survey. Those young men are all against girls in troops. Venturing and Exploring are different and the guys are ok with that.

interestingly, all the girls in my crew are against it as well.

I think we're in a place where we need to figure out the best ways to work with the program.  The change is made, now we get to work on making the best of the situation. 

18 minutes ago, Tampa Turtle said:

(4) Some units who try to stay "Boy Only" will face a PR disaster when some girl gets turned away. Only if a religious based National C.O. backs them up will this be tenable.

Turning girls away is a concern, and I think that districts should prepare to support troops and packs who will be faced with having interested girls, but no actual girls program yet.  I think it would be great if districts would develop some girls program resources,  a girls program chairperson or other go-to-person who can help interested girls connect with other interested girls and join up with Scouting if their most local troops and packs are not up to speed with the girls program yet.   

My pack is sponsored by an elementary school PTO.   There is another elementary school nearby.  I could see an opportunity for some collaboration if each school has a handful of girls who want to try Scouting.  This will take teamwork and communication, but it could help small numbers of girls join up and get started together.    Same deal with Troops -- we easily have 4 troops in close geography -- If all 4 troops could refer interested girls to a newly formed unit, it will take the stress off the individual troops.   Of course new units will need CO's too.