Navybone

Fantastic. I just hope that the stand down does improve safety in all range operations

I agree with your concern, especially if there is the mentality of zero risk. But I applaud BSA instituting a safety stand down when someone is hurt on a range (archery or rifle/shotgun). The stand down is a good opportunity to learn about what occurred at the Summit, and ensue that everyone has the right procedures and training in place. The best defense against any effort to reduce range activities is demonstrating mature processes that are not afraid to be self critical and truly place safety first. A stand down like this is a best practice among many professional organizations (police, military, etc) for a reason.

Fair, just as it is up to the PLC to determine how much they want to scouts to be in the full uniform, to include socks. So, based on this line of thinking, if the PLC supports scouts wearing these socks, there should be no issue. And if the PLC is less strict on wearing the uniform, then there should not be much chasing the uniform method. And I also agree, when the adults get too involved in aspects of the troop operations, such as stressing the uniform method, then yes, it is an impediment.

I know that there is a uniform inspection guide. In my role as a leader in the troop I support, we have never used this. I offer hints to scouts on how to make their uniform look better, to meet the regulations and be more “uniform” with the rest of the troop. It is a method to meet the goals of scouting, but not the only method and not the purpose of scouting. And as I said it was an impediment in its implementation that resulted in my quitting scouts. This was my second troop, the first being one were we camped, we learned, we ran, had fun, we were active and had high retention. We wore the uniform but it was not about the uniform. My family moved to Mississippi and it was uniform inspections (with some type of uniform inspection sheet), standing in ranks. Nope, hard pass. There was no pride and sense of belonging. It was long pants (cotton olive green pants).

They are socks. To put this all into perspective - they are socks and this is not the military. When I was a scout in Mississippi in the early 80’s, we went to summer camp (Camp Tiak) The expectation was to wear the uniform every day. Since I did not have the right socks (actually just missing the red tabs that were to be worn with the socks, I had to wear long pants. Not fun in 100 degree weather. The emphasis in the troop was on uniforms (and inspections with grip chits) - which was a main reason I left scouts - I hated it. I am an ASM now, and my son recently completed all the requirements for Eagle. And after 30 years in the military, my emphasis has never been on uniform other than 1) wear it appropriately, and 2) wear what you have. Perspective. What is important in scouts? Let’s make the main thing be the main thing and use common sense on implementing the methods. My two cents.

But what is stopping adults from doing that now, getting together with adults with similar interests and working on the same skills?

Just scouts being scouts!

I don’t get it. This was all hashed out in May/June, what has changed? This is not about excluding for the sake of excluding. It is about offering some focused targeted to increase recruitment or retention to smaller minority groups. There is nothing devious about most of these meetings. It is all about creating a welcome environment where minority groups might now have felt welcome or accepted. It’s about having a meeting to show why Scouts is for them and thier children, and then have them join the larger Scout population. )

But that is not all scouting is. Its mission 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." Going back in time, the mission of Boy Scouts has not just been about outdoors, that is the method. It has been about developing young men (and now women) into resilient and useful members of society. Previous mission/purpose statements From Wikipedia (just did a quick search): 1910: "to teach [boys] patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred values. 1937: "Each generation as it comes to maturity has no more important duty than that of teaching high ideals and proper behavior to the generation which follows. From the Congressional Charter: § 30902. Purposes The purposes of the corporation are to promote, through organization, and cooperation with other agencies, the ability of boys to do things for themselves and others, to train them in scoutcraft, and to teach them patriotism, courage, self-reliance, and kindred virtues, using the methods that were in common use by boy scouts on June 15, 1916.

If you read the comments on the facebook site, the council did offer a boys-only version, but there was not enough interest. If true, then there is no issue here, huh?

Yes, let’s try to have minority in scouting try to improve its membership. This is about how to increase female membership. Do you have a role in that? If you do, I am sure they would include you.

From where we are, many kids drop travel sports (which consumes weekends) when they reach high school. They transition to high school teams which play during the week. The sports conflict is then usually limited to practices conflicting with troop meetings.

Great question. Not sure, but a good head scratcher. Retention? If you assume you have a good program, scouts stay? Otherwise they vote with their feet?

T Scouts is outdoors and the whole “Cotton Kills” thing

Haters gonna hate. It’s hard to toe a hard line as BSA risks losing those who disagree. Not meant as an excuse, just a reality. Important thing is that BSA stays on track and does not waiver. Change takes time, and it will get there. Keep advocating.

100% agree. It is inappropriate to remove the US Flag to add the flag of another county. How does he reconcile that with the citizenship aspect of scouting?

The OP provided evidence that there were affinity group meetings at NOAC (5 March) He did not specifically state why they were detrimental other than they exist. He never states exactly why. He then provided examples at a national level that had no actual connection or identified applicability to BSA. His apprehension on a white male affinity group is his perception - or did someone tell him he cannot form one?

I would disagree that it is a made up woke term. I have heard it over the last decade plus while int he military to stop/reduce Blue on Blue sexual assaults (committed on sailors by other sailors): do not be a bystander - see something, say something, do something. What is woke about that?

RIGHT - "An affinity group, while potentially helpful could perpetuate the same colorist and euro-centric bias that exists by making those problematic views a necessary status quo in the fight against white supremacy." The important part is that the article does not say all affinity groups cause these issues. I gave you an example of one where membership was voluntary, where is a view where it is not. To bring this back to scouting and not just about how all affinity groups are evil, how are they used in the BSA? Is there any actual evidence that they are operating like the article?

The OP’s question was “So, can anyone explain to me the difference between these groups and how having segregated events develops the concept of DEI among Scouts?” when he sates his opinion that a lot people see woke and DEI as not beneficial. And that special events for minority groups versus majority (white males) in scouts is counter to DEI in BSA. That is what I gave a down arrow to. My response was to ask “What do you disagree with in the Cit in Society MB? Not talking about the political BS, "woke" or rest of it. What part of the requirements of the MB do you disagree with? My experience in our troop is that the scouts don't have issue with it (so far as it is not an active MB - camping, etc...). “ There was no response. I specifically asked about Cit in Society MB because this is a forum about scouting and I was trying to keep the issue on scouting. Cit in Society MB is how the BSA is addressing developing a mindset of diversify, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in our youth. If there was acceptance of the principals of DEI as articulated in the MB, then the need for the affinity groups. The value of affinity groups is that they can be very effective in opening organizations to new minority groups. The provide people with similar background, experiences, and beliefs to see others that share the same beliefs. Having that commonality can be very helpful when entering an environment where they are one of a few. From my personal experience, I retired from military and went to work in higher education, but not as an academic. There was very little veteran presence in the college faculty and staff, and most thought all veterans suffered from PTSD and that we would run the place like boot camp. A veteran’s affinity group on campus was very helpful in assisting me to adapt and understand the college faculty, navigate around the school, and be very successful there. I did not need the group for long, but it was very useful at the beginning of my time there and was important to my staying there. This is no different than from scouting. These groups can be very effective in easing the entry of minority groups into scout. Things are hard enough for a new young man or women as they enter scouts without any of their friends. Or remain after their friends have dropped out. Or keep their parents involved.

That was in what 2000? Was that because of affinity groups or the recent BSA scouts DEI efforts. I seem to remember that was an entirely different issue.

I am not asking about random companies around the country, this is a forum on scouts and scouting. Let's focus on that. We should look at if BSA Scouts is excluding others, inhibiting opportunities for scouts or scouters.

I guess the question is if the affinity groups are causing others to be excluded. Is that occurring? Are the affinity groups resulting in other groups being denied advancement, opportunities, are there new standards that only the groups have to follow, but are stricter/more lenient with the group you associate with? IS that special treatment or recognition occurring?

Why do you say that? where is that happening? Are you saying that white males are being pushed out of scouting? Where?

Totally agree with you.