Navybone

thanks for sharing.

With schools closing and moving to on-line teaching, and groups gathering sizes being limited, how do we sustain interest in and maintain advancement, where we can, in scouting? Virtual troop or patrol meetings on platforms like Zoom, trail to first class discussion in a chat room? Emphasize some merit badges (reading) over others? Interested in thoughts from the community.

At the council for San Jose area, some leadership training and a University of Scouting event were cancelled.

Article does not indicate anything about Girl Scouts - you have some insight on why they were not included?

I am not sure you are reading it right or maybe in totality. It does not specifically say parents are not required for wolf and bear. It also says “ Den leaders, pack leaders, and parents are expected to accompany the youth on approved trips. https://www.scouting.org/health-and-safety/gss/gss03/

Any response and continuation of this line of thinking would probably be more applicable in a different thread.

Interesting argument - you are essentially saying that it is OK for a CO or a MBC to openly and actively work counter to the efforts, the goals, and the mission of Scout BSA. Wonder why there may be issues is Scouts BSA. I cannot help but look at this and think about the message that the scouts in troops like this are receiving and learning. And then to look at the purpose behind scouting and what it hopes to instill in youth.

Good comment, thank you. I would strongly urge any MBC working with youth to err on the side of caution. Be it a male or female scout.

I cannot fathom a reason that a MBC would not want to council a female scout. At least so long as the MBC is meeting all the Youth Protection requirements.

Interesting article, thanks for posting it. Made me wonder when there was a push to bring African Americans into scouting - seems about this time. Interesting times indeed - maybe part of the motivation? https://aaregistry.org/story/the-african-american-boy-scout-movement-a-story/

seriously, Within reason. If a scout has his eight elective badges, and wants to earn another one, and there is a willing MB counselor, why not. What is the scarce resource being expended? if the scout wants to go to sea base and has already been, well common sense is to give another scout the opportunity. But that is not they same as saying that the scout has meet the minimum, so no more. And that is exactly how I read the intent of your comments. imthink we should encourage the scouts to learn and explore as much as possible. The idea of using a MB to expose scouts to a new ability or possible career is so very powerful and gives scouts an edge that other, non-scouts, do not have.

I could not disagree more. Scouting should encourage the scout to develop a lifelong interest in learning. That is exponentially valuable to the scout and the community. And will continue to be of value for the lifetime of that scout. So long as scouts are learning, and it is about learning, not just getting a patch. There is goodness in all of this. i guess if you look at it from a cost perspective, then why encourage scouts to do more. Although what is the cost? A buck to two for the badge and blue card? Continued involvement in scouts? No, cannot see your point on this at all.

Eight elective merit badges is the minimum - are your espousing that scouts should learn that the minimum in life is what they shoot for. Regardless of if there is more they are interested. The purpose for merit badges is not to simply meet the minimum, but to explore subjects to determine if they would like to further pursue them as a career. Or am misreading your post?

I think people will read into what they want on the issue, depending on what they see as value in scouting. There is probably as much on family camping, mainly focused on Cub Scouts aged kids, as not family focused. Since there are age restrictions on who can go to Philmont, maybe encouraging the younger scouts to go with families is a good thing. As in not to discourage them when all the older scouts in troop go (as is the impact In my son troop). And if it not hard to find core scouting articles - there are two articles on snow related adventures In reading the posts and the magazine, this newish ASM has to wonder if The family life merit badge is a waste of time and counter to the aims and goals of scouts. Since it is family and not outdoor or individual accomplishment focused? Because looking at the requirements and the intent of the badge, I don’t see it. .

Depends what the lapse is. There is a ton of vagueness in your comment. And I have concerns, with this individuals background that this could be either more than just a lapse, but a bell ringer that he should have nothing to do with youth or the female sex. His actions are both an indicator of what his sense of right/wrong is as well as what he things is ok behavior. And it is not behavior that should be anywhere scouts- Male or female scouts.

So you think the accused is being wrongfully accused? Why?

Honestly did not read anything after the first line and glad I did not after the last line. At the end of the day, the US civil war was a war about slavery. And where does that apply to scouting? It does not.

Beauty is in the eye of The beholder. I see nothing of value in a statue of a southern general. A memorial to those who caught and died, ok. But for a failed general who was a traitor to his nation and Fought for a cause that one human was worth less than another - no. And regarding destruction of monuments, go to Germany and look at all the building and statues that the Nazis created. While buildings remain, the emblems of the Nazis are gone. And nothing is buried - the Germans make all students see the horrors that the Nazis performed and ensure they understand how it came to be. Maybe that is what should have occurred during the reconstruction. Then there would not have been the romantic fever of the southern crusade that bloomed in the 1920s.

At least I agree with the second half of your sentence on Lee. The civil war was fought at a level of brutality unseen at the time and only surprised by WW1. History is not statues glorifying a false narrative of Southern sons fighting for states rights. History is being willing to accept both sides of the story based on actual accounts and sources. and interesting comment about B-P. Never knew that.

I do not think it is about erasing history, but not celebrating the history of this ideals, actions, or men of beliefs that have been found not worthy of emulation or celebration.

But he did not fight for his nation, but put his state first. And since he lost, he is, in fact, a traitor to his nation. Hence part of the reason not to name a council after him. Does not stand up to the test of being loyal.

Actually, it is sad that they have to use this as a time to promote awareness into sexual abuse. I don’t have a daughter in Girl Scouts, but maybe they have done some research and are being more active leaning the BSA was years ago. Maybe they are actually paying attention and taking lessons from the none stop challenge BSA is dealing with. everyone knows that GSUSA cannot and will not dictate how families act this holiday season, but is bring attention to a real problem any different than BSA making scouts and parents talk about child abuse before a scout can earn Scout? While maybe not perfect, it has you and others talking about it.

I do not buy the narrative your describe for the scouts themselves. I believe that there is crisis in faith of the leaders, down to the local level, based on actions of leaders in the past. Even the homosexual and female fight is only used who have an axe to grind - and the fact that they hate that it has been overall successful. But I want to use a horrible experience to illustrate that Boy Scouts still means something positive when used in reference to actual scouts. When adults and neighbors described the boy who shot and killed some other students at his high school in California, the description was of surprise that he did it, and one of the reason was BECAUSE he was a Boy Scout. His horrible actions are considered antithetical to the image of the Boy Scout. So I argue that the image is less that of the actual scout, but the leadership, and so long as more sex abuse cases surface, that is the image the leaders have to fight to change. But I believe the image of the actual scout and what they are learning remains positive and strong. And that is where BSA needs to be focusing its PR campaign.

For the life of me, where does a families permissive or non-permissive sexual ethic come into BSA? I do not equate being an inclusive organization as being a reflection of any sexual ethic.

I actually see this as a positive reference to Boy Scouts. They specifically call out participation in Boy Scouts because it is so counter to the message and the respect that is afforded Boy Scouts. there is too much negative publicity because of abuses by Boy Scout leaders. But despite that, the public perception of youth in Boy Scouts remains very positive. This entire event is sad and occurs way too often. But the references to Boy Scouts is all positive.