Jump to content

AwakeEnergyScouter

Members
  • Content Count

    457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Everything posted by AwakeEnergyScouter

  1. Forgot one of the most important things... Scout-led! Absolute must. Took it for granted while writing.
  2. Indeed a great question! Almost like a goal writing prompt 😄 * Smiling and laughing scouts at all events / no one left out, all scouts "invited to dance" by other scouts * Scouts want to hang out outside scouting because they're friends * Good and excited attendance at all outdoor events, of which camping and hiking are offered monthly and other outdoors life skills (fishing, orienteering, firebuilding and tending, skiing, skating, etc) are offered at least occasionally. Troops should backpack at least a few times a year * Troop goes to camporee/jamboree every year, at leas
  3. An adult leader meeting is different from an open online forum targeted at scouters. If this was a restricted-access forum, then it would be equivalent to an adult leader meeting. This is on the open internet, no authentication required. This forum is indexed by search engines. That's how I found it, scouting-related searches turned up discussion threads here. It's a perpetual adult leader meeting that anyone can walk into. We will never see the scouts "come into the room" and will never know who heard us here. In a physical room, if a scout suddenly walks in and it's a conversation that'
  4. Appreciating this right here is absolutely key to good online conversation. Everyone is a person living their life, occasionally typing stuff to post here. Not a label or a category. In our cases, a scouter doing scout stuff with scouts, too. A fellow member of the scouting movement. If you wouldn't say something to someone in person, you shouldn't type it, either. The internet doesn't erase speech cause and effect. If you type something hurtful, it's still hurtful. We need to make an extra effort to remember to drop our storylines about people we get to know online if we want to build st
  5. In a US context: Yes, the antonym is conservative. It used to have one clear meaning, but now I just have the same question you asked when I hear it. "What does that mean to you when you say it?" It has so many effective meanings, as does conservative, that they're both becoming useless for communication unless you know the person using them well enough to know what they mean without asking. Both are used as insults both directly and ironically.
  6. I'm pretty sure the account is a human - not you - for multiple reasons. No, I can't prove it, but Occam's Razor suggests it's a human. Not taking what accounts post here seriously because they might be someone posing as a scouter, a troll, or a bot will rapidly destroy any semblance of civil and a scoutlike conversation, and we know that because that's what happens on every chan board. The experiment has been run several times and it always ends in something that's completely against several points of the Scout Law and Oath. For your point to be true, everyone else on the Internet
  7. I asked why the medium matters, this is not a response to what I said and it's a strawman to boot. I agree that it's wrong to dispose of those one does not agree with and that we need to work together. That's not what I'm arguing for. Please don't put words in my mouth. So, why does the medium matter? You never answered. Why doesn't the presence of the youth matter? Isn't that the difference you're pointing at, really? That you can say certain things to other scouters in private, but not in the presence of youth? You do realize this forum is the social equivalent of us stan
  8. I don't know that there's a tactful way to say "your presence here is bad/unwanted". You can deliver it with more or less polish, but "you should be kicked out of this organization" is a fundamentally unfriendly message. Allowing scouts and scouters to tell scouts they shouldn't be in scouting is not a good idea. It creates all kinds of problems in the long run, for both individual scouts and the organization as a whole. Even if the comments aren't targeting a specific youth member, it undermines our value foundation (you only really need to treat some scouts in a friendly and helpful manner)
  9. I'm not sure I understood you correctly. It sounds to me like you're saying that we should let scouts and scouters break any and all parts of the scout law as long as they're experiencing change that's hard for them personally. If scouts are being unkind, unfriendly, etc towards other scouts, then it's on the scouts being targeted to "earn respect" from the aggressors and we scouters shouldn't intervene, not even if the aggressor is another scouter? Or are you talking about changing why some scouts would choose to bully female and LGBTQIA+ scouts, but not actually the question of what to
  10. Some of the phrasings made me think there's also a hostile culture problem in boy units towards girl units, but I would think newly formed units ought to have less of that if that is indeed the case. And if it is, I think it's totally appropriate to kick disruptive and disrespectful units out. Scout law violations are always a problem to deal with. Girls should absolutely not need shielding from boys; something has gone quite awry if they do.
  11. I have to take back my outrage at that specific girls-only camporee. Just in case there was some additional context, I reached out to the organizer, and it turns out that the camporee is there to solve the problem of weak scoutcraft experience among both scouts and leaders. I had most of the facts, I just didn't put them together in a way to predict the problem because of my own scouting and family backpacking experience, including my current scouting involvement in a family pack with family dens where girls and boys learn the exact same scoutcraft skills, hike the same miles, set up the
  12. Thanks for sharing! I've heard this about GSUSA, but that it happens in BSA also was new to me. Indeed, a cautionary tale! Any troop that craves amenities may have a culture problem, irrespective of gender.
  13. Interesting. Honest question: what would clearly demonstrate to you that I do not see myself as participating in the culture wars? Right! Exactly. We share a values foundation. That IS the hill to die on in scouting, don't you think? That we should base all our activities on the Scout Law and Oath? Or do you feel otherwise? If I am right and we do agree that all of our activities in scouting should be grounded in the Scout Oath and Law, then would you also agree that violations of the Scout Law and Oath should not not be tolerated in scouting contexts, or do you think that gi
  14. Sounds like they could use some extra support. Nothing wrong with preparing to help people in groups if there's patterns in who has obstacles and why. What would help military dependent scouts?
  15. These kids today need to appreciate the roots of their fancy image emojis, the merit badge should have requirements like "design your own ASCII smiley using at least five characters"
  16. I was wondering about "the behavior" (I assume going full papa/mama bear) in unisex environments, in case I might have been too quick to think that benevolent sexism was a factor, but even if there's a fuller picture of papa/mama bear behavior that goes a bit too far in single-gender environments as well as mixed-gender environments asking for female-only zones really shouldn't be happening. We are all scouts. That's not a narrative, that's how it is. Or, perhaps I should say, that's how it should be in a properly functioning scouting organization. I don't think that's subtle at all. I've neve
  17. I agree that there is a strong narrative around saying that everyone has to 'pick a side', but I don't know that the narrative is correct. Why are there only two 'sides'? Why are these the sides? Why must I buy an entire 'side' hook, line, and sinker? Reeks of false dichotomy to me. I don't think the world works that way, and I think - to your later point - that in order to preserve scouting as a place to find healthy acceptance, we need to reject that basic frame. Everyone should feel welcome and accepted as they are, quirks and all, in Scouts. That can't happen if scouts/scouters are on two
  18. Perhaps I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying that the latest traditional gender role is a threat. I was pointing to how wide the agreement that aggression and violence towards women (because women are a subset of people) is bad is. We agree on that even if we disagree on the accuracy of other feminist ideas and policies. And this agreement is what's relevant for this discussion. Feminist analysis of gender roles is out of scope for this discussion, but there is plenty elsewhere to read on the subject if you're interested. As far as the PWD podium goes, that leader made sure to say it out of ea
  19. Your sign idea is solid, and the other troop's behavior was not. That's not at all acceptable. First dibs on the big shower is not scout-like at all! And I'm with Eagledad, how can a troop override the camp leadership? Camp leadership needs to fix this for you. I'm also struck by that they had their own signs, which means they planned it. And it wasn't just that they hogged the good shower and sink, they did so by reference to gender. I can't know for a fact, but it smells like benevolent sexism, like they thought that they deserve the nice facilities because it's men's duty to sacrifice
  20. Thanks for taking the time to explain! I understand that you're moving on. No problem. I did want to clear something up, though, for everyone still here, that seems to have been missed. This was a family pack that, unbeknownst to me when we joined, was in the family den pilot with written explicit permission to have both girls and boys together in dens. The relevant agreement bullet is Beginning with the 2022-23 program year pilot packs may form Lion (Kindergarten), Tiger (1st Grade), Wolf (2nd Grade), Bear (3rd Grade), and Webelos (4th Grade Only) dens with boys and girls in
  21. I'm trying to point to that basic feminist values are not opposed to scouting values, including therefore BSA values, by asking the reader to really take in what RememberSchiff posted an excerpt from. Of course you recoil from gender-based violence because it is mid-evil, and it's not just you and me who think so. Having that gut reaction of NO! is the sign that this is outside the Overton window for whatever society you're part of. Of course WOSM is joining the UN in trying to get gender-based violence to stop, and to move the world closer to having gender equality, because it's totally the r
  22. I honestly do not see what's so horrible about having two dens share a meeting for pragmatic reasons. It was allowed for different ages already, and multiple ages could even be in the same den. All for pragmatic reasons I imagine. Like you say, InquisitiveScouter, you still have to apply some judgement and common sense. I don't see how that's against either the Scout Law or Oath, and definitely not that's a much worse rule-bending or breaking than many other such situations discussed here on the forum previously. Sure, some pragmatic rule-bending or breaking can be dangerous, but it doesn't ne
  23. Of course. Had they not done that, they couldn't have served girls at all. They wouldn't have had the leadership. Finding double the den leaders, or getting the existing den leaders to do the same den meeting twice isn't trivial, especially to serve just one or two scouts. And how fun is it to be in a den alone? And tell me, what is the danger we're saving classmates by day from, by making sure that they never do the same activity in a den meeting together? They were allowed to go camping together and do pack meeting activities together, and often are in the same class all day - what woul
×
×
  • Create New...