AwakeEnergyScouter

I have a strategy/philosophy question. Why do various subunits of BSA own so much property in the first place? (That needs maintenance and general expenditures.) Why don't we just use public lands, tents, and our own two legs (and maybe a paddle)?

I was wondering the same thing. I was also wondering if perps who plant cameras also try physical action, or if perps with cameras operate in different patterns than physical abusers. Are we looking for one and the same set of behaviors, or two different sets? If we find cameras, should we also expect to find grooming and/or assaults to be happening? I have no idea. I could see it going either way, or just depending as a 'sometimes'.

That's because there are children who have been victimized. It it 100% appropriate for anger to arise. You, and the other adults in your local scouting community, are the protectors of the children in it, and your anger is a reflection of that you know what is right when wrong happens. As long as you don't cling to the anger, or make it your identity, it is a form of wisdom, especially when it fuels the courage to take uncomfortable action as you and your wife have. Bravo. I hope your children aren't on the tapes, but as you say someone's children are. So I guess what I really hope is that the FBI prosecutes the criminals successfully and that the victimized children (and the whole extended community) get any help they need to not have this create negative ripples in their lives.

Welp, that's a problem, and it's got nothing to do with sexual mores. I would argue that liability is a secondary problem, because scouts assaulting other scouts is a direct harm problem as well as a strong indication that we still seriously struggle with upholding the scout law. Gender separation can help, but if we have a rape and/or other assault problem then that's not a fundamental fix. Obviously, crimes need to be prosecuted and perpetrators need to also be thrown out of scouting. We obviously also aren't doing enough to make it clear that rape, other sexual assault, and sexual harrassment is wrong because it hurts people, not just in policy but socially as a model community. And we need to work towards getting that "dark number" of unreported assaults to zero by creating an environment in which scouts have confidence in that they will be heard, protected, and supported if they report. I know all that is a steep order, perhaps even sisiphyean when it comes to the dark number. But if we scouts don't do the right thing because it's hard... What does that mean? Who are we, then?

I don't really understand what that has to do with sexual assault, or with scouting. Or are you saying that it's not just a concern about scouts getting sexually harassed or assaulted, it's that and/or a concern that scouts will have sex while scouting? If the latter, I can report that when the whole patrol sleeps in a single tent there's nothing going on 😂 It becomes a bit like workplace romances, you have to think about what happens when you break up/stop sleeping together. Could make patrol outings very awkward if your ex is in the patrol too! Nobody in my troop ever had a relationship with anyone else in the troop, and at least for some I know that this exactly was the reasoning. You're right though, Americans scandalize very easily. If that's a big part of the reason then I will probably never emotionally understand, like I will never emotionally understand the problem with bikinis on beaches. It's hard to get all worked up about something that feels very ordinary.

@PACAN in Sweden. I was a regular scout with Svenska Scoutförbundet, the Swedish Scout Association, in the 90s. It's aligned both with WOSM and WAGGS. Now it's been renamed what everyone has always called it anyway, "the Scouts" (Scouterna). Gender-segregated scouting was so long ago for us that I read 'girl scouts' and 'boy scouts' with that hyper-cheery 1950s documentary narrator voice in my head. It's just not a thing anymore, or so it feels like to me. And it's hardly just us, of course. When we were selling popcorn door to door, one family scrambled to get their Belgian exchange student who wanted to see an authentic girl scout. (Sadly for her, of course, we were just ordinary scouts.) I get it. It's exotic when it's something you've only seen on TV. So, I don't mean to be over the top here, it's just very difficult for me to understand why something that's unremarkable and normal and generations have been happy with would be so complicated and difficult to do somewhere else with a fairly similar culture. There are reasons I suppose, I'm just not very good at guessing and/or understanding them. In fact, I don't get why GSUSA and BSA don't just merge. I guess they's some kind of animosity there? But to me it seems like even more inefficiency to have two NSOs instead of one. Way easier to get both scouts and leaders into more active and useful groups.

I'm definitely not a lawyer, so maybe I don't understand the liability problem. I also haven't followed the news about the lawsuit and bankruptcy as closely as I see that some have, so maybe I missed something there too. I thought what was so disgusting with the BSA sexual abuse was that it was pedophilia by leaders that was repeatedly and systematically swept under the carpet by the organization. I haven't picked up on any systematic issues with male scouts assaulting female scouts - has that been a problem for you also? If so, I can see needing to tread gingerly for the sake of PR on that as well. PR isn't liability, though, so I think I need an explainer of why simplifying the troop situation would be a legal liability. YPT already imposes much more gender separation than we had, so it's not obvious to me how the possibility that American men are just rapier and/or touchier than Nordic men hasn't already been considered.

I agree completely. Actually, maybe I don't, I don't see a need for single-gender troops at all. It just complicates everything unnecessarily. Normal gender-mixed troops worked well in my experience, it worked well in my dad's experience, and I assume it's still working well for gen Z now. It's been working well for at least 63 years, in fact. And we all shared tents and latrines. You just need a little common-sense coordination like all gender A out of the tent so gender B can change and then switch.

I see that our council is planning two council-wide campouts for both cubs and scouts proper this fall, instead of one for scouts proper and one for cubs. If this gives more cubs an opportunity to see that Scouts BSA isn't just more cub scouts, and that there is more to experience still, this could be something positive that comes out of a less than optimal policy change. I know my cub fell in love with some of the summer camp activities that cubs are too young for upon seeing them. I'm sure they aren't the only one.

There are waiting lists to join Scouting in Sweden after the pandemic, and interest in getting out in nature rose here too. The base interest is there. https://www.forbes.com/sites/monicahoughton/2018/04/16/why-camping-is-rising-in-popularity-especially-among-millennials/?sh=67c1885916c0 https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fresh-data-indicates-camping-interest-to-remain-high-in-2021-301273611.html https://www.sunset.com/travel/wild-lands/interest-in-camping-is-at-an-all-time-high-following-covid-19-outbreak My scout said they bragged about going camping all day when they came out to car pickup the last time we went camping. Their class will go on an "outdoor education" trip that sounds an awful lot like scouting (pitch a tent, cook, 5-mile hike) in fourth grade. We have trendy eateries with names like "The Camp" (main building is a gutted Airstream) and "The Outpost" in town. The question is, do parents who weren't scouts themselves think of us as a good guide to getting into outdoor life? We have the opportunity to do what we do best here. Let's take it.

I don't have an answer for you, @swilliams, but best wishes in finding a way to get your child actually going with their project over the summer. I hope you are both successful. 🙏

Exactly. You have to fail at leading your peers before you can succeed, and scouts gives you the chance to do it in a low-risk environment.

That's also why BSA should follow the WOSM rules and guidelines that it has committed to, which includes "Scouting reflects the societies in which it exists and actively works to welcome all individuals without distinction of any kind. This diversity should not only be reflected in the membership, but also in the methods and programmes used within the Movement." So, we should welcome all individuals without distinctions of any kind. If the BSA absolutely cannot abide this, it should exit WOSM and leave the field free for another organization to become the WOSM-aligned NSO in the US. Scouting is so much more than BSA, whether all its members think about that or not. The BSA is not free to define scouting by itself. We have signed up to follow the WOSM constitution, which we also have input on in a democratic process. I understand that this may not be how many here emotionally relate to the scouting movement, but if we're saying to follow the rules of the organization you sought to join then that logically includes following WOSM's rules.

Yes, national scouting organization. We are one of two in the US, I am contacting the one in Nepal as an agent of one in the US.

@Protoclete That's a great tip, thanks! The timing isn't right, but I bet the FEC has existing contacts with Nepal Scouts and some ways of working. No need to reinvent the wheel. 🙏

Honest question: what does Duty to God mean to you?

Nepal Scouts got right back to me! Off to a good start. May this benefit all sentient beings

I'm sure they will be not at all suspicious 😂 Joking aside though, this does seem like the sort of thing that will probably take multiple stabs. Appreciate the help.

Thanks guys! This is very helpful. 🙏

I recently realized that the Nepali Scouts have some of the most amazing high adventure around, because of course they do. I can't unsee the call to a climb up Mt. Baden-Powell or the existence of the Lumbini scouting district. I would love to organize a BSA trip to Nepal. What is BSA's modus operandi for this kind of thing? Normally, I would go the organizational route and contact someone in an administrative position to see what ts need crossing and whatnot, but based on the rate of success on contacting national I'm going to assume I won't hear back and need to organize it all myself. Is there some other administrative unit I should contact to avoid stepping on anyone's toes? Or am I free to create a Nepali trip committee and start contacting scouters in Nepal? P. S. Interested in climbing training tips 🧗‍♀️

Are these Westerners who have never made Bolognese sauce? 😯 Who are these people who don't cook with garlic?? You have to tell us more about this.

I see a lot of frustration with especially nationals on these forums, and if this is typical then I suppose I'm on the road to posting frustrated posts myself one day. You would think that people getting paid to administrate would have time to respond. I totally get why other volunteers might be slow. But isn't a core part of the value proposition for paid staff more attentive work?

I don't have much experience with either BSA councils or national yet, but neither have responded to emails I've sent requesting information, offering help, or making requests other than when a CC started the conversation. Maybe they're busy. Maybe not. Either way it's not clear that they are reachable.

@Tron Positional authority isn't the sum of possible reasons for why one ought to follow a particular directive, it's role-based power that an individual holds within an organization. This would be as opposed to personal power, which people have regardless of role. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescoachescouncil/2019/03/06/do-you-exude-personal-power-or-do-you-rely-on-positional-power/?sh=215b212a65ec You're not wrong about the insurance coverage issue, but look around - people are de facto violating the spirit of this rule while cooking up formal explanations for why they are in a legalistic way following it to address insurance-type reasons because nobody understands why this rule improves scout safety, let alone enough to give up a huge part of the program. People think they're taking care of the insurance and other policy-type issues with getting legalistic about what you call night 1 and night 2. They may not be, in which case it's even more important to explain why the rule is in place so that people actually follow it. Otherwise, it's a question of time until some pack is in the news for an insurance kerfuffle with national. Giving a clear answer to why this rule makes sense really isn't too much to ask.

You should eat a full bowl, yes, but that is not only enough, but better than a protein-heavy and fatty breakfast, which is what I assume you mean by energy dense based on breakfast suggestions from this thread. For endurance, you want to eat a ton of complex carbs for steady energy supply and have sugars of some kind (gels, dates, sports drink, trail mix) in your pocket during the activity. You don't want to run into the wall. Endurance is all about staying away from that wall with both your pace and your diet. I've done P90X a number of times, following the diet plans also, and I found that the fitter I got, the worse I felt on the initial high-protein diet. Just didn't have any energy. When you're fit and active you need complex carbohydrates in volume on your plate. https://www.outsideonline.com/2242911/oatmeal-still-worlds-best-performance-breakfast/