What if we DID drop uniforms?

[evmori 11]

If fish didn't have gills they would die. If Scouts didn't wear uniforms would they die? Oh the horror!

 

I like the idea of wearing uniforms for special occasions like flag ceremonies, courts of honor, etc. Sorta like wearing your Sunday best to church.

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Centreville Scout 10]

Doctors , paramedics, and policemen all wear uniforms on duty. Uniforms should be worn during meetings, but most doctors, paramedics, and policemen don't wear uniforms on the street, so why should the scouts make them everyday wear? We don't. They're for stuff with the scouts. They're worn at meetings in the CO, like doctors wear them at their offices, paramedics wear them in the ambulances and hospitals, and policemen wear them in cop cars, their offices, and on patrol duty.

[Bob White 20]

Scouts are not required to wear uniforms all the time. I fear my example was a stretch for some posters. The point is that removing an element would make it something different than what it is it would no longer be Boy Scouts. Now for some units removeing some of the methods would have no noticable effect because they don't use them anyway. What do those units have in common, loss of scouts, poor growth, no scouting program. Without the unoform some units would go from doing stuff in a scout uniform to just ...doing stuff and they would loose all identification with the BSA.

 

You know on second thaought, that might not be so bad.

[evmori 11]

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the uniform method the last one added? If a unit only wears uniforms on special occasions are they not following the uniform method?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[Backpacker 11]

Bob

POOR POOR Analogies, in the early days of scouting most of the boys did not have any uniforms and yet they considered themselves good scouts, are you saying they were not. The uniform did not make these boys scouts the program did and it is still true today. Uniforms have their place in scouting but that is not the subject of this thread.

 

The question here is what really makes scouting scouting, the program or the uniform ,and can scouting still be scouting if uniforms were no longer a program method by National.

[Bob White 20]

In the arly days just like today, Young people scout age want to feel they belong and are accepted in a group. It is a natural progression in the growth and maturing cycle of humans. Many boys will naturally seek group identity whether it is gang colors, a football team uniform wearing the cap of their favorite ball club, or a scout uniform. Identifying yourself to a social group is a normal and healthy part of development.

 

There is nothing mystical about why the BSA uses uniforming. What is a mystery is the inability of some sadults to understand and use this method in a positive way.

[evmori 11]

So if Scouts don't wear their uniforms, they aren't Scouting? Is the uniform that important? And is it is that important, why isn't one required for membership?

 

Ed Mori

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10

[madkins007 10]

Interesting responses! Thanks!

 

Let me try a revision:

 

What if we went to something similar to B-P's old statement that all you need to be a Scout is a 'neckerchief and a stave'.

 

What if we did sorta like the GSUSA and simplified the uniform to one or two highly identifiable items? What might we use?

 

[Bob White 20]

"What if we went to something similar to B-P's old statement that all you need to be a Scout is a 'neckerchief and a stave'.

 

You would have some untrained or inept leaders losing scouts by the trailer load and blaming the problem on the BSA staves not being high enough quality or costing too much.

 

One question will of course be repeated over and over, "are staves required for membership?".

[SR540Beaver 116]

What would happen if we did away with the uniform? The BSA would lose its identity in the community. Just about anytime I walk into a Wal-Mart, there are kids selling something at the entrance. Who are they? I usually don't know until they ask if I want to buy Girl Scout cookies, candy for their soccor team, a hotdog for football or some kind of discount card for their baseball team. The uniform as with all uniforms identifies you to the public. People know what the BSA is and what a good organization it is. Everytime I've walked in a store with my son in uniform, I always see smiles on people's faces and they often stop him and ask him about scouting. Funny, he doesn't get the same reaction when he goes around in public with me in his "civvies". Imagine a 4th of July parade with a troop marching down the street in their oversized t-shirt and baggy pants dragging the ground. On second thought, scratch that. Marching in a parade even in their civvies would be as uncool as wearing that geeky uniform. The uniform serves as identity within scouting and to the public. Without it, most people would never think of scouting without the reminder.

[Prairie_Scouter 10]

As one poster said, and as I've said a couple of times, the uniform method, like most everything in Scouting, is based on opinion, either B-P's original opinions, or those that followed him. They are not etched into stone tablets and delivered from mountaintops. They could be changed. That doesn't necessarily mean that they should or will, just that they could.

 

One point that posters have made that has relevence is that the uniform identifies Scouts as Scouts. Now, to me, that raises the question of what parts of the uniform identifies someone as a Scout? Is it the whole uniform? Some significant part? As one poster said, when his son is out in uniform, he is asked about Scouting, but not if he's in his civvies. So, say, if he left off his Scout socks, would that make him less recognizable? Probably not.

 

My point? As usual, not sure , but possibly that it's good to have *something* that identifies Scouts as Scouts, but maybe there's no need for the level of detail that the current uniform goes to. Maybe the shirt should be considered the "main element" with the rest optional, as long as the Scout is otherwise "neatly dressed" when wearing the shirt. The shirt probably identifies someone as a Scout more than any other part of the uniform.

 

 

[evmori 11]

Excellent point, Prairie. The shirt is the most recognizable part of the uniform.

[FScouter 24]

Which part of the shirt is the most recognizable? Maybe we could ditch the patches, or have the manufacturer sew on 2 or 3 generic "Scout" patches. That would make it easier on everyone. OR maybe the patches are what is most recognizable. In that case we could just glue them onto a tee-shirt and ditch the Scout shirt. Hey, maybe just a fancy Boy Scout hat. That ought to be sufficient recognition for the public.

[htc1992eaglescout47553 10]

To the best of my opinion, the idea of uniforms is to have the Scouts feel that they are on equal footing (no matter what economic class they are from).

 

I also think that the uniform is a source of "bragging rights" (what awards did they earn and so on). Someone asked if the uniforms were dropped, where would they put the patches?

 

I think that uniforms bring some sort of tradition to Scouting.

[SR540Beaver 116]

We could just go with BSA tattoo's and peircing jewelry. Maybe a ring in your left eyebrow for tenderfoot, in the right for 2nd class, a nose stud for 1st class, the left ear for star, right ear for life and a tongue stud for eagle. Boy Scouts of America can be tattooed on one arm and POR's on the other. An eagle on the chest is optional.