Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
JoeBob

WHY the Uniform Pants?

Recommended Posts

Never spun a thread before. Feel like a spider... This is interesting.

 

In the other thread people were discussing the dynamics, leverage, example, etc. regarding an ASM who refused to wear the uniform pants. But no one ever addressed directly the topic that I need help with.

 

WHY must the 'Uniform Method' require the orificial Scout Pants?

 

The uniform shirt is an easy sell. All the bling helps people know who you are, and serves as a bulletin board for scouts to strut their achievements. Very important to recognition and advancement.

 

But why the pants? Other than to enrichen supply? No insignia down there. Which is probably a good thing.

"Why are you wearing a 'Paul Bunyan' badge on your pants fly?"

 

The zipoffs are marginally uncomfortable. They rub on your thighs. And anything heavy in your cargo pockets will beat you legs tender after five miles. A well fitted pair of jeans and a belt pack will serve you just as well, if not better.

 

I want to know the inherent value of the uniform pants so that I can sell them to my scouts.

 

Help me out guys>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an SA who did not wear Scout pants on an outing once. We went canoeing and the night after, I noticed one of the Scouts got out of his tent and seemed disoriented (I'm a very light sleeper). I got out and soon the Scout was vomiting - turns out he drank some river water and had a mild case of "food poisoning" - but at the time I was worried that the whole camp may have an issue with "real" food poisoning (they did not it was an isolated incident). Well after I calmed him down I woke up his dad, who was sawing logs.

 

We re-arranged some of the sleeping arrangements after that - put dad in with Scout, move other Scout to another tent, etc. We stayed up for about an additional hour to make sure none of the other scouts got sick and it was then that we noticed "dad" wasn't wearing Scout pants (nor any other pants, just his "tighty whities") and thus earned the nick name of Sponge Bob No Pants. Parents who don't attend our camp-outs always wonder what goes on at our outings. :)

 

Bottom line, encourage the Scouts and Scouters to wear as complete a uniform as possible but don't sweat the small stuff. I was disheartened that our troop committee felt there was absolutely no reason to wear a uniform but they made damn sure the Scouts did during a BOR! Like I stated earlier, the boys are great at smelling out hypocrisy!

 

The company line is as follows:

The uniform makes the Scout troop visible as a force for good and creates a positive youth image in the community. Boy Scouting is an action program, and wearing the uniform is an action that shows each Scout's commitment to the aims and purposes of Scouting. The uniform gives the Scout identity in a world brotherhood of youth who believe in the same ideals. The uniform is practical attire for Boy Scout activities and provides a way for Boy Scouts to wear the badges that show what they have accomplished.

 

The uniform is rarely required (Jambo lone exception - for PR reasons!). Even for an Eagle Scout Board of Review, the uniform "should" be worn but is not required to be worn:

The Scout should be neat in appearance and his uniform should be as correct as possible...

Board of Review(This message has been edited by acco40)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"WHY must the 'Uniform Method' require the orificial Scout Pants?"

 

 

uniform

   [yoo-nuh-fawrm]

 

adjective

1. identical or consistent, as from example to example, place to place, or moment to moment: uniform spelling; a uniform building code.

2. without variations in detail: uniform output; a uniform surface.

3. constant; unvarying; undeviating: uniform kindness; uniform velocity.

4. constituting part of a uniform: to be issued uniform shoes.

 

The answer to your question, is in the question. Uniforms are the SAME, hence, the word "uniform" if BSA did not want the scouts and Scouters to look the same, it would nt be called a uniform. It could be called a Scout costume or Scout outfit but not a uniform as to be uniform, they must all be the same

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A well fitted pair of jeans."

 

Have you been anywhere near a schoolyard these days?

Well-fitted for what? A circus?

BDPT00

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JoeBob, I don't see any value in the official pants, as a clothing item or a "method."

 

Parents want value for their dollar and a product that will last. BSA pants provide neither.

 

I frankly quit advocating BSA pants a few years ago. Just wasn't worth the trouble. A couple councils ago, my DE never wore the BSA pants, even during official events in town. He wore something (don't know the brand) that was dressy enough for meetings and rugged enough for outdoors.(This message has been edited by desertrat77)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole purpose of a uniform is to present oneself as one-form, or all look alike. To say that only the shirt is uniform and the rest is not is really not a uniform. Uniforms are intended to produce a common identity or image as well. A police uniform is different than that of the medical scrubs, a scout uniform is different than say that of an auto mechanic or religious clergy. Along with identity and image, it also marks one as somewhat "professional" or unique from the rest of society. It is intended in many cases to avoid having to produce identity in certain situations. At a car accident for example, the uniforms distinguish the various personnel as police, medical and fire fighter without the need of having to produce identification of duties. A partial uniform adds confusion and even suspicion. If a police officer is not in full uniform, a sense of: is that person for real or not, comes to mind.

 

If watching a movie or TV show one sees a camper in a uniform of sorts, one can easily recognize whether it is BSA or some other kind of youth camper program. However if the person is in full BSA uniform one knows for sure.

 

The BSA does allow for a certain amount of identification beyond the scout uniform. For example, in my former troop, one patrol of boys all wore the expedition hat with a green/tan hat cord. The PL had a yellow hat cord and the APL had a sky blue hat cord. In a sea of scouts, the expedition hat was rather unique, but with the hat cord I could tell where my boys were and where their leaders were at all times.

 

Neckers do the same for distinguishing the various troops that choose to do so. At a jamboree, camporee or other large gathering of scouts, it's easy to tell who was who.

 

Uniforms in scouting are not necessary, but they do go a long way to make life easier. If the leadership of a troop thinks it is okay with getting by with a partial uniform, so be it, but if one wishes to produce the image of a complete scout, a complete uniform says it all. Ever wonder why Eagle Scouts at EBOR in partial uniform look "out of place" or give the image of just getting by?

 

I had one boy show up in a patched, worn, stained, but carefully laundered and ironed uniform for EBOR. When questioned about it by the board, he simply said it had been to too many outings over the years to stand up to the abuse. They went on to the next question without batting an eye. Pretty hard to argue with Scout Pride.

 

Stosh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The primary reason for the pants is to look better. A Scout in full uniform looks sharper, and a troop all in full uniform does too.

 

This reason appears to be insufficient to influence most of the boys, though, and I've generally given up on the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know when I was working at camps in the UK, many scout associations only have the youth in a shirt and the kids can wear any pants. I got pic of scouts in some very funny pants and shorts. didn't look uniform at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish the pants were optional. If you think they are icky for men, you should try them when you are a woman. Every noticed how horrifically unflattering they are to ladies?

 

I try not to be vain and I really do not care that I look like death warmed over after two nights in the wild, but c'mon! On top of that I have to wear pants that make me look like a trussed chicken? Ugh, sorry no.

 

I am officially a committee member as far as BSA knows, and Awards Chair for the pack. I took all my training for that. I also took all the training for den leader (including leader specific), Hazardous Weather and spent a cold rainy Saturday outside getting BALOO trained. But I am not an official den leader (even though I help a lot and do most of the planning) because, I am sorry, but I refuse to wear those pants. Go ahead slam me and call me vain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My biggest concern with the zip pant/shorts is has any of you had any sucsess in keeping them inflated when doing the inflate the pants life vest requirement for advancement?(first class 9c)

for some reason all the air leaks out of the zippers and the scout sinks.

the other thought is how many different styles of pants are there.not to mention the shorts and kilts.

is it the style or the color that is important.

I think any OD color pant/shorts will work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my son's troop is shirt only - though for an eagle COH some recipients will ask that those that are participating in helping at the ceremony be fully uniformed.

 

my son wears the pants for SMC, BOR, and COH.

 

on campouts I agree on shirt only for traveling - here in Iowa we have so many different types of weather we camp in that having scout pants always on just doesn't make sense.

 

at summer camp we will now and then see a troop that is full uniform (most in this area are shirt only) and I do have to say they look sharp and I wish my son's troop was full uniform as it does look good. but then I also remember the days of going straight from football or soccer practice and pulling off pads and just throwing on the shirt... having to change pants would've required a pop into the bathroom and made him late. and we still have some that do that in his troop.

 

I'd like to see my son's troop do as my son does with the 3 biggies of SMC, BOR, and CoH. and I wouldn't care if they were BSA or just another brand that are same color as I know the price and growing boys can be a factor for many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh, speaking of costs. My son outgrew his uniform recently and since he was crossing over, we decided to just retire it and buy a new one. Pants, shirt, scout handbook, a couple of patches (council patch and bsa patch) plus badge magig: $112.00. Yeah...my wallet hurts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like my uniform pants. They are a vast improvement over the old uniform pants and in my experience, they wear like iron. Trust me, I'm in them a LOT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I resisted the Scout pants for my first 5 yrs as a Den Leader. Then, when I saw the Troop that my oldest was going to cross over to, was a full uniform troop, I decided to go for the pants (got a closeout on the pre-Centennial switchbacks). I like them, especially as shorts. I have no problems with the cargo pockets--they hold my wallet and whatever else I need just fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My son likes the current boy scout uniform pants a LOT, too. He wears them all the time and just got a pair of the venturing ones. The newer styles are an improvement (in my view and his) over the old ones. I see young men wearing them around the college campus where I work, all the time.

 

But I agree with momof2cubs - the fit for women is horrendous. "Trussed chicken" is right, and that is not my favorite look. I wanted to like them and wear them, really I did. But I can't find any sort of size that fits me properly and I'm an odd build, nor am I particularly fussy about things like that. Honestly, I don't mind (too much) plunking down the money for my son's pants because I know he'll wear and wear and wear them. But I will not waste $40 on pants that won't fit me.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×