Where Do We Go From Here?

[Stosh 3452]

I've been thinking on this for sometime now and was trying to come up with a politically correct way of putting it out there on the forum, when I realized that was the problem.

 

As a history buff I spend a lot of time putting together the pieces and finding trends in issues that we face today as a society and Boy Scouting is no different.  

 

Here's the problem as I see it and just maybe the moderators will allow this threat some time to allow everyone a say so in it.  It is "as I see it" and no judgments implied. 

 

In the original Boy Scouts of America handbook it talked about knighthood and chivalry, the male mystique, so to speak, the knights in shining armor stepping up and boldly defending what needed to be defended, saving damsels and slaying the occasional dragon.  It evoked challenges, it evoked danger and adventure, it encouraged young to take it up a level and meet and be prepared to face whatever comes his way.  Brave was a valid and tangible Law at that time.

 

Well it got along pretty well the first half of it's existence, but now in the second half, say 1960's and beyond has it morphed into an emasculated shadow of its former self?

 

When climbing a tree a youth was encouraged by Dad to see how high they could climb, but cautioned by Mom to be careful.  Well, moms have been wining out.  Now it may be deduced that the adventure is contrived and almost impossible to provide, STEM is not an adventure.  

 

Equality for all has been the goal to the point where BSA has had to forego much of what made it historically important to young males in the first place.

 

There are no damsels in distress any more and you will be chastised if one were so much as hold the door for this damsel even with her hands full, In the 1960's male dominated societies like the military and police forces were likened to Baby Killers and Pigs.  Now that they have been integrated with sufficient estrogen, they are Heroes once again.  Has the message been heard?

 

Aggression has been forbidden, bullying and pack dominance has been outlawed, boys that show signs of such behavior are drugged with appropriate prescriptions so that they are docile enough to sit and be quiet.  Make a gesture with one's hand in a threatening way, such as pointing with the thumb up, and it will earn you a zero tolerance response to this male posturing of a few days in social and educational solitary confinement.  Heaven forbid if anyone were to chew their PopTart into the shape indicative of a lethal weapon.

 

The All-Male societies are forbidden and are cast into suspicion and this social pressure over the years have forced those once important institutions to emasculate effectiveness to the point where they are becoming obsolete if not outright outlawed.  (Yes, outlawed, out-side the law of equality where effective female demands can be maintained from within that organization).

 

Such emasculation started with the extension of estrogen into the whole essence of the program.  Den Mothers dominated the early years of the young boy's.  Dens, indicative of the home environment, were of course controlled by the nurturing provided by the female in society.  But as the young men grew older, the social patterning is replaced for boys with the influence of the male role in society.  But now the protector, the defender, the provider, etc.are now replaced with the extension of the Den Mother into the role of ScoutMaster and the process doesn't change.  We complain about Webelos III, but never honest enough to accept it as a process we have created.

 

The Exploring Program which was once the epitome of the male experience in scouting went co-ed both with the members as well as the leadership.  There is nothing uniquely male about it's make-up anymore.  The movement is to do the same for Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts.  We cannot allow boys to be boys anymore.  

 

Now that the Male/Female pattering of society is almost completely broken down, one begins to wonder with multiple female parenting (double Den Mothers) and effeminate males that the imprinting will only progress more along the lines it has for the past 50 years, removing maleness even further.

 

Of course this posting will be perceived as inflammatory on many levels because it asks the question as to how these social changes impact a once bastion of American society.  I'm sure there are many other there that will be first to comment and chastise for mentioning out-loud many of these "hidden" taboos we have come to embrace and protect with numerous zero tolerance, politically correct conversation.

 

If one were to read carefully these comments, there is no attempt made to be judgmental or to draw any conclusions on this subject, but merely observations from a historical perspective that living the last 50 years as an adult has garnered.  I'm not going to be around for the next 50 years so where BSA is heading is of very little consequences for me, but my children and grandchildren will be effected so I do harbor an interest in knowing where the program is headed.

 

I have also resisted attempts over the years to have my consciousness raised to an intolerant level so as to become militantly opposed to new ideas for old concepts.   I don't do lock-step very well, and I don't do re-writing history very well so as to fit it into our modern propaganda.

 

How emasculated has Boy Scouts of America become over the past 50 years?  What's in store for it in the next 50 years?  Will it end up an outdoor Girl Scout Program (vs. GSUSA which is more of a political campaign to promote the female dominance of society---not my words, my daughter's who is a Gold Level Girl Scout) that is open to boys?  That should get the ball rolling and as some of our new forum members have pointed out, this forum does tend to be a bit more thoughtful and introspective than other forums that do nothing but rant and rave with no valid purpose.

 

As request of the moderators.... Please keep the conversation civil and polite as one would expect a moderator to do, but if this thread seems to wander or take on multiple tangents, please allow it some latitude because I am genuinely interested in where it might go and what insights it might open for us to discuss.  Thanks.

 

Stosh

  

 

 

[Gone 435]

@@Stosh, yes it has morphed. Now a days mom will encourage the boy to climb higher and mom will still ask him not to. Or is that dad and dad? I get confused. Maybe it's just mom or dad because only one is in the picture.

[Hedgehog 334]

Stosh:

 

We did a shakedown hike with old scouts and new crossovers on a reallly nice day in March.  It had rained a lot the night before.  Our boots and pant legs were covered in mud.  As we got to the trailhead, I told the new guys, "Scouting is the one activity that you can come home covered in mud and your parents have to say 'good job.'"  Had a crossover on his first campout.  Mom was worried -- it was the first time he had ever been away from home overnight.  At pick-up, Mom asked her son how it was.  His face lit up as he said "awesome."  

 

Next weekend we are going hiking near some waterfalls -- we told the boys that they should wear bathing suits so they can get wet.  Our "free time" activity at camp is for the guy to all go out in boats on the lake.  We're doing a 50 mile backpacking trip in August and going sea kayaking in September.  We've got crossovers who can't wait to go on a 15 mile backpacking trip in October.  

 

In a different area, I had a meeting with a scout last week who was wrapping up the Family Life merit badge.  We discussed the role of parents and what makes a good father as required for the merit badge.  I won't go into the discussion, but at the end I told him that his parents had done a good job with him.  The same with the rest of the boys -- they are great kids who love the adventure of scouting.  

 

I know the boys that come into our troop and I see the men that come out.  Looking at them, I have no doubt about the next 50 years.

Edited May 30, 2015 by Hedgehog

[Horizon 97]

Stosh - you bring up some points, but you also draw some tenuous connections as well. You want to blame women, but are they really the ones to blame? The only women who show up on my campouts tend to shame 75% of the men with their skills and their level of physical fitness. Maybe I am blessed with great volunteers, or maybe I have just done a good job of setting expectations. The worst helicopter parent I had was a dad.

 

It was a mom who helped re-start the modern free range children movement: http://www.freerangekids.com/

 

I don't see that the modern military has a problem with adding women to the ranks, and I think that my Marine Corps has done the best job of it - they have maintained their standards for infantry officer. Now, this means that they have yet to get a women to graduate - but they opened it up, set the guidelines, and wait for the perfect warrior to arrive. Uh Rah! As for seeing the military as heroes again, that attitude shifted in the 80s once the all volunteer force began to arise from the depths of the draft days of Vietnam. The unfortunate side effect is that few of us are connected to those who serve: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-warrior-main-20150524-story.html#page=1

 

Those two points aside,I do think that our organization has seen its adventure status dropping, but I don't blame that on moms nearly as much as I blame it on other factors.

 

Legal: The desire to protect ourselves from lawsuits, etc. I drive around with huge binders of medical forms. I fill out a variety of permits. Last minute trips are next to impossible to get processed. 

 

Population growth: Many of us are living in urban / suburban areas and seeing locations for outdoor adventure slowly going away. I admit I am channeling my own challenges here in Southern California where open space is all either Federal or State land, is heavily impacted by our population, requires permits in advance, etc.

 

Environmental concerns: We are still in a transition from the "build a shelter, dig a firepit, cook a beast over the open flames" to "fluff your duff, backpacking stoves only, leave no trace." In our desire to follow the Outdoor Code, we have held back instead of finding a new way. Some of this is impacted by a generation of parents who only know the old ways and scoff at the new, combined with new leaders who only know the new ways, and don't know where we have come from. This balance needs to be restored. We can adventure while still following the Outdoor Code. Some see it as a barrier to anything fun.

 

The Curse of the Eagle. We have spent our marketing and messaging on the Eagle instead of the adventure. With the Eagle tied to college admission in many discussions, we attract youth (and their parents) based on that achievement alone, everything else is by the wayside. That triggers merit badge days, merit badge summer camps, a million different PORs, etc. How often is this forum full of dealing with parental appeals for Eagle BORs vs. campout adventures? We are reaping what we have sown. We are known for the Eagle, and not the campout. The BSA takes more youth camping than any other group - THAT should be our message. A game with a purpose is my favorite bit - we teach and train, our gym/classroom is the outdoors. In another thread there was a thought on having a minimum number of camping nights for each rank - I completely support that. Not sure of the #, but I would be happy with a minimum of 5 nights camping for every rank as a start.

 

Perception is keeping some away, aka the 3 Gs. Some outdoor types that would help us are turned-off by our reputation. Example: There is a cave exploring club that would be a great resource for us, but two of their organizers are gay and therefore not allowed to register and be counselors in climbing. We have a perception problem that keeps some from supporting us who would be great allies in restarting our adventures. The perception of us is a right-wing fundamentalist Christian organization with military overtones does not help us in attracting the some of the people we need to take our organization further. I don't think that this is an accurate portrayal, but our organization has done a poor job of countering it either. 

 

Modern Problems. Soccer used to be something you did in the fall and spring, now it is a year-round sport. Same with baseball where I live. Sports have migrated to year-round activities, where the best athletes are expected to be on expensive travel teams. Academics in America has gone to AP coursework, excessive homework, and everything focused on college matriculation. We have become an activity that fills in on the sides, or worse one that you choose over something else. This is not our fault, or our cause, but a situation we have to manage. I tell kids I would rather have them late at a meeting in their workout gear, than not showing up at all. I tell parents that if they want to drop off their son after their Saturday morning game instead of skipping the campout - I welcome them. I have made it very clear that they are welcome, and that has kept kids involved in the program we run - but it is still tough.

 

What age do we focus on? Is the BSA a youth program, a program for teenagers? My high school aged Scouts are SLAMMED at school, which keeps my Troop heavily weighted with 6th - 8th graders. By the time high school hits, I am lucky to get any time from those boys. This makes me have to try to keep them interested with other activities, while still running a program for the younger ones. We have tried to help start a Crew a few times, and it exists on paper, but the youth have never really taken off with it. My better ones often migrate over to the local Sea Scout program instead. 

 

So - I agree - we need to bring back the adventure side of Scouting. Some of this is promoting that which we already have, other parts revolves around changing some of our focus in the acitivities we are involved in as Scouts. I think that many of our challenges are not just our own, but more are an issue of how do we fit into this world. Our total numbers have been dropping since the 1970s (and I assume our percentage of available youth as well) for a variety of reasons. I don't worry about total numbers though - I just want to offer a great program for those who join.

[BadenP 93]

There is an old saying that" any organization must grow and change with the times or it will become obsolete." The BSA is no exception and unfortunately has made some poor decisions in its recent program changes and its policies.

[Gone 435]

@@Horizon, I like the curse of the Eagle point.

 

When I see Eagle Scout on a resume I ask a few more questions before I get all impressed. My findings of late are that many Eagles in the last 10-15 years are pretty light in their overall knowledge. Many admit to being pushed by mom and dad. Few meet that image BSA tries like heck to promote. This is why my unit tries like hell to make sure that our Eagles are worth more than the paper on which their certificate is printed. Later, many have come back to thank us for our efforts.

[Stosh 3452]

@@Horizon

 

No, I don't want to blame women, but there is a woman's connection to the reason why I put this post out there.  My daughter is the one who has brought up many of these points as has my wife in our discussions.  Daughter is seriously looking and already inquiring about the American Heritage Girl program for her daughter.  My wife, an avid outdoors person has commented many times that the only way I really get an adventure is when the two of us go,  She has been on scout activities and says that her daughters know more about camping and such than the older boys in the troop.   Her daughters have done the Alaskan commercial fishing, crabbing and such and pretty much figure that she has a pretty good handle on what adventure is really all about.  

 

And really?  Blame the women?  The groups my wife and daughters hang out with tend to be Master Gardeners, and kayaking/canoeing groups.  Mostly these groups are made up of women some as old as 72 years of age as far as activity is concerned have outings as frequent as 2-3 times a week.  My boys do really well at once a month.  And yes my wife is employed full time.

 

So there are plenty of women out there that are more adventurous than the program BSA has to offer.

 

So where is the problem with women?  Nope, but with the program that draws kids in with arts and crafts activities and progress with their boys through their childhood until they end up with arts and crafts eagle scouts.

 

Like I said the post was not judgmental, just observations from one who has been around for 50 years and seen many changes that have reduced the BSA from a powerhouse program to a generic youth entertainment program that still attempts to garner some sort of credibility based on past experiences that they didn't experience. 

[Rick_in_CA 401]

@@Stosh, I agree with many of your points, but I strongly disagree with your reasons. The problems don't stem from allowing women a greater role in the BSA (or society at large). Those days were not the "good old days", but the "bad old days".
 
Yes things in society have changed greatly in the years since the BSA was founded. In 1911, women in this country didn't yet have the right to vote, were bared from many professions (and would routinely get fired when they got married), and were effectively required to put up with pats on the butt by customers, or groping by their bosses to keep their jobs. Baden Powell was originally against the creation of Girl Scouts (because if girls can do it, it isn't worth doing?) and insisted they not use the word "Scout" (hence "Girl Guides"). Women attending universities were often barred from particular majors or classes, and when allowed in those classes were often told no matter their work they won't get anything better than a C. I could go on for pages. I consider these changes as "good things", and I hope you would agree?
 
As for

Aggression has been forbidden, bullying and pack dominance has been outlawed,...

I'm not sure what you are saying here? Unless you are claiming that bulling and aggression are good male virtues???

 

As for male only organizations and feminization, I have no desire to go back to the bad old days where things like the Tailhook scandal would not be a scandal (one thing a lot of people don't understand about Tailhook is the changes in society that caused the scandal was not a change in the attitudes and behaviors of the Naval officers, but that their usual behavior toward women had become no longer acceptable). The military for a long time has put all women into two categories: good women and whores. Both have their uses. But since all good women want to get married, have children and be a stay-at-home mom, any women that doesn't choose that path must be in the other category and can be treated as such. And that attitude was not unique to the military.

 

You can't be nostalgic for the days when "men were men and women were women" without acknowledging the dark sides. Things have changed for very good reasons, and mostly for the better.

 

As for why things have changed within the BSA, I think Horizon has done a good job of articulating the reasons above, so I won't repeat them here.

Edited May 30, 2015 by Rick_in_CA

[MattR 2659]

I agree with a lot of what Horizon says. One more observation: we, as a society, used to be interested in fighting evil, now we're interested in winning. It used to be about being good, now it's about being successful. By 7th grade you need to start specializing in your sport, and don't even think about skipping a game. This feeds the curse of Eagle and modern problems. One aside, the older scouts in my troop all say they like scouts because they can get away from the usual grind of AP, tests, homework, ... being successful.

 

One thing about pushing success is adventure has been pushed out of the way, and that's the problem I see. Adventure is about trying something new and sometimes failing. That's where memories come from. My son and daughter have a much greater sense of adventure then the scouts in my troop. My wife and I both did our share of adventure as teenagers and it rubbed off. The thread on Patrol Method I started is because I want to increase the sense of adventure in my troop. It's a lot harder than I thought. The problem with adventure is it can get close to the edge, and that's where all hell breaks loose at National and the parents. One person goes over the edge and nobody else is allowed to get even close. We can't climb on rocks more than waist high. Squirt guns. We can't shoot cannons at summer camp anymore because one fool stood in front of the cannon and the wad tore up his insides and he died. It was a terrible accident but why can't we learn from this and move forward rather than back away?

 

But it's not all National's fault. Adventure is a skill and many scouters don't have it. A lot of people don't have it and some have it in spades. The idea of adventure as a skill might help the BSA focus on developing it rather than focusing on Eagle numbers. It doesn't have to be kayak a class 5 rapid to get Eagle, but just stretch scouts to get out of their comfort zone, wherever that is for each scout. I can't believe it wouldn't really help membership.

 

BTW, I had a PL just send me email saying his patrol is going to do something else at the next meeting than what the PLC decided (a first!). One idea involves shooting lasers at each other, so don't tell anyone. It isn't hiking the continental divide but it's a start.

Edited May 30, 2015 by MattR

[eagle77 60]

  I think part of the problem just stems from money. Look at what they did in 1972 when they actually took the "outing" from "scouting". National believed that they were losing money by not being able to attract inner city boys. So let's make it possible to earn Eagle and not have to do too much outdoor or a limited number of outdoor activities. Let's make it more cub scout like and add the skill awards, further expence for troops but a chance for National to make more money. Another part is how long it takes them to fix some of the mistakes that they made. Look how long it took to bring Camping and Cooking MB back to the required list for Eagle.

 

  Another part is the "selling out" of the Eagle rank itself. At one time being an Eagle was like having a Mercedes today it's more like a KIA. Instead of working on and improving it's program with some type of quality control (of both paid and volunteer leaders) they just ignore it and let it go. How many scouts do you think have left program because of poor troop or pack programs and simply don't return?

[Stosh 3452]

@@Rick_in_CA

 

I guess I needed to clarify a bit better on the functionality of women and my comments not being aimed at judgment or blame which seems to be the reaction to the comments.

 

Okay let's face it.  Evolution, (  thought I toss that one in there) has resulted in males and females.  In certain respects they are equal and in other respects not.  If one doesn't know what I'm talking about, refer back to Biology 101.  With that being said, the female of most species is responsible for the welfare and protection of the young they bear.  If one has a hard time getting their mind around that, piss off a she-bear by messing with her cub and see what happens.  They are vicious and can handle their own and in many cases run off the males of the species trying to harm the offspring.  So If mamma ain't happy, nobody's happy.  On the other hand the males of the species tend to protect and provide for the female whose focus is on the up-briiging of the young.

 

So if one sees the dynamics of the 50's and 60's that's a fairly generalized stereotyped "family grouping".  Moms stayed home and dads went to work.  Well things began to change.  Well society changed for the better and women went into the work force leaving others to tend to the children.  Double income allows for such a social shift, thus "improving" and moving towards the good new days of the future.  Again, this is merely a subject observation, not a judgment.

 

With the independence brought on by the release from child rearing, females can now conclude there is no need for the males beyond breeding purposes.  Divorce is rampant because the reliance of dependence necessary to maintain the good-old-days structure is no longer there and thus monogamy is no longer necessary.

 

The complicated "family structures" that youth today live with is confusing for adults let alone some kid who's relying on adults to tend to them just aren't as readily identifiable as they once were in the not-so-good-old-days. 

 

By the time I graduated high school in the late 60's I knew of one divorced couple.  50 years later?  Try and find one who isn't.  Again a movement away from the not-so-good-old-days.

 

Throughout the past 50 years health concerns have improved to the point where people live longer than ever before, most outliving the life span of their parents.  Since the year 2000, that trend has reversed and children born after 2000 are not expected to outlive the life expectancy of their parents.  So this is an improvement over the not-so-good-good-old-days.

 

Yes, certain areas of abuse and degradation towards others has gotten better. but the trends still are there.  Unwed mothers are no longer spirited away to give birth in private.  Instead the issue is "taken care" of an no one need know.  Including the father.  In a divorce situation, what is the percentage of times the fathers are given full custody vs. the mothers given full custody and then tell me where the equality of the good-new-days is focused?  

 

Definitions of honor, respect, honesty, etc. have all changed for the better?  Today we can't even find a definition of one's role in society, let alone live up to it's expectations.

 

Of course the equal rights movement and all the riots and problems that resulted in and the new legislation has all but erase racism over the past 50 years.  Right Fergeson? Baleimore? ???

 

BSA along with a always changing environment seems to be out of step with "reality"  Well. maybe there are places where definitions are clear roles clarified, and a sense of security in it all still holds sway.  Those sanctuaries are few and far between and BSA isn't one of them.

 

As far as the bullying, pecking order comment.  As a 4' 11" 97# freshman in high school when it came to choosing up sides. I knew where I stood in the pecking order.  It was never an issue of getting picked it was always an issue of who's going to get stuck with me on their team.  I ended up in the long run far better off than those that got picked ahead of me.  Life works itself out.

 

Again, I'm not trying to be judgmental, just observing the lack of definition and how people are trying to adapt to the unknown.  Scouting is no exception to this problem.

[eagle77 60]

 Can't have that win win situation. Laws and changes are made I believe based on the necessity and pros and cons of said action. Problem is there are those out there that look at things different ways. Some would tell you that the womans lib thing was a total success and others that might say it didn't go far enough and still others that would blame it for the demise of the family unit. Its all according to where you stand and look at the implications from said actions. The other thing is how society works with and makes the adjustments to said changes.

[Stosh 3452]

 Can't have that win win situation. Laws and changes are made I believe based on the necessity and pros and cons of said action. Problem is there are those out there that look at things different ways. Some would tell you that the womans lib thing was a total success and others that might say it didn't go far enough and still others that would blame it for the demise of the family unit. Its all according to where you stand and look at the implications from said actions. The other thing is how society works with and makes the adjustments to said changes.

 

So then which of the options is causing good and what is causing bad for BSA?

 

It isn't a male issue or a female issue.  What we did as kids would have us all trumped up on prescription meds to "calm us down" in today's world.  They finally realized that wasn't the best course of action in the nursing homes for the elderly, but now they are taking a second look at the youth.  

 

Who's taking care of the kids?  Latch key kids, after school programs, sports because school then runs 'til after work hours, playoffs are on Sundays because most people don't work at that time., school lunch now includes breakfast and supper.

 

When I was a kid I remember the horror stories of how the Communists in Russia used to take kids from their parents and raise them in government educational facilities.  Today in America we have other people raising our kids and we do it voluntarily.

 

Is BSA one of those babysitting programs that plug up one night a week and a few weekends along the way?

[eagle77 60]

Stosh,

 

   Had to laugh, some of those things you have listed I was just talking to son about the other day. There is one for me that is not on your list, my parents would be in jail because my brother and I were "spanked" when we were young. Later they found a better way by grounding me or keeping me in the house. One TV, no cable, no internet, no cell phones, no gameboys, just books and your imagination. For some BSA is just another babysitting program, just something else for the kids to do.

[Stosh 3452]

Not only would my parents be in jail, they could have gotten me on child abuse, for spanking them, neglect for putting them in time-out and if they didn't get home on time from roaming the neighborhood, they didn't get supper served and they had to make their own.  They never got an allowance and were denied things on a regular basis while shopping in stores.  They were ignored when they did their temper tantrums and passed out in public.

 

The cycle of abuse continues.  My children are raising their children the same way.  

 

As a matter of fact both my daughters  one a college graduate the other a college dropout (4.0 valedictorian of her high school class full-ride scholarship) are both stay at home moms that are planning on home schooling for their children.  Both seem to be hung up in the good old days.... Neither of them think they are wasting their potential in life as stay at home moms.

 

Only one of the two, however, has chosen to live "off the grid".