Outside Magazine: Boy Scouts Should Allow Girls

[Eagledad 2785]

Not to derail and already derailed thread, but I am surprised the term "Scoutmaster" was kept. I would have thought that with the Patrol Method being so prevalent that another term might be more appropriate.

 

I believe Scoutmaster is very appropriate because Master describes the skills and abilities of the unit role model, mentor and guide. Master infers ability of skills in the style of a patient mentoring observer instead of directive leader. I believe the most power character trait of a adult scout leader is humility and the title Scoutmaster reflects that trait. I also feel that the title is a serious directive to owner of the position to take the role seriously. I admit, only a humble person would turn down the position if they felt their skills weren't acceptable for the needs of the scouts.

 

Barry

[Col. Flagg 909]

I believe Scoutmaster is very appropriate because Master describes the skills and abilities of the unit role model, mentor and guide. Master infers ability of skills in the style of a patient mentoring observer instead of directive leader. I believe the most power character trait of a adult scout leader is humility and the title Scoutmaster reflects that trait. I also feel that the title is a serious directive to owner of the position to take the role seriously. I admit, only a humble person would turn down the position if they felt their skills weren't acceptable for the needs of the scouts.

 

Barry

 

While I believe your interpretation is correct, I think the modern thinking of many SMs is "master" connotes leader of the Scouts, with all the egocentric eccentricities that go with it. 

[TAHAWK 1420]

Scouts Canada

 

Scouts U.S.A.

 

And Cambridge, you deal with a MUCH smaller bureaucracy.  

[NJCubScouter 1389]

We had one adult, (actually became an ASM) who was very offended by the term, Scout Leader. He admitted that he was a 60's hippy that learn to hate any type of authority, so any name with leader attached was offensive in his mind. 

 

I knew some people like that in college and law school, they did not like any kind of "hierarchy".  Some of them were willing to overlook their objections and become part of organizations that had a hierarchical organization, some did not. I remember once in college that a group of what I would describe as radical leftists decided to form a new newspaper because the established college daily paper (on which I was an editor and reporter) was not to their liking, and they tried to run it under "collective leadership" because they did not like hierarchies.  I remember telling one of them that it's really tough to run a newspaper that way, and he agreed with me, but he apparently had been overruled by the rest of the "collective".  I think they probably published one or two editions and that was it.

 

Barry, I am somewhat surprised that your ASM was so focused on the terminology.  A Boy Scout troop is a hierarchical organization regardless of what the positions are called, so if you are philosophically opposed to that sort of thing, you probably don't become a Scouter.  Not to mention, he didn't like the word "leader" but he accepted a position with "master" in the title?  Isn't that "worse"?

 

As others have noticed, this thread has gone completely off the rails, not that we have an actual rule against that.  It is probably a sign that we have said just about everything there is to say about the original topic, multiple times.

Edited July 6, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[Eagledad 2785]

Barry, I am somewhat surprised that your ASM was so focused on the terminology.  A Boy Scout troop is a hierarchical organization regardless of what the positions are called, so if you are philosophically opposed to that sort of thing, you probably don't become a Scouter.  Not to mention, he didn't like the word "leader" but he accepted a position with "master" in the title?  Isn't that "worse"?

 

LOL, he also didn't like uniforms, but admitted in the tent one night that he was proud to wear the Boy Scout uniform. I don't think he can explain his tolerance or acceptance of the hierarchical applications in the program either, but 20 years later he still tells me that scouting as an adult in our troop is one of his fondest memories. Maybe some hippies grow up.

 

Barry

Edited July 6, 2017 by NJCubScouter
Putting reply outside the quote box

[Stosh 3452]

What we often forget is the Scout is the reason why we have the organization in the first place, why then are they at the bottom of the hierarchy?

 

When I run the patrol method in my troop the most important person in the group is the Scout.  He's the one that has paid for the program and expects to receive something in return for his money.  If that be the case: The scout is #1 on the chart.  His PL supports his success and growth in the program.  The SPL is below the PL supporting them in their efforts to make sure their patrols are successful and healthy.  Then comes the leadership corps who support the SPL in the various tasks he is responsible for.  After all the boys are placed on the chart, the SM and ASM's support them in their success as a troop.  The committee UNDER the CC makes sure the SM and his staff are properly supported and equipped to support the boys.

 

Without the SUPPORT of adults the program would struggle but could function in a pinch.  But without the boys, there is no program.  The boys are not their for our edification, they do not "work" for us under our tutelage.  They are the reason why we are doing what we are doing and their success is dependent on how well we support their efforts.  The adults don't run the show, the boys run their own show.  We as adults are there to HELP make that happen.

 

I do not like the hierarchy charts put out by the BSA they give the wrong impression of what the Patrol Method is all about and it only encourages abuse by adults.  

[NJCubScouter 1389]

LOL, he also didn't like uniforms, but admitted in the tent one night that he was proud to wear the Boy Scout uniform. I don't think he can explain his tolerance or acceptance of the hierarchical applications in the program either, but 20 years later he still tells me that scouting as an adult in our troop is one of his fondest memories. Maybe some hippies grow up.

 

Barry

My guess would be that he decided that the good outweighed the bad. I can relate to that.

[Col. Flagg 909]

@@Stosh, the best org chart I have seen has the PL at the top of each patrol and the boys underneath him. The SPL is off to the side along with the other troop leaders (ASPL, Instructors, etc.). 

 

The adult "boxes" are off to the side of the SPL...and very small.

 

I think BSA does a disservice to the program by promoting graphics like these in the ILST and other materials.

[NJCubScouter 1389]

I think BSA does a disservice to the program by promoting graphics like these in the ILST and other materials.

I have no strong feelings about where the boxes should be placed, but I do find one piece of terminology in that chart to be kind of odd. "Boy Scout Committee Members"? How about "Troop Committee Members"? That's what I am.

[Stosh 3452]

@@Stosh, the best org chart I have seen has the PL at the top of each patrol and the boys underneath him. The SPL is off to the side along with the other troop leaders (ASPL, Instructors, etc.). 

 

The adult "boxes" are off to the side of the SPL...and very small.

 

I think BSA does a disservice to the program by promoting graphics like these in the ILST and other materials.

 @Col. Flagg

 

I put the PL as the highest ranking OFFICER in the troop.  It is ultimately up to him to insure the safety, development, welfare and success of the members (his patrol).  It is everyone else's job to support him in his success. 

 

As far as officers are concerned, starting with the PL, his right-hand man is is APL, a position BSA really doesn't recognize as important enough to earn a spot as a position of responsibility.  Yet his responsibility is to insure the success of his PL!  He doesn't just hang around waiting for the PL to be absent, he is to know just as much as the PL's function and more so to insure the PL is successful with what he does with the patrol.  That's a really important job in the success of the patrol method.  The left-hand man to the PL is is liason with the adults, the SPL.  The SPL is the go to man for any support needed beyond the scope of the patrol.  The SPL coordinates between the various PL's.  In my book (I earned the title BSA Heretic legitimately) the SPL doesn't run the troop, he supports the work of the PL as the SENIOR PL who needs to be focused on the workings of the Patrol Method in the troop.  When my troop gets up to 3-4 patrols, the PL's select one person to be the person who coordinates among the patrols in insure they are all successful.  It was interesting, as I have pointed out in the past, when it came time to select the SPL, the PL's picked the best-of-the-best among the APL's to fill that position.  The best person supporting the PL was given the job of supporting all the PL's.  It only seemed natural.  Thus the SPL was selected by only the PL's who would be the ones that would benefit directly from the work of the SPL.  The SPL did not interfere in the workings of any of the patrols and worked only with the PL's and APL's.

 

Whether or not this is a good thing, it was the design created by those boys at that time and it worked really well.  There was no confusion between the "leadership" of the SPL interfering in the operation of the PL's "leadership" in their respective patrols.  After I left that troop they went back to adult led so I have no data on the longevity of such a setup.  My troop is small right now and is run by the PL who doubles as SPL activities when needed.  When there were two patrols, they took turns.  It was only when they got up to 3 patrols did the discussion arise for the need for someone to function as an SPL.

[Eagledad 2785]

I don't know, some members here struggle with "master" in Scoutmaster. If they can't get past that, how can they understand the adult/scout relationship? The concept that this is an adult program created to develop boys into citizens of character and leaders of integrity is just about out of reach of the understanding. AND WE WANT TO ADD GIRLS!

 

Barry

Edited July 6, 2017 by Eagledad

[RememberSchiff 3689]

Too much PC methinks. When I was a "Den Leader", I preferred to be called a "Den Mother" as I wore my mother's old patch (circa 1960). It annoyed some.

 

Up next, rename Second Class to ...

 

My $0.02,

[NJCubScouter 1389]

Too much PC methinks. When I was a "Den Leader", I preferred to be called a "Den Mother" as I wore my mother's old patch (circa 1960). It annoyed some.

 

Up next, rename Second Class to ...

 

My $0.02,

 

Well, if "Second Class" is not considered self-esteem-building enough, I guess that spells doom for my proposal (from when the "new" requirements came out, just about 2 years ago I guess) to have the "new" Scout rank renamed Third Class and to have the Scout badge turn back into the "joining badge" and basically be given out just for showing up at your first troop meeting.  I realize that's never going to go anywhere.

 

Correction: I got my own proposal wrong.  It was to rename what is now Tenderfoot to "Third Class", what is now the "Scout rank" to Tenderfoot, and make the Scout badge back into the "joining badge" that can be earned in the first or second meeting.  So in other words, Scout, Tenderfoot, 3rd Class, 2nd Class, 1st Class, Star, Life, Eagle.  Not that it matters, since it isn't happening.

Edited July 6, 2017 by NJCubScouter

[MattR 2667]

I don't know, some members here struggle with "master" in Scoutmaster. If they can't get past that, how can they understand the adult/scout relationship?

 

We had a similar discussion about Obedient once upon a time. Trust is a big part of it. If you don't trust your SM or PL then there are bigger issues. If you trust them, then do as they say.

[TAHAWK 1420]

"Nearly First Class" ?