Jump to content
an_old_DC

Just curious about background

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I am putting this thread in I&P just in case it goes off the rails. I don't want to start any debates, judge anybody or imply anybody is more passionate than somebody else, I honestly am just curious about something.

So, for the folks who are excited about girls being able to join Scouts, BSA next year, were you a Boy Scout as a youth, are you an Eagle Scout, and have you been a Scoutmaster?

And because I don't want to cross post in a different forum, if you are excited about Scouts BSA members--along with Venturers and Sea Scouts--soon to become eligible to join OA, were you an Arrowman as a youth? Have you been Chapter Advisor or some other Lodge role as an adult?

 

 

 

Edited by an_old_DC
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in favor of all of the recent changes, and I'm an Eagle Scout, Den Leader, Pack Committee member, OA Brotherhood. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In favor, with some concerns about how it all will work out but no reservations about it. I was a Webelos Scout and Boy Scout from the late 70's.  And yes, I wore the long socks with garters/tassels, but I wore a garrison cap. I did not stick with the program. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I'm an Eagle Scout, 10 years an SM, was Vice Chief of Ajapeu Lodge in my long ago youth.  Currently, my troop is viewed as the somewhat radical troop in my district because of how boy led we are --- if it's not a matter of health and safety, or of BSA or my CO's policy, then it's up to the scouts to decide, plan, and carry out their program.  "Things we've always done" and "the way we've always done it" are not arguments for doing or not doing something now.  I tell that to my scouts, and I think it applies to most of life.

I have not been involved more than peripherally in my current lodge as an adult.  I'm friends with the guys who are; they seem happy with their role and my plate is full.

I'm glad that girls will now have the same opportunity to grow in scouting the way that i and my sons did, because I believe in the program.  And as I've told several people locally in recent discussions, if I'd had daughters instead of sons I would have spent the last 15 years mad that they couldn't have the benefits of scouting.  I believe in the unique benefits of our program as a character, citizenship, and personal fitness development program for young people.  There's nothing in our program that young women today don't need just as much as young men do, and there's nothing in our program that isn't appropriate for young women to do.  I am pretty happy with the idea of retaining single gender troops, if/when my CO goes that way our troops will be separate in their meetings and programming, but will have the material support and access to the fifty plus years of equipment, knowledge, and experience that our current troop already has.  If the decision was to go full co-ed I would have liked it less, but I think the benefits to our nation of opening the program up to the other half of our young people would have outweighed even the down side of losing some of the advantages of single gender learning.

As to OA, for me it was an opportunity to hang out with and spend time camping with older guys who shared my interests and ideas of fun.  It was then and should be now an honor society for scouts who are above and beyond the average.  Allowing female Venturers has been overdue for a while, and I've heard that from the female venturers in my council.  Frankly, my lodge would be stronger if some of them had been allowed membership.  As long as they've done the camping I'm fine with letting them in even outside of the Scouts BSA pathway; I don't really have an opinion on Sea Scouts and suspect the numbers are so low that their participation is irrelevant.

Edited by T2Eagle
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, excited.  Eagle Scout, Ordeal OA (weak lodge), Den Leader and Committee Chair at Pack

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not excited about it.  I am accepting of it, and if asked to be the advancement chair for a troop of girls as well as the current troop of boys (whether "linked" or otherwise), I will accept that too.  It is starting to look like, if we have a sufficient number of girls in our town who are interested, we will probably end up with "linked" troops.  Or a linked troop. A linked troops?  They really need to get that terminology straightened out if they want me to use it correctly. 

Grammar aside, I view the whole thing with a mixture of curiosity and concern.

Anyway, I was a Cub Scout and Boy Scout, 1966-76, am a Life for Life, was SPL and JASM, was briefly an 18-year-old ASM, got my Ordeal sash but never really participated in OA after that.  After my son joined Scouting, I have been a Den Leader, Assistant Cubmaster and most recently Troop Committee Member for the past 15 years or so (and currently Advancement Chair), and MBC for the "Cits", Communications and Law.

For whatever it's worth, my younger brother, who is an Eagle and stayed active as an ASM for a couple of years after turning 18, but has no children and has not been involved in the BSA since then, is dead-set against this.  Not that it matters that much, because he is not a Scouter.  What I find funny about this is that my brother is way, way more "liberal" than I am and was all for opening the BSA to gay people, so the average person would probably not expect my brother to have the opinion that he does on admitting girls.  I certainly did not expect it.  But there you go.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As many know, I’m still a youth. Life scout, 15, one merit badge left until Eagle, SPL for 2 years (my last term ends next week!).

I honestly don’t see the real problem with girls being in Boy Scouts. I mean yes, Boy Scouts are in the name, but still. Girls will not be ruining the program for us, they will have their completely own program. Yes, GUSA and BSA should merge but we know that will not happen. 

I would like to know how this change will affect YOUR troop, and your program. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's about time for both girls in Scouts and Venturers/Sea Scouts in OA .  And since you did put it in I&P, but not necessarily meaning to open a can of worms, I'm looking forward to when the BSA finally gets out of the discrimination game altogether and allows agnostics and atheists to join.

Arrow of Light, Eagle Scout, OA Vigil Honor, OA Chapter Chief, Lodge Vice Chief,  National Camp School Day Camp Program, National High Adventure Base staff (Okpik before it became a Council/Unit program - and summer session), Assistant Scoutmaster, Scoutmaster, District Committee, Unit Committee and Merit Badge Counselor.

 

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it would also be interesting to have the same background on those who disapprove of these changes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chris1 said:

I think it would also be interesting to have the same background on those who disapprove of these changes

Not really. We know they are all "Real Scouts"... I think the goal here is to prove or disprove the credentials of the "liberal" wing. From the responses so far  it should be clear that the inclusive group is just as involved and hence we can move on from the "no true Scotsman" fallacy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, oldbuzzard said:

Not really. We know they are all "Real Scouts"... I think the goal here is to prove or disprove the credentials of the "liberal" wing. From the responses so far  it should be clear that the inclusive group is just as involved and hence we can move on from the "no true Scotsman" fallacy...

I don't know that we really do know that.  I know a number of them are all "Real Scouts" but it's also been my experience that some of the most ardent defenders of "Eagle Scout Standards" have never been Eagle Scouts themselves.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking from a scientific and statistical analysis standpoint it would be good to have information from both sides.

I get the feeling that many people feel the majority of scouters are on THEIR side, and those that disagree are a "crazy fringe group"  .  

So if we all give our opinion along with our background maybe we will see a device along age, or when they started as a scouter, or geography, or district/council involvement, or involvement is specific programs, or if commissioners tend to feel one way, while those who have attended jamboree feel another, or if training staff tend to differ from those who have attended 2 or more national high adventure bases.  Etc 

Let us all TRY to stay respectful, and accept the right of others to have a DIFFERENT opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm excited about the recent changes as well.  Initially I was apprehensive about girls, but after a couple of months I thought it through and am very excited about it.

I'm a father with a son and two daughters.  I love my daughters dearly and want them to have the same opportunities that I did.  They are both Girl Scouts now and may stay that way - it's their choice.  But, I'm very excited that they have the opportunity to benefit from the program that I did.

I was a Cub Scouts and earned Arrow of Light.  I was a Boy Scout and stopped at Star.  I was not OA.  As an adult, I've not been a Scoutmaster - but have been: Asst. Cubmaster, Cubmaster, Den leader, Pack Committee Chair, Troop Committee Chair, Crew Committee Chair, and District Committee member.  My brother is a Life for Life and OA member.  My father was an Eagle, Webelos Den leader, and Cubmaster.  My grandfather a Scoutmaster and Silver Beaver recipient.  Scouting has very deep ties in our family. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chris1 said:

I was just thinking from a scientific and statistical analysis standpoint it would be good to have information from both sides.

I get the feeling that many people feel the majority of scouters are on THEIR side, and those that disagree are a "crazy fringe group"  .  

So if we all give our opinion along with our background maybe we will see a device along age, or when they started as a scouter, or geography, or district/council involvement, or involvement is specific programs, or if commissioners tend to feel one way, while those who have attended jamboree feel another, or if training staff tend to differ from those who have attended 2 or more national high adventure bases.  Etc 

Let us all TRY to stay respectful, and accept the right of others to have a DIFFERENT opinion. 

I think it has  less to do with Scouting history and a lot more to do with geography.  I'm east coast born, raised, and educated.  I live in a pretty progressive city and have for 20 years.

I'd suggest if we do that, let's start a separate thread.  I think that cuts down on the tendency to try & convince others.

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

×