Jump to content

Boys-only weeks at camp


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, mashmaster said:

… Regarding the bathrooms, most camps I have gone to in the last five years have been converting to the single stall approach with a sink/toilet/shower all in one locking room.  It works for any gender or age.  Personally I am a big fan of these because they just work.  …

Savvy predators like them too … it reduces the number of eyes that may spot the hidden cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Only for the perpetual victimization crowd.  The message it sends otherwise is: - Different people value different things.  Some scouts value an all-male experience.  It's diversity that makes us

I think the real problem is middle school aged children.....  Both male and female lose their minds during this period of life.  My program is high school and up but for my younger scouts that are 14i

Sadly, these types of considerations now become part of the "routine" of making camp safe, and on our list of things adult volunteers need to be alert to. So, my council camp has three separate b

Sadly, these types of considerations now become part of the "routine" of making camp safe, and on our list of things adult volunteers need to be alert to.

So, my council camp has three separate buildings, two shower houses and the pool house.  All are relatively new, perhaps the last 8 to 10 years.  They are built on the single stall model, single stalls for restroom facilities, and single shower stalls.  Each stall locks from the inside.

All stalls open to the OUTSIDE.  In full view of anyone present.

Each building has a central service corridor for mechanicals to service each stall.  Access to that corridor is behind a locked steel set of double doors.  There is NO access to any stall from that corridor, other than the occasional pipe providing water.  All the walls are cinder blocks.

The stall ceilings are solid.  The walls are very plain. Good lighting in every stall.

It would not be easy to install a camera in these particular stalls, and that they are virtually identical, anything different from one stall to the other would stand out (hopefully).

Being on a National Camp Assessment Team, I've toured a number of camps.

It appears to me that it is the older facilities where cameras could be more easily concealed.  Rustic, weathered, 2 x 4 framed stalls, plywood sides, ceilings open to trusses, bird nests, spider webs, no electric lighting, DARK, etc.  A camera could more easily be placed up in the dark area amongst the trusses, perhaps camouflaged in some fashion.

And, one shower house I toured had open ceilings to the trusses, but everything was painted white, including the trusses and underside of the roof sheathing.  Even there, a determined abuser could make a small (tiny?) box painted white and attach it to a rafter with a single screw and escape detection.

My point is that detection of surreptitious camera placement is extremely problematic.

I have not seen any mention of this issue in my National Camp Assessment Team materials.

Something to be added to that.

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

@SiouxRanger, I agree that bygone bathhouses would not stand a chance against video devices of today. I just don’t know if modern shower houses have provided any long term advantage against determined predators. Good scouters staying educated may be all we can count on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, qwazse said:

@SiouxRanger, I agree that bygone bathhouses would not stand a chance against video devices of today. I just don’t know if modern shower houses have provided any long term advantage against determined predators. Good scouters staying educated may be all we can count on.

Reminds me of one Webelos summer camp in 1993 where a female Webelos leader was asked to leave camp because she walked in the shower area to tell (shouted) her scouts that they were staying in the shower area too long. The whole camp could hear those scouts laughing and joking around. The scouts where in their swimsuits and she was just being a mom walking in the shower area without thinking to tell them to quit messing around and holding up the showers for the rest of the camp. That was when we knew Youth Protection was getting really serious.

Barry

Edited by Eagledad
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, qwazse said:

@SiouxRanger, I agree that bygone bathhouses would not stand a chance against video devices of today. I just don’t know if modern shower houses have provided any long term advantage against determined predators. Good scouters staying educated may be all we can count on.

Well, I can speak only for the shower houses and restrooms at my council camp and the separate show and restroom stalls are simply sterile-cinderblock walls to a ceiling.  NO place to mount a camera, even concealed without being obvious to anyone looking for a concealed camera.

That all being said, I do not know if my camp's shower houses and restrooms were built to National standards, or something else. So, perhaps my council camp's buildings are unique.

But I agree, virtually every building is unique, wherever located.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...

Around 15 or so years ago, our Boy Scout Troop attended the Dorchester International Brotherhood Camporee in Ontario, Canada.  At the time of course, the BSA youth was all male but Scouts Canada was co-ed.   When we attended I had some interesting conversations with Scouts Canada adult leaders about what they thought the plusses and minuses of "going co-ed" were for them.  About the only negative they sited was the difficulty in finding female Scouters to attend camping trips.   

An intended benefit I saw from the boys in my troop were that the younger Scouts (not yet really interested in girls) didn't really care about the girls one way or the other but the older boys, not wanting to appear "uncool" in the presence of their female peers, curtailed some of their more undesirable shenanigans that can occur when a bunch of male teen get together.  

Those experiences were enlightening. 

Edited by acco40
fix typo
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/10/2022 at 10:39 AM, acco40 said:

... the older boys, not wanting to appear "uncool" in the presence of their female peers, curtailed some of their more undesirable shenanigans that can occur when a bunch of male teen get together.  

Those experiences were enlightening. 

That is my perception too.  Co-ed reduces boorish, uncouth behavior.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 3/11/2022 at 12:01 PM, fred8033 said:

That is my perception too.  Co-ed reduces boorish, uncouth behavior.  

As a leader for a co-ed program, I have not seen any of this behavior.  They work together very well and bring out the best of each other.  Each scout has unique skill set.  I see it work really well in Sea Scout Ships and Venturing Crews.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, the guy who really likes co-Ed scouting gets to be devil's advocate.

I’ve endured plenty of “boorish, uncouth behavior” among the male and female youth among the venturers who I supervise. It’s worse among the junior high church youth who I’ve had to chaperone. It takes a lot of determination (and, often, tact) on the direct contact leader’s part to keep it in check. I’ve come to conclude that it’s no different than a unisex group. Sometimes you draw a lot who is more noble than you ever were, while other times you’re constantly calling out one crass comment after another.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I come from the camp of not co-Eding the troop program because my experience is that the adventure nature of prepubescent boys don't mix well with the organizational nature prepubescent girls, The result is neither group grows much from the experience. However, I think co-ed is fine after puberty because the maturity of their adult nature does mix well together and is a benefit for growth.. 

This I believe corelates with qwazse's experience of junior high age youth. I have the been their done that shirt.

Barry

Edited by Eagledad
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, qwazse said:

Great, the guy who really likes co-Ed scouting gets to be devil's advocate.

I’ve endured plenty of “boorish, uncouth behavior” among the male and female youth among the venturers who I supervise. It’s worse among the junior high church youth who I’ve had to chaperone. It takes a lot of determination (and, often, tact) on the direct contact leader’s part to keep it in check. I’ve come to conclude that it’s no different than a unisex group. Sometimes you draw a lot who is more noble than you ever were, while other times you’re constantly calling out one crass comment after another.

Fair point.  I've seen limited co-ed.  I was hoping it improved as co-ed has improved many businesses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the real problem is middle school aged children.....  Both male and female lose their minds during this period of life.  My program is high school and up but for my younger scouts that are 14ish, I do have to coach them sometimes on what is appropriate and what isn't but usually that gets handled by the older scouts that set them straight.

I think this is why middle schools exists as separate entities from elementary and high schools.  God bless all the middle school teachers and staff.

  • Upvote 3
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
×
×
  • Create New...