The real reason the Boy Scouts disappeared

[NealOnWheels]

A very interesting Youtube video from Ken LaCorte about the decline of the Boy Scouts. Not sure I agree with the claim of the title but much of the content is good.

 

Edited June 2 by NealOnWheels
mention author

[Jameson76]

Well - the notation that Scouts did not change 1970 - 2000 is incorrect.  The Improved Scouting Program in 1973 took out a chunk of participants, then the pivot back, then the endless monkeying with the program is the start of the slide.  Also the BOY POWER MANPOWER program / effort (early 70's) wherein the plan was to have 33% of boys signed up led to massive membership scandals.  While the abuse trials starting in 2000 were a challenge, but the program was already down by half or more at that time

[DuctTape]

I have watched a few of his videos. He claims he only puts out the facts and leaves the opinions to the viewers, but what I have seen is little facts or cherry picked ones to support his opinions. If a viewer does not know much about the topic, this is easily missed.

[MikeS72]

11 hours ago, DuctTape said:

I have watched a few of his videos. He claims he only puts out the facts and leaves the opinions to the viewers, but what I have seen is little facts or cherry picked ones to support his opinions. If a viewer does not know much about the topic, this is easily missed.

I was skeptical of his 'facts' right of the bat with the comment the Boy Scouts have disappeared, (we have not); and the claim that in the latter half of the 1900's 20% of boys were Scouts. 

We discuss membership numbers every month at our Council Commissioner meeting.  While it has looked bleak for a while, at least in my council, numbers are starting to stabilize.  We have more units this month than we had at this time last year, and while only by a handful, we have more Scouts than the same time last year.

I am hopeful that some of the changes coming out of NAM will result in meaningful improvements and will put us on the path to sustainable growth.

[BetterWithCheddar]

This seemed like a (mostly) thoughtful take.

Aside from stating the obvious (lawsuits and recent membership changes have adversely impacted participation), he honed in on 2 other factors:

1. Civic engagement (Elks Club, Optimists, etc.) and church attendance has decreased in the US. These organizations have been major sponsors of the BSA and their parallel decline has resulted in less support for Scouting.

2. Society's definition of masculinity has widened. Fewer young men are expected to hunt, farm, fix cars, or join the military. Scouting was once viewed as an age-appropriate way to introduce self-reliance to boys. Today, those hard skills are less important in the information economy.

I especially appreciate the second point. I doubt I'd meet the standard of 1970s masculinity. I'm not handy. I maintain my home to the minimum standard and hire help the second I get in over my head. However, I do make a decent living. Plus, we live in a safe neighborhood and are on track for retirement. My son also has everything he needs, including most of my attention outside of work. By the 2020s standards of masculinity, I'm probably doing just fine.

Edited Saturday at 05:35 PM by BetterWithCheddar

[skeptic]

37 minutes ago, BetterWithCheddar said:

This seemed like a (mostly) thoughtful take.

Aside from stating the obvious (lawsuits and recent membership changes have adversely impacted participation), he honed in on 2 other factors:

1. Civic engagement (Elks Club, Optimists, etc.) and church attendance has decreased in the US. These organizations have been major sponsors of the BSA and their parallel decline has resulted in less support for Scouting.

2. Society's definition of masculinity has widened. Fewer young men are expected to hunt, farm, fix cars, or join the military. Scouting was once viewed as an age-appropriate way to introduce self-reliance to boys. Today, those hard skills are less important in the information economy.

I especially appreciate the second point. I doubt I'd meet the standard of 1970s masculinity. I'm not handy. I maintain my home to the minimum standard and hire help the second I get in over my head. However, I do make a decent living. Plus, we live in a safe neighborhood and are on track for retirement. My son also has everything he needs, including most of my attention outside of work. By the 2020s standards of masculinity, I'm probably doing just fine.

Just now, skeptic said:

Change the word "Boys" to "Adults", and we are onto something.

 

[qwazse]

Trying to decide if it’s worth my time adding comments to his video.

Root causes go back into the sixties.

[skeptic]

Ultimately, Scouting must evolve with the rest of society, but the way to do it and stay faithful to the foundation is the larger challenge.  I have no specific answer, other than still viewing the major foundational supports of Scout Spirit as critical.  Kind of like the the "Golden Rule"; it really is fairly simple.  But we tend to make it less so too often.

 

[Jameson76]

IMHO BSA made the classic error of while having good market share, they started worrying / focusing on how to attract even more market share and not considering how changes may affect current customers.  However you may feel, there was a core constituency for the BSA.  They had ownership in the program, felt a heavy tradition with the program.  The organization still has never fully benchmarked why people join, why they stay, what do their customers want.

BSA shattered that core group in the 70's with wholesale changes (remember ISP and skill awards for Scouting??), they tried to regroup, and then for the next 30 years (maybe 1982 - 2012) were like a small sailboat in a gale, just trying to follow the winds without a firm direction.  The suits and other outside influences tore out the foundations.  Not to mention the $1 Billion vanity project in West Virginia.  They lost a lot of the tradition, a lot of experience, and many of those that had joined and had stayed active for many years.  

Scouting is more transactional now, if kids join they get X, as opposed to when kids joined many years ago they joined for fun and adventure.  Admittedly all of society is now way more transactional, but BSA or Scouting America is more now about what YOU can get from the program and many time not what your GIVE to the program. 

Then there are the two main divides in the organization.  Group A wants to build a program, go and do things, enrich youth, challenge them outside their comfort zones, these we call volunteers.  Group B wants to keep status quo on the organizational structure and administration, the focus is preservation and keeping the paid jobs and kingdoms in place.  The only scoreboard is money raised.  This group we call professionals.

In the end, whether Group A or Group B likes it, the BSA (dba as Scouting America) will become a much smaller organization, less professionals, and lesser societal impact.  Maybe other groups will fill the void, maybe portions of Scouting will grow.  However this shakes out it will not be what the National BSA's rosy growth projections shown at NAM or other meetings think.