name calling again

[DugNevius]

Its all about malice. Sometimes teasing or razzing is simply part of bonding. Its part of male socialization. Guys interact much differently than women, do to agressive instinct and dont emote the same way. Look at any tight knit group of guys, be it in a sports team locker room or a military unit or even in the workforce. The banter is quite different then in a mixed group. In one sentence two friends can put down each other and at the same time make each other laugh as long as its even ground and both parties are participating. I know then when my buddies and i are at a pub drinking a few beers as we watch ESPN we joke around and razz each other and from the outside it may look like bullying but its all equal.

 

There is a fine line. Sometimes names are terms of "affection." In our troop several of the boys have nicknames that stick so well their real names are forgotton, and when a patrol leader is calling the scouts house he'll ask for him by nickname. We`have an eagle scout that has for 7 years been called "Dirty", another "Tweak" after a South Park character and a third "Bubba" after that guy from Forest Gump, all names they were given as a cross over by older scouts. Sometimes the banter gets outta hand and thats when as an adult i have to step in and change the subject, but its not all bullying because its not all malicious. Sometimes that aggressive banter actually pulls the group together.

[evmori]

Please provide an example where name calling is not bullying.

 

"Hey goofball, please come over here!"

 

Please also include what bullying is defined to be.

 

To treat in an overbearing or intimidating manner. To make timid; fill with fear.

 

(This message has been edited by evmori)

[Hunt]

I agree that "namecalling" is not necessarily bullying--however, it seems to me that what Lisabob is describing is beyond the friendly banter (including namecalling) that is common among boys (and men). It can be hard to draw the line, of course.

I think it is true that men and women communicate differently, and this may be an element of this issue. If you haven't read it before, you might read "You Just Don't Understand" by Deborah Tannen, which has a lot about this. [she gives an example--if a girl has a big nose, her good friends will tell her it's not big, it fits her face, etc. If a boy has a big nose, his good friends will call him "Schnozz." This is bonding, not belittling behavior.] One other gender-related comment I must make--the boys may have trouble distinguishing between speech that is inappropriate at any time and speech that is inappropriate around you. (I guess this is not necessarily a gender issue, but I suspect that the gender factor magnifies it.) I would suggest that to make clear that speech of certain kinds is inappropriate at any time, make sure that you don't talk too much about your reaction to hearing it, as opposed to the values that it represents.

[Stosh]

Sorry, I still don't buy it.

 

One may wish to justify it anyway they wish, but addressing another person by "namecalling" always implies a negative and demeaning value. It may be part of male "bonding", but that bonding is nothing more than pecking order and ego building.

 

Our troop forbids any namecalling of any sort. If one must address another person they have a name, use it.

 

I refer to my boys in the same respectful manner they refer to me. "Mr. Smith...." Sometimes it causes confusion when their parents are around, but I call their parents by their first name. If a boy holds rank, he gets a salute and normally a reference to his position. "Mr. SPL..." The closest thing we have to not adhereing to this formula is our Honor's Patrol. They are the RAVENS and carry a raven patrol flag and use the raven emblem on patrol items. They however, all wear a different (black and red) historical patrol patch unique to them. My SPL is "Moose". My other two are "Elk" and "Squirrel". When I am talking to them not in front of the boys, I refer to them by their nick-names.

 

The use of names can and does build respect in a group and will build better bonding in the form of espirit-de-corps rather than good-old-boy hanging out that happens when that respect isn't present. Anyone can be part of a respectful group. Only good old boys can be part of a good-old-boy group.

 

Therefore, all name-calling whether it's a wink, wink, atta boy name or a flat out put-down is forbidden. In the past 15 years, this lack of name calling has not been a problem in our troop and we have great team work and respect for each other in the process.

 

Stosh

[evmori]

Therefore, all name-calling whether it's a wink, wink, atta boy name or a flat out put-down is forbidden. In the past 15 years, this lack of name calling has not been a problem in our troop and we have great team work and respect for each other in the process.

 

Zero tolerance policies for anything are just a poor way to deal with things.

 

Ed Mori

1 Peter 4:10

[DugNevius]

i think thats short sighted. Nicknames like "Dirty" of "Snozz" dont always break teamwork and in somecases bring guys together. Holding everyone at arms length the way yu may an employee or employer may get things done but its stiff and lacks chemestry. Scouts dont have to call me "Mr Nevius" or "Mr Assistant Scoutmaster" to show me respect and ive never had any problem getting respect from any scout for the 10 years ive been an ASM.

 

Maybe its a generational thing. Im still a young guy in my twenties. My guy friends and i rip on each other all the time. I sit at a table or around a fire with the scouts and listen to the banter and im pretty good at judging whats malicious and whats not. The boys tend to as well. Its rare that anything esculates to bullying, ive never had a parent or scout come up to me and complain about it and the boys are very tight knit.

[Stosh]

We have a zero tolerance policy against hitting, too.

[ajmako]

Boy, I remember being 11-12-13 years old. Let's just say calling each other names, using foul language, engaging in incessant conjecture about other people's sexual preferences, put downs, unfortunate nicknames, all of it was "normal" behavior. Joking, yes. And worse.

 

Is it bullying? Sometimes. And even when it's not meant to be bullying, it can be painful to the person on the receiving end. This is boys being boys but that is absolutely no excuse. When it was me dishing it out or being dished upon, it was all part of trying to emulate adults without actually knowing how. It was all about acting big and grown up long before we knew what it meant to be grown up. We had the Scout Law, but there was something missing, and that's the key to solving this.

 

Now, at what age do they begin to outgrow this? Whatever age they happen to be when someone lays down the Law. Some of the guys I grew up with refused to act that way, and some of the people I know who are a lot older than 13 still act that way.

 

So, what do we do to fix it? Follow a few not so easy steps. I wrote them down in order of importance, but you can do them in whatever order makes the most sense.

 

One: Throw away all zero-tolerance policies. They are unnecessary and redundant in Scouting. I mean it. Throw them away. Have a public burning, make a public announcement, let the boys dance around the policies' burning corpses. There's no point keeping them because you won't need them.

 

Two: Have the Scoutmaster stand in front of the assembled troop and recite the Scout Oath and Law. Recite it slowly and with all the right emphasis. Recite it so every Scout hears every word. Then have the Scoutmaster explain clearly and succinctly that the Scout Law is the new zero-tolerance policy. That the Scout Oath is not a suggestion. Have the SM explain that a Scout always does his best to live by the Scout Oath and Law every moment of every day, and that the troop's new policy will be exactly that. If you want to be called a Scout, act like a Scout. If you want to earn ranks and badges as a Scout, be a Scout.

 

This means the troop has to actually mean it. You have to establish your expectations for every Scout--that he will do his best to obey the Scout Law. You have to hold each and every Scout to that standard. If he's caught not being friendly, he isn't being a Scout. If he uses foul language, calls someone a name, or does any of those other things you can't seem to stop, he's not being a Scout. (Don't forget to praise in public and criticize in private). Every rank has a requirement to demonstrate Scout spirit in their every day life. Make it clear this is what you expect, that you know it won't be easy, but show you are confident they can do it.

 

Three: Every registered adult leader in the troop has to not only support the new zero-tolerance policy, they have to model the behavior expected of a Scout. Period. No arguments. I would even go so far as to say they have to model the expected behavior even when they don't think any Scouts are watching (they are, always).

 

Four: At a committee/parent meeting explain this new zero-tolerance policy. Specifically address the old "boys will be boys" and "some people are just too thin skinned" arguments. "Boys may be boys, but Scouts aren't just boys." Lay out the expectations of behavior, answer questions, and be firm. The Oath and Law aren't just a bunch of words to memorize in the hope they'll take root. They have to be encouraged to grow. They have to be nurtured. They have to mean something, or they'll mean nothing. Challenge parents to adopt the same expectations for their son(s) in their homes--reminding them that "Scout" is something he's supposed to be 24/7.

 

You'll have to explain these things to every new boy who joins and his parents. You can add it to a parent handout, but you must explain it to them in person to eliminate excuses and to see that everyone buys into what is expected.

 

This may sound harsh, but it really is what we're supposed to be doing. It's going to be difficult. It's going to require several Scoutmaster minutes to really teach what is expected. It's going to require a lot of Scoutmaster conferences to challenge some boys to be Scouts. There will be momentary lapses of reason and occasional failures. And yes, it's going to be painful when you have to explain to a Scout he can't advance yet because he hasn't been doing his best (um, at the SM conference, not the BOR).

 

Just remember, the Scouts will rise up (or sink down) to whatever level you expect of them. You might find, in time, that instead of the frustrating activities you mentioned, your Scouts will be reminding each other to act like Scouts. You might find that, when they raise their hand in the Scout Sign and recite the Oath and Law, they do it with a little more feeling, like they really know what it means and they really mean the promise they're making.(This message has been edited by ajmako)

[Hunt]

In my son's troop, there was an older boy that everyone called "Spongebob." I'm not sure why they called him this, but it seemed to be an affectionate nickname. It would seem extreme to me to forbid this kind of nickname. On the other hand, I recognize that nicknames can be cruel (especially when they are applied to younger boys). It seems to me that this is something the SM and SPL should monitor and evaluate--while I'm not as sanguine as Ajmako that you can simply apply the Oath and Law to all situations, perhaps I would agree that this is one situation where a bright-line rule may not be the best approach.

[ajmako]

while I'm not as sanguine as Ajmako that you can simply apply the Oath and Law to all situations.

 

Hunt,

Cheerfully optimistic? Yes. Hopeful? Yes. Confident? Yes. I am all those things when it comes to the idea that you can simply apply the Oath and Law to all situations. That is, after all, what we expect a Scout to do. We teach him the Scout Oath and Law and tell him to do his best to live by them in his daily life. We tell him to apply the Oath and Law to all situations and let those ideals guide his actions. He can only learn how to do that by observing us apply the Oath and Law to all situations. He will only be convinced it is possible if we show him that it is.

 

AJ

[kb6jra]

Lisabob, when boys joke with each other, that's one thing, but bullying can rear it's ugly head, and it appears to have done so in this case. The culture this is bringing to your unit is not acceptable and you need to get a handle on it.

 

Scouting is a safe haven, no boy should feel abused in any way, shape or form when attending a scouting activity. While we are not a "feel good" organization, we do have certain expectations.

 

If you have certain members that are behaving badly, they need a SM conference immediately to instruct them the behavior is not acceptable. Personally I'll have the first talk with the boys. If this don't take they get a second one and then have a word with mom and dad. It usually doesn't go any farther than that.

 

The bullies we've had in our unit have learned it away from the troop...it came from home. The parents weren't abuse. They were not respectful to those around them. They would positively reinforce the wrong behavior "you sure showed him tonight son, he won't forget that punch in the arm soon". They denied every instance where the boys were acting inappropriately. Basically, they never got it, until one of them was asked to leave the troop, then they became victims.

 

Don't let it go on. Nip it in the bud. Change the culture of the troop to one of Scout Spirit and Patrol cooperation. I feel very passionate about this subject because I've live through it. Now that the bullies are gone from our unit, we are so much better off.

 

Good luck

[Lisabob]

Thanks for the insights kb. I quite agree that it is bullying in this case and that it needs to be dealt with. Maybe part of my frustration with this issue is that for 2 years I've watched while our SM handles this pretty ineffectively - and I'm on the committee, not the SM or an ASM. The only times the SM has done anything about it are when parents have very publicly threatened to pull their boys out of the troop. But on an on-going basis he just doesn't see it. Similarly he doesn't see a number of other youth leadership/development issues unless someone gets exasperated enough to PUSH - hard - for action on his part. And that tends to be both short-lived and unpleasant/divisive for the adults.

 

In some respects, the SM's weakness here is a strength at other times. He is absolutely unflappable, very slow to anger or to reach that frustration point with the boys. And he sees the best in every situation. But when it comes to using his position as SM in a more overt manner (like SM conferences for behavioral issues or actively mentoring youth leaders), it just doesn't fit his style I guess, and he ends up letting things go.

 

My son loves the troop and would be mortified if I made a public scene out of this, which is what it would require in order to get the SM to act. And we are changing SMs after summer camp, to someone who is a little more no-nonsense when it comes to this kind of behavioral problem. In the meantime though, I admit I find it frustrating.

[kb6jra]

Well, if you're changing the guard, you do have that to look forward to. Be supportive and keep up your good works, it will all turn out for the better.

 

Good luck

[gtscouter]

A few questions from a newbee here...

 

If a scoutmaster or other adult leader is aware of a boy participating in this negative behavior, could the topic become part of his scoutmaster conference or board of review? I realize some of the biggest perpetrators may be those that don't advance. However, for those that do, could the scoutmaster suggest that the parents doing the board of review ask the boy about how boys are treated in the troop.

 

It doesn't have to be a singling out of the boy's specific infractions. Rather, the questions could be general in nature. For example, "How do you see scouts treating one another in this Troop? Do see actions that add or subtract from troop members' ability to live the Scout Oath and Law? Do you take any actions that add or subtract from your ability to live the Scout Oath and Law?" If boys and parents know that someone might not pass a board of review perhaps will they pay more attention to the problem?

 

I see this behavior among kids at school too and in online forums like "Facebook". However, I never see any suggestions about what works to stop it. As a parent I feel like a complete failure when I see my son do this. You talk and talk about it, but it doesn't seem to sink in. It's got to be one of my biggest parental frustrations!

[ajmako]

gtscouter,

Two things you want to keep in mind:

 

1) A Scoutmaster Conference can happen at any time for any reason. It doesn't just deal with advancement requirements. In fact, the SM Conference is the number one tool for adult leaders. You can't help a boy you don't know, and the way you get to know him is by sitting down and talking to him.

 

2) Don't wait for a Scout to be ready to advance to deal with a discipline problem. Advancement is neither the stick nor the carrot in developing a Scout's behavior. If there is a discipline problem with a particular Scout the SM or another adult leader has to deal with it immediately and completely seperately from advancement. A BOR should NEVER be expected to deal with a discipline problem--if there is a behavior issue with a particular Scout he's obviously not ready to advance and shouldn't be sent before the BOR.

 

As far as getting people to pay attention to the problem, that's the SM's job when he/she establishes the standard of behavior. The SM needs to communicate what is expected to the Scout and his parents. The SM needs to continuously work with the Scout and his parents to modify unacceptable behavior.