Scouts-L Mail Archive for February of 1999: Scout U________s
Fri, 26 Feb 1999 16:31:09 -0500
At 11:37 AM 2/26/99 -0500, you wrote:
>There are uniforms and there are uniforms, BUT: Certain uniforms (medical
>personnel like doctors in scrubs, candystriper nurses, etc.) ARE NOT
>military-like; other uniforms (police, park rangers, Boy Scouts, and the
>military itself) ARE military-like.
So? What's your point? Is it bad, good, or what? Gee, high school
bands and UPS drivers are also military-like. As many variations
as there are in military uniforms and with as many changes they
have had over the years, any combination of standardized clothing
could be condemned as military like. All the way from suits with
ties, to kaki shorts have been on the military. In the past 50 years
they have worn every color and fabric. The cut of clothing has
run from Marine Parade to navy dungarees with t-shirts. The real
objection comes from having the expectation that everyone in
the organization being expected to wear a standard set of
clothing as decreed from on high. Folks in our society are very
fashion driven and change clothes styles monthly. Even if
we had the miracle of having a uniform that everyone agreed
upon today, a year from now everyone would be seeking their
own style and individuality through a uniform change.
>So why is everyone in denial about this? Let's admit that the current Boy
>Scout uniform, or at least its individual pieces, is a direct imitation of
>current or prior US military uniforms. B-P was an active UK military officer,
>it's obvious what he used as a model for Scouting uniforms.
So again I ask; Is this bad? If so, Why?
>With all due respect to Oscar de la Renta, would he ever expect any of the
>civilian clothes he's designed to be in style for twenty years? I hope we
>don't have to wait until he's dead before a change can take place.
Change for the sake of change or to stay in 'style' is nonsense. The
scouting clothing (can't use the "U" word because it is military-like)
should be a functional piece of clothing for the outdoors where a majority
of the activities take place.
I neither like nor dislike the current u________. But, whatever we do with
it, it should be function driven, not style driven. Once we arrive there
need to be adult or scout like enough to understand that we voluntarily chose
to join the organization and within that we knew that there were certain
clothing standardizations that were expected of us. None of us were
compelled to join and none of us were surprised that there was a
U________ to wear. Neither are you compelled/forced to buy and
wear the U_________. If no one buys the disliked item then they will
stop making them. Simple as that.
The choices are simple. Dn't like it? Dont wear it. If you can't abide by
the rules of an organization you voluntarily chose to join then perhaps
you belong elsewhere. If you try to get the rules changed throuugh the
system and you fail, live with it. For whatever reason, it appears that
there must be a whole lor of other folks who are able to make use of the
U__________ than the ones who don't like it. If the dislike was so absolute
and widespread as some would hope, it would have beenchanged by now.
For all the guys who don't like it, it might be a good idea to get together
and do some real work beside talk. It might be the time to come up
with a real alternative and then take it nationwide. You know, drawings,
colors, materials, costs, logistics, phase in periods, ...the whole
design and marketing package .
For myself, In a world of big problems, the size of the pockets and the
placement of the elastic band doesn't even get my 'really care' meter
off the zero mark.