scouts-l Mail Archive for June of 2000: Re: New Shorts!!!
Marc Godbout (marcgodbout@LANCAST.COM
Mon Jun 19 2000 - 07:19:14 CDT
I suggest that there is one design that could please everybody. That would
be no design. What I mean by this is make available whatever shorts/pants
that National Supply feels would please most of the people, but make some
statement that choice of pants and shorts is up to individual troops.
>From my experience, the troops that require BSA uniform pants are in the
minority. This is just personal observation of troops in my area. And
there are no real repercussions against troops regarding any type of uniform
choice. But an "official" statement from BSA National could put at least
some of the arguments to rest.
I understand and agree with the reasons for *a* uniform, but the decision to
include pants and socks seems to arbitrary to me. According to a Spanish
exchange student/scout we had in our troop a couple years back, many
European troops require only a neckerchief. It's been pointed out that youth
gangs sometimes wear a special colored handkerchief or a ring to feel their
version of unity. On top of that, our shirts are the most recognizable
parts of the uniform anyway. So what's the point of requiring a certain
type of pants or shorts, only available from your Scout Shop? Let's ask
ourselves these questions:
Does requiring the official BSA pants/shorts really add anything to the
program at all?
Would we lose any boys by removing this requirement?
Do we lose any boys because of the requirement?
I guess that should do it for my annual uniform rant :>)
Crew 98 Advisor
From: Steve Hoar [mailto:pilgrim@CLOVER.NET]
There will never be a design that pleases everyone.