From Scouts-L@tcu.edu Fri Oct 3 14:12:00 1997 Return-Path: Scouts-L@tcu.edu Received: from outbound.Princeton.EDU (outbound.Princeton.EDU [128.112.128.84]) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) with ESMTP id OAA29313; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 14:12:00 -0400 Received: from lightpost by outbound.Princeton.EDU with SMTP id <541587-1979>; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 14:03:50 -0400 Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU (pucc.Princeton.EDU [128.112.129.99]) by outbound.Princeton.EDU (8.8.0/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA14842; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:49:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@TCUBVM) by PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1675; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 11:46:03 -0400 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8818; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 08:03:50 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6532 for SCOUTS-L@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 08:02:36 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM (NJE origin SMTP@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 6531; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 08:26:44 -0500 Received: from mtigwc04.worldnet.att.net by tcubvm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Tue, 30 Sep 97 08:26:43 CDT Received: from host ([207.147.73.225]) by mtigwc04.worldnet.att.net (post.office MTA v2.0 0613 ) with SMTP id AAA12674; Tue, 30 Sep 1997 13:25:00 +0000 X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-WorldNet (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <2.2.32.19970930062649.00a0bc48@TTUHSC.EDU> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <3430FDCA.5195@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> Date: Tue, 30 Sep 1997 09:25:30 -0400 Reply-To: John Birle Sender: Scouts-L Youth Group List From: John Birle Subject: Re: Jewelry in uniform X-To: Russ Jones To: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L Status: RO X-Status: This is undoubtedly the most sensible analysis I have seen on this long and tiresome thread. If all anyone (youth or adult) can find to do to "express themselves" is mutilate their bodies or look outlandish, then they need more creative and productive modes of self-expression like making something useful or helping someone or leading others. If such ornaments are part of "being accepted" by a peer group, then the values of that peer group are vain and shallow and it is not a group where one should even want acceptance. I am shocked that parents allow this sort of attidude or disrespect for the norms of society to happen at all, much less in a BSA uniform. Unfortunately many are not exactly clean cut role models themselves. Yes, one can point out exceptions where an outlandish looking person is actually a fine upright citizen, but why do they burden themselves with such trappings which detract from their credibility? Do people have the freedom under the constitution to do such things? Yes, indeed they do. Both youth and adults have the freedom to appear the fool, but such behaviors are not among the values we are trying to instill in our nation's future leaders. Thank you again for your astute analysis. From Scouts-L@tcu.edu Sat Oct 4 03:34:28 1997 Return-Path: Scouts-L@tcu.edu Received: from outbound.Princeton.EDU (outbound.Princeton.EDU [128.112.128.84]) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) with ESMTP id DAA21441 for ; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:34:28 -0400 Received: from lightpost by outbound.Princeton.EDU with SMTP id <542548-4931>; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:26:50 -0400 Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU (pucc.Princeton.EDU [128.112.129.99]) by outbound.Princeton.EDU (8.8.0/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA15076; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:26:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@TCUBVM) by PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7602; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:23:05 -0400 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2490; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 02:23:11 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 6687 for SCOUTS-L@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 02:22:18 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM (NJE origin SMTP@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 5767; Fri, 3 Oct 1997 16:41:20 -0500 Received: from ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU by tcubvm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 03 Oct 97 12:24:17 CDT Received: from brickbat8.mindspring.com (brickbat8.mindspring.com) by ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-5 #20456) id <01IODBU1678W003M4L@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU> for SCOUTS-L@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU; Fri, 03 Oct 1997 12:22:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from LOCALNAME (user-38lcfas.dialup.mindspring.com [209.86.61.92]) by brickbat8.mindspring.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id NAA20147; Fri, 03 Oct 1997 13:22:02 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: bec@pop.pipeline.com MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19971003132128.0957a1ca@pop.pipeline.com> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:22:02 -0400 Reply-To: "Bruce E. Cobern" Sender: Scouts-L Youth Group List From: "Bruce E. Cobern" Subject: Re: Jewelry in uniform X-To: John Birle X-cc: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L To: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L Status: RO X-Status: At 09:25 AM 9/30/97 -0400, John Birle wrote: >This is undoubtedly the most sensible analysis I have seen on this long >and tiresome thread. If all anyone (youth or adult) can find to do to >"express themselves" is mutilate their bodies or look outlandish, then >they need more creative and productive modes of self-expression like >making something useful or helping someone or leading others. If such >ornaments are part of "being accepted" by a peer group, then the values >of that peer group are vain and shallow and it is not a group where one >should even want acceptance. I am shocked that parents allow this sort >of attitude or disrespect for the norms of society to happen at all, >much less in a BSA uniform. Unfortunately many are not exactly clean cut >role models themselves. Yes, one can point out exceptions where an >outlandish looking person is actually a fine upright citizen, but why do >they burden themselves with such trappings which detract from their >credibility? Do people have the freedom under the constitution to do >such things? Yes, indeed they do. Both youth and adults have the freedom >to appear the fool, but such behaviors are not among the values we are >trying to instill in our nation's future leaders. Thank you again for >your astute analysis. > Maybe, just maybe, one of the reasons that our youth engage in conduct like this that many of the adults view differently than their peer group does is specifically to highlight to us the we NEED to begin to assess each individual by WHO he IS and not by WHAT he LOOKS like. In other words, to point out to US that WE (not THEY) are the ones with the problem. A fine upstanding young man with good moral values, etc. is still the same young man the day AFTER he has his ears (or other body parts) pierced, in spite of what the adults around him might think. His value system didn't all of a sudden change over night because he made a decision about his body that we adults might not agree with. So, either his piercing represents what he is REALLY like and we misjudged him until then, or his history represents what he is really like and the piercing is irrelevant. As I said VERY EARLY ON in the thread, I understand that my negative reaction to some of these things represents MY problem. I believe that the youth should be counseled about the fact that there are many adults who are not mature enough to accept people for WHO they are rather than what they look like, and that they should consider that their appearance may have a negative impact on other aspects of their life, but THEY remain the same people they always were, good or bad, regardless of their appearance. Locally, a McDonalds is being sued because they, allegedly, refused to serve an older woman whose appearance had been disfigured by cancer. The asked her to leave the store because here appearance was making other customers uncomfortable, or so it is alleged. Hmm, is that the slippery slope we really want to be on? -- Bruce E. Cobern mailto:bec@pipeline.com From Scouts-L@tcu.edu Sat Oct 4 03:43:19 1997 Return-Path: Scouts-L@tcu.edu Received: from outbound.Princeton.EDU (outbound.Princeton.EDU [128.112.128.84]) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) with ESMTP id DAA21733 for ; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:43:19 -0400 Received: from lightpost by outbound.Princeton.EDU with SMTP id <542460-4931>; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:35:56 -0400 Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU (pucc.Princeton.EDU [128.112.129.99]) by outbound.Princeton.EDU (8.8.0/8.6.12) with SMTP id DAA15647; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:35:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@TCUBVM) by PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 7736; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 03:32:20 -0400 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2667; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 02:29:26 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 2237 for SCOUTS-L@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 02:28:40 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM (NJE origin SMTP@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 2236; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 02:12:27 -0500 Received: from ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU by tcubvm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Sat, 04 Oct 97 02:12:23 CDT Received: from tthsc2.lubb.ttuhsc.edu by ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-5 #20456) id <01IODYJROJ4W003FJ2@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU> for SCOUTS-L@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU; Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:12:05 -0500 (CDT) Received: from default ([198.213.97.211]) by tthsc3.lubb.ttuhsc.edu with SMTP; Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:12:01 -0500 X-Sender: CSRTJ@MAILHOST.TTUHSC.EDU MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <2.2.32.19971004041047.00eab260@MAILHOST.TTUHSC.EDU> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 23:10:47 -0500 Reply-To: Russ Jones Sender: Scouts-L Youth Group List From: Russ Jones Subject: Re: Jewelry in uniform X-To: SCOUTS-L@TCU.EDU To: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L Status: RO X-Status: Jonathan Dixon's response to my previous post on this subject prompts me to add another observation or two which may be worthy of more general consideration, so with apologies beforehand to those of you who wish this thread would just die: Jon opines that "there actually isn't much difference between the piercing and a ring, since both are often used as symbols to mark important life events." Now, I concede that I do not have the most active of social calendars, nor am I conversant in all the traditions of the various ethnic groups that exist, but I cannot recall ever having attended--or even having read about in the social columns--a wedding where the bride and groom exchanged earrings; neither have I noticed in our local university book store where the guys in the fraternities could order their senior tongue studs. Perhaps that sort of thing only occurs in our mainstream Native American/Asian/African/Pirate culture (as practiced in Pittsburgh?). 8^) Seriously, though, the prevailing traditions of other cultures--whatever they may be--have little or no relevance to our own. We do not live in either Asia or Africa, and relatively few of us are Native Americans. Some of the old pirates may, indeed, have worn earrings, although I think it more likely that such an image is merely a popular and largely fictitious stereotype derived from the likes of old Errol Flynn movies ("Buckle them thar swashes, mateys!"). At any rate, pirates certainly derived at least part of their living from taking relatively helpless merchant ships by force, brutally murdering the passengers and crews, stealing the cargoes, and either selling, sinking, or converting the ships to their own uses, none of which is behavior that I would recommend our Scouts adopt as a lifestyle. Whether or not pirates wore earrings is entirely irrelevant; in our culture--mainstream American culture, distilled from a blend of many cultures--earrings are a traditionally female accoutrement. What they are elsewhere is not the issue. Neither is it the issue that they, like eyeglasses or wristwatches, are not addressed by the Insignia Guide. The Insignia Guide deals exclusively with the uniform and how it should be worn; it generally says nothing about what else should or should not be worn with it. Earrings are not mentioned because they are not part of the uniform. Eyeglasses and wristwatches are not part of the uniform, either, and so are similarly not mentioned in the Insignia Guide. The point is that, unlike body-piercing jewelry, eyeglasses and wristwatches are not merely decorative and otherwise useless eccentricities worn on a whim. Equating the wearing of earrings to the wearing of eyeglasses, or arguing that whatever is not explicitly prohibited must therefore be implicitly permissible and appropriate, simply does not hold water; troop committees are not explicitly denied the right to prohibit camping by those under the age of sixteen, but I am reasonably certain that such a ban would not be considered appropriate by either National or the local council. Perhaps body-piercing is not a fad; perhaps it is more nearly a cult. Whatever it may be appropriately called, even after fifteen years (by Jon's estimate) it lacks the degree of acceptance by the majority of groups and ages to make it significantly more than "a practice or interest followed for a time with exaggerated zeal" (my dictionary's definition of a fad), primarily by the nation's more immature citizens. In the days of my own youth, kids rallied around a different emblem of rebellion, hair; and yet today, even though the culture has become relatively inured to the sight of males with long locks, after thirty-plus years it is still not a practice that can claim to be mainstream. In fact, most of those who so vehemently claimed the right to practice hair-growing those thirty-odd years ago have abandoned at least the more extreme forms of it (of course, more than a few of them simply had to, if for no other reason than what it took to practice it has mostly abandoned them!). 8^) The notion that teens adopt outlandish modes of dress and behavior in order "to see who accepts them for who they are and who rejects them because of outside appearances" sounds good, but the truth is almost precisely the opposite. They already know who will reject them because of outside appearances, and that "who" is the one group that they most want to find themselves accepted among: their peers. Since they know that acceptance by their peers is almost entirely a function of external appearance and behavior, and because they value that acceptance above almost everything else, many of them are willing to buy whatever it takes and do whatever they can to achieve the right look, to mold themselves into the required image, to be "cool." They also value their independence from parents and other authority, so it is doubly convenient for them that doing what they must to obtain peer group acceptance also has the benefit of displaying their disdain for authority. If they really wanted to see who accepts them for who they are rather than for how they appear, they would reject the pressure to conform to the group and see which individuals accept them anyway, instead of rushing to emulate the group with plaintive cries of "but Mom, everybody's doing it!" We certainly should do all we can to let them know that we value them for what they are inside; I've never proposed otherwise. This does not, however, necessitate that we accept whatever they may do in the way of either dress or behavior. Unconditional love does not say "whatever you do is fine;" unconditional love says "no matter what you do, though it may be wrong, you are still loved." Unconditional love accepts that people have faults, but expects them to try and rise above them; what renders love unconditional is not that it has no expectations, but that it does not demand that the effort to meet those expectations be successful as a condition of continued love. If you doubt this, take a look at what my Judeo-Christian theology believes to be the life of the only person ever to grace this planet with his footsteps who was, and still is, truly capable of loving unconditionally. He loves us no matter what we do and He constantly reassures us of that fact, but He also makes it clear that certain things are required of us if we expect to participate fully in what He has to offer us. As we teach them to value other people for what they are inside, we should also teach them that they cannot expect the same treatment from the world at large. Society already teaches them enough lies: that the handsome prince and the beautiful princess always live happily ever after; that the right degree from the right college guarantees success; that happiness can be achieved by buying certain products. Let us not compound that injustice by leaving them with the impression that if they always do the right thing, they will always be rewarded in kind, for much of the time such will not be the case. Let us also not teach them that the exercise of personal freedom is limitless and without consequence, for that, too, is a lie. A rule is only arbitrary if it exists solely to satisfy the personal preferences or convenience of the rule-maker. If it exists to prevent those to whom it applies from adopting a practice which may harm them physically, which may bring discredit upon an organization that exists to benefit them, or which may increase the odds that they will be discounted by teachers, potential employers, and others who have the ability to provide them with something of benefit, then it is not arbitrary. It would be wonderful if we could somehow lead children into always doing the right thing for their long-term welfare, and indeed the overall goal is to help them learn to do just that; but until they mature enough and learn enough to realize and accept some of the harsher realities of life, sometimes one has to make those right choices for them. They are, after all, still children, who sometimes need to be protected even from themselves. If some of them refuse that protection, we can still continue to love them and still continue to try to reach them, but we must realize that they must be willing to be reached. Not all of them will be; that is one of the harsh realities of life which, regrettably, we must accept. Yours in Scouting, Russ Jones Scoutmaster, Troop 575 South Plains Council, Lubbock, Texas Eagle Scout, class of 1965 "I used to be a fox..." SC-295 "I used to be a staffer..." SC-430, SR-110, SR-206 From Scouts-L@tcu.edu Sat Oct 4 12:45:07 1997 Return-Path: Scouts-L@tcu.edu Received: from outbound.Princeton.EDU (outbound.Princeton.EDU [128.112.128.84]) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) with ESMTP id MAA13658; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:45:07 -0400 Received: from lightpost by outbound.Princeton.EDU with SMTP id <541478-4926>; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:38:05 -0400 Received: from pucc.Princeton.EDU (pucc.Princeton.EDU [128.112.129.99]) by outbound.Princeton.EDU (8.8.0/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06491; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:37:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin MAILER@TCUBVM) by PUCC.PRINCETON.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3257; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:34:36 -0400 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3722; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 11:38:22 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 3718 for SCOUTS-L@TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 11:37:45 -0500 Received: from TCUBVM (NJE origin SMTP@TCUBVM) by TCUBVM.IS.TCU.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3717; Sat, 4 Oct 1997 11:37:44 -0500 Received: from ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU by tcubvm.is.tcu.edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Sat, 04 Oct 97 11:37:42 CDT Received: from camel14.mindspring.com (camel14.mindspring.com) by ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU (PMDF V5.0-5 #20456) id <01IOEOJ1X7RK0035LT@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU> for scouts-l@ALPHA.IS.TCU.EDU; Sat, 04 Oct 1997 11:35:58 -0500 (CDT) Received: from LOCALNAME (ip193.chicago10.il.pub-ip.psi.net [38.27.45.193]) by camel14.mindspring.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id MAA02541 for ; Sat, 04 Oct 1997 12:35:55 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: ronfox@pop.mindspring.com MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16) Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19971004113402.0977d278@pop.mindspring.com> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 1997 12:35:55 -0400 Reply-To: "Ronald W. Fox" Sender: Scouts-L Youth Group List From: "Ronald W. Fox" Subject: Re: Jewelry in uniform X-To: scouts-l@tcu.edu To: Multiple recipients of list SCOUTS-L Status: RO X-Status: My two cents worth: In the spring of 1971 I was a Life Scout in a Troop that had no one else past the rank of First Class (I transferred in when my family moved from Massachusetts to Chicago). I was a Junior Assistant Scoutmaster in the Troop. I had been on staff at two different camps (pursuant to the above move). I was an Ordeal Member of the OA, and a member of the Lodge Ceremonial team. I had been the Troop for a year and totally ignored my own advancement in order to assist with the Troop. I came back from my freshman year of college and attended my first Troop meeting. I had hair that just barely touched where my shoulder met my neck. The Committee Chair and the Scoutmaster both told me I looked like a pimp. I left the meeting and didn't come back to one for 25 years. You can bet I'll never say anything to any of my Scouts about anything they wear or do with their hair, as long as they wear the uniform correctly and aren't wearing anything unsafe. If the latter, I'll tell them to take it off during the activity, and then put it back on after the activity is over. Be careful what you say to your Scouts. It's hard to be a good influence on them if they aren't around. mailto:ronfox@mindspring.com Scoutmaster, Troop 69, Des Plaines Valley Council (W&SW Chicago Suburbs) Pachsegink Lodge 246 | >>>------> | "... and a good old Eagle, too" (C-19-96)