Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Sitting on the fence (was Re: Pentacles/Consorts)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 02:13:48 -0500

ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org (Ciaran Benson) writeth:

 CB> this all _APPEARS_ to be so intensely
 CB> biggoted in _PRACTICE_ if not intent.

Ah, now we're making progress.

 CB> in the interest that this is all
 CB> going to turn out to be an extraordinary misunderstanding,

Most flaming usually is!

 CB> with no discrimination intended,

Of that I'm fairly certain.  Pandering to MUNDANE discrimination, yes, but....

 CB> I take it that you've got
 CB> big tourneys where everyone bashes each other about [...]
 CB> and the winner, male or female, gets to choose their consort for some
 CB> period of time.

Close.  The entrants choose their consorts before Crown Tourney.  The winner and
his/her consort get to be Crown Prince and Crown Princess of their kingdom for a
while, and then King and Queen while the *next* winner and consort are Crown
Prince and Crown Princess.  (Reigns are 6 months in most kingdoms; 4 in at least
one; I don't know if there are other lengths.)

 CB>   Is the problem that women are forbidden from the tourney,

Not at all - many women have fought in Crown Tourney, and some even win.

 CB>   Or is it that whoever wins must choose a consort of the opposite sex?

Precisely.

 CB> As has been said, 13th century pretenses
 CB> about male and female roles just don't wash anymore, and are offensive.

Ah, but then we get into the issue of modern liberal attitudes, vs. historical
re-creation, as opposed to recreation (note lack of hyphen) with a historical
theme, in which case we become nothing more than a costume party.  We usually
tread the thin line between, but MANY sacrifices are made in the name of lack of
offense to outsiders... or convenience, ignorance, and many other excuses.

 CB>   If the latter (opposite sex), then there still is discrimination if
 CB> only in that a MOTOS may choose their SO as their consort, while
 CB> a MOTSS has to pick someone they can get along with while their SO
 CB> sits in the sidelines.

Exactly.  However, in period, a royal couple was most often NOT for love, but
for wealth or political alliance, or because the ruler wanted to propagate the
bloodline.  This is thoroughly documented even in the case of heterosexual
monarchs.  As to the issue (so to speak) of gay monarchs, those are also well
documented to have existed in period - but NEVER to have put a same-sex consort
on the other throne!  Most often they did just as the hets did and took a queen,
for the purposes mentioned above.  These were not to "look normal"; there were
many such monarchs that were WAY out of the closet.  They showed their lovers
their favor NOT by putting them on the other throne, but with gifts, offices,
titles, and so forth.  This avenue is perfectly wide open to any homosexual
Crown-winner that cares to use it.  Also, note that many of our hetero monarchs
have ruled with people other than their own SOs (even if they had one); I've
heard tell of one who put his MOTHER on the other throne!

 CB> This is not playing nice, folks.

Like I said, it boils down to niceness versus accuracy - with a view as well to
avoiding things that are so JARRINGLY modern and out-of-place in a medieval
setting that it completely ruins the atmosphere for others.  Like flash photos
at a darkly lit event (flashes are outlawed in some kingdoms) - or introducing
the royal couple as "Queen and Queen".

IMHO, one reasonable compromise would be to use persona gender, not physical
gender, but unfortunately, Corpora is worded physically.  Lobbing arrows at it
from the sidelines won't do nearly as much to change it as joining and working
from within.

 CB>   The idea of defending this kind of social setting -- indeed,
 CB> institutionalizing it through your incorporation, really doesn't
 CB> sound like much fun for a fair number of your members.

Actually, very few bother complaining about it, and most that I have heard do
so, do so solely out of principle, not because they actually want to win Crown
and put their MOTSS lover on the other throne.

 CB>   I sincerely doubt that I'd have much fun in such a setting, especially
 CB> since I've gotten fairly used to communities where people participate
 CB> based on their abilities and desire, rather than their gender.

Far as I know, this is the *ONLY* gender-based restriction - but I haven't
studied the Corpora or all the kingdom/principality/etc. laws.  (Anybody out
there got more examples?)  You can have LOTS of fun without winning Crown - in
fact, I hear tell that being an SCA monarch is a royal (so to speak) pain in the
proverbial posterior, and expensive to boot!

Now, where do I personally stand on this, you wonder?  Undecided.  As a fairly
"progressive" person (and member of another oppressed minority) mundanely, it
bugs me that we are denying something specifically to one mundanely oppressed
minority, but I don't see any way to do it without SEVERE harm to the
"atmosphere" for those who desire some degree of historical accuracy.  (And I do
consider historical accuracy a worthy goal in and of itself.)

 CB> Does this mean
 CB> that a sword, for example, bearing a smith's mark of a pentagram clearly
 CB> visible above the guard or on the pommel would be banned?  How about
 CB> partial plate that has a 1" pentagram embossed in the metal over the
 CB> heart (as is a part of my mark?).

Absolutely not!  The only thing you may not do with a pentacle is use it as a
charge in a device to be registered with the SCA College of Heralds.  Wear it to
your heart's content, be it on a pendant, sword, armor, or whatever.  You can
even DISPLAY armory using it as a charge - you just can't REGISTER it.

 CB> the inverted pentagram which is the star of Easter in
 CB> countries like Germany.

In period?

 CB> By official decree, your incorporation bans the pentacle for registry --
 CB> NOT because is has a questionable historical use, but because of fear
 CB> of intolerance.

 CB>   What then, will the reaction be to people who continue to wear their
 CB> pentagrams at your events?

Excellent point!  If the Society is so afraid of a mundane redneck getting "up
in arms" over arms with a pentacle as a charge, what do they think he's gonna do
when he sees someone dressed funny with a PENTACLE PENDANT?  Heck, I've seen
many running about with INVERTED pentagram pendants, rings, circlets, and so on.
 What difference do they think it being registered with our CoH or not is going
to make to Joe Crossburner???


Newsgroups: rec.org.sca