From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Same-sex consorts, homophobia, fun mavins, etc.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 21:46:52 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

Raedwynn aet thaem Grene Wudu (Judith L. Tabron) writes:

>One of _my_ pet peeves is the fact that the SCA is
>largely run by people with a yen for the Renaissance who are ruining _my_
>medieval mindset. I've done work with Renaissance material, I have the utmost
>respect for Renaissance scholars; I don't think they should be in the SCA and I
>certainly don't think they should be taking over the SCA. But as long as they
>don't infringe upon what _I can do_, I can live and let live. 

You "don't think [Renaissance scholars] should be in the SCA," 
but say you want to "live and let live."  I can't imagine what
you'd want if you weren't so "tolerant."


>Tolerance is acknowledging that you see who I am, a gay woman, and, 
>_knowing_ that, fashion rules for the game that allow me to do whatever 
>I am able to do, just as you are allowed to do. 

No, tolerance is allowing you to do the same things that everone
else is allowed to do.  Fashioning special rules to allow you to
do "whatever [you are] able to do" (i.e., whatever you want to do) 
is not tolerance but special privilege.  Now, changing the rules
for someone's special benefit is not always a bad thing, but if
you expect people to do that for you, you must make a reasoned
case that you deserve it, not demand it as a matter of right.
(Note that I said *reasoned* case, not emotional outburst.  Judging
from the number of run-on sentences and paragraphs in your last
message, and the fact that your signature says you are on the English
faculty of a major university, I can only assume that you wrote it
in a white heat.)

Now, what you are asking for in this case is permission to do
something within the SCA that was not done in period -- something
"blatantly mudane," in the language of Kingdom law and Corpora.
This is not the same thing as simply choosing *not* to recreate
aspects of the Middle Ages that did exist, such as having vermin-
infested rushes on the floors or persecuting Jews.  The current
rules prohibit anyone, male or female, homosexual or heterosexual,
from making a person of the same sex King or Queen.  I repeat, his
applies to anyone, homosexual or heterosexual.  The same rule prohibits
someone from making his horse, or his automobile, King or Queen as well,
and for roughly the same reason: to preserve some semblence of a period
atmosphere.  You wish an exemption of change in the rule for your benefit.
Many other people, most of them heterosexual men, would like a change
in the rules as well, to allow them to champion another man and put 
him and his lady on the throne.  This is more period than what you
want, more period than the present system, actually, but I don't believe
the SCA is obligated to change the rules, either for them or for you,
or that it's being unfair or discriminating against anybody if it doesn't.

I also believe that basing your cause on tolerance, after saying 
that you don't think Rennaissance personas (probably 50% of the 
population in some areas) should be in the SCA, is putting yourself 
on shaky ground.

-- Nicholas van Leyden
 


Newsgroups: rec.org.sca