From: betel@camelot.bradley.edu (Robert Crawford)
Subject: Re: Crusades against Pagans (was Re: Arrow number Two ...)
Organization: Bradley University
Date: 16 Sep 92 03:44:34 GMT

ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org (Ciaran Benson) writes:
>  You're arguing, then, that I should join with my eyes closed?
>  You're suggesting that I should just say; "oh, well, I'm sure
>all of this apparent bigotry that's setting off all of my alarms
>is just a misunderstanding that would be _silly_ to check into
>first"?
>  Yeh, right.

	I don't think anyone was saying that. The quote you were
responding too was more in the vein of, "Why don't you do more than
take our words on it -- go to a few events and see for yourself."

>  With so many people arguing that it's perfectly reasonable for
>any historically accurate prejudices to exist in SCA, and that
>I should just shut up and enjoy it 'cause anacronistic discrimination
>is just good fun?
>  I don't think so.

	No one does. However, I don't think many people have _said_
that the reason for not allowing official registration of devices
containing the pentacle or flyflot is because of "anachronistic
discrimination". It's been clearly stated it's because of _modern_
discrimination.
	I understand that you, because of your beliefs and
orientation, have problems with discrimination. I agree that the
attitudes that make you suffer are wrong, and should be changed.
	However, as a person who hangs around the SCA (not yet a
member...), I _also_ catch crap from the average person. What you're
asking (at least in the pentacle matter) is for me to also risk
catching crap because of your beliefs.
	For example: The last event I was at was at an elementary
school in a small town in the Midwest. Soon after we arrived, we
noticed that there was a little-league game going on behind the
school. We were already getting strange looks from people -- which is
only natural considering the fact that we were in Medieval dress.
	What if someone had come to the even with a pentacle on their
shield, or on a banner? After the little-league game was over, the
spectators and the teams drove right past the tourney field. The wrong
person seeing such a banner or device might have cost the host group
that site next year -- or worse, might have organized a group to go
and "save" the unbelievers.

>  BTW -- I really don't care if you change or if this issue ever
>gets resolved.  I am learning how the SCA treats new members.  I am
>learning how the SCA deals with questions of discrimination.  I am
>learning how the SCA responds to questions of propriety in its
>ruling body.

	Go to an event or a meeting to discover how the SCA treats new
members. Remember that your "introduction" here in the Rialto
consisted of you calling the SCA homophobic and discriminatory.

>  I'm not sure why you're saying that I am suggesting changes,
>when it seems to me that I've been very clear -- I want an
>EXPLAINATION of this, a CLARIFICATION of the SCA's decision
>to ignore "just this one, little, insignificant civil liberty".

	No one's ignoring any civil liberty. Quite simply, there is
nothing that says a private organization _has_ to do something that
could damage its reputation or that of its members. Unfortunately, in
this day and age, official registration of devices containing a
pentacle or flyflot has a good chance of doing so.

>  I'm happy to say that there are very many really nice people who
>have written to me, and they've done much to explain.  Sounds like
>I would have  a lot of fun in the SCA.

	Probably.

>  I'm sad to say that there seems to be a bunch of people who
>really do seem to like setting up historical recreations of bigotry.
>Sounds like I'd get beat up a lot if I joined the SCA.

	Only if you went into fighting :-). I've never seen anyone
anyone trying to set up "historical recreations of bigotry". I would
also say that anyone who _did_ would find themselves pushed out _very_
quickly.

--
	CORN!

Robert Crawford 			betel@camelot.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca