From: ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org (Ciaran Benson)
Subject: Re: Crusades against Pagans (was Re: Arrow number Two ...)
Reply-To: ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org (Ciaran Benson)
Organization: LaserMaster Technologies, Minneapolis, MN
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 19:13:06 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.191701.7262@watson.ibm.com>, mittle@watson.ibm.com 
(Josh Mittleman) writes:
> I've said all that I have to say on the subject of pentacles in SCA
> heraldry.  I would like to suggest that someone who has no acquaintance
> with the Society is in a very poor position to analyze and criticize
> details of its operation.  I'm not saying that newcomers should "shut up
> and learn how to do it right", but I do believe that a new arrival in any
> organization should try to learn everything relevent before he suggests
> changes.
> 

  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.

  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.

  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.

  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".

  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.

  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.

  My original concern has almost completely been replaced by a
new concern -- maybe it's time for another arrow ...

> I'd also like to correct an error in historical fact.  Hal wrote:
> 
> > A small point . . .  I think you will find, on examining the
> > historical record, that 'pagans' were not suppressed by Crusades...
> 
> A couple other people made the same comment; it is inaccurate.  There was
> at least one Crusade against "pagans" (as opposed to Crusades against
> heretics or Crusades against Muslims): The Lithuanian Crusade of the
> Teutonic Knights.  It was a particularly brutal one, too.

  My heretage includes Lithuania, through my grandparents.  My primary
interest in the period your organization explores is whatever tidbits of
Lithuanian history which might have survived, and the relationship
between the peoples of Lithuania (indeed, all of Rus,) and the
remnants of the hords of Mongol (another ancestoral land).

  Ok, so now maybe I'll fit this arrow with a blunt tip.

  Ciaran.

------------------------
Ciaran@county.lmt.mn.org                 Not an LM spokesbeing

  "... hey but I don't care cause sometimes I said sometimes I hear
    my voice and it's been HERE silent all these years" -- TORI AMOS