From: cav@bnr.ca (Rick Cavasin)
Subject: Re: Same Sex Consorts
Reply-To: cav@bnr.ca (Rick Cavasin)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 14:44:58 GMT

In article <8egJVMq00WB9BXJLQa@andrew.cmu.edu>, David Schroeder <ds4p+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
|> Good gentles --
|> 
|> I've been following the 'same sex consorts' thread for some time now
|> and I've got a question and an observation.  First the question.
|> 
|> If people who have no particular interest, romantically, in each other
|> can serve as sovereign and consort -- why do we still cling to the
|> notion of one's consort being the 'inspiration' that spurs the
|> winning fighter on to victory?  

Hey! Wait a minute!  Can't you be inspired by someone you respect,
admire, and love (in the platonic sense)?  I've fought for friends
(in both crown/coronet tournaments and others) and did not feel
particularly bereft of inspiration.  If and when I enter another
coronet tournament, I fully expect that my consort will be a friend
rather than an SO (sex object?).  In fact, anyone who knows me would
put money on it.

|> 
|> (The person who referred to the 'rule of courtly love' that said you 
|> can't _really_ love your spouse may be providing one sort of answer...
|> But let's face it, _many_ royal pairings are matters of convenience, 
|> not 'inspiration.')
|> 
|> The Board of Directors and Corpora don't seem to care about how one
|> is 'inspired' to win a Crown or Coronet -- they just want a biologically
|> human male and a biologically human female as sovereign and consort or
|> vice versa.  The romantic 'ideal' doesn't figure into their calculations.
|> 
|> The most telling argument in *favor* of making the change to allow
|> same-sex consorts *is* based on 'inspiration' (not a bad thing, in
|> my mind).  If I ever got in shape enough to be a threat in such a
|> tourney I could never see myself serving as King or Prince with
|> anyone other than my lady by my side.  I can see how those whose
|> partners are the same sex would not care to enter Crowns and 
|> Coronets if they were forced to compromise in their selection.


Personally, I don't like the idea of same sex consorts for the various
reasons stated quite eloquently by others, and because it smacks of
pandering to 'political correctness'.  On the other hand,
I might not be particularly opposed to lifting the ban on same sex
consorts because I believe that it won't make that much
of a difference.  Considering the demographics of the fighters in my
area, I think it unlikely that lifting the ban would unleash a sudden
flood of same sex consorts. (Yes Yes Yes, this is based on assumptions,
that's why I said 'I think').

|> 
|> Certainly, the SCA would 'survive' gay and lesbian pairs on the
|> thrones just as we've 'survived' women on the battlefield and
|> Board members from places other than California.  Striking out
|> a few words would be all it takes to 'fix' the problem.  
|> 
|> The observation I'd like to share is that we seem to have two
|> 'camps' -- one advocating laissez-faire "anything goes" recreation,
|> the other advocating a more 'strict construction' that tries hard
|> to hold the Society to period models whenever possible.  Arval, I
|> believe, has it right when he asserts:
|> 
|>  > We do not rigidly adhere to medieval evidence in all things, nor 
|>  > do we ignore medieval evidence in all things.  We choose.  We 
|>  > re-create the parts of medieval history which appeal to us.  
|>  > We add modern elements as necessary to ensure our enjoyment 
|>  > of the game.
|> 
|> That observation begs the question -- HOW DO WE CHOOSE?
|> 
|>  PROCESS
|>  o What are the dynamics of our decision-making/selection process?
|> 
|>  CRITERIA
|>  o What are the varied weights assigned to historical accuracy vs.
|>     modern elements?
|> 
|>  STRUCTURE
|>  o What social structures/norm-building and norm-enforcing educate
|>     and 'protect' the traditions of the Society?  (Or are we _so_
|>     laissez-faire we _don't_ do any norm-enforcing?) 
|> 
|>  VARIATION-DISSEMINATION
|>  o How are choices (often made in restricted geographic areas) spread 
|>     across the Society?  What controls 'fit' between choice & locale?
|> 
|> I'll look forward to your comments and further observations.
|> A certain someone needs to be fed...
|> 
|> Take good care -- Bertram
|> 
|> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|> Bertram of Bearington                                      Dave Schroeder
|> Debatable Lands/AEthelmearc/East               Carnegie Mellon University
|> INTERNET: ds4p@andrew.cmu.edu                         412/731-3230 (Home)
|> +------------------------ PREME * Press On * PREME ---------------------+
|>       "He indulged in every excess, yes in each licentious whim..." 
|> 
|> 



Cheers,
Balderik