Perspective
Oct. 5th, 2009 09:01 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
threadwalkerI think everyone needs some perspective. In the real world I deal with costly, stressful decisions that impact the welfare of people who use our medicine. At home I don my Super Mom cape and try to teach my kids to believe in themselves and to be good citizens. In my free time I don't want drama. In fact, at home we have a saying, "Drama means time out in your bedroom".
So on the one hand, the shenanigans going down in the SCA are not life-threatening and on the world-scale of events, are minor. However, they bring unwelcome drama to an activity that's supposed to be fun in a sandbox that claims that integrity, honor, and chivalry have value. And it's a sandbox I play in because it's supposedly the one place where my personal value of integrity is the norm and not the exception.
I finally have time to put my thoughts here.
I was thinking about Ysa's Level 2 banishment and, without any details other than she exhibited "a pattern of unpeerlike behaviour", I was trying to figure out why she's the target of a sanction. If you put anyone under the microscope you will find something; I don't like people who break rules or fail to follow through on commitments, so I'm sure you could find a few dozen slackers who've been on the receiving end of my ire and who'd be willing to say that I have exhibited a pattern of unpeerlike behaviour.
However, our group has a history of turning a blind eye. We tolerate Peers who collect money for goods and never provide the goods (armor, jewelery, etc). We have one Peer who has a history of biting people in the scalp at events and drew blood on at least one occasion. We have people with criminal records; at least one convicted pedofile which is a criminal behaviour which has a high rate of recitivism. So although that person could be considered a person of high risk, he is allowed to freely attend events.
If you look more closely at the culture we've developed within the SCA (West Kingdom), it could be argued that it is a culture that touts peerlike behaviour while the sun is up, but no-rules after sunset. We have public parties rife with alcohol and wanton behaviour on the eric. Frankly, the skin-shows that the belly dancers provide in their American Tribal clothing (or modern spangles which I've seen a few times) is NOT period and it is highly sexual. Based on the pattern of Western party behaviour, the demands by former royals that autocrats MUST get sites that permit late-night noise specificially for drumming, and Royal patronage of "the party on the eric", I think it would be pretty straight forward for someone to make the case that the Western Royal culture encourages alcohol and salacious behaviour after hours and that the definition of "peerlike behaviour" is subject to the time of day.
Regardless, I've never heard of any of these people being banished for theft or assault or drunkeness or "unpeerlike behaviour". IMO, at worst Ysa could be called the "party girl" of the West, a title formerly held proudly by other gals. The West also likes to brag about its parties, so being punished for being the "best" at something our culture encourages is hypocritical.
Furthermore, regarding the actual process of banishment,
1. I despise any indication of denial of responsibility from the Royals for doing this. That's weak. Those who signed the letter get to deal with the consequences. No one held a gun to anyone's head, so suck it up and own it.
2. It is slimey that the letter arrived at Ysa's within hours of the announcement. Although by the letter of the law she needs to be informed ahead of time and technically it arrived ahead of time, I view it as an abuse of the system. In our country, (the one that I pay taxes to), you are given the opportunity to defend yourself in a court of law before a jury of your peers. There was no opportunity for her to seek mitigation within the hours between when the letter was delivered and when the announcement was made.
In Ysa's shoes I'd have lawyered up faster than my last soufle fell. I'd be investigating the SCA banishment process, exploring my legal rights as a paid member, I'd be examining whether or not the banishment procedure that was enacted could invalidate the non-profit status of the organization, and I'd specifically be looking into a case for harrassment with the knowledge of all the people I noted above who have not been banished despite enacting real harm/loss on others. For me there is no extreme that is too extreme when my rights are curtailed and I am singled out without having the right to defend myself.
3. One of the consequences is that Ysa's poppy run is over. I'm pretty upset over that. I sure hope they have enough evidence to substantiate their claims. Otherwise I'm going to be fighting-mad over that and I will personally view the royals as anti-arts.
4. Technically the Royals have 10 days to provide evidence of the charges. That's tomorrow. What if they don't provide it? Day 11 is too late; they have made a point of following the letter of the law, so I expect that they will adhere to it in regards to this as well.
Then personally I'd say they have broken their oaths of fealty to the kingdom to protect the populace, their oaths sworn to Ysa's peers to protect the peers and peers' households, etc.
So where does that leave me? I take fealty and oaths very seriously. Unless sufficient evidence is provided to substanciate their claims by day 10, I gues we're no longer in fealty with each other. Which means there's no point in lifting a sword to defend them at Great Western War. There's no point in attending their peerage meetings. There's no point in attending their courts. There's no point in wearing my medalion which is a symbol of my fealty. I don't feel that I can be proud of my Royalty or want to admit that they are "mine". I'm temporarily a peer without Royals looking for Royalty who are worthy of my fealty.
But it's still Monday and they have until tomorrow. I would be a hypocrit if I convicted them in my own mind before they had their full 10 days to provide data to support their accusations. So I will wait and see what happens.
So on the one hand, the shenanigans going down in the SCA are not life-threatening and on the world-scale of events, are minor. However, they bring unwelcome drama to an activity that's supposed to be fun in a sandbox that claims that integrity, honor, and chivalry have value. And it's a sandbox I play in because it's supposedly the one place where my personal value of integrity is the norm and not the exception.
I finally have time to put my thoughts here.
I was thinking about Ysa's Level 2 banishment and, without any details other than she exhibited "a pattern of unpeerlike behaviour", I was trying to figure out why she's the target of a sanction. If you put anyone under the microscope you will find something; I don't like people who break rules or fail to follow through on commitments, so I'm sure you could find a few dozen slackers who've been on the receiving end of my ire and who'd be willing to say that I have exhibited a pattern of unpeerlike behaviour.
However, our group has a history of turning a blind eye. We tolerate Peers who collect money for goods and never provide the goods (armor, jewelery, etc). We have one Peer who has a history of biting people in the scalp at events and drew blood on at least one occasion. We have people with criminal records; at least one convicted pedofile which is a criminal behaviour which has a high rate of recitivism. So although that person could be considered a person of high risk, he is allowed to freely attend events.
If you look more closely at the culture we've developed within the SCA (West Kingdom), it could be argued that it is a culture that touts peerlike behaviour while the sun is up, but no-rules after sunset. We have public parties rife with alcohol and wanton behaviour on the eric. Frankly, the skin-shows that the belly dancers provide in their American Tribal clothing (or modern spangles which I've seen a few times) is NOT period and it is highly sexual. Based on the pattern of Western party behaviour, the demands by former royals that autocrats MUST get sites that permit late-night noise specificially for drumming, and Royal patronage of "the party on the eric", I think it would be pretty straight forward for someone to make the case that the Western Royal culture encourages alcohol and salacious behaviour after hours and that the definition of "peerlike behaviour" is subject to the time of day.
Regardless, I've never heard of any of these people being banished for theft or assault or drunkeness or "unpeerlike behaviour". IMO, at worst Ysa could be called the "party girl" of the West, a title formerly held proudly by other gals. The West also likes to brag about its parties, so being punished for being the "best" at something our culture encourages is hypocritical.
Furthermore, regarding the actual process of banishment,
1. I despise any indication of denial of responsibility from the Royals for doing this. That's weak. Those who signed the letter get to deal with the consequences. No one held a gun to anyone's head, so suck it up and own it.
2. It is slimey that the letter arrived at Ysa's within hours of the announcement. Although by the letter of the law she needs to be informed ahead of time and technically it arrived ahead of time, I view it as an abuse of the system. In our country, (the one that I pay taxes to), you are given the opportunity to defend yourself in a court of law before a jury of your peers. There was no opportunity for her to seek mitigation within the hours between when the letter was delivered and when the announcement was made.
In Ysa's shoes I'd have lawyered up faster than my last soufle fell. I'd be investigating the SCA banishment process, exploring my legal rights as a paid member, I'd be examining whether or not the banishment procedure that was enacted could invalidate the non-profit status of the organization, and I'd specifically be looking into a case for harrassment with the knowledge of all the people I noted above who have not been banished despite enacting real harm/loss on others. For me there is no extreme that is too extreme when my rights are curtailed and I am singled out without having the right to defend myself.
3. One of the consequences is that Ysa's poppy run is over. I'm pretty upset over that. I sure hope they have enough evidence to substantiate their claims. Otherwise I'm going to be fighting-mad over that and I will personally view the royals as anti-arts.
4. Technically the Royals have 10 days to provide evidence of the charges. That's tomorrow. What if they don't provide it? Day 11 is too late; they have made a point of following the letter of the law, so I expect that they will adhere to it in regards to this as well.
Then personally I'd say they have broken their oaths of fealty to the kingdom to protect the populace, their oaths sworn to Ysa's peers to protect the peers and peers' households, etc.
So where does that leave me? I take fealty and oaths very seriously. Unless sufficient evidence is provided to substanciate their claims by day 10, I gues we're no longer in fealty with each other. Which means there's no point in lifting a sword to defend them at Great Western War. There's no point in attending their peerage meetings. There's no point in attending their courts. There's no point in wearing my medalion which is a symbol of my fealty. I don't feel that I can be proud of my Royalty or want to admit that they are "mine". I'm temporarily a peer without Royals looking for Royalty who are worthy of my fealty.
But it's still Monday and they have until tomorrow. I would be a hypocrit if I convicted them in my own mind before they had their full 10 days to provide data to support their accusations. So I will wait and see what happens.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Gah!
Date: 2009-10-05 05:50 pm (UTC)Can we never be free of it, even in our leisure activities!?
Bloody hell!
Also: "We have one Peer who has a history of biting people in the scalp at events and drew blood on at least one occasion"
WTF??!?! SERIOUSLY?!
Re: Gah!
Date: 2009-10-05 09:19 pm (UTC)Re: Gah!
Date: 2009-10-05 10:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-05 06:26 pm (UTC)*stomps off to mutter and swear*
no subject
Date: 2009-10-05 06:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-05 07:35 pm (UTC)I'm not a Lawyer but the "Biting" incidents sound like Assault Charges should be issued by the local Law Enforcement Officials.
Things like this make it hard to justify being an active member.....
Done in a joking matter;
Date: 2009-10-05 08:52 pm (UTC)"Oh, she's in Zombie mode again."
"Oh, that's funny."
If you don't think it's funny, it's easy to run away, frankly. If the incidents noted above are what I think they are.
Re: Done in a joking matter;
Date: 2009-10-05 11:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-06 03:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-05 08:32 pm (UTC)Think I'll concentrate on websites and weeding. This sort of thing still pushes my buttons
no subject
Date: 2009-10-05 09:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-10-05 11:50 pm (UTC)the ruckus
Date: 2009-10-06 01:10 am (UTC)My two cents.
Personally I hate all of this. I personally do not know who is involved, nor what the charges are, but I do know this, we all need to relax a bit and let the process take place, it will all work out eventually.....
I do not think it is fair to anyone involved in this mess to speculate until we know the facts. And I gather from what has been said that doesn't have to be made know till this Friday??
no subject
Date: 2009-10-06 02:55 am (UTC)By Their actions, whether on Their own, or misguided by others, the King and Queen have earned more negative renown then they have years left to erase.
no subject
Date: 2009-10-06 03:09 pm (UTC)