[Ansteorra] Questions about crowns and crown tournaments

[Bree Flowers]

> You're saying that
> people will leave that which they've been a part of for some time if we
> refuse to *change* to suit them.

Yup, that's what I'm saying. I'm saying that some people have been
sucking it up for years because the timing wasn't right, or like me,
one of those privileged straight folk, hadn't really thought about it
much, but now that it's been brought up I've formed an opinion.
There's a difference between discriminating because no one has pointed
it out or tried to change it, and *choosing* to discriminate. I think
of it like a kid and manners... kids burp at the table, it's natural,
but it's not desirable. We do not think that a small child is rude for
burping at the table, we just point it out to them and ask them to
keep it to a minimum and say "excuse me" when one slips out. And it
might take a while for that change to happen. But when an adult sits
down next to me at the table and burps without saying "excuse me", I'm
going to think it's rude. This proposed change is something like that
to me. I can forgive behavior in the past, when the impact of our
policies hadn't been brought to light, but now that the issue has been
raised, if this organization chooses to discriminate going forward
then I'm not sure it's an organization I really want to be involved
with any more.

  Funny.  When it was mentioned that people
> might quit if the change is imposed, they were mocked at with expressions
> like "take your ball and go home."  Shouldn't the same derision apply with
> even more accuracy to those who might leave if the organization they've
> participated in for years declines to implement the change they demand?

You're welcome to tell anyone you like that they can take their ball
and go home. I'm just pointing out that there will be people who do it
no matter which way the decision goes since you seemed to imply that
we'd only lose people if we change. I stand by my assertion that this
is a polarizing issue that will see fall-out either way it goes.

> Further, I object to your assertion that it is those who oppose the change
> who are closed-minded.  While I've done my best to be polite and reasonable,
> I've been called hateful, bigoted, and un-evolved, all because my *opinion*
> differed.  So who is really being closed-minded? To be open-minded does not
> mean to *accept* opinions with which we disagree; it means to *respect* them
> and those who hold them.  Just because others will label any opinion that
> differs from theirs as "closed-mindedness" does not make it so.  I respect
> the opposing opinion and those who hold it.  Being called hateful,
> closed-minded, and bigoted really doesn't make me feel like I'm being
> accorded the slightest respect.

I'm sorry you feel that way, I was saying what the opinion of the
people who leave would be. I'm pretty sure if you feel strongly enough
about the lack of change that you leave the club, that "closed minded"
is about the kindest term you'd come up with. I couldn't think of a
similarly-worded way to express the opinions of people who would leave
if same-sex couples were allowed to compete (similar in the sense that
closed-minded is "harsh" but not overtly offensive like using a slur
would have been). I was trying to stay away from terms like "bigoted",
"homophobic" or "hateful", but I guess "closed-minded" wasn't mild
enough, sorry. Incidentally, even in that instance I claimed the
organization was closed-minded, not any individual member. I'm sorry
you personally feel disrespected, that wasn't my intention.

~Astridr
Not trying to make enemies, really.