[Sca-cooks] Fw: ***A Message From Bish. I'm O.K.

[Phil Troy/ G. Tacitus Adamantius]

Also sprach XvLoverCrimvX at aol.com:
>--
>[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>In a message dated 12/26/02 3:59:31 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>adamantius.magister at verizon.net writes:
>
>
>>  As it seems you may have learned by now, clerical personae of various
>>  sorts seem to be semi-and-unofficially reserved for gay and bisexual
>>  SCAdians. In theory, such titles are not officially sanctioned by the
>>  SCA, because of the SCA, Inc.'s refusal to espouse one religion over
>>  another, or to officially support religious activities at our events.
>>
>
>Why only gay and bisexual SCAdians?

Possibly it made things less confusing in the swinging 70's, when SCA
events had a little more overt flirting than some of them do now?
"Ladies, don't hit on the monks!". I dunno, it made more sense 25
years ago than it does now, what can I say?

>  I mean i'm not complaining but it seems a
>little odd having it reserved for one group of people within the SCA.

Well, let me ask you this. Is it any less odd for Blue Feathers
(okay, I know I'm getting into Complicated Answer territory, and
possibly trouble here, but it's for a good cause, folks) to be worn
by a single group within the SCA, than for clerical personae and garb
to be reserved by one group of people within the SCA? Especially
when, in both cases, it's a common but individual choice of the
people doing it, and not a requirement of the SCA.

>Mysterious are the ways of the SCA......and the discussion was on Bishop
>Greco, not Geoffrey.

Um. Yes. I'm not too surprised to hear that.

Adamantius