What constitutes "offensive" garb?

topic posted Thu, September 20, 2007 - 7:31 AM by  Pewter
Share/Save/Bookmark
From Leah in another thread...

"What constitutes "offensive" garb? Inquiring minds (mine, at least) would like to know. For indeed of our Society is a Creative one, how much license are we given in our "reasonable attempt" to clothe ourselves in period? "

Please give us your thoughts...
posted by:
Pewter
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:24 AM
    someone mentioned an 'honest attempt' at garb and while its very hard to see such a thing i think its possible to look at someones garb and say 'they're new, thats acceptable' or 'hey they are making an attempt at it'

    somethings that i've found that i've disliked:

    The totally non period patterns, like smiley faces, parrots, etc. The discount rack fabric that people think make cute tunics. They're great for the parties and such, but it isn't something that should be worn in the light of day.

    I've always called them the Class C SCA uniform, the SCA/Medieval t-shirt with the belt and pouch. If you could pull out the pouch why not a quick tunic?

    I know that people can't always afford to buy or make good garb, and thats ok, an attempt is all thats required. Its when they spend that money on stupid stuff that they think they can pass as garb. Certain fantasy things come to mind.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:50 AM
      I hate the word "offensive" because it's not so much "offensive" as it's just not quite "appropriate" for Pennsic.

      So on that note - I'd have to say: those sheer material belly dance hip scarves with all the jingly fake coins.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Sat, September 22, 2007 - 5:32 PM
        Melanie, I have a friggen box full of those things & don't wear them to SCA events, they are hard to figure out how to wash, & some of them leak coins everywhere! if you belly dance, Do not, I repeat, do not tell your friends & relatives you would like a new costume piece (I know it's garb, but youknow relatives) for xmas or your birthday, cause that is all you will get! ever! I even have one I love but can't wear it, cause I can't find pieces to match the color.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 20, 2007 - 8:59 AM
      Things that I've seen at SCA events that I find offensive.
      1. Civil War garb (very accurate if you are trying to reenact 1860's)
      2. Stark Trek Federation uniform (please!)
      3. Klingon uniform (get real!)
      4. Purple velveteen bathrobe with glitter applique moon and stars, conical henin covered in same fabric and a wand (fully matured adult stating that he was Merlin.
      5. 18th century "Captain Hook" style garb
      6. American Revolutionary War garb (again accurate, but not our "period")
      7. Kilts are in no way period to the SCA. I am a Scot mundanely of a noble line (with title) and If I were to dress in distinctively "Scottish" medieval garb, it would be with a saffron coloted shirt and cassock, boots and leggings. I am about as far from "period police" as you can get but on this one point...... it bothers me.
      8. Tri-corned hats
      9. Hooded sweatshirts are NOT medieval even though they have a hood.
      10. We all love Tolkein and the Lord of the Rings movies. Those are fantasy items, please don't wear the licensed reproduction garb to events, it's embarassing.

      Things that I personally don't care about that are anachronisms, but who cares?
      1. Boots with heels and shoes that are made for left and right feet (heels didn't start showing up on footwear until after the reign of Henry VIII of England)
      2. Any woman that wants to run around half naked will get no complaints from me. ;-)
      3. Sewing machines, commercially woven fabrics, commercially dyed and processed leather, fake fur, synthetic materials (let's not get too crazy here)
      4. bras (on women of course, unless of course you see yourself as Kramer or George)This comes into a comfort item for women and just none of anyones business.
      5. Carrying many knives and blades (of course nobody did that in period, but as Scadians, we like our sharp pointy things)
      6. Whatever you drink fluids out of at a summer event is quite alright with me. I'd rather have you hydrated and if you dont have a "period" tankard or container, go ahead and drink from the sports bottle or plastic jug.

      Whatever you may find offensive or not, make a mental note of it for yourself. You are not being kind or helpful by confronting the "offender" with your insights. You're just being a pain in the ass. If you feel the need to vent about it, wait until you can get on the internet and do what we are doing here.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Thu, September 20, 2007 - 9:56 AM
        Chainmail bikinis - (Sorry Jeffrey, I know you likes your nearly-nekkid wimmins! ;-)))) Where in period would women have worn this? I fall into the school of, If you can show an example in a research book, then go ahead. That would allow the ME, Japanese, Etc. to wear period stuff at Pennsic, which should be the periodest of events, not the least period of all. And I think that is starting to bug me.

        Obnoxious street clothes - It is one thing to be wearing your t-shirt and jeans, I always assume you're going into town or leaving or arriving. It is another to be totally Gothed up at Pennsic and thinking it is an attempt. One of the laurels here in Ealdormere did research on what a period Goth would wear. All Black with chains and skulls, like a fashionable biker ain't it.

        Tricked up street clothes - Taking a sharpie and drawing a fleur-de-lys on your blue jeans is not making an attempt. Go get some garb on!
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:41 AM
          "That would allow the ME, Japanese, Etc. to wear period stuff at Pennsic, which should be the periodest of events, not the least period of all."

          I put the blinders on at Pennsic because I know that it has become the east coast Burning Man. There are a large number of camps that have nothing else to do with the SCA the rest of the year so, the come as Goth Vampires because it is cool to them. There is no way to stop it really.
          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

            Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:57 AM
            Ugh, I sooooo hope Pennsic isn't really turning into the east coast Burning Man. For those on the east coast who want that type of atmosphere -- there's Starwood for that ! And on that note ... a few of my friends who do go to BM, SW and Pennsic know how to keep their "costuming" separated ....and that's why they rock. : )
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Thu, September 20, 2007 - 12:53 PM
          I have to say people wearing obviously caberet or tribal fusion bellydance stuff kinda annoys me. Some of the costumes are really beautiful, but they are in no way related to any period Middle Eastern garb. They are appropriate for dancing in other forums, but I don't think they qualify as an attempt at period clothing.
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Thu, September 20, 2007 - 9:54 AM
    The only truly *offensive* garb I have seen was the Waffen SS uniforms.

    I'm sure my own garb wouldn't pass a true critic's eye, but it's getting better.

    I've seen tacky, yes. Wrong, yes. Questionable taste/style/components, yes. But a "reasonable attempt" is left pretty much open to personal interpretation, good, bad, or indifferent.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:02 AM
      Sorry my good Lord Fulke, I don't think a "reasonable attempt" is THAT open to interpretation in the context of what we are doing.

      People who come to us know we are trying to be medieval. We are not Worldcon, Dragoncon, Starwood or Burning Man, even though we have many members that cross all those borders.

      We specify our time period for people to dress in. Heck, we even lend people clothes if they don't know any better (and really, how hard is it to look at period costumes in a book? Or even online?)

      And I agree, the SS uniforms are truly offensive. That would be where I would be calling the autocrat in a huff.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:07 AM
        << Sorry my good Lord Fulke, I don't think a "reasonable attempt" is THAT open to interpretation in the context of what we are doing. >>

        You have a very valid point, Lord Valizan...I left that far too open in it's inclusiveness. An attempt to be medieval in style doesn't exactly require a great deal of research anymore...15 minutes with Google will suffice today, no doubt for a beginner idea.

        I must respectfully say that I would turn a blind eye to the chainmail bikinis under certain circumstances, however :)
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:04 AM
      Vampires, goths, and ravers, mostly. Jeffrey's list pretty much covers my own feelings on it.

      I don't mind "joke" garb, within the context of the joke: Elmo bikinis, medieval "pimps", etc. I get the joke and probably think it's funny. Everyone knows it's not supposed to be authentic.

      Someone shows up in rave wear, though, I'm going to think they are clueles and either don't know where they are or don't respect our scene.
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Thu, September 20, 2007 - 9:56 AM
    My list is rather short.

    Shiney Polyester, really the cotton fabric or poly-blends that don't shine are much better and cheap but, I am not going to say anything to them.

    Hollywood Pirates, I do 1710 Privateer, Queen Anne's War. Notice I said 1710. The war ran from 1702 to 1713 and styles changed during that time for privateers weapons changed too. Full period to be on the crew, I only have 2 sets of garb for it. There were pirates that fall into the SCA time period and Captain Jack Sparrow was not one of them. The stuff most of the SCA pirates wear is not proper for any real pirate of any period. Hollywood saw to that.

    T-shirt as garb and jeans under a T-tunic. Pajama bottoms are cheap and look better than jeans.

    Now, the real question is do I let it spoil my fun. NO!
    Do I spoil their fun by making comments to them. NO!

    So, I guess I am not "offended", I choose to not think about it. It is not like we are trying to teach the public about history, our events are mostly closed to the public. They are pet peaves that I deal with by not caring.
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:36 AM
    I'm wondering--do other Kingdoms have Gold Key or is that a Western thing? Gold Key is a garb lending office--and yes--it is a true office. The Minister cares for, accepts, and makes sure garb gets to events to be lent out for newbies and others that do not have "acceptable" garb.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:46 AM
      Here in the Midrealm, that's generally handled on a group by group basis. Generally the group hosting a given event will have garb available for newcomers and then people can borrow garb to take to wars if they don't have enough of their own stuff. (My tentmate and I shared a couple chemises at Pennsic this year. She looked *way* better in them than I did.)
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 20, 2007 - 10:49 AM
      We certainly do have "Gold Key" and in fact I've donated a number of items that I made in my earlier years in the Sca when I was doing late 15th early 16th century period. One doublet that I made was borrowed by a newbee that was a bit larger than I am and it didn't fully lace up around him, but it was a really nice piece made from silk velvet and a beautiful brocade. At feast one of the "garb/period police" came up to him and told him: "You know, you've really outgrown that garb and now you just look fat and ridiculous. If you want to get some better fitting garb come over to my booth and I can make something up for you."
      He was humiliated and stopped coming to events. The garb BTW won an A&S competition. It was very period, but it perhaps didn't fit too well. I mention this to point out the dangers of over zealotry from "officianatos". They can do much damage.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Thu, September 20, 2007 - 11:01 AM
        You know, that ought to be a banishable offense.

        I'm serious. If I'm not mistaken, can't you get banished by doing something that really give the SCA a black eye? Well, that certainly did.

        Torture is 100 percent documentable and authentic, and Lord knows, it's been several centuries since we've had a good wheeling....

        >:-(
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Thu, October 11, 2007 - 11:06 AM
          I actually wrote to my representative asking that he introduce a bill that would bring back the public flogging. His assistants thanked me for my interest in his campaign and gave me a prepared statement of the use of torture in criminal law. And I got a button.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Thu, September 20, 2007 - 11:02 AM
        And Jeffrey, what happened to the newbie who borrowed your garb was just uncalled for !!! Hearing that kind of stuff makes me angry. Some people just don't understand how strong their words can be and the damage that can be done. There's a big difference in being tactful and down right mean !!!! Those type of people put the ASS in CLASS !!!!
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Fri, September 21, 2007 - 3:51 PM
        Jeffrey, what happened to your friend is just sickening--who ever had the almighty nerve to behave like that doesn't belong in the SCA, or anywhere where civilized humans congregate, let alone a Society based on the ideals of courtesy and chivalry.
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Thu, September 20, 2007 - 11:51 AM
    I swear I saw someone one afternoon at Pennsic (an adult no less) that just flew in from Hogwarts. ;-)

    We had a chuckle over it (AFTER we were back in our own camp of course), but I cant say it actually bothered me.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 20, 2007 - 1:03 PM

      Pennsic is the major offender, its where alot of our restrictions seem to be lessed and those that don't lower their standard come off as being the nazis. The war should be our showiest event, not the lowest common denominator....
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Thu, September 20, 2007 - 1:10 PM
        Keep in mind................ many of the participants in Pennsic are not Scadians and are members of other organizations that have their own dress codes. They are there as our guests and just as we as Scadians extend our courtesies to their titles, we also must be respectful of their customs and modes of dress.
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Fri, September 21, 2007 - 12:17 AM
          Jeffery said: "Keep in mind................ many of the participants in Pennsic are not Scadians and are members of other organizations that have their own dress codes. They are there as our guests and just as we as Scadians extend our courtesies to their titles, we also must be respectful of their customs and modes of dress."

          I think the issue there lies not with the other groups, but with the probable fact that new SCAdians don't know *that* yet. Without a guide, they might just think that some of those other modes of dress are Perfectly Acceptable at SCA events outside of Pennsic.
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Fri, September 21, 2007 - 5:59 AM
          Yes they arn't scadians but the pennsic book clearly states that it is a sca event and that a reasonable attempt is required.

          Maybe its just me but i find most of my garb to be far more comfortable than my mundanes,
          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

            Fri, September 21, 2007 - 7:20 AM
            "Maybe its just me but i find most of my garb to be far more comfortable than my mundanes"

            I agree. My garb for Pennsic is much better in the heat than my mundanes. It's not quite as good in the rain though, but it does dry out faster. Does that count?
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Fri, September 21, 2007 - 12:12 AM
        Our showiest event is Twelfth Night. It's much more pleasant to know your best work worn't be destoyed by the elements....
        Having (finally!) been to Pennsic, I barely had enough garb to make it through; I brought the best, the worst and everything in between.
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Thu, September 20, 2007 - 3:23 PM
    I gauge garb by distance, and stop at ten feet unless invited to comment. I make exceptions for people setting up or tearing down, or on late night runs to the porta-castles.

    Glow sticks and LED's in your garb is in-your-face offensive to me from 50 feet away or more at night.

    Fantasy, or somewhat out of period garb or low quality garb doesn't bother me if that's what it takes to get you interested. (hey kid, the first event's free...) As you get more involved, you're likely to shift toward more SCAdian garb choices of your own free will. None of these things are jarring on the same scale as a glow stick as garb though. Really, how are the Hollywood pirates any more non-period than the Hollywood belly dancers? Like many people, I sought out the SCA as an extension of my own dream, and we have simply grown together. I can be patient with others who are now doing the same, and not hold them to a higher standard.

    The rave garb that isn't at least some form of historical fantasy is a bit jarring. I have to say that I consider it to be another form of street clothes, like jeans and a T-shirt, and equally appropriate.
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Sat, September 22, 2007 - 2:16 PM
    I don't know guys, I will admit that goth gear and things of that vein have a place elsewhere (although I do very much appreciate the beautiful women sporting such "garb"). I'd like my persona to be an amazon...a group whose existance is questionable at best. That's why it's the society for *creative* anachronism. Unless anyone has any suggestions for where I should look for garb ideas, I'm going to make the best attempt I can at period clothing for my group of choice. Appropreate, maybe not.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Sat, September 22, 2007 - 9:35 PM
      <<Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?
      I don't know guys, I will admit that goth gear and things of that vein have a place elsewhere (although I do very much appreciate the beautiful women sporting such "garb"). I'd like my persona to be an amazon...a group whose existance is questionable at best. That's why it's the society for *creative* anachronism. Unless anyone has any suggestions for where I should look for garb ideas, I'm going to make the best attempt I can at period clothing for my group of choice. Appropreate, maybe not. >>

      The Atlantian A&S page has a wonderful database of reviewed links that you can search by region or time period for garb ideas, documentation starting points and construction help. You might want to look at the early Roman, Greek and Briton stuff. They are all comfortable in hot weather, easy to make and actually look good on lots of different body types.

      moas.atlantia.sca.org/wsnlinks/index.php

      This website has tips for finding fiber types- very useful for places like the swapmeet

      www.fabrics.net/fabricsr.asp
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Sun, September 23, 2007 - 8:02 PM
      "That's why it's the society for *creative* anachronism. "

      Heya Ashley!

      While I'm glad to hear you're willing to do some research into the area you like (Try and find the book "History's Great Untold Stories: Larger Than Life Characters & Dramatic Events That Changed The World" by Joseph Cummins for some good leads. But be prepared to NOT be dressed like Xena, Warrior Princess.), I do have to comment on the above phrase.

      People have repeatedly used The Rule Of "C" to justify doing whatever they want in the SCA. The "Creative" part in the name of our group is not a sanction to play the SCA however one likes because one is artistic and creative. It is not artistic license.

      It refers to the fact that we are playing within a time period and CREATING a society by actually acting the roles and making garb, as opposed to just reading it in a book. But we state that we are historically based, not fantasy based.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Mon, September 24, 2007 - 12:13 AM
        Hi there! I just gotta share a funny story....

        At Desert Dance Festival today, I took a class in "tribaret". The instuctor, rather than going into movement right away, gave a long talk about the attributes of tribal and cabaret and how she chooses to fuse them together along with a list of instructors who also explore a true fusion of cabaret and tribal styles. She let the students talk as well, and we basically agreed that the labeling thing was annoying but needed not so much for us, but for the public. One student said that the dancer who coined the phrase, "ATS" wants to reclaim the name for only her style. The instructor replies with words taken right out of your mouth:
        "People have repeatedly used The Rule Of "F" (Fusion style, "C") to justify doing whatever they want in the Bellydancing community (SCA)."
        OK, so I am paraphrasing, but that was basically it! She further went on to describe, diplomatically, how *not* to do fusion dance-all the while valiantly trying to bite her toungue aobut the forks who are too inexperieced or too outright lazy to do their studying and excuse it by saying they are just being *cre-aaa-tive*
        I had to keep myself from laughing as I was recalling these recent posts. At least *I* thought it was funny.....

        Anyway, I belive the Creative exists because ultimately we have limited time in our Society and we must frequently merge the modern world into our activities. We as a group, and as individuals simply cannot do everything they way they did it. So we compromise and find ways to make things more medival without making undue sacrifices of saftey, expense and/or time.

        Hmmm I am getting long winded, this could be another thread....
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Mon, September 24, 2007 - 5:32 AM
        Its called 'creative' cause we don't have a minute by minute account of everything single thing that existed or happened in that time frame. We have to piece it all together based on what we do have and that requires some educated guesses and leaps of logic. Creative just sounds better.

        I'd imagine a amazon would wear whatever she took from a defeated enemy.
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Sat, September 22, 2007 - 2:46 PM
    Wow, Pewter! I never imagined my simple question on another thread would lead to such a lively discussion on it's own!

    While on the topic of "offensive" garb, I'm sticking my neck out and will discuss footwear. Out of medical necessity, I need to wear specially designed medically orthopedic shoes. Simply I have the "feet from hell". If I don't wear such shoes, I'm literally crippled in pain and can't walk at all. This leaves me with *zero* options for period footwear. I know. I've tried, very unsuccessfully. Thankfully, my garb is basically floor-length anyway so for the most part, no one really sees my feet though ocassionally I've taken some flack from people I don't know at events for not wearing "correct" footwear. I have some serious thoughts about that. 1) It's more important for me to be able to walk/stand/move comfortably and to be able to actually attend an event or war than it is to have "period" footwear; and 2) if people are so intent on dissing my feet than they are not looking into my eyes and seeing the love and passion in my heart.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Mon, September 24, 2007 - 6:29 AM
      Leah,

      My first SCA event was Pennsic 32? or 33? Imagine a newbie getting inundated in everything all at once. A friend drug me there after shopping at an ethnic place in Baltimore and buying me an embroidered shirt that looked somewhat medeival. Other than that I had cutoff shorts and black lowtop tennies as I entered troll.

      We went directly to the merchant area and bought me a pair of black pants that tied at the waist. I was all worried about footwear but everyone else (well at least a large number) of people were wearing their mundanes because it had rained the entire week of landgrab and they "didn't want to ruin their leathers" as it was explained to me. There was ankle deep mud and straw everywhere...

      I need to wear my glasses to see. Someone else needs sunglasses. You need special shoes. Some people need the motorized carts. And medical things. The Pennsic complex is FILLED with lots of non-period things (barns, tractors, buildings, busses, fences, cars, etc.). I find the medieval disappears for a moment when I encounter these things initially, but then I try to have a conscious mindset that focuses away from the mundane rather than dwells on it and pop back into being "at War" again. I suppose some people have trouble looking past those things and transitioning in and out of our make believe world...

      I am guessing that you pass the 10 foot rule and that your overall contribution (even with the mudane shoes) is a net positive, at least for the vast majority of us. So do what you have to do mundanely and then do what you want to do garb wise and it'll be fine.

      Peace,
      Pewter
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Mon, September 24, 2007 - 6:50 AM
        Regarding foot wear --oh it's so important to wear what makes your feet happy ! I mean, maybe not so much the bright white Addias tennis shoes - but there are plenty of options that can be passable and comfortable....like black tennis shoes, or comfy hiking boots, or broken in leather sandals.

        It is really neat to see folks wearing those medieval style boots / shoes .... and I've heard that alot of them are quite comfortable. But I've also had someone tell me about their boots and that they cost $900. They are custom-made, really beautiful and have a life time warranty ... but um, I need to use my $900 on something other than a pair of boots that I would wear 2 weeks out of the year....like my house payment. : )

        For some people, this is their passion and they invest heavily in it. For others, it can only be a part time hobby.
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Mon, September 24, 2007 - 10:54 AM
          comfortable shoes are a must, period is nice but if you can't walk its just no fun. However its not too tough to make some slip on spats or covers for a decent pair of shoes.

          I think items like shoes, glasses, sunglasses, certain jewelry (religious or weddings rings), piercings, any medical type stuff (wrist brace) fall outside of commentable 'garb', unless of course they are loud or hideous. They are just required parts of living for alot of people.
          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

            Mon, September 24, 2007 - 3:41 PM
            I don't know about where you all live, but in the halloween section of the stores around here, they've got all kinds of shoe covers to go with the costumes this year, including boots! They will atleast pass the 10ft. rule, Me thinks I'll add that to my list of things to nab after halloween, when it's discounted!
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Mon, September 24, 2007 - 3:32 PM
        Thanks Pewter! Yeah, I generally pass the 10ft rule even with my mundane shoes, prescription glasses and MedicAlert bracelet. Just wear blinders when you look at my personal campsite though because I need my breathing machine (CPAP) so I can sleep at night along with a full battery back-up system and a small portable silent generator that I run during the day to recharge it. A member of our household generously brings his generator for my use so I can attend events. I can't afford one.

        But if y'all ignore all that, I fit in fine ((giggles))!
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Sun, November 11, 2007 - 4:31 PM
      Leah, I agree 100% regarding your post about foot wear. I've had four surgeries apiece on my feet, and will never be able to wear period shoes. I have recieved serious flak at times over this. The individuals who are tactful, and merely trying to give the "newbie' a "heads up" don't bother me...and I do appreciate helpful suggestions on my garb-which is definately in a state of on-going evolution. However, the strident individuals I tend to treat to the sight of my surgically reconstructed footsies...heh,heh,heh....the abject apologies I tend to receive at that part warm my evil heart. <G>
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Mon, September 24, 2007 - 6:12 AM
    I am all about naked people having naked fun at pennsic, naked can fit any period persona
    however there is a time and a place for everything, the most offended I have ever been by garb ( and mind I have no children of my own) I had watched as large drunken man had stumbled too far from the parties of the swamp and kinda tripped and plundared his way through what seemed to be a family type camp that he was not invited to, and the best part of all was his garb, walking wasn't this guys only problem apparently keeping on his much much too small loin cloth had also been a problem of his. as he struggled to stay on his feet he lost his garb more than once as he horrified and confused the children that woke up and came running out of their tents. The look on their little faces haunts me to this day.... poor kids...................................not that I havent been drunk and half naked stumbling through a camp at pennsic, just not one with kids in it!!!
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Mon, September 24, 2007 - 1:11 PM
    At an event this weekend, I encountered a family whose patriarch was very isolationist and kind of a "prisoner" of his family's interest in SCA. His wife told me that he really likes SCA activities, but hates having to dress in the clothes required. His youngest son though enthusiastically embraces the garb to be worn that most easily "shocks" the sensibilities of his mundane 8 yr. old friends, happily donning tights in bright colors and ornate poofy-sleeved shirts (I see a definite early Italian ren style in his future). So, I guess one could say that I am offended by his complete lack of support of his son's love of everything SCA, including the dressing-up part. His lack of garb-wearing beyond jeans and a tunic and obvious lack of comfort even in those clothes causes a cloud to descend and kills my buzz.

    Otherwise, I second the tri-cornered hat thing and non-period pirates (I love and hail period privateers) as being offensive and I personally find cavalier hats offensive, even though yes, I know they keep sun off one's face well. However, I am a strict adherent myself to the 1601 cut-off date.

    Oh, and ill-fitting loincloths have caused some offense...some things are things one just really doesn't want to look up and see.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Mon, September 24, 2007 - 1:52 PM
      "Oh, and ill-fitting loincloths have caused some offense...some things are things one just really doesn't want to look up and see."

      Rules of thumb:
      If everyone seems to be looking the other way every time you wear a loincloth--it's ill-fitting.
      If you can't get a loincloth that fits properly--you shouldn't be wearing one.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Sun, October 21, 2007 - 12:27 AM
        Blast it! Everyone drools at the half-naked ladies, and there are comments up and down this thread about how they're all-forgiven as long as they are showing tiity/legs/booty/whatever, but the minute a dude's loincloth is deigned 'ill-fitting' he gets ragged on. Ain't nothin' but reverse sexism, says I. I should go Pictish next year and wrap nothing but woad round my naughty bits!
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Mon, September 24, 2007 - 3:39 PM
    I thought of another "offensive" garb -- Well, it's not necessarily the garb that's offensive. It's more the lack of garb that could be offensive or at least embarassing. Would someone explain to me why most men feel that it's perfectly justified to jauntily stroll or strut to and from the shower trucks wearing nothing but a T-tunic or a towel with no undergarments?
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Mon, September 24, 2007 - 5:30 PM
      Hee hee...one year I saw a woman walking around on the battlefield on the morning of landgrab, standing there topless, as we all drove past, leaving for our campsites. I wondered if her parents hadn't given her enough attention as a child, or what?! lol

      Folks' garb usually doesn't offend me much...I usually remind myself that the developing of one's persona and garb is a journey, and that my first attempts at garb were sad at best. I can ignore most of it (although the goth kids are pretty annoying!).

      I guess what I found more offensive this year would fall under a different topic: rude and/or coarse language in mixed company. I brought my 7-yr-old during the first bit of War, and there were at least a half-dozen occasions when I found myself inwardly cringing at the extremely colorful language we overhead from strangers while in the marketplace, both day and night.

      I'm no prude, but it seems that common courtesy in this regard is often ignored. One lady started talking to someone we were walking with near the barn, and every other word was f*** this and f*** that, and how many guys she would attempt to f*** this War, etc. I just walked away, but it irked me a little. Am I unrealistic to think that Pennsic could be more family-friendly? At least in public areas...I don't care what goes on at the parties or in private areas.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Mon, September 24, 2007 - 5:45 PM
        I wonder if it would help if we TOLD these people... politely of course... that their expletives were better suited for their camps and were hardly chivalrous.

        Half the time, I don't bother because I figure it would fall on deaf ears. But if we don't speak up, they may not realize they are doing it. And if we ALL say something maybe they will learn.

        If only these same people would read these lists. T'would save us some time, no? :)
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Mon, September 24, 2007 - 6:45 PM
          Valizan,

          We had an incident in our camp at Estrella War this past February. A guest was brought by one of our household into our camp for an evening of campfire fellowship and we offered him food and beverage. Well, he over-indulged in the beverage and before long became increasingly rude, crude and sexually explicit in his language; all the time in front of the women and pre-teen girls. Twice, one of our camp's gallant gentlemen told him that he could not speak like that in our camp. The guest profusely apologized and then proceeded to keep speaking in the same manner; all the while one of our women was trying to eat her dinner. The third incident was the charm because our camp's gallant gentleman told the man he was no longer a guest in our camp and he escorted him out of our camp and told him never to return.

          Not only did the warnings about his abusive language fall on his deaf ears, he had to be actually escorted out of our camp!

          You're right. What we say to others and how we verbally conduct ourselves is worn much more visibly than any garb we can come up with. Perhaps the order of the day is for all of us to try and wear and exhibit the kind of manners we expect to be given to us and treat all as we ourselves would like to be treated; with respect and dignity.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Mon, September 24, 2007 - 8:01 PM
        "Hee hee...one year I saw a woman walking around on the battlefield on the morning of landgrab, standing there topless, as we all drove past, leaving for our campsites. I wondered if her parents hadn't given her enough attention as a child, or what?! lol "

        Well, technically in this day and age in most places in the US, a woman walking topless in a place that men can walk bare chested is not a crime. It is illegal in places that have specific laws stating that nobody (man or women) may appear topless in public, but other than that, no violation.
        On that note I would like to encourage all women to walk around topless, because.............................................well, because I'm a pig, that's why. ;-)
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Tue, September 25, 2007 - 6:13 AM
          However, women will still get convicted, fined, and jailed even in the states without specific laws. And some states actually have nudity laws written in a manner which allows male toplessness.
          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

            Tue, September 25, 2007 - 7:40 AM
            Would someone explain to me why most men feel that it's perfectly justified to jauntily stroll or strut to and from the shower trucks wearing nothing but a T-tunic or a towel with no undergarments?
            >>>>>>>

            if the tunic was long enough i dont really see a problem. the towel just begs for a grab & run........
            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

              Tue, September 25, 2007 - 3:18 PM
              Thanks for the giggles everyone!! Your posts are GREAT. Again, I suppose the wardrobe issue at the showers goes both ways -- I have yet had the wonderful opportunity to attend a Pennsic War. At Estrella War, due to its new location, personal camp showers are not allowed because the site is farmland that grows organic alfalfa when the site isn't being used for Estrella War and for Country Thunder.

              I wear a cotton flannel chemise to and from the shower trucks and no light of day shines through that garment! Sorry folks, there will be no peeking at my naughty bits. I guess I find the men I've seen at Estrella War guilty of "flapping in the breeze" to be rather comical as I swear they don't have a clue. At the same time, the women in the lightweight breezy chemises with nothing underneath don't have a clue either.

              Does make for interesting discussions around the campsite though!

              Man, I can't wait until Southern Crusades (Winkleman Flats, Arizona) in November....
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Sun, October 21, 2007 - 12:34 AM
        On the one hand, dirty language is far too pervasive in contemporary culture in general, and is a problem regardless of whether or not one happens to be at Pennsic at the moment. On the other hand (unless a child is home schooled), by age 7 I guarantee the little one has heard it all on the playground already. At least that was so in my day. Doesn't make it right, of course, but that's the way it is.
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Tue, October 30, 2007 - 4:40 PM
          *giggle* there are all kinds of words I never learned until I was like 15--some of them at homeschool get togethers I went to with my little brother when I was out school (public the whole way, nasty neighborhood) for the day.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Tue, September 25, 2007 - 7:37 AM
      "I thought of another "offensive" garb -- Well, it's not necessarily the garb that's offensive. It's more the lack of garb that could be offensive or at least embarassing. Would someone explain to me why most men feel that it's perfectly justified to jauntily stroll or strut to and from the shower trucks wearing nothing but a T-tunic or a towel with no undergarments?"

      I suppose I am busted...

      At Pennsic, the solar showers are basically in my camp. So I wrap a towel around my waist and grab my soap and shampoo and walk to the shower from my tent. Depending on my mood, I either blush or shake my booty (still covered by the towel) at the ladies that make catcalls.

      But I do it out of convenience, not because I am an exhibitionist. In fact, someone stole my towel one time as a joke while I was showering and left me a dish cloth with a couple pieces of string tied to it. I was mortified at the thought of making that 30 yard dash in the buff with a dish cloth over my bits. But the showers have no place to sit to change in and out of clothing and a wet floor that soaks everything that touches it. So I use my nearby tent as my dressing room instead. The towel does reach 95 percent of the way around me so hopefully I am not scaring someone for life with the little bit of hip that might show...

      We have women in nothing but light chemises pass by on the way to the shower and return with the chemise a bit wet and showing that they are naked beneath. I don't mind.... *wink* Is my towel really offending people? I just never thought of it I suppose...
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Tue, September 25, 2007 - 7:51 AM
        "I thought of another "offensive" garb -- Well, it's not necessarily the garb that's offensive. It's more the lack of garb that could be offensive or at least embarassing. Would someone explain to me why most men feel that it's perfectly justified to jauntily stroll or strut to and from the shower trucks wearing nothing but a T-tunic or a towel with no undergarments?"

        I'm busted too...

        Living a block or so over from you BUT we have a shower in camp so no treks to the showers for me half dressed (or undressed). Now topless in the heat of the day escorting my daughters to and from the Porta johns is another story entirely or helping neighbors during a Pennsic downpour is again another story entirely. Sure i felt strange being half naked in front of total strangers while we built an earthen dam to keep their camp from flooding from the road. the ladies working right along side of us however were wearing modern swim suits however so in times of mundane emergency or necessity I'll wear what's there. My apologies to those whose dream bubble I just burst! LOL!
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Tue, September 25, 2007 - 7:51 AM
        We have women in nothing but light chemises pass by on the way to the shower and return with the chemise a bit wet and showing that they are naked beneath.>>>>>

        perhaps some of them just dont think about it?

        i've gone to the same faire every year for about 9 years now. i would always grab my chemise in the morning, grab a pair of bike shorts (most of the time), and walk to the flushies and brush my teeth etc...after about 5 years someone we hadnt camped with before looks at me while i'm standing outside my tent brushing my hair and asks me if i'm aware that in the morning light the chemise is totally see through.....

        yea 5 YEARS and no one pointed that little fact out. another campmate just blinked, said he thought i knew, and figured if i didnt mind----he wasnt going to complain.......<sigh> i'm not shy, but i do try to be polite.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Tue, September 25, 2007 - 9:25 AM
      We have an in camp shower and I walk to and from the shower in linen shorts. No point in wearing a shirt. In the morning I will throw on a tunic to run to the port-o but my tunics come almost down to my knee. I am sure women are happy that I am not endowed enough for that to be a problem.

      I just do not see how it is offensive. People wear less at a swimming pool.
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Tue, September 25, 2007 - 10:50 AM
        I guess it's the same as with a woman in a chemise and no undergarments - it all depends on which way the sun is shining and where the viewer is standing as to how modest the garment is or isn't.




  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Tue, September 25, 2007 - 8:09 AM
    My first Pennsic I had a lady merchant in the merchant area ask to re-lace my bodice, saying that I had gotten it wrong. She was most definetly not interested in me (just to put that little spark to rest now) but she also didn't explain to me why my bodice was laced wrong and why it was correct to lace it the way she was doing it. She showed me hurriedly and sent me on my way - leaving me a little confused but with a new piece of lacing for my bodice. I ended up getting it right about half the time that war and about a quarter of the time the next.

    I make as reasonable an attempt as I can based on the fact that I'm a college student of limited time and means. I research as much as I can, I try to get things right and I ask a lot of questions. Do I offend anyone? Oh yeah. I get it every war, no matter what I wear. "that pattern isn't period" "They wouldn't be wearing that" etc. Do I let it bother me? No. Why? Because I'm using the most period patterns I can find and I'm using natural fibers. Past that, if they want me to look more period they'd better be ready to fund my closet.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Tue, September 25, 2007 - 9:44 AM
      I have this one bodice that I CANNOT LACE. I don't know why...it's jinxed or something. I will always, without fail, completely bugger it up every time I try it.

      My brother Kaz can lace me into that thing like he's the Flash or something. He tells me with a smirk he has lots of experience with the lacings on ladies clothing. I bet that's right. ;-DDD
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Tue, September 25, 2007 - 4:05 PM
    Ok.. I have to get this one off my chest, because this one guy almost destroyed the past Pennsic for me. I call it, "Early Period Ren Red-neck". Here's the best as I could recollect (starting from the head down). A cowboy hat with a bandana on his head. A puffy ren-style shirt with a leather vest. Leather pants with a belt, mug, and dagger. Pants stuffed into knee high boots. And I kept running into him everywhere... ugh... and he had a female attachment with him that seemed like she knew how to dress properly, but didn't seem to bother telling him. Now, I will accept if this guy was new and didn't know any better, but if he shows up again next year, I will (try to) politely point out a few things to him.

    A couple wars ago, I saw a female with hip-hugger bell bottom multi-colored pants (and yes, she was developed properly for said pants :)). And although the view was nice, thankfully, I saw her like that only the first day she was there - after that she was dressed proper.

    Ok.. I can breather easier now :)
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Wed, September 26, 2007 - 6:04 AM
      Wow Ziggy -- hey I didn't realize Bret Michaels (lead singer of POISON) was at Pennsic this year. : ) Hee !!!
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Wed, September 26, 2007 - 6:54 AM
        "Wow Ziggy -- hey I didn't realize Bret Michaels (lead singer of POISON) was at Pennsic this year. : ) Hee !!! "

        Glad you said Bret Michaels was the lead sanger of Poison but, that begs the question who is Poison?
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Wed, September 26, 2007 - 6:55 AM
          oops ---- "lead sanger of Poison" that should read "ead singer of Poison"....

          They need an edit function.
          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

            Wed, September 26, 2007 - 7:26 AM
            Did you mean "Lead singer of Poison"?
            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

              Wed, September 26, 2007 - 8:22 AM
              Damn! Can't even properly correct myself. This is going to be a good day.

              Thanks for the correction.... That is what I intended to type.
              • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                Wed, September 26, 2007 - 8:50 AM
                Oh come on! Everyone's heard "Every rose has it's thorn"
                • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                  Wed, September 26, 2007 - 9:05 AM
                  Sad to say, my first concert as a teenager was the dubious Ratt/Poison tour. Sad, because we're getting older AND because it shows I had questionable musical tastes back then! This whole tangent is rather OT - but then again, between two similar threads on the subject, I think it's been pretty well beaten into the ground.

                  Still, we must have something better to talk about than POISON! ;-)
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 9:11 AM
                    Off Topic, yes... But I think the horse has been flogged to death and I was curious who this band was.
                    Yet, I am sure we can find a freash horse that is On Topic.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 9:16 AM
                    Speaking of really old bands... I realized I'm getting old this morning. On a local radio station, they were talking about some chick who got arrested trying to see Loverboy in concert. Immediately, the thought that came to my head was, "They're STILL playing?!?!". The DJ then proceeded to say that the concert was at the Kansas State Fair (I'm assuming they meant county/country fair, not the university - though I could be wrong). The finishing touch was when they said that Night Ranger was the opening act... and now I'm thinking, "Wow... how the mighty have fallen." Ok.. back to bad garb :) (P.S. for those who don't know either band, they were fairly popular in the 80's - big hits: Loverboy = "Working for the Weekend", Night Ranger = "Sister Christian") Ok.. now REALLY back to bad garb :)
                    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                      Wed, September 26, 2007 - 11:34 AM
                      many years ago, I saw the mighty really fall when REO Speedwagon was playing at the Minneapolis Rib-Fest (free admission).
                      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                        Wed, September 26, 2007 - 11:43 AM
                        "REO Speedwagon was playing at the Minneapolis Rib-Fest "

                        "When I said that I love ribs, I meant that I love ribs forever...

                        So, I'm gonna keep eatin' barbeque
                        'Cause it's the only thing I wanna do
                        I don't wanna sleep
                        I just wanna eat some barbeque (ooh-ooh-oooooh-ooh)"
                        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                          Wed, September 26, 2007 - 11:59 AM
                          So why is it that all of these "later" rock bands look and act so tired and pathetic and folks like Sir Paul, The Rolling Stones. Jethro Tull, Pink Floyd, Eric Clapton, Jimmy Paige and a whole lot of other folks from the 60's and early 70's are still viable musicians and out there working?
                          Sure, they all now look like "Aqualung" but they are still viable musicians.
                          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                            Wed, September 26, 2007 - 12:04 PM
                            Talent.... People use to listen to music because it was good and the artist had talent. In the 70s and 80s people listened to music that the media told them was good and these people had no talent. How else can you explain disco?
                            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                              Wed, September 26, 2007 - 12:24 PM
                              "Talent"

                              That certainly plays a part. I think you also have to look at what made the 80's bands popular in the first place, which was to a large degree a hit video or two on MTV. Where as a band like Jethro Tull gained their following through entire album after album of well thought out music and constant touring, many 80's bands gained instant fame through one catchy song or a clever video.

                              Obviously, the former has far more staying power than the latter. Add in the fact that many of these 80's bands are trying to recreate the "magic" (i.e. "cash in on") what they did 20 years ago. Meanwhile, Tull (for example) has continued making and evolving their music. They may have slowed down, but they never really stopped. So they never went stale.
                              • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                Wed, September 26, 2007 - 12:53 PM
                                "Where as a band like Jethro Tull gained their following through entire album after album of well thought out music and constant touring, many 80's bands gained instant fame through one catchy song or a clever video. "

                                Yeah, of course I'm going to agree with you on that. I just don't want to get into one of those things where the older guy (that would be me) sytarts making these statements that the music from his youth was better and everything else that's come along has been crap. I sort of feel that way,........ I just don't want to make that kind of provocative statement. We also had a whole lot of crappy music in the 60's too.
                                BTW to sort of answer Pewter..... Ian Anderson is (or maybe was) a member of the SCA. During a few different reigns between here in the East Kingdom and a couple of other kingdoms. The Crowns were such avid fans of Jethro Tull that they proclained their music "period" during their reign. ................ I loved that ;-) This was probably about 20 years ago or maybe more. And Ian was known for wearing a really obnoxious cod piece, doublet and tights (leggings) on stage. He would have been relatively appropriately dressed for Pennsic. Now we have famed guitarist Richie Blackmore and his lovely music/life partner Candice Knight appearring on stage in Renaissance garb and playing re-arranged "period" music. It's really very good and I'm a fan. sooooooooooooooooo..... there is a bit of connection between pop music and the SCA be it a stretch. '-)
                                • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                  Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:58 PM
                                  <"Where as a band like Jethro Tull gained their following through entire album after album of well thought out music and constant touring, many 80's bands gained instant fame through one catchy song or a clever video. "

                                  Yeah, of course I'm going to agree with you on that. I just don't want to get into one of those things where the older guy (that would be me) sytarts making these statements that the music from his youth was better and everything else that's come along has been crap. I sort of feel that way,........ I just don't want to make that kind of provocative statement>

                                  If it's any comfort, the Beatles were the most popular band at my highschool--in the late 90's. = D
                                  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 2:06 PM
                                    "If it's any comfort, the Beatles were the most popular band at my highschool--in the late 90's. "

                                    And what was the most popular band back in the 60's when you attended that high school? *grin*
                                    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                      Wed, September 26, 2007 - 2:52 PM
                                      Ack! You found me out, I'm secretly (2007-1969 + 17, carry the one...) 55.

                                      Actually, I only know the Beatles were popular at my school because so many people listened to them and talked about their songs and such. I preferred my filk tapes. = D
                              • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:19 PM
                                <<I think you also have to look at what made the 80's bands popular in the first place, which was to a large degree a hit video or two on MTV. Where as a band like Jethro Tull gained their following through entire album after album of well thought out music and constant touring, many 80's bands gained instant fame through one catchy song or a clever video>>

                                Hey now, what about Sting? He has consistently produced quality new stuff, and if you want to pretend we're on topic, *grin* he even has an album of period music out.
                                • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                  Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:35 PM
                                  Sting has an album of period music ?? What's it called ? Sounds quite interesting.

                                  And Gabriel --- yes, thank you and all the rest for doing what you're doing over there !!! Many hugs !!!
                                  Oh, and if you do get to meet my boyfriend, Bret, tell him I miss him. : ) Hee Hee !!!
                                  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:46 PM
                                    Sting also makes an attempt at pre-1600 garb.
                                    Come to think of it, that is a little strange since he in not a re-enactor. Oh well, to each his own.

                                    And The Police were a great band and Stewart Coopland has gone on to do some great work.
                                  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 2:04 PM
                                    <<<Sting has an album of period music ?? What's it called ? Sounds quite interesting.>>>


                                    Sting - Songs from the Labyrinth

                                    It's pretty interesting. I enjoy it when the mood strikes.

                                    80's MTV it is defintely NOT though! LOL!

                                    I can rememeber going to see John Valbi live several years ago now at a small hick Bar restaruant bowling alley that was promoting that the following week Loverboy would be playing! LOL!

                                    We laughed that we all enjoyed Valbi much more than we would enjoy Loverboy now!

                                    Superfest XV in Buffalo with Foreigner, Loverboy, Ted Nugent, & someone else too that I cannot remember right now? all together July 3rd 1982 at Rich Staduim
                          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                            Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:37 PM
                            They just didn't make drugs in the 80's the way they did in the 60's and 70's... the original kept you preserved for years :)
                            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                              Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:50 PM
                              Yes, Sting made a recent album of John Dowland songs (vocals & lute). I actually borrowed it from the local library last month and it's pretty good.

                              The Police, though, were not a "one hit wonder" nor were they popular mostly thanks to MTV. Yes, they did have a great deal of MTV play, but by that time (Synchronicity), they were already an established band with quite a few radio hits.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 11:54 AM
                    Johannes,
                    Be glad you got Poison/Ratt. I went to one with Poison and "Britney Foxx". BF was, by and large, the *worst* hair metal band that ever butchered a song. :)
                • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                  Wed, September 26, 2007 - 9:07 AM
                  I thought that was "Guns and Roses"..... I hated that song with a passion.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 10:10 AM
                    That wasn't a song, Shug, that was a band.
                    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                      Wed, September 26, 2007 - 10:24 AM
                      "That wasn't a song, Shug, that was a band. "

                      Dulcinaya,
                      Kerovick wrote: "Oh come on! Everyone's heard "Every rose has it's thorn" "

                      That is what I was replying to... I hated that song and I thought it was performed by Guns and Roses.......
                      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                        Wed, September 26, 2007 - 10:31 AM
                        The song your thinking about from Guns and Roses was "Patience" Almost identical chord pattern. I've heard that Guns and Roses also have really bad garb.
                        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                          Wed, September 26, 2007 - 10:44 AM
                          Nope... I am thinking of the right song I just associated it with the wrong band. If it was not someone like G.B.H, Alien Sex Fiend, Janes Addiction, Ministry or something along those lines then I did not pay it much attention.
                          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                            Wed, September 26, 2007 - 11:15 AM
                            "If it was not someone like G.B.H, Alien Sex Fiend, Janes Addiction, Ministry or something along those lines then I did not pay it much attention."

                            If only I had other influences growing up than my older brother and MTV, it wouldn't have taken me so long (1990+) to discover bands like that. The 80's for me were full of the various hair-metal bands that MTV loved to play. Of course, at least back then they DID play music.
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Wed, September 26, 2007 - 9:13 AM
          "Glad you said Bret Michaels was the lead sanger of Poison but, that begs the question who is Poison?"


          Oh holy crap, am I getting old.
          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

            Wed, September 26, 2007 - 11:57 AM
            << Oh holy crap, am I getting old >>

            It is painful sometimes, Dulcinaya...I mention something about the 80's and my wife looks at me like I just grew a 3rd eye.
            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

              Wed, September 26, 2007 - 12:13 PM
              Greetings All,
              In a bizarre twist of coincidence; Bret Michaels and Poison will be performing here in South Baghdad in 12 days. We have requested that he visit our headquarters before the show as a meet and greet. Gods, but I do lead an odd life.

              Yours in Service,
              Gabriel
              • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                Wed, September 26, 2007 - 12:33 PM
                It's refreshing how well this group stays on topic... *grin*

                BTW, a big thanks for serving our country! Stay safe!

                I personally draw the line of where good music ended at around the end of the 70's. There will always be a song or three that pop up here and there that make the all time great charts but what are the classics of rock and rool, the good classics?

                Inagoddadivida - Iron Butterfly

                Now there's a classic a few of you may not know anything about. I always have to chuckle when you young punks talk about waaaay back in the early 80's... sheesh... *wink*
                • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                  Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:02 PM
                  Well, the fact of the matter is, Pewter, we're talking about bands here that DID start playing 25 years ago, in some cases. That is a pretty good span of time. Hell, I've heard late 70's and early 80's stuff on the local "classic rock" station. For that matter, I've heard some 70's songs on the OLDIES station! I don't really agree with it, but it's true.

                  As for "Inagoddadivida" - I've always had a problem accepting a song derived from the fact that the singer was too f-...*ahem* MESSED up to sing "In the Garden of Eden" as the epitome of great music! :-O (Sorry, Pewter!)

                  What it comes down to is, regardless of when a song was written, it usually needs to be WELL written to last. Which is why I'm spending my morning trying to find free downloads of Early Music, rather than listen to contemporary radio.
                • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                  Wed, September 26, 2007 - 1:53 PM
                  Pewter: "It's refreshing how well this group stays on topic... *grin* "

                  Ah yes... that's what we're good for.. would be too boring any other way.. oh look!!! a butterfly!!! :)
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 4:54 PM
                    Hey Ziggy - my nephew's favorite t-shirt says, "I'm not ADH ... Oh look a butterfly!"
                    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                      Wed, September 26, 2007 - 6:06 PM
                      I think I need to get that for some of my students :) I have one class that every so often starts resembling ADHD on speed :)
                      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                        Wed, September 26, 2007 - 6:45 PM
                        I like driving down the road and pointing to nothing in particular and saying, "Hay, Look a Unicorn!!" and see who looks, hehe.
                        • What about tattoos? How offensive do all you all feel about them?

                          I know there is one guy who wanders about with a totally tattooed body and a loincloth. He has some beautiful tats, but is the SCA really the place to show them ALL off? He jars me out of my Medieval Middle Eastern Reverie.
                          • Valizan - that full body tattooed man in the loin cloth camps in the camp right next to me !!!

                            And let me tell ya, that sight first thing in the morning really does a shocker to the system.
                            This year we had two newbies and we had warned them about him way before Pennsic ...even still, the looks
                            on their faces when they saw him for the first time was just priceless !!!

                            And his tatz may or may not be beautiful, but it's very safe to say that I'll never be that close to find out.


                            • <<<<Valizan - that full body tattooed man in the loin cloth camps in the camp right next to me !!! >>>>

                              Valizan & Mel!

                              Yeah I saw him in the food court one afternoon in a kilt or soemthing. Didn't matter as the "artwork" really turned it off for me. I apppreciate good ink BUT not at Pennsic. Even tribal art isn't really period. Covering it when it is inappropriate is an issue for ME.

                              It is one of the MANY reasons I don't have any ink. Too cliche anymore. Of all my firneds I'm the only one (besides my wife) that isn't inked.
                              • I guess I treat tattoos as one of those things a person can't just convieniently set aside for War. Running with a circle of friends where tattoos are not the norm, I sort of find them fascinating. I am assuming this guy with the tattoos would be hard to look at even if there weren't tattoos? Is it the loincloth or the ink?
                                • To answer Pewter: "I am assuming this guy with the tattoos would be hard to look at even if there weren't tattoos? Is it the loincloth or the ink?"

                                  Dang I'm going to sound mean ... but you asked ! Well, the tatz draw your eyes but then "Whoa ! It's scary loincloth man !"
                                  So yeah, really, it has nothing to do with the tattoos.
                                  >> Side note: So far I've only seen one fellow pull off the loin cloth look with ease and that's D'ner !

                                  I'm not bothered one bit by tattoos and don't think there's really any reason someone should feel they have to hide them.
                                  Um...wait ... that still doen't mean that you should feel the need to show them all off at once by wearing a loincloth !!
                                • Pewter, for me, it is a combination of the Tats (there is SO MUCH of it) and the loincloth (which is plain and makes the tats stand out that much more.)

                                  I don't know if this guy would be hard to look at without the tattoos, because it is the tattoos I'm noticing. (Maybe that is why he got them... So people would notice him... who knows?)

                                  He's probably a very nice guy, but tattoos aren't garb. :) When you are walking down a road and see a lovely Elizabethan Lady, a lovely Tudor Lady, a gent in Landzknect and then a tattooed guy in a loincloth, you're back to that old Sesame Street game of "One of These Things Just Doesn't Belong Here..." :))

                                  And while tats can't be removed for war, one can wear garb to cover 'em up.
                      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                        Thu, September 27, 2007 - 6:52 AM
                        "I think I need to get that for some of my students :) I have one class that every so often starts resembling ADHD on speed :) "

                        Naw Ziggy! That's be ADHD on Red Bull or your choice of energy drink! they sell ti legally to them at every corner store and some schools even! DOH!
                        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                          Thu, September 27, 2007 - 8:00 AM
                          Caffeine can actually help with some forms of ADD/ADHD. All depends on the person.
                          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                            Thu, September 27, 2007 - 9:48 AM
                            <<Caffeine can actually help with some forms of ADD/ADHD. All depends on the person. >>

                            The school nurse told me to keep chocolate covered espresso beans in my desk for my ADHD kids. :)
                            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                              Thu, September 27, 2007 - 9:42 PM
                              Actually, it's the hyperactive portion of the the brain that the caffeine is working on. Since that portion requires more stimulation to reach what is considered a 'normal' base line of sensory arousal, the higher than normal levels of caffeine help the person in question to remain at a more calm and focused state rather than incessantly seeking external sources of stimulation to acheive and maintain said sensory arousal.

                              Hence, if you're wondering if someone you know is truly hyperactive vs just full of energy, pump them up with a caffeinated beverage and then monitor their reaction to it for a few hours. If they calm down and seem more purposed in their energy, rather than continuously all over the place and unable to settle to any one thing, they are truly hyperactive. If they still seem to have boundless energy and can't settle to anything, then they just have lots of energy and are most likely bored. ;)

                              Please note that mental hyperactivity (what is commonly considered ADD) does not always translate to physical hyperactivity, while physical hyperactivity almost always includes mental hyperactivity (unless the person in question is caught by something that REALLY engages their interest).

                              Can you tell I have a hyperactive child and so have studied this area? :P
                        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

                          Thu, September 27, 2007 - 1:13 PM
                          "Naw Ziggy! That's be ADHD on Red Bull or your choice of energy drink! they sell ti legally to them at every corner store and some schools even! DOH!"

                          yeah.. they do that too... but considering that I have it (I use Mountain Dew to keep me sane :) and at least 2 or 3 (that I can gather) of my AP kids have it, OMG.. do we get off topics every so often. And it doesn't take much either.. :)
  • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

    Wed, September 26, 2007 - 6:43 PM
    i know the 80s were a long time ago, but your autographed Poison tour t-shirt doesn't count as garb. i don't care how old it is.
    • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

      Thu, September 27, 2007 - 6:56 AM
      "i know the 80s were a long time ago, but your autographed Poison tour t-shirt doesn't count as garb. i don't care how old it is. "

      Now wait a minute! If it's really pre-1600, it's all good. But if it's in that nebulus time between 1601 and 1650, then it is up for debate... *grin*
      • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

        Thu, September 27, 2007 - 7:36 AM
        "But if it's in that nebulus time between 1601 and 1650, then it is up for debate..."

        Why would that be up for debate? It is not pre-17th-century which is the only date that is set in writing in any official Society document. The starting date for the Middle Ages is still debated among scholars and the Society gives no starting time period. Renaissance and medieval period are specific to Europe and the Renaissance began around the 15 century. So, where is the reasoning to debate anything that would definetly been post 1601? Early period personas before say the 1st century could be debated as not being the Middle-Ages since most scholars argue between 200CE and 500CE as the start of the middle-ages but others push the date back as far as 50BCE and base it on what is percieved to be the hight of knowledge in the developed world. Others say the middle-ages start at around 700CE which some in the Society hold as a start date. Do we want to add the first American settlers into the mix by going out beyond 1607?

        :-) I so love poking sticks into hornets nest........
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Thu, September 27, 2007 - 8:00 AM
          One of the reasons is that some of the books and other things that may have documented things in period may have been published or created after the fact documenting things that existed, just my guess. One of the more popular fencing manuals. The www.thearma.org/Manuals/Ne...poferro.htm was published in 1610 but it is widely accepted that the art as he laid out in his book was practiced well before that.

          Truth is, not everything from thte time period(s) we all emulate were documented. Many were not so that is what we can imagine they might have used/created
        • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

          Thu, September 27, 2007 - 8:07 AM
          Since it's "middle ages and rennaissance of Europe" shouldn't the end date actually be around 1623 or so to catch the tail end of England's?

          I suspect the thought process on 1600 went:
          "well, 1600's a nice round year"
          "okay, sounds good."
          • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

            Thu, September 27, 2007 - 9:52 AM
            <<Since it's "middle ages and rennaissance of Europe" shouldn't the end date actually be around 1623 or so to catch the tail end of England's?

            I suspect the thought process on 1600 went:
            "well, 1600's a nice round year"
            "okay, sounds good." >>

            Didn't the "middle ages" end even later in Russia, or what would become Russia? I read that in one of my books. Wish I could remember which one...
            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

              Thu, September 27, 2007 - 9:57 AM
              "Didn't the "middle ages" end even later in Russia, or what would become Russia? I read that in one of my books. Wish I could remember which one... "

              Sometimes, when I hear the news, it seems like parts of the world are still in the middle ages.

              Maybe autographed rock band t-shirts are period!?!?!? *grin* And my cutoff shorts !?!?!?
            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

              Thu, September 27, 2007 - 10:09 AM
              <<Didn't the "middle ages" end even later in Russia, or what would become Russia? I read that in one of my books. Wish I could remember which one...>>
              Actually, that's an excellent point. There shouldn't even be a date as such, it should be by form of era. So if you can demonstrate that what you are doing is a part of the medieval/rennaissance era of a particular culture, it's okay. So later medieval era Russian stuff would be allowed while at the same time Thirty Years War stuff wouldn't, even if they were at the same time.

              It needs to be less "ZOMG that's from 1620!" and more "did you realize you're dressed like a Musketeer?"
            • Re: What constitutes "offensive" garb?

              Thu, September 27, 2007 - 10:54 AM
              The middle ages is usually applied to Western Europe as a standard and between Rurik and the Mongols the area we know as Russia was not really starting to become stable until the late 1400s. Lots of small Dukedoms and such. Somewhere in the 1500s Russia settled down for a bit about the time the western Rennaissances started. Yes, I used Rennaissances since the movement was stagared across the Western European countries.

              I wish I knew a little more about the Russian wars in the mid 1500s.

              And as it relates to the SCA they are refering to the Middle-Age of Western Europe.

              Just for argument sake:
              Since the standard has become to do cultures that had contact with European nations during this period of time we can add Aztecs, Incas I believe and Native Americans of the Eastern US seaboard.