[Artemisia] This week's edition of "Security Theater"

[El Hermoso Dormiendo]

This "background checks" thing disgusts me, though probably not for the reason 
you might guess.

It doubly fails to affect me directly, since I have no interest nor intention 
of ever being in charge of youth activities in the SCA, and even if I did, I 
would be even more shocked than anyone else if I failed a background check 
for the purpose.  And, is there really anyone at all who WANTS child abusers 
(or adult abusers, for that matter) in the SCA at all?  The apparent 
intention of the policy is to Protect the Children, which is obviously a good 
thing, right?

The problem is, this appears, so far, to be nothing more than a typical 
corporate-style attempt to avoid legal blame without actually doing anything 
about the problem.  And here's why:  

As stated, it sounds as though this is meant to relate to formally 
sanctioned "Youth Activities" coordinators and the like and wouldn't affect 
anyone else.  However, as stated in an earlier post (one of several in the 
same general theme):

"From what I understand of this it only involves those who will or could 
potentially be in close contact with our minor children."

Therein lies the problem.  The SCA is not a day-care center with well-defined 
children's areas - instead, we seem to tend towards "free-range children" in 
the society.  (And why not?  The SCA has historically seemed to be made up of 
a substantially better average class of people than a typical population.  If 
you can't be safe in the SCA, where CAN you be safe?)  Given this fact - 
nearly EVERYONE who shows up at an event may fall into the category 
of "potentially in close contact with our minor children", especially at 
larger events.  Background checks on the handful of individuals publically 
expressing interest in running formally-sanctioned youth activities seems 
ridiculously unlikely to catch the people we really ought to be worried 
about.  ACTUALLY protecting children will require going much further.  Do we 
implement a policy of background checks for all members (and allow only 
people who have undergone background checks to participate?)  Do we limit SCA 
activities to adults only?  Do we require children to remain in designated 
areas under close supervision of formally designated youth monitors when not 
under direct and immediate supervision of their legal guardians?  (Perhaps we 
could outsource this to a 3rd-party certified day-care organization much as 
the chirugeonate-type activities appear to have been outsourced at Pennsic?)  
Not that they'd have to be absolute - we could always alternate 
between "adults-only" events (not requiring background checks) and "children" 
events (where everyone would require background checks), for example.

These aren't sarcastic suggestions - I really think it'll take going to this 
kind of extreme to actually reach any effective level of action against the 
problem.

This policy isn't about protecting children.  This is purely about Corporate 
avoidance of blame.  Even THIS much doesn't really bother me in and of 
itself - "limitation of liability" is a valid concept in running a corporate 
entity.

What really, really bugs me is that this "CYA" attitude is so utterly alien to 
the fundamental culture of chivalry, service, and responsibility that was 
central to the SCA that I joined.  If someone is having a problem, members of 
the populace spontaneously step forward to help solve it, not to just try to 
find a way to avoid blame for it.  Corporate "necessity" or not, an empty 
responsibility-avoidance scheme that doesn't actually address the problem 
effectively just doesn't seem right.

The *membership* of the SCA is still largely about the chivalrous tournament, 
the romance of courtly behavior, and the educational historical research, but 
the *organization* is turning into some sort of Byzantine corporate 
Dilbertian thing that just plain doesn't seem to belong.  I don't think this 
dichotomy is stable.  As the "Society of Corporate Asininity, Inc." slowly 
dilutes the Society for Creative Anachronism out of existence, it reminds me 
more and more of the sort of corporate environment many of us spend our days 
working in.

If I wanted a corporate parody of "The Dream", I'd go to Disneyland(tm) or 
McDonalds(tm) instead.

signed,
El Hermoso Dormiendo - getting increasingly less tolerant of these kinds of 
shenanigans as he ages...