Editing Offensiveness
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
Apart from the designs which are instantly recognizable as offensive (e.g., a swastika or a burning cross) it is nearly impossible to make a ruling on the offensiveness of an armorial motif that is objective, useful for consulting heralds, adaptive to the changing tactics of hate groups, and fair to submitters who have no malicious intent and merely seek to register armory. For this reason, the Laurel office has long been averse to making sweeping rulings on offense, preferring adjudication on a case-by-base basis. | Apart from the designs which are instantly recognizable as offensive (e.g., a swastika or a burning cross) it is nearly impossible to make a ruling on the offensiveness of an armorial motif that is objective, useful for consulting heralds, adaptive to the changing tactics of hate groups, and fair to submitters who have no malicious intent and merely seek to register armory. For this reason, the Laurel office has long been averse to making sweeping rulings on offense, preferring adjudication on a case-by-base basis. | ||
Recently, Laurel and Wreath, with the assistance of Drachenwald's heralds, reviewed several European laws and policies to try to determine a path forward in evaluating armory for offense. Going forward, | Recently, Laurel and Wreath, with the assistance of Drachenwald's heralds, reviewed several European laws and policies to try to determine a path forward in evaluating armory for offense. Going forward, if a symbol is banned as hate speech in all of its forms in a jurisdiction in which the SCA has a substantial presence, that symbol will be unregisterable in the SCA (the swastika, long banned by Laurel precedent, falls into this category). If a symbol is banned as hate speech in some forms, but is exempted for others (especially heraldry), it will not be disallowed immediately in the SCA; however, it will be scrutinized for context. | ||
This approach is not new. SENA A7B4 specifically states that "Some designs are offensive because of individual charges...Others are offensive only in the overall design." There have been several returns for offense over the decades, most recently in the January 2015 LoAR return of Nikolaus Grünenwaldt's device, Gules, in saltire two cubit arms and on a chief argent three crosses formy sable. In that return, Wreath noted: | This approach is not new. SENA A7B4 specifically states that "Some designs are offensive because of individual charges...Others are offensive only in the overall design." There have been several returns for offense over the decades, most recently in the January 2015 LoAR return of Nikolaus Grünenwaldt's device, Gules, in saltire two cubit arms and on a chief argent three crosses formy sable. In that return, Wreath noted: | ||
In this case, both crosses formy and the red, white, and black color scheme were extensively used in German iconography, including during the Nazi era. These motifs are used today by white supremacist and Neo-Nazi groups in the United States. Additionally, the motif of two white objects (hammers or grenades) crossed in saltire is used in Neo-Nazi iconography, as is a raised white fist, often depicted with a substantial piece of arm, as found in a cubit arm). While any of these motifs is registerable, the combination of them here rises to the point of an offensive potential reference to white supremacist movements. | |||
We continue to support this ruling. At the risk of establishing a "steps from appropriate practice" measure, we advise submitters and consultants alike that, while a single use of an a symbol or motif may be considered inoffensive, the use of more than one potentially offensive symbol in any piece of armory runs the risk of crossing the line into offense. This risk increases exponentially as a design becomes more complex. | We continue to support this ruling. At the risk of establishing a "steps from appropriate practice" measure, we advise submitters and consultants alike that, while a single use of an a symbol or motif may be considered inoffensive, the use of more than one potentially offensive symbol in any piece of armory runs the risk of crossing the line into offense. This risk increases exponentially as a design becomes more complex. | ||
| Line 116: | Line 116: | ||
This brings us to the subject of Celtic crosses and Norse sun crosses. Both symbols have deep spiritual and cultural positive meanings for people around the world, and both are popular motifs in SCA heraldry. However, both have also been used by white supremacist groups for some time now. | This brings us to the subject of Celtic crosses and Norse sun crosses. Both symbols have deep spiritual and cultural positive meanings for people around the world, and both are popular motifs in SCA heraldry. However, both have also been used by white supremacist groups for some time now. | ||
The version of the "Celtic" cross used commonly by white supremacists in the U.S. and Europe is | The version of the "Celtic" cross used commonly by white supremacists in the U.S. and Europe is a cross couped conjoined to and surmounted by an annulet. As drawn, it resembles a gunsight. This design is among the more popular designs used by white supremacist groups, similar in ubiquity to the swastika. It was previously ruled unregisterable in the SCA in the January 2010 return of Sadb ingen Chonchobair's device, Argent, on a catamount rampant vert a straight-armed Latinate Celtic cross argent on the ground that the Celtic cross as so drawn is undocumentable; we now rule that this rendering of the Celtic cross, both couped and throughout (the latter also being known as a Cross of Coldharbour) is also offensive and unregisterable in any format regardless of documentation. A more comprehensive discussion about appropriate Celtic crosses may be found in the next section of this Cover Letter. | ||
Norse sun crosses are not offensive in their own right. They are used in several cultures throughout the world. However, the Norse sun cross is also a popular motif among white supremacists, sometimes used as a stand-in for a swastika, and so must be considered with care. | Norse sun crosses are not offensive in their own right. They are used in several cultures throughout the world. However, the Norse sun cross is also a popular motif among white supremacists, sometimes used as a stand-in for a swastika, and so must be considered with care. | ||