🚀 go-pugleaf

Dennis objects that Greg is mixing up Dennis's categories of
"Authenticity Maven"  and "Authenticity Fanatic." 

Dennis, apparently defining (or perhaps only describing?)
authenticity fanatics:

"Further, in the original post, I said that poster I was following-up
to had
postulated the existence of people who are emotionally distressed by
seeing people from various times and places mixed together at an SCA
event, these being the fanatics I mentioned."

This seems an odd definition of "fanatic"--I would not, for example,
describe someone who was emotionally distressed at hearing an
out-of-tune instrument in a musical performance as a "musical
fanatic," fanatic being generally a pejorative term, but if that is
what Dennis means by "Authenticity Fanatic," fine.

Later he writes: 

"The question is in what ways is a person who would, for example, 
make an effort to cause a person in inauthentic garb (that was of
course still OK by Corpora) feel uncomfortable (or try to get them
excluded from the SCA), similar to a person who would  make an effort
to make a minority feel uncomfortable (or try to get them excluded
from the SCA)?"

...

"Does this mean being a fanatic is as "morally reprehensable"  as
being a racist ? ..."

It sounds as though Dennis is now using "authenticity fanatic" to
mean someone who "would, for example,  make an effort to cause a
person in inauthentic garb (that was  of course still OK by Corpora)
feel uncomfortable (or try to  get them excluded from the SCA)." That
does not seem to follow from his original definition, nor to have any
direct connection with Terry's post to which he was responding.

Terry did not say anything about making inauthentic people feel
uncomfortable or excluding them from the SCA.  Nor did she suggest
that people who are emotionally distressed by inauthenticity want to
make inauthentic people feel uncomfortable or try to exclude them
from the SCA. The only discomfort she discussed, so far as I can
remember, was discomfort felt by what Dennis is calling authenticity
fanatics--how does one get from that to discomfort inflicted by those
people on others?

If Dennis is talking about people who are made uncomfortable by
inauthentic things and justifying an analogy to racists, he seems to
have left out a middle step--an argument showing that people who are
made uncomfortable by inauthenticity behave in the discourteous way
he describes.

David/Cariadoc