Ok most of you on here are patrons, yes yes some of you work there but a lot are just pay as you go daysiders.
So let me ask you, hypothetically, how would you feel if MNRF became 100% family friendly. No more bawdiness, no more vil, Fitz might have to become a mime, Gordy couldn't hump trees....think about it. Would you be more inclined to bring your family? Would you be bored out of your mind? Do you think it's too bawdy now to bring your kids? Will they be scarred for life by catching a passing insult from Vil?
I'm just curious.
::Edit to add::
Adding to this, what would you like to see out there that would appeal to a wider array of audience? What do you think could be done to segregate yet have a balance between adult and minor audiences? What do you think should just go away to make things better for everyone?
I bring my kids now, as I have since they were in strollers.
No bawdy = noBody! Meaning nobody from my family would attend.
I travel to many fairs...Turn MNRF into Disney and I'll save my money and spend it at the other fairs instead. I don't want XXX, but I am beyond fed up with PC and sanitized bilge everywhere I go.
Nothing wrong with Disney, love the place. Disney does "Disney" 10,000 times better than MNRF could ever do "Disney". That's why Mickey gets my "G"-rated dollar and MNRF gets my "PG-13" dollar.
It would absolutely suck!
From an entertaining standpoint, I already think it has gone too far in that direction. Check the gates. Count the patrons. Note the ages. Children make a small portion of the attendees and have no money. "Families" have very little discretionary money available these days. They will NOT likely spend it at a RenFaire. They'll go elsewhere.
Financially speaking, the Fair should be targeting men/women/couples between 23 & 45. They can make the long walk from the lot. They buy the crafts. They see the shows. They buy the wine. They eat the food. They play silly games. They interact with the entertainers. Especially the women. Lots of ladies' day out groups.
My feelings are that kids do not belong at the faire, but that the accomodations already made suffice well enough.
A sanitised, pasteurised, homogenised faire? Not interested. :(
Whomever is calling MNRF "Sturgis in Tights" needs to get that chunk of driftwood dislodged from their arse.
We do have kids, and we do bring them... I just keep them away from Vil Ten!
And no, I don't want anything to change!
They ( the kids) know what they should and shouldn't say already.
SnortLOL! Sturgis in tights?Bwahahaaa!
I would stay away with my family if you took away the Bawdiness. People have to understand it's a renaissance festival and things like that happened in the that time and everyone was just fine as they grew up. It would be no fun and lose the renaissance feel if your removed the Bawdiness and that.
Quote from: William_MacKean on April 13, 2009, 09:19:13 AM
My feelings are that kids do not belong at the faire, but that the accomodations already made suffice well enough.
I disagree there that "kids do not belong at the faire". I do not have children but bring Godchildren a few times each season and have gone with other peoples children to ours and other festivals. I only wish I had had the opportunity to visit a faire when I was little. Perhaps I would have had the interest then to learn about history and taken advantage of other classes in high school and college instead of living in my own little world.
I think the rating system on the programs gives families an idea of what they shouldn't bring their kids to and really inappropriate shows always start out with a disclaimer. Most faires have children's areas. This is of course the most obvious place to spend with little ones. I have been to some really great kids areas such as Kansas City & Bristol. (MNRF needs work!!) As the fest is, it can be a place to have several different kinds of experiences. I enjoy sitting in Mac's Pub and drinking Loki. I also love teaching/telling my Godkids about the past and seeing fest through their eyes.
Quote from: William_MacKean on April 13, 2009, 09:19:13 AM
My feelings are that kids do not belong at the faire, but that the accomodations already made suffice well enough.
Hmmm....I have to take issue with that as well. We've gone to MNRF off and on for years, with and without children. In fact, my parents took me to MNRF in the early 80's on a family outing, although I was a teen, my brother was 8 or 9.
When the kids were much younger we would see one or two shows, based on what we felt was appropriate and avoiding any wildly inappropriate material (no Vil tennis for us). We also didn't get to see many of the musical acts when the kids were younger, primarily because the kids wouldn't sit still.
As for families not having any money: some do, some don't. We buy one nice artisan piece each year, and then smaller trinkets when needed/desired.
If the MNRF were Disnified, we may go once in a while, but would take more trips to other faires/fests.
That being said, parents also must bear the responsibility of decided what is appropriate for their child/children, instead of ignoring ratings/warnings and then complaining to management.
I think some are missing my meaning. There is a difference between somewhere kids can go and somewhere kids truly belong. It's 'exposure vs immersion.' Expose? Fine. Immerse? Not so much. But that also depends on the level of participation of the parents and the individual child.
My financial point, from a business perspective, is especially relevant in this economy. Focus on where the money is: Single/coupled adults with no kids. Their ratio of discretionary spending is much more favorable than parents.
I have two words for the entire discussion about kids or no kids at fest.
PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY!!!
Quote from: harem_pants on April 13, 2009, 03:05:09 PM
I have two words for the entire discussion about kids or no kids at fest.
PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY!!!
Say it ain't so!!!! :D
Quote from: Mad Jack Wolfe on April 13, 2009, 09:23:10 AM
A sanitised, pasteurised, homogenised faire? Not interested. :(
Whomever is calling MNRF "Sturgis in Tights" needs to get that chunk of driftwood dislodged from their arse.
Well I have this much to say, has any sat and watched what is said around kids in a normal setting like at a mall or listened to how kids talk to each other? I have heard some things that would have made Vil Ten look tame! So lets keep it the way it is as this makes the fair.
Personally, not having been to MNRF and not having children but loving children that when the time is right I know I'll be bringing mine own to Faire, I would like to say that...on the note and off the note of children...that the faire is as things should be! All this Politically Correct and Protect the Children crap is just a bunch of people saying that my mom's generation should be dead and my generation should never have existed.
Look at how things used to be. How things are now. What's the difference? Parent's can't dicipline their children, people can't say what used to be allowed to be said practically anywhere. Everywhere we look there's more laws and rules to what we do and say. The Faire is the one place where many of us can be who we want to be and no one has a problem with it...well, except those idiots who decide they have a problem with everything and go anyway...but it's a place where we don't have to worry about much. If the Faire was made into something written and considered as "Family Friendly" then much of the crowd would be lost. The children enjoy it, and the parents enjoy it, and the people without children enjoy it now, just as it is. Why change something that's been working for years?
I know that BARF has a specific children's area in the middle of the place, which is always bustling with children and families. Even I enjoy the fantasy that they've put there. But there's something about being allowed to do what I can and be with those who do what they do there that just makes the Faire...well...Faire (to everyone.)
Sorry it's long, but I wanted to kinda put my two cents worth it about the whole situation...
Quote from: harem_pants on April 13, 2009, 03:05:09 PM
I have two words for the entire discussion about kids or no kids at fest.
PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY!!!
I agree we already bring our children ages 11,7,3. They enjoy the fest more than the State Fair. They also don't want anything to change in that manner. In my opinion we are already to much of a nanny state and should let participants still have some fun, but yes rated x is not what I feel any of us want.
Quote from: harem_pants on April 13, 2009, 08:46:50 AM
Ok most of you on here are patrons, yes yes some of you work there but a lot are just pay as you go daysiders.
So let me ask you, hypothetically, how would you feel if MNRF became 100% family friendly. No more bawdiness, no more vil, Fitz might have to become a mime, Gordy couldn't hump trees....think about it. Would you be more inclined to bring your family? Would you be bored out of your mind? Do you think it's too bawdy now to bring your kids? Will they be scarred for life by catching a passing insult from Vil?
I'm just curious.
::Edit to add::
Adding to this, what would you like to see out there that would appeal to a wider array of audience? What do you think could be done to segregate yet have a balance between adult and minor audiences? What do you think should just go away to make things better for everyone?
So how hypothetical is this question?
Quote from: William_MacKean on April 13, 2009, 09:19:13 AM
...Children make a small portion of the attendees and have no money. "Families" have very little discretionary money available these days. They will NOT likely spend it at a RenFaire. They'll go elsewhere...My feelings are that kids do not belong at the faire, but that the accomodations already made suffice well enough.
Don't know what your situation is but I have a very different point of view, allow me to explain. Yep, kids have no money, but their parents do. I personally know two vendors who make their entire income each year selling "kids" stuff at several fairs. We spend hundreds on children's garb each year. Plenty more on food and drink. Admission, toys, keepsakes, the list goes on.
It is certainly fair to bring up "bawdy" shows and children in the same thread as they are intertwined. So no kids eh? Well there goes one of my favorite performers, the impish Fae Twig. No kids, no Twig. No kids, no Children's Trilogy of Games. No kids, no giant rocking horse. Half the hair-braid clients are children. I'd dare say more than half the face painters clients are children. The Elephant rides, pony rides, swings, children's realm. Wax hands, the "Chicken Couple, even "Dragons Eggs" are big time draw for the school aged attendee.
Make no mistake, the financial impact of children at Fest is a whole lot bigger than you give credit. To insinuate that children do not belong at fest is to say adults do not belong in Disneyland. Room for both, no need to keep any group of any age out.
Quote from: white trillium on April 13, 2009, 06:32:53 PM
Quote from: harem_pants on April 13, 2009, 08:46:50 AM
Ok most of you on here are patrons, yes yes some of you work there but a lot are just pay as you go daysiders.
So let me ask you, hypothetically, how would you feel if MNRF became 100% family friendly. No more bawdiness, no more vil, Fitz might have to become a mime, Gordy couldn't hump trees....think about it. Would you be more inclined to bring your family? Would you be bored out of your mind? Do you think it's too bawdy now to bring your kids? Will they be scarred for life by catching a passing insult from Vil?
I'm just curious.
::Edit to add::
Adding to this, what would you like to see out there that would appeal to a wider array of audience? What do you think could be done to segregate yet have a balance between adult and minor audiences? What do you think should just go away to make things better for everyone?
So how hypothetical is this question?
At this point? Quite hypothetical...a few months from now...who knows.
I sincerely hope this wrong-headed idea dies on the vine. It's asinine.
Hey watch the language Jack! ;D ;D ;D
I cannot imagine MNRF without Vil Tennis!
I bring the kids too! (not)
I wouldn't worry about losing Vil altogether, they're amazingly talented folks who could probably do a cleaner show if they had to. In fact it might be funnier at time watching them try not to say some things ::) If there is something funky in the wind I hope you paying customers a give MAF feedback via phone or Email before voting with your feet.
Quote from: white trillium on April 13, 2009, 06:32:53 PMSo how hypothetical is this question?
According to a rumor I heard from someone who attended a recent meeting: Not very hypothetical at all.
There can be a balance struck. In the past (distant) the balance was a bit bawdy. But forcing the balance the other way will change the scope in a way that may not recover in time to generate the new style revenue. If we had a long term shift model to work with, it could be done. But I have my suspicions that this will not be the case.
Now, "Children's Day" other than Fest Friday might be a way to test the water. BUT it would need to be well advertised so that children come and bar flies do not... as much. And ALL acts would need to have such a show as to not offend the uptight parents who think their kids understand inuendo as well as they think they do.
Quote from: groomporter on April 13, 2009, 08:15:56 PM
I wouldn't worry about losing Vil altogether, they're amazingly talented folks who could probably do a cleaner show if they had to. In fact it might be funnier at time watching them try not to say some things ::) If there is something funky in the wind I hope you paying customers a give MAF feedback via phone or Email before voting with your feet.
I'm actually looking forward to doing a cleaner vil show. We were talking about this in email a week or two back, and I am firmly of the opinion that if we have to rely on poop jokes and shock value to pound out a good quality show, we've reached the point where we should walk away. I think that doing a cleaner show for the fest and bawdier shows elsewhere will give us a great opportunity to grow the show itself for other venues, as well as each of us as individual performers and "artists."
I have read through things and don't think it would be possible to make the festival 100% family friendly and still draw in money.
The big names aren't quite 100% family friendly if you think about it. I don't forsee them telling Puke 'n Snot, The Tortuga Twins, or any of the other big attendance drawing shows to make it all faeries and princesses.
I don't think children need to be protected, but I do realize that they draw in a lot of profit. I love our fest the way it is and the loss of the more adult humored things would suck, but from another aspect...if the most complained about things were made to be something to complain about less and more people were drawn to attend the festival and more money was pulled in. Maybe then it may create more of an incentive to put more into it and there may actually be improvements to parts of it rather than letting it crumble. Just a thought...it would suck if some of the fun/crude things were removed, but I think I may see managements thoughts for drawing a crowd and bringing money in with the economy being crappy and all.
Quote from: William_MacKean on April 13, 2009, 02:12:33 PM
I think some are missing my meaning. There is a difference between somewhere kids can go and somewhere kids truly belong. It's 'exposure vs immersion.' Expose? Fine. Immerse? Not so much. But that also depends on the level of participation of the parents and the individual child.
I'm going to have to agree with that. I've been attending fair all my life and started working at the soda booth next to the puke n snot show since i was 7. this will be my 11th year working there plus attending many other fairs and i turned out just fine. but it does depend on the child because i know my mom wouldnt take my autistic little brother till he was older and truly understood what was a joke and what wasnt. personally i think MNRF has changed enough over the last decade.
Does it have anything to do with the long sexual harrassment policy? I received it in my shopkeepers packet. It states that there is to be no flirting, intentional or unintentional, among other things. Remember a few year's ago, when the belly dancers had to cover their midriffs?
Last year there was a pedophilia/incest joke that apparently spurred complaints to the point that later in the run Carr announced at cast call a ban on such jokes on pain of being fired. I would suspect it might be partially a (over)reaction to that.
Quote from: Lady L on April 15, 2009, 01:06:41 AM
Does it have anything to do with the long sexual harrassment policy? I received it in my shopkeepers packet. It states that there is to be no flirting, intentional or unintentional, among other things. Remember a few year's ago, when the belly dancers had to cover their midriffs?
wow . . . well, that should put a damper on things . . . luckily I operate with open hostility and arrogance, which are still O-kay.
Well... there goes half the fun of shopping. ::)
Quote from: Lady L on April 15, 2009, 01:06:41 AM
Does it have anything to do with the long sexual harrassment policy? I received it in my shopkeepers packet. It states that there is to be no flirting, intentional or unintentional, among other things. Remember a few year's ago, when the belly dancers had to cover their midriffs?
I thought making people cover their navals went away in the 1960's.
No sexual harassment, err I mean...no flirting at a renaissance festival???
If that is specified in the vendor rules I assume that is also true for the different stage acts and the people on cast? And how do you prevent unintentional flirting?
And what about all the women in garb showing cleavage...will they include a burka for all women to wear who come to the faire showing cleavage?
If they have a sexual harassment policy like this that means no acts or actors could do or say anything baudy at all because in an open-air environment they would likely be "sexually harassing" someone.
Please tell me this is a misguided rule which they merely wrote for insurance reasons and do not enforce.
Regards,
CB
I believe the harassment policy is mainly a "cover their own butts", "just in case" policy and is quite separate from any talk of toning down the bawdiness of the performances which I believe is probably more related to specific complaints (see my post above about the last year's ban on certain jokes)
[sarcasm]
Just invoke Sharia Law and get it over with. This year-by-year tightenning of the noose is getting tiresome. It's like a bad auto-erotic fantasy.
[/sarcasm]
Quote from: Lady L on April 15, 2009, 01:06:41 AM
Does it have anything to do with the long sexual harrassment policy? I received it in my shopkeepers packet. It states that there is to be no flirting, intentional or unintentional, among other things. Remember a few year's ago, when the belly dancers had to cover their midriffs?
Remember it? Hell I protested it. I wore a tube top that said CENSORED across my stomach on the final day.
Does MNRF realize how many people go to Ren Faires Just Because of the flirting?!?! I bet if you ask 100 woman if they'd pay $20 to be flirted with outrageously, told how beautiful/desireable they were, have their hands kissed and generally made a fuss over, I bet at least 80 of them would ask "Where? :-* "
Dayna
Quote from: harem_pants on April 15, 2009, 12:57:32 PM
Quote from: Lady L on April 15, 2009, 01:06:41 AM
Remember a few year's ago, when the belly dancers had to cover their midriffs?
Remember it? Hell I protested it. I wore a tube top that said CENSORED across my stomach on the final day.
They have effectively done this by shifting the run a week into the colder, darker month.
Quote from: harem_pants on April 15, 2009, 12:57:32 PM
Quote from: Lady L on April 15, 2009, 01:06:41 AM
Does it have anything to do with the long sexual harrassment policy? I received it in my shopkeepers packet. It states that there is to be no flirting, intentional or unintentional, among other things. Remember a few year's ago, when the belly dancers had to cover their midriffs?
Remember it? Hell I protested it. I wore a tube top that said CENSORED across my stomach on the final day.
That was a riot!
Quote from: unilady on April 15, 2009, 01:39:28 PM
Does MNRF realize how many people go to Ren Faires Just Because of the flirting?!?! I bet if you ask 100 woman if they'd pay $20 to be flirted with outrageously, told how beautiful/desireable they were, have their hands kissed and generally made a fuss over, I bet at least 80 of them would ask "Where? :-* "
Dayna
*raises hand* I would!
My husband, two sons, and I first went to the MN faire in 1996, then for the next 3 years. Our kids were ages 12 & 15 in 1996. Until Steve and I went to MN in 2006 by ourselves and met other members of this forum, we didn't even know there was Vilification Tennis (reminder - if you don't know what it is, make sure not to let forum members encourage you to raise your hand when they ask if anyone doesn't know about it. Vil Tennis 2006 - starring Renee!).
My point is that the parents can certainly steer clear of what they don't want their children to see or hear, there's certainly enough other things to do. At Bristol, Christophe's adult show you never see kid's there, and he makes sure the parents understand that, and tells them to leave.
There is enough to do at faire that both adults and children can be entertained without having to limit the other group.
I agree with you, Lady Renee,
Our faire is so big and spread out, that one can find different activities that are suitable for them. It isn't like there is only one stage, that can be seen from every direction. There could be more for kid's activities... there used to be more available in the past. If they really want a family friendly faire, then they would have to get rid of all the alcohol. I don't think they will do that any time soon. The alcohol is what leads to many of the other problems. Not saying anyone in particular, I have just seen quite a few incidents up front, where my shop is. I know SS is good about escorting them out.
I think there needs to be a balance, stuff to entertain kids, stuff for adults. They don't need to limit it to one group or another.
VV and I have been taking the kids to fest for the past almost 10 years. Yes, there are things that are inappropriate for them but isn't that why they have parents? Take responsibility for your children! Oh mom, he said a bad word. Yes he did, talk about it, then remind the child it's not OK for them to use those words. Pay attention to the show rating. Believe the judge at Vil Tennis when he says it's not a child friendly show! EDUCATE not insulate.
Want to make the faire more family friendly? Then don't do it by removing what the adults enjoy, but rather expanding on what there is for children to enjoy. Our children's areas are laughable and scattered. They are too open to the corruption of sites and sounds floating on the wind, and too random for parents to allow their kids to run and play in.
It would seem it's time for MNRF to have a major shake down and re-do. I hope they do it in a way for all to enjoy.
This thread pop's un every 18 months or so...it is a worthwhile discussion.
I flat out take offense to the "Children don't belong at fest" BS. And to be equally blunt, not every adult wants to be hit with non-stop jokes about rape and incest. Here's a thought...TRF has a great "Gated area" with lots of bars and stages. It is age controlled (no one under 18 I think, maybe 21). It is a place for the more "mature" to let their hair down. Love going there towards the end of the day.
New approach...
Monday, April 6, 2009 at 4:27pm
One of the conversations that has been swirling around the festival over the past few years, is how it has turned into Sturgis in tights. Bawdy, raunchy, adult shows, fantasy costumes and moreofthat.
This year will see the first attempt at moving the needle back towards a show that might appeal more to families or people with higher disposable incomes. In other words, we have to clean up our act(s).
The first step in this process is the easiest. Every show must be safe for children of any age. This precludes any show that is considered "adult" fare. We aren't going to allow any "R" rated performances, and though we still anticipate some bawdy comedy, we are lowering the tolerance level for generally offensive performances.
This will be spelled out further in a forthcoming text, but we want acts that are used to having adult shows and content, to recreate a performance where either the level of clever creativity is applied to the material, or adult material is removed.
This is likely to cause some feedback from both the cast and some of our customers. While we are open to insights and suggestions at improvements, we are going to hold steady on our commitment to sand down some of the adult edges of our show.
Just an FYI!
"This was put on the performers face book page unsigned"
- The problem with fantasy costuming is with the playtrons, not the performers or participants. Although, I do recall Fest WANTING hobbits and fae characters some years ago. Kids loved them, too. Do we not have childrens' favorites in the Troll and Wizard?
- Shows such as the Smoker and Feast specifically target the bawdy customers. People PAY for that treatment. Tame them at your peril.
-The stage acts with the most quality attendance are the bawdy shows, especially the 'late' shows.
Let's be reasonable:
-We have acts where violence is prevalent. We have acts where knives are thrown and whips are cracked inches from a patron's face. We have games that are essentially a wet t-shirt contest.
-Does it really matter if a child hears an inuendo that is just about as understandable as most of the Lion King or Alladin or Madagascar?
Street acts can and should be more regulated because customers generally have no choice on whether to see a show/bit that comes to them. Hawking techniques could be toned down a bit in some booths. Basically, anywhere a parent has no choice whether to see/hear a show should be monitored more closely. But, if you sit your child down at a show listed as PG-13 and do NOT heed the warnings issued by the performers... Whose fault is that? And why should the rest of the patrons be made to receive less?
"Sturgis in tights"
Now that's funny! ;D
Quote from: Noble Dreg on April 16, 2009, 05:13:46 PM
"Sturgis in tights"
Now that's funny! ;D
I spent 16 years of my life only a few minutes away from Sturgis. Believe me, fest has a LONG way to go before it ever gets that bad.
hmmm, odd.
It was much bawdier when I was first out there in 1991-92 (I forget which). From everything I have read, it was a real party place back in the 70s-80s. Not necessarily better, just a different sort of event.
So . . . when were we not so risque?
I have been attending fest since 1978 and have noticed a significant decline in Bawdiness. My opinion is that the emphasis on "family friendly" is a problem for many vendors. I postulate that singles and couples spend much more at fest than the typical family of 4. The family just can't afford more than admission and a meal. This of course supports the festival owner but does nothing for the shops or shows.
As I've said, I believe it is primarily an over-reaction to some specific complaints/incidents rather than due to any significant change in the overall presentation.
I think it's becoming to much PC as it is. Anymore and it wouldn't be the same fest for crying out loud. At that point it would be a why bother to go type event.
Quote from: Lord Figaro on April 17, 2009, 02:09:34 PM
I think it's becoming to much PC as it is. Anymore and it wouldn't be the same fest for crying out loud. At that point it would be a why bother to go type event.
I agree!
Agreed. One of the big draws for me is the relative lack of political correctness. I don't wear a muzzle well, as many of you know. ;D
I also agree, the reason we attend is the jokes and humor that most PC people don't get.
Agreed. People that go to fest expect the bawdiness. Those who don't like bawdiness don't go to fest.
But there is always that ONE customer who writes a letter that ends up changing the show for everyone else. Poor way to run a business.
I told George about this and he honestly doesn't know how he is supposed to effectively hawk without flirting.
Speaking of hawking...there is a pickle barrel up front, across from my shop. We have noticed that they have REALLY toned down their hawking in the last few years. Still loud, just not saying the bawdy things they used to and no more "pickle hugs" or "knicker checks".
If one whiner can cause a melt down in the system, what about a stack of letters supporting the show as is? The squeaky wheel gets the grease and while we can sit here all day and complain, justify, compare, it doesn't get the word to those that need to know.
Lucid, well thought out arguments against the PC machine will be more heard than pages of whining on this forum.
What say you all? A letter writing campaign?
Count me in, MG!
I highly doubt, as is being suggested here, that the reaction is due to one or two complaints. A business of this size is in it for the profit and would not change direction based on a single "whiner". MG's letter writing campaign is an excellent idea. One person writing "give me bawdy"! won't do much, but a number that is greater than those requesting PC may indeed do something. A letter campaign could restore balance.
A small suggestion, don't write with an angry tone, and don't use a form letter. Neither will get much headway. Remember this is not a public company you are writing to, there is no board of directors concerned about stock values. This is an individual who also has an opinion and owns a business. Show a financial win for the Fair and your cause will win out.
A final thought...This thread started as a "hypothetical question", are we really sure we are not over-reacting? I recall last years "Feast" theme was "Syphilis", as this is the featured event at fest it hardly suggests a complete change of direction to "Disney".
Have to agree we need to wait and see.
The posting on Facebook said that the details "will be spelled out further in a forthcoming text" Once that forthcoming policy actually comes out it will be easier to target specifics in any letter writing campaign. Whereas, if it just ends up meaning some of the blatant things like Gordy humping trees stop happening (at least in the open) it won't have much effect on the overall show.
As far as the "flirting" clause in the MAF sexual harassment policy, the policy went out to crafters 2, or 3 years ago and to my knowledge has not been openly enforced in any way since then.
I also agree on the wait and see, this sounds like the usual sabre ratteling to see who is really paying attention. Apparently we all are paying attention, and all have our views on improvements and changes that could be made.
I recommend making your views known before they finalize the policy.
I would also tell them that if these rules apply to staff and vendors that the same types of policies would have to be posted in the view of the public regulating how the general public behaves, I.E. no flirting, no bellies showing in shirts, no kissing, no etc etc etc.
I bet they will never want to post such rules for the general public because the general public would think they are incredibly stupid and ruin their enjoyment.
How many rennies would want to go to a faire where posted rules say no exposed midriffs, no flirting, no kissing or having fun, no etc etc etc etc? Even if the rennies don't act bawdy knowing these are public rules will cause a lot of people not to attend.
I would bring up your concerns by asking the faire management what they think the reaction of the general public would be if the general public were required to obey by these rules. I would also strongly insist that if the general public, who will outnumber staff and vendors by 40x or more, do not obey the rules that the staff and vendors obeying the rules will be meaningless.
Ask them whether the intent of the rules is to create a certain type of family friendly atmosphere for the faire.
When they predictably answer YES, then hit them with the above comments of mine and demand an explanation of how the policy can hope to be effective.
And make these comments in a public forum where the faire management comment on their rules and the public can comment.
Personally I would not attend a faire who posted such rules for the public and would likely not go to a faire which posted such rules for staff and vendors.
Regards,
CB
I fear we have started a "Chinese fire drill".
Apologies if the above statement in anyway offended anyone of any persuasion. ;D
Hypothetically speaking....
I'd have no use for a PC, overly family friendly faire. The whole fun of faire is the lack of PC and the escape from our overly PC world!...Bawdiness, adult humor, etc is what makes faire...well faire!
I would be happy to take the money I spend there, which is WAY more then the average family of 4 would spend and go elsewhere with it. They go for 1 day and I go for about 10! If the PTB there can't figure the math out on that, then they don't deserve my patronage. Once again, TPB seem to not care about their most loyal/repeat customers.
This is not the state fair. Its not full of rides and stuff. The ren is by nature an adult orientated deal. There is only a small section of it devoted to kids. Most of the vendors sell wares for adults. Kids don't like going from shop to shop looking at things that aren't toys!..
People always ask me to describe faire and I always say....imagine one huge craft show, with lots of unique food, plenty of beer and wine, and a lot of adult humor orientated entertainment. Can you bring the kids? Sure there are things for them to do there too, but its more of an adult thing since there aren't state fair style rides, etc. there for them. Yes, there are rides on animal backs and some games there too, but if you are looking for the roller coaster type stuff you're better off going down the road to Valley Fair or to the state fair instead. There is a difference between "faire" and "fair" after all....They are not the same thing.....
However this turns out, it boils down simple as this. It all amounts to a couple (or several) new rules I get to break. I get my best fun talking myself out of such situations. Once again, those who know me... ::) :D
And ND, you owe us for the Chinese fire drill. I take payments in cash or alcohol.
Belly up to the bar (Mac's) and I'll be sure to set you up!
Very good point Mad Jack, rules were meant to be broken. As frequently as possible too.
Ok, here's what the rules say...
"Sexual harassment is defined in accordance with the Equal-Employment Opportunity Commission Guidelines, issued Nov. 10,1980 as:
Harassment can occur intentionally or unintentionally. Some examples of conduct that is prohibited by this policy are listed below. Please note that these are not the only examples.
1. Epithets, slurs, negative stereotyping, or threatening, intimidating or hostile acts that relate to race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, disability, creed, marital status, veteran's status, status with regard to public assistance or sexual orientation and any other category protected by law.
2. Written or graphic material that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion toward an individual or group because of their race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, disability, creed, marital status, veteran's status, status with regard to public assistance or sexual orientation and any other category protected by law that is placed on walls, bulletin boards or elsewhere on the Festival's premises or circulated throughout the workplace or entertainment areas.
3. Unwanted sexual comments, innuendoes, flirtations, propositions or suggestions
4. Use of offensive words of a sexual nature, describing body parts or the sexual act, telling "suggestive" jokes or stories and conversations about sexual exploits, sexual preferences and desires or suggestive or sexist remarks about a person's clothing or body.
5. Unwanted and unnecessary touching, brushing against, patting or pinching
6. Displaying in the work or entertainment area, pictures, objects, cartoons, pornographic magazines or representations of any action or subject which is sexual in nature, depicting nude, scantily clad or suggestively posed women or men and which can be perceived as offensive
7.Sabotaging another's character, reputation, work effects or property because of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, disability, creed, marital status, veteran's status, status with regard to public assistance or sexual orientation and any other category protected by law
8. Direct and/or indirect suggestions, requests or demands that an employee's job security, job assignment or conditions of employment or opportunities for advancement depend in any way on the granting of sexual favors or
9. Sexual relations accompanied by implied or overt threats or promises."
Not sure about number 3, number 4, number 5 and number 6. ???
I can understand how this applies in an office type setting, but considering the way some people dress/act at fest, not sure how it applies there. I am also sure that when there are 15,000 people a day, sometimes unintentional touching or brushing against is going to happen.. maybe at drum jam, or going in/out of a crowded shop. I can think of several shops that have pictures of scantily clad people. I don't find that offensive, besides, I have seen patrons that are wearing less than on a piece of artwork. There are all kinds of suggestive, flirtations and innuendos out there. I don't know how they are going to monitor that? Note that this law has been in effect since 1980, but we just got the papers from fest a few years ago. How would this apply at a public beach, or a bar, or does it? If this is directed at employees, staff, vendors, contractors at fest, etc, does that mean it does not apply to patrons? Who should we ask?
Again I believe we are confusing how one EMPLOYEE is to act towards another EMPLOYEE, not how one visitor is to act towards another. The "Mating Game" has been going on since before the first fish crawled out of the swamp. The above rules apply to co-workers in an environment where they are "forced" to spent significant time together.
The above laws do not apply to patrons.
If you are seriously concerned, check out this short but informative video...
http://www.truveo.com/Tom-Brady-SNL-Sexual-Harassment-PSA/id/977175842
The basics of sexual harassment are that an employer has an obligation to provide a "comfortable working environment" and therefore has an obligation to deal with "inappropriate behavior."
For example, in our booth we joke about being partially a brothel since gaming halls sometimes offered other "entertainments" behind the scenes. Therefore we get a little bawdy at times and we warn prosepective helpers of that. (We've even publicly presented the Royal Guard with a "bill" for "services rendered.") But in the past my wife and I have found it necessary to drop certain (male and female) shop helpers specifically because their behavior went over the line and made other shop staff uncomfortable.
The examples listed from the EEO provide guidelines to deal with complaints, or potentially inappropriate behavior if they arise, they are not necessarily intended to stop or monitor normal human interaction. What it comes down to is that sexual harassment is defined by the person who is being offended. If you are not offended by being flirted with, then you are not being harassed. Even if offended, a single unwanted flirtation remark may be inappropriate, but is not necessarily "harassment" unless it continues.
I'm pretty sure the lawyers looked at Peterson and said "Jim, with the number of people you employ or contract with at fest, you really need to have a harassment policy to cover your butt."
As for patron behavior, it could effect a booth owner, or fest as an employer. If a patron, or other participant, is flirting with my staff member in an unwelcome way, I have the obligation to listen to my employee's/volunteer's complaint and deal with the matter. If I just say "put up with it in hopes of making a sale" my employee could have grounds for a harassment complaint against me. (But MAF would probably be not liable as a co-defendent since they have a published policy against harassment)
It does to some degree apply to patrons as well. If safety services gets complaints about a specific patron doing something inappropriate be it with an employee or another patron we WILL go find that person and discuss the matter with them. We have thrown people off site for failing to cooperate with us when told to stop doing it and they continue. Most members of SS do not tolerate harrassment of any kind and will deal with it when they witness it.
I would highly suggest that if ever in a situation where you are made to feel uncomfortable with something either an employee or another patron is doing please notify SS and give a discription of the individual. We are more than happy to check that stuff out as it's for EVERYONE's benefit to get rid of the yucks that plague fest every day.
Sexual harassment can occur when customers act in ways which sexually harass employees and the employer does not take sufficient steps to prevent it. When the employer can predictably determine that such behavior by customers may occur they must take steps to proactively prevent such behavior. This is because the work environment involves extensive customer interaction.
This policy will probably ruin the work environment for many employees/vendors at a renaissance festival because for the love of god flirting, off-color jokes, inuendo and etc are all part of renaissance faires for heaven's sake!
I understand they are trying to cover themselves legally but this is plain stupid. If this applies to employees vs employees and has nothing to do with patrons then it means there can be NO BAUDY ACTS and no cast actors can be involved in ANY BAUDY ACTS or any off-color comments or inuendos, etc because they could violate the sexual harassment rules and another actor could be offended or harassed.
I know people might say, oh well actors can agree to take part in dialog which is baudy but what if the actor doesn't want to take part in baudy dialog? Theoretically the actor could say the employer created a hostile work environment by asking them to take part in behavior which violated the sexual harassment policy.
Someone could sue because they were assigned the character of a wench.
I don't agree with sexual harassment policies in any environment because they create so many legal loopholes and liabilities and problems and trouble than they are worth.
Regards,
CB
This is why I dislike the P.C./Nanny state this country has become. This is the same in my opinion as the smoking ban in bars, if you don't like it don't go to that type of event. People should know in advance that this type of behavior is possible. The racier shows could be placed in their own area with a warning that adult content could occour. I personally don't mind if a vendor flirts with me it boosts my ego and shows to me the vendor is paying attention to those around them. I will say flirting can get out of hand, but I believe most vandors could perform this in a semi-tastefull manor.
Quote from: Cobaltblu on April 22, 2009, 10:02:26 AM
Sexual harassment can occur when customers act in ways which sexually harass employees and the employer does not take sufficient steps to prevent it. When the employer can predictably determine that such behavior by customers may occur they must take steps to proactively prevent such behavior. This is because the work environment involves extensive customer interaction.
This policy will probably ruin the work environment for many employees/vendors at a renaissance festival because for the love of god flirting, off-color jokes, inuendo and etc are all part of renaissance faires for heaven's sake!
I understand they are trying to cover themselves legally but this is plain stupid. If this applies to employees vs employees and has nothing to do with patrons then it means there can be NO BAUDY ACTS and no cast actors can be involved in ANY BAUDY ACTS or any off-color comments or inuendos, etc because they could violate the sexual harassment rules and another actor could be offended or harassed.
I know people might say, oh well actors can agree to take part in dialog which is baudy but what if the actor doesn't want to take part in baudy dialog? Theoretically the actor could say the employer created a hostile work environment by asking them to take part in behavior which violated the sexual harassment policy.
Someone could sue because they were assigned the character of a wench.
I don't agree with sexual harassment policies in any environment because they create so many legal loopholes and liabilities and problems and trouble than they are worth.
Regards,
CB
As I've said before in this thread, the harassment policy was issued to crafters 2, or 3 years ago at least. I have never heard anything about it being included with performers' contracts, and I believe it is totally separate from the more recent talk about making the performance aspects of the show more family friendly.
What part of "HYPOTHETICAL" are people missing? Everyone's getting their undies in a twist over something that hasn't been implemented yet and for which we have yet to see any effects. Fest doesn't even start for over 2 more months. Many attenders who are repeat customers will go expecting the same faire they've been enjoying, and when they don't get it they'll start complaining. Management will either listen or they won't.
It's starting to sound like lewd and bawdy behavior is the only reason to attend faire. That's pretty gross in my book. I enjoy vilification tennis. I like catching the last Phoenix and Tortuga show of the day once a season. But they aren't the only acts or the only reason I go to faire. Some vendors have been incredibly vulgar and I certainly understand how those could have led to some complaints, especially when the vendors are so clueless as to not pick up on their target's repulsion.
I seriously doubt that all flirting will cease. That all acts will be squeaky clean. Or that fest will be unrecognizeable to those who know and love it. Until I witness faire being ruined by PC I'm not going to waste any energy worrying about it.
I have never experienced any type of behavior that I thought would offend say my mother if she was with in my years of going. Any adult humored show you know not to bring kids unless they wouldn't understand.
For older kids that would get it, it would probably be anything they don't see on TV these days. All in all the reason I go and tell other people to go is for some of the adult humor.
As others have said PC has gotten out of control.
I don't know if this policy applies to performers or not. I would think either it applies to all of us or none of us. I can't believe that it *only* applies to shopkeepers. I don't have any employees in my shop, so that isn't what concerns me.
I had several original paintings and subsequent prints made from them, of topless/scantily clad fairies. These were approved by Lois and displayed at Hall of Masters for several years. When this policy came around, saying,
"6. Displaying in the work or entertainment area, pictures, objects, cartoons, pornographic magazines or representations of any action or subject which is sexual in nature, depicting nude, scantily clad or suggestively posed women or men and which can be perceived as offensive."
I have to think it applies to those pieces of artwork. What else can it mean?
All art museums and most art galleries have nude artwork. I can understand that nudes are not acceptable in an office setting, at a bank, at any children's type of store, etc. I just don't think it applies at art shows/renaissance faires.
Even the Sistine chapel has nudes and they have been acceptable for centuries. I don't *know* where the law, or the festival, is going to draw the line. Furthermore, when a patron is dressed in a chainmail bikini top and a thong, (for example) how is that acceptable and a scantily clad "not real person" in a painting is not? My fairies are not real people, I didn't have a live model for them. Some faire attendees have complained about them in the past. Last year, I didn't display them.
As far as religion goes, I have had people complain about my one angel painting, because they were pagan. I had people who were Christian, complain about my shaman and greenmen. I had people complain that my angel was female, white and blonde. I had intended to do a multicultural series, not sure if I will now. So that's gender, religion, race and color I inadvertantly offended.
Everyone can find something they find offensive, so what's left? Maybe I should just paint animals.
I guess I need some clarification.
Anyone remember the good ol days when "harass" was 2 words? ;D...sorry couldn't help it
Seriously though, I have a daughter of nearly 16, and have been taking her to faires since she had to be in strollers, I never kept her away from bawdy acts...to be honest in most cases she simply didn't "get it" when she had questions about it we answered her questions with wait for it ...honesty. did she turn into some kind of deviant? does she speek with a sailors tongue? is she rude or uncouth? those of you that have met her know this is not the case. she is a sweet little girl that is both polite and respectfull (though a bit of a tilted sense of humor). Now being a 10 year Navy veteran I may be more tolerant of such things, but the reality is that my daughter is what We her parents made her to be.
A renaissance faire is what it is, there is room for both chilren and adults, it is the responsability of parents to decide what is and isn't right for their children. It is the obligation of the staff and performers to give the information needed, to those parents so they may make an educated decision as to whether they feel their children should be allowed to see said performance. A rating system is fair... PG-13 or R ratings on movies do not disallow children from seeing them, but they must be accopanied by an adult.
I have only been to MNRF 1 time, and found it to be a very enjoyable faire as it is, the people the shows the site everything about it is perfect just the way it is. it is no better or worse in regards to bawdyness than any other faire i've been to. I think it should stay the way it is ...i look forward to annual return trips every laborday.
sorry it's so long, and all the spelling and grammar errors i'm on my 3rd bottle of wine...on second thought, i'm not really sorry, just hope it makes sense
juste le vent et la mer,
-Le Comte
Personally I wish it would go back to how it was about 10-15 years ago. ;)
Quote from: Lady L on April 23, 2009, 12:41:35 AM
...Everyone can find something they find offensive, so what's left? Maybe I should just paint animals.
I guess I need some clarification.
Not so sure about that...PETA may be offended by using animals for personal gain. ;D
and for painting them against their will too
Quote from: Lady L on April 23, 2009, 12:41:35 AM
I don't know if this policy applies to performers or not. I would think either it applies to all of us or none of us. I can't believe that it *only* applies to shopkeepers. I don't have any employees in my shop, so that isn't what concerns me.
I had several original paintings and subsequent prints made from them, of topless/scantily clad fairies. These were approved by Lois and displayed at Hall of Masters for several years. When this policy came around, saying,
"6. Displaying in the work or entertainment area, pictures, objects, cartoons, pornographic magazines or representations of any action or subject which is sexual in nature, depicting nude, scantily clad or suggestively posed women or men and which can be perceived as offensive."
I have to think it applies to those pieces of artwork. What else can it mean?
All art museums and most art galleries have nude artwork. I can understand that nudes are not acceptable in an office setting, at a bank, at any children's type of store, etc. I just don't think it applies at art shows/renaissance faires.
Even the Sistine chapel has nudes and they have been acceptable for centuries. I don't *know* where the law, or the festival, is going to draw the line. Furthermore, when a patron is dressed in a chainmail bikini top and a thong, (for example) how is that acceptable and a scantily clad "not real person" in a painting is not? My fairies are not real people, I didn't have a live model for them. Some faire attendees have complained about them in the past. Last year, I didn't display them.
As far as religion goes, I have had people complain about my one angel painting, because they were pagan. I had people who were Christian, complain about my shaman and greenmen. I had people complain that my angel was female, white and blonde. I had intended to do a multicultural series, not sure if I will now. So that's gender, religion, race and color I inadvertantly offended.
Everyone can find something they find offensive, so what's left? Maybe I should just paint animals.
I guess I need some clarification.
Yes it applies to performers, as well as crafters, but we crafters can be viewed as "managers" and therefore responsible for people who work for us. My main point there is my belief that it's separate from making the acts less "R" rated.
Yeah we teach people to play the earliest surviving games that were played with Tarot cards so some of the Christians think we're plating with something "evil" and connected with witchcraft, and some Pagans are offended when we say the historic evidence is that they weren't used for fortune telling until the 1700's, and there is no connection between them an ancient Egypt.
I believe that part of the guidelines is more directed at inappropriate art/pinups etc. in the office, workshop or break room as opposed to art that one is selling in what is basically a privately owned shop. As long as a worker knows that's part of what your line, they have no right to complain if it offends them.
I don't have any "workers" to complain, just family that help me. It's the patrons that do the complaining.
Yes, we shopkeepers are sure a wild bunch. ::)
Quote from: Noble Dreg on April 23, 2009, 07:15:37 AM
Quote from: Lady L on April 23, 2009, 12:41:35 AM
...Everyone can find something they find offensive, so what's left? Maybe I should just paint animals.
I guess I need some clarification.
Not so sure about that...PETA may be offended by using animals for personal gain. ;D
How about dragons, unicorns and landscapes, would that be ok? ;)