what if a man says NO i don't fight women?

This topic is not meant to start a fight, nor is it meant to be offensive. It turns out this is a very sensitive subject from both sides of the fence. Anyway, be it one on one heavy weapons or one on one fencing, if a man says NO I don't fight women, NO i don't fight girls, NO i don't fight females, should the woman be forced to accept no for an answer and simply walk away? ANSWER: Yes. Like it or not, but in every state in the US NO always means NO.

If a man has made it clear to his kingdom or even just to his local shire that he will not fight women, should the man be forced to stand face to face with a female fighter and say NO to her face? ANSWER: absolutily not. again, in every state NO always means NO. And in every state if she has a weapon, any weapon, anywhere on her person and the man feels threatened she could wind up in jail. And even if she has no weapon, she cannot approach him in any way that causes the man to feel threatened, or to appear threatening, either by words or by use of body language, as that could be seen as creating a hostile environment.

And how to we get around this very sensitive subject? Well the answer is simple, you have the ladies only tourneys and competitions such as the ones at Pennsic and Estrella, so there is no justifiable reason for not having men's only tourneys and competitions. And for those men and women who think that men refusing to fight women is discrimination, it is not. in fact, when I wrote to the SCA asking about this very subject They stated in writing that if a man does not want to fight women. He doesn't have to. also keep in mind that since the SCA is a private nonprofit organization if they wanted to pass a rule Tomorrow morning saying that women could no longer fight. They could do that and not be guilty of gender discrimination. Just like the LPGA can refuse to allow men to play in LPGA sanctioned events on the basis of gender, and not be guilty of discrimination.

Last but not least. I myself am a member of the SCA, and I am bound by honor to be honest, and to be courteous at all times. So must anyone who replies to this topic that is also a member of the SCA. And may everyone have a very pleasant day.



I'm new to SCA, but I dont agree on the face that girls can't fight. Girls are just as important as men, and they can probaly kick their butts. ~*~ Willamina Morgantra Duchantress~*~

CommanderWhile I agree on


While I agree on the most part with your Comment, I do not agree with having the female fighters excluded because of a Minority of men refuse to fight them based on their sex.

I feel a better solution would be have a smaller tournment where the Men that do not wish to fight a women can fight, for then they can decided to either re evilate their moral objections, or fight in the smaller tourny, rather then removing the chance for our female fighters to fight against the best

Those who should miss out are those who make the choice. A Man can chose if he does or doesnt fight a woman. A Woman can not chose to be a man or a woman

Gawin Bladwell

men fighting women.

what makes you think men who don't want to fight women are in the minority? with the way i've been treated because of my views on this (shunned by all members of the local group) it would not surprise me to find out the number of men who don't want to fight women is quite high. but fight them anyway because they don't want to be treated the way i'm being treated, and the way other men and women who took this stand, have been treated. the fact is the SCA allows it's membership to treat both men and women with this view, in a very dishonorable way.

I can not speak for those of

I can not speak for those of your local group, though they should respect your choices. But unless either of us can produce some sort of evidence one way or another, it is all face vaule.

My point of view comes from the groups that I am involded, and the number of women involded and wanting to be involded in combat. These people have a vast range of experince from 20 odd years in the SCA to as new as 3 weeks.

As I said at the top, people shouldnt shunn you for your choice, they should respect that, as you should respect the choice made by female fights to compete.

It isnt like we are fighting for a large amount of Prize money, or the world title ...

Opinons cant be dishonorable, but actions can be ...


try saying that to the shire seneshal. and as opinions go, we have got this far because everybody was and still is so scared of offending feminist. now, most people will not say what they think because they don't want to be treated in a dishonorable way. in 1970 if a man had suggested allowing men to fight women in boxing or in any other sport, he would be very lucky if he didn't get his brains beat out. i know one guy who did. and he was fired from his job, could not get another because he wanted to beat women for sport, disowned by his parents and siblings, kicked out of the boxing gym (after the guys beat him silly), and lost all of his friends. and the cops would not arrest any of the boxers for beating up the guy. they just left him on the sidewalk. those were the days when men were honorable men. i will never fight a woman. i will always be against men beating women for sport. i will always openly tell people what i think about it. i will not be silenced. and if every man and woman who thought this way took a stand, we all just might be surprised at just how many there are and the impact they will have.

Yes that was in the 1970s

Yes that was in the 1970s ... almost 40 years ago. In 1950 women werent allowed to vote, was looked down on if they wanted to work, and due to the times was very subservent to the Man of the house.

These "feminist" that people are scared to offended. What are they excatly wanting. Equal standing to a guy (which is what they have always wanted)

Using the logic you apply to women fighters above, should each race of people have their own tourniments as well. It was not until years after the African-American Civil Rights Movement, did African-Americans start seeing equal treatment.

Again, I respect your opinon, but request you respect the opinon that all our fighters make, and remember if you make the choice not to fight a female fighter, that is YOUR choice, if she chooses to put her name on the list, that is HER choice.

Now in the post about the woman boxer taking on a man, you said it was humilating for a Man to lose to a Woman ... When I am bested by a fighter on the feild, no matter their gender, I still hold myself with honor.


to suggest that the races should have their own tourniments is an argument that never works, except to create a good laugh. feminins want equil rights based on the misguided idea that men and women are equil. yet even the government now admits we are not. and some will say that "i don't see gender, i only see an opponent" my guess is, that is your view. am i correct? while my view is: it's nothing more that a losers excuse to beat a woman. and what does women not being allowed to vote have to do with men beating women for sport? again, another argument that makes no sense. i do respect the woman's right to chose to fight, but i still think they should not be allowed to do so. an opinion i'm told is held by a substantial number of SCA members, both men and women. and a subject that was described to me as "a very sensitive subject". anyway, this weekend i will be attending my first event. will i see men beat women for sport? only but accident. if i know it's a man beating a woman, i'll turn and walk away and find something else to watch or look at. i will not tell anybody what i think about this subject. people are not comming to this event to here what i think. and i will not ruin everybodys weekend.

Fighting women

misguided idea that men and women are equil. yet even the government now admits we are not

"The government" (a vague citation -- which government, and what documented policy?) is not an unassailable moral compass. "The government" once held that slavery was acceptable and that women and minorities couldn't vote. Government policies evolve over time.

Also, being "equal" under the law does not imply being "identical" biologically.

nothing more that [sic] a losers excuse to beat a woman

Since when is SCA combat "beating" the opponent? I fight both men and women in the SCA. We don't "beat" each other -- we contend with one another in a mutually-enjoyable contest of skill. Is it wrong in your opinion to play chess against a woman? How about tennis? How about tackle football? I have listed several items in order of increasing "violence", starting with chess which has zero contact, tennis in which the woman could be struck by a ball you hit, and football wherein you deliberately block or tackle against the opponent. Where do you draw the line? How would you react if someone else said it's unchivalrous to play chess against a woman because you might damage her self-esteem? This is ridiculous.

SCA combat, when practiced responsibly, is no more violent than tackle football. If you are "beating" your opponent -- male or female -- then you are hitting too hard. That has nothing to do with gender.

I would never, ever, EVER strike a woman in anger (or anyone, except in self defense or to protect a loved one). On the other hand, I have enough respect for my female opponents on the list field, that I regard them as my equals.

Women on the list field are adults, with thinking minds and trained bodies. They are on the list field because they voluntarily choose to be there, just as I do. They are facing me because they want to test their skill against mine, and allow me to test my skill against theirs. No one is getting hurt. Both of us are having an enjoyable day, getting a good cardiac workout, and making new friends. The warriors I fight -- be they male or female -- deserve and expect that I will do my best against them. (I do make an exception when training a brand-new fighter, but that exception is based on their novice status and the fact that they are not yet able to fully defend themselves. I treat men and women the same in this regard.)

I know plenty of women -- and men -- who do not wish to put on armour and be struck by rattan. They simply don't choose to become fighters. No one is being forced into armour to be "beaten" by someone else.

I fully acknowledge your personal right not to fight women, even though I do not understand your rationale. Corpora says that no SCA combatant can be forced to face another combatant. But to imply that anyone who chooses to meet women as equals on the field of honor is somehow a violent woman-beater is completely wrong.

Chivalry does not mean protecting women; it means protecting the weak. The women who put on armour in the SCA are strong, skilled, and capable. They do not need my protection. They deserve, and will always receive, my respect as an equal.



i see that you and i have a difference of opinion that is not likely to change. our choice of words are different. you have no problem facing being public humiliation at losing to a woman in any competition. i one the other will not compete against any woman in any competition because i will place myself in such a position. There have been segments and TV programs such as dateline and 60 minutes were boys losing to girls in wrestling among other sports are so humiliated that they literally break down and cry almost hysterically right on the wrestling mat. In many cases these boys were so distraught that they had to be helped off the floor. These boys quit their teams, gave up a sport they been in all their life, quit school, some had emotional breakdowns. Now I hope, I truly hope, that you don't take the stand at these boys should deal with it, or they are not treating girls as equals, because it is extremely cruel and heartless thing to say to these boys. Several years ago a woman psychiatrist provided me with a very unique comparison that tends to stun everyone who reads/hears it, but I cannot print it here because it might be considered extremely offensive. It's neither vulgar or obscene, it's neither racist or sexist, but it's the comparisons made. May you have a pleasant day do you have a title in the SCA? If so would you tell me what it is. Kenny

re: again

you have no problem facing being public humiliation at losing to a woman in any competition. i one the other will not compete against any woman in any competition because i will place myself in such a position. There have been segments and TV programs such as dateline and 60 minutes were boys losing to girls in wrestling among other sports are so humiliated that they literally break down and cry almost hysterically right on the wrestling mat.

Everyone has a problem facing public humiliation, but I don't think losing to a worthy opponent is humiliating. Period.

It sounds to me as if you have some issues with women. This has nothing to do with the SCA, and a lot to do with your own emotional baggage.

As for the cases you cite of boys who break down emotionally after losing a wrestling match, I will say two things; First, these kids need to be in counseling if they are that insecure about women. Second, these kids' parents need to teach them that school sports are not the be-all, end-all of their lives.

And yes, I'm so cruel and heartless as to say these boys need to "deal with it." Definitely they need some adult guidance and/or professional counseling, but they do need to deal with it, because having an emotional breakdown and quitting school over losing a wrestling match is not a sign of good mental health. You don't get over a mental health issue by denying you have a problem. So yes, they need to deal with it. Not alone, but they need to deal with it.

I do have a title in the SCA, and it is entirely irrelevant here.


Whether you agree or

Whether you agree or disagree on a male versus female bout in boxing, in which I disagree, the one thing you can’t deny is that the guy who steps out and actually accepts that challenge has to have a wheelbarrow full of balls or just plain doesn’t give a hoot about what the critics say.Well, say hello to ‘Gentleman’ James Johnson, the guy who doesn’t own a wheelbarrow but could care less what may spew out of the naysayers mouths. Ann Wolfe said she would do it, the Mississippi Athletic Commission has approved it and James Johnson will accept it. Yes, on August 20th at the Mississippi Coast Coliseum in Biloxi, MS to the dismay and dislike of many fight fans veteran James Johnson, 18-14-2 (11), will face off against Ann Wolfe, 20-1 (14); yes, Ann Wolfe, the female boxer.No, this isn’t the first time a man and woman has fought one another, but this will probably be the most publicized and that is why James Johnson is taking this fight. Publicizing this bout brings opportunity to Johnson’s career – at least in his eyes it does. But is it good publicity? NO! But any publicity to James is well worth the ride. ------------------------- gwenstefni


to make beating a sport out of a man beating a woman with his fist? that is not a sport. if he loses he will have been publicly humiliated. not counting every female boxer will be demanding that men fight them. and as in the sca, there will come a time when men like myself who say I WILL NOT FIGHT WOMEN will be shunned and accused of not respecting women. mens honor and self esteem will, as in school wrestling, be ignored. and if he beats her, he will be the biggest woman bashing SOB on the planet. there is no honor in men hitting women, and i will never do it. even if it results in the SCA refusing to allow me to renew my membership next year, i will NEVER beat a woman and call it sport. in fact, i will never beat a woman at all except in defense of my life. and this boxing match, is it for next year?


he is a women beater and nothing else. and since animals and bugs don't beat their females for sport, that makes him nothing.

Her Choice


This Woman decided to fight this guy, She sought approval from the board, and organised the event. He has agreed to turn up ... but he is in the wrong ...

Now I am against domestic violence of any sort, this is a contact sport, which competing in it (no matter who it is against) you expect to get hit.

Would you be upset about a woman competing in the Tennis grand slams against men???

What about women Jockeys??

Now again this woman has made the choice to fight a guy, she has convinced a board of men that she will be able to hold her own, and convince an opponent that it will do him so good.

it's the same.

i know boys who were humiliated at being tackled by a girl in a football game. or being struck out by a girl in a baseball game. men are humiliated when they lose to women in any competition. so yes women and women should never be allowed to compete against each other. and this woman convinced him it will do him good? now that is.......i can't even come up with something to say about her actions. but it is never good for a man to lose to a woman in a fight or wrestling match or any contact sport. surveys have clearly shown both men and women say women have the added advantage of being female. because men/boys are anywhere from nervous to terrified they will lose to a woman/girl. and this guy, (women beaters are not men), will either win and be forever labeled a woman basher. or lose and forever be the butt of jokes, teasing, ridicule, and public humiliation. and when is this for? 2009?

The opinion of an actual woman

Here's the way I understand it: All SCA tourneys (except special purpose tourneys such as Crowns or novice tourneys) are open to all comers. If I put my name into the list, I fight whoever shows up each round. I don't get to pick and choose.

If you don't want to fight me because you'd be embarrassed to lose, then you should already be embarrassed -- by your lack of respect for me as an opponent. Do you also refuse to fight novices? Men over 50? There is always the chance of being beaten by a "weaker" opponent. So what? A strong man or woman can lose a fight without losing self-respect.

Refusing to fight the opponent you're assigned is called YIELDING, and it is a choice we always have. If you, "Commander," really consider this a matter of principle, then you should be willing to forfeit the bout in order to adhere to your principle.

If you're not willing to do that, then you are simply trying to rewrite Society rules to suit your notions of what a man's privileges should be. We don't let one person do that.

And by the way, a "Men only" tourney is on exactly the same level as Dennis the Menace putting a sign on his clubhouse saying "No Girls Allowed."


According to Corpora, no one can be required to fight in the SCA. No one can force you to enter the lists against anyone if you don't want to.

I am sure you have your reasons for not wanting to fight women, and they are valid for you. Not everyone will agree with you on that, however, so in polite conversation, you may find people inquiring as to why you won't do it, or trying to reason it out with you. You will not likely enjoy this.

We all have people we won't or don't want to fight for whatever reason. People should not deride you for not wanting to fight women, as that is your choice, but you will probably have to stick up for your decision.


My opinion

I've had a lot of problem at first with the local group who simply would not shut up and drop the subject. It got so bad that I finally had to go to the State human rights commission to inquire about the subject. And according to the commission, under the rule of law when anybody says the word no then that's the end of it. Because no means no and it doesn't matter if it's a man saying it, or if it's a woman saying it, when somebody says no that's the end of it. There is no further debate, there is no further discussion, and if people don't shut up about it, it constitutes an act of hostile environment sexual-harassment. In fact, the State human rights commission has already informed me, since everything is fully documented in writing by way of e-mail, that I do in fact have a valid complaint and have had for several months. So far I've chosen not to take any action because there is a one-year statute of limitations on filing a complaint with the commission or a two-year statute of limitations on bringing a civil action. It's like this, I don't have to explain anything, and I'm not going to. People can question me about it here online or anywhere away from any SCA event, or monthly business meeting of the local group, or any practice session, then I will talk to them about it. But if it's ever brought up again at any event or business meeting or practice session then there will be hell to pay. And somebody's actually try to make the excuse that since their volunteers with a nonprofit organization that they are exempt from sexual harassment law, but when the state commissioner read that she practically fell out of her chair. Because it's not true. Anybody can ask me anything about the subject anytime they want so long as it is not at any SCA event of any kind, and so long as nobody attempts any act of retaliation which is forbidden under state and federal law. Kenny