![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Feel free to argue with me.
Dec. 3rd, 2007 01:35 pmToys for Tots, and its promotion by the SCA, gives me the creeps.
This is not in fact a criticism of the program, per se. I don't see anything wrong with it.
I have a problem with it being pushed as pretty much the only community-involvement activity of SCA groups, especially because it is pretty much tied to a) luxuries, and b) direct personal contacts with Marines in the SCA, not that I have anything against Marines as such most of the time. It's a feel-good program, with little personal impact on the community or the people it serves. In terms of the social services available to families living below the poverty line, it has the least impact from what I've seen in my experiences with such families. It seems to me like a throwaway program designed to make people feel good about themselves and be uncontroversial-- no matter what your level of suspicion of poor people, you can't argue with giving an (unrequested) toy (of your choice) to someone's child, even if you are convinced that people who have no money aren't 'deserving'.
But the biggest problem I have with Toys for Tots is its widespread endorsement of and involvement in by local SCA chapters and kingdoms. I think the biggest weakness of the SCA is that in forming its own little community, it's divorced its members from attempts to become part of their local communities of residence. It's tempting to cocoon ourselves in situations where we care deeply about faraway people, and don't know or care about the person who lives 2 doors down our street.
This is not in fact a criticism of the program, per se. I don't see anything wrong with it.
I have a problem with it being pushed as pretty much the only community-involvement activity of SCA groups, especially because it is pretty much tied to a) luxuries, and b) direct personal contacts with Marines in the SCA, not that I have anything against Marines as such most of the time. It's a feel-good program, with little personal impact on the community or the people it serves. In terms of the social services available to families living below the poverty line, it has the least impact from what I've seen in my experiences with such families. It seems to me like a throwaway program designed to make people feel good about themselves and be uncontroversial-- no matter what your level of suspicion of poor people, you can't argue with giving an (unrequested) toy (of your choice) to someone's child, even if you are convinced that people who have no money aren't 'deserving'.
But the biggest problem I have with Toys for Tots is its widespread endorsement of and involvement in by local SCA chapters and kingdoms. I think the biggest weakness of the SCA is that in forming its own little community, it's divorced its members from attempts to become part of their local communities of residence. It's tempting to cocoon ourselves in situations where we care deeply about faraway people, and don't know or care about the person who lives 2 doors down our street.
