OT: Chivalry on the Field vs. Chivalry in the Parlor (was Re: SC - Re: Worst Critique Ever)

[Catherine Deville]

Ras said:
> Actually the SCA is very much focused on courtesy and chivalry. It is
when
> chivalric behavior is confused with courteous behavior that the  problem
> begins. :-(

Just as a point of clarification, I am not confused on this issue mi'Lord,
our viewpoints may simply differ...
    What has been occuring has been verbal sparring...  while it may not be
a medieval concept that chivalric behavior is as applicable to verbal
battle as it is to physical battle, I would consider them so (and during my
stint in the SCA it was traditionally considered so, even if only here in
the South.)

    Which means that the metaphorical concepts of "you don't attack from
behind" (i.e., you don't attack an opponant indirectly e.g. by posting
criticism in a forum where they do not participate rather than addressing
the issue with them directly) and you "fight fair" (i.e., you address the
*issues*, you do not use ad hominim.)  Not to do so is not only
discourteous, (at leat by the more broadly excepted rules of netiquette,)
but is also "unchivalrous" from a debating viewpoint.

If we can't even act chivalrously when our only weapons are words, then how
can we expect honor when there is a sword in our hand?   Again, I grant
that this may have to do more with modern "Southern" concepts of Chivalry
than with medieval concepts of Chivalry, but when I was in the SCA both
applied, at least in Meridies.

So when I *say* chivalry and courtesy, I do mean that I am addressing
*both* concepts, not confusing one for the other.

I remain, in service to Meridies,
Lady Celia des L'archier