SC - earning awards

[Tara Sersen]

>I am a bit dumbfounded that the merit of an award recipient
>should be questioned simply because he or she has a
>disability.  I know you said you meant no disrespect, but
>it's like saying you wonder if someone with black hair
>really deserved their rank or award, or maybe was pitied
>because their hair wasn't the more respectable blond.  

I disagree.  I think it's more like asking if a blind person who recieved a
Laurel for embroidery came by it fairly.  In the past, old ladies continued
to sew and knit and spin after going blind, so it's certainly not impossible...
but, one has to wonder if the end product is of suitable quality, if the person
is able to perform appropriate research and to teach her skills effectively.
 Your blindness, milady, bears no relationship to your singing ability.  At
worst, it might make research a bit more complicated.  From what I hear of such
disabilities, your blindness may make your singing even better - as I'm sure
you know, when people lose one sense, their other senses tend to sharpen to
compensate.  So, your ear is probably far better than mine will ever be.

I have seen disabled people in athletics who do some awesome things - I read
about a man who lost a leg a few short years ago who ran a marathon on a prosthetic
last month.  So, I do not doubt that it's possible for such a disabled person
to attain the rank of chivalry fairly.  But, given the SCA's focus on that one
area of knighthood, it's still incredible.  Not knowing the person myself, I
have no way of knowing for sure if he did acheive it fairly.  Chivalry dictates
that I assume that he did, and I'm perfectly happy to give him the benefit of
the doubt.  But that phrase - Benefit of the Doubt - implies that there is doubt,
or at least a slight wondering.  As glad as I am to believe it, I'd still like
it if someone confirmed it for me so I can go around proudly and say, Look what
someone has accomplished in our Society!

OTOH, unlike that fictional blind embroiderer, a disabled knight is by far still
able to do the other things neccisary to be a knight.  He can certainly be chivalrous,
can excel in an art and at service, and can teach fighting even if he can't
(and I'm not saying that he can't!) do it adequately himself.  He can be an
awesome tactician and an exemplary member of his class, even if he does fall
short in one area.  As I recall, being a member of the Chivalry has to do with
an awful lot more than fighting, and historically many people were knighted
who never fought.  Heck, look at Sir Paul McCartney!  Did playing Obi-Wan Kenobi
count as fighting for Sir Alec Guiness?  ;)  I'm told this goes back historically,
too, to our period; But, I don't know of any good examples off the top of my
head.

- -Magdalena