Speaking of rule changes, I'm kind of horrified by this new rule: blindfolds?

[HafDressage]

Since we've been chatting about rule changes lately:

http://horsesdaily.com/article/disabled-british-athlete-takes-paralympic-committee-fight-her-right-compete

I don't follow a lot of paradressage, but I happened to just see this article and I have to say I'm a bit disgusted at the International Paraolympic Committee. Apparently blind competitors must now wear blindfolds to compete. The idea that you would take away what limited sight someone might have is totally redic. Not to mention, forcing them to wear a blindfold seems archaic and humiliating.

Now, I am by no means the overly sensitive type about these types of things, but this does surprise me quite a bit.

[Bats79]

Oh my. That is a hard one to call. Should everyone be equally 'blind' when they are claiming it as a disability? They don't do this to other para riders.

How about if they made it a rule that everyone had to have the same length legs?

[Chisamba]

I agree with bats, hard to call. If you are completely blind is it unfair to expect you to complete against some one with limited vision? I know people with physical disabilities are categorized as A B or C, why not do the same with sight limits rather than further disable them with blindfold

[HafDressage]

Interesting. I have to say at first I thought the same thing about it being hard to call, but after reflection I don't think this is particularly hard to call.

First, no two disabilities are ever equal. Para riders within each of those classifications will vary from "just slipped in" to "almost needs to be in a more severe" category. Should the less impaired riders be subjected to some artificial additional impairment? The playing field will NEVER be perfectly even in this sport or in any sport ever. Perfect equality is a democratic principal, and while noble, it's not a reality of humanity. While I understand that the goal is to create an even playing field, in reality, there will always be variance in ability within any categorization system that involves humans.

Second, there are a million other options that could create more equality other than a blindfold. A different categorization system or having those with partial sight in one division and those with only light sensitivity in another. Or even a rule that simply says, you must exhibit X amount of vision impairment to compete and rule out those with partial vision. Lots of other options out there.

If as the article notes, the mission of the the paraolympics is to "enable ability within disability," then wearing a blindfold is very seriously off the mark.

What I am curious about is whether this rule change came about because para-athletes with sight thought the non-blindfold system was unfair or because there was concern about fairness among the vision impaired athletes themselves. Would be interesting to know what triggered this change.

[Cookie]

Interesting. I have to say at first I thought the same thing about it being hard to call, but after reflection I don't think this is particularly hard to call.

First, no two disabilities are ever equal. Para riders within each of those classifications will vary from "just slipped in" to "almost needs to be in a more severe" category. Should the less impaired riders be subjected to some artificial additional impairment? The playing field will NEVER be perfectly even in this sport or in any sport ever. Perfect equality is a democratic principal, and while noble, it's not a reality of humanity. While I understand that the goal is to create an even playing field, in reality, there will always be variance in ability within any categorization system that involves humans.

Second, there are a million other options that could create more equality other than a blindfold. A different categorization system or having those with partial sight in one division and those with only light sensitivity in another. Or even a rule that simply says, you must exhibit X amount of vision impairment to compete and rule out those with partial vision. Lots of other options out there.

Exactly what I was thinking. No 2 riders with musuloskeletal disabilities are the same. Granted they have grades of disabilities, but you can't tell me that within a grade there are some that are more or less "able". The blindfolding horrifies me too. Just my humble opinion... Maybe there's more to this ruling than we understand...

[Abby Kogler]

I went through the Para Steward Licensing course recently. The riders we met and those that I know personally have/had no problem with the blindfold rule.

The rating system is pretty thorough, and the rating decisions are not made arbitrarily. I think vision is in somewhat of a distinctive class, not really equal with the other grades/types of disabilities. Since the grade is 'blind', how *could* they define the various degrees of sightedness/non sightedness? they would have to make a whole new bunch of classes for the various levels of blindness. Sure, they *could*.

With what these athletes contend with, I get a sense that something like a blindfold is not something they would worry about. Personally, after being in the world a little bit, I don't have a problem with it either nor do I find it humiliating or horrifying.

Para is a whole nother world. What I got out of it the most, along with learning the rules, protocols, etc etc etc that are part of any FEI licensing system, is how competitive they are. They are absolutely in it to win it. What they aren't, is hung up on stuff like blindfolds. IME/O

[Kathy Johnson]

I think it's discrimination. But that doesn't surprise me in dressage. So, if one rider has a full leg that doesn't work, and the other rider has half a leg, are they going to cut off the full leg? Ridiculous. The horses are the great equalizers. This sport is hard enough--they don't have to handicap it. The rider in the article feels the same way.

She believes this ruling not only contradicts the essence of the Paralympics, enabling ability within disability, but also puts her and her horse in danger, and challenges her basic human rights.

[hoopoe]

I think the only people who should be allowed to vote / decide on something like this are the vision impaired riders themselves
no judges no administrators

no one else

[angela9823]

I'm torn on this one. How do you judge those that can see light/shadows against those that don't see at all? I don't think the horse can equalize the situation here. Just watch the difference in that rider when she gets a blindfold on. She didn't ride the same horse even. She said she couldn't trot when blind folded. IMO, that means she could see enough previously to at least distinguish things. How can you compare that to a completely blind rider? I realize the situation is the same for riders with partial legs versus those with none. But the equipment differs between those riders too. They can have handles on the saddles, equipment to hold them in the saddle...things that can equalize the situation more. In other words, something like a blindfold that would equalize the situation with seeing impairments.

[Kathy Johnson]

Why equalize? We can show horses who are half blind, fully blind, and we don't require them to wear blindfolds. Add more divisions, but do NOT make the job of the rider any harder than it already is. I get someone probably cheated. But don't penalize the rest of the contestants. Totally ridiculous and discriminatory.

[Chisamba]

I have been doing a bit of reading about this, because although it sounded pretty strange to require blindfolds, i wanted to hear what the other perspective on this was. i could not find anything specific to equestrian, however, i did notice that all the other sight limited sports wear blindfolds.



perhaps there was an objection to the unfairness of partial sightedness competing against truly blind riders, or perhaps it was done to bring it in alignment with other para sports for those with limited sight. the images of other athletes competing in blind folds makes the equestrian objections seem a lot less significant.

[Chisamba]

[Abby Kogler]

Why equalize? We can show horses who are half blind, fully blind, and we don't require them to wear blindfolds. Add more divisions, but do NOT make the job of the rider any harder than it already is. I get someone probably cheated. But don't penalize the rest of the contestants. Totally ridiculous and discriminatory.

Then you would have a many divisions that only have one rider. There would be no way otherwise.

Get to know some Para competitors and ask how they feel about it. Try to volunteer at some Para shows. Hang out with the riders and the stewards and the judges. It will give you a lot of insight.

I don't think this is discrimanitory in the least. I think it keeps that visual grade competitions fair. I don't see a single issue with it being against anyones Basic Human Rights(tm). You choose to ride in Para competitions. You choose to follow the rules. You go through the grading process. It is pretty complete and thorough. There is a lot of adaptive equipment out there in attempt to even things up. You can request additional equipment and get it approved. If you are partially sighted and you choose to compete in the blind division, you wear a blindfold.

It was required in 2011 as far as I can tell.

http://paralympics.org.uk/paralympicsports/equestrian

I don't agree with her at all, and wonder how the PtB in Para feel about her and her suit, and how the other riders feel. As Chisamba points out, this is not exclusive to para equestrian.

[Moutaineer]

My knee jerk reaction was horrified, but then when I think about it, I believe that's a sighted person's thought process. I'm inclined to agree with Abby on this one.

I will have to ask my para friends what they think.

[Hot4Spots]

I think the term "blindfold" is part of the problem. I mean, actual blindfolds, like sleep masks (or "Would you like a blindfold before we execute you?" *shudder*) Just sounds like it would look weird and it just DOES create a kneejerk negative reaction. Perhaps they'll implement it more - what's the word I want? - thoughtfully? and say they have to wear opaque wraparound sunglasses? That would create a better "appearance" even if the effect is the same as a blindfold.

[Chisamba]

They are allowed to wear black out sunglasses too, they just have to be approved

[Abby Kogler]

This is from a FB post by a GB Para competitor:

"As a rider on the GB Paralympic squad, I feel I need to clear a few things up here. Whilst I admire Verity's tenacity, there has to be a limit for the number of disability classifications in Paralympic sport, so blind athletes are split into 2 in dressage - completely blind and partially sighted. I think the rule Verity is actually against is that she can no longer compete in a less disabled class (she would be nearer blind than partially sighted) and the partially sighted only have to wear dark glasses. I think this rule on not competing in a higher class is in general fair, but special cases should be looked at.
I'm afraid that there are a lot of disabilities which do not "fit in" to the Paralympics. I advise Verity to either fight the rule to be able to compete at Grade 4, or relearn to ride with a blindfold at Grade 3 - it's only fair for the completely blind riders. You've done it before - I have no doubt you can do it again!
The standard is extremely high in GB for Para dressage - we've won team gold at every major Championships since the sport began. Internationally you would have to get 70-80% in order to even be on the shortlist to be selected for Rio. Perhaps see you at Tokyo! Let me know if I can be any more help."

It would nice if before people got all pantied up that they actually look at the existing rules and talk to people actually competing and working in Para competitions and find out more about what the topic is actually about. Without knowing anything about this competitor and her reasons for the suit, or the existing rules in Eq or other Para competitions, everybody is all 'Discrimination! Human Rights Abuse! Humiliation! blah blah blah" which to a point I understand since on the surface this could appear in a bad light. But wouldnt it be nice to just try o get more information and to be aware that it is easy to be manipulated on line these days, and to maybe be a little on guard against it? And actually, it would be even nicer if people actually researched lots of things before believing and joining the various social media storms that we see occurring in general. (Clock boy comes to mind)

Im sure I sound defenseive and I guess I am...but having met so many Para riders and judges and Chris Porterfield and Loretta and some of the graders and other admins and workers and seeing how hard they try and what everyone goes through to be graded, to compete, to judge, etc etc etc the knee jerk reaction rubs me wrong (and not just hear, its all over various FB groups) I don't agree with Verity. I think her suit actually diminishes the struggle that ALL para riders go through. It also reminds me of the long ago suit by whats her face, Debbie ?? who sued the AHSA?now USEF Olympic Committee in the 80s cause she didn't get picked for the team. The rings from that rock thrown in to that pond lasted for years and in so many really bad ways. Verity strikes me the same way.

[HafDressage]

It would nice if before people got all pantied up that they actually look at the existing rules and talk to people actually competing and working in Para competitions and find out more about what the topic is actually about. Without knowing anything about this competitor and her reasons for the suit, or the existing rules in Eq or other Para competitions, everybody is all 'Discrimination! Human Rights Abuse! Humiliation! blah blah blah" which to a point I understand since on the surface this could appear in a bad light. But wouldnt it be nice to just try o get more information and to be aware that it is easy to be manipulated on line these days, and to maybe be a little on guard against it? And actually, it would be even nicer if people actually researched lots of things before believing and joining the various social media storms that we see occurring in general. (Clock boy comes to mind)

Because people feel differently than you, they are ignorant or being manipulated, etc.? And, furthermore, by taIking to your para friends, you have the right answer? I'm not so sure about those things.

I honestly don't care about the reasons behind this one particular woman's battle, nor the attempted justification that other athletes in other sports also wear blindfolds. I still find it relatively horrifying that a device (blindfold, sunglasses, etc.) would be used to further handicap people. Now I do agree that creating delineations in the sport to match everyone's needs is a difficult task, but surely there is a better solution than further limiting those with a disability, making them more disabled.

Whether this specific person is doing it for a personal benefit or not is not my concern. My understanding is that this was a controversial rule in the first place, so to assume that it was only 1 rider that was upset for personal reasons is naive. Rather than getting involved in the politics of the sport on either side of this issue, it only takes a little bit of reason to understand that this rule has some very serious conceptual flaws attached to it.

[Kathy Johnson]

How many time have we all shown in open dressage at rated shows with only one or two in the class and gotten a first or second? Who cares? It's the scores that count, right?

Because I have actually ridden with a disability dispensation, I am a little sensitive about this topic . I found the whole process extremely discriminatory and horrific for the exact reasons Valerie states. Don't make assumptions about what I know or don't know.

[ejm]

A good friend of mine is totally blind and competed for years as a Grade 3 rider. She had no problem with the blindfold and feels strongly that it evened the playing field for her because a number of the blind riders actually had considerably more vision than she did. She listened to the video and said, it's a horse show, people will take any advantage they can, and if Verity doesn't want to wear a blindfold she's free to compete as a Grade 4 rider.

FWIW, my friend competes in dressage at open schooling shows using "living letters" and is quite competitive locally. She keeps her horses at home and does all the care and day-to-day riding and training herself, with occasional lessons and clinics.