Eventing Nation booted from covering Event in Unionville, PA

[MorganSercu]

@Gardenhorse

I’m not questioning his contribution to the sport. I am wondering whether his reactions to EN’s initial request (which from my understanding went to him and not the landowner) is part of what blew this up into a crazy drama and led to the landowner withdrawing his support. I’m just wondering about all the parts in between EN’s initial email and the landowner cancelling the lease. There is a lot that we don’t know. And we’ll probably never know all the details.

If it went to him then it went to the BOD. At least one member commented on the tone of the emails (pl). He can’t make unilateral decisions.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@Equibrit - thanks. After reading it, I now vaguely recollect it going around the first time. But I don’t seem to recollect whether it’s was ever clear that LW wrote it? And I still am confused as to whether these were hypothetical stories, or real stories. Lord knows there are enough actual stories that real people have come forward with to raise awareness.

Uggh. I’ll leave it at that.

I will own that I do tend to reflexively support anyone who chooses to share on having gone through something challenging they have experienced personally with respect to MeToo or SafeSport related topics… but sadly… like with everything else lately that gets SO intense when everyone focuses in on it… those topics also seem to have turned into more of an ideological/political/social justice topic for many folks… rather than a personal one. And that is not something I personally relate too. Those are very personal topics for me. And politicizing issues like that makes me sad.

Im not saying that was the purpose of their 2017 essay. But I do think the recent editorializing around Plantation Field? It was extremely political in nature, and EN and their supporters are all on one side of a divide, and don’t seem to believe that middle ground or different viewpoints exist. Uggh.

[Jealoushe]

@Virginia Horse Mom

@Equibrit - thanks. After reading it, I now vaguely recollect it going around the first time. But I don’t seem to recollect whether it’s was ever clear that LW wrote it? And I still am confused as to whether these were hypothetical stories, or real stories. Lord knows there are enough actual stories that real people have come forward with to raise awareness.

Uggh. I’ll leave it at that.

I will own that I do tend to reflexively support anyone who chooses to share on having gone through something challenging they have experienced personally with respect to MeToo or SafeSport related topics… but sadly… like with everything else lately that gets SO intense when everyone focuses in on it… those topics also seem to have turned into more of an ideological/political/social justice topic for many folks… rather than a personal one. And that is not something I personally relate too. Those are very personal topics for me. And politicizing issues like that makes me sad.

Im not saying that was the purpose of their 2017 essay. But I do think the recent editorializing around Plantation Field? It was extremely political in nature, and EN and their supporters are all on one side of a divide, and don’t seem to believe that middle ground or different viewpoints exist. Uggh.

She has come forward on Podcasts to say she was the subject of the story. At the time it was anonymous.

[Horsegirl_s_Mom]

When this first happened, I thought for sure USEA and USEF will be able to smooth things over and get the event back on track. But the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this is irreparable. Now that the issue has blown up, are the pro- name change folks just going to drop the issue? Of course not; there will be continuing pressure on the landowner and calls for boycotts of the event next year. The LO is not just going to give in, since he’s already shown he doesn’t care whether an event is held on his property or not. Meanwhile, anyone who advocates going slow and letting the “Plantation” name stick for a while will be called “racist” all over social media, which is already happening.

It’s hard to see any compromise solution that would be acceptable to the EN purists and like-minded thinkers, but maybe people who are more sophisticated negotiators than I can see a path??

[pluvinel]

@Gardenhorse

All I’m saying is that I don’t think the event organizer is blameless in this debacle.

So perhaps you can share what reaction you feel would be “appropriate.”

Here is a 79 year old man who has been organizing eventing competitions for + 40 years…eg., since before the EN writers were born. (Chesterland was run in the mid-1970’s-80’s).

He busts his ass for +40 years and develops two different world-class international eventing competitions (Fair Hill and Plantation Field…actually 3 if you include Chesterland).

One day two “youngsters” from some internet blog show up on his doorstep demanding (not asking) that he change the name of his labor of love (for what else is putting together a horse competition) or they will go to the commercial media claiming the name of his life’s work is somehow racist…and imply that he is racist himself if he does not comply.

He is known to be outspoken. He is proud of his work. What would you do? How would you approach him?

Please broaden my mind because I am actually really interested to hear how people perceive that threatening the organizer was appropriate and how the organizers deserves any blame for telling the young whipper-snappers to go kiss off…to put it nicely.

[Jealoushe]

@pluvinel

So perhaps you can share what reaction you feel would be “appropriate.”

Here is a 79 year old man who has been organizing eventing competitions for + 40 years…eg., since before the EN writers were born. (Chesterland was run in the mid-1970’s-80’s).

He busts his ass for +40 years and develops two different world-class international eventing competitions (Fair Hill and Plantation Field…actually 3 if you include Chesterland).

One day two “youngsters” from some internet blog show up on his doorstep demanding (not asking) that he change the name of his labor of love (for what else is putting together a horse competition) or they will go to the commercial media claiming the name of his life’s work is somehow racist…and imply that he is racist himself if he does not comply.

He is known to be outspoken. He is proud of his work. What would you do? How would you approach him?

Please broaden my mind because I am actually really interested to hear how people perceive that threatening the organizer was appropriate and how the organizers deserves any blame for telling the young whipper-snappers to go kiss off…to put it nicely.

Are you sure this is how it really went down though? I haven’t seen a lot of info on what process actually happened.

[pluvinel]

@Jealoushe

Are you sure this is how it really went down though? I haven’t seen a lot of info on what process actually happened.

I am not “sure” of anything. I am not a fly on the wall. I am not omniscient. I was not privy to any of the communications.

Do you differ with the “big picture” of the story…eg., reading the 36 pages of this thread, what seems to have transpired is that someone(s) approached a person, who has diligently worked for +40 years in his field of expertise, and requested he change the name of his work product.

What would be your reaction?

[Gardenhorse]

@pluvinel

So perhaps you can share what reaction you feel would be “appropriate.”

Here is a 79 year old man who has been organizing eventing competitions for + 40 years…eg., since before the EN writers were born. (Chesterland was run in the mid-1970’s-80’s).

He busts his ass for +40 years and develops two different world-class international eventing competitions (Fair Hill and Plantation Field…actually 3 if you include Chesterland).

One day two “youngsters” from some internet blog show up on his doorstep demanding (not asking) that he change the name of his labor of love (for what else is putting together a horse competition) or they will go to the commercial media claiming the name of his life’s work is somehow racist…and imply that he is racist himself if he does not comply.

He is known to be outspoken. He is proud of his work. What would you do? How would you approach him?

Please broaden my mind because I am actually really interested to hear how people perceive that threatening the organizer was appropriate and how the organizers deserves any blame for telling the young whipper-snappers to go kiss off…to put it nicely.

I don’t know how EN first approached him. If they actually initially brought up the idea that the name was offensive to some people and perhaps it should be changed in a reasoned, non-threatening manner, and his immediate reaction was “kiss off, you young whipper-snappers”, then yes, I think he was part of the problem. In my opinion, being a 79-year old man who is known to be outspoken doesn’t give you the right to act like an a-hole.

Take race out of the discussion. Consider that someone came to you and told you that something you were doing that you thought was completely innocuous had offended them? Would you immediately get defensive and tell them to kiss-off? Would you say, I’m older than you, how dare you question anything I do? Or would you ask questions and engage in a discussion to try to understand why this apparently innocuous issue was a problem?

To be clear - I don’t think EN is blameless. I thought they were an equestrian news organization, I don’t know when they transformed themselves into a social justice advocacy organization. They have said contradictory things about whether they knew there was a chance of the event ending because of this issue. Threats are clearly unacceptable. They obviously contributed to the escalation of the issue. There are other approaches they could have taken rather than going on a crusade to change the name - I personally think that adding an asterisk after the name of the event in their coverage and including a paragraph on the history of the name could have met their desire to not appear to be racially insensitive given that the event location does not actually have any associations with slavery.

I just think that it usually takes at least two parties behaving badly to escalate things to this level. But, I think I’ve made that point as well as I am capable of, so I’ll let you all go back to the EN bashing.

[Jealoushe]

@pluvinel

I am not “sure” of anything. I am not a fly on the wall. I am not omniscient. I was not privy to any of the communications.

Do you differ with the “big picture” of the story…eg., reading the 36 pages of this thread, what seems to have transpired is that someone(s) approached a person, who has diligently worked for +40 years in his field of expertise, and requested he change the name of his work product.

What would be your reaction?

honestly I would just try and change the name and think of the bigger picture, but I am not holding this man or anyone to have to react the way I did.

I just think the details are important. We don’t know what was said or done, so it is hard to judge one side more harshly than the other without the nitty gritty IMO. I think the actual timeline and conversations back and forth would ultimately clear up a lot of this drama.

[pluvinel]

@Gardenhorse

I don’t know how EN first approached him. If they actually initially brought up the idea that the name was offensive to some people and perhaps it should be changed in a reasoned, non-threatening manner, and his immediate reaction was “kiss off, you young whipper-snappers”, then yes, I think he was part of the problem. In my opinion, being a 79-year old man who is known to be outspoken doesn’t give you the right to act like an a-hole.

Take race out of the discussion. Consider that someone came to you and told you that something you were doing that you thought was completely innocuous had offended them? Would you immediately get defensive and tell them to kiss-off? Would you say, I’m older than you, how dare you question anything I do? Or would you ask questions and engage in a discussion to try to understand why this apparently innocuous issue was a problem?

To be clear - I don’t think EN is blameless. I thought they were an equestrian news organization, I don’t know when they transformed themselves into a social justice advocacy organization. They have said contradictory things about whether they knew there was a chance of the event ending because of this issue. Threats are clearly unacceptable. They obviously contributed to the escalation of the issue. There are other approaches they could have taken rather than going on a crusade to change the name - I personally think that adding an asterisk after the name of the event in their coverage and including a paragraph on the history of the name could have met their desire to not appear to be racially insensitive given that the event location does not actually have any associations with slavery.

I just think that it usually takes at least two parties behaving badly to escalate things to this level. But, I think I’ve made that point as well as I am capable of, so I’ll let you all go back to the EN bashing.

As I said, I don’t know who said what to whom.

I will say that being a woman “of a certain age” and the daughter of a highly opinionated 95 year old, I have learned that you tread carefully.

I have learned in my professional work that if someone challenges a person’s life work and you start to criticize how they chose to name their work product…and by inference you criticize the person him/herself…then in my small, humble opinion, it is incumbent on those doing the “challenging” to comport themselves in such a way so as not to engender the “immune reaction.”

[Jealoushe]

The rumors in the comment section of EN suggest the land owner refused to even discuss this with anyone/the board and cancelled the lease based on the question/suggestion alone. So I think we all might benefit from waiting for more details to come out, before we can lay blame.

[atl_hunter]

@Jealoushe

The rumors in the comment section of EN suggest the land owner refused to even discuss this with anyone/the board and cancelled the lease based on the question/suggestion alone. So I think we all might benefit from waiting for more details to come out, before we can lay blame.

Perhaps the landowner knew the actual cost of changing the name, unlike all the people who think it’s a pretty simple thing to do and that it’s just a few hundred dollars (it’s not) and that it wasn’t up for negotiation? To your point, why not wait for all the details to come out before laying blame? Have you ever actually had to change the name of something, other than a pet? If so, you might have more of an understanding of what was actually being requested. If not, then you might want to back off a bit on your constant suggestion that it’s not a big deal, as it actually is as I’ve explained upthread.

[MorganSercu]

@Jealoushe

honestly I would just try and change the name and think of the bigger picture, but I am not holding this man or anyone to have to react the way I did.

I just think the details are important. We don’t know what was said or done, so it is hard to judge one side more harshly than the other without the nitty gritty IMO. I think the actual timeline and conversations back and forth would ultimately clear up a lot of this drama.

Part of the details and bigger picture is that changing the name of a venue/business isn’t cheap. It’s not just the name, it is everything. Atl_Hunter laid it out earlier in this thread. It also affects sponsors. Nor can it be done in a matter of months.

PFEE is a 501c3 and a total outlay of $50,000 - $100,000 would have destroyed it. Fundraising to benefit kids is one thing. Fundraising to change a name would have been a wicked hard sell, no matter how good you are at doing it.

[pluvinel]

@Jealoushe

The rumors in the comment section of EN suggest the land owner refused to even discuss this with anyone/the board and cancelled the lease based on the question/suggestion alone. So I think we all might benefit from waiting for more details to come out, before we can lay blame.

Blame???

The “blame” is always on those who stir the pot. You either get a good stew, or the pot boils over.

I don’t know what EN comments your are reading. This owner is minding his own business for 20 years, quietly leading his life in relative obscurity and this hits his radar. Why should he add hassle to his life when he can just say good-bye?

Let this be a lesson to be learned. A lesson I personally have learned thru the school of (very) hard knocks.

[MorganSercu]

Oops. I must have been typing while atl_hunter was posting. So my post isn’t yelling at you, Jealoushe - simply crossed wires.

[Djones]

@Gardenhorse

I don’t know how EN first approached him. If they actually initially brought up the idea that the name was offensive to some people and perhaps it should be changed in a reasoned, non-threatening manner, and his immediate reaction was “kiss off, you young whipper-snappers”, then yes, I think he was part of the problem. In my opinion, being a 79-year old man who is known to be outspoken doesn’t give you the right to act like an a-hole.

Take race out of the discussion. Consider that someone came to you and told you that something you were doing that you thought was completely innocuous had offended them? Would you immediately get defensive and tell them to kiss-off? Would you say, I’m older than you, how dare you question anything I do? Or would you ask questions and engage in a discussion to try to understand why this apparently innocuous issue was a problem?

To be clear - I don’t think EN is blameless. I thought they were an equestrian news organization, I don’t know when they transformed themselves into a social justice advocacy organization. They have said contradictory things about whether they knew there was a chance of the event ending because of this issue. Threats are clearly unacceptable. They obviously contributed to the escalation of the issue. There are other approaches they could have taken rather than going on a crusade to change the name - I personally think that adding an asterisk after the name of the event in their coverage and including a paragraph on the history of the name could have met their desire to not appear to be racially insensitive given that the event location does not actually have any associations with slavery.

I just think that it usually takes at least two parties behaving badly to escalate things to this level. But, I think I’ve made that point as well as I am capable of, so I’ll let you all go back to the EN bashing.

the answer depends on so many things, such as the strength of my relationship with that person, how they tell me, how they approach me, and whether or not I ultimately trust them and believe them to be fair in their dealings with me. If I don’t know them from Adam’s house cat, then I’m going to be even more on guard, thinking wait, who are you to me, and how do I know you? is this real and fair? What is going on?

[Jealoushe]

@atl_hunter

Perhaps the landowner knew the actual cost of changing the name, unlike all the people who think it’s a pretty simple thing to do and that it’s just a few hundred dollars (it’s not) and that it wasn’t up for negotiation? To your point, why not wait for all the details to come out before laying blame? Have you ever actually had to change the name of something, other than a pet? If so, you might have more of an understanding of what was actually being requested. If not, then you might want to back off a bit on your constant suggestion that it’s not a big deal, as it actually is as I’ve explained upthread.

why exactly are you yelling at me? Where did I say it wasn’t a big deal? Calm down. I’m aware of the costs, I actually battled Ontario Eventing last year on their wants to “rebrand” over the cost (they did it anyways).

[pluvinel]

@Jealoushe

Are you sure this is how it really went down though? I haven’t seen a lot of info on what process actually happened.

Since COTH is “reputable publication”…here is a link to their story which seems to have a good bit of detail.
https://www.chronofhorse.com/article/name-controversy-ends-plantation-field-events

[Jealoushe]

@pluvinel

Blame???

The “blame” is always on those who stir the pot. You either get a good stew, or the pot boils over.

I don’t know what EN comments your are reading. This owner is minding his own business for 20 years, quietly leading his life in relative obscurity and this hits his radar. Why should he add hassle to his life when he can just say good-bye?

Let this be a lesson to be learned. A lesson I personally have learned thru the school of (very) hard knocks.

So if the rumor is true (hypothetical) and the LO just cancelled the event at the mere suggestion of a name change you don’t think that is a bit over dramatic? To not even allow or participate in a discussion?

My point was not to argue for either side. My point was that we don’t have enough information right now to know what really went down.

[Jealoushe]

@pluvinel

Since COTH is “reputable publication”…here is a link to their story which seems to have a good bit of detail.
https://www.chronofhorse.com/article…n-field-events

On Aug. 19, Eventing Nation editor Leslie Wylie took the topic to Denis Glaccum, organizer and owner of Plantation Field Equestrian Events.

Glaccum and Walker did not agree to change the name of the 300-acre site, which has been in the Walker family for generations.

The 2019 Plantation Field International program explains, “The Plantation Field, also known as Logan’s Field, received its names from two sources. A Mr. Logan built the large foundation—long in ruin—with stone from a quarry on the property. Failing to persuade his wife to move so far out in the country, he never finished building a house. Fifty years ago a group of Boy Scouts received permission from Mr. Stewart to plant bushes over in the woods thus the name Plantation Field.”

“Plantation Field will not change its name,” Glaccum said a day before the lease was terminated. “The owner has said that and considers it an insult to his grandfather and a lot of people who don’t know what they’re talking about. [Eventing Nation] believes ‘plantation’ should be never used again. That’s an extreme view, and it’s nonsense. I never even thought of the word in that context. I’ve explained all this to [Wylie] and others, and said, you really don’t know your history because this is an abolitionist area, part of the Underground Railroad. This property was never farmed until the 20[SUP]th[/SUP] century when it was nothing more than grass and hay. There was no slavery involved, I can assure you that.”

Glaccum added, “It’s like tearing a statue down. What good is tearing down for ending racial division? Absolutely nothing, it creates more. So no, there’s not going to be a name change.”

It really doesn’t seem like the owners were open to having any sort of discussion over it but again maybe details are missing. Unfortunate for everyone.