George Morris on the SS list

[smoofox]

@Zirgs

My father immigrated to the USA because of dictatorship that arrested both of his parents based on their association with the democratic leader. He grew up with Aunts and Uncles. In the USA he served the military and the many decades as USA Deparment Of Justice Attorney in Charge held the highest clearance serving Presidents in both parties. His cases have been upheld by the Supreme Court. Annually our home was inspected by investigators, to ensure integrity.

I uphold our Constitution.

When we stray from a land based on laws, we all will suffer in the long run.

And yet you feel that SafeSport rules should be ignored/abolished… when it is the law.

As an aside - what is the position of DOJ Attorney in Charge? Do you mean Attorney General?

[OneGrayPony]

@prairiewind2

IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED. IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED. IT WAS NOT ACCEPTED. How often must I say this? I WAS THERE. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A TIME IN MY LIFE WHEN IT WAS ACCEPTED FOR TEACHERS TO RAPE UNDERAGE STUDENTS. Period. I have no idea where you lived, or even if you were a teenager 50 years ago. But where you lived must have been pretty bizarre.

RAPE is sexual abuse, but not all sexual abuse is rape.

We do not know that any of these people are guilty of rape, but we DO know that they are guilty of sexual abuse. THAT definition has changed.

Please read my other post, then maybe I will have made myself more clear. I just really don’t even know what to say at this point.

Actually, I’ll quote myself, to make it a bit easier:

Thanks poltroon - it is a huge problem for sure.

And I think those of us who knew about these things may not be judged kindly in the future when things come to light.

I know one in my region, and I don't even know if there's anything to be done at this juncture. There were whispers then, but they were just whispers. They are married now. At the time, it was accepted. Not acceptable, but accepted. Should those of us who saw it as skeevy have said something? Yes, that would have benefitted her and probably stopped a predator. But it was culturally accepted (not acceptable) so no one said anything. 

So that people can maybe understand my position - I was definitely groomed by much older men in my early teens - think 12-13 years old. At the time, I saw the attention as flattering, and at the time I had absolutely no comprehension that it was something to be alarmed by.

I see it as a benefit that I'm seeing those things now as not okay. I wish the adults around me had seen it as not ok, but they didn't. I was told that it was natural for older men to take an interest in young women. I was told that I was just "early to be sexually attractive". It *was* culturally acceptable in the 90s to call a 12 year old sexy. 

I still struggle with my rape in my early 20s because of the conversations around what a woman should and should not do and the cultural acceptance of blame because of drinking to excess (both me and my rapist)

Was it wrong then? Yes. Was it accepted then societally that it was my fault? Yes. Is it still? That's starting to change.

It's a GOOD thing, but what I wouldn't have given for someone back in the 90s to say to me "hey, I get it that you were drinking, but it still isn't ok". But that didn't happen because at that point in time it was tacitly acknowledged that a woman who is drinking is opening herself up for rape. In fact, a college roommate of mine was raped at a fraternity and had to leave because it was still accepted that women were "setting themselves up" by going to fraternity parties.

We should *all* be acting like those things that have the potential to harm others are wrong, regardless of their past history, but we should also acknowledge that the people THEN didn't think that the others were doing wrong, so that NOW with the benefit of hindsight we can say "hey, we'll do better by going above and beyond what culture says is ok".

[cnm161]

@Mosey_2003

Boo ****ing Hoo.

I <3 this response.

The subreddit for Men’s Rights activism is, indeed, a real horror story… but not for the reason rollingabout is suggesting.

[Bluey]

@OneGrayPony

RAPE is sexual abuse, but not all sexual abuse is rape.

We do not know that any of these people are guilty of rape, but we DO know that they are guilty of sexual abuse. THAT definition has changed.

Please read my other post, then maybe I will have made myself more clear. I just really don’t even know what to say at this point.

Actually, I’ll quote myself, to make it a bit easier:

Thanks poltroon - it is a huge problem for sure.

And I think those of us who knew about these things may not be judged kindly in the future when things come to light.

I know one in my region, and I don't even know if there's anything to be done at this juncture. There were whispers then, but they were just whispers. They are married now. At the time, it was accepted. Not acceptable, but accepted. Should those of us who saw it as skeevy have said something? Yes, that would have benefitted her and probably stopped a predator. But it was culturally accepted (not acceptable) so no one said anything.

So that people can maybe understand my position - I was definitely groomed by much older men in my early teens - think 12-13 years old. At the time, I saw the attention as flattering, and at the time I had absolutely no comprehension that it was something to be alarmed by.

I see it as a benefit that I'm seeing those things now as not okay. I wish the adults around me had seen it as not ok, but they didn't. I was told that it was natural for older men to take an interest in young women. I was told that I was just "early to be sexually attractive". It *was* culturally acceptable in the 90s to call a 12 year old sexy.

I still struggle with my rape in my early 20s because of the conversations around what a woman should and should not do and the cultural acceptance of blame because of drinking to excess (both me and my rapist)

Was it wrong then? Yes. Was it accepted then societally that it was my fault? Yes. Is it still? That's starting to change.

It's a GOOD thing, but what I wouldn't have given for someone back in the 90s to say to me "hey, I get it that you were drinking, but it still isn't ok". But that didn't happen because at that point in time it was tacitly acknowledged that a woman who is drinking is opening herself up for rape. In fact, a college roommate of mine was raped at a fraternity and had to leave because it was still accepted that women were "setting themselves up" by going to fraternity parties.

We should *all* be acting like those things that have the potential to harm others are wrong, regardless of their past history, but we should also acknowledge that the people THEN didn't think that the others were doing wrong, so that NOW with the benefit of hindsight we can say "hey, we'll do better by going above and beyond what culture says is ok".

Every one of us had our own experiences and our own take on the times then and today.

That is fine, is how discussions work, everyone brings to the table what they know and rarely it will be the same.

I hope all learn more about this and so go forth doing a bit better in their lives, as much as they can.

As for GM, I hope so much said he did wrong is not true and if so, that is a terrible wrong to him.
If it is, as they seem to have decided with what is known, then sad that at his age he is having to face terrible consequences, but lets remember that if so, painful this may be for him, he is not the REAL victim here.

[ladyj79]

But all sex between minors below the statutory limit and adults is rape.

And I was alive in the 90s. I definitely don’t think it was culturally acceptable or accepted to call 12 year olds sexy.

[HLMom]

@NoSuchPerson

To keep beating my own personal dead horse…

SafeSport was created by Congress. It was explicitly created as an extra-judicial process. There were reasons why it was created to function the way it does. We keep seeing posts from attorneys who want to drag SafeSport in the judicial system. I am opposed to doing so. I’m not saying that the process can’t be improved. I posted way back in this thread of some ways I thought the arbitration process could be improved. But, I think that, in general, attempting to make the process run just like the criminal justice system is not an improvement.

No one is suggesting it should run like the criminal justice system. But the point I made is: it does not even have the normal procedural safeguards of typical JAMS arbitrations (which are civil cases).

Some day there will be a case where a false accusation is made. Suppose there is a witness whose testimony could prove that the accusation is false, but this witness would “rather not get involved.” Under SafeSport rules, without subpoena power there is no way to make them come in to testify to what they know (or even to make them testify by phone, or provide a written statement.) The accused would be out of luck, unless he could persuade them to come forward out of the goodness of their heart.

[NoSuchPerson]

@OneGrayPony

Certainly was not ok, but it was socially accepted,

I understand what you’re saying, but I disagree. That behavior was never socially accepted. The social change that you’re talking about has to do with wealth and power, not changing attitudes toward sexual practices.

Historically, being wealthy and powerful meant that you could do whatever you wanted, regardless of society’s moral opinion. That’s why peasant farmers with pretty daughters did their best to hide them when the feudal lord and his soldiers rolled through town. Nobody thought it was socially acceptable for the lord to pick up a pretty young peasant girl and take her back to the castle, but he had all the power and he did whatever he wanted to. The disapproval of his peasants or others within his domain was entirely irrelevant to him because they had no power and their judgement had absolutely no impact on him.

Step forward hundreds of years to, for example, Jeffrey Epstein. Nobody, not even Jeffrey Epstein, truly believed that what he was doing was socially acceptable. If he had, he wouldn’t have taken pains to hide it. But he, and his cronies, didn’t care. They were wealthy and powerful and felt that gave them the freedom to indulge their desires and the capacity to hide it from society.

George Morris and the upper echelon of the horse world of that era who continue to support him are the same way. It wasn’t so much that they believed having sex with underage boys and girls was socially acceptable, but rather that they believed their wealth and positions at the top of the sport insulated them from the expectation that they would comply with societal expectations. The thing that has them reeling isn’t changing social attitudes toward having sex with minors because that has always been frowned upon in general society. The thing that has changed is a societal willingness to allow wealth and power to exempt them from compliance with societal standards related to having sex with minors.

[4LeafCloverFarm]

@OneGrayPony

Certainly was not ok, but it was socially accepted, which is why a common stripper uniform is a schoolgirl. - Van Halen - “Hot For Teacher” (Official Music Video) - YouTube

I’m STILL NOT SAYING IT WAS OK! I don’t know how many times I can say this before my meaning is clear.

What I am SAYING is that people looked the other way for a very long time because it was ACCEPTED.

Not acceptable, but ACCEPTED…

This is also how I see many things back in the 60’s and 70’s. Sad, but true. “Looking the other way” was an art form at that time - fingers in ears, singing “La La La La”… but again, just my experience. Other’s experiences from that period may vary.

[ladyj79]

@HLMom

No one is suggesting it should run like the criminal justice system. But the point I made is: it does not even have the normal procedural safeguards of typical JAMS arbitrations (which are civil cases).

Some day there will be a case where a false accusation is made. Suppose there is a witness whose testimony could prove that the accusation is false, but this witness would “rather not get involved.” Under SafeSport rules, without subpoena power there is no way to make them come in to testify to what they know (or even to make them testify by phone, or provide a written statement.) The accused would be out of luck, unless he could persuade them to come forward out of the goodness of their heart.

except no one is banned or sanctioned based on a single uncorroborated allegation.

This is a red herring.

[OneGrayPony]

@Bluey

Every one of us had our own experiences and our own take on the times then and today.

That is fine, is how discussions work, everyone brings to the table what they know and rarely it will be the same.

I hope all learn more about this and so go forth doing a bit better in their lives, as much as they can.

As for GM, I hope so much said he did wrong is not true and if so, that is a terrible wrong to him.
If it is, as they seem to have decided with what is known, then sad that at his age he is having to face terrible consequences, but lets remember that if so, painful this may be for him, he is not the REAL victim here.

I have absolutely no pity for GM. There’s not just smoke there, there’s a big a&& roaring flame.

Let it not be insinuated for one moment that I do.

I have no pity for those around me who said it was ok because it was culturally ok at the time. It’s understandable that they are squawking now, but I do have empathy for them because they are feeling like perhaps they are culpable because it was accepted. That much is true. They are. The fact that something is culturally accepted doesn’t make it right.

I want this to CHANGE. I want people to say that just because culture says it’s ok for people to say it’s not ok. We don’t do that as people. We should. We don’t.

When we pretend that it wasn’t culturally accepted at the time to goose women, or have sex with inebriated teens at parties (see Pretty in Pink) or marry young children, we whitewash our own history and we forget that as a people we have a responsibility to go AGAINST our culture when potential harm to others could happen.

Another example are the good Germans who supported Hitler. It was culturally accepted to support Hitler at the time. We don’t look at those people kindly now (and Germans don’t particularly think it’s a great period in their history). We, as a culture, should be looking at things in our present where we are doing wrong because it’s culturally accepted - that’s the lesson here.

[prairiewind2]

@OneGrayPony

RAPE is sexual abuse, but not all sexual abuse is rape.

We do not know that any of these people are guilty of rape, but we DO know that they are guilty of sexual abuse. THAT definition has changed.

Please read my other post, then maybe I will have made myself more clear. I just really don’t even know what to say at this point.

Actually, I’ll quote myself, to make it a bit easier:

Thanks poltroon - it is a huge problem for sure.

And I think those of us who knew about these things may not be judged kindly in the future when things come to light.

I know one in my region, and I don't even know if there's anything to be done at this juncture. There were whispers then, but they were just whispers. They are married now. At the time, it was accepted. Not acceptable, but accepted. Should those of us who saw it as skeevy have said something? Yes, that would have benefitted her and probably stopped a predator. But it was culturally accepted (not acceptable) so no one said anything.

So that people can maybe understand my position - I was definitely groomed by much older men in my early teens - think 12-13 years old. At the time, I saw the attention as flattering, and at the time I had absolutely no comprehension that it was something to be alarmed by.

I see it as a benefit that I'm seeing those things now as not okay. I wish the adults around me had seen it as not ok, but they didn't. I was told that it was natural for older men to take an interest in young women. I was told that I was just "early to be sexually attractive". It *was* culturally acceptable in the 90s to call a 12 year old sexy.

I still struggle with my rape in my early 20s because of the conversations around what a woman should and should not do and the cultural acceptance of blame because of drinking to excess (both me and my rapist)

Was it wrong then? Yes. Was it accepted then societally that it was my fault? Yes. Is it still? That's starting to change.

It's a GOOD thing, but what I wouldn't have given for someone back in the 90s to say to me "hey, I get it that you were drinking, but it still isn't ok". But that didn't happen because at that point in time it was tacitly acknowledged that a woman who is drinking is opening herself up for rape. In fact, a college roommate of mine was raped at a fraternity and had to leave because it was still accepted that women were "setting themselves up" by going to fraternity parties.

We should *all* be acting like those things that have the potential to harm others are wrong, regardless of their past history, but we should also acknowledge that the people THEN didn't think that the others were doing wrong, so that NOW with the benefit of hindsight we can say "hey, we'll do better by going above and beyond what culture says is ok".

You seem to be talking about a whole raft of other issues. If a teacher has sex with an underage student, it is rape. It has not been OK in my lifetime. It was not accepted when I was a teen in high school. The difference is that such an act may be prosecuted publicly now when it might not have been back then. But the system did not look the other way and “accept” teachers diddling students back then. At the very least, suspicious teachers were removed.

Once a student graduated, then things were different. Could a teacher have “groomed” a student before graduation in order to seduce them after graduation, after they were considered adult? Sure. But that is not what we are talking here. It is a different issue.

The issue of blaming the victim is a whole 'nother issue.

The issue of what is rape and what are other forms of sexual assault is a different issue.

In my lifetime, it has never been “accepted” that teachers could have any form of sex (rape) with underage students.

[HLMom]

@ladyj79

except no one is banned or sanctioned based on a single uncorroborated allegation.

This is a red herring.

Could you show me the rule you are talking about? Are you saying there always must be more than one accuser before SafeSport will impose a sanction? Are you saying there always must be a corroborating witness before a sanction will be imposed? I didn’t see any of that in the rules.

And in any event, that does not address my concern. What if the 3rd party witness could prove that both Accuser and Accuser’s Friend are lying, but under SafeSport rules there is no way to get the 3rd party witness’s testimony?

That is the concern I am raising. SafeSport has truncated the normal JAMS arbitration procedures.

[KellyS]

@OneGrayPony

So that people can maybe understand my position - I was definitely groomed by much older men in my early teens - think 12-13 years old. At the time, I saw the attention as flattering, and at the time I had absolutely no comprehension that it was something to be alarmed by.

I see it as a benefit that I’m seeing those things now as not okay. I wish the adults around me had seen it as not ok, but they didn’t. I was told that it was natural for older men to take an interest in young women. I was told that I was just “early to be sexually attractive”. It was culturally acceptable in the 90s to call a 12 year old sexy.

I grew up as a teenager in the 90s and I definitely KNEW it was not okay for men to take an extra interest in minors. And the adults around me would never encourage it or think it was okay. In fact, we were specifically taught about this at home and in school as part of how to stay safe and how to identify “wrong” actions by adults. And it was not culturally acceptable to call a 12 year old “sexy” either.

My experiences were in California, Georgia, and Pennsylvania in the 80s and 90s, so I feel pretty confidant about the morals and values of this time period.

As others have said again and again, IT HAS NEVER BEEN OKAY to sexually groom, assault, abuse, or rape a minor.

I am not saying you did not experience what you describe, but in a discussion about sexual predators, in which they are being defended with the excuse that it was okay “back then,” this part of the quoted post just sounds like another example normalizing the behavior of adults abusing children sexually.

As someone who grew up at the same time, I can say that in most of America children were taught by adults that sexual attention and actions, including grooming, were never considered acceptable.

[NoSuchPerson]

@HLMom

Some day there will be a case where a false accusation is made. Suppose there is a witness whose testimony could prove that the accusation is false, but this witness would “rather not get involved.” Under SafeSport rules, without subpoena power there is no way to make them come in to testify to what they know (or even to make them testify by phone, or provide a written statement.) The accused would be out of luck, unless he could persuade them to come forward out of the goodness of their heart.

I think this is a strawman argument. There is absolutely no evidence that the claim of one individual, unsubstantiated by physical evidence of any sort, has led to any SafeSport sanctions. Conversely, we have ample evidence that SafeSport will not take action based on the claims of one “victim” when it’s nothing more than the kind of “he said-she said” situation that you’re describing.

[NoSuchPerson]

@ladyj79

except no one is banned or sanctioned based on a single uncorroborated allegation.

This is a red herring.

Well, I posted something very similar and it was “Unapproved.” So, I’ll just quote ladyj79 and say, “yeah, what she said.”

[OneGrayPony]

@ladyj79

But all sex between minors below the statutory limit and adults is rape.

And I was alive in the 90s. I definitely don’t think it was culturally acceptable or accepted to call 12 year olds sexy.

It has been even in the 2ks, which is why we have pole dancing kits for tweens as a thing, and Brittany Spears dancing as a schoolgirl in whatever the heck that awful album was.

Again I submit this for your viewing…torture - https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/brooke-shields-nude-child-photo

She was 10 years old. Most of the supermodels of the 90s were recruited between the ages of 13 and 16. And they were most definitely called sexy in the media and society. They were dressed provocatively, called sexy, and made to wear makeup that made them look much older to others.

The Protect act, making it a federal offense to possess porn of children under 18 wasn’t put into law until 1992. In 23 states to this DAY it is not illegal to marry someone under 16 years of age.

We should be fighting that fight too, 'cause that just isn’t ok.

Again, I’m not saying that we should be ok with anything just because it was accepted. This should give us pause to examine our own beliefs about what is accepted now, lest we be judged harshly in the future, and it should give us courage to say “hey, this isn’t ok, even though everyone thinks it is”

[Jackie_Cochran]

Back then, 50 years ago, there was a criminal charge that DID get prosecuted sometimes, it was “Contributing to the Delinquency of a Minor.”

That charge was a large reason that underage people were considered “jail bait” (back then under-age was someone under the age of 21). It could be a rather wide-ranging law, sex, drugs, encouraging criminal behavior, exposing children to pornography, anything that could “encourage” an under-aged person to do any criminal acts.

By the standard of THAT law, well GHM certainly seems to have contributed to the delinquency of minors. It was legally considered wrong back then to contribute to the delinquency of a minor.

Of course, just like speeding laws, a lot of people did ignore that law back then, but if they had been caught by law enforcement they could end up in a world of trouble and have their reputations completely ruined.

[OneGrayPony]

@KellyS

I grew up as a teenager in the 90s and I definitely KNEW it was not okay for men to take an extra interest in minors. And the adults around me would never encourage it or think it was okay. In fact, we were specifically taught about this at home and in school as part of how to stay safe and how to identify “wrong” actions by adults. And it was not culturally acceptable to call a 12 year old “sexy” either.

My experiences were in California, Georgia, and Pennsylvania in the 80s and 90s, so I feel pretty confidant about the morals and values of this time period.

As others have said again and again, IT HAS NEVER BEEN OKAY to sexually groom, assault, abuse, or rape a minor.

I am not saying you did not experience what you describe, but in a discussion about sexual predators, in which they are being defended with the excuse that it was okay “back then,” this part of the quoted post just sounds like another example normalizing the behavior of adults abusing children sexually.

As someone who grew up at the same time, I can say that in most of America children were taught by adults that sexual attention and actions, including grooming, were never considered acceptable.

You were lucky. I grew up in PA and had a far different experience. We definitely had zero training in school as part of any “how to stay safe”. Maybe it’s an early 90s vs late 90s thing. Or a rural school vs a city school, I don’t know. But that was DEFINITELY not part of my curriculum - I would have remembered that to be sure.

I am NOT defending predators. NOT in the least!! I’m saying the COMPLETE opposite!!!

What I am saying is that we ought to look at things we think of as OK now, and think “hey, maybe these won’t be OK later”

[Jealoushe]

@cnm161

I <3 this response.

The subreddit for Men’s Rights activism is, indeed, a real horror story… but not for the reason rollingabout is suggesting.

Reddit is a cesspool now, FYI they also have subreddits for pedos, so take what you will from that garbage site.

[KellyS]

@OneGrayPony

RAPE is sexual abuse, but not all sexual abuse is rape.

We do not know that any of these people are guilty of rape, but we DO know that they are guilty of sexual abuse. THAT definition has changed.

Please read my other post, then maybe I will have made myself more clear. I just really don’t even know what to say at this point.

Part of the problem is that it is not clear what point you are trying to make.

There has been no changes in what is considered sexual abuse. Just because it happened doesn’t mean it was acceptable.

Both rape and sexual abuse are illegal, and neither have ever been socially acceptable or accepted.

It is pretty clear that, in the cases of Jimmy Williams, Ron Gage, and George Morris, they raped underage children.

I have been sitting back and reading along all this time, but I am flabbergasted by the handful of individuals here who are trying to pick apart the actions of these men and the investigation of Safe Sport.

It is very clear and very simple:

1. It has always been wrong and socially unacceptable/unaccepted to sexually interact in any way with a minor.

2. Safe Sport does not issue sanctions based on false accusations or without proper protocols.

Just because you (group, but particularly HLMom) are not aware of every single detail of the Safe Sport process does not mean there is something wrong with the process. And even though you feel entitled to know every detail, the protocols are in place to protect the victims rather than to make Joe Public happy.

We can’t always have it all (and this is not a television crime drama)–in this case, I think the victims deserve their privacy and safety, especially after seeing the vindictiveness and brutality of the social media community.