George Morris on the SS list

[specifiedcupcake]

@TheMoo

She deleted it. Shame she can’t stand behind her convictions that he’s a “safe” trainer for her and her daughter.

Well I hope someone reports her to SS. I would if I was a USEF member. (Do you have to be a member?)
I have the unedited screen cap if anyone needs it as backup, where she admits they train with Navarro.

Unless they operate as non USEF members as well? It kind of makes me scared for all the local circuit kids whose parents may no know about stuff like that.

[TheMoo]

@specifiedcupcake

Well I hope someone reports her to SS. I would if I was a USEF member. (Do you have to be a member?)
I have the unedited screen cap if anyone needs it as backup, where she admits they train with Navarro.

Unless they operate as non USEF members as well? It kind of makes me scared for all the local circuit kids whose parents may no know about stuff like that.

You don’t have to be a member to report.

[Mango20]

What bothers me the most about the comment about the 10 year old having her period is the line right before that referring to individual body time clocks, which seems to be saying that once girls get their period, they’re absolutely ready for sex:

[B][I]But each community and each family and each individual have a part, as do the time clocks of each body.

My friend’s daughter had a “visit from the friend”, at 10 years old, and he is incredibly aware and strategic on the subject.[/I][/B]

[Ubu_Goober]

#istandwithkimberlybrubakerbradley

ETA: https://www.chronofhorse.com/article/an-open-letter-to-diane-carney
very well written with FACTS and DATA

[Ubu_Goober]

@Peggy

Interesting is that the reason cited was old charges and what this might say about the GM ban that was upheld. Not necessarily the same arbitrator though.

We don’t know that the only evidence in George’s case was old. It’s not a stretch to surmise that someone that claims as many partners as he does (and counting!) in an autobiography published just a couple of years ago is still or until very recently active. Any more recent partners don’t necessarily have to have been underage but there was that post a while back by someone wondering in hindsight if a BNT who had been a student of George’s might have been trying to recruit a student at a clinic to go work with George in the 90s. Poster said it seemed a bit odd at the time because the rider was not the best it hardest working at the clinic, but was the only teenager that was a tall, slim, male. Might gave even used the phrase that he was the “type” of student George liked to work with.

[Peggy]

@Ubu&Goober

We don’t know that the only evidence in George’s case was old. It’s not a stretch to surmise that someone that claims as many partners as he does (and counting!) in an autobiography published just a couple of years ago is still or until very recently active. Any more recent partners don’t necessarily have to have been underage but there was that post a while back by someone wondering in hindsight if a BNT who had been a student of George’s might have been trying to recruit a student at a clinic to go work with George in the 90s. Poster said it seemed a bit odd at the time because the rider was not the best it hardest working at the clinic, but was the only teenager that was a tall, slim, male. Might gave even used the phrase that he was the “type” of student George liked to work with.

I think we’re on the same page.

My thought process.
This ban was not upheld due to old evidence.
George’s ban was.
Therefore, there is more than just old evidence on George.

For clarity here is my original post (#4410):
“Interesting is that the reason cited was old charges and what this might say about the GM ban that was upheld. Not necessarily the same arbitrator though.”

[Denali6298]

@Peggy

I think we’re on the same page.

My thought process.
This ban was not upheld due to old evidence.
George’s ban was.
Therefore, there is more than just old evidence on George.

I wonder if that evidence also includes the harassment one of the witnesses to the SS case posted about on her Facebook page.

Why threaten the person and family members of you are innocent?

[Capall]

@Mango20

What bothers me the most about the comment about the 10 year old having her period is the line right before that referring to individual body time clocks, which seems to be saying that once girls get their period, they’re absolutely ready for sex:

[B][I]But each community and each family and each individual have a part, as do the time clocks of each body.

My friend’s daughter had a “visit from the friend”, at 10 years old, and he is incredibly aware and strategic on the subject.[/I][/B]

The more I read all of his comments, the more disgusted I am by this individual. I will stop there because the only other things I can say about this involve a lot of salty language.

[YankeeDuchess]

@Ubu&Goober

We don’t know that the only evidence in George’s case was old. It’s not a stretch to surmise that someone that claims as many partners as he does (and counting!) in an autobiography published just a couple of years ago is still or until very recently active. Any more recent partners don’t necessarily have to have been underage but there was that post a while back by someone wondering in hindsight if a BNT who had been a student of George’s might have been trying to recruit a student at a clinic to go work with George in the 90s. Poster said it seemed a bit odd at the time because the rider was not the best it hardest working at the clinic, but was the only teenager that was a tall, slim, male. Might gave even used the phrase that he was the “type” of student George liked to work with.

We don’t know the evidence in EITHER the GM or the skating coach’s case, so it’s not our place to say it was consistent, inconsistent, right or wrong, just as it’s not legitimate for DC and those groups to be demanding “transparent” investigations.  I think they want “transparency” so they can sit in judgement of the perp, but also in judgement of the investigators and the arbitrators. 

  Let’s not go all partisan over this, and instead respect the decision of the arbitrator.

[TheMoo]

@YankeeDuchess

We don’t know the evidence in EITHER the GM or the skating coach’s case, so it’s not our place to say it was consistent, inconsistent, right or wrong, just as it’s not legitimate for DC and those groups to be demanding “transparent” investigations. I think they want “transparency” so they can sit in judgement of the perp, but also in judgement of the investigators and the arbitrators.

Let’s not go all partisan over this, and instead respect the decision of the arbitrator.

I don’t think anyone was going “all partisan.” Both posters were pointing out that independent reviews work based on the information at hand. Neither poster was criticizing. Merely pointing out that the decision in the figure skater’s case pokes massive holes in the argument made by Diane Carney, Bonnie Navin and others who cling to the coat tails of morally corrupt people who happen to be successful in the horse industry. It also furthers the argument that Diane et al are pissed off because “my friend and money maker got caught.”

[ladyj79]

I think they want “transparency” so they can continue to harass victims and anyone else who opens their mouths.

Because they’re monsters.

[TheMoo]

@ladyj79

I think they want “transparency” so they can continue to harass victims and anyone else who opens their mouths.

Because they’re monsters.

This needs to get repeated again and again.

[YankeeDuchess]

@newtopicnewalter

Re: this incredible and repulsive statement by Duncan McIntosh. If the 11 year old in this scenario is unsure whether or not he was a victim; it’s because he had been groomed carefully beforehand. That’s why predators and child abusers groom their victims; it’s another form of gaslighting to make the child question the nature of the relationship. It also makes them incredibly vulnerable to victim shaming, because they already believe that they are somehow responsible for their own abuse.

I had a sexual relationship with a married teacher in my high school for years; it continued after I went to college.

For decades afterwards, during the rare times I discussed it, I would not describe it as abuse, I described it as consensual, and I that I was the one that sexualized the relationship.

The relationship started as mentorship when I was 14 and did not involve intercourse until I was 16, the age of consent in that state at that time. Not a coincidence.

Having been previously abused, I was an ideal candidate. I was starved for attention and pathetically eager to please. And I had been raised to believe that sex was the price one paid for love and care. So would it be accurate to say that I sexualized the relationship? Yes, it was. Would it also be accurate to say that the situation was very carefully prepared and I was manipulated in ways I didn’t understand? Yes, absolutely. I was very eager to start paying back the affection and attention I didn’t feel I deserved.

The “grooming” had started long before I met this man. He only had a little work to do to finish it, and of course, wait until I was of legal age.

Does any of this make it something other than child abuse? Or something other than calculated predation of a child? Nope.

But it took me decades, literally decades (and all those therapists) to stop defending this relationship and see it for what it actually was.

I weep for that 11 year old boy who somehow feels that he was complicit in his own rape. And probably still wouldn’t describe it as abuse.

Obviously a newborn baby does not know that he is gay. A newborn baby does not even understand that his hands are part of his own body, as opposed to interesting objects nearby.

Does an absolutely prepubescent child of 11, boy or girl, perceive sexual attraction (gay or straight) before their body is producing sex hormones, i.e. before puberty? I can understand an 18 year old knowing they are gay, then looking back and realizing they were were never into stereotypically “boy things”, but an 11 year old “knowing” they are gay before puberty? I certainly assume the gay or straight attribute is there, present, at birth. But does a prepubescent child of 11 PERCEIVE that when, in the future, they feel sexual attraction, it will be gay as opposed to straight? Reason #675 that having sex with 11 year olds is a crime.

I am female and straight, but was notably a “tomboy” as a child. Never into dolls and frilly dresses. Looking back, I was never gay, but perhaps a protofeminist who resisted some of the expectations foisted on her. I am particularly glad I resisted the one that said “You don’t need to study math, that’s for boys who want to become engineers. You should go to college, but you don’t need to like your brothers, since you won’t need to support yourself.” I hope the younger posters are aghast that this was the attitude, but it was.

I studied math.

[TheMoo]

@YankeeDuchess

Obviously a newborn baby does not know that he is gay. A newborn baby does not even understand that this hands are part of his own body, as opposed to interesting objects nearby.

Does an absolutely prepubescent child of 11, boy or girl, perceive sexual attraction (gay or straight) before their body is producing sex hormones, i.e. before puberty? I can understand an 18 year old knowing they are gay, then looking back and realizing they were were never into stereotypically into “boy things”, but an 11 year old “knowing” they are gay before puberty? I certainly assume the gay or straight attribute is there, present, at birth. But does a prepubescent child of 11 PERCEIVE that when, in the future, they feel sexual
attraction, it will be gay as opposed to straight? Reason #675 that having sex with 11 year olds is a crime.

I am female and straight, but was notably a “tomboy” as a child. Never into dolls and frilly dresses. Looking back, I was never gay, but perhaps a protofemimist who resisted some of the expectations foisted on her. I am particularly glad I resisted the one that said “You don’t need to study math, that’s for boys who want to become engineers. You should go to college, but you don’t need to like your brothers, since you won’t need to support yourself.” I hope the younger posters are aghast that this was the attitude, but it was.

I studied math.

Kids, no matter the age be it 11, 12 whatever, know who they are attracted to when they become cognizant of sexual attraction. They may not have the words, and that is more so for kids who grew up in the 50s and 60s vs today, but they know.

Kids know a lot. Sometimes they can’t articulate it because of grooming sometimes it’s not having the words.

I get what your saying but you are stereotyping. Men and women can love all things that society deems masculine and feminine respectively and still be gay.

[oneequestrienne]

@Mango20

What bothers me the most about the comment about the 10 year old having her period is the line right before that referring to individual body time clocks, which seems to be saying that once girls get their period, they’re absolutely ready for sex:

[B][I]But each community and each family and each individual have a part, as do the time clocks of each body.

My friend’s daughter had a “visit from the friend”, at 10 years old, and he is incredibly aware and strategic on the subject.[/I][/B]

He’s a real sicko. I feel sorry for his wife and daughter.

[YankeeDuchess]

@YankeeDuchess

We don’t know the evidence in EITHER the GM or the skating coach’s case, so it’s not our place to say it was consistent, inconsistent, right or wrong, just as it’s not legitimate for DC and those groups to be demanding “transparent” investigations. I think they want “transparency” so they can sit in judgement of the perp, but also in judgement of the investigators and the arbitrators.

Let’s not go all partisan over this, and instead respect the decision of the arbitrator.

I’m not criticizing any posters. I’m just emphasizing that since we don’t have the details, I think that support for the SS process lies in respecting the decision of the arbitrator instead of suggesting disappointment that “our side lost this one.”

[TheMoo]

@YankeeDuchess

I’m not criticizing any posters. I’m just emphasizing that since we don’t have the details, I think that support for the SS process lies in respecting the decision of the arbitrator instead of suggesting disappointment that “our side lost this one.”

I’m confused. Were you adding to the post you quoted? No one has alluded to “our side lost”

[RainWeasley]

I mean, I had crushes on boys when I was like 7,definitely not sexual but still had crushes. Never had a crush on a girl. That is probably a good hint.

[YankeeDuchess]

@TheMoo

Kids, no matter the age be it 11, 12 whatever, know who they are attracted to when they become cognizant of sexual attraction. They may not have the words, and that is more so for kids who grew up in the 50s and 60s vs today, but they know.

Kids know a lot. Sometimes they can’t articulate it because of grooming sometimes it’s not having the words.

I get what your saying but you are stereotyping. Men and women can love all things that society deems masculine and feminine respectively and still be gay.

But that is my point. Feelings of sexual attraction are part of the developmental process like the physical body changes that occur at puberty. I agree that a pubescent child doesn’t need to be told. I agree that is is determined at birth or conception.

But in a child prior to the onset of puberty, which is set off by the sex hormones, the child is not feeling sexual attraction to ANYONE. I’m just saying that until a young boy or girl feels sexual attraction, they can’t have perceived that they are attracted to one gender or the other.

[YankeeDuchess]

@TheMoo

I’m confused. Were you adding to the post you quoted? No one has alluded to “our side lost”

A number of people, INCLUDING ME, wrote things that suggested disappointment that the lifetime ban was overturned. 

  Words like “ugh”, “it’s unfortunate”.