I was disappointed in that part of Steinberg’s essay as well.
I think he has misunderstood some details about how the SafeSport bans and their Aiding and Abetting clause works (and SafeSport’s mission as it explains that clause) vs. why Barney Ward, Paul Valliere and others kept their businesses intact.
That said, the reason SafeSport did what it did was a worse version of governing bodies allowing pedophiles continued access to children via teaching. And I think it’s a piss-poor argument to trot out the AHSA’s toothlessness with respect to those trainers as a basis for criticizing SafeSport’s closing the loophole. I mean, why race to the bottom?
And as is always, always true-- organizations can police themselves well or wait for the rot to get so bad that the public smells it and steps in. Witness the USDA and the walking horses and USA Gymnastics and Larry Nassar. I know sexual predators were not on the USEF’s radar, but once that organization got the help of SafeSport, it’s hard to argue that the professional organization ought to prioritize the professional opportunities of its pedophiles over the protection of children from them.
Anyone want to explain that history to Steinberg? I mean I don’t think he condones putting children in harm’s way. But he writes in defense of that because of his ignorance of the details.