And exactly what is it telling you? Sounds like you are insinuating insulting character judgements to me.
If any one comes to any sort of support of Todd, “it’s telling.” Like I’m an abuser of horses? Would that be my nefarious “agenda of my own?”
At least when @Jealoushe comes out with her ageist insult “boomer” she’s direct about it.
It is telling me that, even when the actor himself has accepted that his behaviour is incorrect and also accepted that he will face consequences because of it and does not seek to hide behind any victim-like behaviour such as crying ‘cancel culture’, others are doing just the opposite in his name. I, and I think they, should ponder why that is.
Something is going on that they think it important to defend something that the actor himself is not defending, and belittle others who find it disturbing (which is what calling people part of ‘cancel culture’ is - it’s belittling them with a handy hashtag comeback and dismissing that their objections could be genuine and sincere) when the actor himself is not belittling with that kind of name calling.
There’s lots of things that could say about someone. But, since it is not connected to MT’s own feelings on the subject, it, by definition, is someone else’s agenda: that of the speakers.
If you had bothered to read above, you would know what ‘cancel culture’ means to me and what it tells me about someone who uses that term, particularly in a situation like this. I was abundantly transparent on that point. I’m sorry you chose not to notice.
Happy to take this offline so feel free to message me if you like as I think this hijack has gone on long enough.
Cheers
I know nothing about the owner so I have not sided with her.
I HAVE SIDED WITH THE HORSE AND ALWAYS, ALWAYS WILL.
Your determination to paint me or anyone else as the bad guy says far more about YOU than it does about anyone else.
Well, well, well…kettle, meet pot.
What was her motive for releasing the video two years after the fact?
This was already posted above.
I think that MT has done enough to “pay” for the event. I don’t think he needs to be formally sanctioned, I don’t think he needs to be cancelled, I don’t think he needs to do anything else than what he’s already done.
Thanks! I didn’t notice it previously posted!
I think we are all on the side of the horse here. The thread is very long, but even though people have shared experiences about not-so-nice horses, and have different perceptions about what happened, I think everyone agrees that the grey horse Harry doesn’t seem like a bad egg.
I think the main response to your posts is to point out that there isn’t a structure to “punish” MT within eventing, since he no longer competes or belongs to any of the national/international governing bodies. There isn’t any organization that can ban or sanction him outside of the ones that have already done so.
The point isn’t to defend MT in those replies to your posts, it is to try to get at what more is actually possible to be done within the existing structures of horse organizations. The answer, as far as I can tell, is nothing because there aren’t any other organizations he belongs to.
Someone asked what YOU would like to see done (that is actually possible) and you got upset and basically said that isn’t your job. If you keep saying “something” should be done but there isn’t anything else to actually be that “something,” then what are you wanting to see?
There isn’t some sort of extra international horse organization that can just go around meting out justice. It does not exist. Something that does not exist cannot be used to “ban” someone.
And my point wasn’t to design his exact punishment but rather to assert that he deserves some form of additional price for his acts. That punishment can be any number of forms - anything that is plausible.
My observation at this time is that it’s disconconcerting for so many to energetically defend a man who admitted guilt and owned up to his act of abuse. Yes at least he admitted it but it’s not enough.
Happily I hear that lots of people are boycotting his products and stores returning them to the manufacturer due to customer disgust. That is a start. Losing endorsements is good and right in this situation.
Hairshirts, anyone?
He owned up to it. Let it be.
You’re not the bad guy. You are demanding more without offering substantive ideas or ways that such a “more” might happen. Aka you are spitting in the wind and mad about the mess you’ve made of your face.
Well there you go, each individual that feels strongly can boycott and sanction according to their conscience, all is good.
I don’t understand your vengeance against MT, and your insistence that many are “energetically defending him” I see little defence, but a lot of “enough is enough”
I seem to remember many times in the past the words “let that be a lesson to you” passing my lips, in return for acts of stupidity, or thoughtlessness, feeling that genuine remorse and understand of what they did wrong was enough.
Again, the guy with the electric spurs, continuing deliberate abuse, in search of a ribbon. I just don’t see what MT did in the same light, I still do not endorse or defend it, but fail to see what any further sanctions at this point would benefit anyone. The whole thing has once again raised an issue, and a debate in the horse world, and that is good, because maybe it will make people think twice about their own actions, that is maybe the best that comes from it.
I think it’s quite disingenuous of you to insist that I come up with solution absolute to a rider in a country foreign to mine.
I maintain that his mea culpa is insufficient and I couldn’t care less who agrees or does not agree. I’m done wasting my time on the horsey has-been that is Mark Todd.
His fans will disagree as is their right but I’m not repeating this again.
Chow.
Oh but she has offered ideas! She thinks he ought to be subject to some sort of legal process and fines, which is what “torts” mean. Apparently, this was some level of crime in her book and it should be dealt with as though a crime:
But don’t dare say anything about how that might be just a wee bit over the top: she “sides with the horse and alway, aways will” so you @Djones have zero moral standing here. No one else can can have any other position and still care about horse welfare. Great open minded discussion ya’ll are having here.
Oh the drama!
I don’t agree with you. Get over it.
And tort can also mean an injustice, wrongdoing, etc.
Gets my vote!
Am I the only one who laughed at the irony here? furthered by the tort(e) discussion 
I believe the word you were searching for is “ciao”, although the confusion is understandable as it comes from a country foreign to yours.
Whatever. I meant tort. But by all means enjoy listening to yourself. It’s nice to have a captive audience.
Someone doesn’t think this is funny at all!!! We really should be ashamed of ourselves.
Nah.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
