So basically the group wants to know if SS is using an assessment test on the accused so that they can try to throw that out or claim that because their beloved GM seems to pose a lowered risk due to his advanced age, he shouldn’t be banned. Lovely! I’m sorry, but if there is a credible accusation of sexual misconduct and there is ANY risk whatsoever to a child, that person needs to be banned.
12 Likes
USEF has this article up on their website, which includes a link https://www.usef.org/network/coverage/2020annualmeeting/ to the discussion. https://www.usef.org/media/press-rel…)&utm_content=
1 Like
Both Rob Gage and Jimmy Williams trained out of Southern California, which probably accounts for much of the resistance. George Morris did not, though he visited every year to do clinics and, by then, the #standwith____ people were pretty riled up anyway.
With respect to OJ Simpson, while people are aware that he was found not guilty in criminal court and guilty in civil court, they probably don’t realize the difference with respect to standard of proof. Though they can probably tell you that the car chase involved a Ford Bronco… Among other things, I remember walking out of my office in Santa Monica. and seeing more helicopters in the sky than I have ever seen and concluding that they must have reached a verdict in the civil case.
2 Likes
When the verdict came back on OJ Simpson’s criminal trial, it was piped over the PA at Capital Challenge. I was at the wash rack, and it took me a minute to figure out what was going on.
2 Likes
This is an ageist and “ horrifyingly ignorant “
comment.
8 Likes
It is all that you say. But, IME, it seems true… with some of the people, some of the time. Old white men seem to be “most in need of the demographic cure,” IME. I will justify my opinion if you like, or you can just disagree with it without further consideration.
Oh, and another point that’s more on topic. A (female) friend of mine who is 60 was explaining what a swinger she was in the 1970s. She said, “This was a pretty unique moment-- in between the advent of birth control and legalized abortion, and before AIDS.”
I’m 51 and I grew up in the SF Bay Area. AIDS was on my radar by the time I was of dating age, and, thanks to people who fought hard before me and a vocally pro-choice mom, I got to take for granted that pregnancy was a choice rather than a risk. So my friend’s point about how different sex might have looked to those who found it suddenly “without cost” that it had been for previous generations, and not at all like it was for me, where the “STD” you were avoiding would kill you with lots of suffering and stigma in the offing, was well-taken.
To be intellectually honest, then, I have to say that someone raised in my moment (and someone raised female) probably can’t fully get into the shoes of a swinging gay man in the 1970s and walk a mile.
5 Likes
To be fair, when it comes to Safe Sport the old white women of the horse world need the “demographic cure.” The younger set are blinded by the “lifestyle.”
6 Likes
Gross generalizations about broad demographic groups are simplistic and unwarranted. I’m one of those approaching demographic change in death white women. At 65, my world has depth, vision and strength. I am as steel hardened in fire and tempered by water. I am irreplaceable.
17 Likes
I just watched the replay of the live feed of the Safesport presentation at the USEF meeting. What a difference from what we saw at the USHJA meeting. FYI, I am not at all criticizing the presentation by Safesport there or the comments by Mary Babick. Those were the highlights.
This time, having the panel format and composition was a great idea. Also questions from those attending were better and without “outliers” asking crazy questions as they did at USHJA. I don’t know what happened during the WEF session, but this was the first time I heard Bill Moroney make a very clear statement supporting Safesport, zero tolerance for abuse in our sport, support for victims and calling out those in our sport whose response to victims has been public shaming. Finally, a clear statement from the leadership of our federation.
22 Likes
To clarify,
Not all old people refuse to see this problem. that’s not what I said. At all.
But most people who refuse to see this problem for what it is are old. Not all, but most.
I have said the same thing on other threads, where I more clearly attributed this sentiment to a paraphrase of Oprah, who said a big part of eradicating racism was waiting for old racists to die.
Not that all old people are racist, that was not her point, but that most old school Jim crow racist, are, well, old.
This is an identical situation and I stand by my statement.
it means things generally are getting better, over time, generationally. I don’t think you can really argue that people are more vocally and vigorously opposed to both racism and child rape these days, among other things.
17 Likes
Just got a news blast that Athletes For Equity blah blah is going to be having meetings
https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1103132746&ref=content_filter#!/photo.php?fbid=10157762984472350&id=568272349&set=a.385392852349&source=48&refid=17&ref=content_filter&ft=mf_story_key.10214767892886590%3Atop_level_post_id.10214767892886590%3Atl_objid.10214767892886590%3Acontent_owner_id_new.1103132746%3Aoriginal_content_id.10157762985132350%3Aoriginal_content_owner_id.568272349%3Athrowback_story_fbid.10214767892886590%3Aphoto_id.10157762984472350%3Astory_location.4%3Aattached_story_attachment_style.photo%3Athid.1103132746%3A306061129499414%3A2%3A0%3A1580543999%3A-8606419978911351848&tn=EHH-R
Due process, Constitutional rights… yada yada yada. I think they all have their fingers in their ears every time there’s a SS Q&A session streaming. Here’s the letter:
Athletes For Equity In Sport, inc.
AthletesForEquity@gmail.com
10130 Northlake Blvd. ste, 214-171
West Palm Beach, FL 33412
AthletesForEquity.org
Athletes for Equity in Sport holds educational and informational gatherings to discuss real life experiences of those reporting and those accused in the resolution processes of the U.S. Center for SafeSport and other national governing body (NGB) procedures.
« These groups are panels made up of licensed, practicing attorneys in addition to athletes from multiple sports with their own Safesport case experience.
« Each athlete has firsthand experience of either reporting or being accused of code violation(s) and how that procedure was navigated.
« The attorneys on the panel are experts from navigating the SafeSport process day in and day out for more than two years. They cite examples of Safesport not publicly posting their BOD meetings minutes since May 2019, as well as it being difficult to follow the SafeSport’s system as it does not afford the due process guarantees — legal rights given to all Americans under the U.S. Constitution — that one has come to expect when dealing with such serious topics and such severe penalties as outcomes.
« Discussion from attorney’s and athletes from their experience regarding sanctions or interim measures and methods of reviewing or not reviewing evidence are shared. These facts are easily verified.
« Facts, real life experience during the handling of their case, not opinions, are presented and discussed during Athletes for Equity in Sport’s gatherings.
« Those who attend are given two hours for interaction in Q&A. Athletes for Equity in Sport is providing a service to all sports, it is not a product to be defended or sold to the public,
« At these gatherings. there are athletes sharing their experience along with an emphasis on contributing to solutions for ameliorating SafeSport’s questionable procedures.
Athletes for Equity in Sport’s Executive group cordially invite any authorized representative of SafeSport or a NGB to meet with us. We look forward to the opportunity for sincere discussion, fact checking regarding statements made by representatives of SafeSport and those athletes and attorneys with experience in the Safesport case proceedings. Additional issues include an urgent need to address necessary revisions to the SafeSport code and solutions regarding non-covered individuals at NGB sanctioned event.
There should be no threat to NGBs or the U.S Center for SafeSport in the experience of the SafeSport process being discussed. The education about this experience by attorneys and athletes participating in the process is enlightening. Athletes for Equity in Sport will continue our efforts to build a better SafeSport to protect all athletes.
1 Like
I haven’t watched the replay yet, but read the write up. I’m really impressed by the steps taken, first with USHJA, and now USEF to make sure membership has a better understanding of SafeSport processes, and the opportunity to ask questions. And really good statements from Mary Babick back in December, and a Bill Moroney recently. Good for both of them.
I saw the Facebook announcements from Athletes for Equity. I found the whole notion that people are being solicited for “donations” in order to become a “member” kind of odd. Something about different levels of membership - bronze, silver, gold, platinum. Then they say in the other announcement that they aren’t selling a product to the public… nor do they need to defend their product… they are simply providing a service to all athletes. 
And apparently if you pay to be a member, you get to participate in “discussion panels” with “actual practicing attorneys” with expertise in this field of law, and get 2 hours for q & a. And to hear from other folks who have been through safe sport investigations, how the process worked for them, etc etc.
It seems like membership in Athletes for Equity essentially purchases folks legal advice regarding Safe Sport…
This strikes me as quite murky. I’m also curious about the athletes on their discussion panels who are sharing details about having gone through Safe Sport investigations. I’m assuming they are only including people who were not sanctioned and banned by Safe Sport on these panels. And not including banned individuals… but I actually sort of wonder. The way their announcements read is nebulous.
6 Likes
I’ve said this previously, but I’m going to repeat it for anyone who might be considering attending one of these meetings: When an athlete or their lawyer talks about their “Safe Sport experience” in any setting other than a Safe Sport hearing, they are free to say whatever would best advance their public cause and enhance or repair their reputation. They are under NO obligation to speak truthfully or factually. They are free to leave out crucial pieces of information and to insinuate that their Safe Sport violation was for something entirely different than what it was.
22 Likes
That’s definitely a point worth making.
@Jenerationx was kind enough to figure out how to post the details of the announcement concerning these meetings that Athletes for Equity posted to their FB page. The last two paragraphs are interesting… they
[B][I]“cordially” invite any authorized representative of SafeSport or an NGB to meet with them. They look forward to the opportunity for “sincere discussion” and “fact checking” regarding statements by representatives of SafeSport and those athletes and attorneys with experience in the Safe Sport case proceedings.
There should be no threat to NGBs or the U.S Center for SafeSport in the experience of the SafeSport process being discussed. The education about this experience by attorneys and athletes participating in the process is enlightening.[/I][/B]
So, who precisely are the attorneys and athletes that will be sitting on discussion panels with Diane Carney’s group “educating” everyone about the SafeSport process? Or do we not get to know the answer to that unless we pony up a membership fee?
How much does a bronze membership cost anyway? And what about platinum? And are the attorneys sitting on these panels being paid for their time spent at these meetings? By the Athletes for Equity membership fees? Or are they doing all this on a pro bono basis? After all… Bonnie Navin has done much of her Safe Sport work on a pro bono basis.
It’s all really odd. 2 “educational” campaigns about Safe Sport going on at the same time.
I wonder if Athletes for Equity will put up video of these discussions. Or perhaps they could put it behind a pay wall as well…
They kind of lost me with the misplaced apostrophe while attempting to write the plural of attorney. Correct in one bullet point, but not in a subsequent one.
12 Likes
I understood what you meant. I also understand how the “I’m old but not uncool” does not invalidate the original argument. But thank you for explaining it.
Why is that letter written in the current tense in regards to the panels of athlete’s and attorneys?
To make it sound as if these meetings ARE happening now and will frequently occur? Or just simple lack of editing? Maybe just wishful thinking?
Shouldn’t the entire letter be written in the future tense?
A quick glance at the website shows membership levels that range from $25-300.
Does it sound like these panels will only be open to people who have paid the membership fee?
I’m possibly going to hell for saying this out loud but perhaps these “membership” fees are helping to offset some lost revenue from a big deal annual clinic that had to be cancelled just recently.
18 Likes
