On the issue of people of good will coming at these issues and advocating for legislative and process change? There are indeed MANY people like that. One who I respect tremendously, and who has a twitter feed worth following if you care about these issues, is Nancy Hogshead-Makar. Her feed is public, and regularly links to news reports across the country - and from Canada - regarding SafeSport issues, and broader legal issues related to the USOPC.
She is a fierce advocate for reform. But is looking beyond SafeSport and more focused on the USOPC itself. She has linked to multiple reports related to USA Gymnastics, and updates from an attorney named John Manly, who has worked on multiple cases related to Nassar and USA Gymnastics. John Manly’s twitter feed is public as well, and you can learn an AWFUL lot by reading what he has shared with regard to SafeSport and many legal issues going on in the background. He is actively representing clients involved in cases though, so it’s good to be mindful of this when reading his opinions. He is a ferocious critic of some aspects of the laws involved in all this, and the processes that athletes have gone through when reporting. I feel no need to take any sort of “swipe” at him though, or describe him as undermining SafeSport. I think he is doing g an effective job at identifying big problems with these laws, and going at specific issues which have impacted his clients, and this sort of legal activism will quite possibly lead to overall reform… eventually.
Anyway, some of my perspective on SafeSport topics has been broadened by following both Nancy Hogshead-Makar and John Manly on social media (specifically Twitter), and reading the articles they’ve shared, as well as news about specific ongoing cases. I encourage others to check them out if you want to learn more. Nancy’s feed is excellent.
After reading about Scott Blackmun’s tenure and severance package in particular… it is pretty clear that there is some corruption at the core of the Olympic movement which allowed unchecked abuse to go on for years. There were reports and whispers about Larry Nassar for years that reached executives within the USOPC who had the power to do something about this, and something should have been done about it at that time. Not years later after more girls had been abused.
Bluntly… there have also been whispers and reports about GM for many many years. Everyone KNOWS this. He was interviewed by a South American Equestrian publication back in ?2010?, and asked what he liked most about their country, and I believe the response was, “I like how pretty the boys are.” :no: And I do believe JS did try and report about GM back in 2012. JS is a problematic witness… that is true. He apparently was high on drugs and retracted his own report after making it. Regardless, it sure looks like there was foot dragging by at least someone in leadership in terms of investigating an OBVIOUS prominent coach in the Equestrian community who ultimately was determined to have sexually abused minor athletes.
This is why SafeSport exists. Because without it, in terms of priorities… competitive success and excellence in sport comes first, financial well being and risk mitigation on behalf of the USOPC and the NGBs comes in a close second… and the emotional and physical well being of athletes, and maintaining a safe and healthy sporting environment and community overall, especially for minor athletes? Those issues come in as a VERY distant third. 
Given that… what does everyone make of the organizers of these different clinics and elite shows deciding to hire the President of Athletes for Equity - an organization that is incredibly tied to the ISWG community?
The organizers are ABSOLUTELY well within their rights to hire her. She’s definitely highly qualified, a sought after clinician, and a well respected judge.
But I think the choice to hire DC shows that the people doing the hiring are still stuck in the ”pre SafeSport” mentality, where excellence in competitive sport is the number one priority, economic concerns related to their particular organization or show is the number two priority… and the emotional well being of athletes, and maintaining a safe and healthy sporting environment and community overall, especially for minor athletes? :sigh: That is still lower down on the list of priorities, and I personally wish it weren’t.
That’s how I see it. I’m not saying anyone should fire DC if she has already been hired. Nor am I saying anyone should blacklist DC. But I am saying that key decision makers who actually choose which clinician to pursue, or judge to hire for a specific show … I think these people SHOULD be aware of what a damaging, sad thing sexual abuse of minor athletes by coaches is. The folks doing the hiring really should consider the public positions well known figures in our sport have taken on this topic, and the public statements that have been made. The folks doing the hiring should actually care about this issue. Not just because of the obvious moral factors involved, but because it’s important to the sport as a whole not to turn a blind eye to such things. Granted, all they are technically required to do is complete SafeSport training on the required schedule, and agree to follow the code, and make sure anyone they hire is NOT suspended by USEF or on the SafeSport lifetime banned list. But… I think the people doing the hiring should also actually pause, and take some time to think about it all a bit more. I’m putting the onus on THEM. Take some time to think about the potential silent victims in our midst. Some of whom are, in all likelihood, well regarded and well liked professionals or amateurs. Some of these silent victims are just trying to put the horrible stuff they have personally endured behind them emotionally, and continue on as a positive and productive part of the sport. Don’t create an environment that drives out those people. That’s a loss to the community and the sport. Create a community that is easier for them to be part of while they continue on their own journey with respect to healing. Furthermore… don’t be afraid of making choices that DO actually make supporters of known child molesters upset. At this point, there are many folks who wouldn’t be all that sad if those people (vocal supporters of child molesters) DID decide to self select, and leave the sport, because it was no longer such a welcoming and easy environment and community for their child molesting friends to be a part of.
We all play a part in having a good community and culture in our sport that works for everyone. Especially the folks in leadership, who make decisions regarding which clinicians to hire and promote, which of the qualified and licensed officials to hire for major shows, etc etc. I’m sad and concerned by what I see as a failure to realize on the part of some in leadership, that the current moment is about ADJUSTING priorities. It’s about giving more weight to the issue of safety, and the physical and emotional well being of all athletes… most especially, minor athletes. The future of the sport depends on minor athletes.
There are many many great professionals out there who can do clinics and judge who have NOT been publicly speaking out in a manner that very likely re-traumatizes silent victims of childhood sexual abuse who are part of the sport. And who are not going around publicly making statements saying that a man who as been investigated for child molestation involving minor athletes, and found guilty by the preponderance of the evidence, should STILL be part of our sporting community.
I think it is fair to highlight on this thread which organizers and shows are making choices that many folks are disappointed by. Highlighting these choices is NOT the same thing as a witch hunt. It’s simply holding people accountable for their choices and public statements, and making sure others in the sport who are not closely following SafeSport and related topics are aware.
I hope I have done a better job today of expressing why I started this thread, what I see going on that concerns me, and why I disagree with others in terms of characterizing my positions as “black and white” or tantamount to some sort of “witch hunt” or a call for a “black list” of some kind. I’ve probably gone too far, and been too snarky, and engaged in overly heated rhetoric at times. I can own that. And try and do better. I hope people coming at these issues from any number of different perspectives can also take a moment to self reflect, and adjust, and try and do better when speaking out. We are all human. Nobody’s perfect. These issues are important though, and merit serious consideration, and thoughtful, careful discussion.
I welcome feedback from anyone who sees things differently. And will do my best to NOT be a jerk, and to NOT go low in terms of my responses, and get snarky. It’s just not a good way to engage when dealing with really serious and sensitive issues like this. :o
