The problem is that this is precisely what I am trying to assess: whether or not his misconduct was serious enough to deserve a lifetime ban. The fact that he was given a lifetime ban does not allow me (or anyone else) to assess whether that was appropriate.
Asking whether or not a lifetime ban was appropriate is not an unreasonable question. And the first step to answering this is to know what he was found to have done.
Let’s try this again:
Any and all sexual misconduct with a minor is serious enough to deserve a lifetime ban.
Do you need a flow chart?
It was deemed appropriate by the people who’ve been tasked to answer that question. You aren’t personally one of the arbiters, @OwnTooMany, regardless of your desire to act as such.
Both oneequestrienne AND someone on twitter mentioned 12 year olds.
As far as you not wanting a play by play about what is happening on social media - fine. Ignore it. It’s come up on this thread because everyone who enters the discussion on this thread to play Devil’s Advocate and accuse posters here of “exaggerating” the allegations against him, and “exaggerating” other troubling aspects of this situation (the hostile tone toward the victims that is all over Facebook)…have openly challenged myself and other posters to point to examples and “proof”
I’m pointing out what is being publicly posted that is problematic. My decision. Comments on a post within a few hours of victims coming forward insinuating that Safe Sport solicited them to come forward because Safe Sport was somehow “losing this one” in the wake of the outcry following RGs suicide? And then a lawyer stating that she wants to hear from anyone “SS solicited”
I find that REALLY troubling.
Fact
Do you think we should be allowed to vote on it? What precisely gives you the right to decide if the action by SafeSport was appropriate? Do you want to interview the victims so you can assess their level of pain and measure it against some standard that you believe is correct?
So 5 women, including Hillary Ridland, speaking publicly about their abuse by Rob Gage isn’t enough for you? Hillary stated that she was 13, another victim stated that she was 14. The other three did not state their exact age at the time they were raped. What the hell more do you need?
So the name-calling begins.
I don’t think that sexual misconduct with a minor is ever acceptable. Just to emphasize the point, I will say it again: I DON’T THINK THAT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT WITH A MINOR IS EVER ACCEPTABLE!
I would still like to know from SafeSport what sexual misconduct they determined occurred. More than that, I think it is important the SafeSport be specific to the level of specificity in the code which I would think could usually be done without revealing the identity of the victims. This is actually important in order for the process to have credibility. And I expect that most would want the SafeSport process to be credible.
Does anyone consider the fact that RG’s victim(s) or other victims of sexual assault may be reading this thread?
Trolls don’t care.
We know they are, because many people on the thread have disclosed being victims of sexual assault, in and out of the horse industry.
Yeh…once upon a time it wasn’t your decision or at least was highly frowned upon, but I just reread the forum rules and it’s not in against any rules.
And I’ll admit that I have read a bit on FB…but OMG, it is crazy making and I Just.Can’t. for the most part.
I said your behaviors are making you look like a schmuck. Of all the things I could say, that’s pretty benign. But please, play victim as you’re trying to argue that maybe the sexual misconduct wasn’t “that bad” and didn’t warrant a lifetime ban.
I hate to break it to you, but you’re not going to get your wish that SafeSport reveals all of their information to you so that you can be okay with their decision. That’s not how the world works, not even in the legal system.
Nor do I think revealing the victims’ identities has any effect on credibility. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on that one.
As far as any victims of RG or victims of abuse and assault in general reading this thread… yes. Obviously many posters here have realized that is likely.
This is another reason I have brought up what is happening on Facebook. And pushed back. Firmly.
I agree that following the posts is crazy making though.
Do you really want a debate about what specific sex acts involving children are better or worse than others? Because that is what you are proposing.
I would ask that if anyone is going to bring up specific Facebook posts here on his forum, at least name the person whose thread it is in so that we can read the posts ourselves if we choose to do so.
Bonnie can go hang out with Kelly and Larry, they probably could use her services the most. I find it rather disgusting.
For deciding whether I or my daughter will ride with that person? Nope. Doesn’t matter.
They are each soul crushing in different ways and neither of us need that in a coach.
Is there someone who does need that in a coach?
Remember: athlete-centric.
I think you’re wrong. I don’t believe that the public has any need to know those kind of details. You are an uninvolved third party. It’s none of your business.
Neither is such sharing of detailed information necessary to ensure SafeSport’s credibility. The credibility of an organization comes from having clearly documented and publicly available policies and procedure, which SafeSport does. It comes from have staff members that are perceived as being capable, impartial, and reliable, which I think SafeSport has - and this is ensured by the hearings/arbitration system that has been set up.
I’m scratching my head why people are demanding to know the sordid details.
We, the public, don’t get that information. It’s in an effort to protect the accuser AND the accused. Can you imagine the outcry if the email read “John Doe is under a suspension while we investigate whether he did xyz and xyz to Jane and Jill.” If true, that’s incredibly personal information about Jane and Jill to have floating around (to be judged by the Mob on whether it qualifies for sexual assault or whether it’s “bad enough”) and if the claims are untrue, that report could be far more damaging to the accused.
The public doesn’t get to know all the details. There’s a due process, set forth to protect not just the process but all parties involved.
In the criminal justice system, a charge of sexual assault doesn’t come with a specific description of the acts so the public gets to have an opinion. We trust the system to get it right. We can fight to make sure the system does get it right by supporting the right policies, procedures and people.
But we don’t have a right to know all the details.
And thank God, because then the Mob would be saying that “Oh, that act isn’t bad enough, that’s no big deal, that didn’t warrant a ban, the victims should shake it off” etc.
As has been mentioned many times in this thread, even “just” touching or kissing can have a devastating, lifetime affect on the victim. I carry shame and embarrassment from being inappropriately touched by a trainer I worked for back in my early twenties. No “level” of sexual harassment or assault is okay.
The fact that enough evidence was found to support Gage’s lifetime ban, “reserved for the most egregious offenses” per Safe Sport, should be plenty of information. Whether he touched them or raped them is None. Of. Our. Business. Clearly he did something to multiple teenagers, and that is plenty.
Why can we not support a culture where ANY of that behavior is entirely unacceptable? Our sport sickens me right now. Oh, it’s just a little magnesium…a little Carolina Gold…everyone does it…Oh it’s just a little touching…he likes 'em young…they were warned to stay away…was it really that bad, I mean if he didn’t rape them…
I’ve never been so glad to not be an active part of the show scene.
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
