Larry Nassar

[Spy Car]

If you can't see the difference between thinking a thing and doing a thing I can't explain it to you. 

 

Not "thinking a thing," but actually aligning oneself with vigilante rape in one's position as a judge by stating it out loud in an open courtroom.

 

If you think that's OK then we have very different standards.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

If you can’t distinguish between statements and actions, that’s on you.

 

Telling someone you are going to beat the shit out of them is not the same act as beating the shit out of someone.

 

Thank you for so perfectly illustrating my points about liberal men who speak over women and think their liberal cred gives them feminist cred. It doesn’t. You had my husband and I in stitches at your hyperbolic superlatives last night.

 

It is easy to distinguish between actions and words.

 

The words alone were in support of vigilante rape (and murder) were grotesque and not acceptable from a judge.

 

It is not OK to validate sexual assault as just revenge. I'm not sure how you are missing that? 

 

The continued sexist personal attacks are beneath you. 

 

Bill

[maize]

A link to victim statement excerpts:

 

 

http://www.elle.com/culture/a15883779/larry-nassar-trial-impact-statements/

 

I'd love to find a site that links every individual statement, does anyone know of one?

[Spy Car]

If you can't see the difference between thinking a thing and doing a thing I can't explain it to you. 

 

It is the difference between committing rape in one's heart (mind?) and perpetuating in practice.

 

Saying you support vigilance rape as justice as a presiding judge is aligning oneself with very evil ideas.

 

To utter such expressions in open court is unacceptable behavior from a judge.

 

How do you not see that????

 

Bill

[snowbeltmom]

Another thing that strikes me as wrong is "team doctors." Do all sports at the elite level have that? At Twistars gym in Michigan, the head coach (who was a monster himself) required all his female gymnasts to see Nassar and only Nassar. (Funnily enough, he did not require this of his male gymnasts.) Appointments with Nassar were required for the gymnastics national and olympic team and gymnasts were punished if they missed them. While he may actually have been technically the best doctor for treating gymnastics injuries, we see how that worked out. I feel like there should be a list of approved doctors. Then if one skeeves you out and makes you uncomfortable, you can swiitch. If these girls truly had a choice, how many would have subjected themselves to Nassar again and again?

 

Most doctors are just fine, but when you mandate that young girls (or boys) have to see just one, no matter what...it's a situation that can so easily be abused. 

I don't think it is unusual for teams to have a doctor or team of doctors on staff.  I am surprised that the girls were required to see him. What would happen if a girl wanted to go to another doctor?  How would the girl be "punished?"

 

 

[maize]

Another thing that strikes me as wrong is "team doctors." Do all sports at the elite level have that? At Twistars gym in Michigan, the head coach (who was a monster himself) required all his female gymnasts to see Nassar and only Nassar. (Funnily enough, he did not require this of his male gymnasts.) Appointments with Nassar were required for the gymnastics national and olympic team and gymnasts were punished if they missed them. While he may actually have been technically the best doctor for treating gymnastics injuries, we see how that worked out. I feel like there should be a list of approved doctors. Then if one skeeves you out and makes you uncomfortable, you can swiitch. If these girls truly had a choice, how many would have subjected themselves to Nassar again and again?

 

Most doctors are just fine, but when you mandate that young girls (or boys) have to see just one, no matter what...it's a situation that can so easily be abused.

This is a good point.

 

Requiring all female gymnasts and only female gymnasts to see this doctor--gah!

 

I can definitely see how having a team doctor could be problematic in many scenarios. The doctor at best ends up with potentially conflicting priorities--will they always place the needs/good of the individual over the perceived good of the team?

 

I think this has been a problem in football, with team doctors authorizing players with head injuries to go back out on the field much too soon.

Edited January 28, 2018 by maize

[LucyStoner]

Psst: calling out sexist words on your part isn’t a sexist attack. You are not being attacked.

 

I think I know a thing or two about surviving child rape that you do not. I think I know a thing or two about separating vengeance from justice that you do do not. Your refusal to hear another perspective without equating it to the worst of the worst is both facile and bizarre. I expect, and see, more perspective taking from my autistic sons. It’s not that I don’t see your point, it’s that I don’t share your view that it’s the end of the republic or on par with child rape.

 

Listen to what the survivors said about the judge. The women who were there didn’t see it your way. Listen to them rather than substituting your rage and words for theirs.

Edited January 28, 2018 by LucyStoner

[Spy Car]

Psst: calling out sexist words on your part isn’t a sexist attack. You are not being attacked.

 

I think I know a thing or two about surviving child rape that you do not. I think I know a thing or two about separating vengeance from justice that you do do not. Your refusal to hear another perspective without equating it to the worst of the worst is both facile and bizarre. I expect, and see, more perspective taking from my autistic sons.

 

My words are not sexist. I expect the same professionalism from judges irrespective of their gender.

 

This judge disgraced the court. That she is a female is entirely beside the point.

 

Do you think we should have different standards of male and female jurists?

 

Bill

[ktgrok]

It is the difference between committing rape in one's heart (mind?) and perpetuating in practice

 

Bill

Oh, you do understand. Glad we agree it is totally different. Moving on!

[LucyStoner]

My words are not sexist. I expect the same professionalism from judges irrespective of their gender.

 

This judge disgraced the court. That she is a female is entirely beside the point.

 

Do you think we should have different standards of male and female jurists?

 

Bill

Seriously? That’s what you think I am circling as sexist? 🙄

[snowbeltmom]

(snip)...

 

But it DOES happen, and when it does, it is usually covered up or explained away, or the coach just moves clubs. I don't know if it has to do with our worship of sports (and I say this even though we are a very sportsy family), or our unwillingness to "ruin the lives" of "nice guys" and "good coaches" or our just general unwillingness as a society to respect women and girls who are creeped out buy a man's behavior...I suspect all three. And how to we change it?

 

 

 

ETA, and can we please stop engaging the troll? The only solid block of peace this thread got is when people just stopped responding. 

I wonder how many of us with kids in sports have encountered this issue?  I think it is easy for these guys to get away with abusing children.  Many times, when an accusation is raised, the creep just picks up and moves to a new area.  

 

When he goes to look for another job, the new club will do its due diligence and conduct a background check, but nothing will show up.  

 

In other situations, the coach is such a "good coach" who gets such "good results", that the parents will have their kids take lessons with him despite the rumors.  In the article that swimmermom linked, that coach was suing the high school because the school took away his ability to use the school pool for private lessons.  So even after this coach's abuse was disclosed in a court room, there were still parents who wanted to hire him to teach their kids, otherwise the coach would have had no need to sue to use the pool.

[Spy Car]

Oh, you do understand. Glad we agree it is totally different. Moving on!

 

Both embrace rape. Not so different.

 

Same idea. One just not carried through. 

 

At least not at the moment, although the judge gave a clear signal what she'd allow to happen behind bars, which I'm sure was understood by inmates.

 

This was an embrace of evil on the part of a judge. It was/is shameful.

 

Bill

[maize]

I wonder how many of us with kids in sports have encountered this issue? I think it is easy for these guys to get away with abusing children. Many times, when an accusation is raised, the creep just picks up and moves to a new area.

 

When he goes to look for another job, the new club will do its due diligence and conduct a background check, but nothing will show up.

 

In other situations, the coach is such a "good coach" who gets such "good results", that the parents will have their kids take lessons with him despite the rumors. In the article that swimmermom linked, that coach was suing the high school because the school took away his ability to use the school pool for private lessons. So even after this coach's abuse was disclosed in a court room, there were still parents who wanted to hire him to teach their kids, otherwise the coach would have had no need to sue to use the pool.

And I wonder what role is played by our acceptance of other forms of abusive behavior in the name of pushing kids.

 

Yelling and demeaning language that would ordinarily be termed verbal abuse are A-OK in the context of "coaching".

 

Pushing kids physically until they puke--we would see that as abusive in any other context.

 

Dance instructors who push girls to attain anorexic figures.

 

I think this is a dark underbelly of sports. There are more good instructors and coaches out there than bad but there are plenty who will readily sacrifice the good of their chargees on the altar of success.

[EMS83]

You’ve said it again and again and again.

 

Allow, threaten, enable.

 

Please, in all your infinite wisdom, since you’re so damn right and smart about this, explain exactly what steps she has taken to ensure that he received the same treatment as his victims?

 

<snip>

 

Well I'm sure it just takes a few strings pulled by someone to make sure he's put in with the general population...  Then he would likely get worse treatment.  Baldly stating that she would let it happen but for the Constitution is really just unnecessary, because she did indeed just sign his death warrant.  I wouldn't take her job over it, personally.  But was it uncalled for?  I think so, yes.

[snowbeltmom]

 

 

The behavior here -- this performance, this kabuki of Outrage!!! and verbatim-repetition-of-what's-already-been-said-at-least-fifty-times, this insistence that I Will Not Stop Until Everyone Concedes, is trolling.

 

Whether the performance here stems from cluelessness, or tone deafness, or a weird pleasure in provoking women's distress, or something else -- honestly, who cares.  The INTENT of the trolling doesn't matter.  It's the BEHAVIOR.

THIS.  

 

PLEASE STOP.

[Laurie4b]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/opinion/sunday/larry-nassar-rachael-denhollander.html

 

Here is an editorial by Rachel Denhollander recounting the crushing cost of pursuing justice. I have some reflections on that but can't type more until later.

 

This is the paragraph that I'd like to discuss: 

 

 

 

Most important, we need to encourage and support those brave enough to speak out. Predators rely on community protection to silence victims and keep them in power. Far too often, our commitment to our political party, our religious group, our sport, our college or a prominent member of our community causes us to choose to disbelieve or to turn away from the victim. Far too often, it feels easier and safer to see only what we want to see. Fear of jeopardizing some overarching political, religious, financial or other ideology — or even just losing friends or status — leads to willful ignorance of what is right in front of our own eyes, in the shape and form of innocent and vulnerable children.

 

 

This is a part of all kinds of abuse not just pedophilia. And it is the part that those of us reacting in horror are most likely to participate in ourselves I have seen this happen over and over IRL. 

 

Is the explanation for the length of time this went unchallenged simply that  MSU, USOGC, etc were all filled with truly evil people? Or is there something else going on? Something else that we ourselves might be susceptible to? 

 

 

I think most of us are now aware that sexual abusers of children groom the children. 

 

But what gets much less attention and what Rachel brought up in this article is the process of cultivation of allies that the abuser engages in before any allegations surface.  This way, the defense will be taken up by others.  (And this is true in all kinds of abuse not just child sexual abuse.)  Most of us are not big wigs in some organization, but all of us can take steps so we do not become unwittingly part of the community protection for an abuser. 

 

• It is in the abuser's interest to be well-liked and well-thought of. It is likely that if we know an abuser in our organization  we like that person. 
•  
• Abusers know they are abusing long before the first victim speaks out. They engage in counter-narrative "seed-planting." They often tell stories of how they have been misunderstood (it can't be a coincidence that so many people thought what Nassar did was a legitimate medical treatment after all) , or that there are some difficult interpersonal relationships (with people s/he knows to be victims) that s/he is patiently enduring , etc. So the "seed planting" of what people should think goes on well before anything comes to light. 
•  
• Plausible deniability: the counter narrative provides plausible deniability. Did you wonder how so many people thought vaginal penetration was a treatment for gymnastic injuries? I was so perplexed that I looked it up. There is pelvic floor treatment that might appear to be similar but would be used rarely in treatment for pain in other parts of the body. How did so many coaches, etc know of the rare but "legitimate medical procedure"  Nassar was supposedly using if not for Nassar broadly planting seeds of counter-narrative.   Nassar also recruited pseudo witnesses: "The mothers were in the same room! How could I have abused their child." IRL, I saw this defense used.  A favorite for plausible deniability of emotional abusers is : "I was just joking." 
•  
• Additionally, in organizations, the abuser is likely to be much more valuable to the organization than the victim is. We protect the organizations that we are in. Believing that x valuable person is an abuser will upset the whole organization thrusting it into a crisis. Disbelieving the victim will cost much less (in the short term) to the organization, preserving the status quo. Sadly  I am guessing that it's rare that isn't also a good longterm strategy. It didn't work out for Penn State or Michigan State or the RCC but where is it working out that we don't know about? 

How is it that so many people can be led astray?

 

Our brains betray us: cognitive bias and cognitive dissonance come into play: 

 

Cognitive bias:

 

• We are biased to keep believing what we already believe. This one is called confirmation bias. You already believe Larry Nassar, your kid's coach, your pastor, the volunteer at the YMCA is a good guy. He or she has been diligent in always preserving that impression. When human beings are confronted with evidence contrary to what we already believe, we are much more likely to double down on our belief than to consider whether we need to alter it. Our brains prefer their own status quo.  
•  
• We are biased to believe the best of the Big Guys (or Gals) on our own "team" whatever that team may be: College, religious organization, community organization, political party.  Evidence to the contrary? Our initial belief tends to get strengthened. 
•  
• It happens so often that whether at the conscious level or not people's first instinct appears to be to protect their "tribe," "team", whatever you want to call it. Organizations protect themselves. This is so strong, it appears almost that an organization can have a "will to survive" no matter what it takes. 
•  
• If there is any ambiguity at all?  (legitimate medical procedure, "pseudo-witnesses", a small discrepancy in the victim's account) Our brains will seize on that as a reason not to consider much more compelling evidence to the contrary. 

 

Cognitive dissonance: 

 

When our prior beliefs are challenged by new data ,  cognitive dissonance kicks in. Our brains prefer a nice steady state of the status quo . If they are cast into doubt that is uncomfortable. The easiest way to reduce the dissonance? Disbelieve the person alleging abuse and silence her or him. 

 

The silencing can range from simply turning one's back on the person alleging abuse to outright shaming her into silence or out of the community altogether. For instance, I've personally seen a mother who correctly accused a man of inappropriate touch  of her children become the victim of the rumor mill of the defenders of the status quo for the organization: "She once told a white lie to get out of an event. Therefore she's a liar and can't be trusted." From prior experience, I knew the perpetrator to be a liar on other issues. But as an investigation was going on, I couldn't speak out on that.  

 

 

So what can we do to avoid being a participant in protecting a perpetrator?   

 

I'm not entirely sure. What I have seen IRL is that people who have been the target of an abuser or have seen a scheme unravel that they were personally invested in are much more likely to spot the pattern early on. And there is a pattern. It's depressingly the same.

 

• So perhaps those of us fortunate enough not to have been a target can learn the pattern.
•  
• We can question our reactions if we hear that someone we think the world of is being accused of abuse. We can remember that our brains will be pulling us to believe what we already believed, what is most convenient and less upsetting for us to believe. 

• We can wonder if we've already heard a counter-narrative from that person or those close to him and ask ourselves why.
•  
• We can refrain from any actions that silence the victim.
•  
• We can take a default position to believe the victim or at the very least , we can take conscious steps to counter our cognitive bias: to consciously consider any evidence that s/he is the one telling the truth and to consciously evaluate our prior beliefs about the accused. I do believe conscious choices can override at least some cognitive bias. 

 

We've seen this movie before. Over and over and over. Hopefully, we can begin to rewrite the script.

[snowbeltmom]

And I wonder what role is played by our acceptance of other forms of abusive behavior in the name of pushing kids.

 

Yelling and demeaning language that would ordinarily be termed verbal abuse are A-OK in the context of "coaching".

 

Pushing kids physically until they puke--we would see that as abusive in any other context.

 

Dance instructors who push girls to attain anorexic figures.

 

I think this is a dark underbelly of sports. There are more good instructors and coaches out there than bad but there are plenty who will readily sacrifice the good of their chargees on the altar of success.

:iagree: 

The top coach in my area would swear at and demean 6 year olds while their parents sat and watched.  Other parents didn't understand why we refused to let our kids get on the court with him.

[EmseB]

Not seeing it, doesn’t mean it wasn’t there though. As we’ve seen with so many cases so far.

I'm saying that team cultures were not the throw up on the side of the pool, the coach can do no wrong, abusive type of culture she describes. Of course anything can be happening in secret, but what she describes about competitive swimming culture and destroying athletes is foreign to me as a swimmer and swim mom. To the point that while I was still swimming I read the book about gymnastics and ice-skating "Little Girls in Pretty Boxes" and was horrified that sports could be like that. I was never on a team or had a coach where that kind of stuff would have been acceptable. In fact, a lot of it was the opposite. No, we don't abuse our bodies to win races or beat times. We work hard, yes, but not through injury or with gimmicks.

 

I think that the *culture* of gymnastics as a whole led to a lot of what went on with Larry Nassar. Almost anything and everything was permissible in the name of winning. So if team/sport culture somehow says you need regular pelvic exams to be good (???!!!) then that's what people accept.

 

My point was simply that not all competitive team cultures are like that and that while I was not surprised that some swim clubs are like that (like some soccer or baseball teams are like that), it doesn't have to be the norm and it isn't the norm for many kids who participate.

 

I think part of all of this is parents recognizing that sometimes the price of acheivement can be too high and they don't need to make their kids pay it, even if the kid seems to be driven to do so or they find themselves on a team like this. Just say no, this is not normal.

[mamaraby]

Y’all have got to stop quoting the trolling. It kind of ruins it for us who have used mute to keep the discussion focused. You know, I don’t think that this falls neatly on a liberal/progressive/conservative, male/female continuum. If there’s anything #metoo or any number of issues in the last couple of years have taught me, it’s that many so-called progressive men show their lack of progress by opening their mouths and silencing women by speaking over them. And plenty of white feminists who do the same to women of color. I love my dh dearly, but he said something to me last weekend about two women he thought were in the city we were in and had traveled to go to the women’s march there. In response I said something like, “You know, I think maybe you don’t get to have an opinion about this.†My dh, being the good guy he is, smiled at me and said “Yeah, I can see that.†I think the sign of the best ally is one who knows when to shut up and listen. Expecially when perhaps, just maybe, the women should get the steer this conversation.

 

I think, too, that regardless of gender or where one stands on any number of things, that there are overlapping levels of privilege. We can talk about a situation where both people are women, but one is in a position of authority and another is not. At that point, I guess I’m not super surprised when the one with greater power (privilege) defends that power structure. I think it’s far too easy to circle the wagons against outsiders so that the threat to the insiders seems far more important to defend against than the threat within. I have no idea how to counter this, but I suspect there are paralells within anti-bullying measures that can be applied. Because that woman in power could discourage another woman from reporting for many of the same reasons why other children stand on the sidelines and don’t stand up for the bullied student.

 

I’m probably pages behind and perhaps we’ve moved on from that. When I was sexually harassed by a classmate in high school in full view of my male and female classmates, the impetus to stand silently by felt very similar to me as when I was bullied a couple of years earlier. To me, they come from the same root. In both cases, I never told my parents or anyone at school because I thought they wouldn't do anything which to my adult brain seems ridiculous because at least in the case of my parents, I do believe now that they would have done something. But the shame and embarassment was real. Which is where my example falls apart because the thought of not being believed never crossed my mind. I had no doubt that I would be believed, it’s just that I thought that I’d then have to suffer further shame and embarassement in addition to the inaction of the adults.

 

The statements by abusers do not surprise me. I have no doubt that they think they’ve done nothing wrong and I don’t think either they or their enablers will ever be convinced otherwise. Perhaps society in general might be convinced, though.

Edited January 28, 2018 by mamaraby

[Sk8ermaiden]

There are great gyms out there, even at the elite level. I do have some thoughts on why gymnastics is so prone to verbal and physical abuse and a culture of fear though. 

 

One of DD's coaches was talking the other day about how there is no place in the US that offers a degree in coaching. She said when the eastern bloc opened up and coaches flooded over, they were made the head coaches and superiors over their American peers (who often had decades more experience). They also found it easier to get loans for gyms, why? Because they all had degrees in coaching. They might have zero experience running a gym or coaching girls, but good golly, they had higher education! 

 

We all (right?) know what Eastern bloc coaching was like at the time this exodus happened. Abuse, starvation, fear. The view of most gymnasts as disposable. And this is right when gym started becoming very popular here. So basically, coaches with these tactics and practices made our system. From the ground up. Many of our gymnasts who went on to become coaches themselves, learned to coach from them. It just became the norm over time. And hey, you can't argue with the medals. 

 

I was reading somewhere recently that most current coaches came up under the old system. And they 1) Do it the same way, 2) leave the sport entirely and want nothing to do with it, or 3) do it totally differently. I think we are getting more and more coaches who are doing it differently, to the benefit of their athletes, but the change has been slooow. 

 

Makayla Maroney talked about her coaches once, that they were very damaging to her, but that they didn't see it that way. Her life was so much gentler and cushier than they ever dreamed of when they were gymnasts...they thought they were nice and she had it easy. 

The whole culture has to be razed and rebuilt in a different image. 

[Spy Car]

Y’all have got to stop quoting the trolling. It kind of ruins it for us who have used mute to keep the discussion focused. You know, I don’t think that this falls neatly on a liberal/progressive/conservative, male/female continuum. If there’s anything #metoo or any number of issues in the last couple of years have taught me, it’s that many so-called progressive men show their lack of progress by opening their mouths and silencing women by speaking over them. And plenty of white feminists who do the same to women of color. I love my dh dearly, but he said something to me last weekend about two women he thought were in the city we were in and had traveled to go to the women’s march there. In response I said something like, “You know, I think maybe you don’t get to have an opinion about this.†My dh, being the good guy he is, smiled at me and said “Yeah, I can see that.†I think the sign of the best ally is one who knows when to shut up and listen. Expecially when perhaps, just maybe, the women should get the steer this conversation.

 

I think, too, that regardless of gender or where one stands on any number of things, that there are overlapping levels of privilege. We can talk about a situation where both people are women, but one is in a position of authority and another is not. At that point, I guess I’m not super surprised when the one with greater power (privilege) defends that power structure. I think it’s far too easy to circle the wagons against outsiders so that the threat to the insiders seems far more important to defend against than the threat within. I have no idea how to counter this, but I suspect there are paralells within anti-bullying measures that can be applied. Because that woman in power could discourage another woman from reporting for many of the same reasons why other children stand on the sidelines and don’t stand up for the bullied student.

 

I’m probably pages behind and perhaps we’ve moved on from that. When I was sexually harassed by a classmate in high school in full view of my male and female classmates, the impetus to stand silently by felt very similar to me as when I was bullied a couple of years earlier. To me, they come from the same root. In both cases, I never told my parents or anyone at school because I thought they wouldn't do anything which to my adult brain seems ridiculous because at least in the case of my parents, I do believe now that they would have done something. But the shame and embarassment was real. Which is where my example falls apart because the thought of not being believed never crossed my mind. I had no doubt that I would be believed, it’s just that I thought that I’d then have to suffer further shame and embarassement in addition to the inaction of the adults.

 

The statements by abusers do not surprise me. I have no doubt that they think they’ve done nothing wrong and I don’t think either they or their enablers will ever be convinced otherwise. Perhaps society in general might be convinced, though.

 

The dripping sexism of these remarks and the stoop to personal attacks is offensive in the extreme.

 

Bill

 

Edited January 28, 2018 by Spy Car

[Lang Syne Boardie]

The dripping sexism of these remarks and the stoop to personal attacks is offensive in the extreme.

 

Bill

I reported this post, because it is yet another example of gaslighting. We need a moderator in here. At this point I don't care whether you are disciplined, or whether the thread is locked - I just hope the moderator will agree that one way or another, this behavior from you needs to stop now.

[Sk8ermaiden]

And another thing that kept coming up during the trial was how often the gymnasts were told how "lucky" they were that Nassar would treat them. You hear them say it in all their interviews. Lucky, privileged, grateful. The truth is that these girls sacrificed having normal lives and bodies that didn't hurt, they pushed themselves to the limit every day of their young lives. USA Gymnastics is lucky to have them, they should feel privileged and grateful to work with them. This culture where the athletes feel indebted to the organization has to stop. 

 

I think this may stem from eastern bloc coaching too. I have listened to so many interviews with former Soviet and Romanian gymnasts. Being plucked out of your village and trained as an athlete was maybe your only shot at a comfortable life. And you were fed and housed free of charge. Be grateful. Do whatever we say. Work through injuries. Don't complain. You owe us. 

US athletes don't owe anyone anything. We pay a FORTUNE for our kids to train. 

[Sk8ermaiden]

I thought about reporting too. I hope the thread can remain open though. If people would just STOP responding to him, he would leave and we could have an interesting discussion.

[SKL]

To say that the judge exemplifies the "worst" of human behavior? Really, her behavior is the worst?? AS in worse than all other behavior? Like, worse than the behavior of Nasser, or those who covered up for him?

 

Based on the fact that this individual who considers himself the beacon of integrity and logic has said it so many times, even in the same posts where he mentions Nassar, I do think he means exactly that.  A judge saying some words is worse than a man raping / molesting 100+ youths and not feeling any remorse.  It's also worse than every other horrible crime and abuse of office we've ever heard of.

Edited January 28, 2018 by SKL

[eternalsummer]

I dunno, I disagree with Bill about almost everything except maybe dogs, and I largely disagree with him about the judge (or at least the importance of complaining about the judge), but to me, it is pretty sexist to say that there are things men just aren't allowed to have an opinion about.

 

I don't see it as a personal attack, though.

 

But also not gaslighting - isn't gaslighting when you're telling the other person they didn't see what they thought they saw or something?  Saying men aren't allowed to have opinions because they are men is sexist.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I thought about reporting too. I hope the thread can remain open though. If people would just STOP responding to him, he would leave and we could have an interesting discussion.

But he never will. Unsinkable is right - recall the circumcision threads of yore? And Bluegoat is right - Spy Car wants to make all of these women listen to him for many days until we know that he is the smartest...and the only moral one by FAR.

Edited January 28, 2018 by Tibbie Dunbar

[SKL]

Yes, it is the worst.

She explicitly said she'd use the same tactics as Larry Nassar.

 

How is that any different than him, other than not following up on the threat?

 

...

 

How it's different:

• Everyone knows these are only words, not intent, not action.  She was putting words on an emotion humans feel.  He on the other hand acted on his evil impulses, many times over.
• Her words were not illegal.  His actions were high level felonies.
• He deserves punishment.  His victims did not.
• He is an adult.  His victims were kids.
• He is one person, and his victims are many.
• He put himself in this situation.  His victims did not.

[gardenmom5]

someone posted the link to Rachel Denhollander's NYT op-ed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/opinion/sunday/larry-nassar-rachael-denhollander.html

 

her lost her church?? WHAT THE H#LL????  :cursing: :cursing: :cursing: :cursing:

 

if any group should have been standing behind her, supporting her cause of what is right - it was them.  :cursing: :cursing:

 

 

she's like the bomb in force 10 from navarone.  they don't have enough dynamite to blow the dam, so they use what tiny bit they have in just the right spot - and it started a chain reaction which brought down the dam.

she was just one voice - but she started a chain reaction that brought down nassar.   with repercussions into everyone who covered his pattottie, msu, usagymnastic, etc.  there are so many  other people who deserve to have charges brought against them. - many of them mandatory reporters.

[SKL]

Both embrace rape. Not so different.

 

Same idea. One just not carried through. 

 

At least not at the moment, although the judge gave a clear signal what she'd allow to happen behind bars, which I'm sure was understood by inmates.

 

This was an embrace of evil on the part of a judge. It was/is shameful.

 

Bill

 

Many of your posts make me wonder if you actually understand our justice system.  For example, it is not up to this judge to allow or not allow whatever other inmates do to Nassar behind bars, and that is well known by inmates.

 

Inmates who would rape other men are not generally the type to take their cues from judges anyway.

[TechWife]

I know we've talked some about swimming - has this been discussed? The article is dated 2010 and the abuse, at that time went back 10 years. 36 coaches were banned for life, yet the head of USA swimming had this to say: 

 

"The executive director of USA Swimming, Chuck Wielgus, acknowledged the problem, but said "It's "It's not nearly as serious in USA Swimming as it might be in the rest of society."

"I don't want to be the one to sit here and say 36 is not too many, one is too many, but this is not just a problem that's isolated to one sport," said Wielgus."

This is another example of someone trying to avoid responsibility and to detract from the issues.

Thirty six coaches - how many children?

Not only that, but here we now have this: 

Raleigh Coach Charged with Sex Crime

I don't think USA Swimming was successful in changing their culture. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Spy Car]

I reported this post, because it is yet another example of gaslighting. We need a moderator in here. At this point I don't care whether you are disciplined, or whether the thread is locked - I just hope the moderator will agree that one way or another, this behavior from you needs to stop now.

 

I've been called a troll (for standing in favor of the moral values of our civilization) and have been subject to ongoing sexist remarks for having a strong difference of opinion with those who would excuse the comments of this judge in support of revenge rape.

 

That is an immoral position on her part.

 

The justice system is designed to protect us from mob rule, and not to make a judge the voice of the mob.

 

I could have reported dozens of posts (including yours). I did not do so.

 

It isn't "gaslighting" to say rape is wrong in all situations.

 

Bill

[Bluegoat]

I dunno, I disagree with Bill about almost everything except maybe dogs, and I largely disagree with him about the judge (or at least the importance of complaining about the judge), but to me, it is pretty sexist to say that there are things men just aren't allowed to have an opinion about.

 

I don't see it as a personal attack, though.

 

But also not gaslighting - isn't gaslighting when you're telling the other person they didn't see what they thought they saw or something?  Saying men aren't allowed to have opinions because they are men is sexist.

 

I think men can have opinions, and I don't particularly want them to give precedence to women's views, even of women's issues.

 

I think it's not even the case that in a discussion like this you somehow have to say supportive things about the victims before you talk about something you find to be a problem.  That really does not mean you don't care about that crime - I think that's kind of a strange conclusion, and it rubs kind of close to virtue signalling.

 

However - Bill's problem, here and in 99% of other times I've seen him post - the other 1% is when he agrees with everyone else -  is the way he talks to people - he tends to make things way more serious than they are; he talks as if anyone who disagrees within is some sort of moral invite and also a moron; and he very often does not even attempt to address or engage with what they actually say or their argument, and he doesn't know when to agree to disagree.  If people don't notice this it is from what I can see because they happen to agree with the issue being discussed, not because the way of speaking is different.

 

To what extent this is something done with self-awareness, well, I'd guess maybe not.  But it's something that makes it impossible to actually have a conversation.

[TechWife]

someone posted the link to Rachel Denhollander's NYT op-ed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/opinion/sunday/larry-nassar-rachael-denhollander.html

 

her lost her church?? WHAT THE H#LL????  :cursing: :cursing: :cursing: :cursing:

 

if any group should have been standing behind her, supporting her cause of what is right - it was them.  :cursing: :cursing:

 

 

she's like the bomb in force 10 from navarone.  they don't have enough dynamite to blow the dam, so they use what tiny bit they have in just the right spot - and it started a chain reaction which brought down the dam.

she was just one voice - but she started a chain reaction that brought down nassar.   with repercussions into everyone who covered his pattottie, msu, usagymnastic, etc.  there are so many  other people who deserve to have charges brought against them. - many of them mandatory reporters.

 

Yes, she also stated that in her victim impact statement. As a Christian, that broke my heart. Churches, like other organizations, have their own issues with covering up sex abuse scandals. The problem isn't isolated to the Roman Catholic Church. 

SaveSave

[Spy Car]

But he never will. Unsinkable is right - recall the circumcision threads of yore? And Bluegoat is right - Spy Car wants to make all of these women listen to him for many days until we know that he is the smartest...and the only moral one by FAR.

 

Did you listen to Bluegoat when she said the judge crossed the line?

 

Bill

[Sk8ermaiden]

Maggie Nichols, (current) NCAA beloved Swaggie Maggie was actually athlete A. It was her coach who started the ball rolling with USAG and the FBI, while Maggie was still in contention for the 2016 Olympics. Rachel was the first one willing to actually put aside anonymity and put her name on it. Aly Raisman and her mother have been like dogs with a bone, constantly taking to social media with biting comments journalists love, and refusing to let a single issue be swept under the rug by USAG. It took a lot of teamwork to make this into the spectacle it was (and needed to be.) 

 

I just see a lot of people thinking Rachel Denhollander was the whistleblower, but it was actually Maggie Nichols.

[Lostinabook]

 Lucky, privileged, grateful. The truth is that these girls sacrificed having normal lives and bodies that didn't hurt, they pushed themselves to the limit every day of their young lives. USA Gymnastics is lucky to have them, they should feel privileged and grateful to work with them. This culture where the athletes feel indebted to the organization has to stop. 

 

I think this may stem from eastern bloc coaching too. I have listened to so many interviews with former Soviet and Romanian gymnasts. Being plucked out of your village and trained as an athlete was maybe your only shot at a comfortable life. And you were fed and housed free of charge. Be grateful. Do whatever we say. Work through injuries. Don't complain. You owe us. 

 

 

Mattie Larson said something like this when she was speaking on 20/20. That yes the "treatments" were uncomfortable & unpleasant, but that she was used to gymnastics requiring a huge deal of pain and discomfort, so she just went with it. She also purposely injured herself in order to be able to leave Karolyi Ranch and ended up quitting gymnastics a year before the Olympics.

[Pam in CT]

(I'm out of likes, laurie and mamaraby and others)

 

 

For me, the silent witnessing bystander/ cultivation of enablers/ community culture dynamics are all interlinked, and all also eventually loop back around to dynamics of authority and power.

 

Before #MeToo arose, and conversations around these topics became both wider and more frequent, I explicitly warned my girls: be wary of any and all groups, and individual men who identify strongly with groups, that are exclusively male or whose culture is overwhelmingly male-centric.  

 

Fraternities.

Sports teams.

Military.

Trading floors.

Exclusive golf clubs.

Religious communities that vest authority solely with men.

 

Such communities as cultures do not foster respect for women's decision-making agency or women's physical autonomy.

 

 

(   obligatory break to issue obligatory soothing murmur:    #NotAllMen  .  

 

Not all athletes, soldiers, bond traders, golfers, religious fundamentalists.  Of course.  Got it.  The observation is about CULTURE , not  individuals.)

 

 

 

 

Since #MeToo, we've had many more, and much more nuanced, conversations; and have begun to grapple with the baffling, heartbreaking, infuriating reality of women who enable -- through acts of omission or commission -- the assault of others.

 

And like Laurie I think Rachel Denhollander's language of "community protection" leading to "choosing to disbelieve" what is "right before our eyes" provides a useful tool, in unraveling how this happens:

 

Most important, we need to encourage and support those brave enough to speak out. Predators rely on community protection to silence victims and keep them in power. Far too often, our commitment to our political party, our religious group, our sport, our college or a prominent member of our community causes us to choose to disbelieve or to turn away from the victim. Far too often, it feels easier and safer to see only what we want to see. Fear of jeopardizing some overarching political, religious, financial or other ideology — or even just losing friends or status — leads to willful ignorance of what is right in front of our own eyes, in the shape and form of innocent and vulnerable children.

 

*This* dynamic -- membership in my college, my faith, my political party, my circle of friends -- causes me to believe victim-of-Accused Person A more naturally and easily than victim-of-Accused Person B.  

 

I have absolutely experienced this myself in the recent tsunami of revelations, in which these simultaneous matched sets almost too perfectly comic to even be possible -- O'Reilly-Weinstein, Franken-Moore, Conyers-Farenthold -- have challenged many of us, usefully I think, to work through in real time whether we really view similar behavior in folks we like vs dislike the same way, or do we tend -- in language used just this week -- to give a "mulligan" to people we're otherwise inclined to support.

[SKL]

I just want to say that other than certain distractions (in which I admit partial guilt), this conversation is one of the most intelligent conversations I've seen about what the problems are and what we can do about them.

[Spy Car]

I think men can have opinions, and I don't particularly want them to give precedence to women's views, even of women's issues.

 

I think it's not even the case that in a discussion like this you somehow have to say supportive things about the victims before you talk about something you find to be a problem.  That really does not mean you don't care about that crime - I think that's kind of a strange conclusion, and it rubs kind of close to virtue signalling.

 

However - Bill's problem, here and in 99% of other times I've seen him post - the other 1% is when he agrees with everyone else -  is the way he talks to people - he tends to make things way more serious than they are; he talks as if anyone who disagrees within is some sort of moral invite and also a moron; and he very often does not even attempt to address or engage with what they actually say or their argument, and he doesn't know when to agree to disagree.  If people don't notice this it is from what I can see because they happen to agree with the issue being discussed, not because the way of speaking is different.

 

To what extent this is something done with self-awareness, well, I'd guess maybe not.  But it's something that makes it impossible to actually have a conversation.

 

Should we "agree to disagree" when the issue is whether it is appropriate for a judge to clearly state that she'd allow Larry Nassar to experience the same sort of brutalization that those he victimized did, in an open court?

 

That's not an issue about which compromise id an ethical position in my estimation. Is it in yours?

 

You OK with the judge's statements?

 

Bill

[Bluegoat]

I know we've talked some about swimming - has this been discussed? The article is dated 2010 and the abuse, at that time went back 10 years. 36 coaches were banned for life, yet the head of USA swimming had this to say: 

 

"The executive director of USA Swimming, Chuck Wielgus, acknowledged the problem, but said "It's "It's not nearly as serious in USA Swimming as it might be in the rest of society."

"I don't want to be the one to sit here and say 36 is not too many, one is too many, but this is not just a problem that's isolated to one sport," said Wielgus."

This is another example of someone trying to avoid responsibility and to detract from the issues.

Thirty six coaches - how many children?

Not only that, but here we now have this: 

Raleigh Coach Charged with Sex Crime

I don't think USA Swimming was successful in changing their culture. 

 

 

 

 

You know, I'm not positive this is someone trying to avoid.

 

I mean, it might be.  

 

10 years ago though, a lot of people still had similar scandals from a few other institutions on their minds.  Institutions are systems that leverage power and effort - so they are prone to abuses that make use of those features.  

 

Whether the swimming community was actually better than others I don't know, but I would not tend to think they were clearly worse.  

[SKL]

Should we "agree to disagree" when the issue is whether it is appropriate for a judge to clearly state that she'd allow Larry Nassar to experience the same sort of brutalization that those he victimized did, in an open court?

 

That's not an issue about which compromise id an ethical position in my estimation. Is it in yours?

 

 

 

 

 

1) Yes we should agree to disagree at this point.

 

2) I think many people would agree her words were problematic, so where they are disagreeing is about whether she should remain on the bench.

 

3) That said, again, yes we should agree to disagree.

 

4) I don't know that it's even possible to not agree to disagree.

[TechWife]

This is on swimswam - nineteen people came forward with abuse allegations in 2014. It's like reading a horror story, yet it's real. Just think of all of the children involved in these sports. 

 

"A bipartisan Congressional committee is investigating sexual abuse allegations within organized sports, including USA Swimming. The committee sent letters to five key institutions this week announcing the investigation: USA Swimming, USA Gymnastics, Michigan State University, the U.S. Olympic Committee and USA Taekwondo."

[gardenmom5]

dp

 

I know there are parts of the country that seem to worship sports more than anything else - not sure where she lives, but perhaps that was their problem.   because she exposed MSU enabling a predator. (and rightly so.)

Edited January 28, 2018 by gardenmom5

[gardenmom5]

I don't think it is unusual for teams to have a doctor or team of doctors on staff.  I am surprised that the girls were required to see him. What would happen if a girl wanted to go to another doctor?  How would the girl be "punished?"

 

I think there were threats that is they went to a different dr, they'd be kicked off the team.

 

I want to see heads roll.

[ErinE]

I've never done this before, but how do I set a poster to ignore?

[Spy Car]

1) Yes we should agree to disagree at this point.

 

2) I think many people would agree her words were problematic, so where they are disagreeing is about whether she should remain on the bench.

 

3) That said, again, yes we should agree to disagree.

 

4) I don't know that it's even possible to not agree to disagree.

 

"Problematic?"

 

A judge saying she'd allow a person she's sentencing to be raped as an act of vigilante justice if she could is "problematic?"

 

The "victim" of the judge's remarks BTW isn't Larry Nassar, is is the women in that courtroom who should not have heard a judge suggesting rape is OK in some circumstances, and the American people generally. She let everyone down though grossly unprofessional behavior.

 

Bill

Edited January 28, 2018 by Spy Car

[Bluegoat]

Should we "agree to disagree" when the issue is whether it is appropriate for a judge to clearly state that she'd allow Larry Nassar to experience the same sort of brutalization that those he victimized did, in an open court?

 

That's not an issue about which compromise id an ethical position in my estimation. Is it in yours?

 

You OK with the judge's statements?

 

Bill

 

It doesn't matter if we agree with them or not.

 

You aren't their mother, and neither am I.  They get to choose their own ideas just as you do, and they also think they are correct, and that you are in the wrong.

 

 And you need to try having a little humility and consider that it's extremely likely that some of the time, when you think you are right, you are actually the one in the wrong.  You might find it easier to engage with what people say if you do so.

 

In any case, what are you going to do?  Keep posting until they give in just to get you to shut up, o have you banned?  Send the thought police after them?  Find their addresses and mail them dog crap? If you've made your point in text, saying the same thing again - and in exactly the same way, to boot - isn't going to change anything.  

 

I have a high standard for judges and the judiciary.  I think there are elements of our approach to justice that are very problematic.  I also think you are the one in the wrong in terms of this conversation.  

Edited January 28, 2018 by Bluegoat

[DawnM]

I've never done this before, but how do I set a poster to ignore?

 

I have had to do this for the first time recently.  Go to your profile.  There is a tab that says "Ignore" and you type in the person you wish to ignore.

 

I now may need to add to the list.

 

Sigh.  

[Lostinabook]

I think there were threats that is they went to a different dr, they'd be kicked off the team.

 

I want to see heads roll.

 

I'm also pretty sure that Twistars at least wouldn't accept doctor's notes to be excused from practice except from Nassar. I don't know where I saw that though, so I can't give a link.

 

 

 

edit: added an "also" since it may have sounded like I was disagreeing instead of adding add'l info.

Edited January 28, 2018 by Lostinabook