As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Larry Nassar, USA Gymnastics, and Michigan State : Sports Abuse Scandals

13335373839

Posts

  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
  • ani_game_bumani_game_bum Optimistic, Rule-Breaking Nice Guy The Final World/DestinationRegistered User regular
    The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding a hearing today regarding the FBI's investigation into Nassar; Biles, among other USA Gymnastics assault survivors, and top FBI and Justice Department officials are expected to testify before the Committee.

    C-SPAN is covering the hearing starting at 10:00 AM EDT; website landing page is here.

    steam_sig.pngPSN: ani_game_bum Battle.net ID: Anigamebum#1354 Genshin UID: 660694297 Switch FC: SW-2127-8288-6505 Steam Wishlist
  • yossarian_livesyossarian_lives Registered User regular
    What are the odds that Jay Abbot and his former subordinates will catch charges over this? Motherfucker got to retire and is pulling a pension, meanwhile his inaction ruined a bunch of lives.

    "I see everything twice!"


  • GnomeTankGnomeTank What the what? Portland, OregonRegistered User regular
    What are the odds that Jay Abbot and his former subordinates will catch charges over this? Motherfucker got to retire and is pulling a pension, meanwhile his inaction ruined a bunch of lives.

    We'll see, I have extremely little confidence in the criminal justice system in this country doing any sort of self correcting and holding it's own actors to account. That said there is a lot of political bluster from both sides of the aisle that something on the criminal front needs to happen to these people.

    Sagroth wrote: »
    Oh c'mon FyreWulff, no one's gonna pay to visit Uranus.
    Steam: Brainling, XBL / PSN: GnomeTank, NintendoID: Brainling, FF14: Zillius Rosh SFV: Brainling
  • JarsJars Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    In further injustice news, Nassar has yet to pay into the federal victim's fun while enjoying several thousand dollars flowing through his commissary account.

    From The Washington Post:
    “Nassar has paid approximately $8.33 toward his criminal monetary penalties per month, despite receiving deposits into his account over this period totaling $12,825.00,” said the filing by Assistant U.S. Attorney Joel Fauson. It reported Nassar’s current account balance as $2,041.57.

    The Washington Post reported last month that the bureau allows inmates to keep unlimited amounts of money in their accounts and effectively shields much of that money from collection by various entities, leaving the Justice Department in the odd position of having to file court cases to force one of its own agencies to turn over money owed to crime victims or for other debts.

    That seems dubious and probably should be better ran on an individual basis. But that would require people, and people can make mistakes and/or be bribed, so instead we have this blanket rule which really puts a crimp into things.

    He spent $10k this month while in prison on prison commissary stuff? I know that prison fees and commisaries are all part of the fuckbarrel system, but that seems dubious.

    the commissary would have a monthly limit on it that is only a few hundred dollars so he wouldn't be able to spend $10,000 period. you have all kinds of alternative markets going around, but nothing that would go directly off his balance.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Honestly Wray needs to be fired for this alone he should be gone.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Honestly Wray needs to be fired for this alone he should be gone.

    He got by on not being an obvious axe man for Trump as was initially expected but he’s pretty Dogshit, yeah

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • [Expletive deleted][Expletive deleted] The mediocre doctor NorwayRegistered User regular

    Is lying to the police not a crime if the lie has no impact on the case (in the state of Michigan)?

    Sic transit gloria mundi.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular

    Is lying to the police not a crime if the lie has no impact on the case (in the state of Michigan)?

    Yep, and this is a massive issue with the courts (a similar attitude is why prosecutorial misconduct can wind up not resulting in a mistrial.) It's stupid and rewards bad behavior, but the courts seem to have a pathological need to determine "did this act really mean anything" (but only for people of the right class.)

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular

    This is what class warfare looks like. The judge sees Simon as a peer, and as such is shocked that the AG would go after her for such "trivialities".

    The judge should leave the bench.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Reading the article it seems reasonable given those facts.

    1) Lying to the police, if the lie is not material to the prosecution of a crime should not be a crime. You should be able to lie to the police when you’re not covering up crimes. *

    2) the police asked her what she knew and she told them what she knew. There wasn’t any testimony or evidence that contradicted her statement. She did not take actions that indicated she knew more than she told the police. There was no evidence that suggested that she was informed in greater detail than she claimed she had been informed in. Either from letting notes or from testimony.

    Reading article the first is even more egregious. Klages was convicted of lying to the police for a falsehood that came after the conviction of the person it was supposed to have protected . If they can prove they knew then the police should have charged them with aiding/abetting.

    *I would argue intent should not matter here but I think it does, which isn’t too unreasonable.

    wbBv3fj.png
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Reading the article it seems reasonable given those facts.

    1) Lying to the police, if the lie is not material to the prosecution of a crime should not be a crime. You should be able to lie to the police when you’re not covering up crimes. *

    2) the police asked her what she knew and she told them what she knew. There wasn’t any testimony or evidence that contradicted her statement. She did not take actions that indicated she knew more than she told the police. There was no evidence that suggested that she was informed in greater detail than she claimed she had been informed in. Either from letting notes or from testimony.

    Reading article the first is even more egregious. Klages was convicted of lying to the police for a falsehood that came after the conviction of the person it was supposed to have protected . If they can prove they knew then the police should have charged them with aiding/abetting.

    *I would argue intent should not matter here but I think it does, which isn’t too unreasonable.

    The problem is that the judge's argument goes to the heart of our current crisis of elite impunity. It is the absolute height of absurdity to argue that the president of Michigan State was "on the periphery to the abysmal decisions" made by her subordinates, and whenever this gooseshit comes up, I'm reminded of the old military adage "you can delegate authority, but not responsibility." (Not to mention that the university's behavior beggars belief that Simon didn't know, but lately courts have been taking the tack of arguing that you need explicit proof to show elite corruption, gutting anti-corruption law in the process.) But the kicker was this bit:
    "...why did the attorney general get involved in a criminal investigation of MSU after Nassar had been sentenced and the civil litigation commenced?" Gleicher wrote of the investigation begun under Republican former Attorney General Bill Schuette. "The historical background supports that the goal was to exact retribution for MSU’s failure to stop Nassar rather than to pursue justice for criminal wrongdoing. Dr. Simon was one of the scapegoats selected to justify that effort."

    This is where I want to bop Gleicher on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and say "bad judge". The fucking point of the investigation was to investigate why MSU allowed a sexual abuser to continue to abuse numerous women and girls for decades while reports were dismissed, and ultimately hold those responsible for the cover up accountable. This is not "retribution" - this is the legal system doing its actual fucking job, and the fact that a currently seated judge on the bench called it the former goes a long way in showing why we have issues with holding elites accountable. Simon wasn't a "scapegoat" - she was the head of the university, and as such holds ultimate responsibility for the university when things like covering up mass sexual assault occur. That's how leadership and accountability are supposed to work. And this also comes back to the overturning of Klages' conviction, as the heart of the court's argument there as well is that the investigation into the cover up at MSU is somehow illegitimate, and that the conviction of Nassar should have closed the book. Absent this utterly gooseshit belief, Klages' lies are absolutely material to the investigation.

    So yeah - these rulings are gooseshit built on a belief that the legal system should not investigate cover ups, and that belief illustrates that Gleicher is unfit to serve on the bench.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Also the judge said that it was completely unreasonable for MSU to suspect Nassar in 2016 when they had ignored a dozen reports dating back 20 years.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • BlackDragon480BlackDragon480 Bluster Kerfuffle Master of Windy ImportRegistered User regular
    Also the judge said that it was completely unreasonable for MSU to suspect Nassar in 2016 when they had ignored a dozen reports dating back 20 years.

    Por que?

    Wow, that's almost more indefensible bullshit than the Brock Turner judge saying "It's not rape, he went to Standford, like me."

    No matter where you go...there you are.
    ~ Buckaroo Banzai
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited December 2021
    But I was wrong in my third belief. I was wrong that surely, if someone had been made aware of what Larry was doing they would report it and ensure it was legitimate before ever allowing him near another child. I did not know when I was 15 that in 1997, three years before I walked into Larry’s exam room that MSU’s head gymnastics coach, Kathie Klages, had waved a report form in front of Larissa Boyce after being told by two separate gymnasts of what Larry was doing and told Larissa there would be consequences for her if she reported.

    I did not know that Tiffany Thomas Lopez had reported the penetration and sexual assault to athletic trainer, Destiny Teachnor-Hauk, and to other athletic trainers and supervisors two years before I walked into Larry’s door.

    I did not know that Christie Achenbach had reported the penetration and sexual assault to her track coach and her athletic trainers and had also been silenced a full year before I walked into Larry’s door. I did not know that Jennifer Bedford had also reported to Destiny Teachnor-Hauk and asked if she could file a report that Larry’s treatment made her feel uncomfortable and that she had also been silenced.

    I believed the adults at MSU surrounding Larry would do the right thing if they were aware of what Larry was doing, and I was terribly wrong. And discovering that I could not only trust my abuser but I could not trust the people surrounding him has been devastating. It is part of the consequences of sexual assault, and it needs to be taken seriously.

    ...

    Every time I repeat these facts about the number of women who reported to employees at MSU and were silenced, you respond the exact same way. You issue a press statement saying there is no cover-up because no one who heard the reports of assaults believed that Larry was committing abuse.

    You play word games saying you didn’t know because no one believed. I know that. And the reason everyone who heard about Larry’s abuse did not believe it is because they did not listen. They did not listen in 1997 or 1998 or 1999 or 2000 or 2004 or 2014. No one knew, according to your definition of know, because no one handle(d) the reports of abuse properly.

    Victims were silenced, intimidated, repeatedly told it was medical treatment and even forced to go back for continued sexual assault. You have stated in a motion to dismiss our civil suit that, ironically, is being heard right now in court as I am speaking. That the reports that were given in 1997, ’89, ;99 and 2000 to track coaches, head gymnastic coaches and athletic trainers and supervisors don’t, quote, count as notice because these teenagers didn’t report it to the right official. The 14-year-old didn’t go to the right person.

    You have stated that no reports of sexual assault count as notice unless it is reported to a person who is capable of firing the alleged perpetrator. This entirely contradicts the letter that president Simon sent all 11,000 MSU employees in 2012 reminding them that MSU policy requires them to report any suspected child abuse and any allegations of sexual assault against someone at MSU. So, MSU, which is it? Do your employees have a duty to protect children or not?

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/24/us/rachael-denhollander-full-statement/index.html

    (Again, if you never read or watched this, you should)

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Reading the article it seems reasonable given those facts.

    1) Lying to the police, if the lie is not material to the prosecution of a crime should not be a crime. You should be able to lie to the police when you’re not covering up crimes. *

    2) the police asked her what she knew and she told them what she knew. There wasn’t any testimony or evidence that contradicted her statement. She did not take actions that indicated she knew more than she told the police. There was no evidence that suggested that she was informed in greater detail than she claimed she had been informed in. Either from letting notes or from testimony.

    Reading article the first is even more egregious. Klages was convicted of lying to the police for a falsehood that came after the conviction of the person it was supposed to have protected . If they can prove they knew then the police should have charged them with aiding/abetting.

    *I would argue intent should not matter here but I think it does, which isn’t too unreasonable.

    The problem is that the judge's argument goes to the heart of our current crisis of elite impunity. It is the absolute height of absurdity to argue that the president of Michigan State was "on the periphery to the abysmal decisions" made by her subordinates, and whenever this gooseshit comes up, I'm reminded of the old military adage "you can delegate authority, but not responsibility." (Not to mention that the university's behavior beggars belief that Simon didn't know, but lately courts have been taking the tack of arguing that you need explicit proof to show elite corruption, gutting anti-corruption law in the process.) But the kicker was this bit:
    "...why did the attorney general get involved in a criminal investigation of MSU after Nassar had been sentenced and the civil litigation commenced?" Gleicher wrote of the investigation begun under Republican former Attorney General Bill Schuette. "The historical background supports that the goal was to exact retribution for MSU’s failure to stop Nassar rather than to pursue justice for criminal wrongdoing. Dr. Simon was one of the scapegoats selected to justify that effort."

    This is where I want to bop Gleicher on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and say "bad judge". The fucking point of the investigation was to investigate why MSU allowed a sexual abuser to continue to abuse numerous women and girls for decades while reports were dismissed, and ultimately hold those responsible for the cover up accountable. This is not "retribution" - this is the legal system doing its actual fucking job, and the fact that a currently seated judge on the bench called it the former goes a long way in showing why we have issues with holding elites accountable. Simon wasn't a "scapegoat" - she was the head of the university, and as such holds ultimate responsibility for the university when things like covering up mass sexual assault occur. That's how leadership and accountability are supposed to work. And this also comes back to the overturning of Klages' conviction, as the heart of the court's argument there as well is that the investigation into the cover up at MSU is somehow illegitimate, and that the conviction of Nassar should have closed the book. Absent this utterly gooseshit belief, Klages' lies are absolutely material to the investigation.

    So yeah - these rulings are gooseshit built on a belief that the legal system should not investigate cover ups, and that belief illustrates that Gleicher is unfit to serve on the bench.

    The legal system should investigate criminal wrongdoing. This isn't the military, you can't charge her with "dereliction of duty", "Bad Leadership" isn't a crime, nor is outside of narrow groups/situations "Failure to report".

    Let's assume she knew everything. If she just passively did nothing. Didn't pass on reports, didn't launch and investigation, just ignored the situation completely. What law did she break. Maybe mandatory reporter laws, but those were generally much narrower until the last few years in response to this and the catholic church.

    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Reading the article it seems reasonable given those facts.

    1) Lying to the police, if the lie is not material to the prosecution of a crime should not be a crime. You should be able to lie to the police when you’re not covering up crimes. *

    2) the police asked her what she knew and she told them what she knew. There wasn’t any testimony or evidence that contradicted her statement. She did not take actions that indicated she knew more than she told the police. There was no evidence that suggested that she was informed in greater detail than she claimed she had been informed in. Either from letting notes or from testimony.

    Reading article the first is even more egregious. Klages was convicted of lying to the police for a falsehood that came after the conviction of the person it was supposed to have protected . If they can prove they knew then the police should have charged them with aiding/abetting.

    *I would argue intent should not matter here but I think it does, which isn’t too unreasonable.

    The problem is that the judge's argument goes to the heart of our current crisis of elite impunity. It is the absolute height of absurdity to argue that the president of Michigan State was "on the periphery to the abysmal decisions" made by her subordinates, and whenever this gooseshit comes up, I'm reminded of the old military adage "you can delegate authority, but not responsibility." (Not to mention that the university's behavior beggars belief that Simon didn't know, but lately courts have been taking the tack of arguing that you need explicit proof to show elite corruption, gutting anti-corruption law in the process.) But the kicker was this bit:
    "...why did the attorney general get involved in a criminal investigation of MSU after Nassar had been sentenced and the civil litigation commenced?" Gleicher wrote of the investigation begun under Republican former Attorney General Bill Schuette. "The historical background supports that the goal was to exact retribution for MSU’s failure to stop Nassar rather than to pursue justice for criminal wrongdoing. Dr. Simon was one of the scapegoats selected to justify that effort."

    This is where I want to bop Gleicher on the nose with a rolled up newspaper and say "bad judge". The fucking point of the investigation was to investigate why MSU allowed a sexual abuser to continue to abuse numerous women and girls for decades while reports were dismissed, and ultimately hold those responsible for the cover up accountable. This is not "retribution" - this is the legal system doing its actual fucking job, and the fact that a currently seated judge on the bench called it the former goes a long way in showing why we have issues with holding elites accountable. Simon wasn't a "scapegoat" - she was the head of the university, and as such holds ultimate responsibility for the university when things like covering up mass sexual assault occur. That's how leadership and accountability are supposed to work. And this also comes back to the overturning of Klages' conviction, as the heart of the court's argument there as well is that the investigation into the cover up at MSU is somehow illegitimate, and that the conviction of Nassar should have closed the book. Absent this utterly gooseshit belief, Klages' lies are absolutely material to the investigation.

    So yeah - these rulings are gooseshit built on a belief that the legal system should not investigate cover ups, and that belief illustrates that Gleicher is unfit to serve on the bench.

    The legal system should investigate criminal wrongdoing. This isn't the military, you can't charge her with "dereliction of duty", "Bad Leadership" isn't a crime, nor is outside of narrow groups/situations "Failure to report".

    Let's assume she knew everything. If she just passively did nothing. Didn't pass on reports, didn't launch and investigation, just ignored the situation completely. What law did she break. Maybe mandatory reporter laws, but those were generally much narrower until the last few years in response to this and the catholic church.

    Accessory? Aiding and abetting? This is why we have things like reckless malice - because at a certain point, not giving a shit ceases to be functionally different from intentionality. And it's worth pointing out that among the lower classes, people are routinely held to those charges for passively ignoring abuses they know about, even in situations where they are just as much a victim as well. Yet when we get to the upper classes, suddenly justifications and excuses are much more readily available for much less defensible behavior, because those who are supposed to be the ones holding these individuals accountable see them as peers.

    I also find the "what law" argument to ring especially hollow in the case of sexual assault and its environs given the continuous fight to define it (and thus who is accountable) narrowly. Not to mention that we have had "bad" (that is, corrupt) leadership laws on the books to say that yes, head officials have a positive duty to make sure their subordinates aren't breaking the law, only to have the courts gut them.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    I too think the world would be a better place If all situations were resolved as I philosopher god king wish them to be. Alas we are a world of laws.

    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • MagellMagell Detroit Machine Guns Fort MyersRegistered User regular
    I too think the world would be a better place If all situations were resolved as I philosopher god king wish them to be. Alas we are a world of laws.

    He literally said the laws they should be charged with breaking.

  • HamHamJHamHamJ Registered User regular
    I really doubt this would meet the requirements of accessory or aiding and abetting.

    While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    Magell wrote: »
    I too think the world would be a better place If all situations were resolved as I philosopher god king wish them to be. Alas we are a world of laws.

    He literally said the laws they should be charged with breaking.
    I also find the "what law" argument to ring especially hollow in the case of sexual assault and its environs given the continuous fight to define it (and thus who is accountable) narrowly.

    Literally, "what does it matter if they actually broke a law"?

    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    HamHamJ wrote: »
    I really doubt this would meet the requirements of accessory or aiding and abetting.

    Why wouldn't they? Again, we routinely use these charges against people in the lower classes who passively ignore abuse, and in cases where the reason they choose passivity is because they're victims as well. No, the reason we don't is because that sort of thing is not "done" to someone of the sort of position as Simon. And the fact that Gleicher chews out the prosecution over the "factual record" while demonstrating that the person actually unaware of the factual record of complaints against Nassar being squelched for over two decades is herself is demonstration of the problem. She decided that there was no way Simon could have been aware, and then worked backwards from there - I have my suspicions because the other way might have her thinking about her own career as a defense attorney.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Magell wrote: »
    I too think the world would be a better place If all situations were resolved as I philosopher god king wish them to be. Alas we are a world of laws.

    He literally said the laws they should be charged with breaking.
    I also find the "what law" argument to ring especially hollow in the case of sexual assault and its environs given the continuous fight to define it (and thus who is accountable) narrowly.

    Literally, "what does it matter if they actually broke a law"?

    Again, I pointed out two laws. But the point of my comment there is that I find the claims of "oh my God, there isn't a law" to be particularly tedious when the reason there isn't is because people have been actively making sure there wasn't. The point is that what also matters is the fact that the reason the legal terrain here is so muddy is because it's been made that way intentionally, and it's goosery to ignore that while crying out "but there isn't a law!"

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Michigan settled with the Anderson victims (all 1050 of them so far) for 490 million dollars. Which is half of what MSU paid out on a per victim basis.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • knitdanknitdan In ur base Killin ur guysRegistered User regular
    And a fraction of what they’ve given the football program to consistently fail to win a title

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    knitdan wrote: »
    And a fraction of what they’ve given the football program to consistently fail to win a title

    Not really, football generates 125m in revenue and costs 50m in operating expenses. It's stupid and immoral in coutless ways, but for the big schools getting rid of it or men's basketball would basically force every other sport to cease operating.

    6ylyzxlir2dz.png
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    And we have another predatory gynecologist preying on college students:
    The University of California has agreed to pay more than $100 million to settle allegations that several hundred women were sexually abused by a former UCLA gynecologist, lawyers announced.

    The settlement was announced Monday by some of the attorneys representing 203 women who said they were groped or otherwise abused by Dr. James Heaps over a 35-year career. Details weren't released.

    The suit said that the university ignored decades of complaints and deliberately concealed abuse.

    Just...what the fuck, people?

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    So, figure skating has a major scandal going on over Russian skater Kamila Valieva. Short version - Russia has been seeing success in women's figure skating thanks to coach Eteri Tutberidze, who has seemingly dusted off the old Karolyi playbook and added some new twists such as abusing the age limits on doping. (Short version there: WADA rules hold that competitors under 16 cannot be held fully responsible for doping because of their age - part of the scandal is that Valieva was allowed to compete at the Olympics after a test result that would have gotten an older competitor banned.)

    Needless to say, this has not been a good look for all involved, especially after Valieva's fall down the rankings and off the podium.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2022
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse. The gold medalist sitting alone with no one joining them to celebrate, the silver medalist describing how she hates everyone and figure skating, and the obviously broken projected champion (Valieva) despondent and being yelled at by her coach. Only person who was capable of enjoying their Olympic experience was the bronze medalist from Japan.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse.

    The kid is already being abused by the coaches, now the whole world is treating her like shit.

    She's just a fucking kid.

    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse.

    The kid is already being abused by the coaches, now the whole world is treating her like shit.

    She's just a fucking kid.

    Not only that, she's a victim. But since she's the unintentional face of this mess, she's become the focus. Not to mention that because of how her coach works, this is likely her last shot at the Olympics (which was also part of why she was cleared to compete.)

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Basically, there's one clear course of action here, which should have been done years ago - Tutberidze needs to be banned from the sport. Given that she was the International Skating Union's coach of the year in 2020, I don't see that happening without pressure given the amount of crow that would need to be eaten.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse.

    The kid is already being abused by the coaches, now the whole world is treating her like shit.

    She's just a fucking kid.

    The (slightly older) gold medalist carrying her freaking teddy bear with her everywhere really hammered this point home.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse.

    The kid is already being abused by the coaches, now the whole world is treating her like shit.

    She's just a fucking kid.

    The (slightly older) gold medalist carrying her freaking teddy bear with her everywhere really hammered this point home.

    One suggestion that has been floated is upping the minimum competition age to 18, which while not the worst idea is sidestepping the actual issue here - an abusive coach supported by a political regime that sees these girls as tools.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • LostNinjaLostNinja Registered User regular
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse.

    The kid is already being abused by the coaches, now the whole world is treating her like shit.

    She's just a fucking kid.

    I’ve been really conflicted around the whole situation. She’s a kid, and clearly this is all solely the fault of her abusive coach (and county - they should not be permitted to still compete as the ROC, it should be as independent athletes or something else that removes Russia’s ability to still call that their team). At the same time, even if this was her one shot, it’s not fair for her to compete against the other athletes who didn’t take a banned substance. Of course the irony being that what she took wasn’t even going to make a difference in that she was that much of a favorite. She didn’t need that little bit of extra endurance she gained to still win.

    I think it probably would have been better for all involved if she hadn’t been allowed to still compete. The added spotlight/scrutiny of her being allowed to despite the positive, which is above and beyond what the positive test itself would have caused, was certainly more detrimental to her mental health in the long run.

    The coach broke that poor kid, and apparently the two others as well as her past skaters, and shouldn’t be allowed to keep doing it.

  • ButtersButters A glass of some milks Registered User regular
    Is it possible to change the rules to change the culture of child abuse around women's gymnastics and figure skating or do we like...eliminated those sports entirely? I feel like the incentives around a sport where it is advantageous to be tiny teenage girl are always going to lead to tragedy.

    PSN: idontworkhere582 | CFN: idontworkhere | Steam: lordbutters | Amazon Wishlist
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited February 2022
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse.

    The kid is already being abused by the coaches, now the whole world is treating her like shit.

    She's just a fucking kid.

    The (slightly older) gold medalist carrying her freaking teddy bear with her everywhere really hammered this point home.

    One suggestion that has been floated is upping the minimum competition age to 18, which while not the worst idea is sidestepping the actual issue here - an abusive coach supported by a political regime that sees these girls as tools.

    To me you should do both. Make the minimum age 18 and also take strong steps against abuse like banning this coach.

    Also, the USOC and ROC are pretty similar in their toleration of abuse, unfortunately.

    enlightenedbum on
    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited February 2022
    Shadowfire wrote: »
    Honestly the transparently fucked up emotional abuse last night might have been worse.

    The kid is already being abused by the coaches, now the whole world is treating her like shit.

    She's just a fucking kid.

    The (slightly older) gold medalist carrying her freaking teddy bear with her everywhere really hammered this point home.

    One suggestion that has been floated is upping the minimum competition age to 18, which while not the worst idea is sidestepping the actual issue here - an abusive coach supported by a political regime that sees these girls as tools.

    I am not sure that would do a lot since you have to be ready to compete at 18. So, more or less, they’re going to do the same stuff at the same time they just won’t start competing till later. *

    Probably better to ban the coach and have aggressive monitoring. Which has its own problems but I think these are more able to be overcome

    *it could actually make it worse. The reason for steroids isn’t really “endurance and strength” in the actual competition. It’s the ability to recover between training sessions. The faster you recover the more and harder training you can get in. If the women cannot compete until theyre 18 then they will likely not be monitored for performance enhancers until then and this means that coaches will load up girls with PEDs in order to get them ready without much of a downside.

    Goumindong on
    wbBv3fj.png
Sign In or Register to comment.