Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You're responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the Forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it--details of personal disputes may be better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts, though are not legally obligated to do so, regardless of content.

Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting. Moderators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts unless they have been alerted and have determined that a post, thread or user has violated the Forums' policies. Moderators do not regularly independently monitor the Forums for such violations.

Profanity, outright vulgarity, blatant personal insults or otherwise inappropriate statements will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

Users may provide their positive or negative experiences with or opinions of companies, products, individuals, etc.; however, accounts involving allegations of criminal behavior against named individuals or companies MUST be first-hand accounts and may NOT be made anonymously.

If a situation has been reported upon by a reputable news source or addressed by law enforcement or the legal system it is open for discussion, but if an individual wants to make their own claims of criminal behavior against a named party in the course of that discussion, they too must identify themselves by first and last name and the account must be first-person.

Criminal allegations that do not satisfy these requirements, when brought to our attention, may be removed pending satisfaction of these criteria, and we reserve the right to err on the side of caution when making these determinations.

Credible threats of suicide will be reported to the police along with identifying user information at our disposal, in addition to referring the user to suicide helpline resources such as 1-800-SUICIDE or 1-800-273-TALK.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it's understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users' profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses -- Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it's related to a horse for sale, regardless of who's selling it, it doesn't belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions -- Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services -- Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products -- While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements -- Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be "bumped" excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues -- Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators' discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the �alert� button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your �Ignore� list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you'd rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user's membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 5/9/18)
See more
See less

Eventing Nation booted from covering Event in Unionville, PA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Albion View Post

    Amazing, you can manage to be succinct when you're not pontificating for pages (as I always knew you could!!). Feel free to go on further though, honey. And yes, if you were one of my students, I'd be rolling my eyes while marking your assignments.
    Criticizing someone's writing style on a bulletin board when that person didn't ask for feedback is just rude. And then going on and on with it is ruder still.
    ~Veronica
    "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"
    http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/vxf111/

    Comment


      OK folks, though I appreciate support some have offered to me after getting myself into a bit of “back and forth” with others on this thread...

      I want to take responsibility for my role in it, and just say I’m sorry for being snide, engaging in mocking type posts, and digging my heels in and arguing with others, and taking some posts that have been pointed in my direction very personally.

      It just wrecks the discussion for everyone when we go there. And I have indeed gone there multiple times ok this thread. I will do my best to knock it off going forward. Although I do still enjoy witty humor, and likely will engage in it a bit of the opportunity arises during the course of this discussion.

      ladyj79 has an academic background, I believe. And I admittedly always enjoy it when she starts quoting stuff on one of these threads :-) She’s truly a brilliant person, in my opinion, and I can’t resist deciding what it is she says, and trying to play along and quote back at her.

      But I’m sorry if some of the rest of you are annoyed by this.

      As for my use of quotes and terms in the context of this discussion like “activist agenda”, “white privilege” and “social justice warrior”... I’m sorry if that offended and upset some of you. I am going to be brave right now, and out something on the COTH forums that honestly caught many posters I had always been friendly with by surprise several months ago when I made a poor decision and decided to participate in a current events thread about masks. I am philosophically and ideologically to the right of center of many many subjects in real life.

      People seemed to be upset by this when they caught on to it in the context of a Covid mask thread. And they seemed to feel mislead and betrayed, because I have participated extensively on Safe Sport topics, and am a staunch supporter of Safe Sport.

      And so, here we are. I don’t actually want to continue arguing about stuff that is truly mostly political in nature with others on this thread. We will just get mad at one another, and decide we really don’t like each other, and stop listening to anything the other side has to say.

      So I will knock it off.

      And I hope others will join me in knocking it off, and the discussion can now just move forward.

      Peace everyone. My apologies if this post is too long, or riddled with typos. And my intention right now is not to come off as arrogant, but to be conciliatory. If I have failed at that... well... it wouldn’t be a first

      Comment


        Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

        Emails have been published in the Horse of Delaware Valley, and they indicate they have seen a copy of the letter Rob Burk sent to Eventing Nation on Sept. 13 as well. Everything I’ve stated in my post has bent based on reporting that anyone came from reading from both HoDV, and COTH. Nancy Jaffer’s recent report on it all (she put it out on September 21st on the HorseSport site) also has many quotes from people directly involved, and reporting with respect to what the situation was like at Plantation field with all the riders there the other weekend.

        It’s fine if you don’t like my style or want to read my posts, and if you don’t want to bother reading reports from HoDV abc COTH or HorseSport on this whole situation. You can have an opinion without having followed it closely. But it is actually not ok to accuse me of “dangerous speculation” when it seems quite clear you haven’t read what I’ve posted, or noted that it’s based on MULTIPLE public reports that are now out about this situation, and the chain of events and communications with respect to everyone involved. I call foul on that.
        I have to say I highly enjoy your posts ( ALL) in this thread. Where I sometimes lack eloquence in my thoughts when I’m angry, you’ve been able to keep the decorum in your posts and intelligence. It’s the people with opposing views, or woke status who have a problem. I love how the majority of woke people are mostly white women ( a few men) who like to lecture everyone on what is racist/ white privileged and how we should be ashamed for the color of our skin ( racism against white people for being white). I’m not going to be ashamed or made to feel bad because I was born with white skin. But I also don’t make anybody feel bad for the color of the skin. And why are we using the term BIPOC When many POC hate the term and have said they prefer to be called black, not African American or POC, but black.

        Comment


          Originally posted by TXnGA View Post

          I have to say I highly enjoy your posts ( ALL) in this thread. Where I sometimes lack eloquence in my thoughts when I’m angry, you’ve been able to keep the decorum in your posts and intelligence. It’s the people with opposing views, or woke status who have a problem. I love how the majority of woke people are mostly white women ( a few men) who like to lecture everyone on what is racist/ white privileged and how we should be ashamed for the color of our skin ( racism against white people for being white). I’m not going to be ashamed or made to feel bad because I was born with white skin. But I also don’t make anybody feel bad for the color of the skin. And why are we using the term BIPOC When many POC hate the term and have said they prefer to be called black, not African American or POC, but black.
          Thank you for the positive feedback. It is appreciated.

          As for the term BIPOC, I sometimes use it, and sometimes don’t. I have also heard directly from many folks who are black and a one who is actually Native American, that they think it’s a really weird term. But it seems to be widely accepted these day’s that use of that term indicates a conscious attempt to be sensitive when talking about other people... so sometimes I use it.

          I will take this moment to mention one other point... that will probably get me into trouble... it hey... it is what it is. Might as well just be honest...

          Does anyone else find the fact that Hispanic equestrians are ignored in the context of this discussion and others sort of odd and perplexing? This topic is about eventing... but back awhile ago when similar editorials were circulating in other equestrian publications over the summer about race and inclusivity and sensitivity in sport... I found it odd that the focus was on BIPOC. I have some acquaintances who are deeply involved in the hunter community in particular, and who consider themselves very socially conscious and sensitive and caring. One of them was having trouble finding part time labor, which was going to involve some horse management and grooming responsibilities for her personal farm a little while back, and I suggested she actually look into hiring someone who was young and local and coming out of a working student program for an eventer. Because they probably could use free board for their horse, and would likely be a hard worker and have pretty solid horse management skills... and her response to me was, “Thanks for the suggestion, but what I really want is a good Mexican, just like most of the other top hunter barns have.”

          I was shocked.

          I know for a fact she is not a consciously racist or discriminatory person, and I also know she is a proud supporter of BLM. And hates the orange man, and loves her sport. And wants it to be more diverse and welcoming towards everyone. But clearly... she has a bit of a blind spot of some sort going on.

          I’m kind of curious... what do others think of that story? I’m actually curious about the opinion of people who do believe in living life while remaining cognizant of their own white privileged, who care about diversity in equestrian sports, who support BLM, etc. What do you make of the hunter person’s comment about finding Mexican labor?

          It’s a 100% true story. And for the record... the person who said that is not a conscious racist in my opinion. She tries hard to be a good person. But she is admittedly quite a difficult to get along with sort of horse person at times. My response, in the moment, was just to look at her and say, “Oh. I see. Well, I don’t know how to help you with that. I just think a poor working student in need of free board for their horse coming out of a decent program might be a great option for you.”

          I didn’t tell her she sounded like a total elitist bigot at the time, because it would have led to a fight. And I didn’t want to fight with her. But I did think she sounded like an elitist bigot. And it made me wonder if she was looking for undocumented labor in particular... to keep her costs down. And I have a BIG opinion on that. I think it’s unfair and wrong sbd abusive to use undocumented labor in the horse industry to suppress wages.

          But I digress. And have rambled. Carry on folks :-)

          Comment


            I have many, many, many words about the treatment of grooms and stable hands, particularly those who are minorities and/or immigrants.

            Very, very few of those words are kind, and usually the people who are the very worst offenders are educated professional white women who view themselves as incredibly socially conscious.


            It is vomitous.


            I have also heard trainers say that, and I've heard other trainers say of particular clients "she treats me like I'm a Mexican."

            The gross hypocrisy makes my head explode.


            FWIW in Europe, it's now the Poles, or as my Polish groom friend and I would jokingly say, the Mexicans of Europe. Poles do not have the same right of movement as most if Western Europe, and so are absolutely taken advantage of as transitory and expendable labour.

            I hate everyone.
            Let me apologize in advance.

            Comment


              I want to take a moment to note something to anyone else still following this thread... just in case they aren’t checking Eventing Nation’s site any more. Which I understand.

              There is no coverage on their site about Middleburg Horse Trials. It ran this weekend. Maybe they just skipped it. Or... maybe someone in area II told them they didn’t want EN to cover anything to do with that competition. Because it’s not just Boyd who is upset with EN right now, and pushing back hard.
              Last edited by Virginia Horse Mom; Sep. 27, 2020, 03:31 PM. Reason: Typo

              Comment


                Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                I have many, many, many words about the treatment of grooms and stable hands, particularly those who are minorities and/or immigrants.

                Very, very few of those words are kind, and usually the people who are the very worst offenders are educated professional white women who view themselves as incredibly socially conscious.


                It is vomitous.


                I have also heard trainers say that, and I've heard other trainers say of particular clients "she treats me like I'm a Mexican."

                The gross hypocrisy makes my head explode.


                FWIW in Europe, it's now the Poles, or as my Polish groom friend and I would jokingly say, the Mexicans of Europe. Poles do not have the same right of movement as most if Western Europe, and so are absolutely taken advantage of as transitory and expendable labour.

                I hate everyone.
                Well, it just goes to show, as we were discussing earlier, all animals are equal. Except for some animals, who are more equal than others. Especially during an election year. When media outlets are trying to capitalize on a hot button issue, and both gain clicks by talking about it, and rally the base of specific segments of the population who make up their base in order to get out the vote.

                I truly dislike this sort of thing, when both sides engage in it on consequential issues. And I get exceptionally frustrated when people with strong beliefs on one side or the other get roped into it all, and then start attacking other folks and claiming to have the moral high ground.

                Sometimes I think the attacks are a matter of people having sincerely held ideals, and just getting swept up in the moment. But I’m deeply distrustful of some of the underlying dynamics involved with the media these days, and feel it’s a huge factor in our society tearing itself apart.

                And this, I am greatly distressed by this Plantation Field episode, and the sport of eventing, because I think it is truly a bit of an issue of certain media tactics making their way into our sport, with timing that neatly coincides with a national focus on the BLM movement.

                But I am profoundly cynical about almost everything and everyone these days. Except for the family dog. I trust her, and am positive she is pure of heart. She’s a Labrador retriever.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post
                  As for my use of quotes and terms in the context of this discussion like “activist agenda”, “white privilege” and “social justice warrior”... I’m sorry if that offended and upset some of you.
                  Thank you for saying that.

                  I don't consider myself a "woke" person tbh (or someone who gets offended easily), some of the stuff I see I do think is ridiculous and snowflakey. But the hate-on I have been seeing towards EN, specifically LW, really bothers me because I do think she had the right idea. And seeing people mock other people that agree with that sentiment and calling them woke social justice warriors, which is very much intended as a smug derisive insult, just seems so wrong in this situation.

                  By all means, discuss what could have been done to get a better response, or what can be done in the future if there are any other attempts like this. I have no issue with people saying they went about it wrong. I'm not convinced anything would have changed the outcome, but maybe it would have.

                  But the attacking of people that genuinely care about how others are affected by something (and have said they are affected) and want to do SOMETHING to affect change is disturbing to me. And the claim that it's all white people that have just assumed it bothers POC but haven't actually talked to any is just plain wrong. Not to mention you can go on any SM platform and look at comments and see POC riders and parents of riders chiming in with how uncomfortable the name has made them, how disappointed they are by the snubbing of (mostly white) people in charge.

                  Just please try to keep the "woke SJW" comments at least to yourself. This really isn't a random white person deciding to be an activist for the rep, even if it started that way (though not convinced it did). This is a large group of people that are really bothered by not only the name of this place, but now also the reactions of people saying what they think and feel doesn't matter. And seeing it from their heroes, no less. And no, I'm not talking about us white "activists".

                  The people that went after you for long posts, that was too harsh too. The attacking on both sides needs to cool it. I don't think you guys that are "siding", so to speak, with the LO are bad, racist people at all. And I agree on some points. I just think the better way to say it would be something like "Their hearts were in the right place but execution was lacking" instead of "omg EN is evil and everyone should boycott them and they suck and I hate them". For the ones that do agree with the sentiment, anyways. The ones that think all of this is just stupid, we will have to agree to disagree on that and you can ignore everything I just said since it won't matter to you anyways

                  Comment


                    From the Boyd Martin post on FB, my understanding is that Middleburg HT asked EN not to show up.

                    Let me apologize in advance.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by RainWeasley View Post

                      Thank you for saying that.

                      I don't consider myself a "woke" person tbh (or someone who gets offended easily), some of the stuff I see I do think is ridiculous and snowflakey. But the hate-on I have been seeing towards EN, specifically LW, really bothers me because I do think she had the right idea. And seeing people mock other people that agree with that sentiment and calling them woke social justice warriors, which is very much intended as a smug derisive insult, just seems so wrong in this situation.

                      By all means, discuss what could have been done to get a better response, or what can be done in the future if there are any other attempts like this. I have no issue with people saying they went about it wrong. I'm not convinced anything would have changed the outcome, but maybe it would have.

                      But the attacking of people that genuinely care about how others are affected by something (and have said they are affected) and want to do SOMETHING to affect change is disturbing to me. And the claim that it's all white people that have just assumed it bothers POC but haven't actually talked to any is just plain wrong. Not to mention you can go on any SM platform and look at comments and see POC riders and parents of riders chiming in with how uncomfortable the name has made them, how disappointed they are by the snubbing of (mostly white) people in charge.

                      Just please try to keep the "woke SJW" comments at least to yourself. This really isn't a random white person deciding to be an activist for the rep, even if it started that way (though not convinced it did). This is a large group of people that are really bothered by not only the name of this place, but now also the reactions of people saying what they think and feel doesn't matter. And seeing it from their heroes, no less. And no, I'm not talking about us white "activists".

                      The people that went after you for long posts, that was too harsh too. The attacking on both sides needs to cool it. I don't think you guys that are "siding", so to speak, with the LO are bad, racist people at all. And I agree on some points. I just think the better way to say it would be something like "Their hearts were in the right place but execution was lacking" instead of "omg EN is evil and everyone should boycott them and they suck and I hate them". For the ones that do agree with the sentiment, anyways. The ones that think all of this is just stupid, we will have to agree to disagree on that and you can ignore everything I just said since it won't matter to you anyways
                      Well thank you for engaging, and your attempt at reflection, and explaining where you are coming from.

                      And I will commit that much harder to drop the use of the term “woke” and “social justice warrior” and even just “activist” from all of my discussions on this topic, from here on out. Both on the forums, and on other SoMe platforms, and in real life. Because of the way chose to engage with me.

                      And that’s a good example I guess of how we can all start doing better when talking to one another. I’m willing, and will try and step up when others approach me in kind.

                      As for demonizing LW, etc, I can understand how you might perceive it as overboard and unfair. I am privy to some information that I hAve not shared on these forums, and it does color my personal judgement. And bothers me a bit on this whole thing. But I will try harder to better manage myself and my posts in the context of this discussion. That’s fair.

                      Any thoughts on the issue of the hispanic/Latino population in our country with respect to a number of horse sports, and the curious lack of discussion right now about elitism, bigotry, insensitivity and frankly significant systemic inequity issues with respect to their role in various horse sports?

                      Just curious. I’m not trying to be a jerk or bait you. But it does seriously seem bizarre to me that this isn’t a discussion we are all also having...

                      But part of it is that so many folks like cheap labor... and often that means undocumented labor... and horse sports are expensive... and people like to sweep that issue under the rug. And I think that’s a terrible thing. Just my opinion.

                      Comment


                        VHM -- I completely agree about how the latinos/as have been treated in the horse business. That has burned me for years.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Virginia Horse Mom View Post

                          Emails have been published in the Horse of Delaware Valley, and they indicate they have seen a copy of the letter Rob Burk sent to Eventing Nation on Sept. 13 as well. Everything I’ve stated in my post has bent based on reporting that anyone came from reading from both HoDV, and COTH. Nancy Jaffer’s recent report on it all (she put it out on September 21st on the HorseSport site) also has many quotes from people directly involved, and reporting with respect to what the situation was like at Plantation field with all the riders there the other weekend.

                          It’s fine if you don’t like my style or want to read my posts, and if you don’t want to bother reading reports from HoDV abc COTH or HorseSport on this whole situation. You can have an opinion without having followed it closely. But it is actually not ok to accuse me of “dangerous speculation” when it seems quite clear you haven’t read what I’ve posted, or noted that it’s based on MULTIPLE public reports that are now out about this situation, and the chain of events and communications with respect to everyone involved. I call foul on that.
                          I'm puzzled by why you hold HoDV up as a journalistic source on par with COTH. I have been rather unimpressed by their coverage of a number of issues including their anti-SafeSport stance with respect to the GM ban and the seeming lack of any background research on the cancellation of the Princeton Show Jumping fall shows. In the latter case they claim the local government is attacking equestrian events when basic research into public records shows the management's failure to comply with longstanding requirements for the use of preserved land. From what I have seen of them, they seem prone to hyperbole and passing off editorial pieces as factual news. What criteria are you using to determine their journalistic credibility?

                          Comment


                            I was surprised to find this still so active, so popped back in to look around. As someone a bit removed from the situation (and who has no vested interest in the outcome, the players involved, etc) I'll chime in. Ignore it if you want - I certainly won't lose sleep over it.

                            I read a comment that this up and coming generation was taught to stand up, take a stand, etc. (So were previous generations - you're not special) No one is telling younger people to shut up and sit down and eat your meat or you won't get any pudding.

                            But there are ways to broach difficult subjects - you don't get to just decide one day you're going to get into someone's face. First - you actually don't have the right to dictate to other people. Second, it's a good way to get punched in the nose (probably why there are so many "brave" people on the internet) Third - what makes you think you are right? Just by deciding that your opinion is the only right one and there is no possibility you could be wrong, everyone else is wrong but you doesn't actually make you right. Really. It's a great big world out there and incredibly rich in diversity of thought, experience, and perspective. Overlapped with different generations, ethnic makeup, nationalities, and genetics. But it seems there is this tendency to think there can be only one possible worldview. That's very narrow minded, dangerous thinking. It's also infantile.

                            I was actually appalled by the actions of EN and their journalist. Because what they did was unethical. Yes, at the end of the day they acted unethically. Not because they aren't entitled to an opinion (of course they are) but because this publication and its employee decided to abdicate their responsibilities as journalists - and go on a PERSONAL attack against a landowner and a nonprofit. You don't actually get to do that - or - if you do - don't be surprised if you're out of business. What people do on their own time is one thing. I've certainly written scathing letters to the editor, picketed, and protested.

                            But what I didn't do is use my employment as a cover to further a personal agenda. Unfortunately, this appears to more of a personal crusade than a professional one to EN. If I was the owner of EN, and this journalist was my employee, I'd fire her.

                            Social activism is a wonderful thing. To use our words and actions to uplift others, to identify problems in our society and propose solutions. But you also have to acknowledge that engaging in figurative or literal destruction doesn't actually accomplish anything. As we see here.

                            To assert that anyone who doesn't fall on their knees and beg to whoever is making a demand of them is actually entitled, privileged, and selfish doesn't follow. Quite the opposite. As I've written before - the landowner does not owe you anything. None of you. That's not white male privilege. That's not classism, narcissism, or any other ism. He owns the land and you were his guests. You acted like jerks. He was harassed and a "journalist" targeted him. There's an easy way to fix that. He asked you to leave. From his perspective, the problem is solved. Which is true.

                            That isn't a white male right - that is a right all of us have. And if you're not careful - more landowners, sponsors, and organizers will exercise that right.

                            It's called consequences.

                            I wish you could read these posts from a more nuanced perspective. Do you realize that instead of old labels to identify minorities - you've just come up with new ones? Did you ever think to refer to your fellow human beings as just that? No - you have to stick them in a box and label them. In point of fact - by labeling them you diminish them as human beings. They're just an acronym. A "group". How dehumanizing. And you pretend to know all about this "group" as if these human beings are not entitled to diverse experiences and opinions?

                            Are you truly concerned about being inclusive? Because it doesn't sound like it. From what I've read it sounds like some of you are trying to outdo each other on how "woke" you are. Using the latest buzzwords and acronyms. Frankly - the way I see minority groups being used in this way - I don't blame them for not getting involved in eventing.

                            I can think of other horse sports that are more diverse and inclusive. Much more. Maybe the problem isn't the name of this venue. Maybe the problem is that many of the personalities in this sport are rich white women worrying about where they'll find a "Mexican" as a laborer. But only if he's illegal that way you don't have to pay him much.

                            Lots of luck with the future of eventing. You're losing access to land, your horses and many riders are killed or severely injured, animal rights activists would shoot you as much as look at you, you can't manage to talk about expanding the sport without using dehumanizing language, and you've managed to piss off some of the most influential and dedicated supporters.

                            May I suggest that is not a winning strategy?




                            Comment


                              Originally posted by ghst13 View Post

                              I'm puzzled by why you hold HoDV up as a journalistic source on par with COTH. I have been rather unimpressed by their coverage of a number of issues including their anti-SafeSport stance with respect to the GM ban and the seeming lack of any background research on the cancellation of the Princeton Show Jumping fall shows. In the latter case they claim the local government is attacking equestrian events when basic research into public records shows the management's failure to comply with longstanding requirements for the use of preserved land. From what I have seen of them, they seem prone to hyperbole and passing off editorial pieces as factual news. What criteria are you using to determine their journalistic credibility?
                              Might I suggest that NEITHER HoDV nor COTH are truly " hard hitting journalism" though I do agree that COTH has better quality overall. I would say both fit squarely under more of a rubric of "entertainment." Over the years I have been pretty frustrated with the way COTH shies away from ticking off BNTs and sponsors when it comes to coverage of drugging/medication issues, for example.
                              ~Veronica
                              "The Son Dee Times" "Sustained" "Somerset" "Franklin Square"
                              http://photobucket.com/albums/y192/vxf111/

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Wingstem View Post
                                I was surprised to find this still so active, so popped back in to look around. As someone a bit removed from the situation (and who has no vested interest in the outcome, the players involved, etc) I'll chime in. Ignore it if you want - I certainly won't lose sleep over it.

                                I read a comment that this up and coming generation was taught to stand up, take a stand, etc. (So were previous generations - you're not special) No one is telling younger people to shut up and sit down and eat your meat or you won't get any pudding.

                                But there are ways to broach difficult subjects - you don't get to just decide one day you're going to get into someone's face. First - you actually don't have the right to dictate to other people. Second, it's a good way to get punched in the nose (probably why there are so many "brave" people on the internet) Third - what makes you think you are right? Just by deciding that your opinion is the only right one and there is no possibility you could be wrong, everyone else is wrong but you doesn't actually make you right. Really. It's a great big world out there and incredibly rich in diversity of thought, experience, and perspective. Overlapped with different generations, ethnic makeup, nationalities, and genetics. But it seems there is this tendency to think there can be only one possible worldview. That's very narrow minded, dangerous thinking. It's also infantile.

                                I was actually appalled by the actions of EN and their journalist. Because what they did was unethical. Yes, at the end of the day they acted unethically. Not because they aren't entitled to an opinion (of course they are) but because this publication and its employee decided to abdicate their responsibilities as journalists - and go on a PERSONAL attack against a landowner and a nonprofit. You don't actually get to do that - or - if you do - don't be surprised if you're out of business. What people do on their own time is one thing. I've certainly written scathing letters to the editor, picketed, and protested.

                                But what I didn't do is use my employment as a cover to further a personal agenda. Unfortunately, this appears to more of a personal crusade than a professional one to EN. If I was the owner of EN, and this journalist was my employee, I'd fire her.

                                Social activism is a wonderful thing. To use our words and actions to uplift others, to identify problems in our society and propose solutions. But you also have to acknowledge that engaging in figurative or literal destruction doesn't actually accomplish anything. As we see here.

                                To assert that anyone who doesn't fall on their knees and beg to whoever is making a demand of them is actually entitled, privileged, and selfish doesn't follow. Quite the opposite. As I've written before - the landowner does not owe you anything. None of you. That's not white male privilege. That's not classism, narcissism, or any other ism. He owns the land and you were his guests. You acted like jerks. He was harassed and a "journalist" targeted him. There's an easy way to fix that. He asked you to leave. From his perspective, the problem is solved. Which is true.

                                That isn't a white male right - that is a right all of us have. And if you're not careful - more landowners, sponsors, and organizers will exercise that right.

                                It's called consequences.

                                I wish you could read these posts from a more nuanced perspective. Do you realize that instead of old labels to identify minorities - you've just come up with new ones? Did you ever think to refer to your fellow human beings as just that? No - you have to stick them in a box and label them. In point of fact - by labeling them you diminish them as human beings. They're just an acronym. A "group". How dehumanizing. And you pretend to know all about this "group" as if these human beings are not entitled to diverse experiences and opinions?

                                Are you truly concerned about being inclusive? Because it doesn't sound like it. From what I've read it sounds like some of you are trying to outdo each other on how "woke" you are. Using the latest buzzwords and acronyms. Frankly - the way I see minority groups being used in this way - I don't blame them for not getting involved in eventing.

                                I can think of other horse sports that are more diverse and inclusive. Much more. Maybe the problem isn't the name of this venue. Maybe the problem is that many of the personalities in this sport are rich white women worrying about where they'll find a "Mexican" as a laborer. But only if he's illegal that way you don't have to pay him much.

                                Lots of luck with the future of eventing. You're losing access to land, your horses and many riders are killed or severely injured, animal rights activists would shoot you as much as look at you, you can't manage to talk about expanding the sport without using dehumanizing language, and you've managed to piss off some of the most influential and dedicated supporters.

                                May I suggest that is not a winning strategy?



                                Liking this a million gazillion times.
                                Certified Guacophobe

                                Comment


                                  AnastasiaBeaverhousen - mega dittos.

                                  Wingstem - you are a SUPERB writer. At the risk of being utterly juvenile, but in the interest of levity, I have only one question for you...

                                  I just can’t resist asking it...

                                  How can you have any pudding if you don’t eat yer meat?”

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                                    From the Boyd Martin post on FB, my understanding is that Middleburg HT asked EN not to show up.
                                    Which is hilarious, because it's a small, national-level event whose only mention in EN will be a link to the results - just like every other national level event that went on this past weekend. Plus the girl who wrote that comment is not the organizer and it's highly unlikely she got the permission of the organizing committee since the HT literally just finished today, and she wrote it on Saturday AM. I don't think they had time to meet and vote on whether or not EN should "cover" them. Also, I don't see any other events shooting themselves in the foot by asking for the same...
                                    Blog
                                    Translation
                                    fri [fri:] fritt fria (adj): Free
                                    skritt [skrit:] skritten (noun): Walk

                                    Comment


                                      I also love how the dissenters on this thread say that "well, they did a survey and two POC didn't mind the name, so that must mean EVERYONE who is a POC shouldn't find it offensive!" And saying that a) because I and others on this thread are white women and b)
                                      we haven't talked about Latinos at all, means that we're somehow ignorant and not qualified to argue on behalf of POC,... yeah. That's not how it works. That's not how ANY of this works.
                                      Blog
                                      Translation
                                      fri [fri:] fritt fria (adj): Free
                                      skritt [skrit:] skritten (noun): Walk

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by FrittSkritt View Post
                                        I also love how the dissenters on this thread say that "well, they did a survey and two POC didn't mind the name, so that must mean EVERYONE who is a POC shouldn't find it offensive!" And saying that a) because I and others on this thread are white women and b)
                                        we haven't talked about Latinos at all, means that we're somehow ignorant and not qualified to argue on behalf of POC,... yeah. That's not how it works. That's not how ANY of this works.
                                        Well, I haven’t seen anyone making the arguments that you are attributing to them. Nor have I made those arguments. Because they are obviously failing arguments.

                                        But I really don’t want to get in more “back and forth” stuff again. It’s so unpleasant.

                                        Do you have any thoughts with respect to creating a more inclusive and respectful sporting community for everyone, that you want to voice? I brought up the example of a conversation that I had with someone, and how they spoke about “Mexicans”... because it made my jaw drop. But... I don’t move in high end hunter circles, and that sort of commentary is not the norm in the eventing community. Nonetheless, there are horse farms everywhere in this country which do cut costs by employing undocumented labor. And I think that’s an equity concern, and awful.

                                        I invited anyone who doesn’t see eye to eye with me on a lot of what I’ve said on this thread so far to share their opinion on that issue. I thought maybe we could find some common ground on that at least.

                                        Any thoughts?

                                        Comment


                                          It's about time for me to stop reading this thread any longer ... maybe just this one last thing, and even though it won't make any difference in this discussion.

                                          My problem with this thread is the way it is ignoring the actual subject of inclusion. Ignoring this opportunity to venture into that subject in a way that eventing has never done before. And, the influence that this thread may be having on the larger wave of feeling in eventing. And that this thread is a *very* *bad* *look* for eventing, as it ignores that opportunity, and instead is defending one or two people who do *not* want to have that conversation.

                                          And that posters in this thread are calling out other posters who are trying to point this out, trying to move the discussion in a broader direction about real inclusion. But some posters who are driving the thread direction are responding by calling them names; making personally disparaging remarks; even posting in aggressively hostile and shocking ways. Actively trying to drive them out of the discussion. And being praised for it.

                                          I will be forever mystified why the principal discussion - in this thread, anyway - has *not* been about inclusiveness.

                                          Why is our sport so intensely white, are we doing things on a regular basis that are alienating and discouraging participation of horse people of color? How can we find out more - if there is anything we should do or change - or if horse people of color are fine with eventing culture and behavior as is? White folk are not gong to know these things from inside our little bubble.

                                          And why, instead, this gigantic conversation has been wasted on Eventing Nation. A barely-journalistic online horse-fan publication of little significance in the larger picture of national and world events.

                                          The LO & organizer do not need the help of a mass public rally to handle EN et. al. The LO & organizer are very capable individuals who can do all they want to do with no help from the crowd,. They've made it pretty clear that the crowd's help isn't needed or wanted.

                                          These two who refused to even have a discussion about inclusion, regardless of the outcome of such a discussion being in favor of the name, or suggesting a change. Who threw away every opportunity to make themselves and their event, and eventing generally, look wonderful. And inclusive. And opted for another look instead - for eventing, as well as for themselves. And yet those are the battlements that the crowd has chosen to plant a flag on and defend.

                                          Maybe the thread title is what drove the discussion .... but there is the larger public reaction that is following the same track.

                                          So let's say that five years from now, hypothetically, EN/Leslie Wylie/John Thier are long gone from eventing, and so is Plantation Fields. Newer eventers have never heard of any of this. Let's say that in this hypothetical world five years away, someone who was active on this thread tries to explain to a newer, younger eventer how wonderful PF was, and how the terrible EN drove it away. This newer eventer, believing inclusion is a topic of primary importance, is confused about how inclusion played out in this drama. "So EN was against inclusion and that's why everyone hated them, and PF was for it and that's why everyone supported them?" Uh ... well ... there were emails and board meetings ... people felt pressured to do what they didn't want to do ... "And so auntie, what did you and your friends post about, about how PF was developing inclusion in eventing, in spite of that hateful EN?"

                                          Or in short words, I don't think this thread discussion is going to age well.

                                          I think that this conflict, and why people chose to take the sides that they did, is going to be *really hard to explain* in five years, by some of the most involved participants. Even if it seems crystal clear today.

                                          This conversation should be about inclusion. But it's not. For some strange, twisted, incomprehensible reason, it's about defending some people for not wanting to discuss inclusion, from a force that is no real threat to them. It's about vilifying some well-intentioned, if possibly misguided, people who wanted better for eventing.

                                          I have optimistically always tried hard to hang on to the idea that people involved in eventing are welcoming and inclusive. That they are happy to see non-white eventers joining the ranks. That what they are saying here is just about being lost in the moment. Wound up by others in a discussion that seems hot and urgent in the moment. But I'm becoming worried and sad that I might be wrong about that.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X