Stallion Spotlight

C-Quito1

Real Estate Spotlight

IMG_0213
  • Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

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

George Morris on the SS list

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

  • There are some very brave posters on this thread who have related their accounts......absolutely shocking how many
    people have had attacks and I'm so sorry to read this.

    It is also dismaying that allegations lead to GM misbehaviour....He was a hero to me and my daughters and many others.
    It appears his behaviour is far more than just talk and disrespect and it is atrocious because nobody - nobody - does not know they are doing wrong on a very different level. I always stuck up for him because we had never had anything that resembles what is being described. May the truth come out.
    Proud member of People Who Hate to Kill Wildlife clique

    Comment


    • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

      I consider this one of the top 10 posts of this thread.
      well, that is only one survivors tale of the witness block, and certainly not at all like many others who have posted here including myself.

      If your prosecution didn't prep you, they didn't do their job. I am also surprised the testimony was only 15 minutes so I will assume there were a lot of agreed facts in this trial. The more prep you are given the better the outcome. Thankfully the posters attacker was convicted.

      I also disagree with this poster and I don't think dissociating yourself with the event is healthy in the long run...but that is a whole other topic I guess. I would rather save my story to tell when it will help someone rather than tell it those who just want to know "what happened".

      dags I feel you on being a victim of a very violent crime. It's not easy.
      Boss Mare Eventing Blog

      Comment


      • Thank you Jealoushe

        LadyJ... your statement did strike me, and not in a good way. I believe Response clarified the triggering word.

        One really weird & surreal thing I've dealt with ever since the attack... I was never properly cracked up & destroyed enough for some people. It was like, if I wasn't plagued by nightmares, or curled up in bed wondering how I could ever possibly go on, I wasn't being "victim" enough for some folks. There was a whiff of that in your post LadyJ, quantifying your sentiment with the word "just", and offering Response none of the sincerity shown to others that have revealed their stories in this thread.

        Just because we are not visibly broken does not mean we don't still struggle. According to some after the event, I was trauma-ing all wrong. If I didn't hash the whole thing out, re-live it in vivid detail for the therapist, examine every second of it in search of some nonexistent truth, I was setting myself up for some future psychotic break (still waiting on that shoe to drop, keeps life interesting!). We did finally go to therapy and the first thing she told us was, It's okay to be okay. That was some really welcome comfort to us, having been near convinced that our emotional compasses were broken.
        EHJ | FB | #140 | watch | #insta

        Comment


        • Originally posted by 4LeafCloverFarm View Post
          I wonder how other sports handle this (ejecting people who are on their permanent ban list)? Swimming and gymnastics have HUNDREDS of permanently banned former members. It would be interesting to know what their process is to ensure they stay away from sanctioned competitions/events.
          Bigger meets (and many smaller ones) have security on the doors and at other points, they generally “remove” anyone that needs removing. Most spectators wouldn’t even notice it happening.....they are usually quietly “escorted out” via a side door! Plus to gain entry to events like gymnastics and swimming, it’s also through an entrance way that security can easily scan for “banned” people plus bags etc are also usually checked.....it’s not like walking into a huge, open outdoor venue like, say Spruce Meadows!
          I have cancer but cancer doesnt have me!

          Comment


          • Response I was serious about asking advice. I really appreciate you explaining how you viewed the process and why it helped you. Maybe sharing that tactic will help more people choose unrestricted reporting in my line of work. I get and respect those who don’t but I always like to see people punished for such heinous crimes.

            dags why I personally do not want to see subpoenas come into play is because we already have and have had for a while a court system with which to punish offenders. Sometimes people are more comfortable with anonymous reporting. Please remember that anonymous just means anonymous to the general public. People I work with sometimes just want help from doctors and therapists to move on. Would it be great if everyone made criminal complaints to ensure no one else became a victim at the hands of their abuser? Yes it would. However, sometimes people just don’t have the strength. People deal with violent crimes in many different ways. We cannot begrudge someone for choosing the anonymous route. Also, if it is within the statute of limitations Safe Sport works with law enforcement and encourages people to contact them. However, people still need to be allowed to deal with it in their own way. Sometimes that means telling their story, hoping the person gets sanctioned by their NGB, and getting resources to deal with what happened to them.

            ETA: Not directed at dags, but those supporting a process more in line with the criminal justice system, have you ever contemplated why they didn’t choose that route and are now choosing the Safe Sport route?
            Last edited by Denali6298; Sep. 4, 2019, 08:22 PM.

            Comment


            • Nobody can say how a survivor is going to deal with their trauma. Some people go to pieces, some stuff it down and go through life seemingly untouched. I say seemingly, because even for those who block it completely, it still happened, and it's still there. We all deal in different ways.

              Aside from this board, there are maybe a handful of people in my life that know what I went through. It's not a story I want to share in most cases, except as Jealoushe said, if it can help someone. Every so often I run into another survivor, and I find it very easy to be open with them about my ordeal.

              There was a time that I wanted my day in court, but back then things were different. I was told that without evidence, he would most likely walk. They went through things I would be asked on cross examination, and it was like being attacked all over, because without any physical evidence, that was all they would have to go on, and what they would need to destroy. I was told that without evidence, my coming forward would not get him thrown in jail. Every case is different, and I don't think in most cases it's a 15 minute gentle questioning. You have to look at the bigger picture.

              Take someone raped by a stranger in their home.... look at the evidence that is probably available to prove that person entered their home and raped them. The survivor's testimony is there of course, but it's not the entire case. In the case of GM, in the case of my perpetrator, we're talking about someone that groomed children over years or decades, and made sure it was hidden. Their presence in a child's room can be explained away, because of course they were there, they were family, family friend, teacher, etc. Unless the survivor can report right away, and there's proof of violence (the purpose of grooming is to avoid that,) then basically the whole case is based on the survivor's testimony vs. the perpetrator. That's the only thing the defense has to attack and discredit to get their client to walk. Do you really think that defense attorney is going to play nice on cross examination and not try to discredit the survivor?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by dags View Post



                But I also think the experience of testifying & reliving the violent experience could be traumatic & terrifying for anyone that is a victim of violence. Frankly, my House of Horrors experience is a list-topper for situations you never ever want to relive and are never fun to retell.

                So, and I pose this as delicately as I can and in a sincere quest for understanding, why the special consideration for sexual violence & not victims of other violence? Especially when it has been a particular challenge for them to get those cases convicted & get those criminals off the streets?
                This is a very interesting question. --I'm not commenting on subpoenas versus no subpoenas, which has been thoroughly discussed. Just commenting on the philosophical issue you raise, if I understand it correctly. 2 data points, one fiction and one real:

                Last night, I was watching an episode of Shetland. The female lead, Tosh, had been kidnapped and raped on the orders of a criminal gang. She was willing to allow her coworkers to know the details of the kidnapping, but did not want them to know of the rape. Her boss, Det. Jimmy Perez, whose character has come to embody wisdom and sensitivity along with tough effectiveness, tells her something like, "Your call, but it's hard for me to see you act like you have something to be ashamed of..." (She ultimately decides not to press charges.)

                From: https://www.kcra.com/article/woman-e...emoir/28912544

                Her name is not "Emily Doe." It is not "unconscious, intoxicated woman." Nor is it "victim of Stanford University swimmer Brock Turner."

                It's Chanel Miller.

                For the first time since her 2015 rape, she is telling her story not from behind a curtain of anonymity, but as herself -- attributed and for the record -- in the aptly titled, "Know My Name."

                In releasing the book, says publisher Penguin Random House, Miller is reclaiming her identity. Her struggles with shame and isolation provide a microcosm into the oppression that sexual assault victims -- even those with supposedly "perfect" cases -- experience, it says.

                --How can we support victims of sexual violence, yet not feed into the narrative that rape is somehow more shameful or embarrassing or "private" than other violent crimes?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Horsegirl's Mom View Post

                  This is a very interesting question. --I'm not commenting on subpoenas versus no subpoenas, which has been thoroughly discussed. Just commenting on the philosophical issue you raise, if I understand it correctly. 2 data points, one fiction and one real:

                  Last night, I was watching an episode of Shetland. The female lead, Tosh, had been kidnapped and raped on the orders of a criminal gang. She was willing to allow her coworkers to know the details of the kidnapping, but did not want them to know of the rape. Her boss, Det. Jimmy Perez, whose character has come to embody wisdom and sensitivity along with tough effectiveness, tells her something like, "Your call, but it's hard for me to see you act like you have something to be ashamed of..." (She ultimately decides not to press charges.)

                  From: https://www.kcra.com/article/woman-e...emoir/28912544

                  Her name is not "Emily Doe." It is not "unconscious, intoxicated woman." Nor is it "victim of Stanford University swimmer Brock Turner."

                  It's Chanel Miller.

                  For the first time since her 2015 rape, she is telling her story not from behind a curtain of anonymity, but as herself -- attributed and for the record -- in the aptly titled, "Know My Name."

                  In releasing the book, says publisher Penguin Random House, Miller is reclaiming her identity. Her struggles with shame and isolation provide a microcosm into the oppression that sexual assault victims -- even those with supposedly "perfect" cases -- experience, it says.

                  --How can we support victims of sexual violence, yet not feed into the narrative that rape is somehow more shameful or embarrassing or "private" than other violent crimes?
                  Just because someone wants to take the anonymous and administrative route doesn’t mean they think it’s shameful. I think that’s what you all are missing. People deal with things in their own way and with their own timeline.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Denali6298 View Post

                    Just because someone wants to take the anonymous and administrative route doesn’t mean they think it’s shameful... People deal with things in their own way and with their own timeline.
                    THIS.

                    When I was 5, I was molested by the teenage son of an authority figure. I didn't know that was the word for it at the time, and I didn't tell anyone, for reasons I won't get into here. I had never met the guy before that day, and don't recall seeing him again after. I know his last name, but not his first.

                    I managed to live much of my life with no outwardly obvious impacts other than that I put walls up with everyone other than my son and my horse, I have social anxiety that causes me to be horrified by the idea of having to talk to someone I don't know, I am very reluctant to let anyone know me well enough to be in a position to hurt me later on, and I absolutely, positively, do not want to be the center of attention in any situation - even good ones.

                    I'm in my 40s now. I just told my husband what happened within the last year (we've been married for 20), and started going to therapy shortly thereafter. The first few sessions caused panic attacks, and FEAR. I could see everything in vivid technicolor, as though it was happening again right in front of me. It's harder to see now - everything is dark and fuzzy instead of clear, but I can feel that someone is there. I can feel that something is wrong. I can feel that I don't want to be there anymore. But I can't see it as well, so that is progress.

                    There is a separate memory I have from when I was a little older, maybe 8ish, that I often remember as an uncomfortable situation that I just wanted to get away from. To be clear, the person in this memory did not do anything to me, but I did NOT want to be there with them. I associate that memory with certain smells that I absolutely hate, and when I smell them, that memory usually comes up. It randomly popped into my head the other day, and in addition to remembering the feeling of wanting to get away, for the first time I also remembered FEAR. I cried, hard, for 30 minutes after that, because I started seeing all the similarities between the two situations. I can only think that the 8yo me must have recognized them at the time, even though the adult me didn't tie them together until now. What a burden for an 8yo to carry, and to keep to herself.

                    I haven't checked into the statute of limitations in that state. I haven't tried to figure out his first name, or where he lives, or if he's still alive. There would be no point in going to the police now - all he'd have to say is that nothing happened, and I don't have any way to disprove that. Even if I did, I don't want to be a witness in a public trial. I don't want my name in the news. I don't want to have to tell my mom. I don't want to deal with all the people saying it was so long ago, I probably misunderstood what was happening, 5yos can have active imaginations, he never did anything to them, etc. I don't want that attention. Allow me to repeat that: I do not want that attention. UNWANTED ATTENTION IS TO BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS.

                    But if I could say something to a reporting authority that could keep my name anonymous? That feels like an immensely more comfortable option. Even though they'd almost certainly also say there was no evidence and nothing they could do, I would be 1000x more likely to talk to that type of authority over law enforcement. Why? Because it avoids drawing unwanted attention, and unwanted attention is to be avoided at all costs.


                    Comment


                    • I'd like to lay a bet that almost every young woman has had some sort of sexual harassment while growing up or later -
                      some more minor, some very, very serious and I commend all of you on this board. This is why I wrote the harassment
                      policy for Pony Club which I think has got buried in the web page, but I'm long out of Pony Club now. In Pony Club, I included verbal harassment because that seemed the most common.

                      Then there was B camp at an equestrian center where they had multi discipline borders, etc. One day, when the riders went for their lessons, afterwards they came back into the dorm and found there had been a panty raid,
                      all the underwear gone, fresh or otherwise. Police were called in but we never heard the outcome, if there was one.
                      Sick! Chaperoning was taken very seriously after that, and the harassment policy seeds landed in my head.

                      Proud member of People Who Hate to Kill Wildlife clique

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by dags View Post

                        So, and I pose this as delicately as I can and in a sincere quest for understanding, why the special consideration for sexual violence & not victims of other violence? Especially when it has been a particular challenge for them to get those cases convicted & get those criminals off the streets?

                        This is not saying SS should have subpoena power. I'm just trying to understand how much of the argument against subpoena power is based on keeping SS 100% separate from LE, and how much rests on the distaste for forcing SA victims to testify, even at the risk of other children being assaulted.
                        That's a valid question. I think from my own experience, and having talked to others that have been victims of molestation, rape, date rape, etc... It's a violation in the most intimate way possible. When you look at how most rapes or molestation happen, it's not usually a stranger. I get that it happens, but the majority is someone the victim knows. Narrow that down to minors, and most likely it's family, trusted friend, or some kind of authority figure, someone they trusted... and then you get some degree of self blame or shame involved as well. Now let's say their body had a natural response to stimulation and even though there was no consent or mentally wanting the person touching or having sex with them, their body was stimulated.

                        So, take someone held up and mugged, beaten, shot, stabbed, etc. I was robbed in a parking lot, and although I did blame myself for not making sure someone walked me to the car and being more vigilant, I didn't feel like I maybe somehow asked for that kind of attention. I didn't feel like I wouldn't be believed if I told. I didn't feel like it was his word against mine.

                        If you read court transcripts of different types of cases, there's a kind of victim blaming that happens with sexual crimes that just doesn't seem to happen in other violent cases. "Why were you in the parking lot at night if you didn't want to be mugged?" isn't going to be asked. In a date rape case "Why did you go back to his room?" or "Who suggested you go back to the room?" is probably going to be asked.

                        Having said that. I think keeping SS separate from LE, is as important to me because of statutes of limitation and burden of physical evidence that often keeps rapists free..... but forcing SA victims, especially minors to face their violators could also mean that many aren't willing to come forward, and I think that risks more children being hurt by them too. I don't think there's an easy answer.
                        Last edited by Jenerationx; Sep. 5, 2019, 04:35 AM. Reason: typo

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ladyj79 View Post
                          I think that for most victims the attack doesn't end when the perpetrator walks away from them having assaulted them.

                          I'm happy that that was the case for you, and that it became just an interesting story to tell.

                          I wish you peace.
                          Congratulations on victim shaming any survivor who handles it differently from you.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by chisamba View Post

                            Congratulations on victim shaming any survivor who handles it differently from you.
                            As with dags, you are attributing sentiment to me which is a direct quote. I'll let it go, because that post I am directly quoting from was certainly long and difficult to get through.

                            There is no such thing as "victiming" correctly, and you are correct that victim shaming and insensitivity toward other survivors is not limited to those who have not experienced an assault.
                            Let me apologize in advance.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by chisamba View Post

                              Congratulations on victim shaming any survivor who handles it differently from you.
                              ladyj79 was directly quoting the victim herself. She didn't just come up with that statement on her own.

                              This discussion has developed a serious lack of reading for comprehension. I wonder if this is just a characteristic of threads that go on for long periods of time and grow to huge numbers of posts.
                              "Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything
                              that's even remotely true."

                              Homer Simpson

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Jealoushe View Post

                                well, that is only one survivors tale of the witness block, and certainly not at all like many others who have posted here including myself.

                                If your prosecution didn't prep you, they didn't do their job. I am also surprised the testimony was only 15 minutes so I will assume there were a lot of agreed facts in this trial. The more prep you are given the better the outcome. Thankfully the posters attacker was convicted.

                                I also disagree with this poster and I don't think dissociating yourself with the event is healthy in the long run...but that is a whole other topic I guess. I would rather save my story to tell when it will help someone rather than tell it those who just want to know "what happened".

                                dags I feel you on being a victim of a very violent crime. It's not easy.
                                Her point on the prosecutors not “prepping” her was that they were careful to avoid “coaching” her in terms of her testimony, which could have led to the testimony being thrown out.

                                Re: her statement that for her the ordeal ended when the attacker walked out he door: I was raped by a complete stranger who grabbed me from behind when I left my office building around midnight one night. He said he had a knife, but I was never convinced that he did. He subdued my struggling to get free by strangling me with his hands. During the attack, which probably lasted only a few minutes, I assumed his plan was first rape, then kill, as he demonstrated whenever I offered physical resistance that he could easily choke me.
                                When he suddenly stopped and walked out the door, my first emotion was one of elation: I was alive.

                                The lasting trauma was this: this occurred in 1980, when AIDS had been discovered and was known to be sexually transmitted, but there was no test for having been exposed to the virus. The percentage of the population that carried the virus was very small in 1980, what some poster would probably breezily refer to as “vanishingly small”, but I was haunted by the possibility that he might have infected me with HIV/AIDS. After 10 or 15 years with no symptoms of AIDS, that haunting fear died away. Other than the fear that I had been infected with HIV, I have genuinely viewed myself as as a survivor more than a victim, and all these years later I still remember the exhilaration of realizing my attacker had not finished things by killing me: “I am alive!”
                                Last edited by YankeeDuchess; Sep. 5, 2019, 12:24 PM.

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

                                  The lasting trauma was this: this occurred in 1980, when AIDS had been discovered and was known to be sexually transmitted, but there was no test for having been exposed to the virus. The percentage of the population that carried the virus was very small in 1980, what some poster would probably breezily refer to as “vanishingly small”, but I was haunted by the possibility that he might have infected me with HIV/AIDS. After 10 or 15 years with no symptoms of AIDS, that haunting fear died away. Other than the fear that I had been infected with HIV, I have genuinely viewed myself as as a survivor more than a victim, and all these years later I still remember the exhilaration of realizing my attacker had not finished things by killing me: “I’m alive!”
                                  I had a similar fear, my attacker was also sleeping with prostitutes regularly and using hard drugs, the nurse in the DV/SA center at the hospital was really good at calming my fears, they also did testing from that day and then every 3 months afterwards for a period of a year. Was still terrifying. I lost an uncle to AIDs, not something I ever wanted to get diagnosed with.

                                  My therapist would always say something similar - you got out, you survived, you can do it again.
                                  Boss Mare Eventing Blog

                                  Comment


                                  • Originally posted by Jealoushe View Post

                                    I had a similar fear, my attacker was also sleeping with prostitutes regularly and using hard drugs, the nurse in the DV/SA center at the hospital was really good at calming my fears, they also did testing from that day and then every 3 months afterwards for a period of a year. Was still terrifying. I lost an uncle to AIDs, not something I ever wanted to get diagnosed with.

                                    My therapist would always say something similar - you got out, you survived, you can do it again.
                                    I don’t think the tests for HIV were developed in the early to mid 80’s - I would have given a lot to have been tested every three months for a year and see: NEG, NEG, NEG, NEG. At the time of the attack, it was known that the percentage of the population infected was very small, and over time it became known that the probability of transmission in any one sexual encounter was also small, so my risk of having been infected was (very small number)x(very small number)=really tiny number. However, a really tiny chance that I had been infected with HIV via rape was pretty much the whole trauma I experienced.

                                    Comment


                                    • A test for HIV/AIDS was developed in 1984. The FDA approved one for commercial use in 1985

                                      Comment


                                      • To circle back around to the original topic for this thread, I wonder how the appeal is progressing? We're coming up on the 30-day mark now.

                                        I was just thinking...it's not only GM who has a lot on the line here. If his appeal is upheld and he is reinstated, there will be no convincing anyone that SafeSport has any teeth as far as the horse business is concerned.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by dannyboy View Post
                                          To circle back around to the original topic for this thread, I wonder how the appeal is progressing? We're coming up on the 30-day mark now.

                                          I was just thinking...it's not only GM who has a lot on the line here. If his appeal is upheld and he is reinstated, there will be no convincing anyone that SafeSport has any teeth as far as the horse business is concerned.
                                          You’re absolutely right- SafeSport has more on the line than GM does. But they knew that when they issued the ban. Strategically, if they only had so-so evidence against him, it would be a bad bet to attempt to ban an 81 year old icon if there were significant risk that the ban would be overturned. I am assuming they would not have put themselves on the line by issuing a ban unless they had rock solid evidence.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X