Sport Horse Spotlight

IMG_6002

Real Estate Spotlight

Hart_Barn 1

Sale Spotlight

COTH_without Subscribe
  • 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

  • Originally posted by YankeeDuchess View Post

    I think what the poster was reacting to was the statement that s private club can ban “anyone” without legal repercussions. The Boy Scouts tried to ban gays from serving as leaders and even, I think, as Scouts. They lost in court.
    No, they did not lose in court. The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court which narrowly (5-4) affirmed that the Boy Scouts had the right to deny membership to openly gay individuals.

    The Boy Scouts later decided to allow gay scouts and leaders, but that was their choice, as a private club. Yeah, there was lots of public pressure and bad PR behind the decision, but it was still the organization's choice.
    "Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything
    that's even remotely true."

    Homer Simpson

    Comment


    • Jonathan Soresi was banned by USEF for a time-maybe six months. I remember because I talked to one of his clients at WEF after the ban was complete.

      Comment


      • GM has been quoted as saying he’s had over 10,000 sex partners. If he had sex everyday with a different person, that’s over 27 years of every day a new partner. That’s mind boggling. It’s not hard to believe that some of them weren’t of age or willing. How did he find time for horses?
        Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by NoSuchPerson View Post

          No, they did not lose in court. The case went all the way to the US Supreme Court which narrowly (5-4) affirmed that the Boy Scouts had the right to deny membership to openly gay individuals.

          The Boy Scouts later decided to allow gay scouts and leaders, but that was their choice, as a private club. Yeah, there was lots of public pressure and bad PR behind the decision, but it was still the organization's choice.
          Thank you for correcting me on this. I remembered that they asserted the right to exclude gays, it went to court, and eventually the admitted gays. Had forgotten they won at the Supreme Court.



          Comment


          • Originally posted by Escada View Post
            So Robert Dover and Mary Phelps are coming out in support of George Morris. They are blaming SafeSport.

            I think I would be more careful about saying stuff if I was a horse professional. He didn't get banned on a whim.
            The statement was from Mason Phelps PR Company, not Mary Phelps the photographer.

            Comment


            • I followed the RG thread peripherally, and I wasn't shocked to see the ban of GHM pop up in my newsfeed yesterday.

              I read his public response and thought "good" - let him appeal, let's hope everything that led to this point is rock solid (no unlabeled test tubes!), and let's add a denied appeal to the proof that the Safesport investigative process is thorough and legit. And then maybe we'll have a genuine legal case in NY to do it all again in an actual court of law - with hopefully the same results.

              In the meantime, I am sure that if GHM announced a new set of clinic dates, all the slots would fill immediately. "The Bad Bully Tour"
              Last edited by Groom&Taxi; Aug. 6, 2019, 03:56 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Groom&Taxi View Post

                In the meantime, I am sure that if GHM announced a new set of clinic dates, all the slots would be fill immediately. "The Bad Bully Tour"

                100%. People don't care. Like they're freaking out at the opportunity they might not be able to give him their money. Give him your money, move him into your home, fly him around the world. His life really will barely change.
                Let me apologize in advance.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by bird4416 View Post
                  GM has been quoted as saying he’s had over 10,000 sex partners. If he had sex everyday with a different person, that’s over 27 years of every day a new partner. That’s mind boggling. It’s not hard to believe that some of them weren’t of age or willing. How did he find time for horses?
                  More than one at a time?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by vineyridge View Post

                    There is absolutely no scientific PROOF of the universality of the latter statement at all. Environmental factors have traditionally been thought to have had significant impacts on sexuality.
                    Here is an article which seems to confirm that both genetic and environmental factors may be at play. If it was all genetic, then we would expect identical twins to always share the same sexual orientation.

                    https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/17/s...win-study.html

                    A new study of twins provides the strongest evidence yet that homosexuality has a genetic basis, researchers say, though they say other factors like social conditioning may be important.

                    The study, published in the December issue of The Archives of General Psychiatry, adds to evidence that sexual orientation does not result from a maladjustment or moral defect, one author said.

                    "We found 52 percent of identical twin brothers of gay men also were gay, compared with 22 percent of fraternal twins, compared with 11 percent of genetically unrelated brothers," said J. Michael Bailey, an assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by HLMom View Post

                      Here is an article which seems to confirm that both genetic and environmental factors may be at play. If it was all genetic, then we would expect identical twins to always share the same sexual orientation.

                      https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/17/s...win-study.html

                      A new study of twins provides the strongest evidence yet that homosexuality has a genetic basis, researchers say, though they say other factors like social conditioning may be important.

                      The study, published in the December issue of The Archives of General Psychiatry, adds to evidence that sexual orientation does not result from a maladjustment or moral defect, one author said.

                      "We found 52 percent of identical twin brothers of gay men also were gay, compared with 22 percent of fraternal twins, compared with 11 percent of genetically unrelated brothers," said J. Michael Bailey, an assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University
                      It’s genetic. No. It’s not environment. It’s genetic. One is born that way. Never mind that study is 28 years old.

                      Comment


                      • I made the mistake of reading the comments under the Chronicle article.

                        I don't know which position is more nauseating: "I like how he rides and teaches; therefore, he must be innocent" or "I like how he rides and teaches; therefore, it doesn't matter what he did."

                        Comment


                        • Sexual orientation is a continuum. Some lean more up, some down, some left, some right, some in the middle; and putting it into binary terms is an archaic societal construct. Next topic.

                          Comment


                          • I quickly ventured to some of the Facebook threads and YIKES. Those people are doing a great job of showing exactly why people are reluctant to come forward.

                            To to the the victims who did, THANK YOU for your courage. You are doing the sport we all love a valuable service in exposing its dark corners, with little to gain and a lot to lose. A lot of people are standing with you, even if our voices aren’t as loud.

                            on another note, I do think SS could go a long way towards dispelling the rumours by providing a little more evidence. NOT names, salacious details or anything to identify the accusers, but they could provide basic details such as: number of accusers and their age range, approximate date range when the offenses occurred, when their investigation began, how many witnesses they interviewed, the general type of evidence they had (photo? Eyewitness? Written admission?), as well as a few details of how and when the accused was allowed to defend himself, and how he did so.

                            Even sexual assault trials that are subject to strict publication bans offer this much, so there should be a way to do it without outing a victim.

                            It’s clear from the online reaction that, for better or worse, people are not willing to put their blind trust in an institution, and take them at their word that there was evidence. Should it be needed? Maybe not. But human nature is what it is.
                            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                            "I know nothing with any certainty, but the sight of stars makes me dream." --Vincent Van Gogh

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by fargaloo View Post
                              I made the mistake of reading the comments under the Chronicle article.

                              I don't know which position is more nauseating: "I like how he rides and teaches; therefore, he must be innocent" or "I like how he rides and teaches; therefore, it doesn't matter what he did."
                              Those comments are special.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Tiramit View Post

                                Good. If it's true then bring them all down.
                                Yes, please.
                                www.laurienberenson.com

                                Comment


                                • Originally posted by Denali6298 View Post

                                  It’s genetic. No. It’s not environment. It’s genetic. One is born that way. Never mind that study is 28 years old.
                                  I'm sorry you're not comfortable with what the science seems to show. Kind of reminds me of the Republicans with global warming. "We don't like it; therefore it can't be true!"

                                  Here is a 2019 article that reaches the same conclusion: https://www.timescolonist.com/life/h...ght-1.23644975

                                  And another recent one:
                                  https://www.latimes.com/science/scie...007-story.html

                                  "But experts said the results -- as yet unpublished in a peer-reviewed journal -- offer preliminary new evidence that a man’s genetic inheritance is only one influence on his sexual orientation. Through the epigenome, the results suggest, some facet of life experience likely also primes a man for same-sex attraction.

                                  Over a person’s lifetime, myriad environmental factors -- nutrition, poverty, a mother’s love, education, exposure to toxic chemicals -- all help shape the person he will become."

                                  Comment


                                  • What I've learned about the appeal process from the fallout after RG is that SafeSport tends to be pretty quick to back down anymore when someone puts up a good fight.

                                    I have no doubt in my mind GM will have this overturned, regardless of the "truth," given his stature and seemingly endless access to the resources of his supporters.

                                    I hope I'm wrong, not because I want him to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt, but because overturning it would be about the worst thing that could happen in terms of SafeSport earning respect from the equestrian industry. As I've mentioned in the RG thread, "permanent ineligibility" from SafeSport has done little to slow down business for an alarming number of parties on the list, with many of those banned still actively involved in programs that train children. Overturning GM's suspension would further perpetuate misconceptions that SafeSport operates under false information.
                                    Don't fall for a girl who fell for a horse just to be number two in her world... ~EFO

                                    Comment


                                    • Originally posted by HLMom View Post

                                      Here is an article which seems to confirm that both genetic and environmental factors may be at play. If it was all genetic, then we would expect identical twins to always share the same sexual orientation.

                                      https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/17/s...win-study.html

                                      A new study of twins provides the strongest evidence yet that homosexuality has a genetic basis, researchers say, though they say other factors like social conditioning may be important.

                                      The study, published in the December issue of The Archives of General Psychiatry, adds to evidence that sexual orientation does not result from a maladjustment or moral defect, one author said.

                                      "We found 52 percent of identical twin brothers of gay men also were gay, compared with 22 percent of fraternal twins, compared with 11 percent of genetically unrelated brothers," said J. Michael Bailey, an assistant professor of psychology at Northwestern University
                                      What the heck is a “genetically unrelated brother”?

                                      Comment


                                      • Originally posted by lonewolf View Post

                                        on another note, I do think SS could go a long way towards dispelling the rumours by providing a little more evidence. NOT names, salacious details or anything to identify the accusers, but they could provide basic details such as: number of accusers and their age range, approximate date range when the offenses occurred, when their investigation began, how many witnesses they interviewed, the general type of evidence they had (photo? Eyewitness? Written admission?), as well as a few details of how and when the accused was allowed to defend himself, and how he did so.

                                        Even sexual assault trials that are subject to strict publication bans offer this much, so there should be a way to do it without outing a victim.

                                        It’s clear from the online reaction that, for better or worse, people are not willing to put their blind trust in an institution, and take them at their word that there was evidence. Should it be needed? Maybe not. But human nature is what it is.
                                        Yes, this point was made with respect to the Robert Gage situation as well. It is actually healthy that people are uncomfortable putting blind trust in institutions that conduct most of their work in secret.

                                        I think if SS said, our investigation disclosed 15 underage victims of GM over a timespan of 20 years, the defenders would shut up fairly quickly.

                                        Comment


                                        • Originally posted by lonewolf View Post
                                          I quickly ventured to some of the Facebook threads and YIKES. Those people are doing a great job of showing exactly why people are reluctant to come forward.

                                          To to the the victims who did, THANK YOU for your courage. You are doing the sport we all love a valuable service in exposing its dark corners, with little to gain and a lot to lose. A lot of people are standing with you, even if our voices aren’t as loud.

                                          on another note, I do think SS could go a long way towards dispelling the rumours by providing a little more evidence. NOT names, salacious details or anything to identify the accused, but they could provide basic details such as: number of accusers and their age range, approximate date range when the offenses occurred, when their investigation began, how many witnesses they interviewed, the general type of evidence they had (photo? Eyewitness? Written admission?), as well as a few details of how and when the accused was allowed to defend himself, and how he did so.

                                          Even sexual assault trials that are subject to strict publication bans offer this much, so there should be a way to do it without outing a victim.

                                          It’s clear from the online reaction that, for better or worse, people are not willing to put their blind trust in an institution, and take them at their word that there was evidence. Should it be needed? Maybe not. But human nature is what it is.
                                          In some of the social media posts concerning Rob Gage, a woman was stating that’s how it was. She then told a story about how she walked in on JW having sex with a junior rider.

                                          The horse world is way to small to give out those details because someone some where will know who and bet, that name will be on social media. People still are commenting the SS killed Rob Gage despite HR holding an informal QA about it. Another person has a photo from 2017 that makes you go WTF? I’ve seen it. That person thankfully sent it to the appropriate people.

                                          Comment

                                          Working...
                                          X