ISU announces the death of John Coughlin

[Finley]

People don't believe victims because they don't want to. Or they do believe them and they just don't care. Or for whatever reason, the perpetrator (and what he/she represents - Catholic Church, USA Gymnastics, etc.) is considered more important than the victim and the safety of future victims. Let that sink in.

This story is long and there is no happy ending. A man married a woman with three daughters. The oldest girl never told anyone he was molesting her because she thought she was protecting her younger sisters. Finally when she was sixteen she told her mother.

Her mother didn't believe her. She ran away. Her sisters told their mother he had been molesting them too. Each one of them had believed they were protecting the other two by keeping the secret. No one believed them. All of his friends, neighbors and co-workers thought the girls were ungrateful, jealous, lying, troublemakers. He was the greatest guy, a pillar of the community, a war veteran, a hard worker, a good neighbor, a good provider, you could count on him for anything.

One of the daughters friends came forward and said he had molested her as well. Other girls in the neighborhood had stories about him. This was enough for the mother to divorce him and for him to leave town. I don't know why charges were never brought against him. This was a long time ago. It wasn't the 'done thing'. I would like to assume people thought they were doing what was best for their children by 'sparing' them the ordeal of reporting what happened to the police.

His best friend stood by him. They served together in the Vietnam War. They were closer than brothers. This man molested his best friend's daughter for years. Until she got old enough to put a stop to it. She never told anyone. She believed that if her father found out he would kill this man and go to jail for murder. She finally told her older brother. Her brother said if she didn't tell their dad, he would.

She told her parents what he done to her. Guess what? They didn't believe her. Her dad was sure she must have misunderstood what had happened. His friend would never do anything like that. His friend had saved his life. His daughter finally got through to him and he finally believed her. He never spoke to his best friend again. Once again, no official report, no charges.

As devastating as the abuse was, it was more soul crushing not to be believed after finding the courage to speak to the people they loved the most. Especially to the girl who kept silent because she believed she was 'protecting' her father from killing the man. There aren't words for this. You either know or you don't.

The molester moved to a nearby town. The story repeats itself. It always does. Remarried, an elder in his church, a pillar of his community, much beloved by his friends and neighbors. There is no way to know how many victims he molested in his lifetime but finally someone reported him. He was charged, arrested, a case was brought against him.

First time offenders at that time and in that area were usually given the option to plead guilty and be placed on probation and attend a sex-offender rehabilitation program. One of his former step-daughters and his former best friend's daughter contacted the district attorney in the county where the case was pending to let him know that this man was a serial offender with a history going back decades. The statute of limitations to charge him for what he had done to them had expired.

The case never went to trial. He was not convicted and any background search on this man would show nothing more than an arrest and what he was charged with. So many of these cases never make it to trial. The conviction rate is not good. It's hard to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt when there are no witnesses, no dna evidence, no understandable motive. Just his word against hers. Did I tell you what an amazing guy he was? An American hero, a man a faith, a good neighbor, a true friend, devoted husband, good provider, a hard working man you could trust. Everyone who knew him liked him. He would give you the shirt off his back.

His story ends another decade later in a car accident. It wasn't his fault. He and his wife had just left church to get lunch and they were hit by another car. There was a lot of news coverage of this event for various reasons not relevant to this story. This man and his wife were eulogized in news story after news story. The community had lost one of its best, a great man, beloved by all.

Finally one of his former step daughters wrote a letter to the news stations and local news papers (like I said, this was a long time ago) telling them this man had molested uncounted numbers of victims and all of this glorifying of his character needed to stop. Some people said it was a shame for her to speak ill of the dead. Some people said she was wrong to tarnish his memory. Some people said nothing at all. Victims are not believed.

He's been dead for years now. I thought it all happened the way it did because it was so long ago. That none of the victims thought they could tell and nobody believed them when they did. And even when they did FINALLY believe them no one pursued anything like a criminal action or reported him to the authorities. I thought if this happened today things would be different. Then fast forward to Larry Nassar. People don't want to believe victims.

Sometimes people DO believe victims but they just don't care. Nothing is going to get in the way of whatever agenda is of paramount importance to the 'bigger picture' certainly not some victim(s) stories. This is why the Catholic Church scandal lasted as long as it did. The people in power knew what those abusers did but they enabled them to keep doing it rather than acknowledge what was really happening and face the consequences to their organization.

USA gymnastics can say the same.

I know there are false allegations. I know there can be dire consequences to false allegations. People have been murdered because of false allegations. I do not deny this. Anyone accused has every right to be defended, helped, protected and to clear their name.

But for the love of everything in the universe, if someone tells you something, please believe them. Protect them. Help them. Get them to people who can help. Someone, somewhere will care. If it should turn out that you were taken in by a false allegation then at least you know that you erred on the side of caution. That you gave someone a chance. Even if they didn't deserve your compassion and empathy you did the right thing.

There are people whose sole job it is to be finders of fact. Let them do that job. Let justice be done. Maybe justice can't be done. Just because there isn't enough evidence to prove a case beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law doesn't mean it didn't happen. You can't win every case. But it is important to have to fought for the chance to try.

All we can do is try to protect each other to the best of our abilities. Especially those weaker and more vulnerable than ourselves.

 

[CellarDweller]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This post says it all, and IMO, could not have been said better.

 

[Metis]

Every part of this story is a tragedy.

I’m going to repeat this, because it’s important, even if I don’t change any minds: the overwhelming balance of probabilities is that there’s merit to the accusations against Coughlin, not that there isn’t. That doesn’t mean you need to act as if he was found guilty in a court of law. But it is something to keep in mind moving forward and when adjusting your worldview if and when we learn more information. While we lack hard confirmation of some facts, we can know the following things with a high degree of confidence:
1. SafeSport would not have been given responsibility for investigating complaints unless they were related to sexual misconduct.
2. SafeSport received the first complaint as early as October. In the subsequent time, they managed to conduct (possibly even complete?) an investigation that involved interviewing even peripheral figures who might have information about a culture of abuse at the time or who had seen behaviour that was only relevant in light of received complaint(s).
3. False accusations of sexual abuse are vanishingly rare, and those that are made tend to follow a specific pattern. They tend to be extreme stories with well-defined villains and heroes, grotesque behaviour, and very clear on specific details such as time, place, assailants, etc. In other words, the opposite of the kind that would trigger an investigation that includes witnesses from three decades ago. (An anonymous complaint is also not a primary vehicle for false accusations.)
4. Anonymous to us does not mean anonymous to SafeSport and other relevant parties.
5. I do not know anyone who has been sexually abused who takes any kind of reporting lightly. I once spent hours staring at the FBI’s crime survey and debating what to select before just closing the window without reporting — and that was a completely anonymous, purely quantitative survey aimed at measuring the actual incidence of various crimes.
6. There is no magic bullet here. For those who are falling back on due process: the legal system emphasizes due process at the cost of swift action. If there were an accusation against a coach and you would want to know before retaining their services, that’s in tension with the desire to see SafeSport move to a full legal model. The legal system offers vanishingly little hope to anyone whose case can be dismissed as a he-said/she-said — I would know, I worked for prosecution on domestic violence during university, nevermind my adventure in federal civil torts.
7. Those who have experienced abuse are caught between a Scylla and Charybdis of bad options: say nothing and be blamed for future victims, say something and be blamed for not saying so “correctly.” Everyone has an opinion on what the best mechanism of reporting would be, when the victim is the one who has to make the judgment call regarding what they’re capable of enduring, likelihood of success, closure (if possible), level of support, safety concerns, etc. It is excruciating. Excruciating. I don’t know what I could have done better, looking back at my own life, but if I could have availed myself of an organization like SafeSport, that’s the mechanism I would have chosen for a multitude of reasons.
8. Suicide is a special kind of Hell to endure. My family has had struggles with suicidality and I was one of the last people to contact a friend who committed suicide — I can’t see a Subway without thinking of her, even almost a decade later — and it was a profoundly awful kind of grief, worse in some ways than that of the grief I experienced when I lost a parent. We don’t know if Coughlin had prior mental health issues, if his suicide was a direct result of the sanctions imposed by SafeSport and USFSA, etc. It was not an inevitability, however, or somehow foreseeable. The only person who is responsible for the death of Coughlin is Coughlin himself.

None of this means Coughlin is guilty or has been proven to be a predator or anything like that. Do I think it’s more likely than not? Yes, by a factour of 9 to 1. Which is not 100%. You may not be comfortable with that. I understand. (Ask me about my stance on the preponderance of the evidence standard in Title IX guidance issued under the Obama administration. I would not wish my long, bitter journey to finding counsel on anyone.) But I am willing to accept the possibility that I am wrong in my conclusions, although I regard that outcome as less likely. For those who feel nothing has been proven and that we shouldn’t rush to judgment on mere accusation: I understand, although I disagree, but I also have to ask — when is an accusation more than an accusation? Mine only went as far as a draft complaint to be filed in federal court. Had I pursued that case and spent more than five years of my life in legal limbo, even a victory in court would not have meant accusations related to actual abuse were substantiated, only that I had said I had been abused and that my rights had been violated in attempting to report the claims of abuse. Legally, the actual abuse would never be more than an accusation. (You could, in fact, believe I was lying and that still wouldn’t change the civil rights claim.)

That claim wasn’t even the first time something happened there, with those specific actors, to me or to someone else. It was the second — that I knew of, because I was a victim. I wasn’t the first girl my abuser dated who then disappeared; the girl before me also just vanished one day, Google returning nothing. (Unsurprising. He off-handedly described raping her to me.) The two predators I met were pushed through the system with no warnings to future institutions of the danger they posed to others. The climate of abuse, the broken system, the people who perpetuated it: all of them remain in place. I threw myself against that brick wall until I shattered but an immovable object is an immovable object.

Could I have done things differently? Could I have reached out to law enforcement? Maybe. My brain was over-clocked with illness and a desperate survival instinct, as the abuser I was trying to flee had demonstrated to me how he’d kill me. When I remarked I wanted to break up with him, I was told it would be better to survive the rest of the academic term to avoid creating any awkwardness. By the time I finally was able to get my shrink to just shut up about everyone having bad sex and listen to me, I was out of immediate danger and seeking a restraining order would only have given my abuser notice that I was scared of him while drawing him a map to my location. If I’d known I would have cause for a civil claim a year later, I might have gone to my old job and told all the gory details to a middle aged man and then taken off my clothes so the injuries could be photographed. (A process I had helped with from the other side when I worked in prosecution.) Would it have made a difference? No. Consensual rough sexual activity. Maybe I could have screamed “NO” and “you’re hurting me” louder at the time, but my abuser reacted to those protests with delight and my survival instinct soothed me with the promise that turning into a limbless, numb doll would cause it all to be over faster. If I had said something at the time — well, said something louder, because I do remember saying something while my skin was sticky with bruises and being told to shut up — I might have retained the legal claim that would satisfy those who believe in that standard but I also would have exposed myself to the most immediate danger, and I was already in plenty of danger. Nevermind how slow the wheels of justice turn, if they turn at all. What would you have done? What would you tell a friend or daughter to do?

And, of course, what should Coughlin have done? I don’t know and I genuinely struggle with that question. There is no system that can make everyone happy: if you want to have knowledge of complaints that would change your decision about whether or not someone is “safe,” you can’t have perfect transparency and “innocent until proven guilty.” Those desires are inherently in tension with each other. If you want swift action on allegations of abuse, you have to accept a lesser standard for action than “beyond a reasonable doubt,” as if you wait for proof beyond all doubt, you’re open to the criticism you allowed a “known” abuser to continue unimpeded. But swift action only looks like the right choice once we know how the story ends: a trail of ruined lives and rumours, warnings, reports that went nowhere years or decades ago. It may be the right decision and in the interest of public safety to suspend someone before they’ve been proven guilty, but only if the person is later revealed to be what we suspected they were. If they weren’t? “You could ruin a man’s life!” “Due process!” How do you balance one person’s reputation and ability to participate in a sport with a voluntary federation and accrediting system against the safety and concerns of others, most of whom are far more vulnerable?

I would love to know what the right balance is. Because no one gets more blame for their choices than victims, as if the act of abusing someone isn’t a choice — but the passive voice wipes that away. I was abused, not He abused me. (What, I was hit by a bus? This was just an unforeseen accident?) But starting any kind of process is an active choice — they accused, they ruined a man’s life. And there is always something that should have been done differently by those making a complaint. I wish it were so simple. My brain flat-out could not understand that I was being abused at the time I was enduring it, as it was a little busy trying to maintain a veneer of sanity and figuring out an escape plan. It was only later that I was told by my housemates that I was screaming in my sleep.

 

[eaglehelang]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...-coughlin-death-sexual-misconduct/2632092002/

Apparently, 2 of the allegations are from minors(at the time of the incident), hence the suspension. The 1st allegation was from an adult.

 

[luckyguy]

Once the accused died they do not prosecute them. Like the guy that held those 3 girls captive in Chicago (?) who committed suicide in jail. They don't bother with a trial. Also how can the accused defend themselves? Everyone has the right to face their accuser and the only exception to that is if they try in absentia and even then if they catch the person they often have to redo the trial.

They may investigate it but it will always be incomplete because they will not have his version of events.

True and very sad. Especially because we know from an article by Christine Brennan that the SafeSport procedure did not allow him to present his version in the media. Did he ever had a chance to be heard before the suspension? I did not read anything about it, so I am in doubt.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

True and very sad. Especially because we know from an article by Christine Brennan that the SafeSport procedure did not allow him to present his version in the media. Did he ever had a chance to be heard before the suspension? I did not read anything about it, so I am in doubt.

It will certainly be interesting to see what develops. Did they interview him? I’m sure at some point but did they confront him with the new allegations and did he formally respond?

Lots of investigators will give the accused a chance to speak and then collect more evidence before reinterviewing. I do wonder how far along they got and if they were near complete or only in the beginning phases of how they planned to go about this particular case prior to this tragic event. Tomorrow is holiday in the US so I don’t think we’ll see much until later in the week or even further.

 

[melgirl25]

TSL took down their video discussing this. Had anyone listened to it?

 

[Ambivalent]

TSL took down their video discussing this. Had anyone listened to it?

I listened to it. The guest, who was interviewed by SafeSport, had a flippant attitude throughout and Dave Lease seemed very unnerved by the events of the last 48 hours. Best that the video was taken down.

 

[el henry]

TSL took down their video discussing this. Had anyone listened to it?

I listened to part of it, but I did not find it very helpful. I was hoping for a roadmap through SafeSport and it was more like, oh here’s something I did, and based on what I know from cheerleading, etc. And the interviewee was rolling her eyes and interrupting and I just, well, I couldn’t finish it. Maybe she did say something useful that I did not hear.

She was interviewed for the current investigation of John Coughlin and I am shocked that she even mentioned that. For someone (both Dave and interviewee) who claims to care about confidentiality, that IMHO was not the wisest move. And maybe why it was taken down.

 

[Metis]

TSL took down their video discussing this. Had anyone listened to it?

Yes. Dave discussed the culture of abuse in skating with a woman who declined to give her full name (I’m not even going to repeat her first name) who trained at the same club as Coughlin in the 90s, though she is ~7 years older. She was contacted by SafeSport — I think more about the culture at the time and anything she may have noticed then that could be relevant to the allegations under investigation, but we honestly don’t know as she wasn’t able to go on the record about much. She disclosed that she was contacted by a former coach who had knowledge of the region. (I think. It was definitely a coach, not a lawyer.) Also, she gave us a better sense of the timeline: the first complaint was filed in October and she was interviewed not long after (I think that was what was implied, but it wasn’t directly stated, I don’t think). So in the time since the first complaint and now, a pretty broad and deep investigation going back decades has already occurred.

In addition to skating, she was or is active in artistic roller skating and cheerleading and has had plenty of interaction with SafeSport. She stressed that you can’t simply place an anonymous phone call and trigger a suspension or any of the disciplinary action that occurred in Coughlin’s case — this had to be something serious and credible. She criticized the lack of transparency in SafeSport but broadly argued that they do more good than bad and that this is absolutely not a witch hunt.

There was a larger discussion about the culture of abuse in skating and the presence of skeletons around every corner that I can also summarize, but as far as the specifics related to Coughlin, that’s all I remember. In terms of the accusations against Coughlin, there wasn’t much, as there was little she could say (and it seems even the little she did say was too much). What I found most interesting and relevant was the fact that she had been contacted at all — tracking down witnesses that far on the periphery is not easy or cheap, but the fact that she and others she knows who are now quite removed from figure skating were interviewed by SafeSport suggests, at least to me, that this was a very thorough investigation and that there was an attempt at gathering information on time, place, culture, etc.

tl;dr not much on the internal workings of SafeSport in terms of their roadmap (she expressed familiarity with their workings as both a parent and then as someone who had been interviewed during an investigation) and had some limited knowledge of the Coughlin investigation, but I find the fact that she was even interviewed more interesting than much of what she said about the specifics of the events.

 

[melgirl25]

I listened to part of it, but I did not find it very helpful. I was hoping for a roadmap through SafeSport and it was more like, oh here’s something I did, and based on what I know from cheerleading, etc. And the interviewee was rolling her eyes and interrupting and I just, well, I couldn’t finish it. Maybe she did say something useful that I did not hear.

She was interviewed for the current investigation of John Coughlin and I am shocked that she even mentioned that. For someone (both Dave and interviewee) who claims to care about confidentiality, that IMHO was not the wisest move. And maybe why it was taken down.

Yeah seems like it shouldn't be territory TSL gets into at this point.

 

[Finley]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This post says it all, and IMO, could not have been said better.

Thank you. It was hard for me to find the courage to post it. I'm still second guessing myself because it isn't just my story. The last thing I ever want to do is cause pain to anyone, but so much pain is caused by things left undone or unsaid. Terrible things can grow in silence.

 

[Metis]

Yeah seems like it shouldn't be territory TSL gets into at this point.

I didn’t find the interview compelling but that was more because I felt the woman Dave interviewed was very nervous and uncomfortable offering much on the record. She tended to fall back on a sort of flippant attitude in what looked to me like nervousness — I had that habit myself, of sort of disowning my own insights when pressed on them in seminars, and it seemed to me that she was trying to come off as too cool as more of a defensive mechanism than as a reflection of how she truly felt. The whole thing could have used more time and prep, but I did see some value in it.

People need to give Dave a break. I realise TSL has rubbed many people the wrong way, but Dave has really been trying to tone down the snark — I can think of several snarky comments made by Jonathan that Dave said he wasn’t going to acknowledge — and he’s been doing those judging videos to try, I think, to actually help people better understand the scoring system. He’s also been consistent on elevating SafeSport announcements and stories of abuse. And at the end of the episode, he spoke about his own experience discovering child pornography on the computer of a close friend he was living with, reporting to the authorities, his own lack of knowledge about what was going on, etc.

I know he’s not everyone’s favourite person and he can be a lot to take, but credit where credit is due: he’s actually even-handed about reporting abuse and he’s a genuine ally here.

 

[brightphoton]

Yes, the guest on Dave Lease's show was a former cheerleader, and stereotypically so. She was blonde, and had a air-headed, high-pitched voice. However, if you look past her physical attributes, she did shed light on the pairs skating culture, which may have contributed to, or covered up, John's alleged actions.

- Girls in pairs are told they are worth 1/100 of a boy. They should do what the boy says, because if she is too difficult, there are 12 other girls waiting behind her to take her spot. Boys are golden. They are king. They have their pick of partners.
Perhaps unrelated, perhaps a bit related. John Coughlin unceremoniously dumped his partner Caitlin and replaced her immediately with Caydee. Caitlin never found a similar partner and had to quit pairs.
- Girls don't go into pairs from the start. They enter the discipline, usually because they not good enough at singles. From the get go, the girls have lower self esteem.
Caveat is dancing. Dance is not a second tier sport. You have to train from a young age to do well, at least now.
- Girls in pairs are often partnered with older sisters. 16 year old girls with 25 year man is common. These girls are sheltered, and this man may be the first young male who has paid attention to them.

 

[twirlingblades]

Side note, but I know Dave has been very shaken by this. I talked to him a bit on twitter and he said yesterday was horrible. I know people don’t like him but he is a real person that is hurting over this.

Edit: I’m not surprised the video was taken down. There were some pretty horrendous comments directed towards both Dave and the interviewee.

 

[melgirl25]

Side note, but I know Dave has been very shaken by this. I talked to him a bit on twitter and he said yesterday was horrible. I know people don’t like him but he is a real person that is hurting over this.

Edit: I’m not surprised the video was taken down. There were some pretty horrendous comments directed towards both Dave and the interviewee.

I like Dave a lot and enjoy their show. That's what I was worried that doing a show this soon on this topic would lead to that.

 

[Metis]

- Girls in pairs are told they are worth 1/100 of a boy. They should do what the boy says, because if she is too difficult, there are 12 other girls waiting behind her to take her spot. Boys are golden. They are king. They have their pick of partners.
Perhaps unrelated, perhaps a bit related. John Coughlin unceremoniously dumped his partner Caitlin and replaced her immediately with Caydee. Caitlin never found a similar partner and had to quit pairs.
- Girls don't go into pairs from the start. They enter the discipline, usually because they not good enough at singles. From the get go, the girls have lower self esteem.
Caveat is dancing. Dance is not a second tier sport. You have to train from a young age to do well, at least now.
- Girls in pairs are often partnered with older sisters. 16 year old girls with 25 year man is common. These girls are sheltered, and this man may be the first young male who has paid attention to them.

Yes. Pairs is very tolerant of large gaps in age, and it isn’t unheard of for parents to react with complete denial upon being told that a romantic relationship is occurring even when it would be illegal due to one party being well under the age of consent. Both she and Dave discussed the fact that skating, like gymnastics, attracts the same “type” of people, with the same troubled family dynamics, etc. I thought Dave made a rather astute point in noting that in gymnastics, the NCAA system allows gymnasts who don’t want to continue in elite gymnastics to opt-out of the system and go to college, where they have a chance to be in an environment of their peers, but no such off-ramp exists in skating and it’s very common for social circles to include skaters in their mid to late 20s as well as recent teenagers — skaters don’t have the same ability to pursue skating and university, on top of dance and pairs being disciplines in which age divisions aren’t really addressed.

The guest pointed out that skating has a well-known culture of abuse and that it’s not as though there are a multitude of well-adjusted former skaters. She cited Tonya Harding, Nicole Bobek, and Tara Lipinski as examples. Dave noted that the fear of skeletons in the closet in skating seemed to be different than in gymnastics — gymnastics absolutely has its own monsters and cases of complete system failure to end abuse, but in skating, it wasn’t just that; rather, his experiences with the sport (both as a fan and a skater) led to him feeling as though any real accounting for the culture of abuse and bad actors would dislodge skeletons from everyone’s closet. There’s a sense that seemingly everyone had either been part of the culture of abuse, been abused, seen something but been conditioned to accept it as normal, etc. And that that “oh god we all have skeletons” kind of atmosphere was part of what prompts the skating community to immediately close ranks and lock arms whenever accusations are unearthed.

Dave mentioned his own experiences as an adult skater — seeing a teenage girl being put out on the ice by a middle aged coach and the two being in an open romantic relationship. That this was just ... accepted. A sense that rinks have plenty of open secrets that aren’t discussed because they’re normalised and there’s an element of being conditioned to accept the situation. Parents being in denial. Et cetera.

As far as SafeSport, she said they’re trying and the rules are generally good, albeit very clearly aimed at a specific kind of predation — rules against allowing coaches to transport students, for example, don’t stop coaches who live with students (this was Dave’s point) and can also make it harder for athletes to attend competitions, as USFSA doesn’t pay for a chaperone to attend with the athlete(s) and coach. They’re blunt measures, they do more good than harm, but they can’t stop everything.

On the issue of mandated reporters: she said her understanding was that SafeSport was moving through the states alphabetically? But that they were grandfathering in past decades and even old incidents were now subject to current rules. This discussion was a bit unclear, but I believe that’s what she was saying. I wouldn’t take her statements on SafeSport’s actual practises as gospel.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

- Girls in pairs are told they are worth 1/100 of a boy. They should do what the boy says, because if she is too difficult, there are 12 other girls waiting behind her to take her spot. Boys are golden. They are king. They have their pick of partners.

I can tell you from firsthand experience that this is not normal! Many men absolutely cherish their partner and show them the utmost respect. I know several that have married and or have formed lifelong freindships.

I’m not saying anything is off the table and it is true that people (of both sexes) may enter the discipline who don’t have a great respect for their partner or have been put into a disfunctional situation but your words are not in line with my experiences firsthand. I wanted to take the time to point that out.

- Girls don't go into pairs from the start. They enter the discipline, usually because they not good enough at singles. From the get go, the girls have lower self esteem.

Boys are the same. A good friend of mine made it to US Nats and subsequently tried pairs but never really got into it or was very good. I don’t think the partners he tried it with had low self esteem...in fact...they seemed very into the idea and one even one went on to have a reasonably successful pairs career and just started coaching. I think your projecting a bit here versus what reality is in general.

- Girls in pairs are often partnered with older sisters. 16 year old girls with 25 year man is common. These girls are sheltered, and this man may be the first young male who has paid attention to them.

This is a very real issue. I think parents need to be extra vigilante in this time period. Far too often we see kids just left unsupervised wrecklessly at the ice rink by adults who should be vigilante. I know they can drive themselves to the rink around 16 but parents can’t just check out!! Considering some pairs skaters have to drive several hours to work with a coach there are certain situations that need to be given attention. Like letting them make the drive alone. I do think the coach should report to the parent but that is a bit awkward so I think the parents absolutely need to be the first line of defense. Fortunately I myself have never encountered anything awkward like a 25 and 16 year old partner but I don’t even think I can think of a reason why it should be allowed. The USFSA should probably have simple rules in place that discourage anything like this.

 

[Metis]

I can tell you from firsthand experience that this is not normal! Many men absolutely cherish their partner and show them the utmost respect. I know several that have married and or have formed lifelong freindships.

I think it’s pretty clear we’re speaking of a dysfunctional culture that exists, albeit not uniformly, in the discipline, not claiming that it’s normal either within or outside of skating.

I used to “joke,” darkly, that if your girlfriend is crying and moving away from you, that sure as hell ain’t sexy and should cause any normal guy to immediately cease feeling aroused... but that’s not uniformly true, as I can attest.

 

[Sam-Skwantch]

Side note, but I know Dave has been very shaken by this. I talked to him a bit on twitter and he said yesterday was horrible. I know people don’t like him but he is a real person that is hurting over this.

Edit: I’m not surprised the video was taken down. There were some pretty horrendous comments directed towards both Dave and the interviewee.

To be frank....I don’t see why we are discussing Dave here. It’s so far removed from anything related to the issue. The reason people don’t often like TSL or Dave isn’t personal. For me it’s the way that they use situations like this to perpetuate their own interest and then as their fans start spreading their content he often becomes a martyr and it distracts from the actual topic at hand.

Comments can simply be turned off so I think it’s a bit more than people lobbing comments at Dave that caused the video to be removed.