How do you know?
Girls don't come forward because they know white privileged men will call them liars. Just because you haven't heard it in public, does not mean its not going on. Use your common sense.
How do you know?
Girls don't come forward because they know white privileged men will call them liars. Just because you haven't heard it in public, does not mean its not going on. Use your common sense.
Lots of interesting comments on this thread. Some assume AS is guilty of something bad. Others don't make that assumption. Lots of people who take one view are intolerant of those who take the other view.
The American legal system is imperfect, but it exists as it does because it does arguably the best job in history at balancing the different concerns surrounding justice. It's easy to alter that balance for one purpose or another, but you'll get a less optimal ultimate balance.
Here, we have a relatively secret proceeding with a high profile defendant and a punishment that generates great attention. That process may address some negatives with the justice system, but it creates problems with other concerns, like fostering public confidence in the result.
And that's what we see here. A lack of public confidence in the result. Some won't mind. Others will. Some are too uninformed about how these things work to have an informed opinion.
The references in some posts to other systems are not wildly off base. The further you drift from the American legal system, even if you think it's for a good reason, the further you take things out of balance.
KudzuRunner wrote:
Finnished at 344 wrote:
"breasts and bottom were too big," are considered sexual harassment and Salazar is purported to have commented on these specific parts of Cain's anatomy.
https://www.insider.com/runner-mary-cain-nike-lawsuit-salazar-weight-shaming-abuse-2021-10Yes. I think this is probably what got him banned. And, as Rojo helpfully noted by quoting from p. 9 of the relevant regulations, simply talking like that in an effort to motivate and inspire the female athlete in question to modify her behavior in a direction that the coach adjudges necessary for the athlete's future development and best racing, can, at this moment in history, be construed as "sexual misconduct."
The problem is that every other form of stipulated sexual misconduct is grounded in desire: wanting to possess and use somebody in a sexual way, or actually possessing and using them in a sexual way. I get that to speak in the way AS spoke to MC would, in almost any other workplace one can imagine, be actionably improper. But the training of athletes is, or has always been, somewhat different, because the athlete's body--not just its actual performance, but its appearance as that closely correlates with its actual performance--is the whole point. So there HAS to be somewhat more latitude in the way that the coach speaks to the athlete about the athlete's body.
You can be da**ed sure that Ed Ogeron and many other football coaches talk in a no-holds-barred way to their athletes about their bodies. If a guy shows up at training camp and he's overweight, you KNOW that coaches are talking about that in colorful ways.
But the moment you get a male coach talking to a female athlete about her body in a colorful way--and specifically a way designed to achieve a mutually agreed upon end of superior performance--there's a problem. And that seems like a problem to me: that difference. To label that colorful talk "sexual misconduct" in the case of a male coach and his female athlete, when you wouldn't label it that way in the case of a male coach and a female athlete, is wrong, IMHO.
If Salazar misbehaved in some other way, if he pushed for sexual favors--I'd toss him off the boat in a minute. I'm not an AlSal fanboy. But I'm also not inclined to condemn him in this way, to deprive him of his livelihood, because he pushed an athlete too hard in a way that he sincerely believed was justified in order to achieve--again--A MUTUALLY AGREED UPON GOAL of superior performance. He may well have been mistaken about her body: about her voluptuity (as it were) foreclosing superior performances. He may have made a professional misjusdgment. That's an entirely different issue. But he's entitled, as the hard-driving professional he was, to do what he does. If those two athletes decideds that his methods weren't worth their psychic cost, they should have severed the professional relationship.
I guess the decision is un-appealable. That's a shame. But I certainly hope Salazar will tell his side of the story.
And again: everything I'm saying is subject to revision if it turns out that something more legitimately resembling sexual misconduct actually took place.
I'm pretty sure we're discussing an independent arbitrator's unpublished review - and denial - of his appeal (IIRC, the initial lifetime ban came down in July or thereabouts).
Are appeals of SafeSport decisions decided by SafeSport itself?
It would be patently absurd for SafeSport to decide appeals of its own decisions, but none of the reporting I've seen even suggests that a third party was involved .
This smells pretty bad.
Taro wrote:
Are appeals of SafeSport decisions decided by SafeSport itself?
It would be patently absurd for SafeSport to decide appeals of its own decisions, but none of the reporting I've seen even suggests that a third party was involved .
This smells pretty bad.
It will be open season on coaches if SafeSport gets away with what they are trying to do to
Salazr.
whaletail wrote:
I'm pretty sure we're discussing an independent arbitrator's unpublished review - and denial - of his appeal (IIRC, the initial lifetime ban came down in July or thereabouts).
So why do we not even know who this arbitrator is or the names of the prosecutor's on the SafeSport side? What are their backgrounds and inherent biases? At least with public courts you are expected to declare your conflicts of interest and excuse yourself. Ah, beauty of a secret court.....no accountability when there is a miscarriage of justice.
If there was an "independent" arbitrator, he/she could not in fact be independent at all because the way SafeSport has written it's laws is that anything it says is "sexual misconduct" can be sexual misconduct so the arbitrator would have no choice but to say Salazar is guilty of sexual misconduct. There is no independent choice for an arbitrator to make because SafeSport would have bound the arbitrator to only judge by it's laws it defines however it wants and not public law. The arbitrator does not even have the choice of nullification of the stupid and arbitrary SafeSport "sexual misconduct" law that a public jury would have. Jury nullification is an important power that does not exist in the SafeSport tyrannical regime.
Conspiracies Are REAL wrote:
whaletail wrote:
I'm pretty sure we're discussing an independent arbitrator's unpublished review - and denial - of his appeal (IIRC, the initial lifetime ban came down in July or thereabouts).
So why do we not even know who this arbitrator is or the names of the prosecutor's on the SafeSport side? What are their backgrounds and inherent biases? At least with public courts you are expected to declare your conflicts of interest and excuse yourself. Ah, beauty of a secret court.....no accountability when there is a miscarriage of justice.
If there was an "independent" arbitrator, he/she could not in fact be independent at all because the way SafeSport has written it's laws is that anything it says is "sexual misconduct" can be sexual misconduct so the arbitrator would have no choice but to say Salazar is guilty of sexual misconduct. There is no independent choice for an arbitrator to make because SafeSport would have bound the arbitrator to only judge by it's laws it defines however it wants and not public law. The arbitrator does not even have the choice of nullification of the stupid and arbitrary SafeSport "sexual misconduct" law that a public jury would have. Jury nullification is an important power that does not exist in the SafeSport tyrannical regime.
So like doping control procedures.They have every interest in protecting their position.
It could be that the proceedings are all confidential to protect the victims AND the perpetrator. If Salazar did something pretty heinous, it's within his best interest to not have exactly what happened publicized and accept a judgement such as this silently. Having a shadow of doubt surrounding the circumstances definitely benefits him in many ways. Perhaps there was some sort of settlement as well, which would also make sense to make sure there is continued silence on this issue. He can't avoid the news about the lifetime ban, but he can avoid the details of why which does benefit him (if they are very shameful or could lead to awful social consequences in addition to his ban). People are already questioning the legitimacy and appropriateness of the decision BECAUSE it is vague with no real detail. Again, the only benefit that I see to maintaining the silence is if he is completely guilty otherwise he would at least be arguing his case (or his lawyers would be for him).
Secrets wrote:
Again, the only benefit that I see to maintaining the silence is if he is completely guilty otherwise he would at least be arguing his case (or his lawyers would be for him).
It would make perfect sense for him not to make a public statement if he's preparing a legal case against SafeSport and its ruling.
original liar soorer wrote:So like doping control procedures.They have every interest in protecting their position.
Yes, good comparison. Arbitrators have to follow the applicable Code, whether it's WADA's or SafeSport's. Looks like large parts of Letsrun now deem both Codes unfair just because they led to the banning of Houlihan for doping with nandro and Salazar for sexual misconduct (who is already banned for three different doping infractions).
Oh, and a little reminder: USATF knows, and they aren't exactly anti-Nike. So to call this a secret process (just because it's not public), isn't exactly accurate.
[quote]Secrets wrote:
It could be that the proceedings are all confidential to protect the victims AND the perpetrator. If Salazar did something pretty heinous, it's within his best interest to not have exactly what happened publicized and accept a judgement such as this silently. Having a shadow of doubt surrounding the circumstances definitely benefits him in many ways. Perhaps there was some sort of settlement as well, which would also make sense to make sure there is continued silence on this issue. He can't avoid the news about the lifetime ban, but he can avoid the details of why which does benefit him (if they are very shameful or could lead to awful social consequences in addition to his ban). People are already questioning the legitimacy and appropriateness of the decision BECAUSE it is vague with no real detail.
No "real" detail?
Zero detail. Not even a general statement.
I see no legit reason to not give any explanation as to why you would take away someone's livelihood away and give no reason.
The idea that they are protecting Salazar seems crazy. They took his career away for God's sakes
casual obsever wrote:
original liar soorer wrote:So like doping control procedures.They have every interest in protecting their position.
Yes, good comparison. Arbitrators have to follow the applicable Code, whether it's WADA's or SafeSport's. Looks like large parts of Letsrun now deem both Codes unfair just because they led to the banning of Houlihan for doping with nandro and Salazar for sexual misconduct (who is already banned for three different doping infractions).
Oh, and a little reminder: USATF knows, and they aren't exactly anti-Nike. So to call this a secret process (just because it's not public), isn't exactly accurate.
I found fault with the doping rules long long before the SH case; as do others.
Secrets wrote:
It could be that the proceedings are all confidential to protect the victims AND the perpetrator. If Salazar did something pretty heinous, it's within his best interest to not have exactly what happened publicized and accept a judgement such as this silently.
If he had done something heinous there would have to be a criminal investigation.
In fact, going by the "naive" commonsense understand of sexual harrassment until a few years ago, there would be very little legal space between something bad enough to ban a coach for life but not bad enough to prosecute him criminally. As apparently there is no criminal investigation under way whatever happened must be either very lame, like comments about weight, or maybe making a pass at someone (sometimes inappropriate but not criminal) or between consensual adults (again sometimes inappropriate but usually not criminal) .
runner89275485634867 wrote:
How do you know?
Girls don't come forward because they know white privileged men will call them liars. Just because you haven't heard it in public, does not mean its not going on. Use your common sense.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Stupid to make it a gender/racial issue.... what it comes down to is these two were not compatible....Alberto because he is the bullying type and Mary because she is un -coachable. Actually, she should call the whole revenge thing off and try to make peace with Alberto and Nike - and vice versa.
SS says the evidence against Salazar is publicly available, so there’s no sexual assault of a minor. If there was, there would be a police report.
If Mary really wanted to make a comeback, she could do it if the desire was there. We all know that desire, The fact that she’s not even trying suggests running was never her dream.
How does SS know Salazar’s fat shaming led to Mary’s suicidal thoughts. She was taking honors chemistry courses at a top tier college. That means she was putting in 10 hours a week per class at a minimum. Some of these science tests are 6-8 hours long. The labs are also very time consuming. She was a zillion miles from home and training with older athletes that had already been through the college system so they had more strength and experience. Also, I bet nobody wanted to socialize with someone so young. These all factored into her depression that was not considered by SS because SS consisted of a bunch of uneducated resistors (look at their bios) who believe that Taylor Swift was violently sexually assaulted.
Again, we aren’t defending Salazar for the drug use and fat shaming. The issue is the integrity of a system that lets women seek revenge that is out of proportion with the misdeed.
AlohaState wrote:
SS says the evidence against Salazar is publicly available, so there’s no sexual assault of a minor. If there was, there would be a police report.
If Mary really wanted to make a comeback, she could do it if the desire was there. We all know that desire, The fact that she’s not even trying suggests running was never her dream.
How does SS know Salazar’s fat shaming led to Mary’s suicidal thoughts. She was taking honors chemistry courses at a top tier college. That means she was putting in 10 hours a week per class at a minimum. Some of these science tests are 6-8 hours long. The labs are also very time consuming. She was a zillion miles from home and training with older athletes that had already been through the college system so they had more strength and experience. Also, I bet nobody wanted to socialize with someone so young. These all factored into her depression that was not considered by SS because SS consisted of a bunch of uneducated resistors (look at their bios) who believe that Taylor Swift was violently sexually assaulted.
Again, we aren’t defending Salazar for the drug use and fat shaming. The issue is the integrity of a system that lets women seek revenge that is out of proportion with the misdeed.
Who’s definition of misread?
What’s the correct word since there’s no criminal case?
Should have said misread and am happy with that word, but who determines the significance within the broad range within misdeeds.
Misdeed .
Safesport fir what it was set up for is a good and sadly needed thing.
But it has its down sides as well
1-anyone for any reason can file a safesport complaint against you. Example-ibe 9f tge employees of this site could write an article an their description of an athlete a reader feels sexualized the athlete. The reader could filed a complaint. There are no standards anyone can file against anyone for anything. If a person has a personal grudge against another person they can use safesport as a way to go after them
2-you are not allowed to know who filed that complaint
3-you really have no recourse
If you are not a member of usatf, there is very little to zero safesport can do to you(unless of course you did break a law they could turn the complaint over to authorities). You are simply given a call put of the blue by a person from usatf you are told a complaint has been filed against you. You are read the complaint and the conversation ends with the usatf rep telling you they are sending you a copy of the complaint and a copy is going to the usatf lawyer as well.