My home life as a kid was likewise quite painful.
-
91
-
another way of looking at it wrote:
high school xc coach wrote:
The boys definitely seemed to have moved past their fear of Gjert in their adult lives. It was amusing to watch them toy with him for a reaction during the show. Gjert even says in one of the side interviews that they are looking for a reaction, so he kind of has to play the part. The stuff in the show, which might differ from real life, was just amusing. Like they are teasing Gjert that they're eating fast food, and he goes on a little rant, as expected.
That's one of the reasons I believe Jakob was lying when he said he couldn't remember any good times with his dad. That television series showed a bunch of times when the boys were laughing and having a good time with their father.
I saw the same thing, but I also realize there's an awareness of camera's that could possibly color things different from reality.
Also, when you read the experiences of ingrid, they seem a lot worse than what the boys went through. Maybe they had strength in numbers. maybe it was frustrating to Gjert that she wasn't responding to the training as well as they did. A lot to unpack.
181 -
darthJogger wrote:
high school xc coach wrote:
A lot of this is ridiculous, but the belief is that this is mostly over Gjert's treatment towards Ingrid. Everything else is just there to support what went on there.
And of course, Norway likely has different societal expectations than America, so maybe some of what seems like minor or typical to us, would be considered much worse over there.
Takes me back to the Adrian Peterson case of abusing his son, where the cultural differences between what some families in America consider normal versus what some consider an offense worthy of jail.
For the most part, I'll leave this for the Norwegians to pass judgement.
You lost me with the Adrian Peterson reference. There is no acceptable cultural explanation for how he beat the ever living crap out of his 4-year-old kid.
Not acceptable to you. Not acceptable to me. But there's a large culture that thinks different. It's similar (not the same) to holding people from 100s of years ago to our standards.
104 -
The boy's bare legs and scrotum were bloodied by the closest thing to a superhuman in our world striking him repeatedly with a switch. You can find the pictures if you want. That has never been acceptable. Not every moral situation is relative.
80 -
darthJogger wrote:
another way of looking at it wrote:
That's one of the reasons I believe Jakob was lying when he said he couldn't remember any good times with his dad. That television series showed a bunch of times when the boys were laughing and having a good time with their father.
Terrible take. My dad was an absolute bully. I lived in fear every day for 18 years. Grew up thinking of myself as a coward b/c at 7 years old I didn't step between him and my mom when he came home drunk and started pushing her around. I certainly hope that if other people could have seen past the happy facade we all wore most of the time they would have intervened. Since they didn't, I can only assume that they would be shocked to hear that I have exactly two happy memories involving my dad. (Playing Yatzhee and eating Sara Lee poundcake with Reddi whip one night my mom was gone and going to see the movie UHF in the theater.) Someone putting up a good front does not imply they're not going through hell.
Sounds like my stepfather. He was a ticking time bomb. Any little thing would set him off. I grew up plotting to beat the crap out him as soon as I turned 18 (instead I decided to go off to college on the opposite side of the country). Yet I can remember good times with him (playing basketball, watching our favorite sports team win the championship, and him teaching me to ride a bike).
151 -
seeing some posts that emotional abuse is not a crime or a felony. There are lots of crimes in the US that are defined by verbal comments that are intended to scare, shame, injure people and can result in jail time.
Threats to do harm
sexual harassments that is verbal in nature
are two examples of "verbal" activities that can be tied to arrests/punishments/jail time.
each of those is driven by the emotional impact to the victim.
If you threaten to kill someone and leave it at a verbal threat a part of the reason it is a crime is because of the emotional damage it does to the victim.
Just because some of you think of "emotional" in the context of some sort of whiny person situation is a problem with your short sided takes on a serious situation.
A stalker who constantly verbally harasses someone receives a restraining order and or arrest for emotional abuse.
222 -
I also love all of the people calling one of the worlds best athletes who handles running 20 miles a day darn near year round a weak or whiny person.
155 -
odd situation wrote:
Under the aegis of "careful what you wish for". The TV series is coming back to haunt Gjert. However, if there was was any truth in the series, many situations can get blown out of proportion. I find it somewhat ironic that Martin (the middle child), who was emotionally ignored (since he quit the sport), seems not to be a part of this suit and has supported Gjert, likely to the distancing of his relationship with his brothers.
As one who also came from a large family (5b,2g), the difference being that my athletic brothers got no support for sports development from my parents, which affected their opportunities, rather than a father who was all in. But, since we all know of parents coaching their children, it can have problems if handled poorly - even with the athletic success of the three boys. My eldest brother blamed my father for all of his problems, to the point that I never spoke to that sibling again (after he missed my father's funeral). Hopefully the family can heal in the years ahead.
I found with Ingrid's situation (again knowing nothing about abuse if it happened) that Gjert was put between a rock and a hard place - he didn't want to coach Ingrid, and it turned out that she wasn't nearly as talented as her brothers, yet her expectations were sky high. She was doomed to quit the sport in that scenario.
Getting back to Martin, if the others had such a problem, why didn't they just quit as he did? You feel sorry for him as it means he no longer has his father's attention, but to be honest, he seems to be the most well adjusted amongst them all, other than perhaps Kristopher. Just because someone is a star athlete, doesn't make them well adjusted.
You seem to miss some information, thus making some errors about Martin and Kristoffer:
1. Martin didn’t quit -he played soccer for many years, and was, according to Jakob, severely bullied by Gjert for that, and other things.
2. Kristoffer has in a long interview in Aftenposten accused Gjert of severe emotional and physical violence -the worst violent episode was a non sport related one (Kristoffer was reluctant to look after his younger siblings at Gjert’s demand): Kristoffer claims that he was afraid he could die after Gjert pressed bought his hands around this eldest son’s throat, lifted him up and threw him several meters away.
3. Your “well adjusted” comment seems a little strange -Kristoffer for instance, who left athletics as you recommended, underlines that he now as an adult has to fight severe anxiety (among other things) that he clearly relates back to the upbringing under his father.
,
192 -
another way of looking at it wrote:
What parents don't put limits on how much time their underage children can spend with their boyfriends and girlfriends? Having those limits is not abuse.
I didn’t claim abuse here. Of course parenting is a totality, and limits and everything must be seen in a context.
32 -
They should have kept this crap within the family. If the dad wasn’t so strict there is no was the family would have produced three world class/super elite middle distance runners.
It’s kind of like the Jackson family. The dad was super strict and controlling, but he molded his kids into superstar performers.
Do you think these children would have achieved anything without a strict father?
921 -
arunnerinwa wrote:
Two of the complaints seem silly to me. Or maybe I'm just abusive too.
First, I limit my kids' snacks after school to fruit only, which they don't really want, so they don't snack much. If you let them just eat snacks, they don't eat their dinner. I think it's a reasonable position to not allow snacks after school.
Second, I don't let my kids play computer games. In fact, I even limit the time they can spend doing anything in front of a computer. My logic is that they are probably going to spend most of their adult lives in front of a computer. But not letting him play the Playstation seems pretty reasonable. When you take away the computer, kids come up with better ways to entertain themselves.
The towel thing also seems like not a big deal.
Hitting in the head and kicking in the stomach - those are bad. But in the case of the former, he must not have been hitting him hard or he would have gotten a black eye. And a real kick in the stomach would have put him in the hospital, so I guess I wonder about that also.
Its pointless to look at every event isolated. If an old lady stare you down its weird, if its a 6'5" dude in a backalley its different. But its the same thing, looking at someone. He didnt want to limit his playing, he threw it out of the window I think?
If you really read what they say, they don't complain about petty things such as not being allowed to play playstation or snack, but for some reason a lot of people pretend like they do.
Ps: are you serious with the black eye? Have you never been in a fight before? You only get a black eye if someone hit you in the eye with their closed fist. If you hit a kid with an open hand its abuse, even though it wont give them a black eye.
Hope everyone can agree that hitting a kid repeatedly in the head with an open hand is abuse, even if you believe the accusations or not.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.131 -
another way of looking at it wrote:
????? wrote:
You are not accurate. I haven’t seen Jakob complain over no sleeping over in his parents house -on the contrary Gjert allowed Elisabeth to sleep over when she and Jakob were only 16 years old (according to the “Team Ingebrigtsen TV-series”). But Gjert wanted Elisabeth to leave when she had a cold.
What Jakob is criticising is this: He thinks Gjert unjustly criticised Elisabeth. And he also didn’t like that Gjert would restrict how much they were together, also in clear daylight, and both being healthy.
What parents don't put limits on how much time their underage children can spend with their boyfriends and girlfriends? Having those limits is not abuse.
Yes you are right, so maybe its not about that?
40 -
Strict parenting wrote:
They should have kept this crap within the family. If the dad wasn’t so strict there is no was the family would have produced three world class/super elite middle distance runners.
It’s kind of like the Jackson family. The dad was super strict and controlling, but he molded his kids into superstar performers.
Do you think these children would have achieved anything without a strict father?
There's strict and there's abusive. Somehow Richard Williams got Venus and Serena to achieve amazing success on the tennis court without beating, threatening, or bullying them -- but I'm sure he was strict.
171 -
reer wrote:
Strict parenting wrote:
They should have kept this crap within the family. If the dad wasn’t so strict there is no was the family would have produced three world class/super elite middle distance runners.
It’s kind of like the Jackson family. The dad was super strict and controlling, but he molded his kids into superstar performers.
Do you think these children would have achieved anything without a strict father?
There's strict and there's abusive. Somehow Richard Williams got Venus and Serena to achieve amazing success on the tennis court without beating, threatening, or bullying them -- but I'm sure he was strict.
Serena and Venus revere their dad. Tiger Woods revered Earl Woods. These are probably the two most famous examples of the bonkers sports dad’s who coached up their kids to become goats. You can be a crazy, obsessed, intense sports dad and not go anywhere close to the behavior of Gjert.
This post was edited 44 seconds after it was posted.210 -
LarsL11 wrote:
another way of looking at it wrote:
What parents don't put limits on how much time their underage children can spend with their boyfriends and girlfriends? Having those limits is not abuse.
Yes you are right, so maybe its not about that?
I don't think it should be about that, but Jakob talked about it in his testimony.
31 -
Take your time. Hurry up. wrote:
I wouldn't even mind going to prison in Norway
Could be a good place to train.
21 -
renowned family man wrote:
1. You dont grass on your family for something this petty. Especially when your dad gave you everything you are.
2. Why are posters here suggesting his running would be affected by having to go to court a few days later? The only way I can think it might affect it would be if it is literally keeping you awake at night.
Wow, you sound like an utter moron!
Congratulations!
42 -
Hxjcjc wrote:
Peter Griffin the Family Guy wrote:
Here's a summary of why the court case is happening:
1. The boys split from their father/coach. Gjert was fired as a coach and they bought his share of the running joint venture.
2. This had two purposes. Distancing themselves from who their father had been up to this point both personally and formally, but also giving Gjert an out. Just look at their statements at the time, saying how it's the strain and friction from mixing roles that makes it untenable to continue like before. No criminal accusations at this point. Gjert had a way out.
3. If Gjert stepped away from the running scene altogether, the accusations behind the indictments would've probably been swept under the rug. Instead he continued coaching other athletes in the periphery of the Ingebrigtsen training group, and his presence continued in the running scene.
4. The media circus involving the two camps that erupted every time there was a championship forced the boys to tell their side of the story, because it didn't make a lot of sense at the time. If they didn't reveal why they demanded that Gjert should be nowhere near their "workplace", it would just look like the biggest athletics star in the nation instructing the national federation on what to do, i.e. removing the coach of his (biggest) rival.
5. The nature of the things they told meant they also had to formally report it to the police, who in turn were forced to investigate. The results of the investigation resulted in Gjert being indicted for violence in close relationships, and here we are today.
The problem now for Gjert is that there will be a lot of eyes on this case and it will be used to make a “point”
His first error was to have so many children. How can you raise so many children in the 2000s? Talk about an impossible task.
Musk has 13. It's possible.
13 -
darthJogger wrote:
The boy's bare legs and scrotum were bloodied by the closest thing to a superhuman in our world striking him repeatedly with a switch. You can find the pictures if you want. That has never been acceptable. Not every moral situation is relative.
I find it hard to disagree with you, but at the same time, I read an article like this:
21 -
bekymretborger wrote:
we wont know who called nordås until he testifies
Huh?
20
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.