According to Sally Bergesen, there's a Harvey Weinstein-type scandal in T&F???

Manny Buff wrote:

i have no idea but wrote:

Had she not used the word 'professional' I would assume that she's talking about college coaches having sex with their female athletes.

Re-directing the subject, quickly... if a college coach sleeps with an athlete, are they always fired? Is it essentially universal athletic department law that a coach is terminated?

I am speaking more in terms of current time, as opposed to previous decades, etc.

What if a college coach drugs you so you're unconscious then rapes you?

Orange Gatorade wrote:

Manny Buff wrote:

Re-directing the subject, quickly... if a college coach sleeps with an athlete, are they always fired? Is it essentially universal athletic department law that a coach is terminated?

I am speaking more in terms of current time, as opposed to previous decades, etc.

What if a college coach drugs you so you're unconscious then rapes you?

wtf? Duhhh... the coach is a criminal.

Dick Tater wrote:

Time to implement what we'll call the Bergesen rule: If you have something to say, say it.

Bergesen and fellow Oisellers Fleshman and Goucher are always doing this if-you-knew-what-I-knew hinty BS. If you're so brave and bold and unafraid of The Man, just act on what you know, and then feel free to tell us about it. Don't introduce hazy accusations and then clam up when people ask for specifics. And don't backpedal on how you were misinterpreted when people ask that you offer up the goods or shut up.

would you please check your privilege before posting next time

Manny Buff wrote:

Orange Gatorade wrote:

What if a college coach drugs you so you're unconscious then rapes you?

wtf? Duhhh... the coach is a criminal.

God's mills grind slowly but grind to powder... you can run on for along time but sooner or later..

I'm a woman and I don't 'fly with the flock.' As I posted above, stop with the catty hinting around. I'm a research scientist who has had my own battles with being heard and recognized in my male-dominated field. But guess what, I faced things head-on in a professional, straightforward manner, including issues of unwanted advances. I communicated directly and clearly, and resolved the issues. While I always support young women in science and sport, I get weary of this unproductive, back-handed way of drawing attention to the issues that Bergeson and Goucher seem to be employing. Face it head on, ladies.

I fly with the flock wrote:

Dick Tater wrote:

Time to implement what we'll call the Bergesen rule: If you have something to say, say it.

Bergesen and fellow Oisellers Fleshman and Goucher are always doing this if-you-knew-what-I-knew hinty BS. If you're so brave and bold and unafraid of The Man, just act on what you know, and then feel free to tell us about it. Don't introduce hazy accusations and then clam up when people ask for specifics. And don't backpedal on how you were misinterpreted when people ask that you offer up the goods or shut up.

would you please check your privilege before posting next time

I don't know where this is going, but the original question had to do with whether or not athletic departments around the country are consistent in their handling of these types of situations.

Fair enough; I'll stop posting.

Manny Buff wrote:

I don't know where this is going, but the original question had to do with whether or not athletic departments around the country are consistent in their handling of these types of situations.

Flipp wrote:

We already know about several incidents of misconduct and have seen rumors of many more. The Toledo coach and his female athlete,

I must have missed this one. Any link to a thread discussing it?

Manny Buff wrote:

I don't know where this is going, but the original question had to do with whether or not athletic departments around the country are consistent in their handling of these types of situations.

People often comment and don't read the thread. You are the first to comment and not read the title.

Really. Spill it. There is NO ONE in pro-track so powerful to ruin Sally Bergesen. She is not the same as some 20 year old actress.

I don't believe the rumors about John Capriotti on Galen Rupp.

Androgello Biafra wrote:

Kara Goucher = Ashley Judd?

That’s what I think this person is referring to

There's a plethora of Pervy coaches in t and f. Easy for them to get away with it. If they're called out they just blackmail the accuser/use scare tactics and tighten up their act and image.

Sally's got a short window of opportunity while our collective short attention spans are focused on Weinstein. If it goes on too long, we'll have forgotten and moved onto the next shiny object. But name names and don't play coy. She's got a good position where if she names a name, she's got built in support from her cult (I mean, flock) so she can name a name with some proof and it'll come across better and with more authority. Or something.

Don't know about track and field but swimming and gymnastics definitely has a similar problem. https://www.outsideonline.com/2162781/unprotected

Fessuporshutup wrote:

Yes, I’m a woman, and no, I’m not posting pics. I’m heading out to run errands, and will leave this thread to you all to hash out. I’ve already expressed my stance from the perspective of someone who has lived life and decided to face these issues head-on. Was it hard, yes, very much so. But I believe in direct, open, and clear communication, and try to hold myself to that.

Pics? I'm skeptical that you, in fact, a "woman."

Ditto. Show us your shoulder boulders for verification.

Being versed in scientific communication is different than the way most of us communicate. What you hold yourself to is different than what others do. So I think it’s a little much to much to expect others to approach the issue like you have, which is more sober and straightforward than most humans that often get their emotions mixed up in matter.

FYI, I’m aware of the sexual harassment that occurs in the STEM fields. A lot of insecure man boys out there.

I fly with the flock wrote:

would you please check your privilege before posting next time

Would you please ditch your ad hominem remark next time before posting?

Fessuporshutup wrote:

I'm a woman and I don't 'fly with the flock.' As I posted above, stop with the catty hinting around. I'm a research scientist who has had my own battles with being heard and recognized in my male-dominated field. But guess what, I faced things head-on in a professional, straightforward manner, including issues of unwanted advances. I communicated directly and clearly, and resolved the issues. While I always support young women in science and sport, I get weary of this unproductive, back-handed way of drawing attention to the issues that Bergeson and Goucher seem to be employing. Face it head on, ladies.

I fly with the flock wrote:

would you please check your privilege before posting next time

I'm also a woman and tired of the hinty stuff, but I wonder whether they see legitimate reasons not to give specifics. Especially in the NOP case (and maybe others they know about), there's an ongoing investigation. Giving specifics opens you up to WAY more press, including negative press that they may just not want to have to deal with. I've always felt their hinty stuff was directed to their friends and community, to say we know there are problems and are eager to see things come out eventually.

oke wrote:

I'm also a woman and tired of the hinty stuff, but I wonder whether they see legitimate reasons not to give specifics. Especially in the NOP case (and maybe others they know about), there's an ongoing investigation. Giving specifics opens you up to WAY more press, including negative press that they may just not want to have to deal with. I've always felt their hinty stuff was directed to their friends and community, to say we know there are problems and are eager to see things come out eventually.

But if they don't offer specifics, they're just seen as losers venting instead of actually helping fix a problem. Sally has to decide if she's the leader of the flock or a clucking hen.

Karl Hungus wrote:

oke wrote:

I'm also a woman and tired of the hinty stuff, but I wonder whether they see legitimate reasons not to give specifics. Especially in the NOP case (and maybe others they know about), there's an ongoing investigation. Giving specifics opens you up to WAY more press, including negative press that they may just not want to have to deal with. I've always felt their hinty stuff was directed to their friends and community, to say we know there are problems and are eager to see things come out eventually.

But if they don't offer specifics, they're just seen as losers venting instead of actually helping fix a problem. Sally has to decide if she's the leader of the flock or a clucking hen.

Maybe they don't state the obvious as they figure people should be smart enough to figure it out for themselves. I find it funny you're a registered user on this site complaining about losers venting. But not surprised you're on here as a male criticizing a woman for having an opinion.