Fran Haring Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 (edited) On 11/14/2018 at 12:53 PM, Tim K said: There was a man who marched with Cadets who was there with his wife and children, one of whom was going into 5th grade. As I was grabbing cup of coffee, I spoke with the family and I learned that the boy going into 5th grade played the clarinet. I told him I played the clarinet when I was his age. This caught the ear of the colorful character who ranted and raved about the evils of woodwinds and accused me of being like George Hopkins and wanting to force woodwinds into DCI. This was on the morning of prelims and for the rest of the weekend, anytime he saw me, including at LOS, he called me George Hopkins. Holy mackerel, that is quite a stretch to say the least!!! "My grandfather was an Army Air Corps pilot in the Pacific theater during World War II." "Oh... so he's the reason we have nuclear weapons!!!" LOL Edited November 17, 2018 by Fran Haring 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skevinp Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 40 minutes ago, Icer said: What I find most perplexing about this topic is that in all the discussion of GH that took place at the time, not one criticism had anything to do with what would become the subject of the allegations, EVEN THOUGH EVERY ONE HAD ALREADY OCCURRED. Even on an anonymous forum like DCP in a thread that was specifically created to bash the guy, no mention. As one who believes that at least some of the incidents rise to some pretty serious levels of misconduct/assault, including potential criminal consequences, it is a mystery how this stayed under wraps for so long. It doesn't seem like a mystery to me. The fact that he called attention to himself in every other way but stayed quiet about this one thing suggests he knew how very wrong it was. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Icer said: What I find most perplexing about this topic is that in all the discussion of GH that took place at the time, not one criticism had anything to do with what would become the subject of the allegations, EVEN THOUGH EVERY ONE HAD ALREADY OCCURRED. Even on an anonymous forum like DCP in a thread that was specifically created to bash the guy, no mention. As one who believes that at least some of the incidents rise to some pretty serious levels of misconduct/assault, including potential criminal consequences, it is a mystery how this stayed under wraps for so long. How it stayed under wraps so long..... Penn State, Bill Cosby, Michael Feinstein..... etc etc. It's not unheard of..... Edited November 17, 2018 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icer Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 47 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: How it stayed under wraps so long..... Penn State, Bill Cosby, Michael Feinstein..... etc etc. It's not unheard of..... Penn State and Bill Cosby (and Matt Lauer and Tiger Woods if you want to throw them in as well) were not controversial at the time of the respective allegations. By contrast, GH was already a highly controversial figure, with plenty of people having a lot of strong opinions. Of course in the Penn State case there were loud voices saying Paterno was long past his sell-by date. Maybe if he were still on top of his game things would have been kept quiet for longer. I worry that there is a problem here that background checks will not sufficiently address. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Icer said: Penn State and Bill Cosby (and Matt Lauer and Tiger Woods if you want to throw them in as well) were not controversial at the time of the respective allegations. By contrast, GH was already a highly controversial figure, with plenty of people having a lot of strong opinions. Of course in the Penn State case there were loud voices saying Paterno was long past his sell-by date. Maybe if he were still on top of his game things would have been kept quiet for longer. I worry that there is a problem here that background checks will not sufficiently address. I was only referring to things being kept under wraps as it wasn’t just GH. Controversial doesn’t really matter. Edited November 17, 2018 by JimF-LowBari Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IllianaLancerContra Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 5 hours ago, Icer said: Penn State and Bill Cosby (and Matt Lauer and Tiger Woods if you want to throw them in as well) were not controversial at the time of the respective allegations. By contrast, GH was already a highly controversial figure, with plenty of people having a lot of strong opinions. Of course in the Penn State case there were loud voices saying Paterno was long past his sell-by date. Maybe if he were still on top of his game things would have been kept quiet for longer. I worry that there is a problem here that background checks will not sufficiently address. this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 5 hours ago, Icer said: Penn State and Bill Cosby (and Matt Lauer and Tiger Woods if you want to throw them in as well) were not controversial at the time of the respective allegations. By contrast, GH was already a highly controversial figure, with plenty of people having a lot of strong opinions. Of course in the Penn State case there were loud voices saying Paterno was long past his sell-by date. Maybe if he were still on top of his game things would have been kept quiet for longer. I worry that there is a problem here that background checks will not sufficiently address. If a person is doing what GH did in secret (obviously), and as they happened none of the victims ever made a report, then there would be nothing a background check of any type would uncover. There needs to be some sort of public evidence for a check to uncover something. Esp going way back to the 80's, my guess is those victims were horrified, ashamed and just unable to come forward. Heck, they did not come forward by name as early as this past January. That has to change, and if the @metoo movement does anything good, it is a chance to change everybody's approach to monsters like GH. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IllianaLancerContra Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 53 minutes ago, MikeD said: If a person is doing what GH did in secret (obviously), and as they happened none of the victims ever made a report, then there would be nothing a background check of any type would uncover. There needs to be some sort of public evidence for a check to uncover something. Esp going way back to the 80's, my guess is those victims were horrified, ashamed and just unable to come forward. Heck, they did not come forward by name as early as this past January. That has to change, and if the @metoo movement does anything good, it is a chance to change everybody's approach to monsters like GH. Absolutely correct. Everyone has the presumption of innocence esp w/r/t the the legal system. But what do we, as a society in general, and Drum Corps in specific, about individuals who make some uncomfortable, but never actually commit an offence and at any rate are never accused? This is an issue that we as a society need to work out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeD Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 5 minutes ago, IllianaLancerContra said: Absolutely correct. Everyone has the presumption of innocence esp w/r/t the the legal system. But what do we, as a society in general, and Drum Corps in specific, about individuals who make some uncomfortable, but never actually commit an offence and at any rate are never accused? This is an issue that we as a society need to work out That is a difficult question to answer. Two people reacting to the exact same stimulus may have different reactions, from being angry, uncomfortable, to brushing it off to even feeling happy, depending on the stimulus and how they individually interpret it. A person who does have a negative reaction...made to feel uncomfortable, should be able to make that known to the person who making them feel that way, but we all have different mindsets and experiences. I just wrote "Of course, I am not talking about obvious harassment", but I deleted it because what I may think is "obvious" someone else may not. How neutered do we want interpersonal interactions to be as a society, let alone in drum corps? If a person DOES feel uncomfortable with how they are being treated, they should be able to state that without fear of reprisal or being made fun of. The person who made them feel that way needs to understand the differences between people as individuals. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted November 17, 2018 Share Posted November 17, 2018 4 minutes ago, MikeD said: That is a difficult question to answer. Two people reacting to the exact same stimulus may have different reactions, from being angry, uncomfortable, to brushing it off to even feeling happy, depending on the stimulus and how they individually interpret it. A person who does have a negative reaction...made to feel uncomfortable, should be able to make that known to the person who making them feel that way, but we all have different mindsets and experiences. I just wrote "Of course, I am not talking about obvious harassment", but I deleted it because what I may think is "obvious" someone else may not. How neutered do we want interpersonal interactions to be as a society, let alone in drum corps? If a person DOES feel uncomfortable with how they are being treated, they should be able to state that without fear of reprisal or being made fun of. The person who made them feel that way needs to understand the differences between people as individuals. The different reactions is a big part of my training every year. That's why if someone feels uncomfortable they have to let someone know be it the person making them uncomfortable or someone higher up. After the other person finds they are doing something objectionable they have to stop. Yep one person has no problem and another does. Duty of the person who finds it objectionable to make their feelings heard. And the big piece is what to do if the person you are supposed to report to is the person causing the problem 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.