Fran Haring Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 3 hours ago, GUARDLING said: That's putting it mildly..lol. LOL... I marched through the 1970s into the early '80s... from my early teens until my early-to-mid 20s, basically. Back then it never seemed to occur to me, or other people I knew, that it was unbelievably stupid to drive around with open adult beverages in the car... and at times....uhhhh... a less-than-legal cigarette in hand. I was a teenager/early 20-something, and I was bulletproof. Or so I thought. Same thought process for a bunch of my friends, and a lot of folks in other corps. I can't say we didn't have fun. We certainly did. Some day I might write a book with all the names changed to protect the innocent. Or guilty. But we're lucky we survived...literally... and I wouldn't recommend that kind of "fun" to anyone now. I'm glad times have changed. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camel lips Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 13 minutes ago, GUARDLING said: At no time was rape or unwanted advances acceptable BUT you are right. Also at that time, he was also something like in his early 20s. close to victims ages AGAIN not that it's an excuse Exactly the point I was trying to make. When I was in my Late teens I was dating a girl that was 17. Im sure I could have been brought up on charges even then. Today I would no doubt be on some sort of registry for my acts. But we really were into the same things and hung out in the same crowds and really didn't think anything of it at the time. Neither did her parents. She thought I was a good kid and good influence on her compared to some of the guys she was dating at the time. So they didn't have a problem with it. In no way am I making excuses for George . He has to man up and take responsibility of these allegations are factual. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camel lips Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 14 minutes ago, mfrontz said: I utterly disagree. Every person 'from that era' was not and is not a serial harasser/rapist. Promiscuity is not the same thing as sexual assault. Originally Harvey Weinstein tried to claim that he 'was from a different era,' too. The George Hopkins portrayed in the article is a person with no conscience. I agree that not everyone was a serial harasser/rapist but the climate was certainly different. No doubt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 19 minutes ago, N.E. Brigand said: Well, sure, but these messages are aimed primarily at members' parents, don't you think? Ummm... I think they are well-crafted to show that they have strong policies for anyone who's questioning, parents or otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimF-LowBari Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 (edited) Definitely a less knowledgeable era and I am right behind GH in age. BUT..... some of us learned as we aged Edited April 9, 2018 by JimF-LowBari 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 7 minutes ago, Tim K said: If you are the director, you learn the corps sing and sing it, period. I am sure I am not the only DCP poster who is friends in FB with corps directors. They give their all to the corps, and some have young families. If they sacrifice as much as they do for their job, they are a member of that community.Sing the song. If I am assigned to a parish with a school that has a school song that is sung by alumni and students of which I am neither, I would listen once, learn that song for the next time, and sing sing it with gusto. Immediately upon singing it I would be a member of the community and chances are, by the end of the year would be an honorary alum. BTW, if you attend shows in the Boston area, they are still Garfield, or as we like to say “Gaahfield.” For those who think this rant is from someone with too much time on his hands, I am sitting in a medical office, waiting for someone to be finished and needs me to drive him home. 3 You can look at this quite different although as I said none of it has to do with the serious topic. One can look at it like the song for members is or can be a personal bond with other current and past members. Maybe even an adult free zone something that belongs to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 25 minutes ago, mfrontz said: I utterly disagree. Every person 'from that era' was not and is not a serial harasser/rapist. Promiscuity is not the same thing as sexual assault. Originally Harvey Weinstein tried to claim that he 'was from a different era,' too. The George Hopkins portrayed in the article is a person with no conscience. If you go back in some of the historic threads, you do see all sorts of stories about “sex, drugs, and rock n roll” so to speak, but there are others in the same threads who will claim stories are exaggerated or outright wrong. So I agree that back in the day may have had some questionable behavior but it is no excuse. We need to keep other things in mind in mind too. Where all sexual assaults can be devastating, the role a person plays in a victim’s life can make matters worse. An older member coercing a younger member, bad, an adult volunteer makes it worse, an instructor far worse, a director, no excuse, period. A back in the day argument would also not hold water when you consider which directors were still at the helm when GH started his tenure: George Bonfiglio, Gail Royer, Don Warren. I’m not sure if Jim Jones was still alive but he would have been if recent memory, and Bill Cook would have started a few years after GH took the helm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drumcorpsfever Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-nws-yea-issues-second-george-hopkins-statement-cadets-sex-misconduct-20180409-story,amp.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim K Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 13 minutes ago, GUARDLING said: You can look at this quite different although as I said none of it has to do with the serious topic. One can look at it like the song for members is or can be a personal bond with other current and past members. Maybe even an adult free zone something that belongs to them. It could be off topic, it may also lead to a slippery slope going off topic, and others feel differently about whether it is appropriate to sing the song. Perhaps my conclusion makes my comment sound like an attempt to inject humor, but in situations like this, looking at patterns of behavior can be crucial in preventing future abuse. If a corps has a tradition that only marching members and alums sing a song, that is one thing, if not, not singing the corps song could be viewed in a different manner. If you read accounts of serial abusers who share what they did and why, you will find they saw themselves as invincible, above reproach , or better than those harmed. If for Cadets singing “Holy Name” is a mm or alum tradition and only for mm and alums, GH not singing it is an insignificant detail, if that’s not the case, it could be a red flag. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terri Schehr Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 (edited) 40 minutes ago, JimF-LowBari said: Definitely a less knowledgeable era and I am right behind GH in age. BUT..... some of us learned as we aged Thank you. We are more aware and sensitive to these issues. Edited April 9, 2018 by Terri Schehr 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts