2021 is my last year of USAWS

[The_MS]

2022 they are requiring Safesport training for all members.

I’m done.

[Horton]

@The_MS SafeSport is far from perfect but please explain why you are so adamantly against it. It costs a couple of dollars and it takes like an hour of your time and it is intended to add just one more level of protection for our young people.

[Broussard]

@Horton According to the email from Nate Boudreaux (Executive Director) there will be no cost for taking the training course.

[klindy]

@Horton there is no cost for taking the course.

[The_MS]

It’s another hour. Not a dam thing will happen to anyone. Can you fail the training? What happens if you fail? What happens to all the information collected? What does it cost for the USAWS to affiliate with SS? It’s way too Woke for me.

[ALPJr]

Doesn’t sound like anything really new. To me it’s more like waterskiing is catching up to other sports. For at least 20 years or so all adults involved in youth sports like AAU, Little League, NERVA, have had to submit some sort of criminal background check and complete health and safety training requirements.

[The_MS]

Being involved in youth sports is being a coach or organizer.

[MarkTimm]

Personally I have to do safe sport training as a member of the National Ski Patrol, so it doesn't affect me. But to have a person that is on Safe Sport probation serve on the board and then require all members to take the training is hypocritical!

[MattP]

@The_MS yes and no. I think all officials should be required to take the training, but apparently it is goin to all members so if there are members who do not want to give 1 hour of their time to protect the children in the sport I am not sure I want people like that at a tournament. If someone fails they have to take the training until they pass if I am not mistaken.

 

If you have a problem with the decision I think you should reach out to your regional reps & AWSA reps on the USAWS BOD.

 

I have been a high school coach for 11 years. I can tell you this training has helped many many people prevent bad actors from doing something or be sanctioned. Understanding what to look for, what to do and how to act is a main part of the training.

 

@MarkTimm can you say that a bit louder so the people at the top can hear?

 

[klindy]

@MarkTimm That is no longer the case.

 

[The_MS]

I just don’t agree with teaching a almost M6 guy to be Woke. If they exempt me from the 1 hr I will pay my dues next year

[MarkTimm]

@klindy Thanks for the info, I just checked the website to confirm, glad to see the members voices were heard.

[Horton]

@The_MS attempting to prevent sexual exploitation of minors is not "woke". That's the most ridiculous thing you've ever said.

[ski6jones]

Requiring this of all active members is a bit much in my opinion. Makes sense if you are directly involved in activities supervising youth like coaching, JD, etc. Otherwise not so much.

[RazorRoss3]

@The_MS are you honestly telling me that you moved to a water ski paradise that hosts at least two tourney weekends annually including a record capable event and because of 1 hour of safe sport training you are going to stop tournament skiing? Just turn it into a drinking game, every time they say “safe” take a shot.

[markn]

I am going to side with @The_MS on this one. We are now required to take a SAFE SPORT course, yet can use any gender bathroom depending on how we identify that day??? Please.

[Broussard]

That's the most ridiculous thing you've ever said.

That's a bold statement! :D

[Horton]

@markn if you went to the ladies room with my wife or daughter in there I'm pretty sure you would find the result to be unpleasant. My guess is most of the readers of this website would also take you to the woodshed if you enter the ladies room while their wife or daughter was inside. I can't imagine how you're making that leap from protecting children from sexual abuse to all of the gender fluid crap that's going on in our society.

 

This is about protecting children. It is not about anything else.

[Jody_Seal]

I am going to probably get banned after this but here goes!

 

USAWS has gone down the liberal left road. Reminder the USOC is a US government funded entity, the socialist left now runs this country.

In order for the agreement as a usoc affiliated organization to work all participants must submit to social re-education.

When re educated you will have another identity # attached to your human electronic profile.

 

As a moderate and conservative I know that the problem with our laws in this society is that they are not enforced and penalties applied to the highest degree for cases such as heinous crimes against children and minors are not enforced and often times not even administered. I read into the Safe sport doctrine but it is thin. Is Safe sport lobbing for harsher penalties for child abusers? No they are not! Again another government watch dog group sucking off our tax dollars. Big Government!

 

My enrollment in the rankings organization is up in May. I too as I know my wife will reconsider whether we re-join and continue in the Rankings organization..

 

12:51 pm the clock is ticking!!

 

 

 

[markn]

@Horton I am NOT making that leap....the legislators are. This is intellectually void. The law, signed by the Senate states the purpose of the law is to avoid the potential for abuse, yet these are the SAME law makers who signed a law stating any one can use a gender specific bathroom depending on how they "identify". Now, law makers claim they want to prevent or reduce the potential for abuse, but pass a law which arguably could potentially increase abuse, yet then pass another law to prevent abuse. Explain that to me...go ahead, I'll wait. And just for the record, my wife too is rather formidable and I would not worry about her at all. That is not to say others are not at greater risk

[Bruce_Butterfield]

The real problem is that this is just one more mandate that will have no effect on the 99.99% of us who are not child predators. It will also have no effect on the genuine child predators except perhaps to learn how to hide their actions. Will it help with awarness of our kids? Call me skeptical.

 

Its just one more example of the vast majority of decent people being forced to go out of their way because of the bad actions of few. JMO, but this is a backwards solution.

 

@horton did you need Safesport training to know that a man following your wife or daughter into the ladies room is a bad idea?

[NikolG]

In California starting in 2021(AB 1963) any manager/supervisor has to take a similar course if they have employees under 18. It's in every industry and sport, why not waterskiing!?

[The_MS]

I guess it’s just my M5 white privileged side of me

[Than_Bogan]

It is disheartening that this is a good idea.

 

Nevertheless, it's a good idea.

 

The training is not fun, btw, but quite educational.

[ski6jones]

@NikolG using that argument the USAWS solution would be like anyone conducting business with an establishment employing minors must have the training. Supervisors makes some sense.

[Than_Bogan]

Mark down this moment: I think it's the first time I completely disagree with Bruce Butterfield!

 

Us non-predators are the ONLY hope to stop the predators early. All of the other mechanisms we have punish them after the damage is done.

[kurt]

@NikolG "It's in every industry and sport, why not waterskiing!? " and that thinking and statement is exactly why we are not a free country anymore.

 

The opposition to it has nothing to do with safesport and if it is good or not.

 

@horton if the predators had ever gotten taken to the woodshed even once we would not be having this discussion, but that doesn't happen anymore.

Will safesport take them to the woodshed? Highly unlikely!

[Broussard]

@NikolG I am surprised that it is being required for all members. I am also surprised that it was not previously required for judges, drivers, scorers, TCs, and safety personnel to maintain ratings.

[Horton]

I am struggling to defend my position without jumping deep into the banned topic of non-waterski politics.

 

@markn

Just because SafeSport can be associated with legislators of one party does not mean that the underlying goal of SafeSport is a bad goal. I do not care if Chairman Mao supports SafeSport if it moves the needle away from what happened in Gymnastics with Larry Nassar. Sexual abuse of children should not be a political Left or Right thing.

 

(Sarcastic Font) since you oppose this legislation or any bills from these legislators does that mean you support sexual abuse of minors? I am pretty sure you do not / I am not suggesting that you do / just making a point.

 

The ONLY reason I can see why we would object to SafeSport is the required background checks / invasion of privacy. I am not on board with that objection but at least it is logical.

 

[Horton]

@Bruce_Butterfield I get your point. We can certainly debate the effectiveness. If it is mostly a waste of everyone's time but protects one child it is worth it. When and if it erodes my personal privacy or freedom in a real way I will change my tune.

[ski6jones]

@Horton "The ONLY reason I can see why we would object to SafeSport is the required background checks / invasion of privacy. I am not on board with that objection but at least it is logical." And we accept this for anyone that wants to strap on a ski and participate in a tournament? Seems pretty invasive.

[jgills88]

@Bruce_Butterfield the training is all about recognition and prevention. Its not about teaching the 99% not to be predators (although there is a small section that is basically "don't touch kids"), it's about getting them to recognize hidden signs of abuse and effectively deal with those situations. It's a hell of a lot harder to be a scumbag when everyone around you can actively recognize it happening and know what to do.

 

It's kinda like having everyone CPR/First Aid Certified. Will it be useful most of the time? No. But the second someone starts drowning, you have 50 people on shore who know exactly what to do

 

And like others have said, its 45min-1hr of videos and questions to keep young athletes safe

[Horton]

@ski6jones Actually I am not sure if this mandate includes a background check or not. I am sure someone will figure out that detail.

[igkya]

@NikolG I can understand the manager/supervisor, but not the other employees. I think this is what @The_MS and others are saying. It's ok for coaches to have to take the SS training, but not the athletes in general.

[Horton]

I actually found the training instructive. At the time when I took the first training I had been corresponding with an underage girl about babysitting via text message. The training made me realize that I needed to move all of my correspondence to her to email and CC her parents. I was not doing anything inappropriate but the training pushed me in a direction that protected me from any misunderstandings or accusations.

[klindy]

I hear both arguments and find it hard to take a side. I would suggest that anyone that has a criticism about the SafeSport program or it's effectiveness should not comment until they've been thru the course. Like has been said, it's an hour or less, it's free and, almost to a person, those that have taken it have said it HAS opened their eyes on how it can happen AND how to have the tools to prevent/stop it.

 

As a board member, I've taken it twice - once as a refresher. I learned somethings. Since (hopefully!) none of us are perpetrators of these horrible things, it may be helpful to get some more information on what can happen and how it can happen. And as I said, having the tools to do something, say something or otherwise prevent it is important. Seems like a pretty 'low price to pay' for some positive potential.

 

Other than SafeSport acknowledging that I took the training, I don't see any other personal information of mine they can possibly have. To me it seems the equivalent of taking the red cross safety training - better for me and those around me and no personal freedoms lost in the process.

[wawaskr]

It is interesting that one known sponsored and sanctioned skier is no longer listed in their database.

[lpskier]

@markn We solved the “men in the ladies’ room” problem by having but one outhouse and it is unisex.

[markn]

I stand by calling out the hypocrisy of it all. @Horton, you said "this is all about protecting children. Nothing else". Then why would ANY legislator pass a law allowing any gender (yeah, I know, that is fluid) to use any rest room of the gender with which they identify? And at the same time stress the importance of legislation to "protect young kids"? In what universe does that, in any way, advance protecting children? It is totally illogical.

I recognize this thread is dangerously close to breaking your protocol regarding politics, so I will post nothing further on the topic.

I respect and thank you for this website and for what you do for the sport of water skiing.

 

[JackQ]

Since 99.8% do not need the training as they would never conceive of such behavior, do we really think the .02% that are or are considering such behavior are going to take the training, and have an revelation and think, “ now that have this 1hr of training I realize I should not be a child predator” really. For Coaches, Camp Councilors I can buy it, but for the rank an file skier and judges/driver...BS.

[Bruce_Butterfield]

@Horton “If it is mostly a waste of everyone's time but protects one child it is worth it.” Will you please stop with that bullshit? That type of mentality has lead to more misguided, ineffective, and outright destructive policies than I could list in a day. There is ALWAYS a cost to these policies and it goes way beyond the man-hours wasted in taking the training. In this case there is:

 

- the erosion of personal responsibility. Would you confront a 20 something man who follows your daughter into the ladies room with an “unpleasant” consequence or turn him over to Safesport? Which one will be more effective?

- the false security that can lead to parents being lax, “oh everyone has had Safesport training so now I don’t have to watch what my daughter is doing”.

- there is one more FORCED training with questionable, if any benefit. What’s next? We are already down the slippery slope of useless mandates.

-At what point will you say your personal freedom has been eroded too much?

-What benefit has Safesport provided? Seriously has that been quantified? Has there been ANY documented prevention do to the Safesport mandate?

- the real reason is to provide some level of legal protection to the organization and its management if something happens and the lawyers go crazy

 

Until there are real consequences for bad actors, the problem will not go away, regardless of how much “training” the rest of us are forced to take.

 

@jgills88 I will agree that if the training is about recognition and prevention, that would be beneficial, but still does not warrant making it mandatory for the entire organization. Is mandatory CPR training for all members next?

 

@Than_Bogan just remember if 2 people agree 100% of the time, one of them is irrelevant!

 

[dave2ball]

This is the STUPIDEST THING I have heard in a while. Why doesn’t USA waterski give the classes to the boys/girls through age 18. This would show and tell them what is appropriate and what is not. Where s the responsibility of the parents?

The only people that need this are the coaches or ski school employees. If someone wants to do this type of despicable act a class will not detour them. It’s is getting where a safety person won’t be able to help someone due to the fear of the allegations inappropriate contact. A minor better have mom or dad around before safety tends to an injured skier.

 

[kurt]

@Bruce_Butterfield AMEN!

[Horton]

@markn I just don't get it. what does this conversation have to do with people going into the wrong gender bathrooms. Most of use are against letting biological men into women's restrooms and most of us are for protecting minors.

[The_MS]

@JackQ @Bruce_Butterfield @dave2ball All are spot on.

So I want you to get up now, I want all of you to get up out of your chairs, I want you to get up and go to the window. Open it, and stick your head out, and yell ‘I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not gonna take it anymore’.

 

[JackQ]

I just had my annual physical yesterday, and as is typical you have endure the inevitable prostate exam. But a new law requires you to sign a special permission form to have the exam performed. More and more layers of well intentioned stupid requirements. What’s next a witness to have a colonoscopy performed.

[jgills88]

One thing that I think has been very overlooked in this discussion is the athletes that Safesport is supposed to protect. The program is super important to a lot of young athletes and it only works is everyone buys into it, or at the very least it's principles.

 

Last month during the MCWSA Captains meeting, there was an amendment that added something with Safesport to the bylaws, it passed quickly and unanimously because we all saw it as an important thing to protect our teammates/athletes.

 

I've seen clear safesport violations get brushed off at tournaments because people don't think its a big deal, or are too uncomfortable to confront it. There's safety in having many more skiers be apart of the program, and honestly using slippery slope and other strawman arguments against it really doesn't approach an issue with the program itself.

[lpskier]

One thing the Safe Sport training points out is how to spot inappropriate behavior in others. Actually, this was surprisingly informative.

 

[ForrestGump]

Just as I was about to sign up with USAWS again. So Matt, what you're trying to tell me is that me not wanting to force people to take this means I don't want to protect children? That's f$cking stupid. Aren't you the self righteous one. This has zero to do with protecting children and everything to do with checking a box to guard USAWS against liability. Same as all those drivers background checks for the last 8 years.

 

And for the record, I've taken the SafeSport training because I'm a USA BMX coach and track operator. And I still think this is stupid and over-reaching.

[6balls]

I'm just a really busy person and another hour means something--I hate it when work gives me one more mandatory module to watch.

If there is good info on spotting the scurvy predator on there, it's probably worth it--if everyone knows what to look for, that person kinda goes on surveillance from the group. Maybe it's nothing, but maybe they are predatory. Keep an eye on 'em.

Could some be identified prior to the next bad behavior? Maybe.

At the end of the day it's an hour--no biggie. As for background checks my job has me getting them regularly apparently I check out ok--I doubt a background is required.