Missoula Rises is giving Griz Nation a chance to submit some questions

[griz71]

I would like to chime in my thanks to Brint for being willing to take this on. I would like to see a question something like the following but I could use a little help framing it. While I don't feel this way, possibly because I'm retired and have no job to lose, it is clear to me (from the the 24 page thread above all threads) that it is real and an issue that has the potential to derail some positives that could come from this seminar. It has something to the posts from CDA, PR, Ringneck and others yesterday. So roughly:

With the increasingly public nature of alleged sexual harassment incidents that have have been brought forth in the political and entertainment sectors, we observe men that are not perpetrators moving away from normal interactions with females, especially within the business place, because of the fear of unwarranted litigation. We see females as well with hesitation to interact with males both because of a fear of sexual harassment and their fear of being perceived as trouble makers. With fear comes the flight or fight phenomenon which is not conducive to resolving differences. How does Missoula Rises propose to dampen the fear factor on both sides so we can move forward in a unified and progressive fashion in resolving harassment issues the Missoula community and the UM campus.

I welcome any edits that can retain the concept but wouldn't be off-putting like mine can tend to be.

Well constructed Fish. :thumb:

 

[GGNez]

I would like to chime in my thanks to Brint for being willing to take this on. I would like to see a question something like the following but I could use a little help framing it. While I don't feel this way, possibly because I'm retired and have no job to lose, it is clear to me (from the the 24 page thread above all threads) that it is real and an issue that has the potential to derail some positives that could come from this seminar. It has something to the posts from CDA, PR, Ringneck and others yesterday. So roughly:

With the increasingly public nature of alleged sexual harassment incidents that have have been brought forth in the political and entertainment sectors, we observe men that are not perpetrators moving away from normal interactions with females, especially within the business place, because of the fear of unwarranted litigation. We see females as well with hesitation to interact with males both because of a fear of sexual harassment and their fear of being perceived as trouble makers. With fear comes the flight or fight phenomenon which is not conducive to resolving differences. How does Missoula Rises propose to dampen the fear factor on both sides so we can move forward in a unified and progressive fashion in resolving harassment issues the Missoula community and the UM campus.

I welcome any edits that can retain the concept but wouldn't be off-putting like mine can tend to be.

My suggested edits/rewording:

As the matter of sexual harassment allegations become increasingly prevalent among celebrities and politicians, respectful men are becoming more hesitant to engage in normal interactions with females; particularly in the workplace, for fear of being misunderstood and sued for harassment. Similarly, females are shying away from normal communication with men for fear that they will either be the victim of harassment, or because they are being perceived as easily-offended and litigious. These fears on both sides have created a fight-or-flight response which is neither productive nor conducive to resolving our differences.
How does Missoula Rises intend to bridge this gap and tone down the fear surrounding normal interactions between men and women? Is it your intention to help the UM campus and Missoula community move forward in a more unified, less divisive fashion and, if so, what is your strategy?

 

[Alaska Griz]

Another question:
For the anti-Hauck folks: Dan Brooks of the Missoula Independent quoted a very crude remark from one man on a football forum; a man who has been banned from eGriz. Mr. Brooks used that remark to specifically represent the "community" of Grizzly Football fans.
Do you acknowledge that it is inaccurate and unfair to judge an entire fan base on the remarks of a handful of unstable individuals?
For the pro-Hauck folks: Historically and currently, preferential treatment and special social status of athletes has fed into the problem of sexual assault on college campuses. Do you agree with that statement, and, do you acknowledge personal responsibility to work toward changing that?

I like all of your questions GG...and I'm curious on the second one because I don't know. If this forum ends up being about sexism, Bobby Hauck, and the Griz (which it seems that way) rather than sexism in the general population, are there statistics or anything other than circumstantial anecdotes that link Griz football to an abnormally high rate of sexism, toxic masculinity, etc? If not, why the distinction? Or are we unknowingly feeding a stereotype and kicking off a dialogue using a false premise? I'm honestly curious. Is "Griz" simply a buzz word? A jump off point to talk about sexism, etc., and give the subjects more intimacy? Maybe it doesn't matter and the trajectory is the same but I still wonder.

Just for fun, as far as the follow-up question, I think elevated social status and preferential treatment manifests in different ways, depending on the person. It's just a reality. Always will be. In small communities success in sports is sometimes an indicator of the town's economic and social health and they tend to reciprocate. Elevating certain people to represent a group happens in all communities. Athletes are no exception. It's a form of power, which brings responsibility. In many cases athletes use their social status to do good things. Like anything, it goes both ways.

 

[Alaska Griz]

Will anyone ask Davey's about the dishonesty of altering the book cover?

:thumb:

I was also going to request this question.

Perhaps she could discuss "toxic masculinity" and its relationship to "toxic rhetoric" such as what appears in her petition artwork. It might be helpful if a poster was printed out for those at the forum who might have missed her creative libel. I'd specifically like to hear her articulate her thought process in deciding to photo-shop Bobby Hauck onto a book about rape and put it on the internet...perhaps she can address Bobby with her answer. At the very least, I think she owes him an apology. I'll be attending. If there is a Q&A I'll be happy to ask Lisa myself.

Btw, thanks Brint for attending on behalf of Missoula and Griz Nation!

 

[cclarkblues]

You can find them on Facebook, Glendive.

Thanks but doesn't address the question. Closed group so doesn't say much. Obviously, a very political organization from their website. Just wondering about source funding.

From their site:

Missoula Rises is a community-led, local group committed to the protection of the rights of our community members. Our group serves Missoula, the Bitterroot Valley and surrounding areas. We seek to effectuate local change with the intent that our local work will eventually have an impact on a larger scale. We are non-partisan and inclusive. Diversity is key. We seek input from all people and understand the success of our message depends on the diversity of voices. Missoula Rises will further the protection of human rights through: education, dialogue, vigilance, accountability and activism.

My guess (because I don't fully know) is that this group really isn't funded formally and organized/recognized as a company. I see it's more of a collective group of people that use mostly facebook to organize and plan events. I think most events and things they do is all volunteer. Again, that's a guess.

Huh, they are selling stuff on their website. Money has to be accounted for I would think. If you find out, I am curious.

Call me cynical but I no more believe they are not funded by someone than I believe Lisa acted totally on her own. Follow the money.

 

[PlayerRep]

I see that the topic is now expanding:

" to explore the topics of sexism, sexual assault, entitlement, cyber-bullying and perceptions surrounding those issues within UM Athletics"

My questions:

1. For Lisa Davey, why did you put Coach Hauck on the cover of the Krakauer book, when Hauck is not even mentioned in the book?

2. For Lisa Davey, what's your basis for associating Coach Hauck with sexual assault at UM. Please read this Guest Column, which refutes everything related to that topic in your petition, before answering.

http://missoulian.com/opinion/columnists/no-basis-for-blaming-hauck/article_1b9547e0-65c4-57db-ba03-da1c349fac23.html

3. Who, besides AlphaGriz, may have been cyber-bullying and where?

4. What do sexism and entitlement have to do with Griz athletics, and what is your source?

5. Are you aware of any UM athletes, besides Donaldson, who have been "convicted" in a UM sexual harassment/assault proceeding and kicked out of school? I'm not.

6. What's the view of Lisa Davey or others on this quote from a Missoula federal judge regarding a particular UM sexual harassment/assault proceeding involving a student? This quote indicates blatant unfairness by UM in that proceeding, which was run by the at-that-time Dean of UM.

""Indeed, from a normative perspective, the process applied to Plaintiff Doe and the behavior of University officials in investigation and prosecuting this matter offends the Court's sense of fundamental fairness and appears to fall short of the minimal moral obligation of any tribunal to respect the rights and dignity of the accused." Judge Christiansen, Order dated May 10, 2012.

PR, I know you earn your living asking these sorts of things, but these are excellent questions. I love them because they challenge the very premises that this whole ordeal has been founded upon. In order for an argument to be sound, the premises must be true, the conclusion must be true, and the conclusion must logically follow from those premises. If they have the guts to respond to your questions, I think it will expose the numerous flaws in their argument.

Your second sentence is what I have been thinking all along. Thx.

 

[PlayerRep]

Another question:
For the anti-Hauck folks: Dan Brooks of the Missoula Independent quoted a very crude remark from one man on a football forum; a man who has been banned from eGriz. Mr. Brooks used that remark to specifically represent the "community" of Grizzly Football fans.
Do you acknowledge that it is inaccurate and unfair to judge an entire fan base on the remarks of a handful of unstable individuals?
For the pro-Hauck folks: Historically and currently, preferential treatment and special social status of athletes has fed into the problem of sexual assault on college campuses. Do you agree with that statement, and, do you acknowledge personal responsibility to work toward changing that?

As to the last question, I don't believe the question even applies to UM. Maybe at some other bigger schools, but not here.

What preferential treatment do Griz athletes get? Headlines in the Missoulian for things that don't belong in the headlines? Not being able to get a water and a hot dog at a tailgate after the game, including at tailgates of the parents of their teammates. Feel free to list the preferential treatment. For whatever special social status they may get, it's because of the other people, not the players or their coaches or the school.

I also don't get, and probably dispute, the connection between preferential treatment and special social status--and sexual assault. Happy to discuss that with anyone too.

 

[argh!]

lots of self-indulgent soliloquies, but not much sense.

 

[tourist]

Good questions. Pull your punches? Never! Davey's needs to admit her lies and biases, then PUBLICLY apologize to BH, UM athletics, and the University in general. After that, a discussion about their topic. Making nice with ones enemies is short sighted and foolish.

 

[GGNez]

Another question:
For the anti-Hauck folks: Dan Brooks of the Missoula Independent quoted a very crude remark from one man on a football forum; a man who has been banned from eGriz. Mr. Brooks used that remark to specifically represent the "community" of Grizzly Football fans.
Do you acknowledge that it is inaccurate and unfair to judge an entire fan base on the remarks of a handful of unstable individuals?
For the pro-Hauck folks: Historically and currently, preferential treatment and special social status of athletes has fed into the problem of sexual assault on college campuses. Do you agree with that statement, and, do you acknowledge personal responsibility to work toward changing that?

I like all of your questions GG...and I'm curious on the second one because I don't know. If this forum ends up being about sexism, Bobby Hauck, and the Griz (which it seems that way) rather than sexism in the general population, are there statistics or anything other than circumstantial anecdotes that link Griz football to an abnormally high rate of sexism, toxic masculinity, etc? If not, why the distinction? Or are we unknowingly feeding a stereotype and kicking off a dialogue using a false premise? I'm honestly curious. Is "Griz" simply a buzz word? A jump off point to talk about sexism, etc., and give the subjects more intimacy? Maybe it doesn't matter and the trajectory is the same but I still wonder.

Just for fun, as far as the follow-up question, I think elevated social status and preferential treatment manifests in different ways, depending on the person. It's just a reality. Always will be. In small communities success in sports is sometimes an indicator of the town's economic and social health and they tend to reciprocate. Elevating certain people to represent a group happens in all communities. Athletes are no exception. It's a form of power, which brings responsibility. In many cases athletes use their social status to do good things. Like anything, it goes both ways.

I would ask the second question of any Athletic Director or coach.

Here’s a link with a few points to ponder.

http://pact5.org/resources/prevention-and-readiness/athletes-and-sexual-assault/

 

[tgreseth]

You can find them on Facebook, Glendive.

Thanks but doesn't address the question. Closed group so doesn't say much. Obviously, a very political organization from their website. Just wondering about source funding.

From their site:

Missoula Rises is a community-led, local group committed to the protection of the rights of our community members. Our group serves Missoula, the Bitterroot Valley and surrounding areas. We seek to effectuate local change with the intent that our local work will eventually have an impact on a larger scale. We are non-partisan and inclusive. Diversity is key. We seek input from all people and understand the success of our message depends on the diversity of voices. Missoula Rises will further the protection of human rights through: education, dialogue, vigilance, accountability and activism.

My guess (because I don't fully know) is that this group really isn't funded formally and organized/recognized as a company. I see it's more of a collective group of people that use mostly facebook to organize and plan events. I think most events and things they do is all volunteer. Again, that's a guess.

Huh, they are selling stuff on their website. Money has to be accounted for I would think. If you find out, I am curious.

For what it's worth, "Missoula Rises" doesn't show up in the Secretary of State's database of registered businesses nor has the name itself been registered...

Look for yourself if you'd like to: https://www.mtsosfilings.gov/mtsos-...25079a2b59cbfdb8&_timestamp=32292487816344720

 

[sdk.catfish]

: Missoula Rises is giving Griz Nation a chance to submit some questions
Quote
Post by GGNez » Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:49 pm

My suggested edits/rewording:

As the matter of sexual harassment allegations become increasingly prevalent among celebrities and politicians, respectful men are becoming more hesitant to engage in normal interactions with females; particularly in the workplace, for fear of being misunderstood and sued for harassment. Similarly, females are shying away from normal communication with men for fear that they will either be the victim of harassment, or because they are being perceived as easily-offended and litigious. These fears on both sides have created a fight-or-flight response which is neither productive nor conducive to resolving our differences.
How does Missoula Rises intend to bridge this gap and tone down the fear surrounding normal interactions between men and women? Is it your intention to help the UM campus and Missoula community move forward in a more unified, less divisive fashion and, if so, what is your strategy?

Great edit GG and I hope it makes it to the final. Just one other observation. For those wishing for the pound of flesh from Ms. Davey in this forum that is not going to happen. In my working life I was a participant in many forums. Most work like this. A short statement from the panelists, then the moderator asks questions that have been accepted by the forum in which panelists who have meaningful contributions make comments, and possibly a final statement from the panelists. This is not a cage event with Brint and Lisa in the limelight. So I actually support the way Brint suggested that he would mention the interaction between him and Ms. Davey, and how he/we had objections to how she presented the issue, and leave it at that. It appears to me that some of you view this as an opportunity to vilify Ms. Davey in public and I can assure you that is not going to happen nor should it. The big elephant in the room is Bodner who has a resume that would indicate he is actually take this thing over and be very clear the UM position. None of you really wants to go up against him.

 

[alabamagrizzly]

Wish this could be streamed live. I’d love the chance to watch the debate. I do hope this meeting leads to an understanding from both sides how the other feels and some sort of path to help bring everyone’s desires to some sort of fruition. Unfortunately my thoughts are that Davey and the people that share her point of view will still feel the way they do now after this event is over.

 

[mondayamqb]

What specific training, support, or resources do you think need to be added for students to feel safe at UM that aren't currently being done?

 

[tourist]

adk.catfish makes some good points.
-- "questions that have been accepted by the forum."
--"It appears to me that some of you view this as an opportunity to vilify Ms. Davey in public, and I can assure you that is not going to happen."

I take your word as for being in many of these types of forums.
Then, what is the purpose of this 'forum,' other than political theatrics, with BH, Haslam, and Bodnar as props? This whole premise of BH being responsible for a rape culture of " toxic masculinity " is sure bullshit, libel. You call a spade a spade. A lie a lie. This 'questions the forum will accept' is just loading the deck against UM. This whole post is an exercise in futility. Wahlberg is a tool of this left wing garbage. Just my opinion, let them prove me wrong. 10.5 days and counting.

 

[AZGrizFan]

: Missoula Rises is giving Griz Nation a chance to submit some questions
Quote
Post by GGNez » Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:49 pm

My suggested edits/rewording:

As the matter of sexual harassment allegations become increasingly prevalent among celebrities and politicians, respectful men are becoming more hesitant to engage in normal interactions with females; particularly in the workplace, for fear of being misunderstood and sued for harassment. Similarly, females are shying away from normal communication with men for fear that they will either be the victim of harassment, or because they are being perceived as easily-offended and litigious. These fears on both sides have created a fight-or-flight response which is neither productive nor conducive to resolving our differences.
How does Missoula Rises intend to bridge this gap and tone down the fear surrounding normal interactions between men and women? Is it your intention to help the UM campus and Missoula community move forward in a more unified, less divisive fashion and, if so, what is your strategy?

Great edit GG and I hope it makes it to the final. Just one other observation. For those wishing for the pound of flesh from Ms. Davey in this forum that is not going to happen. In my working life I was a participant in many forums. Most work like this. A short statement from the panelists, then the moderator asks questions that have been accepted by the forum in which panelists who have meaningful contributions make comments, and possibly a final statement from the panelists. This is not a cage event with Brint and Lisa in the limelight. So I actually support the way Brint suggested that he would mention the interaction between him and Ms. Davey, and how he/we had objections to how she presented the issue, and leave it at that. It appears to me that some of you view this as an opportunity to vilify Ms. Davey in public and I can assure you that is not going to happen nor should it. The big elephant in the room is Bodner who has a resume that would indicate he is actually take this thing over and be very clear the UM position. None of you really wants to go up against him.

Well I respectfully disagree with your statement taht she shouldn’t be vilified. Her entire premise is flawed and it’s resulted in this 3-ring circus event. She literally has no “standing” and wouldn’t have made it past the front door of the court house if this were a legal matter (which if I were BH it WOULD BE). If she were publicly willing to apologize, then things might move forward, but absent that she’s a non-starter IMHO.

 

[sdk.catfish]

by AZGrizFan » Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:54 pm

Well I respectfully disagree with your statement taht she shouldn’t be vilified. Her entire premise is flawed and it’s resulted in this 3-ring circus event. She literally has no “standing” and wouldn’t have made it past the front door of the court house if this were a legal matter (which if I were BH it WOULD BE). If she were publicly willing to apologize, then things might move forward, but absent that she’s a non-starter IMHO.

AG and Tourist and for those with the same viewpoint. First it has never been my intention to a major poster on this forum and anything I say should always be viewed with skepticism. But I do know this. With Bodner, Haslem and Hauck on the panel this is going to be no witch hunt, ganging up on Ms. Davey. UM can't afford that. It is a opening discussion. I expect that her initial opinion of Coach Hauck to be modified as she can't afford negative publicity either. I wish we could all agree to just let the event happen and then we can have a 24 page recap on egriz. But please be realistic. In 90 minutes, with multiple questions from multiple parties on multiple issues there is no time for Brint to put a cross face cradle (wrestling talk) on Ms Davey. And you are perceptive enough to know that Hauck, Haslam and Bodner are not going to go that route. Sometimes as irritating as it can be you just have to let things go. If we could work on crafting a really intelligent question based on Ms Davey's loose interpretation of the truth, and getting that to make the final list that is about all we can do. I'm willing to work on that but you, PR and GG and others are more qualified than I to accomplish that.

 

[GGNez]

by AZGrizFan » Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:54 pm

Well I respectfully disagree with your statement taht she shouldn’t be vilified. Her entire premise is flawed and it’s resulted in this 3-ring circus event. She literally has no “standing” and wouldn’t have made it past the front door of the court house if this were a legal matter (which if I were BH it WOULD BE). If she were publicly willing to apologize, then things might move forward, but absent that she’s a non-starter IMHO.

AG and Tourist and for those with the same viewpoint. First it has never been my intention to a major poster on this forum and anything I say should always be viewed with skepticism. But I do know this. With Bodner, Haslem and Hauck on the panel this is going to be no witch hunt, ganging up on Ms. Davey. UM can't afford that. It is a opening discussion. I expect that her initial opinion of Coach Hauck to be modified as she can't afford negative publicity either. I wish we could all agree to just let the event happen and then we can have a 24 page recap on egriz. But please be realistic. In 90 minutes, with multiple questions from multiple parties on multiple issues there is no time for Brint to put a cross face cradle (wrestling talk) on Ms Davey. And you are perceptive enough to know that Hauck, Haslam and Bodner are not going to go that route. Sometimes as irritating as it can be you just have to let things go. If we could work on crafting a really intelligent question based on Ms Davey's loose interpretation of the truth, and getting that to make the final list that is about all we can do. I'm willing to work on that but you, PR and GG and others are more qualified than I to accomplish that.

Wow. This dialogue, both publicly and within my personal mailbox, has gone to places I'd never imagined. I "bolded" your final remark for a couple of reasons. First of all, I'm honored to be included in your remark. I certainly have learned a lot about sexual assault, footall, humanity, society among many things in the past decade. I used to work for PR and greatly admire so many things about him. He is the head of the office of a major, international law firm and does an exemplary job in each and every case that is assigned to him. He pulled himself up by his bootstraps, studied hard and played football well at an Ivy League University and is married to a beautiful, sweet, kind-hearted woman. His children are smart, ambitious and most importantly, respectful and kind. PR is clearly a loving and proud husband and father.

That said, we disagree on some things. We approach life and interactions from two entirely different worlds. Yet, I can safely say we really like and respect each other.

I also have total respect and much affection for tourist, AZGriz and those who've made similar remarks. We DON'T AGREE on some serious matters. But, I see clearly that they have kind hearts and good intent. I know they see the same in me.



I'm sorry.....what was the question???

 

[PDXGrizzly]

My question: the perception exists in the Missoula and greater UM communities that sexual harassment, assault, bullying, etc are part and parcel with the atheletic department, specifically the football team. The petition created by Ms. Davey, signed by over 800 people, demonstrates this. Moving forward, how is the University Administration, athletic department, and football program going to address this?

Follow up question for the opposition: what specific instances occurred, along with university inaction, that would have created the impression that the Football team was “out of control”? Please limit your responses to actual instances and not unsubstantiated allegations.

Let’s have everyone lay their cards on the table. Sniping and innuendo are not going to solve this issue. What is the end result that everyone would like?

Let’s stop beating around the bush.

 

[snap]

question: Is this a joke?