Joanna Schroeder asserts that Paterno’s name will forever represent the ways in which you don’t have to be the abuser to be guilty of harming children.
In light of the Freeh report, which details the numerous ways in which Paterno and others at Penn State University ignored the many signs of horrific abuse at the hands of Jerry Sandusky on their own campus, Nike has decided to drop Paterno’s name from the company’s child care center.
Newser quotes Nike founder Phil Knight:
“Joe influenced thousands of young men to become better leaders, fathers and husbands,” he said. But “according to the investigation, it appears Joe made missteps that led to heartbreaking consequences. I missed that Joe missed it, and I am extremely saddened on this day. My love for Joe and his family remains.”
I didn’t know what “I missed that Joe missed it” meant exactly so I did a little research and found this quote from Knight at Paterno’s memorial service, offered by ESPN’s Big Ten Blogger Brian Bennett:
“Whatever the details of the investigation, this much is clear to me: If there is a villain in this tragedy, it lies in that investigation, not in Joe Paterno’s response,” Knight said. He later earned roaring cheers by listing Paterno’s accomplishments and then asking, “Who is the real trustee at Penn State University?”
Bennett explains that Knight’s statement always made him uneasy and concludes with this: “It’s understandable that Knight revered JoePa and wanted to honor his legend. But his remarks in January went too far, and now he has had to sheepishly retreat from them.”
I think we can all agree that it’s a truly sad day. But for those of us observing from the outside, it is merely one sad day, or perhaps a sad year of revelations regarding PSU and Sandusky. For the survivors of Sandusky’s crime, it is many many years of sadness on top of unimaginable pain. We need to remember this, as a culture, and take individual responsibility for the children in our lives and what happens to them.
My hope is that the Freeh report, the conviction of Jerry Sandusky, the nation’s outpouring of support and love for the survivors, and hopefully further action taken against PSU will show survivors of abuse, particularly male survivors, that their lives matter to us, and that we as a society will stand by them and do our best to prevent other children from having to endure what they did.
Paterno’s name will forever represent the ways in which you don’t have to be the abuser to be guilty of harming children.
About Joanna Schroeder
“…sheepishly retreat from them”?
I don’t think so – and I sure as hell am no defender of Nike!
Sandusky used his position to groom kids and Paterno groomed sponsors and sports connections to allow his football myth to be facilitated. Would it have been appropriate for Phil Knight to pee on Paterno’s coffin at his funeral? I don’t think so.
Timing is everything when the media circus is in town. It’s a bad news day – so I’m not surprised that Nike chose today to announce some long overdue and needed good news. But sorry Nike – It’s not sheepish, just spineless! You should have chosen a better time to get out from under! A time when the cost of making the announcement would have been real, and not smacking of convenience and retreating into the media haze.
Better luck next time! Next time make it count!
I don’t think Knight had to say what he said about Paterno EVER, let alone at his funeral. Knight could’ve said a billion things about his friend without saying that he knew Paterno wasn’t involved. That was pretty bold. And wrong in the end.
It isn’t that Knight could only say bad or good about PSU, he didn’t have to mention PSU at all. Very early on it seemed Paterno was complicit in covering up the abuse, and I can see why Knight wouldn’t want to believe it. I’m a VERY loyal person, but I think he could’ve just simply not mentioned it publicly.
Oh I agree – Many people have not had to say anything – they have not had to lionise, inflate, politicise and above all else do and say things which had demeaned and degraded victims and survivors.
I just find it reprehensible, that when it comes to walking the kitty back it’s been done in a manner and at a time that is designed to have minimal impact on the bottom line and business reputation. It smacks as cynical twice over!
“My hope is that the Freeh report, the conviction of Jerry Sandusky, the nation’s outpouring of support and love for the survivors, and hopefully further action taken against PSU will show survivors of abuse, particularly male survivors, that their lives matter to us”
I guess female survivors don’t matter
Bad Guess! Want to Try Again?
Please Note – Victim status and survival is not a competitive sport. You’re response is pure Joe Pa. Winning at any cost is all that matters?… at any cost?
This is not a zero-sum game. As I tell the male survivors when they’re upset that females get attention for being victims, one person’s pain does NOT negate yours.
PSU was about all children in a broad sense, yes. Abusers of both sexes are protected by institutions, but unlike any time in our history, this nation came out to support MALE survivors, who in the past have had much more murky support. Aside from the implication that a male victim somehow is always “gay” (let’s just ignore the homophobic aspect of this accusation which is so profound I cannot even get into it here) and therefore “asked for it” or wanted it, there is the notion that any male that has been abused by another male is somehow tainted for life, emasculated, and shamed for bringing it on with his “gayness”.
We, as a society, have classically been comfortable standing up for little girls, protecting little girls. It’s so cut and dry in many ways. A man abusing a little girl seems very naturally wrong, it’s so easy to understand, because OBVIOUSLY the little girl is innocent. But in our society, we cannot really believe that a male victim is innocent.
While we should be protecting ALL children better, and many studies show that female children are more likely to be sexually abused (again, there is always reporting bias), in this case we saw an unprecedented support for male survivors without an iota of blame or shame.
Nobody said a single thing about female survivors not mattering, but this is a case about boys being abused by a man. And a nation that stood up and said, “NO MORE” and held that man responsible and respected the privacy and rights of the survivors.
Here at The Good Men Project, supporting male survivors is a crucial part of our mission. While we support female survivors as well, this is a safe place for people to talk about male survivor’s issues. Please respect that space and do not hijack it.
“I missed that Joe missed it.”
That quote makes no sense at all. Nor does the other qoute you provided shed any light on the meaning.
I just scoured the Internet trying to figure out what that quote means, but couldn’t find anything.
It must be a typo of some sort. The fact that a corporation as big and powerful as Nike would issue such a shoddy press release and let it be printed in hundreds of media only shows how much Nike and Phil Knight care about child sex abuse–not at all, apparently.
I know, it’s odd. I think he’s saying that both he and JoePa both “missed” that Sandusky was abusing kids…
I’m with you that it isn’t totally clear, but that’s my best bet.
I agree that’s the most likely interpretation of what Knight was saying. But if that is what he was saying, then Knight is essentially in denial. The investigative report on which Knight’s statement was commenting concludes that Joe Paterno didn’t “miss” anything. To the contrary, it concludes that Paterno knew full well about the sexual abuse for more than a decade and didn’t go to police.
Best case scenario: This is a typo and Nike is full of idiots who can’t proofread a press release.
Worst case scenario: Knight is an asshole in denial.
Neither scenario looks very good for Phil Knight and Nike.
I’ve been reading – It’s such a bad habit and maybe I should kick it. There is a “Factoid” in fact there are more than one – There are so many bobbing “Factoids” concerning Sandusky as far back as 1994 – and it took until 2009 for any to be picked up and acted upon. I can’t believe that all of the scattered realities have now been gathered into one basket for tidy up. It’s never that simple.
One Factoid that keeps on emerging and then being submerged again – it goes right back to Matt Sandusky and 1996, the attempted suicide. One factoid keeps being mentioned – Matt Sandusky was not “Alone” in that suicide attempt.
Another child who was also being fostered/cared for by the Sanduskys was involved in the 1996 Suicide attempt, it was apparently a suicide pact – and the other child, “She” still remains a mystery.
The Second Mile was not just for boys – if was for all children. Was this girl linked to Second Mile in some way, and why does her connection to the whole scandal keep bobbing up and then vanishing? Not Waving But Drowning comes to mind. It is a common pattern with abuse victims of all types – now you see me now you don’t. I know from too much experience that these cases are far more complex than people believe.
From what I have been able to find, all of the Foster Children in the Sandusky household came from Second Mile connections.
I keep being bugged by a factoid as to how the Biological Mother of Matt Sandusky ended up in front of a Grand Jury. It was an accident! There is this perception that The Grand Jury presentment and evidence came from a most detailed investigation – but the truth is a great deal was accidental and not planned and didn’t come from detailed forensic investigation.
It was due to Matt Sandusky’s Biological brother (Ron Heichel) facing a murder charge, and a state trooper dealing with the case recognising Debra Long (Mother to both boys), whilst also being aware of the Sandusky Grand Jury – putting Two and Two together – and hey presto – Subpoenas for both Debra Long and Matt Sandusky very late in the day to appear before The Grand Jury. I have to wonder if Ron wasn’t detained, if concerns going back to 1994 and earlier would even be known now?
Another factoid that is still bugging the hell out of me concerns how The Whole Safety Net set up in the 1980′s – a decade earlier – failed during the 1998 Sandusky investigation?
All the right people knew and were alerted – Police – State Attorney – the Pennsylvania “suspected child abuse” hotline … and yet the one place any concerns should have been recorded “statewide “child-line” registry of suspected child abusers” just never seemed to get the message. They controlled the Flag Poll – They never got handed The Red Flag.
If they had, then every school, educational institution and even Second Mile Itself, would have found out when basic appropriate adult checks were run, and yet more victims would have been protected. There is just such a lack of clarity as to why the one place that should have had the red flags never go them!
I have no doubt that PSU failed in it’s duty of care and that was primarily due to Football, Image and the Power of one man to be King and God in all but name. But, elsewhere the failures can’t be attributed so easily – and those factoids just keep bobbing up and waving. I fear that there is a great deal of evidence and failure to still be accounted for, and with the Institutional failures linked to child welfare I can see The State of Pennsylvania being sued for more than contributory negligence.
It really bugs me – that’s Two Red flags from two kids living in the Sandusky home attempting suicide – a Biological mother calling out On Sandusky’s behaviour before that – another mother even saying to a psychologist “I hope I’m wrong, but I’m worried” and the Psychologist saying Sandusky is a paedophile (after she had consulted with colleagues after interviewing the child targeted – and they agreed) – Police knowing that – State Attorney knowing that – Child Welfare Knowing that – and still the red flags failed to get planted?
Joe Pa may have had influence at PSU, but did his Aura of Majesty extend so far that it also controlled The “statewide “child-line” registry of suspected child abusers” and all the State Agents who were there to make a call – send a note – fax a report – hell they could even have used email! How and why did that level of failure happen – and was it just about Sandusky or are there yet more cases to surface.
Weren’t the State Agents here also responsible for for some red flags when it came to clergy abuse?
I’m used to human error and fallibility playing it’s part in abuse cases of all types – but incredulity (The state of being unwilling or unable to believe something) really has no place in this whole story – and I can’t believe that the Red Flag failures can be explained away as someone forgetting to tick a box on the right paperwork and fax a report to the right number!
Many point to lessons needing to be learned in Collegiate Sports – Universities across America. I have a suspicion that there are far bigger and wider lessons to be learned and acted upon and the institutions are far bigger.
Freeh’s reports says “The most saddening finding by the Special Investigative Counsel is the total and
consistent disregard by the most senior leaders at Penn State for the safety and welfare
of Sandusky’s child victims.”
That deals with PSU. And the rest of the failures by all the Pennsylvania State agents and agencies? When will the fearless and in depth report into all of them be published? Is there another Freeh investigation that needs to be made and a report that needs publishing?
I keep wondering when attorneys for Sandusky’s victims are going to mention some of the Factoids that just keep on bobbing up and vanishing again?
But that suicide attempt – 1996 – Two people not one – and whoever She is, we still have not heard from that woman who along with Matt Sandusky decided the only way out of the Sandusky Foster Care system was suicide. It’s a factor of abuse survival that even post abuse and escape the likelihood of suicide remains alarmingly high – some talk of calls for help as the reason, but even when calling for help that help does not arrive in time and the result is very permanent.
If a survivor who has been left holding the red flags because of systemic failure of any type, if they should end it all, exactly what is the legal position of all those who failed to man the Flag Poll?
I hope that it’s not too late that her voice has been lost forever. It also makes me wonder about other missing voices, such as Victim 2. If a child is left in an abuse situation and then decides that the only route out is to end it all – is that a tragedy, manslaughter or even worse?