Page 9 of 11

PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 2:24 pm
by kozman18
I smell a MasterCard sponsorship . . .

Brother’s previous sail around the world: -$50,000
Dismasted Sayer Class 40 Yacht: -$400,000
Food, fuel, outfitting for a solo voyage around the world: -$25,000
Reality TV show contract: +$200,000
Book deal: +$500,000
Australian government rescue tab: -$300,000 (but the Sunderland's ain't payin')
Claim that Abby was just pursuing her dream and it wasn’t about the money: Priceless
(Alternate ending: Father's soul: Priceless)

PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 2:25 pm
by John Duffield
Bob Sihler wrote:I'm not one of those who say the girl had no business trying to sail around the world solo. Although it's debatable, I think 16 is old enough to make an informed decision on a lot of things (not anything, though),


But in the realm of Apple/Oranges argument, we allow boys of nearly the same age to go into military service. A life changing decision and in my experience IMO not something many of them have the mental firepower to make.

PostPosted: Tue Jun 15, 2010 2:42 pm
by The Chief
John Duffield wrote:But in the realm of Apple/Oranges argument, we allow boys of nearly the same age to go into military service. A life changing decision and in my experience IMO not something many of them have the mental firepower to make.


In many cases John, that is an empowering one for those boys & girls, and gives them that "mental firepower" they lack. Many of them come from a home with absolutely no role mode, direction nor any guidance to follow. They find that and so much more once they are in and doing the gig. As in many other nations throughout the world which a two year stinch is mandatory, it affords them solid direction in teaching them how to serve "others" and not one self. A very meaningful virtue that many in this nation could stand to learn and practice.

Whole different enchilada.... trust me.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:02 am
by chugach mtn boy
Dingus Milktoast wrote:If she writes a book, I will buy it.


You won't miss it. Watch for an announcement from her spokesperson.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:17 pm
by surgent
Dingus Milktoast wrote:Well if she inspires other young women to flip the finger of fate at the 'can't do it' naysayers, I will gladly shake her publicist's hand.

Maybe she should have stayed home, eating doritos and watching Oprah on cable. But THAT book has been written 10 million times.

DMT


Is there no middle ground?

I work with college-age kids all day. Many are just a couple years' removed from Abby. Many are also very interesting, well-adjusted young people. Extrapolating backwards, it's reasonable to assume many younger teens have their heads on straight and will grow up to be fine people.

However, the variable that makes Abby's experience different is she had the parents with the wherewithall (i.e. $) and skewed sense of judgment to let her sail solo around the world. For what end? To "prove" what a great kid she is? I daresay there would be hundreds of kids in their midteens doing all sorts of interesting things like this if they had the lucky set of circumstances Abby had. The playing field is not level.

Please note: none of this is an ad hominem on Abby herself. It is better directed at her parents, and to those who find such feats by young kids "amazing", as if all it took for Abby to do this was a lot of courage and determination (ignoring the convenient fact she had access to a nice big boat, a lot of scratch, and parents who apparently were content to let their kid battle 50-foot waves in the Indian Ocean ... maybe they had a spare back home?)

I'll tell you what impresses me: the kid with a broken home who ekes through college and doesn't use it as a crutch. Who just plugs away and gets it done, quietly without fanfare.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 4:30 pm
by mrchad9
surgent wrote:
Dingus Milktoast wrote:Well if she inspires other young women to flip the finger of fate at the 'can't do it' naysayers, I will gladly shake her publicist's hand.

Maybe she should have stayed home, eating doritos and watching Oprah on cable. But THAT book has been written 10 million times.

DMT


Is there no middle ground?

I work with college-age kids all day. Many are just a couple years' removed from Abby. Many are also very interesting, well-adjusted young people. Extrapolating backwards, it's reasonable to assume many younger teens have their heads on straight and will grow up to be fine people.

However, the variable that makes Abby's experience different is she had the parents with the wherewithall (i.e. $) and skewed sense of judgment to let her sail solo around the world. For what end? To "prove" what a great kid she is? I daresay there would be hundreds of kids in their midteens doing all sorts of interesting things like this if they had the lucky set of circumstances Abby had. The playing field is not level.

Please note: none of this is an ad hominem on Abby herself. It is better directed at her parents, and to those who find such feats by young kids "amazing", as if all it took for Abby to do this was a lot of courage and determination (ignoring the convenient fact she had access to a nice big boat, a lot of scratch, and parents who apparently were content to let their kid battle 50-foot waves in the Indian Ocean ... maybe they had a spare back home?)

I'll tell you what impresses me: the kid with a broken home who ekes through college and doesn't use it as a crutch. Who just plugs away and gets it done, quietly without fanfare.

Excellent post. There's a lot of people out there who deserve more credit than her. She was simply lucky enough to be born into the right circumstances.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 5:08 pm
by kozman18
People who have the means to embark on adventures are fortunate, but it doesn’t mean that those adventures can’t be inspiring. In general, I think anyone that attempts a solo sail around the world is pretty daring (I sail solo a lot in a small boat, and find 25 knot winds and four foot swells on Lake Champlain to be pretty intimidating -- I can’t imagine soloing in 40 knot winds and 20+ foot swells).

But I don’t find all such stories inspiring. If this voyage was really just about the accomplishment, why the pre-trip attempt at a TV deal? Why all the publicity and the talk of a book? I would find her story more compelling if she was just in it for the love of the adventure (just like I find mountaineers more interesting when they climb for the sport and not the publicity). But I see the hand of her parents in all of this -- too manipulative/abusive of someone so young (I highly doubt she could/would have pulled this trip off on her own). It all seems very circus to me, which detracts from any inspiration I might find (same is true of Romero and Everest). In the end, like Romero, she appears to be just another rich kid with vicariously-living (and/or opportunistic) parents. If that’s true (and that’s all I can glean from the reporting I have read), the story is one I have read many times before -- to be honest, really kind of boring.

Finally, I don’t understand why she should expect a free rescue at the expense of the Australian taxpayers -- she took the risk and yet they pay the bill. Hey -- happy to throw gas on that fire again . . . .

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 6:12 pm
by dskoon
mrchad9 wrote:
surgent wrote:
Dingus Milktoast wrote:Well if she inspires other young women to flip the finger of fate at the 'can't do it' naysayers, I will gladly shake her publicist's hand.

Maybe she should have stayed home, eating doritos and watching Oprah on cable. But THAT book has been written 10 million times.

DMT


Is there no middle ground?

I work with college-age kids all day. Many are just a couple years' removed from Abby. Many are also very interesting, well-adjusted young people. Extrapolating backwards, it's reasonable to assume many younger teens have their heads on straight and will grow up to be fine people.

However, the variable that makes Abby's experience different is she had the parents with the wherewithall (i.e. $) and skewed sense of judgment to let her sail solo around the world. For what end? To "prove" what a great kid she is? I daresay there would be hundreds of kids in their midteens doing all sorts of interesting things like this if they had the lucky set of circumstances Abby had. The playing field is not level.

Please note: none of this is an ad hominem on Abby herself. It is better directed at her parents, and to those who find such feats by young kids "amazing", as if all it took for Abby to do this was a lot of courage and determination (ignoring the convenient fact she had access to a nice big boat, a lot of scratch, and parents who apparently were content to let their kid battle 50-foot waves in the Indian Ocean ... maybe they had a spare back home?)

I'll tell you what impresses me: the kid with a broken home who ekes through college and doesn't use it as a crutch. Who just plugs away and gets it done, quietly without fanfare.

Excellent post. There's a lot of people out there who deserve more credit than her. She was simply lucky enough to be born into the right circumstances.


Yes, but just because of her fortunate circumstances, does that make it wrong?
Again, try to step into their shoes. Parents are rich, kids grew up sailing, they want to do it; anything wrong with that? Think of all the rich parents who groom their kids from a young age to excell in sports, the tennis club, the golf course(Tiger Woods), etc. etc. Talk about her parents "proving what a great kid she is," is just conjecture on your part.

I do agree that if this was all about $$ and fame and she was pushed by her parents, then, I would lose interest quickly. And, we can all glean that or whatever we want, from media reports. Not sure we know all of that. . . therefore, I remain open to the perspective that she just might've done it for the adventure. Remember, there have been plenty of 16yr. olds to attempt and succeed at what she was attempting. Robin Lee Graham, for one, some 40 yrs. ago. I wonder if he had naysayers, and people critical of his "abusive parents," as well?

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 6:56 pm
by mrchad9
mrchad9 wrote:There's a lot of people out there who deserve more credit than her. She was simply lucky enough to be born into the right circumstances.

I stand by it.

dskoon wrote:Yes, but just because of her fortunate circumstances, does that make it wrong?

I in no way implied it was wrong, don't think surgent did either. I am only saying this is an 'accomplishment' due only to her circumstances, and not much else. And I really don't think folks should be too impressed by it. There are plenty of others out of the 6 billion people in the world that could get rescued in Austrailia if they had the means and desire too.

Dingus Milktoast wrote:What does that mean?

It means exactly what I wrote in my original post, and reply to dskoon. It is an 'accomplishment' due to circumstances, little else. A lot of race drivers have parents who did the same, so perhaps we could acknowledge that there is potentially a lot of much better drivers out there that the world will never know, because they weren't born in a family to provide them the opportunity. (and I do not mean to compare this girl directly to Michael Andretti, just a crude analogy) Micheal has talent, but if he'd been born to my parents, he'd likely not even know it and we'd have never heard of him.

Dingus Milktoast wrote:That jealousy and class envy are legitimate criticisms?

Yes.

Dingus Milktoast wrote:Can *anyone* with sufficient cash sail solo around the world?

No, but it is a prerequisite. And there is a reasonable handful with sufficient cash that could.

Just saying a normal 16 year old raising enough cash to do this is hands down a bigger accomplishment than this particular one actually trying it.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:01 pm
by mrchad9
Dingus Milktoast wrote:
kozman18 wrote:People who have the means to embark on adventures are fortunate, but it doesn’t mean that those adventures can’t be inspiring. In general, I think anyone that attempts a solo sail around the world is pretty daring (I sail solo a lot in a small boat, and find 25 knot winds and four foot swells on Lake Champlain to be pretty intimidating -- I can’t imagine soloing in 40 knot winds and 20+ foot swells).

But I don’t find all such stories inspiring. If this voyage was really just about the accomplishment, why the pre-trip attempt at a TV deal? Why all the publicity and the talk of a book? I would find her story more compelling if she was just in it for the love of the adventure (just like I find mountaineers more interesting when they climb for the sport and not the publicity). But I see the hand of her parents in all of this -- too manipulative/abusive of someone so young (I highly doubt she could/would have pulled this trip off on her own). It all seems very circus to me, which detracts from any inspiration I might find (same is true of Romero and Everest). In the end, like Romero, she appears to be just another rich kid with vicariously-living (and/or opportunistic) parents. If that’s true (and that’s all I can glean from the reporting I have read), the story is one I have read many times before -- to be honest, really kind of boring.

Finally, I don’t understand why she should expect a free rescue at the expense of the Australian taxpayers -- she took the risk and yet they pay the bill. Hey -- happy to throw gas on that fire again . . . .


How about those idiot tourists that sailed too close to Somolia... free rescue?

DMT

C'mon. Shoudn't journalists in unstable countries have to pay their own rescue if they are hostage or otherwise, because they put themselves in a dangerous situation? That seems to be the view of some at least...

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:06 pm
by kozman18
Dingus Milktoast wrote:How about those idiot tourists that sailed too close to Somolia... free rescue?

DMT

Societies decide which risks to "socialize" -- meaning that the members of a society agree implicitly or explicitly that they will all shoulder the burden of certain risks -- fire, accidents, etc. The risks are spread them out, just like insurance -- except the insurance premiums are in the form of taxes. Risks that are outside the "societal agreement" aren't covered. When the agreements are implicit, it is sometimes hard to tell where certain risks fall. But that doesn't mean there are no limits -- just hard to define.

Societies are free to explicitly define what risks they are willing to accept. For example, NH passed a law allowing the recoupment of costs for rescues where the victim was neglient. I don't agree with such a rule because the standard is too low, but it is a perfect example of a society deciding (explicitly) that it will not bear the burden of rescuing negligent people. In NH, negligent people pay.

Did Australia decide, implicilty or explicitily, to pay for the rescue of an American citizen in the Indian Ocean pursuing her very risky dream of sailing around the world? I don't know anything about Australian law, but it's pretty doubtful. If you are asking me if she should pay -- yes, because I see the risks that she took as being well outside the "societal" contract (at least the types that exists in the USA). In other words, I don't think an individual can expect to shift the risk of any and all activities onto society.

As for the tourists near Somalia, they were French, recued by French commandos, no? Again, not sure what the laws in France would say about this -- it may depend on where the tourists were, what they were doing, etc. Don't know enough to express a personal opinion.

For the record, I am not saying they shouldn't be rescued, just discussing who pays.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:10 pm
by mrchad9
kozman18 wrote:Did Australia decide, implicilty or explicitily, to pay for the rescue of an American citizen in the Indian Ocean pursuing her very risky dream of sailing around the world? I don't know anything about Australian law, but it's pretty doubtful.

Nor do I know anything about Austrailian law, but if it was an Australian (or US) citizen in US waters the US Coast Gaurd would've pulled them in for free. So what's the big deal?

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 7:17 pm
by kozman18
mrchad9 wrote:
kozman18 wrote:Did Australia decide, implicilty or explicitily, to pay for the rescue of an American citizen in the Indian Ocean pursuing her very risky dream of sailing around the world? I don't know anything about Australian law, but it's pretty doubtful.

Nor do I know anything about Austrailian law, but if it was an Australian (or US) citizen in US waters the US Coast Gaurd would've pulled them in for free. So what's the big deal?


My point is that any society can decide what it is willing to do or not do. If the US decides all coastal oceanic rescues are free, regardless of the actions of the victims, then no big deal because we decided, as a group, to spread the risk of such rescues around. We could easily decide that such rescues are not free. NH citizens decided they would not pay for the rescue of negligent people. The societal group providing the service can set the rules, and they often do.

PostPosted: Wed Jun 30, 2010 9:20 pm
by surgent
Dingus Milktoast wrote:
mrchad9 wrote:There's a lot of people out there who deserve more credit than her. She was simply lucky enough to be born into the right circumstances.


What does that mean? That jealousy and class envy are legitimate criticisms? Can *anyone* with sufficient cash sail solo around the world?

DMT


You're confounding "necessary" with "sufficient". To sail solo around the world, it is necessary to have access to money, but not sufficient, since skill plays a role, too. However, the failure to have access to the funds (e.g. not meeting the necessary condition) essentially blocks out all would-be sail-around-the-world aspirants, regardless of whatever skill they possess. This is the predicament faced by 99%+ of those who share similar goals.

My point was that I believe there are many, many kids who have the maturity and skill to pull off feats such as this (or similar), but since most will never have the circumstances (cash and related) to attempt the dream as children, we must view Abby's situation as highly unique, and to not judge "all the rest" as lazy dorito-eating blobs because they didn't share Abby's circumstances.

There's still the ethical issue of allowing your child (<18yo) to do this, no matter the situation.

You can be impressed and heartened by Abby all you want. She seems like a good kid. But don't lose sight of the surrounding details. Had her folks said "no, you can wait until you're 18 to sail solo", would we have thought less of her?