Reply to 8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "8 Skiers dead after accidental Avalanche in California!"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Story in NYT relaying account from two of the survivors (gift link): https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2026/02/28/us/tahoe-avalanche-survivors.html?unlocked_article_code=1.PlA.m9Z3.x4oSjjKcyO5_&smid=url-share

Puts all the decision-making onus on the guides. More stories to come, I'm sure.[/quote]

Thanks for posting. This is a fascinating article. The comments at the end are worth a read.

There was no pressure from guests to stay or go. The decision to go and the path taken was made
in a back room meeting by guides on the phone with the home office.

There were two groups of guests.  There were the 8 women who were highly proficient back country skiers. The women were friends.

The second group was 3 solo men who were all back country novice level and knew they needed guides.

Each group had two male guides.  The womens group and their guides were typically in the front as the women were more proficient.
One of the males talks about being embarrassed that he kept falling down.

On the last day the two groups operated as one group but the solo men were at the rear with one male guide following.

I don't think the solo men would have spoken up about staying or going. The two men interviewed both said they were less skilled and knew they needed guides in the back country.

[/quote]

Still no explanation as to why the proficient, skilled women skiers ignored weather warnings and went on with their plans. Guides didn't force them to go on the trip.  [/quote]
They relied on the guides. It’s really gross that people feel such a need to villainize these dead women.[/quote]

Standard DCUM victim blaming. So gross.

[/quote]

Especially when women are involved. [/quote]

Yes.  It is gross how many posts make a point of saying the women skiers.  They could just type the skiers.  But they go out of their way to emphasize the women did'nt watch the weather beforehand, the women didn't cancel, there must have been 1-2 alpha women.  Their sex had nothing to do with it, except that it's used when assigning blame to part of the group.  The full group was 4 guides, 3 independent people who signed up individually, and 8 people who were linked in a group.  Emphasizing over and over the women is blantant misogyny.

Also - they had a gorgeous day skiing the day before.  The tour company said the trip was still on.

There's a lot in the NYT article about group think and how these large high death events happen psychologically.  Most of those elements were present in this situation, and none of those elements involve the sex of the victim.

If you cannot talk about this story without talking about "women skiers" as opposed to just "skiers," you are part of the problem.  [/quote]

The group that planned a trip together was comprised of women. Consequently, the friends group is described as a group of women skiers. Get over it. [/quote]

Also, in the article recently posted the male survivors were at the back of the pack. So the women, out in front, with the guides likely caused the avalanche.[/quote]

Which shows you that if the guides had followed avalanche protocol and spread out the skiers, there would have been more survivors. [/quote]

Maybe. I’m sure we’ll find out what happened at the eventual trial. [/quote]

There should have been at most 1-2 people in the clearing at a time. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics