This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Rugby League Louts

Jump to new
cordelia said:
clearly you dont understand much because it was on national tv that she consented!.....
Click to expand...
No, I watched the interview yesterday, and she consented to go back to a room with two men, and said didnt really enjoy the kiss. She never said she consented to any sex act. With anyone. As for your other posts Cordelia, whether or not you are male or female, quite obviously you have never experienced the situation of being a female in a group of 12 'mates' who are drunk and out for their turn. You know nothing of the feeling of powerlessness, vulnerability and terror that such a situation involves. Jane Austen? Sheesh, actually, quite the opposite; I have worked with more rape victims (whose offenders were found guilty in court, by the way) than you will have ever read about in the papers.


And yeah, I think you may have missed a few posts that basically said she was asking for it.

I think perhaps we are 'arguing' different concepts. If it had been proven that the girl had been raped - perhaps there were bruises, cuts, even a witness, would you still say you disagreed with me, if every other aspect of this story was the same? ie she had voluntarily gone to the room with two men, but was raped by four others and watched by another six?

Your argument I think is that no-one really knows what went on, and that is a totally valid point. It happened 7 years ago and memories and recollections change. Remember though, that while charges were not laid, she has been receiving criminal compensation money from the NZ Government all this time - the Govt never hands out money lightly - they felt there was a need for this compensation, even though charges were not laid. And she did get an apology from him afterwards - why was that? And why were people climbing through windows? There are enough suggestions that something bad went on in that room! But not enough to be proven in court.

My argument is that fundamentally, regardless of whether a woman is drunk, sexily dressed, with one man or two, she is not consenting to sex. Just as a man, who is drunk, sexily dressed, with one man or two, is not consenting to sex. And that is the bottom line.

Metric, why are you so hung up on sheep?
 
She obviously consented to sex and put up with all that because she didnt have a man to cook and clean for.

When the natural balance of male female relationships is not fully satisfied odd behaviours surface.

Now if she was happily in the kitchen or the laundry or keeping her husbands dinner warm while he had a few harmless beers with his mates all would be ok.
 
Except she wasnt "out on the piss"

She was at her workplace, in a familiar and safe environment. She invited Johns and Firman to her room.

Other players joined in later, but by all accounts (apart from hers) this wasnt a problem.

As for the general issue that "no woman would consent to this", well sad truth is they do.

I personally know a girl who gave oral sex to 2 Warriors players and got spitroasted by another 2 on one night. She has low self-esteem but is not "scarred" by the experience. Her issues run far deeper, and the incident was a symptom, not a cause, of any problems.

I think we need to look at how we are raising our young women in particular, because for people to allow themselves to be degraded like this, society is failing.
 
White_Knight said:
Except she wasnt "out on the piss"

She was at her workplace, in a familiar and safe environment. She invited Johns and Firman to her room.
Click to expand...
I didnt think it was her room? I thought it was a hotel room which had been left with the windows unlocked?
 
Calliope said:
I have noticed that all your posts are an attempt to put down women. You must have had some bad experiences to make you so cynical.
Click to expand...


No more than the average guy Calliope. Seems you have no response to my posts showing how women lie regularly in such cases, and that this kind of sexual behaviour is not uncommon. Instead you have resorted to attacking me personally.
I'm sick and tired of men being vilified, and women treated as paragons of virtue. Man bad/woman good permeates the media and legal system.
Why does the media not question the culture of these women (groupies) who sexually pursue these men? Instead its all about Rugby League culture. It's always the man's fault. Women are helpless victims. Until women take responsibility for their choices, they will never be considered equals.
 
scanspeak said:
No Calliope, I'm just sick and tired of men being vilified, and women treated as paragons of virtue.
Why does the media not question the culture of these women (groupies) who sexually pursue these men?
Click to expand...

But it hasnt been established that this woman is a groupie.
 
Calliope said:
I have no idea. I have been out of touch for too long to have any expertise on the sexual appetites on modern young women. But in regard to the women I do know I find it highly unlikely. Kiwi women may be different.
Click to expand...

Calliope, c'mon - you know better than that. You mightn't be an expert on the sexual appetites of modern young women - neither am I - but you and I are well aware that women, albeit a minority of women, were willingly engaging in gangbangs back when you and I were youngsters, and long before that.

You're also aware that moral standards are declining and promiscuity is increasing in modern society - therefore increasing numbers of people, both male and female, are getting in involved sexual adventures.

So don't kid yourself that the female in question is highly unlikely to have willingly participated in what took place.
The statements from people who were her work colleagues at the time are probably the most reliable indication of all about what actually happened. And they're absolutely adamant that she bragged openly about her exploits with those footballers.
That hardly supports her claim that she was unwilling, now does it?
 
another thing i find a bit weird

why does everyone expect those other idiots to come out and name themselves?

To put myself in their shoes now, the only course of action would be to remain steadfast "no comment"

what could they say?

very difficult to defend the indefensible

I dont think they should make any statement that further degrades the woman.

I also question the value of an apology, if not fully sincere.

The thing is you would bring tremendous public shame on your present family

if I was yr legal advisor or manager, I would stress to you that a "no comment" policy would be much lower risk strategy

finally, I would say that Matt Johns would not be helped, nor the culprits, not even the other players not involved, or anyone i can think of..

except..

the media

ps I know their are reasons that can be advanced to fess up, just that the - outweighs the +
 
Pospector,

Your summation (Post # 301) of this sordid affair is the most rational and balanced viewpoint yet to appear on this thread. Most posters' arguments are based on whom they disrespect the most, the players or the girls.

In my case I guess I am biased against the players. Some years I had a similar experience to Judd (Post # 198) when I happened to share a return flight to Brisbane with a team of victorious Bronco players;


Given a choice I would much prefer to travel with a team of victorious netball players.
 

So I have resorted to attacking you personally...what rubbish. I didn't even notice you until you tried to put me down for not sharing you contempt for women.

Obviously you have an axe to grind. Come clean. What is it?
 
Prospector said:
But it hasnt been established that this woman is a groupie.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how you define a 'groupie', but if she had a boyfriend, i.e. was in a relationship with someone, what was she doing going to a hotel room with two blokes whom she didn't know, or hardly knew?

I take your point about her needing to give specific permission to each person she had sex with and I have already made the point that her failure to say "stop", "no" or anything else could have been due to intimidation/stress/whatever, but I don't see how she is without any responsibility at all in the whole grubby situation.

I just don't go for the automatic assumption that all females are pure and innocent and all males predatory . And what about the subsequent comments she made to her workmates? They didn't suggest she was too unhappy about it at the time.

And that doesn't mean I'm suggesting the actions of the dumb footy players were anything other than utterly unacceptable.
 
Julia said:
I just don't go for the automatic assumption that all females are pure and innocent and all males predatory . And what about the subsequent comments she made to her workmates? They didn't suggest she was too unhappy about it at the time.
Click to expand...

And neither do I. As a mum to two young male adults, I have certainly seen a lot of behaviours from both the boys and the girls that really shocked me! And as for alcohol consumption and drunkeness in young women, well, it wouldnt have happened in my day! : A little might have been nice though! And this generation of women certainly arent reticent in social situations.

It scares me that the boys can get themselves into situations where they think 'yes' but girl claims 'no' - well down the track. I think it scares them too! There are so many mixed messages out there.

And I agree, Clare certainly did give out a mixed message in this one! But cutting through all that, agreeing to go to a room with 2 men is not tacit consent to sex; and it certainly isnt tacit consent to group sex, with four other unknowns, and the voyeurs who came to watch. Which, I guess, means that the two players she originally went with have become the suckers for the rest of them, unless they in some way, encouraged the others to join in.

The workmate - well, I would like others to come forward to corroborate that one.
 

Julia I hope you don't mind me responding to some of your comments above. My view is that these situations unfold - no clear intent necessarily exists prior to them occurring. It's pretty likely she had the possibility of sex with one or both of them on her mind prior to going to the room (it would be naive to think otherwise) - but thats very different to the act of going to the hotel room being an implicit consent. Consent can be given and withdrawn at any time - even during sex. Its also entirely possible and completely reasonable for a woman to think she can go to a hotel room without having sex with either of them, or having sex with one but not the other, or thinking about having sex with one or both of them but changing her mind when she gets there.

Of course the riskier the situation the woman places herself in, the more difficult it is to determine the truth of what occurrs and miscommunication and lack of assertiveness can be a big problem as well.

I also don't dispute that there are women who enjoy group sex - clearly there are - but in general (apart from those with a very low self esteem) - they expect to be respected through the entirity of the encounter. I'd imagine it takes a fairly assertive and confident woman to be able to engage in group sex activity and maintain this status quo throughout the event and also requires blokes that are aware that the act of a woman participating in group sex doesn't automatically make her a second class citizen that it is ok to degrade and mistreat. A complex psychological situation that obviously has a lot of risk in it for all parties.

Its also easy to forget that at 19, a 30 year old is a world away in age difference and life experience - this could significantly affect the way the woman behaved - she may have been less likely to assert herself - or may have been trying to 'punch above her weight' in terms of experience and overplay her confidence in the situation to 'prove' herself to these guys.

Nobody that wasn't there can know the truth of what went on for this particular women - my personal opinion is that its likely what was initially an exciting adventure for her where she felt sexy and empowered morphed over the course of the interaction into a degrading experience where she felt disempowered and humiliated.

I do also think that a much older, married man that instigates a situation like this bears a significant responsibility for the final outcome. I also think its completely appropriate that given what has occurred that it was untenable for Johns to continue on as an 'ambassador' for a sport that is marketed as a family sport and heavily targeting women and children to come on board as supporters. Obviously its a difficult time for Johns, and everybody makes mistakes in life. Dealing with those mistakes and the consequences is a part of life - assuming he gets through it, he'll likely come out the other side a stronger/better person - he's also lucky that he's got good friends that are standing around to support him.
 
Calliope said:
So I have resorted to attacking you personally...what rubbish. I didn't even notice you until you tried to put me down for not sharing you contempt for women.

Obviously you have an axe to grind. Come clean. What is it?
Click to expand...

Quotes from Calliope:
"You must have had some bad experiences to make you so cynical. "
"Obviously you have an axe to grind. Come clean. What is it?"

What would you call the above if not attacking me?
Why don't you stick the argument in question? Her behaviour versus theirs?

You still avoid the points I raised in my previous posts, so I won't waste any more time on you. Sidetracking the argument is a common tactic for those that have no defence.
 

Yes, and quite often these girls come from disadvantaged backgrounds or are even intellectually challenged. They are looking for acceptance and quite often don't realise that they have been degraded and hence often brag about their experiences to their peers.
 

Rubbish! Defence against what? You are not the first person to use a thread like this for their own agenda.

Your statement in a previous post gives a clue to what your agenda is;
Until women take responsibility for their choices, they will never be considered equals.
Click to expand...
 

You could make the same argument for the guys, especially young rugby players who lack the maturity to deal with fame, money and adoration.
There's zero evidence thats she's disadvantaged or intellectually challenged.
 
As usual Alan Jones speaks sense:
Source: http://www.2gb.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5813&Itemid=134

Where is the fair go?
 

This is pure utter rubbish. Not all women that are into group activities can be categorized as such. This is just as bad a generalization as all footballers are rapists.
 
It's Snake Pliskin said:
As usual Alan Jones speaks sense:
Click to expand...

From the Alan Jones article:

What about women's disrespect for themselves, chasing unknown men simply because they like the look of their flesh.



yeah - you'd never catch a guy degrading himself that way ... chasing after unknown women simply because they like the look of their flesh


Alan Jones speaking sense lol ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...