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
Calliope, I very specifically said that my hypothetical example was NOT referring to the specific case under discussion.
That hypothetical did not discuss any woman having sex with seven men.

So I think your sarcastic tone is completely unwarranted.

My previous remarks stand: Nothing to do with footballers, but if any woman willingly engages in sex with any bloke, what is to stop her the following day (or anytime thereafter) having a change of heart and yelling Rape.

Or do you think such behaviour is never likely to happen??

If so, you must have an intensely idealised view of women.
 
Stan 101 said:
A girl willingly went to a motel room with a footballer.
Click to expand...

Calliope said:
In spite of what all you apologists say to defend the footballers, this defenceless vulnerable girl was the victim of the sexual depredations of a pack of hooligans.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone is defending any footballers.
"A defenceless, vulnerable girl"??? Really? Anyone would think she was on her way home from Sunday School and was attacked out of the blue.
As Stan 101 has pointed out, she willingly accompanied a bloke to his motel room. I doubt she imagined they were going there to read the Bible.


One enlightened supporter of pack sexual thuggery thinks that people who can't accept this as normal footy culture are wowsers and should be hanged.
Click to expand...
Could you provide a link to this statement. I haven't read anything that makes any such statement.

Personally, I find the culture of worship of footballers baffling. They largely appear to be poorly educated idiots with a specific skill regarding a particular sport. Why this should identify them as people destined to be role models is beyond me, and the behaviour of many of them is testament to their complete incapacity in this regard.

But in the interests of rational and equitable discussion, I just can't see that any woman who has no previously established friendship with said footy stars, should be labelled an 'innocent victim' if she gets drunk with said footy heroes, and accepts their invitation to adjourn to motel room.
 

Julia

In my books if she was raped she is an innocent victim - her behaviour has nothing to do with it.

Is a six year old girl sleeping in her bed an innocent victim

Is a 18 year old girl walking home an innocent victim?

Is a 18 year old girl wearing a miniskirt in a pub having a few beers an innocent victim?

Is an 18 year old girl wearing a miniskirt who goes back to a guy's house for a coffee an innocent victim (coffee sometimes does mean just that)

Where do you draw the line? In my view all victims are innocent, it is the criminals who are guilty
 
You are assuming she is a victim.
You are assuming she was raped.

I am making neither assumption.
 

Who's being sarcastic now? And I don't think that she went to his room in the expectations that she would suffer degradations at the hands of his mates. You may not be defending these knuckledragers, but you implied in an earlier post that they were as vulnerable as the victim. How come?

Could you provide a link to this statement. I haven't read anything that makes any such statement.
Click to expand...

Sure. Metric's post #131 on this thread.

Furthermore I don't think my refusal to join the mob in trying to blacken the character of the victim means I have an "intensely idealistic" view of women. I have never been a part of the nightclub culture, so my views are probably a bit old fashioned.
 

Julia said:
You are assuming she is a victim.
You are assuming she was raped.

I am making neither assumption.
Click to expand...
Julia, I was responding to your post rather than making assumptions. Your statement was that any woman is not an innocent victim if she get drunk with footballers and goes to their hotel room. If she is not innocent, she must therefore be guilty. So it must be her fault.

If the sex was consensual then she is not a victim. If the sec was non-consensual, she is a victim. However, your statement made to reference to consent of non-consent, it just stated that the woman was not an innocent victim. You are clearly applying a level of guilt because she had some drinks and went to the motel room. In my eyes, this may be considered risky, but it is never guilty - the man who forces the rape is the guilty party.

BTW, despite the nic, I am assuming you are a man, as my wife believes no woman would make the comments you have made.
 
Gooner,

While tonight's program will probably fail to change the minds of those posters who think the women deserved everything they got, I think it will at least demonstrate their courage in coming forward in contrast to the cowardly pack mentality of the players.

These players could always depend on the support and cover ups by their clubs and the NRL. These girls had no support. Their detractors even try to blacken their characters, as an excuse for the players' actions.

It's a case of the powerful against the weak.
 

Calliope

I agree with your comments. As an example of the offensive reporting - here is Danny Weidler in the Sun-Herald yesterday "Today I'll deal with some aspects of the matter. Johns and a teammate had sex with the woman. When other players entered the room and began to watch what was happening, Johns backed out. The woman requested that Johns have sex with her again. Her request was made in the crudest of terms. When another player said he would, the woman requested that Johns have sex with her again. Her request was made in the crudest of terms. When another player said he would, the woman requested Johns. He declined"

This is reported as fact, however Danny Weidler was not there. Very poor journalism IMHO and an attempt to smear the woman.
 
most of the comments seem to focus on one incident, for which all and sundry are paying a price for poor judgement on the night.

apart from anything else, the show may make some comment on the rabid efforts of some of the female fans to impress themselves upon their chosen favorites..but i doubt that will be the main focus!

There is at least 2 sides to every story
 
I remember in 'the old days', in Australian Rules football and in cricket, the payments made to players were never enough for them to live on, and so they had to work in another job or build a career in order to make ends meet.

Now we have the professional sportsman, who never experiences the real world. They are selected straight from school, even from Year 11; paid salaries of at least $70k from the age of 17 and usually much more than this; are lauded and feted in the media as being our heroes, and of course the girls come running. They have no idea what it means to put in a potentially boring '8 hours work in the office', eat a rushed lunch, then back to work. They dont have to deal with work relationships in mixed company as they are surrounded by like minded men. And all they do is either hit a ball with a stick or kick and throw a leather bag full of air around an oval. How stupid are we!

No wonder they get into trouble.
 
Much has been made of the fact that the NZ police couldn't come up with the evidence to charge any members of the Cronulla club. The police came to Australia and interviewed 40 players and club staff who were in Christchurch that night.

The club knew they were coming and they would have got their stories in agreement down to the last detail. If only one of this forty had said that the girl said no or stop at any time during her ordeal then several players could have ended up behind bars.

However, club solidarity is such that anyone breaking ranks can count his career as finished.

As for the nastiness in the Sun-Herald, I give more credence to the girl's employer at the time, the motel owner who said that she was the last person he thought would do such a thing.
 


Oh for heaven's sake, I did not make such a statement.
Calliope and Gooner, just re-read my post above. I specifically said I was not referring to the incident which had been the subject of this thread.
I haven't read anything about what is alleged to have happened so am not in a position to make any conclusions.

My point was rather a general one and if you can't see what I was saying then there is little point in my further attempting to explain.
Others had no such difficulty.



The hypothetical example I offered was one of consensual sex, not rape.

The vulnerability I mentioned was that of a man who engages in consensual sex, consensual OK??, then could be vulnerable to a woman at some later stage wishing she had not become thus engaged, and crying rape. How is the bloke going to defend himself?

Remember, in my example, she was not raped.

BTW, despite the nic, I am assuming you are a man, as my wife believes no woman would make the comments you have made.
Click to expand...
I'm less than interested in what your wife thinks, frankly. I am merely attempting to introduce a note of objectivity into this discussion, something which - apart from a few posters - seems to be somewhat lacking.
 

I find it somewhat amusing that both yourself and Gooner are carrying on about poor reporting and the clubs covering it up but the fact is neither of you know exactly what happened on the night either but are quite happy to jump on you high horses and condem the footy players purely because they are footy players.
I don't really know what happened on that night and neither do you guys we are all going on second hand reports.

Footy players don't do themselves any favours at times but there are plenty of young & not so young girls that are willing to do things with these footy player especially when under the influence of drugs and alcohol that most people find disgusting, it is unfortunately a fact of life nowadays.
 
I find Rugby League a boring spectacle, a recent survey in the Newcastle Herald also suggested this was one reason for falling attendances in Knights matches. The survey also mentioned the off field antics of NRL players as well. Why any business except for perhaps the alcohol industry would want to be associated with the NRL and the behaviour of its players amazes me. If I had the choice of buying from a business that supports professional football or one that doesn't I'd go for the one that doesn't. Repetitive boozy,violent behaviour by some players is the reason why I don't want my money going to them.
 

OK you find my opinions amusing.

But as I have said before, I am not into nightclub culture, so maybe I am behind the times. It is your choice to accept these carryings-on as a "fact of life."
But you will have to excuse me for my intolerance of bad behaviour. I suppose it depends on how you were brought up.
 

I also haven't been to a nightclub for a number of years.
I accept these carryings-on as a fact of life because they happen - turning a blind eye doesn't stop them from happening.

I also don't particularly like some of the behaviour of most of these footy players and the antics that happen in our nightlife city centres now but turning a blind eye to it and pretending it doesn't happen isn't exactly dealing with reality is it?
 

I have seen some 'to rude to print behavior' resulting from nightclub culture. Also stories from my wife’s sisters friends of various gangbangs when they were 14yr olds (now 18-20). It does go on a lot and mainly alcohol related. With role models like Paris Hilton or Britt spears no wonder
 
I'm a little surprised that there are no comments about the 4 Corners programme this evening, given the firm opinions that were expressed prior to it being aired.
 
Julia said:
I'm a little surprised that there are no comments about the 4 Corners programme this evening, given the firm opinions that were expressed prior to it being aired.
Click to expand...

The wife was watching something else. Was it any good?
 
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...