“Generation Yes” needs to learn the word “No”

Aidan says:

12:47pm | 08/03/11

Must….......avoid….......“cheese” gag….......!!!!!!

Bitten says:

02:44pm | 08/03/11

You know, I have never seen that movie. I think it’s a Baldwin thing - never really got into them.

Sam says:

12:52pm | 08/03/11

The footballers could have said ‘no’ also.

Stefan says:

03:05pm | 08/03/11

Sam, the footballers COULD have said no but they are playing football for the fame and noteriety, not for the better good of the public. Their own clubs treat them like a protected species and will continue to insulate them from their own stupidities.
I’m not forgetting the girl’s own choice of actions was idiotic and I have absolutely no empathy for her. She made up her mind and now she has to live with the consequences.

PaulB says:

04:22pm | 08/03/11

Played at a local rugby team function up here recently.  The boys were all youthful, attractive and excitably drunk…and the young girls were all around, skankily clad and trying to catch one for the night.  It was funny watching the look of horny anticipation fall off a girl’s face when the young male target suddenly vomited across the table in front of her. 

No-one was forcing them to present themselves as willing receptacles, but why are our young (both sexes) so poor at the pride and self esteem thing these days?

Huey says:

05:31pm | 08/03/11

@ NSW, agree but I reckon you could add vicious and vengeful to the list of her attributes.

Brett says:

10:31am | 09/03/11

I think Paul B put it correctly. Some of the older generation think of a 16 year old as this young naive and innocent person being taken advantage of. 13 year old girls fight over sexual partners (literally) and in the country 10 year olds are losing their virginity to other 10 year olds (personally I didn’t know what sex was at 10).

So to think that this girl didn’t go there looking for it is just stupid. She was gagging for her own conquest, she wanted to bang a footballer and then boast about it. We’ve all been there. Ditto to the young guys who bang their attractive teachers. Its all for street cred points.

The footballers could have said no, and in the interest of their sponsorship deals probably should have, but then what testosterone fueled male says no to sex. In addition, most of these girls, who they shag on a weekly basis, don’t have a cry about and whinge to ACA, and the media doesn’t listen. So why would they think it would be any different to the gang bang they had last weekend.

Sportsman from local club soccer to multimillion dollar athletes have girls willing for group gang bang sessions throwing themselves at them regularly. Should we feel sorry for them?

Respect and responsibility says:

12:22pm | 09/03/11

On one side a 16 year old girl with mental health issues.  On the other a man in his early twenties with financial resources and personal power.  I can’t take seriously any suggestion that they were equally resourced to make decisions and control what happened in that room.  There is one person who behaved irresponsibly and it wasn’t the girl.

Gabrielle says:

12:53pm | 09/03/11

I agree—and I feel very sorry for her parents / siblings.. they will now have to live with being the “brother / mum / dad” of “that AFL groupie..” And dont get me started on ricky nixon… geesh - it seems as long as you cry out “addicion problems” and go to re-hab, think fevola, all your low acts / mistakes can be forgotten and erased.. Talk about the Victim mentality. Own up for pete’s sake !!

Rick says:

03:56pm | 09/03/11

You under rate all kids with this comment. Not ALL kids behave like this but there are exeptions.Like the prepubecent dick cheeses that spat at me and threw things at my car because because I wouldnt let them change lanes to get ahead one carlength in peak hour traffic. They really need to learn about life…...all be it the hard way.

Tim says:

12:02pm | 10/03/11

@Respect and responsibility,
“A girl with mental health issues”
Oh, are you her psychologist?
No?
OK, i’ll treat your comment with the respect it deserves, none.

John C says:

01:46pm | 08/03/11

I am with Sam.

The men alleged to have had sex with her, all older than her, presumably wiser and more experienced than her, who should have recognised that she was a young and unstable girl, and all who would have had some knowledge that sex scandals tend to follow footballers, also should have said NO.

ABC says:

03:17pm | 08/03/11

I think Jugg’s point is that the media are all completely outraged on this girls behalf, yet it is the media (and the Herald Sun in particular) that have continued to play to this young woman’s need for attention.  The fact that it is the media that are continuing to give her airtime and column space that is perpetuating the very issue that they are railing against.  If the media left her tweets and facebook comments within that medium she would soon understand that she cannot and should not use sex as a weapon or as an instrument for revenge.

As to sex education - well isn’t it up to those in the media (given that young women of this St Kilda girls age live almost totally in the media social networking realm) to start trying to practice what they preach and speak to young women in the manner in which they purport to promote.

realist says:

03:35pm | 08/03/11

John -  Recognition she was young and ensuring it was legal - yes. Mental health check - no.

They earn money for kicking a pig skin full of air around, they are not health professionals. Some AFL footballers are the same age as this girl and if a footballers is 30, they are considered a virtual relic.

Tim says:

01:31pm | 08/03/11

Agree Adam,
I think this case has highlighted the amount of people who are willing to forgive extremely bad behaviour from girls and young women because of some sort of antiquated notion that women can’t make decisions for themselves, or if the consequences of their decisions are bad then someone (anyone) else must be at fault.

BK says:

08:50pm | 08/03/11

The problem is the attitude that discussing consequences equals undermining freedom of choice.

Shifter says:

01:41pm | 08/03/11

Come on Tim, everyone loves a scandal. As newly found pop culture icon and all around internet hero Charlie Sheen stated:

“Two wars are in an endless state of sorrow. Egypt about burned to the ground, and all you people care about is my bullshit?”

People care about the immediacy of a local scandal much more than any atrocities occurring in that place, far off, over there. You know the one.

Tim says:

03:38pm | 08/03/11

Shifter,
yes people love a scandal but not a manufactured one.
Some basic fact checking by journalists at the beginning of this “story” would have ended it pretty quickly.
Unfortunately, journalists hear the words footballer and sex in the same sentence and go into a muck lather.

PaulB says:

04:32pm | 08/03/11

But Charlie’s “bullshit” is such a convenient distration. 

The American media is so bad it makes our look vaguely coherent.

AdamC says:

01:49pm | 08/03/11

See, this is so much better than your domestic violence comments! Having said that, aside from the Zeta Sir Galahad philosophy (which I think I am starting to better understand) why is there some obligation for the 27 year-old in your example to say ‘no’.

Gladys says:

01:58pm | 08/03/11

I believe you are Nick Earls.

Hamish says:

02:10pm | 08/03/11

Zeta, what’s bad about the idea? Sure for Nixon it was a bad idea, what with him being almost fifty, a player manager and a complete moron and she being well known for shit stirring, taking (or stealing) and posting compromising, embarassing, bizarrely homoerotic and totally hilarious photos online and generally trying to make life difficult for men who she felt had scorned her. Generally though, what’s the prob?

Zeta says:

02:50pm | 08/03/11

@ AdamC - There’s no obligation. It’s the right thing to do. I don’t usually believe in moral absolutes, but I believe when there is a 16 year old girl in your hotel room in her pyjamas there is a right and wrong thing to do. I think the problem is people don’t recognise right and wrong for what they are anymore.

I have a vegan friend who at the slightest suggestion will rant at you about how the real problem behind most illnesses is dehydration, and the problem with modern society is we just don’t know when we’re thirsty anymore. And it’s true. Unless you’re absolutely parched you just can’t tell when you’re properly thirsty because every day we’re drinking coffee, soft drink, organic wheat germ juice. Often we confuse being thirsty for being hungry. I think right and wrong is like that.

It’s this thing we feel without understanding what it means any more because it has no relevance. There will always be someone to tell us - the media, the Police, our parents we confuse law with morality, habit with righteousness.

People think ‘rightness’ is some kind of thing you give and receive in kind but it’s not - the way you referred to it as an ‘obligaton’ proves my point. The right thing just is, you don’t know it until it’s upon you, it usually gives you a few seconds to figure it out and it always costs you something. 

@ Gladys - How dare you accuse me of being that hack.

@ Hamish - Because it’s wrong.

mary says:

02:50pm | 08/03/11

Love you Zeta.

Hamish says:

03:14pm | 08/03/11

Zeta, I assume you mean morally? Why? I must say for someone who seems happy to blame male victims of domestic violence for being abused, you seem to have a sudden attack of holier-than-thou-ness when it comes to perfectly legal sexual behaviour.

Never picked you as a prude.

rufus says:

03:27pm | 08/03/11

It’s not a bad idea if you’re a 16 year old boy (who is prepared to practice safe sex). I agree that it’s not a great idea for a man to be involved with a teenage girl. It suggests to me pedophile tendencies, or at least an inability to deal with women of equal age.

Zeta says:

03:31pm | 08/03/11

@ Hamish - Men are held to a higher standard of behaviour. It’s part of the pants wetting glory of being a man. Law is just something Man made up to keep the proles in line when it suits him. The law is meaningless compared to the unspoken codes of manhood.

Tim says:

03:48pm | 08/03/11

Zeta,
maybe it’s time to look at the laws regarding consent and I assume you’ll be petioning your member of parliament to have them changed?
On a side note, I find it amusing that of the people i’ve talked to about this issue, the same people who use a moral argument to say “It’s wrong” have been in part the same people that whinge the most when religious people or conservatives make arguments based on morality on other issues.
The cognitive dissonance is astounding.

Hamish says:

04:12pm | 08/03/11

So, Zeta, what you’re saying is that you’re sexist? Women do like sex as well you know and if a sixteen year old wants to have sex with you (and she’s not a complete emotional train wreck) there’s nothing wrong with both of you enjoying yourself. It’s part of the pants wetting glory of being alive.

Ana_F says:

08:11am | 09/03/11

Zeta - This is one of the most eloquent comments I have seen on this site. And while people may disagree with what you say, it certainly is the way of the world right now.

Young girls are being taught that taking control of their life and sexuality means doing whatever, whenever, with whomever, they please (or whoever offers). In a perfect world, older men would use their brains and not get involved with younger girls, but we dont live in a perfect world and we have to be teaching our daughters to take responsibility for their own actions, and that every action has a consequence that can possibly affect them for the rest of their lives.

Fredbiblic says:

04:13pm | 08/03/11

“Where were they when they kicked her out of home?”

Presumably in the home.

Miki says:

02:32pm | 08/03/11

“What has made this so different? Regrettably it’s the mainstream media whose business imperatives result in it being seen as a marketing opportunity: More clicks, more eyeballs, more sales.
Sad, isn’t it. ”
Sad it certainly is.
I am ever grateful to have been a teenager in the 70’s when there was no media in sight. Football clubs were a lot of fun, with plenty of sex, drugs and rock and roll. One of my girlfriends, barely 17, made it her ambition to have sex with as many footballers as she could, starting with the colts (under 19s). Needless to say she was incredibly successful. Needless to say she had an appalling reputation and the blokes in the team would take bets on who she would take home for the night. Yet at no time did she feel guilty, sad or abused. She was having a ball. Quite literally.  These days as a respectable middle aged mother of adult children my friend looks back on her youth with fond memories. The young girl in the spotlight today will grow older and wiser too, but the media has made that transition a much harder task.
—
For the record the sexual revolution happened in the 60s; that’s closer to 50 years ago than 30 years ago; and there wasn’t a lot of “No” going on by either sexes in the 70’s either.

James says:

03:16pm | 08/03/11

Perhaps, but the point could be made without depicting a young man whose reputation has already been absolutely and dishonestly trashed as some sort of predatory drunk.

Chris L says:

06:53pm | 08/03/11

Yep, religion is necessary to be a good person. If I hadn’t read the bible as a child I would have killed at least twenty people by now and sucked the marrow from their bones. (sarcasm font required)

Ben C says:

03:01pm | 09/03/11

@ Cybacat

Many kids said no to the chaplains at schools like St Stanislaus. Big load of good that did for them. The Vatican has admitted as much.

mary says:

03:04pm | 08/03/11

Thanks Sheree. I’m flabbergasted that this is not more common knowledge. Because obviously those who call the girl all kinds of names must have absolutely no idea of the pressure these kids feel. It’s not even pressure as such, a lot of these teens genuinely don’t feel as if there is actually a choice available to them.

Society to blame for condoning people sleeping around left right and centre. How on earth can we expect teens to make sensible decisions with regards to these kind of situations if in the same breath we excuse the more mature ones for failing to show maturity?

Erick says:

03:21pm | 08/03/11

Thank you, Sheree, for a deeply considered and well-balanced comment.

Coming to terms with sexuality is not easy for many adolescents, both male and female. The problems faced by girls and boys need to be considered as equally important, and worthy of support.

Jade says:

04:55pm | 08/03/11

Sheree, as a former high school teacher I cannot agree more with your comments. Boys and girls are heavily, heavily influenced in our media and even in our everyday dealings that sex is something that they should want to do all the time, and be willing to do on demand.

Boys are raised to believe that there is something wrong with them if they attach more importance to the act than a more pleasurable way to masturbate, and girls are taught that if they are not willing to engage in a variety of sex acts, they are frigid or prudish and no fun.

The variety of magazines aimed at teens does nothing to ameliorate this pressure. Cleo, Cosmo, Dolly etc promote the idea that girls should be aiming to “please their man” with a range of sex acts that never cease to amaze me, and young boys are taught through other magazines that they should only perceive women as an opportunity for sex.

Furthermore, there seems to be extremism in sex education. We have certainly moved beyond the idea that abstinence-only is the way. But I fear that some educators are terrified of teaching more than the facts for fear of being accused of being judgmentalist or imposing inappropriate values on children.

I think that there is definitely a happy medium in sexual education to be found between - Don’t do it until you’re married, and There is no reason to say no because its just a pleasurable act.

Kika says:

06:12pm | 08/03/11

Good comment! I totally agree. I was dumped by a boy after 1 date because I refused to put out. He didn’t tell me that, but he found someone who would put out and went with her. Oh well. And boys are also force fed information from the media or other males that women are just sex objects and that they are all out there to entrap them into more than just that.

I have no doubt that girls are hamstringed by their boyfriends, and boyfriends are hamstringed by their girlfriends. Because there is so much confusion about what is expected in each other could be the very reason we delay marriage and children these days - nobody knows what to do.

Zeta says:

03:39pm | 08/03/11

That story is bullshit. He claims the dildo traveled 7m and reached a maximum height of 2m before striking him in the forehead. Assuming the exotic dancer was on the ground, or at least on all fours, where x is the velocity of the ersatz phallus the pinnacle of the dildo’s trajectory would have been roughly at a distance of 3.5 metres from him, where abouts it would have begun losing velocity at rate equal to its weight over distance. At point blank range, and I have some experience in these matters, I imagine it could have done some damage, but at that distance, you could have caught it in your mouth.

I’m suprised the NT Times isn’t claiming she shot a UFO out her va-jay-jay.

malohi says:

06:03pm | 08/03/11

I don’t understand why it would be losing velocity.
At the peak of the aformentioned phallus’ parabolic arc, it would certainly be 0 velocity in the y plane and only increase velocity at the rate of 1 G toward the ground in the moments prior to impact with the gentlemans cranium . the horizontal or X plane velocity over such a distance would be more or less contant.
Ergo there would of in fact been acceleration of the dildo in the vector tangential to the arc relating to the collision just prior to impact.

That , or my year 11 physics has failed me once again…

Jade says:

05:39pm | 08/03/11

Slim, the major difference between a group of teachers behaving in that manner and a group of football players is the power imbalance that occurs between the teacher and the student. That is why, regardless of whether the teacher is a 21 year old graduate and the student is a 47 year old mature ager, the teacher is still in the wrong. Because the teacher, by virtue of their position, holds the power.

Now you can argue all you like that a football star and a 17 year old is a power imbalance. But it in no way is similar to that of a teacher and a student. In this case, some silly boys accepted an offer that they probably regret accepting from a girl who was seeking fame and fortune. In the case of the teacher and the student, that teacher can potentially destroy his/her chances at university, future employment, or even accessing continuing education at the school.

Erick says:

05:44pm | 08/03/11

If a bunch of female teachers had been handing around a male Year 11 student, everyone would either yawn or congratulate them.

That’s the real double standard.

Kika says:

06:16pm | 08/03/11

Good point, Totally agree. In fact I find it strange that she’s been painted completely in the same brush as every other footy groupie. We idolise footy players - that’s the problem. They are heroes, innocent and completely above everyone else. So it’s ok for old men to be sleeping with and having drugs with teenage girls coz it’s footy regardless of whether she wanted to or was trying to entrap him. A man of his age shouldn’t be in the position to be entrapped by a kid.

Jade says:

07:04pm | 08/03/11

Erick, the boy would be congratulated or scorned if he expressed anything other than pride and delight. That is the double standard and it is despicable.

BK says:

01:05pm | 09/03/11

Her looks give her alot of power too. She is experimenting with what they can get her.

Jade says:

01:39pm | 09/03/11

The teachers are responsible because their actions have a direct impact on the lives of those they hold power over. Footballers do not hold any real sort of power over anyone.

Noone is victimising the girl of legal age here. Least of all the footballers who engaged in a legal act with a by all accounts, very willing and enthusiastic participant.

There is no ethical responsibility implicit on footballers to say no to anyone offering them sex. There is also no ethical responsibility implicit on footballers to engage in a relationship with them or ensure that they are let down gently, any more than on any other male in their 20’s.

Teachers do have a responsibility to students in the school system because they hold a position of power over those students in a hierarchical system which places students at the bottom, and therefore in a position of real vulnerability to abuse and exploitation.

Jugg says:

07:21am | 09/03/11

The law says you can’t have sex with a minor.  Being a minor is no excuse and certainly no defence.  Should a minor be able to kill another minor and receive no punishment, because they were ‘just a minor’ themselves?  We have laws for a reason.

Bev says:

09:16am | 09/03/11

Jugg by your logic we would be putting every teenage boy below the age of consent who had sex with a girl 2 years younger than him on the sexual offenders register.  I guess that would solve the male problem for feminists there would be very few boys who excaped since due to different maturation rates boys are normaly older than their girlfriends.
Just because its the law does not make it right or moral.  The the thugs and apparatchiks of repressive regimes all claimed they were just carrying out the law when hauled before courts after the event . Welcome to the gulag feminist style.

As for you citing murder completely off target murder is by its nature non consentual.

Jugg says:

09:49am | 09/03/11

Bev,

We would be putting everyone who commits a crime on the register.  That’s its purpose.  If you child was reared properly, he would be aware it was a crime and there would be conseuqences for his criminal action.

There wouldn’t be ‘very few boys who escape’.  Only the criminals suffer.

‘Just because its the law does not make it right or moral.’  Yes it does, that’s why it’s the law.  They took advantage of an underage girl, no matter which way you look at it.  Even if she consented she’s too young and naive to realise what she’s doing and be taken advantage of by boys older than her.  It’s very right. It’s very moral.

Yes, we live in a repressive regime in Australia.  Criminal actions draw criminal consequences.  Terrible sign of the decline in this country.  Underage sex should be everywhere…some morals.

Don’t dismiss a concept as completely off target just because you don’t comprehend the concept.  You suggest that because consents involved there should be no consequences for actions.  So, if the underage kids strangle each other (as they do these days) and one dies, the other isn’t responsible for his death because he consented to the strangling?

See, not so off target at all?

Is one of these boys yours?  Would it be acceptable if three boys had sex with your underaged daughter?

You should be less worried about Australia becoming a repressive regime and more concerned about parents who find it acceptable for their children to commit crime and who look to provide excuse for their actions to divert culpability.

A far greater moral concern.

Tim says:

09:53am | 09/03/11

Bev,
the law says you can’t have sex with someone more than 2 years younger than you if you are less than 16.
The case makes perfect sense. 15 year old boys shouldn’t be having sex with 13 year olds.
In fact, I would say that 13 year olds shouldn’t be having sex full stop.

Bev says:

11:38am | 09/03/11

While I agree with Tim that young teenagers shouldnt. Dispite whatever they are told by their parents and others a large number do and there is peer pressure on both girls and boys to do so and you wont stop that unless you separate the sexes and only allow them to mingle under supervision. I hope neither of you have male children because it could be them quite easily.  I hope you are going to tell them what could happen and that it was a life sentence which would blight any future they thought they had and that kids/marriage was not in their future. Good luck to keeping their self esteem in tact.
Please dont reply and tell me your kids would never do anything like that because even the best behaved and brought teenagers do things behind your back.

Jugg says:

02:44pm | 09/03/11

“I hope neither of you have male children because it could be them quite easily.  I hope you are going to tell them what could happen and that it was a life sentence which would blight any future they thought they had and that kids/marriage was not in their future. Good luck to keeping their self esteem in tact.”

Because they had underage sex, they are not going to get married and have kids?  That makes no logical sense.

‘Please dont reply and tell me your kids would never do anything like that because even the best behaved and brought teenagers do things behind your back.’

I do have a son and he made it without criminal charges and I know he has never had sex with a thirteen year old girl, must have been his upbringing.

Bev says:

05:51pm | 09/03/11

Jugg
First I suggest you reread what I said about the implications of being on the Sexual offenders register (the same register they put phedophiles and violent rapists on). Oh and I will add that most potential employer access this list.  Do you seriously think they would employ? Most people equate this list with the most reviled people in our society pedophiles. What women is going to want to marry a man on this list?
Will her parents and relatives accept him?  I think not.  Even if she did marry him the above restrictions apply.  Lets say these boys live till 75 thats 60 years on this list (remember it applies for life).  Think about it and research what this list entails if you like. Then tell me you think this is a fit and just punishment for these boys.

Jugg says:

10:54am | 10/03/11

Bev,

Your paranoia is on overload.  Take a breath and think rationally.

Does the ordinary person have access to the Sex Offenders Register?
Doe the ordinary person care to access the Sex Offenders Register?

The answer to at least one of those questions is no.

The list exists so the proper authorities can check whatever they need to about a sex offender (yes if your child is having sex with a 13 year old girl they are a sex offender - there is no argument on this).

Despite this, if you don’t tell anyone the child is on the list.

No one will know (outside of the authorities).
Most potential employers are too busy with their own lives to even care to access the list.  (Government jobs might be an issue where he would be asked, but I am sure they will check the file anyway and consider the circumstances).

No woman has access to this register?  What makes you think woman even think ‘Oh I better access the Sex Offenders Register to see if my potential partner is on it?’  If he had been raised properly, at the appropriate time he would sit down and explain it to her anyway.  That’s an open relationship.  You would hate to hide it and have her find out later?

Do I think it’s appropriate punishment?  I certainly do.  What if he goes on to sexually assault other children?  There’s nothing wrong with vigilance in our community.

People forgive mistakes of youth and move on.

The sky isn’t falling, they will survive and lead a normal life.

Phil says:

01:16pm | 09/03/11

You cant seriously expect her to not take responsibility on this whole situation! You are quite foolish if you think this is the case.

The last paragraph has a line in it, “Next year, another girl will be introduced to players, who’ll gladly use her and toss her away”

What is interesting is that even after all this media showing that its not a great idea that girls will still want to be involved with these meat heads as they cant see what will go wrong.
Thats the worst part.

If she realises the long term consequences at 17 or not she was still a very willing participant in the whole situation at the time, there is little more that you can do about that.
Do we really need people to lecture people <20 about every decision they make?
Everyone should take more responsibility and accountability for themselves.

Jugg says:

05:24pm | 09/03/11

Who said no in relation to this story?  Seems like one little girl did a lot of saying ‘yes’.

Cry in my Gin says:

05:26pm | 09/03/11

They would have listened if she had said it. Or were they meant to mind read and know that the 19 year old was a lying manipulative 16 year old. As for Nixon, the guy is a tool. Doesn’t stop her being a stunning example of a $!ut.

Wilma J Craig says:

06:29pm | 09/03/11

Fair enough, Lucy, but this particular woman has never claimed to have said “No” to any of them. Maybe she & all those other “Camp Followers” should also learn to do so too. If they can’t then they should not offer themselves.
Any person, male or female, who has reached the legal Age of Consent knows perfectly well what is expected if they accept an invitation to go to someone’s bedroom and particularly lif it is late at night.