Four Corners

[Rodo]

I hope that the things talked about on last nights show don't prejudice the outcome of Stewarts case.  I'm sure there will be many more people thinking now (if they didn't before) that he is guilty.

It seems like this sort of activity still goes on.  I wonder if there will be an investigation into the video that Charmayne Pavati supposedly received about the incident with the group of footy players in Cronulla.  Probably not.

 

[Canteen Worker]

Fluffy, CW, mws, totally up to you whether you hold onto your thoughts.  Totally up to you whether you consider there is any possibility those thoughts may not be true.

There are direct consequences arising from the belief systems we hold.  .....

Some people may wish these abuse-of-women-by-players situations would continue to be swept under the carpet, but the reality of the world now is that they aren't. Manly either adapts to the new world or faces the consequences, including lower crowds.  Bleating on sites like this one might be nice but won't change that reality.

You are misunderstanding my views on the matter. I do not condone any of this behaviour and when I played football at a particular level, I had to make personal decisions about what was right and wrong for me. Several times on trips I chosewalk away from team mates involved in actions I could not condone. When training was cancelled due to weather, team bonding was sometimes porn viewing (which demeaned women as mere sex objects - though that opens a huge debate that also results to footy culture) that I did not personally feel comfortable with. Our society has very mixed messages on that - I won't start that debate!!!

I am also a father of three daughters who have to put up with League players buying them drinks and 'purveying' their charms upon them. Some are reported as nice and sincere and others are totally offensive, including a Manly player or two. I hope that my family and personal values have impacted on my girls.

My previous comments indicated my belief that Watmough's behaviour, as reported, was offensive. However, I did suggest that the polarised and sensationalised reporting (in the Telegraph at the time) didn't necessarily tell the whole story - that is all. If this in any way minimised the offence of lack of respect to women, I have been very remiss. I do not wish to sweep anything under the carpet or lessen what is a huge problem that clubs have to deal with.

I agree with you that Manly must do all they can to eradicate this sort of thinking.

 

[Chip and Chase]

What a lousy show by 4 Corners. Instead of bringing something interesting to the table with this topic, like professional experts in this field, rather than Charmayne Pavati who carries little credibility in my eyes....

It's funny you should say that. I took it the completely other way. I thought the point they were trying to make is that there are "groupies" out there who specifically target RL players. It seemed to me that this Charmayne is a self confessed (and proudly ?) groupie who seemed to me to be the "aggressor" and quite comfortable with that role. She certainly didn't come a cross as an insecure, vulnerable woman who is taken advantage of. I took it as them trying to point out that this is the sort of potential minefield the players are faced with when they go out in public. If there are some women who are literally throwing themselves at the players then it must be very hard for the young "unworldy" men of the NRL to keep perspective of what society deems is acceptable treatment of women. I can see (but not condone) how the players could get a warped sense of how the normal world works. Do you think that some of these guys would be in this position if they had normal jobs and weren't "famous" NRL players. Fair or not, they need to be educated that they don't lead normal lives and therefore need to operate under a different set of values to the general public. Not any easy proposition I agree, but something that the clubs and the NRL need to do more work on.  

 

[Rex]

There isn't a whole lot I take seriously. Ive owned this site for long enough to grow pretty thick skin and realise 90% or more of what people say is tongue in cheek

Back to topic.  Where's your tongue?

 

[Fluffy]

the way this thread reads a lot of people seem to thing rugby league players are the only ones who get involved in group sex acts.

I would say they make up less than 1% in australia

 

[Rex]

Yeah, C&C I saw the show on different levels too, which I'm not used to seeing on the commercial channels.  Whilst their approach of leading with Manly pushed my buttons, on settling into the show it seemed they were more focused on exploring the various issues than presenting a one-dimensional opinion-piece. Their piece on the junior players might be seen as an insight into the rugby league community, but also into a cross-section of young men's beliefs/perspectives in society generally.

Simply damning players is as effective as damning the tide for coming in.

 

[Rex]

the way this thread reads a lot of people seem to thing rugby league players are the only ones who get involved in group sex acts.

I would say they make up less than 1% in australia

You sound well researched Fluffy.

 

[Rex]

I heard Gallop on  the ABC this morning.  Said nothing about how the game relies on booze for a major part of their funding and he would work towards minimizing that.  Nothing about the self outed Joey Johns drug taking, the self outed Mathew Johns sex stupidity and how they are promoted by the League, and he would do something about that.  Nothing about how women are promoted at matches in their scanties kicking up the legs and how he would do something about it.  Sure sexist attitudes are a societal problem and the issues of sexism et al should be dealt with at home, but the League is culpable in its promotion of sexist behaviour and the promotion of guys who stupidly indulge in anti social behaviour, ala the Johns 'boys'.  Keep nibbling at the edges Gallopfool.    

Hey DSM we're aligned here.  Gallop selected Stewie and Johns as the faces of league.  Has been amazingly silent on his selection of Johns.  Hasn't said boo.  After non-stop rants about Stewie.  And his backup face of league - Inglis! lol Charmaine knows him well. Wonder why then?

And Gallop was warned to not attach the NRL's image to any individual players, and ignored that advice... 3 from 3.  Well done Gallop.

 

[Rex]

I agree with you that Manly must do all they can to eradicate this sort of thinking.

Got all you said CW except this last one.  I don't think that Manly must do all they can to eradicate this sort of thinking. They can alternatively learn to live with reduced sponsors and crowds.

 

[Rex]

By the way does anyone really think that Roy Masters had no knowledge of this sort of stuff going on at a club where he was coaching, and that he didn't participate in condoning it by not doing anything about it ? He seemed pretty knowledgeable on the so called \"bonding benefits\" of group sex among players for someone who had never allowed it to happen on his watch. As usual his story smelt funny.

We all know that Masters is agenda-driven in his professed hatred of Manly.  He is a slick conceptualiser and articulator.  His body language, especially around his eyes, also gives him away.  And suggested he was indeed hiding some issues.  All the same, his description of the group-sex culture and practices did ring true.

 

[Rex]

Sorry Rex - I didn't think the sponsor's daughter looked very honest, (my opinion only) it was another cue for her to show her modelling skills (which she did) and gather more media attention... Does that mean Choc didn't insult her? No, but maybe not to the degree she is claiming...I read earlier that Grant Mayer said the incident was to do between Watmough and the sponsor and that is why he apologised to him. And the club apologised to the daughter and the family as a sign of good faith and offered them tickets to a game (family tennis box) which was gratefully accepted.

The reason the sponsor objected was to protect his daughter.  If Choc didn't see that then it's no surprise he didn't address the underlying issue by apologising to the daughter rather than the father.  No surprise it remained (and remains) unresolved after the misdirected apology either.

I'm not in the mind of the model, and nor are you.  Sure she gets welcome exposure if she handles herself well, and the exposure could also backfire on her if she doesn't.  And Choc failing to apologise to her made her story all the more credible.  People see that failure as a reflection on Choc, undermining his credibility.  Does the club not think through these issues and help the poor guy?

 

[Rex]

I hope that the things talked about on last nights show don't prejudice the outcome of Stewarts case.  I'm sure there will be many more people thinking now (if they didn't before) that he is guilty.

Yes.  How does Stewie get a fair trial when the jurers are selected from the very community which has been saturated with prejudicial opinion? And rumour stated as fact.  The media, NRL, Australia Post, etc have a lot to answer for. The presenters of that Four Corners program might also reflect on how they might have better presented their story in a non-prejudicial way.

 

[Dan]

[quote author=Dan link=topic=180349.msg222381#msg222381 date=1242090189]
There isn't a whole lot I take seriously. Ive owned this site for long enough to grow pretty thick skin and realise 90% or more of what people say is tongue in cheek

Back to topic.  Where's your tongue?
[/quote]

depends on the moment, could be many different places. Most often you will find it touched to batteries

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

So how much of a run did the Sharks girl get ?

I heard a story about her from someone who worked with her at the time, and that was backed up today by another guy she worked with phoning into the radio to give more of an insight into her

 

[Rex]

So how much of a run did the Sharks girl get ?

I heard a story about her from someone who worked with her at the time, and that was backed up today by another guy she worked with phoning into the radio to give more of an insight into her

What's your point Kiwi?  That her opinion doesn't count? That she couldn't have been damaged by the experience? That discrediting her makes the issue of predatory footy group-sex cultures (a la Sharks and Bulldogs) go away?  Wonder why victims of rape, assault and abuse are reluctant to expose their truth when we have safe supportive environments like footy forums then?

 

[Ian Martin tragic]

On the group sex question (many men one woman, or many men watching one or more partnered up women), it's where the 'male bonding' talk assumes its most explicit homo-erotic aspect. It's like part of the appeal of hardcore hetero porno (ie. why is a cum-shot the compulsory 'climax' to the action?).

Years ago I ran into an old teammate who had made grade at the bears. I hoped he might tell me about what it's like playing at such a high level, but all he wanted to tell me was about the group sex scenes he was now part of on a regular basis. It seemed weird then (and now) but for him it was obviously the epitome of being a graded player.

We're talking about late teenage-early 20s men in a largely homo-social environment (a big part of its synthetic nature as mentioned in other posts), hyped up on their own and others' tesosterone from all that power training, desperate to 'prove themselves' as real men on and off the field.

As another poster pointed out, this is part of bigger picture: alcohol sponsorship, player stardom and the special treatment that goes with it incl. groupies and leniency from club and police (in the past at least), cheergirl squads (either can em or bring back the 9 yr olds imho), etc. etc.

No argument from me this is an unacceptable culture to be condoning; it has 'lord of the flies' written all over it and it's easy to see how it leads to sexual assault and humiliation with non-consensual (or withdrawn consent not acknowledged) participants/victims all too often. of course there are groupies and girls happy to be in that scene as well, that doesn't make it excusable to treat all women as if they would or should be like that.

Culture is a public, collective issue as much as one of personal responsibility. I think the poster who mentioned the absence of Menzies is probably right on the money here. the player groups need the older heads to be moral guides to some degree also (people whose behaviour tells them that showing you can get a hard on is not the only way to prove you are manly). clubs, the league etc also have to take a more consistent and publicly defensible position. Then they can look back at the media and society and say we're doing something, what about the rest of you?

 

[Rex]

Footy Show apology 'did more harm'
Christine Kellett
May 12, 2009 - 2:25PM

A young woman left suicidal after group sex with members of an NRL football team was "dehumanised" for a second time when Channel Nine presenter Matthew Johns failed to apologise to her directly on The Footy Show last week.

In a Four Corners program that aired on ABC television last night, the woman, known only as Clare, said she had sex with Johns and another player from Johns' former club Cronulla when the team toured New Zealand in 2002.

Clare, who was 19, said up to 10 other players and staff were in the room at the time, fondling her and masturbating against her wishes.

In a preemptive strike last Thursday night, Johns appeared on his popular rugby league panel show to apologise for the "embarrassment" caused by the incident, stressing the matter had been investigated by police and no charges had been laid.

But Brisbane Rape and Incest Survivors Support Centre counsellor Karin Cheyne said the apology, in which Johns made mention only of the hurt he had caused his wife and family, showed player acceptance of their own bad behaviour was a long way from improving.

"The most disgusting thing was the pat on the shoulder he got from the guy sitting next to him (co-host Paul Vautin) on the panel," Ms Cheyne said.

"I think she (Clare) would have seen that and felt dehumanised all over again. It also shows that the attitude in football is `Don't worry mate, you didn't do anything wrong.'

"Well, if there isn't something wrong with 12 men being in a room watching a 19-year-old girl (having sex) and masturbating themselves, I don't know what is."

Ms Cheyne said the performance by Johns, now an assistant coach at the Melbourne Storm, discredited claims by NRL boss David Gallop this morning that inroads had been made to change player attitudes towards women since an alleged gang rape scandal involving the Canterbury Bulldogs at Coffs Harbour in 2004.

"The culture of football - this toxic mix of alcohol, sex and sport - has to change...and while education is part of it, there has to be punishment involved," she said.

"If they (clubs) are going to create the gladiator on the field, they have to prepare them for when they get off it. These men have got to be taught to use their brains, not just their dicks."

Ms Cheyne said the public view that "football groupies" or women who chose to "assert their sexuality" had to accept some blame in sexual abuse was just as damaging.

"That is a really common response towards victims of rape and sexual abuse victims and just another thing they have to live with."

She said the fact that charges were not laid did not mean the players had acted legally or appropriately.

"The mental pressure (Clare) felt to do this is about being demeaned, being put down and made to feel like what she wanted didn't matter; that she was not a person with valid feelings and rights.

"The fact that she has considered suicide is not surprising. Lots of women go through that, they self harm, they have difficulty forming relationships."

Asked if Clare would feel a sense of justice following the airing of last night's program, Ms Cheyne said it was unlikely.

"I think this morning she'd probably be re-experiencing what happened to her and is probably in shock.

"The horrible part is that there has been no validation for her."

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/qld-news/footy-show-apology-did-more-harm-20090512-b18l.html

 

[Ian Martin tragic]

"12 men being in a room watching a 19-year-old girl (having sex) and masturbating themselves,"

I rest my case.

 

[Kiwi Eagle]

[quote author=Kiwi Eagle link=topic=180349.msg222427#msg222427 date=1242106321]
So how much of a run did the Sharks girl get ?

I heard a story about her from someone who worked with her at the time, and that was backed up today by another guy she worked with phoning into the radio to give more of an insight into her

What's your point Kiwi?  That her opinion doesn't count? That she couldn't have been damaged by the experience? That discrediting her makes the issue of predatory footy group-sex cultures (a la Sharks and Bulldogs) go away?  Wonder why victims of rape, assault and abuse are reluctant to expose their truth when we have safe supportive environments like footy forums then?
[/quote]

The point is quite simple, she is parading herself as an innocent young naive girl, and she was far from it, just have to ask many of the truckies that rolled through the hotel while she worked there.
To counter your point, why does Matt Johns opinion that it was all consensual not count ?
We all make wrong decisions, everyone on here has. Have I been damaged by some experiences ? Yep. Did I personally make a choice to put myself in that situation, Yes again

I have been around plenty of footy sides, and have yet to encounter a "group sex culture". Does 3-4 incidents over a 7-8 year period mean Footy has a group sex culture ?

 

[niccipops]

I watched the show last night. At first I thought it was going to continue on as a Manly bashing session, but they did focus on a few other clubs as well and in particular gave lots of attention to the Cronulla/Johns incident.
It totally peed me off that they did not mention the recent incident involving the Broncos players. If they talk about something that happened in 2002, then hello, what about 2008.
There are definitely some protected species in this game.
As for Stewie's court case his lawyers could actually use the show as evidence of trying to sway public opinion.