Equitist wrote on Dec 27
th, 2010 at 10:31am:
What I was trying to get at was: -
If it wasn't this girl, it would have doubtless been another one.
Why!?
Because these footballers obviously have a propensity to engage in the exploitation of young vulnerable 'women'!
I do not 'like' the girl. I do not 'trust' the girl. I find it difficult to feel empathy for the girl. But the fact remains that she is a child. A troubled child.
As for the professional adult footballers, it is about time that they took responsiblity for their own thoughts and actions - and stopped associating with minors!
The longer they go on demonising, vilifying and scapegoating this particular child, the worse this whole saga will become for them, their team, their code and football in general...
And, if it weren't the AFL players the girl would have gone after some other adult.
But then that'd be all right wouldn't it.
It wouldn'ty have made the headlines as the girl would have just had her one night stand and moved onto the next guy.
So you think that 'these AFL" footballers would "obviously" have a propensity to engage in the exploitation of young vulnerable 'women'.
Really? It's that obvious is it?
Not a bit prejudgemental are we?
Not being swayed by generalisations and stereotype images from the feminists are we?
And 'these' women have no say in having sex with the players now do they?
Guess 'these' women aren't willing participants are they?
Guess 'these' women are never trophy hunters are they?
guess 'these' women are the only people who have thoughts and feelings aren't they?
Guess 'these' women are going to adult venues to meet Mr Right aren't they?
Guess these women all have altruistic values and motives, so we should see them all in the philanthropy stakes now won't we?
Guess these women never get drunk and if by some rare occassion that they did then that's excusable or you'd be more comforatble laying that blame onto a man as well wouldn't you?