19 May 2009

We breed all sorts in this city

| shutterbug
Join the conversation
204

This evening, two stories hit the front page involving women from Canberra. Their contrasting stories prove what a diverse little city we have here (and perhaps the growing need for selective breeding).

First, everyone’s favourite trashy spray tan “artist” and self proclaimed addictive drug to footballers Charmyne Palavi has written a piece for News Ltd about the perils of being so irresistible to footy players.

She has a positive spin on sleeping with footy players, arguing that it’s about a woman’s freedom.

    “[I can] have sex whenever, with whomever, I choose. I am old enough and wise enough to know these encounters are nothing more than what they were at the time – mostly consensual, one-on-one sex, on my terms.”

Mostly consensual? Gosh, a class act and expert on woman’s rights to be sure.

Luckily, there came another story, a sobering ying to that trashy yang. A former Canberra resident named Natalia Dearnley had her wedding plans disturbed by the filming of a new Tom Hanks movie. He was apparently only to happy to help her get to through the commotion to her classy ceremony.

So from trashy bed hoppers to well educated romantics, see it all in your nation’s capital.

See it in Canberra!

Join the conversation

204
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

AngryHenry said :

Jim Jones said :

wow – shutterbug really turned out to be a complete and utter d1ck.

Sure did!

That really went kind of off the rails though didn’t it?

I think being online that late at night seems to be like feeding a mogwai after midnight.

LOL!

showing your age, angryhenry. Thanks for the reminder re gremlins, though. Forgot all about that movie.

Jim Jones said :

wow – shutterbug really turned out to be a complete and utter d1ck.

Sure did!

That really went kind of off the rails though didn’t it?

I think being online that late at night seems to be like feeding a mogwai after midnight.

Jim Jones said :

wow – shutterbug really turned out to be a complete and utter d1ck.

+1

wow – shutterbug really turned out to be a complete and utter d1ck.

shutterbug said :

Granny said :

Granny said :

Run along, see if your suffocating hubby wants any.

Fortunately most of the men on this site are fantastic, and I appreciate them more than ever right now.

Yes, I’m sure you’ll do a fine job of showing them your appreciation too.

Well, both those statements are unisex. Men and women can be in a suffocating marriage and man and woman can show their appreciation to the opposite sex. So I do not accept either is sexual harassment, certainly not in a reasonable interpretation of them.

However, I will accept that my words have caused you some distress and offence. I am sorry.

I’m sure my wife would like to suffocate me sometimes

Pommy bastard7:47 am 20 May 09

It would be nice if we could have an adult discussion here on matters involving sex without you turning it into a forum about your own emotional needs Granny.

Let’s start over. Hi, I’m Granny!

: )

Ms Broderick has the url and presumably became a Commissioner through being neither naive or stupid ….

However, I forgive you, shutterbug, and I thank you for your apology. Consider it forgotten.

Granny said :

Granny said :

Run along, see if your suffocating hubby wants any.

Fortunately most of the men on this site are fantastic, and I appreciate them more than ever right now.

Yes, I’m sure you’ll do a fine job of showing them your appreciation too.

Well, both those statements are unisex. Men and women can be in a suffocating marriage and man and woman can show their appreciation to the opposite sex. So I do not accept either is sexual harassment, certainly not in a reasonable interpretation of them.

However, I will accept that my words have caused you some distress and offence. I am sorry.

Granny said :

Run along, see if your suffocating hubby wants any.

Fortunately most of the men on this site are fantastic, and I appreciate them more than ever right now.

Yes, I’m sure you’ll do a fine job of showing them your appreciation too.

Granny said :

shutterbug said :

… I did not fully appreciate the someone so strong willed could be so sensitive.

Maybe that’s because you didn’t see me put my head in my hands and cry while Nick Cave sung People Ain’t No Good. I fight because I have to, not because I want to. And I’m so sick of fighting the whole world … for everything.

I note you continue to be ambiguous about what comments constitute harassment and would therefore be of interest to HROC.
Perhaps because they’re aren’t any. If they’re are, put it on the table now.

shutterbug said :

… I did not fully appreciate the someone so strong willed could be so sensitive.

Maybe that’s because you didn’t see me put my head in my hands and cry while Nick Cave sung People Ain’t No Good. I fight because I have to, not because I want to. And I’m so sick of fighting the whole world … for everything.

Granny said :

You don’t have to be in my presence, genius. The operative word is ‘or’. You did make at least two statements of a sexual nature *to* my person in writing.

What were these to comments?

You think you can treat women like that? You think you can talk to women like that? Think again. Women deserve better. We deserve some damned respect. I’m so sick of this $hit.

You don’t have to be in my presence, genius. The operative word is ‘or’. You did make at least two statements of a sexual nature *to* my person in writing.

Granny said :

Bring it.

Well, I do not apologise for my comments. But I do apologise for any offence caused, I did not fully appreciate the someone so strong willed could be so sensitive.

Clown Killer12:18 am 20 May 09

You’re still a toad though.

Granny said :

Oh, really? I was under the impression that sexual harrassment was breaking the law.

DISCRIMINATION ACT 1991 – SECT 58

PART V—SEXUAL HARASSMENT Meaning of sexual harassment
58. (1) For the purposes of this Part, a person subjects another person to sexual harassment if the person makes an unwelcome sexual advance, or an unwelcome request for sexual favours, to the other person or engages in other unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature in circumstances in which the other person reasonably feels offended, humiliated or intimidated.

(2) A reference in subsection (1) to conduct of a sexual nature shall be read as including a reference to the making of a statement of a sexual nature to, or in the presence of, a person, whether the statement is made orally or in writing.

I am not in your presence. This is the internet.

Granny said :

Oh, really? I was under the impression that sexual harrassment was breaking the law.

hahaha, calling someone a toad isn’t sexual harassment. The remark is not based on gender.

Besides, AHRC deals with discrimination and harassment in a formal sense, such as employment and education rather than just a rude comment on a forum. But if you want to waste time with a conciliation process (which will not result in an apology that impinges on my free speech) and therefore an action in the Federal Magistrates Court in which case I will bleed you dry with legal costs, go ahead. Your car ought to pay for the first week of fees.

Oh, really? I was under the impression that sexual harrassment was breaking the law.

Granny said :

shutterbug said :

Wow, the opinionated zealot has become a spineless toad all of a sudden.

This toad has just emailed the human rights commission.

Hahaha, go for it. Just what is the AHRC going to do?
Remember, you profess to support free will, hence I have the freedom to extend an opinion, in fact, freedom of expression is a fundamental human right.

Granny said :

You find quotes from The Goodies offensive? Why am I not surprised? The ‘Gender Education’ episode quotes were not directed at you but at the attitudes expressed by shutterbug.

And your comments are most certainly sexually harrassing and unwelcome.

Goodness. Everyone should know that these were Goodie quotes and I should have realised that although you quoted a comment of mine infront of your first goodie Goodie and immediately after my second comment you were not actually directing both to me.

monomania said :

Why, yes, monomania!
“Now that we all know about the rude bits, aren’t they rude? And as we get older, they get ruder and ruder.”

I’m glad that

Granny said :

Well, let’s face it – rude bits are obscene, dirty, squalid, scabrous, salacious, lewd, randy, rude, outrageous, lubricious … and a bit off!

wasn’t intended for me.

Shutterbug’s might be sexual harrassment but mine certainly are only argument. I have no idea who you are directing your comments to and I’m not too sure you do.

shutterbug said :

Wow, the opinionated zealot has become a spineless toad all of a sudden.

This toad has just emailed the human rights commission.

AngryHenry said :

I think the men involved have got their tail between their legs at the moment and they’re trying to lay low, whereas she is seizing the opportunity to raise her profile and do a bit of promotion before some kind of confessions-type book comes out.

Just you wait and see.

Yes

My Life As A Slut

Clown Killer11:24 pm 19 May 09

I think the bragging may have been an initial attempt to process the incident emotionally. There is little doubt that it has taken a huge toll on her life.

It’s an attempt to regain some sort of control over what happened. It it no way distracts from the distress caused by the incident. I suspect that if you still believe that a full-on group sex session really boils down to consent you need to be doin’ your google searches a little differently.

Granny said :

You find quotes from The Goodies offensive? Why am I not surprised? The ‘Gender Education’ episode quotes were not directed at you but at the attitudes expressed by shutterbug.

And your comments are most certainly sexually harrassing and unwelcome.

Wow, the opinionated zealot has become a spineless toad all of a sudden.

shutterbug said :

Yes, I’m sure you’ll do a fine job of showing them your appreciation too.

You’ll be hearing from me.

You find quotes from The Goodies offensive? Why am I not surprised? The ‘Gender Education’ episode quotes were not directed at you but at the attitudes expressed by shutterbug.

And your comments are most certainly sexually harrassing and unwelcome.

Granny said :

shutterbug said :

Granny said :

I’m talking about Charmyne, genius.

Run to bed granny, you’re up too late. You were talking about Claire.
When was Charmyne sodomised by a group of footy players?
Run along, see if your suffocating hubby wants any.

When Charmyne said the sex was ‘mostly consensual’ that obviously means that there has been at least one time where the sex was not consensual i.e. rape or some form of sexual assault occurred. She describes one such episode at length in the interview, where she was asleep and semi-conscious in her hotel room when she awoke to find a player raping her. So, if you had bothered to inform yourself, you would know this instead of tastelessly and insensitively chastising her because she was raped.

Post #165, I believe, referring to Charmyne which was who I was discussing.

Your comment is contemptible. Fortunately most of the men on this site are fantastic, and I appreciate them more than ever right now.

Yes, I’m sure you’ll do a fine job of showing them your appreciation too.

Point is you suddenly started to talk about Charmyne. And don’t you see that she is defending her sexual encounters with that comment, even those that weren’t consensual. Her comment is also contradictory, as she says “mostly consensual” and “on-my-terms” in the one sentence. How can she claim to be old enough to know what she is doing is she doesn’t seem to realise that on my terms and mostly consensual don’t go together.

Granny said :

Let me be clear. Insults based on my sex are offensive and intimidating to me and I wish this unwelcome conduct to cease now.

I have made no insults based on your sex, simply on your statements. It is not sexual harassment to comment on hypocrisy. You were the one to comment with no evidence that this is the way I thought.

Granny said :

Why, yes, monomania!
“Now that we all know about the rude bits, aren’t they rude? And as we get older, they get ruder and ruder.”

Granny said :

Well, let’s face it – rude bits are obscene, dirty, squalid, scabrous, salacious, lewd, randy, rude, outrageous, lubricious … and a bit off!

shutterbug said :

Granny said :

I’m talking about Charmyne, genius.

Run to bed granny, you’re up too late. You were talking about Claire.
When was Charmyne sodomised by a group of footy players?
Run along, see if your suffocating hubby wants any.

When Charmyne said the sex was ‘mostly consensual’ that obviously means that there has been at least one time where the sex was not consensual i.e. rape or some form of sexual assault occurred. She describes one such episode at length in the interview, where she was asleep and semi-conscious in her hotel room when she awoke to find a player raping her. So, if you had bothered to inform yourself, you would know this instead of tastelessly and insensitively chastising her because she was raped.

Post #165, I believe, referring to Charmyne which was who I was discussing.

Your comment is contemptible. Fortunately most of the men on this site are fantastic, and I appreciate them more than ever right now.

nota said :

whatsinaname said :

But it’s impossible to rape Charmyne coz she’s a slut, right?
Just like it’s impossible to rape a prostitute.
Or, as that Judge infamously opined, the woman wearing the tight red dress had ‘invited’ undue attention onto, and into, her person.

Legal precedent is fairly clear that regardless of professional or circumstance, no means no. But if the woman doesn’t say no… well, stuff her.

whatsinaname said :

I think the problem is that people like Charmyne like to brag about it. This Daily Telegraph article is proof of that.

I’ve got no problem with her forthrightness to tell, or with the untold masses who like to hear.

What does genuinely shock me is the resultant total villification of her, for the apparent social crime of revealing that she as an adult pursues and enjoys an ‘active’ lifestyle. I thought the main issue of concern is that she had been plugged while unconcious, in other words another example of non-consensual rugby sex by a decidedly non-gentlemanly assailant, which to me is rape.

But it’s impossible to rape Charmyne coz she’s a slut, right?
Just like it’s impossible to rape a prostitute.
Or, as that Judge infamously opined, the woman wearing the tight red dress had ‘invited’ undue attention onto, and into, her person.

Honestly the morals of the self-appointed moralist brigade belong back in the stifling 1950s, when repression of women blighted the day.

“Unfortunately, we live in a society where women will always be shut down for the very characteristics men are revered for – being strong, opinionated, fearless and open about their sexuality.” Sadly yes, Ms Palarvi.

Granny said :

I’m talking about Charmyne, genius.

Run to bed granny, you’re up too late. You were talking about Claire.
When was Charmyne sodomised by a group of footy players?
Run along, see if your suffocating hubby wants any.

I’m talking about Charmyne, genius.

Granny said :

This is because she was raped once, shutterbug, which you’d know if you’d seen the interview. Your tastelessness is frankly appalling.

Um, when. She had consensual sex with Mathew Johns. If more people came in and got undressed, then why didn’t she say no.

You call me tasteless because I’m pointing out the facts. That she didn’t say no and you expect men to be mind readers. Frankly, I think your outlook on life is appalling and your double standards sicken me.

This is because she was raped once, shutterbug, which you’d know if you’d seen the interview. Your tastelessness is frankly appalling.

Let me be clear. Insults based on my sex are offensive and intimidating to me and I wish this unwelcome conduct to cease now.

Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination and involves unwelcome sexual
advances, requests for sexual favours or unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature
that offends, humiliates or intimidates. It has nothing to do with mutual attraction or
friendship.
Sexual harassment may include the following:
???? Suggestive behaviour
???? Staring and/or leering
???? Sexual jokes
???? Sexual propositions or asking for sexual favours
???? Unwanted invitations for dates
???? Sexual or physical contact such as touching,
slapping or kissing
???? Insults or taunts based on a person’s sex
???? Sexually offensive gestures
???? Sexually explicit materials or emails
???? Intrusive questions about one’s private life or body.
Just one of these actions may be enough to constitute sexual harassment.

Granny said :

Somehow I have the feeling that if you were being sodomised by half a dozen footballers while more were climbing through the window to have a go, you might feel just a little intimidated. Perhaps you would even be in shock, like the girl said. Because after all, you were only expecting to have a threesome, and your anus might be getting pretty sore after the third or fourth go.

Well come on, two guys in the room. When more came in and got undressed, what did she think they were planning, to have a cup of tea and watch? That was the time to say “enough, stop”.

“I am old enough and wise enough to know these encounters are nothing more than what they were at the time – mostly consensual, one-on-one sex, on my terms.”

I’m surprised no one has highlighter the curious quote from Charmyne’s article where she says “mostly consensual”.

Granny said :

And I consider that statement to be sexual harrassment.

Why. You have been flat out defending Charmyne’s behaviour. So why is it harrassment to suggest you might envy her kind of freedom. I was not suggesting that you want to chase and have sex with numerous footballers that you hardly know and then blab about it. Yes Granny, you both have been selectively quoted.

Charmyne:

Granny said :

Unfortunately, we live in a society where women will always be shut down for the very characteristics men are revered for – being strong, opinionated, fearless and open about their sexuality.
I’m no angel, but I’ve seen this game play out from both sides: First as the partner of a pro footballer for nine years, then as a single woman who can have sex whenever, with whomever, I choose.

Granny:

Granny said :

I love men. A lot. And not just sexually. I just like them. I like being with them. I like hanging out with them. I like watching their faces when they talk. That I haven’t slept with them is partly trying to honour a commitment I made to somebody, partly fate, and partly that I haven’t had the opportunity yet. I actually find marriage suffocating. Sometimes I long to be free. I’m sorry that I’m made that way. I’m just not good at it. I don’t think I was meant to be married. Also marriage ruined one of the best relationships I ever had. I don’t see anything wrong with a woman seeking sensual pleasure in the arms of a stranger.Frankly, I’d rather hang out with Charmyne than you any day.

Somehow I have the feeling that if you were being sodomised by half a dozen footballers while more were climbing through the window to have a go, you might feel just a little intimidated. Perhaps you would even be in shock, like the girl said. Because after all, you were only expecting to have a threesome, and your anus might be getting pretty sore after the third or fourth go.

sepi said :

The police officer, not the footballers involved have denied her story.
The only grey area is ‘consent’. The event happened as she stated – noone denies that.

She was too frozen up to actually say no out loud, and thus apparently the charges would not stick. Although the NZ police took the event seriously enough to fly 5 police over to Australia to interview 20 involved persons.

Oh what the hell. Too frozen to say no? Did they have a gun, a knife, no. The footy players are animals but gosh knows the “no means no” rule is useless if the woman is mute.

And if she were really interested in speaking up to stop this, she would reveal her identity and be a leader against this sort of terrible stuff, like that woman who was raped in Sydney by a footy player.

This anonymous mud slinging years after the fact is nothing but vindictiveness by a woman who realised she did something dumb.

I have to wonder if the blokes climbing in the window even bothered to ask her consent. They sure as hell didn’t bother to knock.

That should say

The police officer, NOR the footballers involved have denied her story.
The only grey area is ‘consent’. The event happened as she stated – noone denies that.

The police officer, not the footballers involved have denied her story.
The only grey area is ‘consent’. The event happened as she stated – noone denies that.

She was too frozen up to actually say no out loud, and thus apparently the charges would not stick. Although the NZ police took the event seriously enough to fly 5 police over to Australia to interview 20 involved persons.

Her ex-boss described her as level headed. It is the owner of the place that the Daily Telegraph dug up to say bad things about her. He is angry they won’t get anymore footballers staying. How can he say she is despicable and the footballers are great blokes, and be talking about a single event?

The ex-workmate who said she bragged. I think this workmate is the attention seeking one. Why say this now? As mentioned above, I think talking about this sex event to others was a way for this young girl to try to sort out in her own mind if something halfway normal had occurred, or if it was as horrendous as she felt it was. And a way to convince herself it wasn’t that bad.

But if you really want to believe in good old Matty Johns and the rest of them, and find pre-planned group masturbation + scared teenager acceptable, it won’t really matter what I say.

sepi said :

Ah – so you’re only calling her an attention-seeking, sex mad, bragging serial liar?

No problem.

I prefer not to blame the victim.

Ah, sepi the lefty. The victim is always blameless.

Ever heard of contributory negligence? Means that if someone runs onto the road and gets run down by a speeding motorist, sure, the speeding driver is responsible but some blame is apportioned to the fool who ran out. Doesn’t mean I don’t feel sorry for the victim, but why should victims automatically be beyond blame.

My impression is what happened to Claire was wrong, but she is deliberately been ambiguous about the issues of consent. She has said she “didn’t want group sex” but she is less clear on if she actually told them she didn’t. Couple with her alleged bragging after the incident, it seems to me that at the time her consent wasn’t clear and only subsequently did she consider it wrong.

Nobody would develop post-traumatic stress by choice. It is a terrible, terrible thing.

whatsinaname10:02 pm 19 May 09

Whoops, double post…sorry. 🙂

whatsinaname10:01 pm 19 May 09

I didn’t call her that – I was merely poitning out that the people in the various articles over the past week or so called her that. Is it right to simply dismiss those sorts of allegations? If so, why should her allegations be believed to be gospel?

whatsinaname10:01 pm 19 May 09

I didn’t call her that – I was merely poitning out that the people in the various articles over the past week or so called her that. Is it right to simply dismiss those sorts of allegations? I so, why should her allegations be believed to be gospel?

Ah – so you’re only calling her an attention-seeking, sex mad, bragging serial liar?

No problem.

I prefer not to blame the victim.

whatsinaname9:53 pm 19 May 09

By the way, the second part of my post at #149 wasn’t necessarily aimed at “Clare” so please don’t think it was. It was a generalisation about many of the girls that do follow this sort of lifestyle. Reading back, I can see how the second part could be misconstrued especially after the first part of my post.

See when you start off by hating everyone else for all the evil sex, gay sex, prostitution, and sexual diseases that they are sharing around, then you start to miss the point where things are not normal anymore.

For mine, that point is right in between Charmyne and Clare.

Charmyne is getting a bit with some footballers, cos that gives her a thrill of some kind. Tacky, but it’s her life. Still normal sex really.

Clare was taken advantage of by a dozen older men, who felt entitled to do what they liked with her, cos they were footballers, and they were away from home. Perverse.

whatsinaname9:47 pm 19 May 09

BerraBoy68 said :

shutterbug said :

Well hang on, if sleeping around is okay, why does it have to be kept under wraps?

Seems society is very good at taking the highroad yet pushing morally controversial stuff behind closed doors. Prostitution, pornography, abortion, homosexuality. Heck, it’s all been pushed behind closed doors even by a community that claims none of it is wrong.

Just a guess but I’d suggest it’s best kept quite to possibly avoid upsetting people like you who feel the need to pontificate to others about their life choices and feelings:)

LOL!!

whatsinaname9:45 pm 19 May 09

sepi said :

The police officer at the time described Clare as a ‘young for her age 19 year old’. She didn’t go to the media, they went to her. Seven years ago she entered a room with 2 men, and was ambushed by 10 more. This still upsets her tot ears to talk about it. She has since tried to commit suicide.

This is not someone I can paint as the villain of the piece.

She has also been painted as a serial liar who was warned about fraternizing with patrons by her previous boss, a woman that went looking to sleep with footballers and then proceeded to brag about it by previous co-workers, and the investigating police officers didn’t press any charges. Was does all that say about her?

Please, don’t think Í’m defending the actions of any of the footy players involved (I’ve met some of the local players at the pub after a couple of games, and they certainly aren’t geniuses…) but I don’t think the players are always at fault (I’m sure they are quite often).
A workmate of mine described some of these women as predators. They go out in search of the footballers (knowing where they hang out after the game, etc) and do whatever it takes to end up in bed with one (or more of them). If a girl like this was to suddenly (for whatever reason) claim that the player assaulted her (for example), who is society likely to believe? Even if the accusation is unfounded, the damage will have been done. Is it all attention seeking at any cost?

shutterbug said :

Well hang on, if sleeping around is okay, why does it have to be kept under wraps?

Seems society is very good at taking the highroad yet pushing morally controversial stuff behind closed doors. Prostitution, pornography, abortion, homosexuality. Heck, it’s all been pushed behind closed doors even by a community that claims none of it is wrong.

Just a guess but I’d suggest it’s best kept quite to possibly avoid upsetting people like you who feel the need to pontificate to others about their life choices and feelings:)

whatsinaname said :

My original point was that these people that go out and sleep with certain people (whether it be women with footy players, or men with models or whoever) just for bragging rights, have seriously got something lacking in their lives. Sleep with who you want to – just keep it to yourself (or tell your best friend if you have to, but people you don’t know don’t need to know). 🙂

Well hang on, if sleeping around is okay, why does it have to be kept under wraps?

Seems society is very good at taking the highroad yet pushing morally controversial stuff behind closed doors. Prostitution, pornography, abortion, homosexuality. Heck, it’s all been pushed behind closed doors even by a community that claims none of it is wrong.

whatsinaname said :

I think the only people that really know what happened are the people in the room at the time. And that being said, everyone in the room could still have a differing opinion as to what actually happened.

My original point was that these people that go out and sleep with certain people (whether it be women with footy players, or men with models or whoever) just for bragging rights, have seriously got something lacking in their lives. Sleep with who you want to – just keep it to yourself (or tell your best friend if you have to, but people you don’t know don’t need to know). 🙂

I have no problem with that, I just cautious about labelling ‘Clare’ as one of these people:)

Me either, sepi. My heart goes out to her.

The police officer at the time described Clare as a ‘young for her age 19 year old’. She didn’t go to the media, they went to her. Seven years ago she entered a room with 2 men, and was ambushed by 10 more. This still upsets her tot ears to talk about it. She has since tried to commit suicide.

This is not someone I can paint as the villain of the piece.

whatsinaname9:22 pm 19 May 09

I think the only people that really know what happened are the people in the room at the time. And that being said, everyone in the room could still have a differing opinion as to what actually happened.

My original point was that these people that go out and sleep with certain people (whether it be women with footy players, or men with models or whoever) just for bragging rights, have seriously got something lacking in their lives. Sleep with who you want to – just keep it to yourself (or tell your best friend if you have to, but people you don’t know don’t need to know). 🙂

whatsinaname said :

Granny said :

I think the bragging may have been an initial attempt to process the incident emotionally. There is little doubt that it has taken a huge toll on her life. People don’t cut their wrists lightly.

Is it possible though that everything (taking part in the group sex act, the bragging – then the realisation that no one thought it was a good thing, calling the police, the suicide attempt, and now the massive media exposure etc) was all just her way of getting some attention? Maybe this girl has a lot more wrong with her, which could go way back to before she met any of the footballers involved… *shrugs*

or maybe she was in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong people. Ic an think of better ways of getting media attention that making yourself out to be a victim or a villain. I’d prefer to give her the benefit of the doubt, especially after other similar stories that have been coming out lately (including John’s admission that other players joined in only after she’d consented to having sex him plus one other).

That doesn’t appear to be the police officer’s assessment of her character, but I’m not willing to get into this discussion. I’ve had it with others and I get too upset. We’ll have to agree to disagree, I think.

whatsinaname9:08 pm 19 May 09

Granny said :

I think the bragging may have been an initial attempt to process the incident emotionally. There is little doubt that it has taken a huge toll on her life. People don’t cut their wrists lightly.

Is it possible though that everything (taking part in the group sex act, the bragging – then the realisation that no one thought it was a good thing, calling the police, the suicide attempt, and now the massive media exposure etc) was all just her way of getting some attention? Maybe this girl has a lot more wrong with her, which could go way back to before she met any of the footballers involved… *shrugs*

Interesting points ‘whatsinaname’ but I have a different theory on why ‘Clare’ appeared to be bragging about what happened. Perhaps she was really ashamed about what happened and was telling people to gauge others reactions to what happened, gain some view on others perceptions of the event or even to understand if others thought she was willing to take part. It may have just been a clumsy attempt at bravado to make the whole thing seem not so bad, an attempt to kid herself.

As for Charmyne, maybe she does like the added attention of being the new spokesperson for those that like to sleep with footballers for a hobby, but at least she’s being honest.

monomania said :

Granny said :

If you’re referring to the vile and unfounded comment you made about my personal life, then you should not be surprised that I found it offensive. It reflects much more on yourself than on me.

My initial question was not unfounded but based on what you had blabbed about your personal life and your dissatisfaction followed by the statement about how you would like you children to respect their partner. Seems like Charmyne envy to me.

And I consider that statement to be sexual harrassment.

at 133 that is!!!

Granny said :

If you’re referring to the vile and unfounded comment you made about my personal life, then you should not be surprised that I found it offensive. It reflects much more on yourself than on me.

My initial question was not unfounded but based on what you had blabbed about your personal life and your dissatisfaction followed by the statement about how you would like you children to respect their partner. Seems like Charmyne envy to me.

I think the bragging may have been an initial attempt to process the incident emotionally. There is little doubt that it has taken a huge toll on her life. People don’t cut their wrists lightly.

whatsinaname8:58 pm 19 May 09

I realise I’m coming into this pretty late but I think a very important point is being missed. You see, I don’t care how many people someone else sleeps with. Sleep with ten, a hundred, a thousand if you like. But why does anyone else need to hear about it? Can’t it be your little secret? Why do you need the validation?

I think the problem is that people like Charmyne like to brag about it. This Daily Telegraph article is proof of that. What are they trying to prove by telling everyone how much they’ve slept around? Society, whether anyone likes it or not, is going to judge this person straight away – they know that. This “Clare” girl at the centre of the Matthew Johns story supposedly bragged to some workmates about having this session with all these footy players. It was only four or so days later when she realised that no one thought she was a legend, or funny, or great in any way that she suddenly called the police claiming she was sexually assaulted.

I think it’s the need to tell everyone about it that makes these people (and this goes for both girls and guys IMO) so sad and pathetic, moreso than the actual act itself.

I am fine with my kids sleeping with whomever they choose, and enjoying it.

Granny said :

shutterbug said :

Actually, looking back on the responses, no one has had the guts to say they would be okay with they’re kids acting like Charmyne.
Closest so far are those who say kids can do whatever they choose, but that’s different to actually saying I don’t mind them acting like Charmyne.

If anyone does say they would not mind their kids acting like Charmyne, that’s their opinion and I would accept it.
No one has though, just cop outs about free will and kids own choices.

Comment #105, genius.

Okay, and I accept it. You are fine with your kids acting like Charmyne.

monomania said :

You started on about rude bits. What got up your nose was my comment about rude (in a difference sense) spouses. Hence those non sequiturs.

If you’re referring to the vile and unfounded comment you made about my personal life, then you should not be surprised that I found it offensive. It reflects much more on yourself than on me.

shutterbug said :

Actually, looking back on the responses, no one has had the guts to say they would be okay with they’re kids acting like Charmyne.
Closest so far are those who say kids can do whatever they choose, but that’s different to actually saying I don’t mind them acting like Charmyne.

If anyone does say they would not mind their kids acting like Charmyne, that’s their opinion and I would accept it.
No one has though, just cop outs about free will and kids own choices.

Comment #105, genius.

Coffee would be wonderful, BerraBoy.

BerraBoy68 said :

Shutterbug @ #122 (a) “yeah, she is a lovely and caring woman. Wonder if her hubby knows how suffocated she is?”

And how would this be any of your business? What, are you going to tell him? Maybe he is, maybe he isn’t aware of Granny’s feelings but big deal. What’s it to you? At least she’s been honest in her replies to you which is more than you’re being. Which leads me to…

Shutterbug @ #122 (b) “So I seek to find out if people would be as okay with their own kids acting like Charmyne.”

That’d be fine but if you were simply surveying respondents views – but you aren’t. Instead you want people to simply agree with your position. When you get an answer that you don’t like, however, you attack the person for their honesty.

Actually, looking back on the responses, no one has had the guts to say they would be okay with they’re kids acting like Charmyne.
Closest so far are those who say kids can do whatever they choose, but that’s different to actually saying I don’t mind them acting like Charmyne.

If anyone does say they would not mind their kids acting like Charmyne, that’s their opinion and I would accept it.
No one has though, just cop outs about free will and kids own choices.

Granny said :

Well, let’s face it – rude bits are obscene, dirty, squalid, scabrous, salacious, lewd, randy, rude, outrageous, lubricious … and a bit off!

You started on about rude bits. What got up your nose was my comment about rude (in a difference sense) spouses. Hence those non sequiturs.

shutterbug said :

Haha, yeah, she is a lovely and caring woman. Wonder if her hubby knows how suffocated she is?

Yes, he does actually, and he still likes and respects me.

Shutterbug @ #122 (a) “yeah, she is a lovely and caring woman. Wonder if her hubby knows how suffocated she is?”

And how would this be any of your business? What, are you going to tell him? Maybe he is, maybe he isn’t aware of Granny’s feelings but big deal. What’s it to you? At least she’s been honest in her replies to you which is more than you’re being. Which leads me to…

Shutterbug @ #122 (b) “So I seek to find out if people would be as okay with their own kids acting like Charmyne.”

That’d be fine but if you were simply surveying respondents views – but you aren’t. Instead you want people to simply agree with your position. When you get an answer that you don’t like, however, you attack the person for their honesty.

Are you a parent? There is a difference between being OK with your kids choices and actively encouraging them. Ask any parent of a kid that comes home and tells their mum and dad that they are gay. Parents might not like to hear it but you either get used to it and move on or you alienate you kids, and where is the benefit in that?

Granny said :

Thanks, BerraBoy. That’s a lovely thing to say.

No problem, I mean every word, and I’ll contact you separately about coffee this week.

I just don’t understand people that want to impose their own values or standards on others. So what if someone wants to be monogamous or sleep around or even have cover themselves with baby oil and whipped cream and have kinky sex with a rubber doll… as long as the person is an adult, is not hurting anybody else and is engaging in safe and consensual behavior, who cares!

BerraBoy68 said :

Well I don’t like offensive tools who overstep the mark. I know Granny, shutterbug, and you have well and truly misjudged her. A nicer, more caring women you’d be hard pressed to find.

Granny said :

I actually find marriage suffocating. Whilst I like my husband very much and even still love him after seventeen years I feel like I’m not in control of my own life. We hardly ever fight and get on pretty well on the whole. We laugh. We muck around together. But I would never do it again. Never. Not with anybody. I’m in no hurry to see my kids married. Sometimes I long to be free.

Whoever designed marriage could have done a much better job if you ask me.

Haha, yeah, she is a lovely and caring woman. Wonder if her hubby knows how suffocated she is?

BerraBoy68 said :

I think your confusing a parents legal and moral responsibility with the rights of a child when he or she becomes an adult, shutterbug. If either of my kids came home and told me they were promiscuous what I am to do? Lock them up? No, you give them advice and let them live their own life – all we can do is offer support. In any event it would be hypocritical of me. Most of my late teens, 20s and early 30s were spent engaging in one night stand with strangers. Why should I judge a women for making the same choices as mine?

Nothing to do with parental control. My point is so many people here are okay with sleeping around. I think such a response is to be expected if one is detached from the situation. So I seek to find out if people would be as okay with their own kids acting like Charmyne.

Thanks, BerraBoy. That’s a lovely thing to say.

shutterbug said :

Granny said :

You don’t like women, do you?

haha, your argument has given way to personal attack. Ironic.

And no, I don’t like old women who sleep around.

Well I don’t like offensive tools who overstep the mark. I know Granny, shutterbug, and you have well and truly misjudged her. A nicer, more caring women you’d be hard pressed to find. You only object to her having an opinion that differs to yours, wich is pretty pathetic really. Oh, and she’s quite beautiful too, both literally and metaphorically.

shutterbug said :

You wouldn’t send your daughter to have sex with a stranger because you wouldn’t think it was okay. But if she decides to do it, well, you get to pass any responsibility

Ah yes, resort to insults. It’s much easier than actually arguing the issues.

And if I had a daughter I would support her views and ideals, even if I didn’t believe in them.

That’s what free will is all about.

And I don’t have a daughter.

haha, this is where the super-lefties always fall apart. Free will, you always argue for free will.

So where does free will end. By your logic, you will let your child go drinking and doing drugs with your full knowledge. Not because you think it’s okay, but because of free will.

I think your confusing a parents legal and moral responsibility with the rights of a child when he or she becomes an adult, shutterbug. If either of my kids came home and told me they were promiscuous what I am to do? Lock them up? No, you give them advice and let them live their own life – all we can do is offer support. In any event it would be hypocritical of me. Most of my late teens, 20s and early 30s were spent engaging in one night stand with strangers. Why should I judge a women for making the same choices as mine?

Indeed!

Bill: “It is Mrs. Carthorse, isn’t it?”
Mrs. Desiree Carthorse: “Yes.”
Bill: “What does your husband do?”
Mrs. Desiree Carthorse: “He keeps his distance!”

what a sad and unattractive woman

Granny said :

Well, let’s face it – rude bits are obscene, dirty, squalid, scabrous, salacious, lewd, randy, rude, outrageous, lubricious … and a bit off!

Well, they shouldn’t be if you look after them.

Well, let’s face it – rude bits are obscene, dirty, squalid, scabrous, salacious, lewd, randy, rude, outrageous, lubricious … and a bit off!

I don’t know about rude bits. I always read my National Geographics in the dark.

Why, yes, monomania!

“Now that we all know about the rude bits, aren’t they rude? And as we get older, they get ruder and ruder.”

Granny said :

“There is a difference between men and ladies. Do you know what it is? Yes. Men are better at football.”

But some women are better at footballers.

“There is a difference between men and ladies. Do you know what it is? Yes. Men are better at football.”

Deadmandrinking6:29 pm 19 May 09

shutterbug said :

Granny said :

You don’t like women, do you?

haha, your argument has given way to personal attack. Ironic.

And no, I don’t like old women who sleep around.

Because other people’s sex lives are your business. I think you might have some problems when it comes to females.

And, people like you are fuelling this sort of tabloid news hype, you know. The media wants you to be outraged by this tripe so you’ll buy their papers to see exactly what you’re outraged about. Saves the trouble on actually having to report on things that deserve coverage.

No, it was simply a rhetorical question, unlike your own remarks.

Granny said :

You don’t like women, do you?

haha, your argument has given way to personal attack. Ironic.

And no, I don’t like old women who sleep around.

You don’t like women, do you?

So sue me.

Granny said :

…is a warm, willing woman…

Funny, I read that same line in the Canberra Times classifieds. Interesting.

shutterbug said :

Well Rioters, I ask you a question.

Who hear want Charmyne as their daughter?

I will. Next question.

monomania said :

So Mr Granny is getting a respectful mercy-marriage?

What he is getting is a warm, willing woman that still likes and loves him after seventeen years of having a lot of boundaries trampled, and I’m not willing to dignify that remark further.

You wouldn’t send your daughter to have sex with a stranger because you wouldn’t think it was okay. But if she decides to do it, well, you get to pass any responsibility

Ah yes, resort to insults. It’s much easier than actually arguing the issues.

And if I had a daughter I would support her views and ideals, even if I didn’t believe in them.

That’s what free will is all about.

And I don’t have a daughter.

haha, this is where the super-lefties always fall apart. Free will, you always argue for free will.

So where does free will end. By your logic, you will let your child go drinking and doing drugs with your full knowledge. Not because you think it’s okay, but because of free will.

mono, you missed the opportunity for 3-post nutbag! I think granny longs for time to herself. no kids, no gramps, just granny. apparently, husbands drive wives nuts. or so mine tells me…

Granny said :

Peterh, I am attracted to many different and diverse people. I love men. A lot. And not just sexually. I just like them. I like being with them. I like hanging out with them. I like watching their faces when they talk. That I haven’t slept with them is partly trying to honour a commitment I made to somebody, partly fate, and partly that I haven’t had the opportunity yet.

I actually find marriage suffocating. Whilst I like my husband very much and even still love him after seventeen years I feel like I’m not in control of my own life. We hardly ever fight and get on pretty well on the whole. We laugh. We muck around together. But I would never do it again. Never. Not with anybody. I’m in no hurry to see my kids married. Sometimes I long to be free.

Whoever designed marriage could have done a much better job if you ask me.

Granny said :

I think with your kids one of the most harmful things you can do is make them feel guilty for feeling pleasure in their sexuality.

If the context is respectful and responsible and consensual that is what I would ask of my children. I would be disappointed if they were disrespectful of their sexual partners and devastated if they attempted sexual gratification non-consensually.

So Mr Granny is getting a respectful mercy-marriage?

Granny said :

deezagood said :

And perhaps even more disturbing …. the ‘selective breeding’ comment should have been an early give-away!

Eugenics, yes.

Well Rioters, I ask you a question.

Who hear want Charmyne as their daughter?

Come on Rioters, if you profess to support her sex with nameless strangers way of life, lets see if you really agree.

Jim Jones said :

shutterbug said :

I didn’t realise that the puritan ethos still existed today.

If Charmyne wants to be promiscuous then so be it. After all, it is her life and last time I looked it was still legal to go to bed with a stranger.

In the last five years, infection rates for Chlamydia have doubled. In fact NSW Health is indicating that in their state, the increase is well over 150% in the past 12 months.

Who cares if a woman has a lot of male friends and sleeps with them, or if she is in a long term relationship with someone or not. That is all besides the point and is a matter for ones personal morality to decide.

The point is women sleeping around randomly, often with strangers and increasingly without using protection.
This sort of activity has huge implications for public health.

And its all well and good to say oh it’s my choice, it’s her choice.
Well, you wouldn’t send your daughter around to have sex with a stranger. Those of you who say it’s okay if the woman consents are just palming off the responsibility.

Ah, so it’s all about disease now, is it?

You can keep changing your tune, but you still sound like a self-righteous puritan to me.

Those of you who say it’s okay if the woman consents are just palming off the responsibility.

This is about the most f4cked up thing I’ve read in a long time. You obviously have some really really big problems. I’d strongly suggest talking to a therapist rather than making jokes about people’s daughters.

I’d suggest that you go get laid, but you’d probably find that offensive.

You lefties are so f*cked up.
Point is you keep spouting that women sleeping around with strangers harmless if the woman consents. Point is that this sort of behaviour is linked to mental and physical health problems including the spread of STIs and depression.

I’m not changing my tune either f-wit.
My tune all along has been that sleeping around with strangers is a problem.
The issue of how harmless it is was introduced and I responded that it isn’t.

Well, you wouldn’t send your daughter around to have sex with a stranger. Those of you who say it’s okay if the woman consents are just palming off the responsibility.

You appear to have problems with the meaning of the word consent.

You are thick aren’t you Thumper.
You wouldn’t send your daughter to have sex with a stranger because you wouldn’t think it was okay. But if she decides to do it, well, you get to pass any responsibility.

deezagood said :

And perhaps even more disturbing …. the ‘selective breeding’ comment should have been an early give-away!

Eugenics, yes.

Granny said :

It does make the title of the post ironic ….

And perhaps even more disturbing …. the ‘selective breeding’ comment should have been an early give-away!

It does make the title of the post ironic ….

Yep – we have an A grade puritan here folks; of the ‘all women who have sex with more than one partner are dirty and infested’ variety… and very disturbingly, who fails to understand the meaning of ‘consent’. Scary.

I offered, Jim Jones, but I was rejected!

*chuckle*

shutterbug said :

I didn’t realise that the puritan ethos still existed today.

If Charmyne wants to be promiscuous then so be it. After all, it is her life and last time I looked it was still legal to go to bed with a stranger.

In the last five years, infection rates for Chlamydia have doubled. In fact NSW Health is indicating that in their state, the increase is well over 150% in the past 12 months.

Who cares if a woman has a lot of male friends and sleeps with them, or if she is in a long term relationship with someone or not. That is all besides the point and is a matter for ones personal morality to decide.

The point is women sleeping around randomly, often with strangers and increasingly without using protection.
This sort of activity has huge implications for public health.

And its all well and good to say oh it’s my choice, it’s her choice.
Well, you wouldn’t send your daughter around to have sex with a stranger. Those of you who say it’s okay if the woman consents are just palming off the responsibility.

Ah, so it’s all about disease now, is it?

You can keep changing your tune, but you still sound like a self-righteous puritan to me.

Those of you who say it’s okay if the woman consents are just palming off the responsibility.

This is about the most f4cked up thing I’ve read in a long time. You obviously have some really really big problems. I’d strongly suggest talking to a therapist rather than making jokes about people’s daughters.

I’d suggest that you go get laid, but you’d probably find that offensive.

colourful sydney racing identity4:36 pm 19 May 09

“Well, you wouldn’t send your daughter around to have sex with a stranger.”

I wouldn’t SEND my daughter around to have sex with anyone. I hope you are just trolling, otherwise your a grade a wanker.

And I am also totally failing to see where it states that Charmyne doesn’t use appropriate protection during her encounters. And I most certainly wouldn’t send anybody anywhere to have sex with anyone – why do you keep reiterating this extremely strange point? Shutterbug – I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you clearly have some major issues. I suggest you seek help.

I think a lot of people hide behind public health objections when the real objection is to other people making their own sexual choices.

Shutterbug, I wouldn’t send my daughters anywhere. As adults they are perfectly capable of deciding where they want to go and whom they wish to sleep with. Sometimes that may be a stranger. Sometimes somebody they know. Sometimes a stranger who becomes somebody they know.

It’s none of my business, any more than it is yours.

I think it was Kathy Griffin who said she just looked at a picture of Tommy Lee and caught herpes.

After the stories of the past week I think I know how she feels.

By the way, is jaundice a major symptom of any STD’s? Just curious.

Yes – those dirty, dirty chlamydia infested women, spreading disease with the greatest of ease. Those poor, poor men.

I think with your kids one of the most harmful things you can do is make them feel guilty for feeling pleasure in their sexuality.

If the context is respectful and responsible and consensual that is what I would ask of my children. I would be disappointed if they were disrespectful of their sexual partners and devastated if they attempted sexual gratification non-consensually.

I didn’t realise that the puritan ethos still existed today.

If Charmyne wants to be promiscuous then so be it. After all, it is her life and last time I looked it was still legal to go to bed with a stranger.

In the last five years, infection rates for Chlamydia have doubled. In fact NSW Health is indicating that in their state, the increase is well over 150% in the past 12 months.

Who cares if a woman has a lot of male friends and sleeps with them, or if she is in a long term relationship with someone or not. That is all besides the point and is a matter for ones personal morality to decide.

The point is women sleeping around randomly, often with strangers and increasingly without using protection.
This sort of activity has huge implications for public health.

And its all well and good to say oh it’s my choice, it’s her choice.
Well, you wouldn’t send your daughter around to have sex with a stranger. Those of you who say it’s okay if the woman consents are just palming off the responsibility.

Awesome post, deezagood!

There are a lot of references to ‘would you want your kids to act this way’ in this thread.

I hope my own kids feel comfortable exploring their sexuality in a safe way of their own choosing (safe – as in using protection, not placing themselves in risky sitations, remaining in control etc…) – one extreme might be settling down with the first guy/girl that they date, the other extreme may be having numerous partners, a tonne of ‘meaningless sex’ and never settling into a monogomous relationship. I certainly won’t judge them for making either choice, as long as it is their own choice made of their own free will.

I really, really hate the fact that women who choose to have multiple partners (and are open about this fact) are considered ‘sluts’ or are assumed to have low self-esteem issues. Hell – maybe they just love having a lot of sex with different partners – and if they are safe and in control, can you please tell me again why this is this such a bad thing?

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Yes, Peterh, I agree. You’re just never alone. I have always needed a lot of alone time. I love people, but I do need to be alone. And somebody else making all the decisions that somehow never include my dreams and heart’s desires.

Thanks for your thoughtful response previously – clearly you know what you need, which is good.

For me, marriage is more about amplifying the dreams we share, and having shared resources (in every sense) to put towards achieving this. Since focusing on the things that unite us, the things I thought I wanted seem to have become less important to me.

But I am a very, very fortunate individual in that respect.

Granny, I hope you find what you need.

as do i.

Vy – 10 years. well done. My marriage isn’t as solid as it was, but the onset of 3 kids hasn’t helped. we will get back on track, but it is all about communication and time to do so. and 10 years just flew by for us. and before the glib comments come in, i wanted 2 kids – but we got twins. such is life. I have been a bit haphazard in my responses, I agree. might be time to take a break.

Thanks, VY.

colourful sydney racing identity3:59 pm 19 May 09

I refer to meaningless sex with strangers. But if your so comfortable with it, send your daughter around.

Send your daughter around? you really don’t get the consent thing do you…

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy3:54 pm 19 May 09

Yes, Peterh, I agree. You’re just never alone. I have always needed a lot of alone time. I love people, but I do need to be alone. And somebody else making all the decisions that somehow never include my dreams and heart’s desires.

Thanks for your thoughtful response previously – clearly you know what you need, which is good.

For me, marriage is more about amplifying the dreams we share, and having shared resources (in every sense) to put towards achieving this. Since focusing on the things that unite us, the things I thought I wanted seem to have become less important to me.

But I am a very, very fortunate individual in that respect.

Granny, I hope you find what you need.

shutterbug said :

I refer to meaningless sex with strangers. But if your so comfortable with it, send your daughter around.

Faced with a question that you don’t know how to answer, you respond with pointless smut.

You’re all class.

peterh said :

defining my interpretation of when it can be bad for other parties is not changing the direction of the discussion.

Yes it is. If you go off on tangents about infidelity, then it is. FC pulled you up on it too.

If there’s nothing wrong with sex between consenting adults, as you state earlier, then why do you keep banging on about her being a trollop?

Yes, Peterh, I agree. You’re just never alone. I have always needed a lot of alone time. I love people, but I do need to be alone. And somebody else making all the decisions that somehow never include my dreams and heart’s desires.

There’s plenty of one night stands that beat that hell out of a lot of crappy relationships.

Which is not to say that a warm long term relationship is not the ideal.

But let’s not let the best be the enemy of the good.

Jim Jones said :

peterh – Changing the nature of the debate to magically be centred on the issue of cheating is just plain dodgy and you know it. The issue of fidelity hasn’t arisen in the thread yet, and it’s extremely deceptive to try to introduce it at this late stage.

If you want to argue that someone is a bad person because they cheated on their partner, go ahead. But don’t pretend that you can get away with tut tutting about the evils of sexual promiscuity and then argue that you were ‘really’ talking about infidelity. It’s not the same thing, and never has been.

Jim, I responded to your claim that I think sex = bad. defining my interpretation of when it can be bad for other parties is not changing the direction of the discussion. I think that the focus on this woman is exactly what she wants, but what happens to the partners of the players who have played around with her? that isn’t being focused on at all. does she have a partner? what do they think about all this hype?

we don’t know. she is proud of what she has done. and that is all we know.

Jim Jones said :

shutterbug said :

Jim Jones said :

And peterh – just like shutterbug – everything you’ve said is premised on the idea that sex = bad.?

Um, no. I’ve been saying the meaningless sex is bad.

So you’re opposed to sex unless the two people in questions are in a stable, long-term relationship.

You do realise that the 1950s are over, right?

Jim, read my post at #58: “Those with self respect may sleep with many people, but they would know the people and sleep with them because they’re friends or in a relationship.”

I refer to meaningless sex with strangers. But if your so comfortable with it, send your daughter around.

Yes, it is sad. I’m sorry that I’m made that way. I’m just not good at it. I don’t think I was meant to be married. Whilst I am very happy for you, of course, VY. But I’m not you. And I can’t be you. Also marriage ruined one of the best relationships I ever had.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy3:36 pm 19 May 09

I actually find marriage suffocating. Whilst I like my husband very much and even still love him after seventeen years I feel like I’m not in control of my own life. We hardly ever fight and get on pretty well on the whole. We laugh. We muck around together. But I would never do it again. Never. Not with anybody. I’m in no hurry to see my kids married. Sometimes I long to be free.

That’s really kinda sad, if you ask me. I got married fairly young by modern standards (early 20’s) and will celebrate my 10th wedding anniversary this year. Getting married was one of the best things I have ever done.

Granny said :

Peterh, I am attracted to many different and diverse people. I love men. A lot. And not just sexually. I just like them. I like being with them. I like hanging out with them. I like watching their faces when they talk. That I haven’t slept with them is partly trying to honour a commitment I made to somebody, partly fate, and partly that I haven’t had the opportunity yet.

I actually find marriage suffocating. Whilst I like my husband very much and even still love him after seventeen years I feel like I’m not in control of my own life. We hardly ever fight and get on pretty well on the whole. We laugh. We muck around together. But I would never do it again. Never. Not with anybody. I’m in no hurry to see my kids married. Sometimes I long to be free.

Whoever designed marriage could have done a much better job if you ask me.

the scary thing is, granny, that i hear you. Marriage should have had a clause built in that allowed both people 1 week of alone time. Not for extramarital sex, but to be able to sleep, read a book, watch the show that you want, go to a movie, have a meal alone in a restaurant, be you again.

But, I have never felt in control of my own life, or the people that I interact with on a daily basis.

I actually enjoy being told often by JB to pull my head in. why? I am addicted to this site. I spend nearly every day here. I have to know what has happened if I miss a day. It is a drug that I feel i have to have.

I may be wrong, but this is what I think the footy groupies feel towards the players. they have to have a “fix”…

I don’t see anything wrong with a woman seeking sensual pleasure in the arms of a stranger.

“The problem with these scenarios is the other party – the wife or husband who has no control over the situation. How many of these men who have engaged with this woman were married, had girlfriends, etc? What happens to their partner and any kids when the media brings to light their sordid activities? I doubt that they are as forgiving as matthew johns’ wife.”

that is the men involved responsibility if they have a partner and are being unfaithful.
and that is the issue of infidelity – not the issue of groupies.

And I still don’t see what’s wrong with ‘meaningless’ sex.

I had a ‘meaningless’ lunch today. It tasted great. I might even have a couple of ‘meaningless’ beers when I get home.

peterh – Changing the nature of the debate to magically be centred on the issue of cheating is just plain dodgy and you know it. The issue of fidelity hasn’t arisen in the thread yet, and it’s extremely deceptive to try to introduce it at this late stage.

If you want to argue that someone is a bad person because they cheated on their partner, go ahead. But don’t pretend that you can get away with tut tutting about the evils of sexual promiscuity and then argue that you were ‘really’ talking about infidelity. It’s not the same thing, and never has been.

shutterbug said :

Jim Jones said :

And peterh – just like shutterbug – everything you’ve said is premised on the idea that sex = bad.?

Um, no. I’ve been saying the meaningless sex is bad. Hookers do it for money and most use precautions against STIs. Those with self respect may sleep with many people, but they would know the people and sleep with them because they’re friends or in a relationship.

Charmyne is an example of someone who just sleeps around meaninglessly. I bet she often doesn’t know the name of the person in the bed and doesn’t bother with protection.

You’re making a lot of assumptions.

Meaning is what you attribute and take away from an event.Maybe having a night that is purely based on sensual pleasure and not tied up in emotional or other agendas does provide some meaning to her.

there can still be respect and meaning even in a one night stand.
Not all one night stands are drunken toilet fiascos.

Its just a suggestion and I’m not saying this is definitly the case in her scenario, but is might well be.

shutterbug said :

Jim Jones said :

And peterh – just like shutterbug – everything you’ve said is premised on the idea that sex = bad.?

Um, no. I’ve been saying the meaningless sex is bad.

So you’re opposed to sex unless the two people in questions are in a stable, long-term relationship.

You do realise that the 1950s are over, right?

Jim Jones said :

peterh said :

And peterh – just like shutterbug – everything you’ve said is premised on the idea that sex = bad.

I had many one night stands when I was younger. Now I’m shacked up in a monogomous relationship with a kid and a mortgage (please send help!!!) and not suffering any side effects of my ‘depraved lifestyle’ (yes – that’s sarcasm).

What in all hell is wrong with sex between consenting adults?

Jim,

sex between consenting adults? not a thing. what about sex between a single person and a man that has a wife, mortgage & kids? or a woman that a husband, mortgage & kids and a single man? as a one night stand initiated for fun?

The problem with these scenarios is the other party – the wife or husband who has no control over the situation. How many of these men who have engaged with this woman were married, had girlfriends, etc? What happens to their partner and any kids when the media brings to light their sordid activities? I doubt that they are as forgiving as matthew johns’ wife.

I never had one night stands. I was more concerned in earning money and getting drunk. Must have missed out on so much then?

Shutterbug, I shall just have to survive somehow.

: )

Jim Jones said :

And peterh – just like shutterbug – everything you’ve said is premised on the idea that sex = bad.?

Um, no. I’ve been saying the meaningless sex is bad. Hookers do it for money and most use precautions against STIs. Those with self respect may sleep with many people, but they would know the people and sleep with them because they’re friends or in a relationship.

Charmyne is an example of someone who just sleeps around meaninglessly. I bet she often doesn’t know the name of the person in the bed and doesn’t bother with protection.

Peterh, I am attracted to many different and diverse people. I love men. A lot. And not just sexually. I just like them. I like being with them. I like hanging out with them. I like watching their faces when they talk. That I haven’t slept with them is partly trying to honour a commitment I made to somebody, partly fate, and partly that I haven’t had the opportunity yet.

I actually find marriage suffocating. Whilst I like my husband very much and even still love him after seventeen years I feel like I’m not in control of my own life. We hardly ever fight and get on pretty well on the whole. We laugh. We muck around together. But I would never do it again. Never. Not with anybody. I’m in no hurry to see my kids married. Sometimes I long to be free.

Whoever designed marriage could have done a much better job if you ask me.

FC said :

A hooker is not doing it for the fun of it shutterbug, she is doing it as a proffession. To earn money. GET IT?

There is a huge difference. Charmyne is saying she does it to have fun.

And I don’t think you really have the capacity to grasp Granny’s opinion on much to be honest.

I didn’t say hookers do it for fun. I said Charmyne lacks the business sense of a hooker (who does it for money) or a classier individual who does it because they genuinely like someone. So basically she is as publicly available as a telephone booth.

Granny said :

What are you doing tonight?

Sorry Granny, I prefer my women like my cars, with low KMs and plenty of revs left. I suspect you would have a trip to Darwin and back on your odometer.

peterh said :

On the flip side, how many men engage in the practice of many, many one night stands? Is it an acceptable practice for them? Not in my eyes. I have friends who behaved this way, and they are now alone. They knew what they were doing, and now have no-one to blame but themselves. The fact that there are people out there in the world who behave like this is a bit sad, really.

And peterh – just like shutterbug – everything you’ve said is premised on the idea that sex = bad.

I had many one night stands when I was younger. Now I’m shacked up in a monogomous relationship with a kid and a mortgage (please send help!!!) and not suffering any side effects of my ‘depraved lifestyle’ (yes – that’s sarcasm).

What in all hell is wrong with sex between consenting adults?

Shutterbug, everything you’ve said is based on the premise that sex = bad.

That kinda attitude (while popular in the middle ages and amongst the nutsack evangelical community) really doesn’t have much currency anymore.

A hooker is not doing it for the fun of it shutterbug, she is doing it as a proffession. To earn money. GET IT?

There is a huge difference. Charmyne is saying she does it to have fun.

And I don’t think you really have the capacity to grasp Granny’s opinion on much to be honest.

Granny said :

So how many men am I allowed to sleep with before I fit your definition of a trollop, peterh? Perhaps it’s already too late, but just so I can tell my kids “Don’t have that one more or you’ll be a trollop”. Don’t have the 3rd or the 13th or that 297th man, because that’s it. You’ll be a trollop forever.

she is a trollop, granny, or a selective nymphomaniac (which i think fits her better) due to the number of one night stands that she has engaged in with these rugby league players. Lets be frank here, the men are no better. she is now a joke. and they are still in the background, hiding behind the likes of matthew johns who has been caught out, and has ruined his career over an indiscretion that he really should never have been a part of.

She is a groupie – not just content with an autograph, but with a notch in her belt, that she had another footy player. If your kids were having 297 one night stands, i think the discussion you would be having wouldn’t be about trollops, don’t you agree? it would probably focus on more of a discussion around protection and potential diseases that they were exposing themselves to.

If my children engaged in this kind of practice, when they are older, I would not be proud of them. A trollop, as was explained to me and perhaps i am wrong, is a person that engages in sXX with many, many different partners to fulfill a need that will never be met.

On the flip side, how many men engage in the practice of many, many one night stands? Is it an acceptable practice for them? Not in my eyes. I have friends who behaved this way, and they are now alone. They knew what they were doing, and now have no-one to blame but themselves. The fact that there are people out there in the world who behave like this is a bit sad, really.

What are you doing tonight?

That is true, shutterbug! Which is why I make a point of always sleeping with men whom if I knew I would strongly dislike ….

; )

Granny said :

So how many men am I allowed to sleep with before I fit your definition of a trollop, peterh? Perhaps it’s already too late, but just so I can tell my kids “Don’t have that one more or you’ll be a trollop”. Don’t have the 3rd or the 13th or that 297th man, because that’s it. You’ll be a trollop forever.

There is no number, it’s the purpose that counts. If you want to sleep with heaps of men who you know and like, that’s fine. I may not like it, but heck it’s your life.

Charmyne though just sleeps with random men who she doesn’t even claim to like. It’s just fun. She doesn’t even charge for it so to be honest, she lacks the class of the women I like and she lacks the business acumen of a hooker.

P.S. I understand your opinion on sleeping around Granny, at your age you have to get what you can.

Probably none, FC. You will just have to lie about it.

*chuckle*

So can you be a respectable trollop?

Hmm.. I wonder if I have passed that magical number.

If I have will I be doomed to never be married. What man would ever want me now?

Granny said :

shutterbug said :

She is setting a very poor example for her own children and by publicising her exploits, a poor example to wider society.

Having multiple sexual partners greatly increases the incidents and transmission of STIs. I doubt she uses protection all the time and even if she did, many STIs are transferred via the skin which condoms only offer limited protection against. Sleeping around and possible spreading things is indeed hurting people.

That she offers herself so willingly (even if she doesn’t pursue them actively), she is creating a new level of acceptable behaviour towards woman. I believe women, regardless of background or race, deserve to be treated well and respected. Frankly, Charmyne’s behaviour goes against this, suggesting women will put fun over respect and good choice. I’m smart enough to just not hang with women like that, but there are men who will see that as the new standard.

Frankly, I’d rather hang out with Charmyne than you any day.

+1

“That she offers herself so willingly (even if she doesn’t pursue them actively”
She OFFERS HERSELF SO WILLINGLY???
I must have forgotten that women are mearly recepticles for men’s penises and ‘offer themselves’ up for the taking as though we are some type of a commodity!

So how many men am I allowed to sleep with before I fit your definition of a trollop, peterh? Perhaps it’s already too late, but just so I can tell my kids “Don’t have that one more or you’ll be a trollop”. Don’t have the 3rd or the 13th or that 297th man, because that’s it. You’ll be a trollop forever.

shutterbug said :

She is setting a very poor example for her own children and by publicising her exploits, a poor example to wider society.

Having multiple sexual partners greatly increases the incidents and transmission of STIs. I doubt she uses protection all the time and even if she did, many STIs are transferred via the skin which condoms only offer limited protection against. Sleeping around and possible spreading things is indeed hurting people.

That she offers herself so willingly (even if she doesn’t pursue them actively), she is creating a new level of acceptable behaviour towards woman. I believe women, regardless of background or race, deserve to be treated well and respected. Frankly, Charmyne’s behaviour goes against this, suggesting women will put fun over respect and good choice. I’m smart enough to just not hang with women like that, but there are men who will see that as the new standard.

Frankly, I’d rather hang out with Charmyne than you any day.

shutterbug said :

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Sounded more to me like a spectrum of variation, rather than an insinuation about one being better than another.

That’s right, it was comparing two extremes of the spectrum. Canberra is often seen as an elitist city of up themselves Uni grads. This goes to show there is so much more.

wow. I didn’t know that. I thought it was the same as any other city, with its fair share of fools.

The comparison to a prostitute is off base. she is a trollop. she doesn’t care who she gets her “action” from, as long as it is a footballer. selective nymphomania might also be a tag that fits. I don’t want to be a rugby league player, if she has been with as many men as she claims, good luck to her. She may come unstuck one day when the guy she is with refuses protection forcibly, and she has a shortened life to contemplate her foolish and dangerous behavior.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Sounded more to me like a spectrum of variation, rather than an insinuation about one being better than another.

It’s worth noting here that many men WILL view differently women who have had many partners compared with those with few. Rightly or wrongly, many men will take this into consideration when deciding whether a given woman would make a good partner for them. I strongly suspect many women make the same judgement call with men.

Frankly, I think we need to get away from automatic assumptions of ‘better’ or ‘worse’, and accept that different people have different behavioural standards. And provided it’s not hurting anyone, this is ok.

Well, the “not hurting anyone” tag is so overused. It’s basically the defence of I can do whatever I want as long as no one dies.
She may not be hurting anyone directly, but her behaviour certainly is in the long run.

She is setting a very poor example for her own children and by publicising her exploits, a poor example to wider society.

Having multiple sexual partners greatly increases the incidents and transmission of STIs. I doubt she uses protection all the time and even if she did, many STIs are transferred via the skin which condoms only offer limited protection against. Sleeping around and possible spreading things is indeed hurting people.

That she offers herself so willingly (even if she doesn’t pursue them actively), she is creating a new level of acceptable behaviour towards woman. I believe women, regardless of background or race, deserve to be treated well and respected. Frankly, Charmyne’s behaviour goes against this, suggesting women will put fun over respect and good choice. I’m smart enough to just not hang with women like that, but there are men who will see that as the new standard.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Sounded more to me like a spectrum of variation, rather than an insinuation about one being better than another.

That’s right, it was comparing two extremes of the spectrum. Canberra is often seen as an elitist city of up themselves Uni grads. This goes to show there is so much more.

I do agree VY – However its a really tough one because it depends on the type of promiscuity and what it involves.
For example I have had friends who would go from guy to guy, and a lot of it was to do with validation and low self esteem (and perhaps looking for love)
whereas I know other girls who are not interested in having a partner (relationship) at the moment but that have healthy sex lifes and what appear to be a healthy sense of self and self estee,.

I think it runs a little deeper in the sense that the way women are generally (but not always) brought up and taught about themselves and their sexuality doesn’t (in my opinion from my experiences) encourage and nurture healthy sexual growth and exploration and this culture that I have kind of been ranting against on this threat, plays a part in contributing to that.

So for example even though I don’t want it to be, sometimes I feel conflicted about what I think is right and wrong to do sexually because of my upbringing (catholic) versus the knowledge and empowerment I have gained in the past few years.
while intellectually I don’t see a problem if I were to take a lover without them being my boyfriend/girlfriend, I might still feel pangs of maybe guilt or “easiness” (ie. I am worth less now because I am ‘easy’) because being brought up where your value and worth was very wrapped up in your sexual behaviour. (Being that you had no real value or worth if you expressed yourself sexually).

I am not explaining this as well as i wish I could, but while I that a lot of promiscuity can be linked to low self esteem in girls, I think it is not the act of ‘having sex with many partners’ more than the warped ideas and values and conflicting messages women have had around sex and their sexuality.

Mr Evil said :

“….I’ve had many pets in my life time but have never been accused of being a veterinarian because of it.”

But Charmyne has slept with heaps of NRL animals – does that mean she’s a veterinarian then?

Where is the evidence that she has actually slept with heaps of NRL players?

Other than the few who have been in the paper (Thurston, Keith Senior) all we have is Charmyne saying “Oh yeah i’ve slept with heaps of them”.

I thought even League players would be more discerning. I spose alcohol can get you into strange predicaments though.

I disagree Chewy.It is a very big issue and obviously one that sparks my interest. The undercurrent of this all is issues that (without us even realising it most of the time) effects our every day interactions with each other, and the world and how we identify with that. There is no escaping it and therefore I believe warrants a lot of thought.
Although I do understand that that can sometimes hurt people (them thinking that is).

And your follow up comment on why you think the prostitute comparison is apt doesn’t hold much substance in my opinion either.

Angry Henry – in hindight Cassanova may have been a better example.

Vandam – Maybe if more people began reading into the things they say and automically think and challenge or enquire as to why they think/say them then maybe some of these shitty values would actually change for the better.
I am always being told I think too much about things – and I don’t know you people at all – but in my normal life the people who tell me I think too much I generally think that they don’t think enough.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy2:04 pm 19 May 09

oh – and VY my post was meant generally – only the first little bit directed at your comment.

No problem. The only reason I brought it up is because the women I have known who have had sexually promiscuous lifestyles have also typically had low self esteem. Of course, I probably know women right now who have promiscuous lifestyles that I know nothing about. Maybe the self respect thing is linked to telling everyone what you did afterwards, or perhaps not.

Thoughts?

“….I’ve had many pets in my life time but have never been accused of being a veterinarian because of it.”

But Charmyne has slept with heaps of NRL animals – does that mean she’s a veterinarian then?

FC, Your reading into things a lot today.

To be honest I’m not sure why she wrote the article or what purpose it serves.
She is not addressing the issue, just saying that she loves having groupies with footy players and that footy players can’t keep away from her.

Btw my previous post was tongue and cheek.

Picasso was famous because he could paint (apparently).

Not because of his sexual exploits.

Palavi is trying to gain notoriety from her sexual exploits, I haven’t seen any spray-tanning in an art gallery lately.

Cassanova possibly could have been a better example.

I’m just saying is all.

You’re putting way too much thought into this FC.

I think the comparison with a prostitute is quite apt actually.

Just that the money is not coming from the guys but rather from the book deals and the DT who got her to write this crap

oh – and VY my post was meant generally – only the first little bit directed at your comment.

Just to add to the discussion I’ll ask the question: does she respect herself?

Who knows? but if she lacks respect for herself is that because of her sexual behaviour now or is it from being brought up in a society that seems to equate a womans worth with her ability to satisfy and please a man (by being attractive and sexually desirable – but at the same time supposedly needing to remain good and ‘pure’) Maybe her confusion around it all led to a screwed up sense of personal identity and sexual identiy?

There is so many possible reasons and thoughts on what things may have been in the mix to lead each and every one of us to behave and think the way we do in our lifes and it is far too complex for even each of us individually to often understand in regard to ourselves.

And also, is the question raised about whether Picasso respected himself??
(being that he was a well known womaniser)
The thoughts that that question seems to prompt in me is the kind of double standard in thought/values/gender roles/sexuality that I think is very interesting to ponder.

It is silly to make over-simplified statements on extremely complex issues.

The sleaziest thing Palavi has done is write an article for the Telegraph. She’s probably better than the rest of the ‘journalists’ there though.

vandam said :

Mr Evil said :

Charmynge is a slut: a publicity slut.

Maybe right, but how blokes (and females) are wishing they are footy players right now? She’s cheaper than a prostitute!

WTF!

Probably not too many actually. As they would probably be dealing with a lot of negative stereotyping from all this media attenting.

And equating her to a prostitue is just screwed up
:/
Where does it say that she received money for having sex? does it say that anywhere or are you just meaning cheapers as in, not a prostitute and therefore not exchanging money for sex and therefore ZERO dollars is cheaper than a prostitute fee?

Logic is lost.

And didn’t you know that a prostitute has sex with men as a job, and therefore provides a service and recieves a fee for that service.
Whereas this woman was having sex becuase (OH MY!), she WANTED to, and it was about her pleasure/enjoyment, not about ‘servicing’ the men.

You have equated her with a prositute WHY????!!!!!!!!

Because she is a woman who seems to be liberal in her sexuality and has had various sexual partners? is that why? I’m still lost

I’ve had many pets in my life time but have never been accused of being a veterinarian because if it. do you follow my line of thinking here?

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/entertainment/815007/rochester-biggest-loser-as-hosting-gig-ends

“Charmyne Palavi accused Rochester of throwing a gift bag at her while backstage on the Biggest Loser set, where Palavi was contracted to spray-tan contestants. “

I’m not sure what’s funnier, Rochester throwing stuff at Palavi or the thought of Charmyne spraytanning the fatties.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy1:32 pm 19 May 09

Possibly she doesn’t respect the men much either, just the fact they’re active members of a particular team.

Just to add to the discussion I’ll ask the question: does she respect herself?

Mr Evil said :

Charmynge is a slut: a publicity slut.

Maybe right, but how blokes (and females) are wishing they are footy players right now? She’s cheaper than a prostitute!

Charmynge is a slut: a publicity slut.

Furry Jesus said :

The problem for me is that I suspect many of the men who have sex with Charmyne Palavi don’t particlarly respect her

Possibly she doesn’t respect the men much either, just the fact they’re active members of a particular team.

Well Shutterbug I expect if Tom Hanks met Charmyne he would have a pleasant conversation with her. I doubt whether he would bother drawing classist comparisons. If he read your post, he would probably be annoyed by it.

It is annoying that because a small number of women hang around footballers and do whatever they want, that footballers can’t be expected to tell the difference between these groupies, and the rest of the women on the planet.

I know they aren’t that bright, but do they honestly think any woman is fair game?

It is like the Summernats argument that because some women there show their boobs, that every other woman can’t complain about being asked to flash.

If all women are seen as being the same, and answerable for each other’s actions, then all men should also be seen as the same, and the majority of normal men would be also getting the blame for being gang rapists.

Listening to comments in the media and online about this footballers case, it’s noteable how the women are so stridently against the women complaining about the footballers. They “throw themselves” at the footballers, apparently, so it’s not the poor footballers’ fault. And similar sentiments.

ant said :

motleychick said :

It still worries me that this is an almost 40 year old woman with 3 children. Who looks after her kids while mummy is out acting like a sl*t?? It’s disgusting.

Yes, she’s being a whore when she should be a madonna, clearly. It’s odd though, how she’s a “sl.t” but the men she does these things with escape censure.

I have had similar discussions with people not about this incident, but similar situation. They’re response, “Oh, well they are also male sluts”

I found it interesting that the term ‘slut’ is still then attributed to females primarily and needs to be specified male.
It is just another derogatory term out there to judge womens worth on one small aspect of their behaviour (sexual behaviour being only a small part of ones overall behaviour). Generally in the male sense, the behaviour is described, more so than an overall value on them as a person. (no always though)

I also note that a lot of women use these terrible terms against other women.

I think the men involved have got their tail between their legs at the moment and they’re trying to lay low, whereas she is seizing the opportunity to raise her profile and do a bit of promotion before some kind of confessions-type book comes out.

Just you wait and see.

motleychick said :

It still worries me that this is an almost 40 year old woman with 3 children. Who looks after her kids while mummy is out acting like a sl*t?? It’s disgusting.

Yes, she’s being a whore when she should be a madonna, clearly. It’s odd though, how she’s a “sl.t” but the men she does these things with escape censure.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Frankly, I think we need to get away from automatic assumptions of ‘better’ or ‘worse’, and accept that different people have different behavioural standards. And provided it’s not hurting anyone, this is ok.

I agree.

People are judged for their behaviour, and the groups we associate with all the time.

That’s what gives people an insight into what kind of a person we are.

I judge Dane Tilse because of his behaviour – he’s a perverted idiot.

I judge Matthew Johns – he’s a perverted idiot too.

I judge Charmyne Palavi – she’s just an idiot.

And I judge Tom Hanks too – His movies suck but he seems like a nice guy.

You are judged by the company you keep and the way you carry yourself everywhere, not just in the bedroom.

Wether you’re male or female if you’re running around telling all and sundry about your sexual exploits then expect people to judge you.

It’s a fact of life.

motleychick said :

I don’t deny I’ve had liaisons with many, many footballers, but what annoys me about these tags and the way I was portrayed on that show is the idea I prey on them like some of the starstruck women I’ve seen out there.

It still worries me that this is an almost 40 year old woman with 3 children. Who looks after her kids while mummy is out acting like a sl*t?? It’s disgusting.

Maybe the FATHER?

and I regardless of what this woman did or didn’t do (I didn’t watch the show) I think your comments are disgusting.

I think Magella’s spot on. Women should be able to make decisions around their sexual behaviour without being judged for it, particularly by the men they have sex with.

The problem for me is that I suspect many of the men who have sex with Charmyne Palavi don’t particlarly respect her, because the gang-bang (group sex – what an obfuscation that term is in this context) culture in the manly sporting codes is based on scoring and getting women to do things with the group – a vehicle for perverse male bonding processes at the very least, which puts the interests of the woman and side issues like her level of intoxication and capacity for informed consent well below the men’s wish to use them to play out their fantasies (and sneak a peek at their mates’ erections).

I’ve participated in group sex a few times, and I can tell you that when it works (which it rarely does – someone always regrets it the next day), there’s a lot more respect for each other than the hotel room/public toilet scenarios that we’ve been exposed to this week. There’s more often an equal number of men and women, and there’s probably more same-sex activity than we’d see from the footballers. Group sex of the type I’m referring to is often a middle class rite of passage, with participants exploring their own sexualities by experimenting with the limits of sexual freedom and intimacy, in a setting made emotionally safer by being with peers capable of giving equal informed consent.

Lady_from_Holt10:50 am 19 May 09

I think we should all just be excited that TWO Canberrans were mentioned in the news outside of the CT in one day! That has to be a new record!

I don’t deny I’ve had liaisons with many, many footballers, but what annoys me about these tags and the way I was portrayed on that show is the idea I prey on them like some of the starstruck women I’ve seen out there.

It still worries me that this is an almost 40 year old woman with 3 children. Who looks after her kids while mummy is out acting like a sl*t?? It’s disgusting.

johnboy said :

Hmm… great piece of journalism describing the millennia old Roman Pantheon as a “centuries old church”.

well, it was a temple to all the roman gods.

and a church from early AD, so it is provbably true.

I bet the christians did a lot of praying in roman times…

probably about the apparent short time stays in the colliseum…

and the abundance of lions.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy10:16 am 19 May 09

I think the ‘trashy’ bit was referring more to the fact that someone went on the news about being with lots of footy players. It’s the telling everyone, more than the doing, that makes it trashy. Di

There was a story about it on news.com.au this morning, too.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25502809-421,00.html

I’d say a lot more would write articles if they weren’t shot down. Period.

Hardly worth getting your panties in a bunch over.

Surely the comment about selective breeding in the OP insinuated one being better than the other?

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Frankly, I think we need to get away from automatic assumptions of ‘better’ or ‘worse’, and accept that different people have different behavioural standards. And provided it’s not hurting anyone, this is ok.

This was what I was getting at. Well said.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy10:07 am 19 May 09

Sounded more to me like a spectrum of variation, rather than an insinuation about one being better than another.

It’s worth noting here that many men WILL view differently women who have had many partners compared with those with few. Rightly or wrongly, many men will take this into consideration when deciding whether a given woman would make a good partner for them. I strongly suspect many women make the same judgement call with men.

Frankly, I think we need to get away from automatic assumptions of ‘better’ or ‘worse’, and accept that different people have different behavioural standards. And provided it’s not hurting anyone, this is ok.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy said :

Some women choose marriage over adventurous sex lives

So married women don’t get to have adventurous sex lives now? Or is that reserved for the promiscuous?

No, that was an example. Read the bit where I mention endless possibilities.

AngryHenry said :

And guess what else?

Some write articles for RiotACT about their observations.

Both stories highlighted here I thought were of interest and appreciate being steered in their direction.

Cheers.

I dare say a lot more would write articles for riotact about their observations if they weren’t shot down for providing a difference of opinion that challenges the boys club atmosphere.

I have no issue with the stories mentioned, just the fact that women are referred to as BREEDS, and the underlying insinuation that just because someone is ‘trashy bed hopper’, they are worth less than someone who is an ‘intelligent romantic’.

And guess what else?

Some write articles for RiotACT about their observations.

Both stories highlighted here I thought were of interest and appreciate being steered in their direction.

Cheers.

VYBerlinaV8_the_one_they_all_copy9:47 am 19 May 09

Some women choose marriage over adventurous sex lives

So married women don’t get to have adventurous sex lives now? Or is that reserved for the promiscuous?

And guess what? There are many other types of women in Canberra to and dare I say all over the world. Why, some women have consentual group sex AND are intelligent, class themselves as feminists, wear short skirts, have a few drinks and engage in ‘trashy’ behaviour. Some women choose marriage over adventurous sex lives, or only take a small number of lovers in their lifetime, class themselves as feminists, wear short skirts, have a few drinks and may not be intelligent. Some women don’t go out drinking, lead subdued lives and don’t get spray tans but still engage in consentual group sex. The possibilities are endless.

What I’m trying to say is that palcing women in categories such as classy vs trashy, educated vs uneducated is simplistic, judgemental, and not at all original. Ever heard of the Madonna/Whore complex?

wow. there are two women that you have judged to be of different classes.
who would have thought – two different types of people in a city of around 400 thousand :/

Hmm… great piece of journalism describing the millennia old Roman Pantheon as a “centuries old church”.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.