Firstly, all the tabloids are little more than pulp fiction, entertainment value only. It is difficult to actually to determine what the real facts are, as many papers use artistic license of embellishment and leave certain inconvenient facts out and rely on emotional sensationalism to sell their papers.

Hook people emotionally and then milk the story for all it is worth.

Susie OBrien
Sex never the path to revenge
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion-old/sex-never-a-path-to-revenge/story-fn56aaiq-1226017296613

the media is the covert collaborator in the gender wars.

I'll have to stick with the gender lines on this one although I do think there is plenty of reason to decide that players are not role models and should never be touted (or paid) as such.

"subjected to abuse of power and inappropriate behavior by well paid men held in high esteem by society"

By her own admission the girl claims to have told the player initially involved that she was 19 at the time (and from the footage I've seen could easily pass for 19). She admits to having used a long running false claim of pregnancy. She has breached trust given to her by stealing images from a players computer (not sure why someone would want to keep nude photo's of workmates on their computer though). She has published stolen photo's of people who were as I understand it not in any way involved with her on the internet without their consent.

Just what abuse of power was she subjected to prior to starting her vendetta?

She was only 16 so perhaps some room for cutting her some slack over her choices but that does not make villain's of those she has lied to.

From the coverage I've seen on this the only one with a case to answer is Ricky Nixon who on the face of it appears to have begun a relationship with her knowing her age and what's gone before.

This girl is definitely not the poster girl for demonstrating abuse of male power.

R0bert

Where's the connection?

"A young woman, subjected to abuse of power and inappropriate behaviour by well paid men held in high esteem by society, takes revenge"

Who here is "held in high esteem by society"?

Football players? Their agents? The AFL? Journalists? Radio shock-jocks? Eddie McGuire?

Fell at the first fence.

The critical issue here is the "Age of Consent"(recall the movie?)
This girl was 16 years , was she raped? She wasn't so what's all the fuss , perhaps she is intellectually handicapped if so then a gang-bang would be an assault and consequences applied .
The issue of her IQ was never mentioned , so perhaps she is inspired by attention to be a Snoddie-Burger and simply does what a Snoddie-Burger does so where is the illegality here . Perhaps the Age of Consent for females in any Group event should be twenty five years ?

It never ceases to amaze me what some people genuinely seem to believe.

Questions like "why have they come down like a ton of bricks on a 17-year-old girl?" and "why did St Kilda management launch a public attack on a schoolgirl for distributing photos that their own players took of each other" are utterly ridiculous. Given her long list of attrocious behaviour, both the media and St Kilda have been amazingly forgiving. Any older member of our society would be treated way more harshly. I acknowledge that it is only proper that people are a little forgiving when young people who make mistakes, but don't pretend that her treatment has been in any way harsh.

Furthermore, while the case of Ricky Nixon is quite different, the only crime of the players has been to have casual sex with her. For this, they are accused of hating women. Whatever people think of casual sex, if men are criticised for it, women should also be criticised.

And what of personal responsibility? The article states that men should take note, women will no longer take being treated this way. But yet there is always dozens of women hanging around footballers. If the treatment is so bad why not send a massage by just walking away? If a person says that something is not acceptable and then by their own actions consents to it does that person not hold some responsibility? And what of the parents in this case. If she was 16 at the time why were they not more concerned about why she was spending so much time around footballers, do not they hold some responsibility also?

This entire issue has been taken and twisted into a political and ideological spear for use by those with an agenda. Not once did the author question the 'St Kilda Schoolgirls' responsibility, not once did she question the responsibility of the parents. Nor did she question the responsibility of the groupies that no doubt add to the culture that she finds so repugnant. No, she laid all the blame at the feet of not the St Kilda players/manager but "Men" in general. It seems the author is stating that women should be permitted to do anything they wish because men should always hold all the responsibility.

The fact is that all sides hold responsibility in matters like this. You cannot drink and drive - even at 16 - and get away with it, you cannot assult someone at 16 and get away with it. Yet in cases like this it is always the mans fault, why?

"the only crime of the players has been to have casual sex with her. ..."
@ benk, Thursday, 10 March 2011 10:00:39 AM

The players and the girl in question met at her school when the players went there on some AFL promotional visit.

It was unethical and despicable for them to meet up with a schoolgirl they met at her school.

They and St Kilda are paying the price they deserve to pay for that and their appalling handling of the fallout.

Football fools of all codes deserve to be pilloried.

McReal I've not seen any indication that the player involved recognised the girl from the school visit. My understanding from her comments in a recent interview is that she saw the players on a school visit and sought them out elsewhere and lied about her age.

R0bert

Just imagine if Corey Worthington had done all this!

I remember all these women being so upset about the treatment of Lara Bingle, who had her semi-naked picture posted on the internet. Apparently this kind of behaviour is acceptable if it is directed at footballers.

The funniest thing about the whole saga is the silence by everyone about the homosexual angle of a footballer keeping a photo of his team mate masturbating on his computer. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I just find the silence amusing.

The chick has told lie after lie after lie and people still keep falling for it. I actually predicted that she was never pregnant in the first place. That's one terrible thing to lie about. Where is the condemnation from women who have lost babies? I'm waiting for the Nixon stuff to be revealed/admitted as a lie but I cant see how it could be.

The only innocent parties in this are the guy who had his private picture plastered over the internet, and the player who was told he would be a father. Just how has this girl been wronged? She saw a player at a school presentation, flew to Sydney to see a game and told the guy she was 19 and slept with him. All this is by her own admission. Where is the abuse of power?

Lets not forget, she has stated that she deliberately started a relationship with Nixon in an attempt to set him up. And he has abused his power? Seriously? Sure he didn't have to sleep with her, but she pursued him with vindictive motives. It's not like she fell in lust/love or something. I don't think she can claim to be the victim, whatever her age.

All I can say is, reverse the genders, and see what feminists would think if a 17yo guy who was shagging Liz Ellis plastered her team mates naked pictures all over the internet, and told everyone he had been given aids by her, and then seduced the coach and secretly took photos. Would Corey get any sympathy?

Quite a complex set of arguments here and I look forward to the REAL truth being disclosed. From the press reports so far (maybe they are pretty shallow) but this young lady needs some serious help, or discipline or guidance or all of the above, and Nixon should never have got involved. He looks old enough to know better, but maybe he wasn't thinking with his head? By the way, is he a very unattractive man, or what?

My only question is,"Why does anyone care?" As far as I can tell the young women was above the age of consent when the alleged sexual relations took place. No crimes appear to have been committed and it's none of my or anyone else's business with whom football players and their managers choose to sleep, as long as no coercion is involved.

For me,the really sad thing is the prurient delight the media have taken not only in reporting these incidents but also in passing self-serving moralistic judgements on all involved. We must be a shallow society when stuff like this takes over the front pages.

they did meet her at a school, and she did lie about her age. Think about that for a bit.
So the men in question had no reason to disbelieve her. Think about that again.
Their true mentality is between their legs, and that gets first priority.

This is more a very sad event really, and the girl needs a responsible adult to take her aside and tell a few home truths about forging a life that has some meaning and not wasting her time on revenge on a few footballers. Corey Worthington would be opening a new fashion or music store if he had done same Houlley. :P

Both equally as narcissistic and both equally troubling. What sort of behaviour is the media fostering or 'rewarding' with this constant attention to the LCD?

I am happy to say I agree with JamesH for once on the role of the media in the gender wars.

I read the article twice, trying to look for a bit of common sense in it. I couldn't find any.

As far as I can tell, the only one who abused power - indeed, the only one who had power in this situation - was the girl herself. She carried out several despicable acts:
1) Lying about her age
2) Lying about her pregnancy
3) Stealing photos
4) Lying about the context in which the photos were taken
5) Deliberately using those photos to cause harm to another person.

Now I have very little tolerance for sportsmen who use their status as a means of enhancing their promiscuity, but only one party here set out to maliciously harm another person. That was the girl, in case you're wondering.

The players involved have managed to develop a sort of martyr status, while she has succeeded in causing harm. Sadly, at the tender age of 17, she has caused irreparable damage to herself. What man in his right mind would engage in a relationship with her? What employer in his/her right mind would employ her, given her tendency towards vindictiveness, sensationalism and dishonesty? Still a teenager, and more damage to overcome than most of us will have in our lives.

A link to Jezabel, a popular feminist website, to show how feminists really think. When a 30yo female teacher's aid sleeps with a 15yo boy it's fine because he 'hit on her' and was 'sexually experienced'.

The hypocracy would be laughable if feminists weren't funded by millions of our tax dollars. No talk of 'power imbalance' or 'girls club' or 'boys kicking up a hornets nest' here.

And our female PM, supported by our female G-G, is now setting up another tax payer funded girls club to ensure that our companies are employing enough girls on boards. Just what we need.

http://jezebel.com/#!5779110

I should be clear, I'm talking about some of the comments above.

Surely you notice the massive double standard though pelican.

It amuses me because I would think the ideal of feminism would be for women to be sexually liberated, and for the patronising paternalistic attitude to women in society be rejected. Well! Not so! When it comes to sex and alcohol, it seems even the 'liberated' woman is never sexually aggressive, and even if she is, it's up to a man to tap her on the head sober her up with a cuppa, and tuck her in to bed alone to save her from herself. Or maybe it's just that a woman, while being able to vote and work and do all sorts of things, isn't really mature enough to handle sex until she's 30. Then again even if she's over 30, it appears group sex (Bulldogs NRL affair) could never have been her idea.

I'm beginning to wonder if there is ever any situation that a woman is ever considered in a position of power. Everything in the world really is all men's fault. I suppose if a woman was ever accepted to be in a position of power, that would mean she had some responsibility. Cant have that!

So, no matter how liberated a woman wants to become, with feminism, when any sexual encounter is the responsibility of the man, women can never really be liberated. Look at all this 'sexualising' and 'objectification', the assumption being that women expressing themselves through sex or being depicted in a sexual way is dangerous. It can only be so dangerous because

a) All men are rapists
b) feminists cant accept sexually assertive or aggressive women.

579,

'they did meet her at a school'
Did they 'meet' her, or were they giving a presentation to a group of 50 kids. I wonder how many people have 'met' these players, and how many they could recognise or name a week later.

She met them 3 months later, and judging by the fact she travelled interstate to 'meet' them, I think they left more of an impression on her than she on them.

Houllie

Many teenaged girls (and ex teenaged girls) report that their brothers had more freedom, in regards to parties, drinking, staying out late etc. The attitude seems to be that young ladies need more protection and the same attitude is on display here. Four things have happened to this particular young lady. She has behaved disgracefully and been criticised, she has had sex and she has had her heart broken. All of these experiences are simply a part of life, yet some people seem to think that they are catastrophies that she should have been protected from. The people kicking up a stink really should know better.

I never heard any men complaining about footballers hanging over the top of toilet cubicles taking photos they had no permission to take in the John’s case. No doubt handing them around in the lockyer rooms etc. (displaying them publically) later on. Oh! The outrage when a mere slip of a girl does the same to the footballers. There wasn’t too much spitting of the dummy by men either when Brendan Fevolla posted pictures he had no permission to reveal to the public on the internet.

True two wrongs don’t make a right. But then it wasn’t treated as too much of a wrong when it was done to the women so that is why women now can’t help thinking there is a bit of poetic justice in this sorry case and they also notice the different reaction by males in general when it is they who are on the receiving end.

What were these men doing alone in rooms with this girl, obviously it is their fault because they shouldn’t have put themselves in compromising sexual situations. At least that was the verdict in the John’s case when it applied to the woman victim. Sorry fellows you laid down the rules in these cases. It’s the ones who are set up in a compromising situation who are guilty, so in this case, by those rules, it must be the footballers who are at fault. Or is your double standard showing?

Who paid for her trip to meet these blokes interstate, that could be a deciding factor.
They would have known she was not 19 yo, what is a nineteen yo doing at that school.
Probably getting her interstate was the cheaper alternative, than employing a girl local.
I think what upset the balance was after arrival, she was confronted by a gang , this was not one on one.

Cherful

You are one nasty piece of work.

No-one claimed that it was ok to take naked photos of Lara Bingle without her permission. No-one claims that it is ok to post naked photos of Nick Riewoldt without his permission. Where is the double-standard?

Cherful,

The girl admitted she wasn't there when the pictures were taken.

BENK <cherful you are a nasty piece of work)

How do you explain the Johns fellow apologizing to Claire for all the other players in the room on National Television. Sounds like an admission of guilt to me. And it’s not second hand, I saw the news bulletin and heard him say that with my own ears.

The point I am making is that these footballers deliberately set this girl up in a compromising situation so she is the one that looks guilty. They knew very well this is the way it would appear when they planned it.

Whether these blokes the 17year old girl set up to look compromised are guilty or not is not what I am debating here it is this article which says women feel there is a double standard in the male media when reporting this case and other cases involving football sex scandals. Because whenever they set a girl up to look compromised it is never their fault but suddenly when this girl sets them up to look compromised regardless of how she has done it the male media and males in general don’t like it one bit.

The crucial factor is the deliberate planning to make someone look compromised in a way that is hard for them to refute.

The football clubs and a lot of rapists who walk free in our society a la Mrs Brimble are quilty of this. The woman who wrote this article and women in general have every right to feel the footballers needed a bit of their own medicine dished out to them. How did this girl get this kind of access to their room and their computer anyway. Certainly looks compromising to me.

Nasty footballers.

CHEZZA,

I think you've got your cases mixed up. The toilet cubicle was 3 broncos players I think. There are so many it's hard to keep up.

I remember the girl thought in that instance she was going into the men's toilet in a nightclub for a cup of milo according to many commentators.

'I never heard any men complaining about footballers...'

And they haven't complained about this 'poor troubled girl' either. The Football code administrations punish their employees for social behaviour outside of work hours too.

'Oh! The outrage when a mere slip of a girl does the same to the footballers.'

There is no outrage. There is ONLY outrage at the double standards of painting this girl as a victim. LAra Bingle affair; Player at fault(good). StKilda girl affair; Player still at fault. Shorthand; Women is always the victim.

'There wasn’t too much spitting of the dummy by men either when Brendan Fevolla posted pictures he had no permission to reveal to the public on the internet.'

No there wasn't. And there wouldn't be here either if people weren't painting the girl as such a victim.

'What were these men doing alone in rooms with this girl, obviously it is their fault because they shouldn’t have put themselves in compromising sexual situations'

Does that argument stand for when women are raped too? For Lara Bingle? Sounds like we have another double standard!

'How do you explain the Johns fellow apologising to Claire for all the other players in the room on National Television. '

Media pressure.

It seems nobody thinks women enjoy or willingly participate in group sex. Did you know 'Claire' was rejecting some players based on their looks and summoning others forward? It was the topic of jokes about the rejected players.

'The crucial factor is the deliberate planning to make someone look compromised in a way that is hard for them to refute.'

Where has this happened? Not much deliberate planning in getting pissed of your head and seeing someone you fancy and putting your career on the line for having sex with them.

what a pity that this article projects the notion that the young woman concerned is 'the first' to fight back or stand up to sexual exploitation and abuse by australian footballers. what about those women who have reported to police and who have thereby received abuse, contentions that they are engaged in making 'false' complaints and other such responses? women (of whatever age) who endeavour to follow the 'ordinary' processes whereby 'our' institutions contend sexual abuse/exploitation of and violence against women will be taken seriously deserve recognition and affirmation, not being written out of the equation and ignored.

let's affirm the courage of *all* women who report on sexual abuse, exploitation and violence against them, for particularly where the alleged offenders are australian footballers, they will generally receive short shrift.

Houellebecq, < I don’t think media pressure would make John’s apologise for all the other players in the room but I think guilt and some belated sense of shame would. >

They are not the words of an innocent person, I would never apologise for Something I knew I was dam well not guilty of.

So the men said she rejected some of them because they were not handsome enough. Like she would have had that power of veto in this situation, I don’t think so. Another plausible lie to make it look as though the woman was controlling the situation.

The same in the Brimble case, where one of the men (found not guilty of rape in a previous case) says Mrs Brimble jumped on him to have sex after having sex with all the other players who had fallen asleep. This is the same sort of cunning lie as the one above to make it look as though the woman is all for it. These blokes work out what to say between them to make it all look bad for the woman.

As I pointed out when we previously debated the Mrs. Brimble case, the time frame there from when she was seen staggering on deck with Wilheim (or whatever his name was) was 4.15am until the paramedics arrived at 5.30pm, and it was they who put her death at 30minutes earlier, 5.00pm.
This allows 45mins for all of the players to have full sex with her, fall asleep and then her to jump on one of them with abandoned sexual lust, waking him from sleep, a woman unconscious or very close to death by those time frames.

Yet these blokes tell these lies to influence the jury and the sad part is it works. This lie is very similar in it’s scheming purpose of making the woman look guilty as the one you mention in the John’s case, knocking blokes back who weren’t handsome.
It sounds like lies and it is.
If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck then it is a duck.

Jocelynne

Who says that the sex with the footballers (as opposed to Ricky Nixon) was exploitative? It appears that she was quite happy to have sex and only became upset when the relationship didn't end up being longer term. Don't blokes have a right to decide who we love?

The alleged victims in all of the cases that you have mentioned have behaved poorly and have been judged accordingly. The women in the St Kilda, Sydney Bulldogs and Brett Stewart cases were judged as liars, because they were lying. Clare of Christchurch was judged as a slut, because she had oral sex with blokes she had only just met in a pub toilet. If the next alleged victim has behaved differently, it is entirely possible that people will judge them differently. We are all judged, whether we like it or not. We do get to decide how people judge us.

Chezza

The media coverage of the Brimble case made the blokes look like the biggest tossers it is possible to imagine. This may well be accurate, but it is hard to argue that the media is particularly harsh on women involved. The media have also been quite critical of Sam Gilbert. His only crime was to have sex with a woman who he thought was 19. When he found out that she was younger, he cut her off. If he was wrong to have casual sex, she should also be criticised.

Cherful, are you Claire? Are you one of the football players who was involved in that incident? If not, what inside information do you have that qualifies you to make the bold statement that Johns was lying when he said that she rejected the ugly ones?

Believe it or not, some women are secure enough to tell men that they don't want to have sex with them. And not all men - not all footballers, even - are rapists. Most accept that no means no. So it is entirely possible that she had the power to veto the ugly ones. Unless you know otherwise, it's unacceptable to declare that someone is lying. Without a qualifier such as "I believe" or "in my opinion", it borders on slander.

Let's not forget that no charges were laid over that incident. No rape was committed, and Claire's former colleagues reported that she was quite proud of her exploits the next few days at work. None of this changes the fact that the incident, in my view, was disgraceful and a cause for shame for all involved. That's ALL involved.

'I don’t think media pressure would make John’s apologise for all the other players in the room but I think guilt and some belated sense of shame would.'

Oh come on he knew apologising was the only way to save his million dollar media career. The whole interview was staged for him to turn public opinion by the same network that employed him.

I don't know if I'm the first, but I'm willing to cross the gender lines and side with the girl.

Football is supposed to be about sport, fitness, healthy competition, etc. Instead it seems more about making money and not trashing the brand.

The media (ideally, of course) is supposed to be about reporting the truth. Yet they're in bed with the football code, as it is the biggest vehicle for selling newspapers in the state.

To be honest, I don't really understand what was at issue in this whole StKilda girl affair. She seems to be of age and capable of standing up for herself. I only hope that she writes a book one day and makes half as much money as some of the footballers and journalists.

My gut feeling is that I'm glad St Kilda didn't win the flag in the last few years. They shouldn't be rewarded with a cup after showing they can't kick straight with this and also the Andrew Lovett scandal.    

OTOKONOKO

Well who was in that room? You? It all comes down to whom you believe is lying doesn’t it.

As for Claire’s work mates. I read that scenario differently. Because the first stage after a traumatic or shocking event is a kind of denial or a distancing from the horror of the event. A calmness of mind as the mind goes into the first stage of grief which is a denial of the full extent of the event. Like in the event of the death of a spouse. The mind shuts down to an extent.
Everyone says how well the bereaved is taking it. It can sometimes take weeks or months even a year for the whole grief process to play out.

I think Claire told her work mates this in a calm state of mind and it was they who were shocked and put their own slant on it because she wasn’t reacting like they thought crying hysterically or something.

Houellebecq

<The whole interview was staged for him to turn public opinion by the same network that employed him.>

If that was the case, it was pretty badly worded.

He says, “ I apologise to Claire for all the other players in the room.”

Apologise for what? Is the question that comes immediately to mind.

The public was baying for an apology, the outrage industry was in full swing, and the NRL was under pressure as was Channel 9 for employing him. So it was handed down, in a way that would maximise ratings. The subject of the affair was thus changed from the girl to Mathew's remorse and the bad little boy did his penance to the Matronly Tracy, so as he could then get on with the show. I was waiting for him to cry, wife by his side to show she's forgiven him, it's time we all did.

The truth of the case is irrelevant to the theatre and the sating of public thirst for blood and the TV ratings and the PR damage control.

It is amazing how naive some people are , demonstrates how sad and inadequate our education system is , reading through the posts one gets to consider that many young people think the "Gang Bang" is an AFL , modern , invention !
William Wordsworth 1700? refers to difficulty reaching the door because the cobble stones were so slippery and how easy it was to find the Venue just follow the slippery trail running down the Street .

A then there is Larry Flint publisher of Hustler Magazine who used to run competitions to establish records , Sick you say , I agree , but I am certain that if young girls were somewhat acquainted with this history they would better understand out of control carnality and wised up avoid such encounters .

Been watching this train-wreck of a story for a while. I think if you took those newsworthy three letters 'AFL' out of the story then it would boil down to not very bright young man who has shown himself to not be completely reliable in the ethics department (eg taking those photos) meeting somewhat troubled and demanding young woman who also shown herself to be not totally reliable in the ethics department. Her age is the mitigating factor in this case but even tben, the lying about the pregnancy and stillbirth which had to be really upsetting for the male and his family crossed a very big line in behaviour.

So we have a couple of people pretty much deserved each other. Combinations of the two and also involving not young people but middle aged and even old people are played out all the time with equally bad behaviour happening. The difference is that it's not newsworthy unless it really blows out into the bizarre and ends in court. When it's uni students or staff, or politicans or their staffers, lawyers, doctors, hairdressers or any other profession, commentators don't raise a sweat about say 'doctor culture' for example the way they do about 'AFL culture'. Yes of course a blokey culture is out there but it extends past the AFL and all AFL players shouldn't be automatically regarded to want to be involved in that culture or associated with that image.

This wasn't a case of a young woman being used for a one night stand. She had a relationship with the male which ended badly but if he hadn't dumped her, she might have been the one doing the dumping a few months down the track without the media explosion unless she decided to kiss and tell. Normally it's considered healthy for people to have few relationships before finding Mr or Ms Right. Of course though you treat the people you are moving on from well and maybe that didn't happen in this case, hence the young woman's outrage.

Totally agree, Dan S de Merengue.

>>The media (ideally, of course) is supposed to be about reporting the truth. Yet they're in bed with the football code, as it is the biggest vehicle for selling newspapers in the state.<<

That's it in a nutshell. If it weren't for the newsworthiness of the footballing fraternity - whose fame is entirely a construct of the media themselves - there wouldn't be a story.

We have reached a position that is self-perpetuating. Where their every drink, every barroom slurred slur, every speeding ticket, every blurry mobile-phone picture, every unauthorized micturition, as well as every root, gets front page attention and weeks of analysis.

Which ultimately says more about us, than it does about them.

JL Deland, Wednesday, 16 March 2011 9:01:45 AM
I don't get your issues about age of males and "Age of Consent"
I am not a lawyer but I am sure you are wrong , it's legal and in some cultures commonplace.
If your interpretation gained traction thousands of men will be languishing in goal , you will cripple our economy .

Sorry Garum Marsala but I don't get your post either!

What I'm talking about is not age of sexual consent though I do think that both for males and females there should be one. That provides some small protection from older predators moving in on young people as they think they may be in trouble with the law, and also is useful if a young person is being pressured for sex which they don't want but are having problems because of confidence issues in refusing as a way out. Consenting and hopefully educated 14 year olds having sex with each other is not for the law.

What I'm talking about is younger people being given more rope as hormones and lack of experience charge around their body. If I experienced say some inappropriate attention say just nosiness say from a young person, I'd be more forgiving than say if I experienced it from a older person - 47 does seem to be a difficult age for some people for example. I also would be less forgiving of someone who was in a position of trust in society for doing inappropriate stuff than someone who wasn't, though age again should soften the fallout if that happened in my eyes.

Ricky Nixon for instance seems to have put himself in a idiot situtation with a young woman who had already being flagged as needing careful handling. He's been bundled off to rehab, which seems to be the modern societal cleansing technique (personally I'd like to see us get back to the ashes and sackcloth days and being beaten around the village square, but I'm a traditional sort - joke people joke!) for treatment for his boofheadedness. His age makes him come out worse in a moral sense to me than the girl who also did questionable things because of her age.

By 47 though she won't have the excuses. The boredom factor should have well and truly set in by then and we probably won't be reading about her actions. So I don't see me collapsing society with my views anytime soon.

is she the new kathy lett

No she is the original Capitalist , please consult your Bible .