There's a really simple principle here:

sanity, and freedom, and not mucking yourself and the rest of us that have to share the planet with you, depends on seeing and treating things according to what they are.

Eg. truck drivers treat a truck as such and not like a rally car, companies treat truck drivers as people and not as robots for profit.

When it comes to sex, then sanity and freedom and not mucking one's own head up and not abusing others depends on treating others as persons, not regarding and using others as objects.

It's really simple, you don't appreciate being used by others, then don't you use others. Long term, developing sanity will give greater happiness, better sex. Treating others as objects will keep you immature, isolated and probably long term dependent on viagra because of deleting one of the key ingredients of best sex, which is love of another person.

Another God bothering Australian Family Association member trying to make a moral judgement about what we choose to do.

The desire to impose their own "ethical and moral" values on everyone else is dangerous.

BB is crud television, but ratings are the only thing that matters. When people get bored with the show it will be axed, the way it should be.

To the religious right, get out of my life.

Standard regulation on televsion presentation is more helpful than censorship. This was not a failure in BB, it was a failure in the concept of self regulation standards which are not proactive.

I think some viewers legitimately watch BB curiously as a sociological laboratory. The housemates are willing guniea pigs. Love it or hate it, BB chooses a large crossection of housemates in its range, including the best and worse characters that you will find in Australian society. Particularly in a younger generation.

Perhaps this is the problem. It has been marketed as a family show for young people. Its not the kind of show for kiddies.

I'm glad they axed the "uncensored" BB. That ended up being pornography.

But I'm not convinced that the whole show should be censorsed. The house rules could include higher standards of language and behaviour. BB should have been faster in responding to the sex abuse incidence. They only had to switch on the lights!

This season already had early indicators that it was going to be a problem with the eviction of Elise first. She was only evicted because she was Asian. This sent a message to kids. Asians are rejected first. Another nasty side to our culture in real life television.

Real life television is a reflection of Australian culture, not BB. He does set them up with the double beds and drinks, and this is the problem.

The "up-late" time slot should be the actual airtime everytime for adults. Regulation for local production needs to return for prime time using actors, drama, movies: made in Australia.

If you censor BB, you will also have to censor most American crap as they often have sex and violence guns and blood in the same scenes. These are not good for children either, yet they are in prime time.

Would we rather watch Americans with their guns, violence, sex and blood than Australians, simply because can't stand our own culture? Or do we regulate how programing is presented to a higher standard?

Where do you draw the line with censorship?

Hey, you only need to use the off button if you don't like it.

And it ain't my ethics, just as the laws of gravity ain't my imposition on anybody. Do you discount the basic law of humanity that says don't use others as objects?

This little 'episode' of the public conciousness is very amusing. l thought it was terrible what happened eventhough l hadnt seen the footage. But then when l did look at a clip of that 'incident' (its all over the net), that pesky thing called truth and er, reality intruded upon my sanctimonious disquiet. Since when does a victim of sexual assualt laughingly and with implicit invitation suggestively ask questions like 'you're not gonna turkey slap me are you?'... nudge, nudge, wink, wink. Then laugh and giggle all the way through the 15 second 'assault'. And since when does a vitim od sexual assault then snuggle up to one of the agressors and giggle whilst she gives him a hand job under the covers?

Sorry to burst the bubble folks, but that is what actually happened.

All this public/media outrage is a joke? A way to get up ratings possibly? You gotta be kidding right?

This thing has been blown so far out of proportion by people who havent even bothered to have a look at what ACTUALLY happened. Not like its difficult to get the footage as its all over the internet.

The real outrage here is that overt exaggeration (of an trivial incident like this one) fosters a mentality of "she's crying wolf and playing the victim" when a woman is actually the victim of a real life sexual assault.

Its also ironic that given her tacit approval and jocular invitation of the horse play, she too was not chucked off that tawdry show.

Thank small mercies that my TV stopped working 6mths ago and l havent replaced it.

Parenting as all parents know and few singles understand, is a constant negotiation. The result of all negotiations should be a win-win for all parties and this is no different. We parents hope for a well-balanced strong and capable individual who is suitably equipped to chart their own course through life.
We also understand that in order to produce this individual, we must set and apply boundaries with clear understanding that to cross the boundary will result in consequences. The parents’ capacity to maintain control is diminished significantly once the exposure to peers and other influencing sources increases. It is at this time when we rely upon the greater community, governments and other regulatory bodies to support us in enforcing the fact that when a boundary is crossed, there will be significant adverse consequences.
Right now we are dropping the ball. The boundary is hazy at best, and the consequences are becoming insignificant or ignored all together. I look back at one of the most rudimentary rules I had taught to me, “would you like that done to you, your sister, or mother, [daughter]….?” I think it is appropriate that some of you respondents should apply that argument to your own logic.
The community is quickly becoming so complacent with regard to an individuals right to engage [or not] in activities, masked as freedom of choice, and the media is ensuring that we are increasing desensitised to the point where the consequences of our actions are made to appear insignificant. It is time that the vast majority of people, those of us with sound morals, ethics and principles stand up and say this is unacceptable and demand that the boundary be put back.