Of course the guy's an idiot, but why the detailed critique of what he's doing? A party went wrong, the police stuffed up, and the media beat it up. Reading more into it is laughable.
Every teenager avoids responsibility, so in the end, you've started sounding like a man-hating feminist...

No no no no. The goose (let's not dignify the perpetrator/victim with a name) is smart and has taken complete responsibility for his actions. He invited people to the party through a completely unmoderated medium and those people decided to trash the world, requiring police intervention to calm the neighbours.

He's a teenager,up himself and selfish - of course he won't take responsibility for his actions. But there is a larger problem evident here. It's all about the newsworthiness of moral outrage.

This would not have ever been as big as it is if the goose hadn't stage managed it all well and the shock jocks, New Idea readers and the media fed brainless hadn't turned it into the newsiest story around. Why? Because the issue presses all the right buttons.

The superiour can snoot about the sluts and studs, parents can promise peril to the progeny who perpetrate, the religious can rant about moral reticence. The rest of us can just be amazed at what fun it might have been if you were a hormone fuelled 16 year old full of booze and chemicals.

The child porn charges were a cack-handed attempt to salvage the remaining shreds of dignity the Victorian police force might have had after media magnet Christine Nixon had to jump in for her say. It will be interesting to see if they stick - when you want to destroy someone's credibility just wave the paedophilia wand - even though he was 16 and probably took happy snaps of other 16 year olds having trouble keeping their clothes on.

Just let the goose get cooked in his own juices. This isn't the first or last time this is going to happen.

Finally a feminist with some honesty has come out with it, and used the words “all men”

“a belief that all men, Worthington included, have grown up with and - to a large extent - been socialised to agree with.”

All men are bad, and I’m a man, and I must be bad, and I must take no responsibility for my actions.

But who built Corey Worthington’s neighbourhood. Who built all the houses. Why did those houses have to be built to engineering specifications, and also pass a building inspector's approval. Who supplied all the water and electricity to the neighbourhood, and is it safe to use that water and electricity.

It could not have been men who built the neighbourhood, because men take no responsibility for their actions.

It must have been feminists who built the neighbourhood, because they take responsibility for their actions.

Maybe the author should have a think about it next time they open the front door, turn on the electric light switch, or get a drink of water from a tap.

How they are a Phd candidate in a university is beyond all comprehension (or perhaps not).

I'm rather bemused by the reactions to Corey Worthington/Delaney.

He held a party. It got out of hand. Hundreds of teenagers showed up.

So what?

To clarify, there was not $20,000 worth of damages, and nobody has said that. A few broken letterboxes and damaged police cars don't add up to that much.

Most of the cost is for all the police who showed up, and the chopper.

Out of control parties are hardly a new phenomenon. They occur most weekends, somewhere in Australia.

Clearly, Corey is a bit of a buffoon - that's not hard to tell, judging by the sunglasses. Buffoon he may be, but he's hardly the scourge on society that the pitchfork-wielding-indignant-mob types (you know the kind, they generally shake their fists at television programs like Today Tonight) would have you believe.

In the foolish teen's defence - it wasn't him breaking the letterboxes or damaging police cars. Also in his defence, he was kept in the house by the police, and not allowed to attempt to persuade the teenagers outside to leave.

Corey's crimes are thus:

1) Open invitations on myspace.
2) Lacking contrition after the event.

These are minor things. He's 16. SIXTEEN! Everybody is howling for his blood as if he's a hardened criminal.

Sure, he oughta know better, but plenty of teenagers don't. This is hardly a revelation.

As for his response to the event, I was mostly bemused. The journalist questioning him on A Current Affair went well beyond the bounds of what balanced journalists should do when she started haranguing him about making an apology or taking off his sunglasses.

And HRS... read into it what you will. It's what you've clearly been socialised to do. I guess unless everybody inserts the appropriate disclaimers being warm and glowy about men, they're evil feminists.

Fortunately, part of my definition of the male gender includes the ability to shrug off vague generalisations about the gender, but I guess I prefer to avoid automatically viewing groups of people as victims.

Maybe it's simpler. Maybe some men just can't hack it and some can.

"I would instead suggest that Worthington is voicing that old and still pervasive belief that men are never at fault. Guys just “wanna have fun”, and if things go awry - don’t blame them! This belief has underpinned justifications for men’s violence against women and members of other oppressed social groups (gays and lesbians, the elderly, the disabled). This belief has also underpinned justifications or excuses for “anti-social” acts such as vandalism and trespassing."

I have read some utter tripe on this site but this piece might take the biscuit. 95% of Australians recognise this fool Corey for the jumped-up little publicity whore that he is, the other 5% are vacuous degenerates who wish they were the ones hosting the party, or maybe that they can get into the next Big Brother. There IS no underlying belief that what he did was OK, everyone hates him!

The author's attempt to link this in to feminist theory demonstrates one thing - material for that PhD of his is a little thin on the ground...

Why should he or his parents have to pay a dime? They SHOULD NOT!

One cannot be responsible for the behavior of invited or uninvited persons in public space or neighboring enclosed lands.

The bar industry does not have to pay for any of the public damage and anti-social behavior caused by intoxicated and unruly patrons. The tobacco industry and other businesses are not having to pay for the dangerous consequences of their goods.

So why should he or his family pay. They bloody well should be left alone.

Thing is, Corey and his family, unlike bars, purveyors of liquor, gambling houses, tobacco companies and others whose commerce pollutes, damages or affects our communities, don't have mates in high places whereas all those businesses command phenomenal leverage right up to the highest offices in the land.