Barbara Biggs; many thanks for relating your experience and opinion.

But this is OLO.

If you have perused other threads on this subject, then you would be fully aware of the trend on OLO currently.

Most male posters on this site have gone to extraordinary lengths to justify the Christchurch incident, including rationalising the male need for group sex/the victim being to blame/the players being victims!

Any of the minority female members of OLO (yes, they are in the minority in current active m/ship of OLO), have been attacked as feminists-as if that were some kind of dirty word. It was irrelevant what approach they took.

IF they considered the women in the incident in any way, shape or form-a victim, then they too;..were fair game. Just as she was.

The few real men,- (putting in the 'real' IS deliberate and calculated),- who were not part of the condemnation of the woman,-but sought to make the point that the men should have behaved with some modicum of responsibility... were roundly condemned and ridiculed.

It has been nigh on impossible-even for the more 'reasoning' of female members, to make any kind of dent in the wall of the male mantra-line that occurred here.

Posting this is tantamount to OLO Boy's Club heresy.

I write this, which I will largely repost on the thread below this, because this is the second time I have been stunned by reaction on this site-and I don't stun easily!

OLO is not-IS NOT:- currently a forum that is female friendly. I made a comment about female members 'circling the wagons', which has already been thrown back at me,-but I meant exactly what I said.

If we defended from the female prospective we were roundly condemned!
Does that sound familiar?

1 women-11 men; that's OK? 'She asked for it'.

Sad isn't it?

I truly wonder why you felt the need to put up a thread on OLO, which all current evidence suggests that you will get more of the same.

The widely entrenched here?:-'stop whining on about what you asked for, and then blaming men for it'.

When I read some of the OLO posts I really wonder how many of the respondents actually get out on a Friday night to join the rest of the human race (whoops, not a PC word on OLO!).

If they did maybe they might finally let go of those old fashioned myths about men being always up for it while women are the demure virgins, looking for love and commitment before being ravished in the safety of partnerdom, where their precious 'eggs' can be cosseted and properly cared for.

Go out and you will see that as far as having a good time (and getting bonked) is concerned, women are just as persistent and predatory as men. It is also very noticeable that men are under-represented in the groupie stakes and there have always been groupies. Women adore 'bad' boys and that is obvious at any social venue where the 'good' boys are the wallflowers.

It is silly to require men to be responsible for the 'weaker' sex because women are not weak at all. It was always a rather quaint notion in the West. They make up their own minds, take their own risks and sure, they regret some of their stupid decisions too - few of which are down to 'men' or booze. Listen to young women planning their night out (starting with copious drinks after work) and the penny should drop that many are not setting off to be 'nice' girls, Fifties style.

They are big girls. So leave them alone, even if the occasional one might want to blame others, or get 'square' with that bad boy, embellishing her story to minimise her own role.

Maybe it is the Grrrls who are holding women back, not men. After all, winning a fight and shoring up a victim industry that puts bread on their table are far more important than the truth. What is the truth? Well for a start there are thousands of ladettes around and there probably always were, except now they are liberated to raunch in the public eye. How is that men's fault?

JonJ you ask

'So, runner, you don't think that it might have anything to do with the official policy of celibacy, which forces priests to seek their sexual release among those who are powerless and unlikely to tell on their persecutors?'

I actually think this idea of forced celibacy for priests is un scriptural and demonic. However abstaining from sex is far less likely to cause a man to rape or molest a child than feeding on porn. There are numerous men (secular and believers) who are not yet in sexual relations but never contemplate fiddling with kids. Many of these priests were likely to be attracted to the priesthood because of their homosexual tendencies. There, unfortunately they get to carry out their fantasies.

Some excellent advice from the Chaser Team:

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/chaser/#/latestepisode/chaser_09_03_01_openmiccro/