Pynchme, I hardly think that evolution theory is dated. With blokes
like this guy around, perpetuation of the species will no doubt
continue:

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25559154-13762,00.html

The question then arises, why did those 11 women not choose to
keep their legs together?

Why do women rush to Tom Jones and Michael Buble concerts and throw
their knickers at them, then rush backstage to try and hop into
their beds?

Clearly some guys trigger primordial instincts in women, some
seemingly react to footballers.

I don't know a thing about your husband or CJ, so would not comment.
What I do know is that if you ask any hooker, so called well behaved
married men make up the bulk of their clients. Things are not always,
what they appear to be superficially.

There are no shortage of men who have learnt to tell their wives
what they want to hear, then behind their backs, do whatever they
can get away with. The same applies to women.

"If we want to sanction distastfull activities which humiliate participants and or non-participants then I'm guessing we could easily find much clearer targets."

RObert,

I agree that the ARL gang-bang thing is not the clearest of targets as it would seem there's a fairly small virulent group deeply embedded at the font of the problem. I think the best thing to do would be to excise the worst excesses that manifest themselves from the culture - eg Paul Gallen and his racist slur toward a Polynesian opponent is an obvious start as he has form for eye gouging and other dirty play in the past.

To paraprase Sun Tzu, when fighting a bigger opponent, which the ARL culture is, pick it off at the edges to start with. Then reassess to see what's left and go after it again if there's still a problem. It just takes perserverance. It happened with the samurai in Japan and it'll eventually happen with the ARL too.

Group sex has always been represented in erotic art and literature so perhaps the politically correct purging should start there.

When were you last on the receiving end of a gang bang, Cornflower?

Just to clear up some confusion from James and many others, feminism was not started just to allow women to do whatever they wanted. Freedom of choice was one goal amongst many. Some women tend to highlight this goal, because it is convenient, they can do whatever they want and tell other women to do the same. Piss easy.
However, feminists have always had other goals. They want to stop rape, but this can't happen while some women choose to say 'no' a few times before saying 'yes'. They want to stop sexually predatory behaviour from men, but some women choose to be just as sleazy.
These examples explain why some women are accused of 'playing the victim'; because they complain about problems but make choices that exacerbate these problems. Helping other women to have fulfilling lives can't be done without dicussing the negative implications of some choices.
Perhaps feminism need to rediscover the goal of stopping society from treating women like weaklings who constantly need their feelings protected.

You forget that men get raped too and from all accounts in not inconsequential numbers. Similarly men are bullied in the workplace, have their rights removed and are victims physical violence.

Feminism is as feminism does.

The play used in the case was the usual float a high ball for the runners to take and toss the pill back and forth amid much shouting to keep the other side cowed and confused. Near the line use the big forwards to push the ball across by sheer weight of numbers. After the goal is scored it is on the record books and no-one questions if it was fair or not.

It is a play that has worked a thousand times before.

In this case the play didn't go so well even though it was well disguised from the start by a well-practised kicker, the backs ran the blind side for a overlap (onya Tracey Grimshaw, you go grrrl) and the reliable old heavyweights applied the usual biff and stiff arms to the opposition. The play failed not because the 'other side' didn't see the move coming, but because there were too many obvious infringements (including of the feminists' own rules) and the line umpires said so.

Now what has to be done is quash the video replay and analysis. The Footy Show is out for that, even if some of them did pass fourth grade (school, you dimwits), their eyes are still watering from a knee or few to the groin.

Not to worry, after some annoyed clucking and feather ruffling the grrls brigade will be back for another shot at the goal of proving that girls are made of sugar and spice and all things nice, while the boys...well you know what boys are made of and the disgusting things they do! Now that IS what feminism is in Oz. Well, that and getting highly paid jobs for the middle-class, tertiary educated women who are well placed in the network. Hey, that IS where there really is a glass ceiling (and walls and floor).