Whether or not we agree that this particular story is a beat-up, or that the young woman involved in the Christchurch incident is some kind of 'victim' (or indeed whether Matty Johns is a 'victim'), it's apparent that Rugby League has a big PR problem. Public reaction to the media free-for-all this week has been sufficiently negative that major sponsors are apparently getting leery.

Regardless of whether or not the 'group sex' episode at the centre of the latest media storm was consensual, I think that most people would find that the apparent Rugby League tradition of the "bun" somewhat distasteful and indicative of an unfortunate subculture.

I gather that the "bun" involves several blokes 'gang-banging' some star-struck woman, while various others stand around watching and masturbating. While such an activity is legal if everybody is a consenting adult, it's hardly a good look is it? Little wonder the circle-jerkers are unwilling to own up but are willing to let their former teammate carry the can.

That such activities are apparently viewed as 'team-building' exercises within League circles is also a bit of a worry. I think that Houellebecq is closest to the mark here when he identifies the intrinsic homoeroticism of this particular form of group sex - i.e. the woman is a proxy who facilitates the closest thing that these guys can get to actually having sex with each other without actually doing so.

Belly's also right - the 'circle jerk' is a homosexual act, but it seems to me that the Rugby League "bun" functions to mask the innate homoerotic character of the event by involving some hapless woman. Like Rugby League itself, the "bun" is both homoerotic and misogynist. I'd never heard of the "bun" until the latest scandal, but I have to say that it fits well within my observations of the Rugby League subculture.

That said, I quite enjoy watching a good game of League - although Football, AFL or even Union tend to be more entertaining. However, I detest much of the accompanying subculture, and this latest incident reinforces why.

I don't agree with the justification objectification of Sex on this site/topic. It seems to run shallowly on gender V gender. Foxy is getting a bit of a hammering unfairly. I think we are talking on different levels of analysis.

I can hardly claim to be a prude given my past I have no problem with the sexual antics in a bed room between two equal power consenting adults.
Hence my point about a company director I knew, that pitiful excuse for a real man. saw me with a young busty brunette in the pub. In a conversation in front of other senior managers made fun of me claiming "I was a dark horse." recounted the incident with the following description. “Long dark hair reasonably good looking about a "six pot girl", but F# able but big juicy tits.” seeing my discomfort he continued
along the same line laughing at me with "what didn't you get your # in? Bring her round here And I'll show you how.... oh here she comes now watch this....” I was about to go ballistic when his female state manager and “stand by bed mate" told him It was my eldest daughter. “ he then told me I should've told him I had a daughter.(why?)
What I said is irrelevant but this shows that this type of person was so conditioned with Uber 'Masculine' displays/need for male bonding he didn't/doesn't understand that it's not part of the mainstream social mores. given the sociological fact that the further you get from 'common accepted practice' the harder the public are, consequently the ever opportunist media jump to lead the lynch mob.

BTW My daughter has excellent hearing..she handed him her business card (she was an investigator with the department dealing with sexual harassment.)

Hol......
That description was what others incl. His dad said.
The whole point as described was about uneven power. I was pointing to cultural contradictions and that the case isn't universally indicative.
My boys? I would be disappointed, we did a better job than that.

How can saying yes to one man be construed as
saying yes to five more?

How would it be possible for a 19 year old
to be capable of consenting under the circumstances?

Does consent negate moral responsibility?

There are two issues here:
1) Personal responsibility
2) Respect for women

Trish Johns got to the heart of the matter when
she said simply, "I wouldn't want it to be my
daughter!"

Fascinating isn't it, that all responsibility
rests with a very young girl rather than a
dozen or so bulked-up blokes?

You are indeed taking a hammering, but have withstood it with dignity dear girl!

This last post of yours is excellent. Spot on!

It's interesting watching this thread develop..

"BTW My daughter has excellent hearing..she handed him her business card (she was an investigator with the department dealing with sexual harassment.)"

That was brilliant.

Something wrong with my daughter, I can't explain her or why she is the way she is but she would have punched him out without thought (she doesn't have many I suspect).

You my friend have done well.

Dear examinator, Jewely, Ginxy,
CJ,

Thanks for your thoughts on the topic.

It helps I think in an
emotive discussion such as this one to get as
many takes on the topic as possible.

Much appreciated!