I agree with all the posters.

I have talked to a number of women who say they watch ARL because they like the short shorts the players wear. Now that can't be sexual exploitation can it ?

Somehow I doubt whether either Kate Lundy or runner would be in the target demographic for the LFL. As such, their opinion as to its merits/demerits counts for nothing.

Personally, I find programmes such as The Biggest Loser, The Farmer Wants a Wife, Please Marry My Boy, Aussie Ladette to Lady, Aussie Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Dating in the Dark - and a whole host of others - to be bordering on obscene, and an insult to the intelligence of the Australian people.

But then again, I am not in their target demographic, so my opinion is irrelevant.

As it happens, I have seen the LBL on cable a few times, it occasionally appears on the sports channel in the pub. My impression is that it is entirely harmless, and certainly no more "cheap and degrading" than an episode of "Being Lara Bingle".

Dear runner,

Again I agree with you. Ethnic hatreds are exacerbated by professional sports. There is a temendous amount of money and feeling in the religion of sport so nothing will be done about it. I enjoy watching American football even though the results are horrific.

Of course the social consequences of casinos are also horrific, but there is a buck to be made there so government won't touch it. Wilkie tried, but the NSW members are in the pocket of the gambling (not gaming) industry.

The difference between lingerie football and other sports where people are scantily clad, is that LF is designed "specifically" for sexual titillation (it's based on the old "quasi" lesbian thing of 2 nearly undressed women "battling" each other; mud wrestling for example).

Therefore it's TOTALLY different from legitimate sport. It in fact takes sexuality back to the Dark Ages. It's just quasi prostitution, with the lingerie girls getting paid from the money the men pay to look at them. It doesn't get dumber than that. Remember, it's designed specifically for sexual titillation, and it's not a real sport. If anyone thinks it is, then they're seriously deluded or simply lack even basic intellectual insight.

Such indignation, FP72E.

>>Remember, it's designed specifically for sexual titillation, and it's not a real sport. If anyone thinks it is, then they're seriously deluded or simply lack even basic intellectual insight.<<

Fortunately, there are still the classic Olympic sports to maintain the fine tradition of non-titillation.

Beach volleyball, for example. Totally non-titillating. Especially when they have to dislodge the sand that has somehow wedged its way into their "swimwear".

Incidentally, where did anyone suggest that LFL is a "real sport"? It is an indoor, for-television, marketing-led reinterpretation of an outdoor stadium sport. Like indoor cricket and five-a-side soccer.

Kate Lundy, our Minister for Sport, Minister for Multicultural Affairs, and Minister Assisting for Industry and Innovation is in danger of creating substantial conflict between her various roles.

As Minister for Sport, she should simply point out that "this is not a sport", and move quickly on.

As Minister for Multicultural Affairs, she might have to cogitate for a while on LBL's significance in the task of welcoming diversity, and acceptance of cultural differences. Then move quickly on.

As Minister Assisting for Industry and Innovation, she might pause for a moment, admire the high level of innovation, and look to exploit industry opportunities to capitalize on LBL's arrival in Australia.

Instead, she just has a public whinge and sulk.

Nice "excuses" pericles.

LF demeans women's sexuality, makes the men who come to gawk look neanderthal and intellectually weak, it's NOT a sport, it's sexual entertainment (harking back to a bygone era of sexuality, where women were kept in place and men paid for them).