so, the show was disturbing to say the least. some highlights for me? a football player suggesting in a 'seminar' about respecting women that 'trouble' could be avoided after you have group sex with a woman, if, instead of calling her a 'dirty whatever', you say thank you and put her in a cab. i mean, do you laugh or cry? but mostly the show was upsetting because of the testimony of the women involved, who nearly all kept breaking down into tears despite the incidents taking place years prior. but especially that of the then 19 y/o woman from christchurch who went to a hotel room with two cronulla sharks players, and ended up having sex with 6 of them while 6 other players and staff looked on.
their are a million reasons find the show unsettling. but i guess one of the reasons i find the whole thing so upsetting because as usual, a really important discussion that we could be having gets drowned out by lame media coverage, stupid acts of damage control and unhelpful moralising about group sex and infidelity.
ok, so please give me a second to explain what i am about to say before you start rolling your eyes. these 'bonding' acts of group sex, but also the way it has been handled via the media, remind me of Puar's work on Abu Ghraib. i am kind of blushing at what you must be thinking - no, i am not suggesting that this woman is akin to the detainees at Abu Ghraib. obviously, those men (and women, who are, interestingly, mostly invisiblised in the whole discussion about AG) were completely without political rights as the full might of unmitigated sovereign power was unleashed upon them, because everything that was being done to them was, apparently, well, legal. but Puar wrote one of the most interesting and insightful pieces into the torture and the way it entered public discourse i have read. stay with me, 'kay? i promise i can relate it to this incident!
basically, she was saying that despite the way it was discussed in the media and the bush admin, as un-american and an exception, (sexulaised) torture is not an exception, it is an intrinsic part of nation/empire building . she argues that the sexualised torture of the detainees is an act of heteronormative patriotism (remember, detainees were forced to wear women's underpants, masturbate themselves and each other, analy penetrated etc). so here, sexual torture functions as a way to expel the queer, perverse body of the terrorist from the notion of what constitutes 'america'. the MP's who committed the torture could all bond through the queering the bodies of the Iraqies, thus consolidating a heteronormative patriotism. you know, the terrorist/queer bodies are the antithesis of America, and through this, the MP's were all truly, americans, ie not 'terrorists' and not 'queer'. but equally, in the way it was discussed in the media - as the actions of a few 'bad eggs', as 'gay sex', 'disgusting' and an 'exception' and 'un-american' - the nation gets to expel the violence from the functioning of, sorry to sound all 3rd year uni (well, more so), the nation state by pinning the acts onto a few dumb kids, but also banishes 'perverse' sexuality from what constitutes america. do you see where i am going with this?
it would be stupid to transplant Puar's theory straight onto this incident. but i think there is a correlation. i do think the footballers bond via sex acts that degrade and make perverse the body of the woman, so that their own shared heterosexual masculinity is reaffirmed via what they ARE NOT: you know, feminine, penatratable, stupid, something to laughed at, gross. dude, hi five!
and similarly, the way it has been discussed in the media - as the fault of mathew johns, or 12 guys, or even rugby culture - allows us all to cleanse ourselves of the misogyny that is, actually pervasive through out culture. saying that rape/disrespect of women/misogyny is only endemic in football culture is just as stupid as saying it is endemic to lebanese culture (though i am enjoying the irony that the cronulla sharks, home team of the cronulla riots, are the team in question - didn't everyone want 'lebs' off the beach because they were sexist/lascivious towards women? huh!). so we can all feel scandalised at mathew johns, and football culture, and group sex and infidelity and in doing so reconfirm that that all these things certainly aren't what we are about. but unfortunately we miss another chance to discuss something really important in a way that would actually be helpful.
anyway, thats what i have been thinking about. what a horrible situation. ugh.
WOOOOO! right on, well written and great connection!! that is awesome angela. you nailed it. women's sexuality is constructed as other. it is freaky and yet it is used as a "perverse" indulgence by men, and i use the word perverse NOT in the good way, because perverted is fine if you're respectful. (homophobic men who are hot for lesbian porn is a good example of this phenomenon.)
ReplyDeletei didnt see the 4 corners show and im so glad i didnt. i would certainly have lost sleep feeling traumatised and full of rage! i cant handle those things. but my mum mentioned it in an email, how distressing it was. anyway im glad you ranted about it.
you have inspired me to write another feminist post that ive had on the backburners for a while. and im going to add you to my blogroll five minutes ago!
p.s. why does he have to give Novocastrians a bad name!
ReplyDeletegreat connection. i've found myself appalled at football player behaviour for some time, what with them glassing their girlfriends and comedy rape videos, and now bonding over group sex, however you're right in that we look at this and like to push it away and say it's not normal. the sad thing is, this kind of action IS becoming normal!
ReplyDeleteyesterday i was reading a 6 pager in the age about teenagers having group sex and i was suprised and horrified by some of the things it was describing kids as doing! (google it! i can't because i'm at work and would surely get busted for googling teenage GS)
i guess it makes me scared for the next generation of teenagers, or 20somethings. how do we teach them love and respect? rather than use and throw away?
hey thanks guys, i had a case of the horrors after i hit 'post', but your comments made me feel much better, i really appreciate you taking the time out comment!
ReplyDeleteanyhoo, i read a great little article today in 'the guide' of all places, about the media's role in the whole affair. the writer asks some really good questions of the 4 corners story: why the focus on Johns (to the exclusion of others)? why the proclamation of group sex as 'depraved'? and why the superficial examination of the culture of women who vigorously pursue footballers?
great questions, don't you think? if we try and answer these i think a really great and helpful discussion could take place.
yo!
angexx
hey angie look i read your blog post! i think you make some excellent points. i must say i am actually pretty impressed (generally) with the way the media has handled this one, and feel a marked shift in what is 'okay' in our society, and what is not. The running themes I see through commentary is one of consent (how can a girl walk into a room with two guys have given consent to 12?), and what actually constitutes sexual assault. Important questions that aren't about the morals of group sex or infidelity. Media Circus' and Footy Shows aside, I really do think that people are asking bigger questions of themselves and society, and I don't want tear my hair out the same way i did with the Bulldogs 'incident' a couple of years back. I am.. hopeful. Anyway well done on your first blog post, keep writing! xx
ReplyDeletehow dare you contradict me on MY BLOG!
ReplyDeletejust kidding, obviously. i really mean: hello my steffy! i like your points - i think i was being lazy in my blanket referral to 'lame media coverage' and probably a bit in trying to transpose puar's theory onto this situation. (i was putting a bit of pressure on myself to post something. you know me, i would re-write and re-write it until everyone would be like mathew who? because it would be 5 YEARS LATER).
i guess i should have written 'i am afraid it will be drowned out in the frenzy for johns himself (which is partly due to be people finding this behavior toward women unacceptable, which is a good thing, and partly due to 'the circus') and because of the complexities it brings up around consent, i am hearing a lot of moralising about about group sex, as in: she may have consented but you can't do that to a woman anyway because it implicitly degrades her (see adel horin 'sex thugs and footballers', smh 'fatherhood' blog, the footy show, or rove shouting 'have sex with your wife at home - be normal! or annablle crab - who i love actually - saying that 'isn't it weird that 10 men want to be naked together anyway?'). and i do find that unhelpful. but maybe i was wrong to say it it is the overarching theme of the press?
anyhoo, obviously the biggest questions at the moment are, as you say, consent and what is constitutive of sexual assault. but i am also interested in the way heterosexual partner sex is (sorry for the uni word) 'constructed' as normal and anything that deviates from it is pathologised, but at the SAME TIME, heaps of people are benefitting from the violence and that seems to be is part of football culture (their aggression, 'risk taking' 'modern day gladitators' blah blah is what wins games apparently) and the misogyny that seems to be part of that, and of culture more broadly, and at the SAME TIME, the NRL and the footy show et al get to distance themselves from this violence and misogyny via mathew johns, by saying that this behavior is disgusting and not what they are about, when they actually are as much part of it as him, because it is about more than just what happened in that hotel room.
anyway, im glad you are hopeful because that gives me hope. i mean not that i am completely without hope, but you are one switched on lady, so maybe you are totally right!
well, actually, not everyone is as much part of it as him - obviously, you can play football or work for the NRL and not be implicated in sexual assault!
ReplyDeletehey love, it wasn't my intention to contradict you, i think your concerns at the time the johns story broke were valid, and i think a week later i was buoyed with some thoughtful commentary and excellent statements by senior wonen. you're right that some people have turned an ethical debate into a moral one (particularly johns himslf).
ReplyDeleteYour behavioural link to Abu Ghraib is important and i think should be pushed in discussion. Now you've written your fisrt blog post, maybe it's time for your first letter to an editor, or comment on a fairfax blog. xx
it is an important point that there is nothing wrong with (consensual) group sex. kinkiness is not akin to evil!
ReplyDeletethere would be nothing wrong with a roomful of naked men if it werent for the need for one "dirty slut" who serves as the object that validates their straightness (hetero-normativity!) and subjectivity.
and its true there are women who seek out such experiences with football players.
yes it is the misogyny of the culture, and how it manifests that needs to be questioned and examined.
well, i think i have officially now read so many articles, blog entires, and opinion pieces in both the mainstream and independent press that i will probably have to write my thesis on this to validate the time spent!
ReplyDeletebam beccy jo! nice one!
stephy i was joking about being contradicted, you know that right?! i was really enjoying our discussion! i was glad to have your perspective on the media coverage - i hate totallising theories that twist events into theories rather than just looking at what actually is happening, i didn't want to do that at all. oh and i don't really think i was being 'lazy' trying to transpose puar's theory onto this one, i think it works well - i am totally patting myself on the back! ha ha.
I stumbled upon your blog post, and I'd like to give the other side of the story. I think you've been unfair in painting all footballers with the same brush of the idiotic actions of a few.
ReplyDeleteMy nephew, Julian, was diagnosed with cancer many years ago. He was a mad North Melbourne fan. My brother, Eric, who is just an ordinary football fan with no connection to the club, had bumped into one of the North Melbourne players whilst shopping with his son. The player spent time to speak to Julian and asked Eric for his phone number.
A few days later, Eric recieved a phonecall from the player and on the weekend, Julian was invited to the club, taken into the players rooms before the game, introduced to the players, given a signed jumper, and then taken to an after match function.
Eric and Julian would have been happy with that. But the player kept in regular touch with my nephew. As Julian's condition deteriorated, the player and his teamamtes would visit him in hospital to keep his spirits up. Julian passed away, but a number of the players attended his funeral (including one who had travelled from interstate, at his own expense).
There are many fine people involved in football, and who do many good deeds without asking for recognition. Things like this go unreported in the media. There are about 700 footballers in the AFL, and you can't tar all of them by the actions of a few.
hey carly,
ReplyDeletei don't know if this will ever reach you - i didn't find your message until now! first of all, i'm really sorry to hear about your nephew. what a terrible thing for your family to go through. i hope everyone in your family has been doing as well as they can be after such an event.
that sounds like an amazing act of generosity on behalf of those football players. and, it certainly wasn't my intention or even my argument that all footballers were the same. in fact, i was actually arguing that sexism/misogyny is pervasive through out culture.
thanks for taking the time to comment on my blog!
ange.