By Matthew Bock
I'm sick of people inviting me to join Matthew Johns 'support groups'. This is really a disgusting effort to make Mattie Johns look like the victim in this whole scenario.
If you've been living under a rock and don't know what I'm talking about, read this transcript from Four Corners 'Code of Silence'
Irrespective of whether or not it was 7 or 70 years ago, it was wrong and he shouldn't have done it. The responsibility that he has is even greater given that he has launched himself into a very high profile position, where he is a role model to many young boys.
I've looked at many of the groups I've been invited to and I'm disgusted by the attitudes of its members. The guys are completely disrespectful to her, saying that she was a "whore" and a "slut". Some of the girls are chiming in too saying that she's "a stupid bitch". That's the exact attitude Channel 9 wanted to distance itself from, and rightly so I reckon.
Now there's been a lot debate about "rape" and "consent".
"Consent" it's presence or absence is not the key factor in this situation. She was able to freely give consent UP UNTIL 12 others walked into the room. At that point, it became almost impossible her to withdraw consent. I don't think it can be disputed that consent is a very grey area in this regard.
However, even if consent was given at the beginning, and you accept that as being legitimate. You need to look at their conduct after consent was given.
They rubbed their penises on her face and ejaculated on her. Demeaning her, calling her names, and treating her like a piece of trash.
No woman deserves to be treated in such a degrading way, and no woman enjoys that kind of treatment. To suggest she consented to that treatment is ridiculous.
If you've seen the four corners program you'd know that it says:
"Four Corners doesn't say that what took place in room 21 of the Racecourse hotel was sexual assault.
But a woman involved in degrading group sex can still be traumatised whether she consents or not."
I'd totally echo those sentiments.
Mattie Johns has done wrong, he knows he has, and he should pay the price. He knows that being a celebrity he puts himself under the scrutiny of the media. He knew that as soon as he signed a contract saying that he wouldn't put Channel 9's reputation to harm.
People have been writing to me saying that this whole situation is a 'trial by media' which has resulted in the norm of 'innocence before proven guilty' has been breached here. This is particularly unsophisticated analysis. Mattie Johns hasn't been put in jail. He has had his contract torn up, presumably for breaching a term of the contract around not causing reputation damage. This is particularly standard for professional sport contracts and TV celebrities.
Mattie Johns has never said that he's innocent. He apologized to the girl after the incident, and has apologized again since. If he had the courage of his convictions of innocence he could defend the breach of contract on the grounds that he didn't cause reputational harm. However, he's shown no such defiance, instead he has shown guilt and remorse.
Nevertheless, what is particularly disgusting about a facebook group celebrating and supporitng a man who degrades and abuses women is that one in three women are victims of some form of sexual violence. Consent is not always crystal clear in these cases, but the degrading manner in which they are treated is.
Supporting and endorsing this behaviour has upset and will continue to upset victims of sexual assault, who fear exactly this type of reaction should they disclose their history of abuse by seeking police or other support.
If you've been living under a rock and don't know what I'm talking about, read this transcript from Four Corners 'Code of Silence'
Irrespective of whether or not it was 7 or 70 years ago, it was wrong and he shouldn't have done it. The responsibility that he has is even greater given that he has launched himself into a very high profile position, where he is a role model to many young boys.
I've looked at many of the groups I've been invited to and I'm disgusted by the attitudes of its members. The guys are completely disrespectful to her, saying that she was a "whore" and a "slut". Some of the girls are chiming in too saying that she's "a stupid bitch". That's the exact attitude Channel 9 wanted to distance itself from, and rightly so I reckon.
Now there's been a lot debate about "rape" and "consent".
"Consent" it's presence or absence is not the key factor in this situation. She was able to freely give consent UP UNTIL 12 others walked into the room. At that point, it became almost impossible her to withdraw consent. I don't think it can be disputed that consent is a very grey area in this regard.
However, even if consent was given at the beginning, and you accept that as being legitimate. You need to look at their conduct after consent was given.
They rubbed their penises on her face and ejaculated on her. Demeaning her, calling her names, and treating her like a piece of trash.
No woman deserves to be treated in such a degrading way, and no woman enjoys that kind of treatment. To suggest she consented to that treatment is ridiculous.
If you've seen the four corners program you'd know that it says:
"Four Corners doesn't say that what took place in room 21 of the Racecourse hotel was sexual assault.
But a woman involved in degrading group sex can still be traumatised whether she consents or not."
I'd totally echo those sentiments.
Mattie Johns has done wrong, he knows he has, and he should pay the price. He knows that being a celebrity he puts himself under the scrutiny of the media. He knew that as soon as he signed a contract saying that he wouldn't put Channel 9's reputation to harm.
People have been writing to me saying that this whole situation is a 'trial by media' which has resulted in the norm of 'innocence before proven guilty' has been breached here. This is particularly unsophisticated analysis. Mattie Johns hasn't been put in jail. He has had his contract torn up, presumably for breaching a term of the contract around not causing reputation damage. This is particularly standard for professional sport contracts and TV celebrities.
Mattie Johns has never said that he's innocent. He apologized to the girl after the incident, and has apologized again since. If he had the courage of his convictions of innocence he could defend the breach of contract on the grounds that he didn't cause reputational harm. However, he's shown no such defiance, instead he has shown guilt and remorse.
Nevertheless, what is particularly disgusting about a facebook group celebrating and supporitng a man who degrades and abuses women is that one in three women are victims of some form of sexual violence. Consent is not always crystal clear in these cases, but the degrading manner in which they are treated is.
Supporting and endorsing this behaviour has upset and will continue to upset victims of sexual assault, who fear exactly this type of reaction should they disclose their history of abuse by seeking police or other support.
No comments:
Post a Comment