Just another Gang Rape Case in Sydney (2 Viewers)

[LaraB]

What I'd really like to know is where were the girls parents? No sane parent would let their 15 year old daughter hang around black people.

PS some douche has been deleting my posts :mad1:

She's 15, not 5....

Its less likely, yes... but possible that her parents are ordinary decent people...just like its possible that they're bogans.

You never know.

 

[Gavvvvvin]

Your just trying to shift the responsibility from the parents to the black people.

 

[jb_nc]

Your just trying to shift the responsibility from the parents to the black people.

yeah, i mean, what can black people do, besides rape girls, they dont have any shred of morality

 

[Snaykew]

As Gavvvvvin implied, black people can do nothing else but be criminals. Why would you let your 15 year old daughter out loose when you know these sorts of people are around?!

-.-;

 

[jimmayyy]

Lol i'm waiting for someone to chime in which the standard "where were her parents" crap

yeah, well where the fuck are they? if this girls parents, foster or not, had fulfilled their duty and responsibility as guardians do u think this girl would even be drinking on the streets at night in the first place? let alone be stupid enough to go home with older men she doesn't know, undress and get into a bed? i'm not saying its her fault, and of course i think the accused (if proven guilty) should be sent back to africa after having their penis and testicles cut off, but fuck - start doing your jobs parents. if u dont want to raise a kid properly, don't have one.

typical. another example of how the breakdown of family fucks the rest of society up.

 

[LaraB]

Your just trying to shift the responsibility from the parents to the black people.

You know what? that's exactly it!

I mean, everything i did wrong when i was 15 was because of "black people"

 

[jimmayyy]

everything i did wrong when i was 15

drinking whiskey and cask wine in hurstville at night and being picked up but a 20 something black man?

i dont know if "i did something wrong" really cuts it. this is gross negligence on the part of the parents, not typical teen acting out behaviour.

 

[LaraB]

yeah, well where the fuck are they? if this girls parents, foster or not, had fulfilled their duty and responsibility as guardians do u think this girl would even be drinking on the streets at night in the first place? let alone be stupid enough to go home with older men she doesn't know, undress and get into a bed? i'm not saying its her fault, and of course i think the accused (if proven guilty) should be sent back to africa after having their penis and testicles cut off, but fuck - start doing your jobs parents. if u dont want to raise a kid properly, don't have one.

typical. another example of how the breakdown of family fucks the rest of society up.

It is not as simple as 'blame the parents' - that's just a naive cop out for a real understanding of why people do the things they do. There are plenty of cases where genuinely responsible parents lose control of their kids once they're old enough to get around on their own, or old enough to start lying to their parents about major things.

She's not in kindergarten, she is old enough to know right from wrong so you cannot just say that had the parents "done their job" she wouldn't have done it. In the law firm that i work in i've encountered countless situations where the parents were decent, responsible people - albeit perhaps a bit naive and wishful thinkers - but the kids were just plain arseholes intent on being violent, rude, disrespectful people.

The breakdown of family? What the? For starters you don't even know there was a breakdown of her family. Secondly, family breakdown and society are symbiotic - once doesn't cause the other. If anything the situations families are forced to function/live within cause breakdowns rather than the other way around.

You have no idea of what her familial circumstances were so you are wrong to assume that the parents (EDIT: i.e. her current carers - her foster parents - not her natural parents as she isn't being cared for by them) were irresponsible and to blame. Yeh its possible it's the parents fault, even probable, but it is not an inconclusive fact so you are wrong to reply so rudely.

 

[LaraB]

drinking whiskey and cask wine in hurstville at night and being picked up but a 20 something black man?

i dont know if "i did something wrong" really cuts it. this is gross negligence on the part of the parents, not typical teen acting out behaviour.

Then you have an extremely optimistic and trusting view as to what typical teen behaviour is

There have been so many studies to show just how prevalent under age drinking and sexual activity is, it shouldn't come as a surprise...

It would only be "gross negligence" on the parents part ( in a non-legal sense, given that these words obviously have a far different meaning in their true legal context) if they knew she was or could be out doing it....

 

[LaraB]

LaraB - it says in another article on the matter (the Daily Telegraph one, someone look it up) that she was in a foster family. So yes, she's obviously had some kind of family breakdown.

Yes but i am referring to her current familial situation considering people are trying to place blame on those responsible for her - i.e. her foster parents.

Just because her prior family had broken down, if it had, it doesn't mean she was in a bad situation with her current foster family. A lot of foster families are really caring people.

 

[jimmayyy]

It is not as simple as 'blame the parents' - that's just a naive cop out for a real understanding of why people do the things they do. There are plenty of cases where genuinely responsible parents lose control of their kids once they're old enough to get around on their own, or old enough to start lying to their parents about major things.

She's not in kindergarten, she is old enough to know right from wrong so you cannot just say that had the parents "done their job" she wouldn't have done it. In the law firm that i work in i've encountered countless situations where the parents were decent, responsible people - albeit perhaps a bit naive and wishful thinkers - but the kids were just plain arseholes intent on being violent, rude, disrespectful people.

The breakdown of family? What the? For starters you don't even know there was a breakdown of her family. Secondly, family breakdown and society are symbiotic - once doesn't cause the other. If anything the situations families are forced to function/live within cause breakdowns rather than the other way around.

You have no idea of what her familial circumstances were so you are wrong to assume that the parents were irresponsible and to blame. Yeh its possible it's the parents fault, even probable, but it is not an inconclusive fact so you are wrong to reply so rudely.

errr she was in foster care - clearly there was something sort of breakdown with her biological parents. they may be dead. she is under the care of foster parents and is hence their responsibility. they are the parents i am talking about. the girl is 15. if you don't keep checks on where your kids are every few hours when they are that young(the new story indicates she had been drinking all day) you shouldn't be a parent.

as for your argument one doesn't effect the other - i think they have total effect on each other. society changes which leads to family break down which leads to more social decay which leads to more family breakdown. example: have a look back when marriage was a real sacred institution and families pretty much stuck together in the traditional way - bread winning father, housewife mother, 2.5 kids.

was there any of this sort of thing back then? no, but as we have moved away from marriage as a "for life" institution (for whatever reason) it has led to more scenarios with broken homes etc where children are likely to end up like this. its a vicious cycle, but i think you can trace alot of what is wrong with society back to its basic unit - the family. if things are good at home in the majority of homes, you can pretty much expect things to be good in society.

i'm not saying that is specifically this girls case, but i think this case is an example of how losing that basic structure in the infancy and building block of life (how a child is raised) effects the rest of society. its a ripple effect with the household at the middle. society is the pond. get me?

 

[LaraB]

But often foster parents have to repair the damage done from the previous living situation - who's to say the victim still wasn't damaged and/or acting out because those were her inclinations that she learned when growing up?

All the more reason not to simply explain it away by labelling the parents as irresponsible.

Perhaps they were in over their heads but that doesn't make it their fault, it doesn't mean they're irresponsible or "not doing their job" as others put it.

It would then be her biological parents fault not her current parents - those responsible for her care so the only ones who it can be said "where were the parents".

So again - you cannot just blame the child's carer

 

[sthcross.dude]

more like an alleged rape. we dont even know if it actually happened.

 

[jimmayyy]

So again - you cannot just blame the child's carer

i agree with you - i'm also blaming the girl who clearly doesnt know right from wrong if she is a) intoxicated and b) so willing to go back to strange older black mens houses and the scumbag accused (if of course, they are guilty), but i think through the natural course of events, it comes back to the parents.

sort of goes like this;

if the accused had been raised properly in the first place, they would know not to take (alledged) advanage of a young drunk girl. if they knew right and wrong, they would also know in this country you need consent of a person over 16 to have intercourse.
\/
if the girl wasn't such a lowie she wouldn't have found herself in that position in the first place
\/
if the parents had instilled into her the values of "right and wrong" you clearly think she had, she wouldn't end up drinking all day in hurstville.
\/
if the girls family hadn't broken down, it wouldn't have fallen to the foster parents to fail to instill those rights
\/
if marriage was still a sacred insitution, she wouldn't have ended up in a foster home

 

[LaraB]

errr she was in foster care - clearly there was something sort of breakdown with her biological parents. they may be dead. she is under the care of foster parents and is hence their responsibility. they are the parents i am talking about. the girl is 15. if you don't keep checks on where your kids are every few hours when they are that young(the new story indicates she had been drinking all day) you shouldn't be a parent.

See my above post.

For all you know, they were doing that. But regardless, I don't know anyone whether they were a "screwed up" kid or a "perfect kid" whose parents checked in on them at night once they were in high school... i wouldn't have thought that is the norm so that doesn't make them so irresponsible that they shouldn't be parents.

My point is, and was from the first post - that you can't just blame the parent. You don't know the situation, you don't know what the kid was really like, you don't konw who her friends were, you don't know how the foster parents approached their responsibilities towards her. So you can't just assume its the parent's fault, foster or not.

Yes there probably was a breakdown with her biological parents but that has nothing to do with whether or not the foster parents were responsible people - if anything, it would explain her behaviour and how they could have failed even were they responsible and careful.

as for your argument one doesn't effect the other - i think they have total effect on each other.

I didn't say one didn't affect the other quite clearly - i said they are symbiotic.

I don't know if you know what symbiotic means, i am assuming not given you are of the impression that i said they don't affect each other - so, symbiotic means they have a mutual kind of relationship - they affect each other.

society changes which leads to family break down which leads to more social decay which leads to more family breakdown. example: have a look back when marriage was a real sacred institution and families pretty much stuck together in the traditional way - bread winning father, housewife mother, 2.5 kids.

was there any of this sort of thing back then? no, but as we have moved away from marriage as a "for life" institution (for whatever reason) it has led to more scenarios with broken homes etc where children are likely to end up like this. its a vicious cycle, but i think you can trace alot of what is wrong with society back to its basic unit - the family. if things are good at home in the majority of homes, you can pretty much expect things to be good in society.

i'm not saying that is specifically this girls case, but i think this case is an example of how losing that basic structure in the infancy and building block of life (how a child is raised) effects the rest of society. its a ripple effect with the household at the middle. society is the pond. get me?

All i can say to that is I"m assuming you're a conservative Christian so i'm not going to waste the huge huge post it will take to explain why that is wrong on as many levels as it is.

More or less you have equated divorce to social disorder, which in turn cannot do anything else but imply that divorce creates social disorder which creates divorce which creates social disorder etc.

It is just as possible thaht you will be a fucked up arsehole of a kid regardless of whether you are of a family that believes the so called "sacred" nature of marriage and the family unit or not.

End discussion because i can see that this is going to go absolutely nowhere since that is your end conclusion.

 

[jimmayyy]

i didn't equate divorce with social disorder at all, i said its a ripple effect. i don't know if you know what a ripple effect is but the ripples get bigger each time they go out, eventually making a little wave that crashes on the shore of the lake. divorce might seem like a small ripple in the centre, but it leads to other things that lead to other things that eventually end up with a 15 year old intoxicated youth being (alledgedly) gang raped.

there is fault on all three parties we are discussing here, i just think if you work backwards to find the cause, it comes down to factors like the upbrining of both accused and victim. we are largely (not totally, because i agree bad kids happen to good parents and vica versa) a product of our environment. good parenting has an awful lot to do with becoming a good person once the child grows, i believe. i think its safe to say the majority of good parents raise good children, who in turn will raise good children and so on. clearly, like you said there are exemptions, but it is well proven things like abuse run in cycles, something like 70% of abusers were once abusees. its the same with child rearing. if you were raised poorly, you are more likely to find yourself in a position where you yourself will be a substandard parent.

and your assumption would be totally wrong - i am a non-partisan agnostic.

EDIT: PS, your use of symbiotic implied one doesn't have control over the other which i disagree with - i think society de-valuing traditional family paradigms is responsible for the increase in fucked up shit we have seen in the last 30 years, which was way i said what i did about society and family breakdown.

EDIT: PPS, why say end of discussion? just because we disagree doesn't mean we can't continue to exchange ideas. we both might learn something. plz, continue.

 

[LaraB]

i am a non-partisan agnostic.

well that's a first! As an agnostic myself - i have never encountered an agnostic who championed the "sacred" nature of the family i.e. marriage.

It's quite ironic , and in a way it doesn't make sense to me, that an Agnostic would say that the root, in a way, of social disorder is a lack of highly religious tradition Even more so defending it by labelling it as sacred - again a highly religious notion lol.

Quite humourous actually

I say end discussion because it is getting nowhere.

Half the discussions stems from a disagreement as to the use of certain words, so if you disagree with my use of words, despite my having explained the meaning of their use and thus the context, it's not going to go anywhere but in circles.

I mean... apart from that, i completely 100% disagree with your definition of what is a "good" family... what it is to be a responsible person... what motivates persons to act the way they do etc etc.

Whether or not you are, you come across as defending the bullshit Howard party line of "the world will be a better place if we go back to the nuclear family with a father who works and a mother who's a cooing cleaning baby factory - that way kids will grow up proper" and i could never for any reason ever agree with an argument that even seems to head in that direction.

 

[jimmayyy]

well that's a first! As an agnostic myself - i have never encountered an agnostic who championed the "sacred" nature of the family i.e. marriage.

my bad if my use of words with religious connotations confused you. sacred was the best word i could think to describe where something is held in high regard for moral reasons. i dont mean it in a religious way.

It's quite ironic , and in a way it doesn't make sense to me, that an Agnostic would say that the root, in a way, of social disorder is a lack of highly religious tradition Even more so defending it by labelling it as sacred - again a highly religious notion lol.

again, i don't mean it as a religious thing? i don't really think marriage is a religious thing anymore when you look at it. sex before marriage, gay de facto unions, divorce being quick and easy etc etc. i think its a social thing now. sure, still has religious aspects to it eg doing it in a church with a minister, but more and more marriages (by legal definition) are becoming secular eg, having nothing to do with a church or priest, not necessarily being practicing christians etc

Quite humourous actually

err k? haha

I say end discussion because it is getting nowhere.

i don't really see two members having a civil disagreement and exchanging different ideas means its going no where, but k

Half the discussions stems from a disagreement as to the use of certain words, so if you disagree with my use of words, despite my having explained the meaning of their use and thus the context, it's not going to go anywhere but in circles.

i'm not sure what you mean? you disagree with me thinking the parents are partly (a large part, IMO) to blame. doesn't mean we have to stop the thread, does it? forums are made for discussion

I mean... apart from that, i completely 100% disagree with your definition of what is a "good" family... what it is to be a responsible person... what motivates persons to act the way they do etc etc.

i never said that the "traditional" family structure i described was good, or the right way a family should be, or what we should go back to. i simply used it as an example to show how family has an effect on society. back then with a different "stronger" family structure, things like this where at a minimum. i was trying to illustrate cause and effect between the family unit and society as a whole, because i think there is a link there.

our difference in what it means to be responsible clearly just comes from the different values we hold. again, hopefully that doesn't mean because i have different views you won't discuss with me?

Whether or not you are, you come across as defending the bullshit Howard party line of "the world will be a better place if we go back to the nuclear family with a father who works and a mother who's a cooing cleaning baby factory - that way kids will grow up proper" and i could never for any reason ever agree with an argument that even seems to head in that direction.

well, i'm not defending that at all. i myself live in a broken home. all i was trying to do was show how family in the traditional sense fucking up leads to society fucking up. i was trying to show you there is a link between family and society, because i believe that the family is the basic building block, the smallest atom if u will that makes up society. everyone in society has some sort of a "family".

and lol, if you don't want to argue with people i wouldn't post in this particular forum. i meant no offence to you hopefully you took none.

its a bit narrow minded to simply cut yourself off because i have a different opinion to you. just because you think the opinion i put forward (not necessarily the one i support, i just advocated it to illustrate a point) is wrong doesn't mean it doesn't have value. society is made up of differing values.

 

[LaraB]

my bad if my use of words with religious connotations confused you. sacred was the best word i could think to describe where something is held in high regard for moral reasons. i dont mean it in a religious way.

again, i don't mean it as a religious thing? i don't really think marriage is a religious thing anymore when you look at it. sex before marriage, gay de facto unions, divorce being quick and easy etc etc. i think its a social thing now. sure, still has religious aspects to it eg doing it in a church with a minister, but more and more marriages (by legal definition) are becoming secular eg, having nothing to do with a church or priest, not necessarily being practicing christians etc

err k? haha



i don't really see two members having a civil disagreement and exchanging different ideas means its going no where, but k

i'm not sure what you mean? you disagree with me thinking the parents are partly (a large part, IMO) to blame. doesn't mean we have to stop the thread, does it? forums are made for discussion

i never said that the "traditional" family structure i described was good, or the right way a family should be, or what we should go back to. i simply used it as an example to show how family has an effect on society. back then with a different "stronger" family structure, things like this where at a minimum. i was trying to illustrate cause and effect between the family unit and society as a whole, because i think there is a link there.

our difference in what it means to be responsible clearly just comes from the different values we hold. again, hopefully that doesn't mean because i have different views you won't discuss with me?

well, i'm not defending that at all. i myself live in a broken home. all i was trying to do was show how family in the traditional sense fucking up leads to society fucking up. i was trying to show you there is a link between family and society, because i believe that the family is the basic building block, the smallest atom if u will that makes up society. everyone in society has some sort of a "family".

and lol, if you don't want to argue with people i wouldn't post in this particular forum. i meant no offence to you hopefully you took none.

its a bit narrow minded to simply cut yourself off because i have a different opinion to you. just because you think the opinion i put forward (not necessarily the one i support, i just advocated it to illustrate a point) is wrong doesn't mean it doesn't have value. society is made up of differing values.

This is why i said there's not point continuing to discuss it -

all it has ended up being is a discussion about the discussion rather than about the topic itself per se...

Obviously we have different opinions, why do you feel that i should be compelled to continue to discuss? There is no reason why it cannot be left at simply that - i.e. I do not agree with you and you obviously don't agree with me.

 

[jazzy fizzle]

oh my goodness..
some of you people sound as though she deserved it.
has anyone here not gone out with their mates and drank or gotten completely trashed.
the girl is 15 for god's sake, she's still a child and her mind hasn't developed completely enough to take on responsibilty and to think about the consequences of her actions, it's clear she's probably drank too much and wasn't thinking straight, not like she knew exactly what she was doing, she was most probably just thinking.
how can you pass judgement on someone who's still a child.
and as for the "animals"..fair enough, those men are horrible for doing what they did.. but is it necessary to be accussing their heritage of being like that..that racisms just fuckin disgusting.
And to the person who brought in statistics..rape statistics is based on people who have reported it. 60% of rape victims don't report it at all..because it's family members or family friends, perhaps ye gang rape..rapists could be anyone. statistics means shit.
can we please stop with hideous accusations, racism and blame.

xxx
jazz