Anyone else disturbed by this police-sex witch-hunt going on right now? The timing is interesting, in that it comes out now, when the Government is hurting over it's bungling attempt to inflict an anti-smacking bill on the population. Then Helen's out there calling for more women to come forward.
Now, before any one jumps on me for this post, I don't condone what went on at the time. It sounds truly horrible and predatory. But - it was the eighties guys. Work hard, play hard mentality as one police guy on Newstalk ZB said yesterday. Strangely enough, that exact phrase was given to me as the culture of the workplace I joined as a late teen back in that period of time.
So, rather than focusing on how bad the police apparently were at the time, let's instead stand back a bit and think about how the eighties were in general. I don't believe that it was just the police engaging in this type of behaviour, but with the police it was more reprehensible given their position of authority over the population. Just like it was with pederast priests earlier.
Instead, let's think about this as a result of sexual liberation. Liberalise the conventions around what is considered appropriate sexual behaviour (think back to the free-love that came out of the sixties and seventies) and then what is the result - an increase in sexual predators across all spectrums of society.
But now that all of this has occurred in the past, doesn't everyone think it's all terribly convenient for the Labour Government - who most likely were those in power at the time these sexual antics were in play.
Contrast all of this with the sexual purity movement that has hit NZ, where young girls are encouraged to remain chaste (virgins for the unenlightened) until marriage, and fathers are encouraged to protect their daughters in this endeavour. I noticed two letters to the editor on this subject in today's Dom Post - one from a man who didn't want this sort of thing in NZ and one from a woman who was all for it.
I wouldn't be surprised if men in greater numbers were against women waiting for marriage to have sex. Men are more likely to go out hunting for sex, while as women tend to want love and engage in sex to get that love. I'm generalising though, I know there are many men who want love and vice-versa.
Which got me thinking - would all these young women in the eighties have become the targets of sexual predators in the police had they been adamant that they would save themselves for marriage? In a society where that was the norm, the predatory men would have known that had they gone after chaste women that their fathers would have raised hell, and the police hierarchy would have come down hard on them for any such action. But instead, the hierarchy were most likely men that were old enough to have been raised during the free-love sixties and seventies sexual "liberation", so may have thought nothing of policemen going after young girls.
Women like Helen Clark are guilty as sin in this. Sexual liberation is a part of her manifesto and has been for decades. To come out now, all concerned about the police sex scandal, is a denial of her role in setting up the whole sorry situation to begin with. And without a doubt, totally hypocritical. But then, what else do we expect from Labour politicians. Certainly not any sort of desire to actually fix things up. Instead this will give Helen an excuse to increase the powers of government.
Now, before any one jumps on me for this post, I don't condone what went on at the time. It sounds truly horrible and predatory. But - it was the eighties guys. Work hard, play hard mentality as one police guy on Newstalk ZB said yesterday. Strangely enough, that exact phrase was given to me as the culture of the workplace I joined as a late teen back in that period of time.
So, rather than focusing on how bad the police apparently were at the time, let's instead stand back a bit and think about how the eighties were in general. I don't believe that it was just the police engaging in this type of behaviour, but with the police it was more reprehensible given their position of authority over the population. Just like it was with pederast priests earlier.
Instead, let's think about this as a result of sexual liberation. Liberalise the conventions around what is considered appropriate sexual behaviour (think back to the free-love that came out of the sixties and seventies) and then what is the result - an increase in sexual predators across all spectrums of society.
But now that all of this has occurred in the past, doesn't everyone think it's all terribly convenient for the Labour Government - who most likely were those in power at the time these sexual antics were in play.
Contrast all of this with the sexual purity movement that has hit NZ, where young girls are encouraged to remain chaste (virgins for the unenlightened) until marriage, and fathers are encouraged to protect their daughters in this endeavour. I noticed two letters to the editor on this subject in today's Dom Post - one from a man who didn't want this sort of thing in NZ and one from a woman who was all for it.
I wouldn't be surprised if men in greater numbers were against women waiting for marriage to have sex. Men are more likely to go out hunting for sex, while as women tend to want love and engage in sex to get that love. I'm generalising though, I know there are many men who want love and vice-versa.
Which got me thinking - would all these young women in the eighties have become the targets of sexual predators in the police had they been adamant that they would save themselves for marriage? In a society where that was the norm, the predatory men would have known that had they gone after chaste women that their fathers would have raised hell, and the police hierarchy would have come down hard on them for any such action. But instead, the hierarchy were most likely men that were old enough to have been raised during the free-love sixties and seventies sexual "liberation", so may have thought nothing of policemen going after young girls.
Women like Helen Clark are guilty as sin in this. Sexual liberation is a part of her manifesto and has been for decades. To come out now, all concerned about the police sex scandal, is a denial of her role in setting up the whole sorry situation to begin with. And without a doubt, totally hypocritical. But then, what else do we expect from Labour politicians. Certainly not any sort of desire to actually fix things up. Instead this will give Helen an excuse to increase the powers of government.