Had enough, yet? Because I could go on, and on, and on. And this is just standard filesharing that anyone can go on – parental net security doesn’t stop it, because technically, it isn’t an adult site. And these are more popular than standard porn videos. Seems that “Debbie Does Dallas – erotic shower scene!!” (that 2 people were currently downloading, while I was online) just isn’t as exciting as “See father lock 12 year old daughter in bedroom and fuck her virgin pussy!!” (which had 65 people download it in the space of the two minutes that I was there). 

It shouldn’t need to be said. This world of access – the normalisation of this entertainment amongst children as young as 12 and 13 (and trust me, they’re watching it) has to affect this generation, psychologically, in terms of who they “are”. We have this legal system that confirms the idea that children are not entirely repsonsible, and that they’re influencing reality is the cause – which means “we” are – and yet, we choose ignorance, and turn a blind eye to what those kids are abosrbing as human beings. Mums buy their 12 year old the violent video game they’re hassled to buy (because the multi-million dollar corporation that makes it has been glamorising it and advertising it to their child, during cartoon shows), and they are fine that their children are in the next room, spending hours vicariously existing in a space where extreme violence is rewarded, and where you pretend to be a violent criminal, and are heralded as a “winner” for successfully being so. And if Mum’s response is, “Well, I don’t even know what I'm really buying them”, then why the fuck doesn’t she? Why don’t we care how we are growing our children, and why have we turned them over to the corrupt world of commercially driven entertainment and internet? I understand that many people just don’t realise the nature of what their children are absorbing, but that is no excuse. Why don’t we look? We bother spending our lives being suspicious of the Mulsim down the road, and some invisible enemy we are told is about to destroy us – but we don’t bother looking to see if we are doing that, all by ourselves. People tell their children about the “bad people” who killed people in New York, and how we’ve had to go to war with a country in order to get rid of them (even though Iraq isn’t about that, anyway), but we don’t blink an eyelid or go beyond the sensationalist panic that is so quickly forgotten (and never really turns into anything), when children see pictures of the soldiers they are told to look up to as heroes, torturing the people whose country they have invaded. When we justify the brutality of war, we justify it to our children, as well.

The Australian newspaper ran with the headline, “DVD just a bit of fun say students”, and interviewed students from schools involved. Among the responses (referencing not the rape scene, but the violence also on the DVD) was, "It's like one of those Rambo movies where they just fight." It was also justified because it was perceived to have been done to a “loser”.

And what about this idea that the boys were just having “a bit of fun”, and that the girl must have been “asking for it”? One teenage girl sighted that because the girl had obliged, and got on her knees to perform oral sex, she must have been agreeing to it; “You can't make someone get down on their knees.”

I want you to cast your mind back a few months, to the show that grips an adolescent nation every year, Big Brother. Can you see, anywhere in it, an instance where such a belief system was presented to youth? You didn’t have to be on the internet, downloading “pre-teen rape” to absorb the idea that sexual assault by groups of mates is nothing but acceptable larrikinism and that the girl is essentially to blame for the scandal.

One of the things we talked about during Big Brother was the idea that these people – grown adults, might I add, everyone on Big Brother is over 18 – stooped to such lows, even though they did, after all, realise they were being filmed 24 hours a day. We even heard the boys in question telling us they wouldn’t normally have behaved in such a manner, in any other situation. How does that go with one common idea (mostly held by older members of the community) that surely it is when you’re being watched, that you are best behaved?

Technology has done something else to our evolution – it has provided a means. Video recorders and cameras are now an everyday part of normal life (they were a luxury for the rich, until this decade), and computer and internet technology has given birth to a new culture of “fame”. We’ve wanted to be famous for a long time – and in adolescence, this is particularly strong – but never before have we had such means in order to psuedo-experience it. Youtube is the most obvious part of this, and reality TV is the commercial epitome of it (it’s as close to “real” fame as the everyday person can feasably achieve).

Even the real celebrity world has adapted in return, putting itself forward in the “reality” format. Not only do we have the Jessica Simpsons of the world, we have the popularity of Jackass (which is really like expensively produced youtube on the big screen - and presents real violence as larrikin entertainment). Ironically, the star of Jackass (Johnny Knoxville, who happily boasts of his alcoholism) is in town this week, in a PR tour to promote his new film, Jackass 2 (another collection where Knoxville is heralded as a “legend” for filming himself undergo a variety of painful, violent acts). Knoxville is himself a father, and when on Rove this week, told the endearing story of how his Jackass partner comes over to his house, where his six year old fetches them beers. One day, his daughter was “pissed” at his co-star, and subsequently urinated in the bottle of beer she retrieved for him. His co-star threw up in the sink - as his little girl looked on, laughing. “I was so proud of her,” grinned Knoxville.

The Seven network put it to Knoxville that he was an “inspiration” to the boys in the DVD, but he denied the suggestion; "No, they're not inspired by us - they're animals.”

But this crime must be viewed in light of the intended pseudo-fame through the recording of those acts for public viewing. That was their intention. It was part of the act. And where did the footage first show up, before it was sold on the slickly produced DVD? It was posted on youtube, under the same title as the DVD, “Cunt – The movie : Pimp my wife”. This section involved another local girl, who laughed along with the boys as they discussed forcing a girl to allow them to give her a brazillian wax – one boy offering, “We have to make this girl look like a slut.”

That very idea shows the intention being connected to the fact that this is being filmed. The crime is to “make her look” like something, that goal isn’t achieved in merely performing the act, but the response of the audience who will view and hopefully enjoy their “product”.

As already mentioned, this new game with technology that we see in the phenomenon of youtube is a game of escalation. And just as the viewer's thresh-hold changes, that forces those aiming to be viewed to escalate, also. You’re always trying to outdo the others – in a sea of choices, you have to be really shocking to get the viewers. And you can only move forward – you can’t do something less extreme than your last feat, it must escalate and push the envelope, every time. Where does that game end? Well, we’ve seen where this particular one led these boys – beside a river, with their gentials forced into the mouth of a 16 year old developmentally delayed girl. And where did they meet and arrange the event?

In cyberspace.

 

And why is that we raise men in this society to be the kind of creatures who are so driven by a powerlust, that they are led to assert proof of their ability to manipulate and dominate others through the new world of technology? And why is this revered and engaged by others to the point that it can create a situation of “fame”?

One of the other videos currently downloading on limewire is one I had my attention brought to, a couple of months ago, by a friend who was with me when I had a rather unpleasant experience, a couple of years back. We had gone out for a night on the town in Sydney, and come home for post-club drinks and joints, with a couple we had met at the bar. It turns out that they had only met each other this night, and we had unknowingly become involved in a “pick up” situation. Unfortunately for him, we got them so stoned that she passed out on the lounge, beside him. But that wasn’t going to spoil his reputation.

We had left them on the lounge (thinking he was also asleep), and moved onto the balcony. Upon going back inside to fetch another drink, I caught him taking photos up her skirt while she slept, with his mobile phone. I was stunned. We threw him out, instantly, and the whole time we were doing so, he had the audacity to be shocked at our response. Though, admittedly, I do think he was being sincere. He thought I was “over-reacting”, and that it was “just a bit of fun”, and besides, “everyone did it”. I told him he was sexually abusing her, and that if he didn’t get out, I’d call the police.

But Limewire one-ups this experience, hands down. On Limewire, you can find a new trend of videos, mostly titled “Hidden Camera”, accompanied by short boastings from the men who have filmed them. Remebering our discussion after that morning, where we lamented that technology was allowing these men to venture to dangerous places, my attention was brought to one titled, “Amateur hidden camera – I fuck my sister's friend and get the whole thing on camera!” In this video, a man has hidden a camera, positioned to face the lounge. On this lounge, we see him try to seduce his sister's best friend, while they wait for her to come home. She occasionally gets up to motion them to leave the area, and we see him try desprately to keep her on the lounge (so she can be recorded). In the end, he succeeds, and we see the two have sex for almost half an hour. He keeps demanding they do this in a variety of positions that are all secretly decided upon in order to provide the best “view”, and he constantly glances at the camera, while she obliviously has sex with the moron. It reminded me of the fact that the winner of this year’s Big Brother was – perhaps appropriately – a young man who looked in the mirrors and cameras, almost pathologically, and had done so during the famous romp scene with Katie in the rewards room.

 

In this video, the entire experience for the man – that once upon a time would have been engaging in the thrill of the actual sex – is about the recording of the moment. You can literally see his attention always come back to the idea of his image being burnt into the microchip, by which he will soon spread his glory throughout the world. He looks at the camera, excited by knowing he will soon be looked at, in return.

 

This is why the viewers are as much a part of the issue (despite the move to excuse them in the Werribee case). That goal cannot be reached without the audience. It's symbiotic - take the audience away, and you take the end motivation of their crime away. The social problem is not just that people are engaging in production of these videos, it's that even those who do not produce them, lap them up, and give reason to producing them.

 

That is the thing we will probably overlook in our assessment of these shocking crimes of the Victorian schoolboys. We’re all wondering no further than the extent of why they would want to commit those actual acts. But the acts are a means to an end; they’re a consequence of the real rush - a strange, existential mal-adaptation in the modern, technological world. Those boys turned that act into a product; they packaged it, and marketed it, and sold it like true little capitilists. But they weren’t even after the money. They were, like the kids who throw themselves into the exploitation and humility of reality television, after the notoriety.

They certainly ended up with that. Though sadly, they were beaten to the punch as the lead-in story in tonight's news, and the front pages of the papers. That honour was given to the Muslim.