Belated said:
There is nothing wrong with a slut parade. And by the way, "slut" is a totally derogatory term. It implies that there's something wrong with dressing sexy or being promiscuous. NO. There is nothing wrong with that. If a woman wants to look her best and get laid a bunch, she should be able to. What's the big deal? If she's happy doing it, let her do it. And NO. It is not a woman's fault she got raped. It doesn't matter how sexy she looked. If you rape a woman, it is on you. A woman should be able to dress how she wants to without feeling like she's endangering herself. It's not her fault if somebody rapes her, and she shouldn't have to expect that to happen.
Totally agreed. Though I can't argue with the logic that when a woman dresses slutty, they appear to be telegraphing to tohers that they want a sexual encounter; thus "inviting" perverts. That doesn't give rapists any excuses for their actions, but it does mean that a slutty dressed girl should be aware of what they are conveying to total strangers. They should know the risk, even when there shouldn't be one in a decent society.
I think that society needs to be more accepting female promescuity, and not treat casual sex as acceptable just for men.
Those who trade freedom for safety deserve neither.
I hate that phrase. It is almost always used by people from very safe (and free) worlds. Try telling a starving, diseased person in a war torn, developing country to favour liberty over basic survival. Security breeds democracy, liberty and moderation; insecurity breeds extremists, tyrants and demagogues - people who will exploit desperation by promising drastic and simple solutions. Nazis, communists and Islam fundamentalists can never gain real power in a stable society, but they will always gain opportunities in times of stress or calamity.
Instead of discouraging dressing sexy, the police should be encouraging conceal carry licensing for women. They have a right to protect themselves, but they shouldn't have to give up something they enjoy in order to do it. So why not add something instead? Add a gun. And no, a gun is not a big deal. It's a tool. A tool for self-defense. People have a right to protect themselves. And no, an innocent person with a gun just trying to protect herself is not a danger to society.
Why specifically a gun? In most circumstances, canned mace is far more practical; it is cheap, it requires no training or maintenence to use accurately and effectively, it is unlikely to kill someone (so one can be less reluctant to use it in face of a threat), and it WORKS. When people think "self-defence", they are too quick to think "gun". Depending on your situation, there are more sensible options.
