'Slut' Parade

[Reaperman64]

Yes people should be allowed to do and dress how they want, although the empowering thing seems a little off ( How does dressing provacativly empower you?).

I've said it before, but relying on common sense without looking into the actual numbers if fallacious. Common sense sometimes has shit for brains.

Becareful of studies, they can be manipulated in favour of the writer...
Good point some people who claim to be sensible do some dumb things especially under the influence...

 

[AgentNein]

Or... you know, we could promote sensible clothing, so the temptation isnt more there

Hey that's a great idea, why didn't anything think of this befor- What's that? Iran, you say? Afghanistan? Oppressive, you say? Still get raped anyway but because the onus is on the women instead of the rapist they get blamed, you say? Darn.

Thats a different culture entire, especially since the woman is killed in that culture for it. We're talking western cultures, where we have a bit more respect for our women. So thats not a fair comparison.

It sure is a fair comparison. Because this is the logical end to this thought process. If all women started wearing skirts to their knees and showed no cleavage the definition of what "dressing like a slut" is would change, and women would still be getting part of the blame for being raped. Showed too much knee or some crap.

But sexual assaults show no real correlation with what a woman was wearing at the time. So why do people keep assuming this? I am of the opinion that it has to do with deep seated societal issues with how women SHOULD or SHOULDN'T dress (more fun with institutionalized sexism), and people try to use sexual assault as a backup for that (because in actuality there really IS no backup). But the stats aren't there.

 

[Iron Mal]

Saying that the victims bear even some of the blame (which you just did) counts as blaming the victim.

Also, there is no evidence to back up your implication that rapists are more likely to target scantily-clad women. You may think that it's "obvious" or "logical" that this would be the case, but until there's evidence, you cannot use this assumption to justify telling women how they should dress. In fact, as has already been stated in this thread, 89% of rapists say that their victim did not provoke them in any way and that they were not sexually attracted to their victim. Rape isn't about the perpetrator being overwhelmed with lust. It's about power. Any person, no matter their gender, age or manner of dress, is a potential target, and nowhere is there evidence that dressing provocatively makes you a more likely one.

Running with scissors makes you more likely to stab yourself with scissors. Dressing provocatively does not make you more likely to be raped. It's not a valid comparison.

What you fail to realise is that some victims really do need blaming, and I'm fairly certain that a statement being 'obvious' and 'logical' is fairly good grounds for it still being held valid even if there aren't any statistics to back them up.

If you're really going to get into it then any statistics discerning crime are automatically to be held with skepticism due to what is referred to as 'the dark figure of crime', that being the difference between the crimes that are reported and the crimes that actually happen, see, not all crimes are recorded and presented in statistics (due to various factors such as criminals who get away, crimes which aren't seen as important enough, crimes where no action is taken by the police or crimes where the victim simply doesn't come foward to speak to the police out of fear or concern for their safety, all of which happen far more often than you may want to think), when you can back your opinion up with more than statistics which by their very nature must be held in suspect then I may be inclined to agree with you.

If you need a better analogy, were you ever told to dress warm when going outside in winter because you'll catch a cold? Well, medically speaking you can't actually catch colds as a result of the temperature outside but you'd still be an idiot to defy this 'common sense' advice because of all the other bad shit that can happen to you insted.

Dressing like a slut may not get you raped (although it might, 11% isn't an insignificant number if we're gonna trust your stats) but it could get you mugged, abducted, solicited for prostitution, drugged, be stolen from and all other assortments of lovely street crime (yeah, that can happen to anyone, but drawing attention to yourself with the way you dress certainly doesn't help matters).

Also wearing revealing clothing in winter means you'll probably catch a cold on top of that too.

 

[Kpt._Rob]

I'm not sure if you're a man but it's clear that you don't understand how the male sex drive or libedo works which in turn explains why the advice 'don't dress like a slut' is actually pretty good advice in general (patriarchal, yes, inappropriate, hell no).

You may say it's blaming the victim or sexism (how is it an open display of hatred or contempt for women? If anything it's actually more prejudiced against promiscuouity in which case I fail to see the problem) but in some cases the victims do bare some of the blame for what happened, look at it this way, who is a prospective rapist going to be more interested in? Someone with less clothing or more?

Now I think about it, this isn't even blaming the victim, that would be if you were faced with a case of something that was completely unavoidable and could not be helped then berating the victim would be somewhat harsh (what were they supposed to do about it?) but if the request here is 'if you're worried about sexual assault then don't dress provocatively' then that's not really 'blaming the victim' as much as telling someone 'don't run with scissors' is.

Don't get me wrong, my sympathy goes out to rape victims (it is a horrible and unforgiveable crime) but this just reeks of 'I wanna do as I please but still be allowed to wail as loud as possible if it comes back to bite me' to me.

You, good sir, clearly did not read the later post I made, in which I already debunked your argument, so I'm just going copy it for you here so that you don't have to hunt it down

and rather then listening to advice on how to avoid rape, they want to protest?

The piece of "advice" you refer to, against which they are protesting, is a police officer telling them that "if they don't want to get raped, they shouldn't dress like sluts." That, incidentally, is not advice, it's sexism at its worst. It's blaming the victim. Honestly, it's not all that far from the passage in the bible where it says that if a woman gets raped in the city and doesn't scream loud enough she should be put to death because she should have screamed louder. It's the worst kind of patriarchal bullshit, and it's the kind of attitude that people do need to stand up against.

I don't know that attempting to "reclaim the word slut" is the right way to go about it, but nonetheless, it's important that people stand up and point out that saying things like that isn't going to be tolerated in a civilized society.

But would saying 'If you don't want your car stealing, don't leave it in the middle of the road with the doors open' be wrong? It's exactly the same. It would be nice to live in a world where bad things dont happen but we do.

If you leave your stuff on display then chances are someone will eventually take it.

Comparing those two things is a faulty metaphor.

To make my case there are a couple things I would point out. The first is the simple phrasing which was deemed offensive. If the officer had said "women who want to reduce their chances of getting raped should dress more modestly," that would be one thing. But that's not what he said. He said that women dress like sluts, and that's why they get raped.

The second thing I would point out is that, if I'm recalling my high school criminology class correctly, for most rapists the act of raping someone has less to do with being overwhelmed by sexual desire, and more to do with implementing a kind of power fantasy. To that extent, it is less the clothing the women are wearing, and more the simple fact that they are women in dangerous places, that puts them in harms way. So if you accept what you would be told by a criminal psychologist, the idea that a woman could avoid being raped by dressing more modestly is false to start with.

What you have then is an officer saying that victims of horrendous crimes are at fault for their own victimization, a claim which modern science would say is false in this case. And on top of this, he's phrasing it with a very charged word, when he could have at least been much more diplomatic in the way that he said it.

I would also point out that if you want to see the purest expression of the officer's logic, that 'women are at fault if they get raped because they didn't dress properly', then you should look to the middle east. The burka is the purest expression of the idea that 'women should hide their bodies because if they don't bad things will happen to them and it is their fault for not dressing with the greatest amount of modesty possible'. Incidentally, women still get raped there too, hell, Theo Van Gogh got killed for making a film about it.

 

[Jimbo1212]

...what?

Would you feel sorry for a kitten that fell off a cliff?

Well yes, because I kitten may not understand what a cliff is and as it is young, it would most likely be naive and innocent. If someone is old enough to dress like a slag then they really should not be naive and will most certainly not be innocent.

 

[Manji187]

The point of the protest is not to say "We are proud of being sluts"

The point of the protest is not to say "We should be allowed to dress this way without fear of rape"

The point of the protest is to say "Men are responsible for their own actions; if a woman is raped, it shouldn't make a blind bit of difference to an officer whether a victim comes alone wearing a tube top or a turtleneck".

They are protesting the callous dismissive-ness of a police officer here, and damn right too.

The amount of people on this site condemning the women doing this march is staggering.

I mean come on, put your latent misogyny aside for one second and think. Most of you here are male, I presume? Most of you have, in your time, seen a woman wearing something rather provocative.
Was your first instinct to rape her? Like some sex-crazed robot? No? (I hope not...)

This protest isn't so much about rape as it's about victim-blaming. If a rape is committed, the woman is in NO WAY responsible for it, not even if she was wearing a shirt with "FUCK ME" written on it in big gold letters.

Well, you are right about one thing. It's fundamentally about responsibility. Yes, in case of rape (if it actually is rape) the legal responsibility (accountibility) rests with the man. Responsibility is not only a legal matter though. If a woman dresses sexually provocative that is her choice and reasonably she doesn't have to expect to be raped for it.

Here's where the big "but" (no pun intended) comes in. I hope you're not the naive type. A woman instinctively knows/ accepts that by dressing provocatively she exercises "a certain power" over men and that not all men are equally capable in remaining unaffected (empirical knowledge). The woman in question de facto puts herself at risk (how high depends on further circumstances, like the neighborhood). Especially so if she is unlucky enough to encounter a mentally ill (and possibly sexually frustrated) man.

Do you smoke near a fuelling station? Do you drive like a madman in the middle of the night with lights out? You don't do these things because you are capable of risk-assessment and minimization. If a woman knows that she's having an effect on men, that men are not eunuchs/ monks or Vulcans (Star Trek) and she doesn't know the mental state/ history of the men....it is possible that she is in fact smoking near a fuelling station. Women are still responsible for their risk assessment...or lack of it.

Sure, one might hold that men should exercise more self-restraint/ control...but really that is a statement that is gender neutral and is applicable to women just as easily. You can't possibly hold that it's totally okay for women to play the unrestrained goddess relishing in her sexuality (nymphomania)...while simultaneously men must be practically a-sexual.

Men being what they are (sexual beings, just like women) and life being what it is (unpredictable)...it really is best to be cautious. Wearing a shirt with "FUCK ME" written on it in big gold letters is anything but cautious. It's a terrible risk-management decision that, combined with other circumstances, might end up in a tragedy.

Or it could be the best joke ever ("fuck me" as in "no way...I don't believe it"). It depends on a lot of things. You just never now when somebody takes it literally and decides to act on it.

 

[emeraldrafael]

Or... you know, we could promote sensible clothing, so the temptation isnt more there

Hey that's a great idea, why didn't anything think of this befor- What's that? Iran, you say? Afghanistan? Oppressive, you say? Still get raped anyway but because the onus is on the women instead of the rapist they get blamed, you say? Darn.

Thats a different culture entire, especially since the woman is killed in that culture for it. We're talking western cultures, where we have a bit more respect for our women. So thats not a fair comparison.

It sure is a fair comparison. Because this is the logical end to this thought process. If all women started wearing skirts to their knees and showed no cleavage the definition of what "dressing like a slut" is would change, and women would still be getting part of the blame for being raped. Showed too much knee or some crap.

But sexual assaults show no real correlation with what a woman was wearing at the time. So why do people keep assuming this? I am of the opinion that it has to do with deep seated societal issues with how women SHOULD or SHOULDN'T dress (more fun with institutionalized sexism), and people try to use sexual assault as a backup for that (because in actuality there really IS no backup). But the stats aren't there.

Yes, but again, woman are forced to wear this. There is no real rape as we would think where you get a fair trial in that portion of the world. Its never the man at the majority fault, its always the woman for allowing herself to be taken. Being born a woman is saying you just lost the cosmic lottery, sucks to be, better just bend down to whatever the man says because you dont want to take the chance of going outside it and being punished.

These women are saying they should be FREE to wear what they want (to which I agreed) and not be raped (to which I agree), because rape isnt about sexual desire, its about power (to which I... feel you could debate on a case by case basis), and that they shouldnt be labeled a slut for thier dress (to which I dont agree, but hten again, I'm one of those old school going into business type people who believe in sensibility and not having my brand new jeans look like I just found them in the dumpster with holes and patches in them, so thats just my opinion).

The women in the article get the choice to wear what htey want, cause they have the civil liberates in a western world, and beleive they should be protected and able to walk around without fear even though they're dressed as a "slut". Be cause yes, there was a time in (at least) America (where I'm from), where showing your ankles meant you were a sexual deviant of a woman, and that you should have been punished. But we (The West) woud like ot think we're passed that.

Women in the Arab world (for the most part) dont have those liberties. Its not a matter of I want to wear this, but Idont wnat to be raped, its a matter of "my religion and culture say I cannot wear such clothing, and I must good to my husband, never to anger or upset or dishonor or be unfaithful". Women there pretty much have to take the cards their dealt, but thats not Oppressive there (at least not to their culture). You cant take an argument in a Western World like this,and apply it to the Arab world, because the cultural differences are just to great to have it make any sense to either side.

Now I'm not saying its all bad over in the Arab world, or that they arent making strides towards a more Westernized thought on women's rights. But in countries like Iran, Like Afghanistan, these notions are met as the West trying to take our culture, and generally arent met very well by the locals.

 

[hitheremynameisbob]

No its just the normal take no responsibility rhetoric of feminist everywhere. If i go out of my way to paint my self blue, then walk around in public & get offended when people look at me funny & comment on me being blue, i have no right to get offended. I also have no right to then get other people together to march around demanding the right to be taken seriously while painted blue... This slut parade is just as stupid, but not in a haha funny sort of way.

If you dress in a way to attract attention from members of the opposite sex dont be surprised when you attract attention from members of the opposite sex.

-M

What is it with people and the blatantly invalid comparisons here? Being raped is a crime and a terrible violation of another person's rights. Pointing at someone and saying "haha, you're painted blue" is not. The issue here isn't that people look at provocatively-dressed women and disrespect them, it's that they are physically assaulting them and RAPING them. Nobody is trying to say that you can't have opinions about what women wear. It's when people try to use those opinions to justify severe crimes that things become wrong. Conversely, when people suggest that crime prevention is the responsibility of the victim, things are just as bad. Ultimately the fault lies wholly with the person who chooses to commit the crime. Even IF there were a demonstrable connection between women dressing provocatively and rape incidence, suggesting that someone who knowingly increases the chances that a crime will be committed against them bears some of the blame has crazy slippery slope consequences. Is little Jimmy responsible in any way for being hit by a drunk driver, because he had the audacity to play outside? Surely he would have been less likely to be hit if he'd been inside.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13333013

So these women are proud of being sluts, think that there is nothing wrong with acting in that way, and rather then listening to advice on how to avoid rape, they want to protest?

Does anyone else find this type of behavior ridiculous and shows how warped/hedonistic parts of Western society is becoming?

Way to completely miss the point, OP.

They're protesting a Canadian police officer essentially saying that rapes happen because women dress like "sluts." Apparently, males are barely-restrained rape machines with the vision of Tyrannosaurus, except instead of being sensitive to movement, we're sensitive to miniskirts.

 

[Flight]

Rape is the fault of the rapist, not the victim. The "slut shaming" and victim-blaming is appalling. If men sleep around, they're often heralded as champions of their gender; if women do the same, they're dirty. What's with the double-standard? Furthermore, people should be able to dress however they wish without others making it their business. If the clothes one is wearing are the clothes one likes, what's the problem? The real issue is the lack of education surrounding rape and the fact that survivors of such a horrific act are stigmatized.

 

[Hive Mind]

...what?

Would you feel sorry for a kitten that fell off a cliff?

Well yes, because I kitten may not understand what a cliff is and as it is young, it would most likely be naive and innocent. If someone is old enough to dress like a slag then they really should not be naive and will most certainly not be innocent.

"If someone dresses in a way I find sexual, THEY must not be innocent."

lulwat?

*faceplam*

 

[Justforonething]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13333013

So these women are proud of being sluts, think that there is nothing wrong with acting in that way, and rather then listening to advice on how to avoid rape, they want to protest?

Does anyone else find this type of behavior ridiculous and shows how warped/hedonistic parts of Western society is becoming?

Way to completely miss the point, OP.

They're protesting a Canadian police officer essentially saying that rapes happen because women dress like "sluts." Apparently, males are barely-restrained rape machines with the vision of Tyrannosaurus, except instead of being sensitive to movement, we're sensitive to miniskirts.

No, but rapists ARE.
Men are not. Rapists, who are often men, evidently do not have the same degree of self control as most men. It's like a soldier dressing like a soldier when there are snipers around. If you don't want to get shot, take off the uniform.

 

[Ericb]

Two types of trolls; the proper trolls, and the type of people for whom any response, positive or negative, only validates their opinion and increases their ego.

I'm glad there are people who realise this.

Way to completely miss the point, OP.

They're protesting a Canadian police officer essentially saying that rapes happen because women dress like "sluts." Apparently, males are barely-restrained rape machines with the vision of Tyrannosaurus, except instead of being sensitive to movement, we're sensitive to miniskirts.

No, but rapists ARE.
Men are not. Rapists, who are often men, evidently do not have the same degree of self control as most men. It's like a soldier dressing like a soldier when there are snipers around. If you don't want to get shot, take off the uniform.

I find that the quote below provides a very civilized and thought-out response to your argument.

What is it with people and the blatantly invalid comparisons here? Being raped is a crime and a terrible violation of another person's rights.

(...)

Conversely, when people suggest that crime prevention is the responsibility of the victim, things are just as bad. Ultimately the fault lies wholly with the person who chooses to commit the crime.

Even IF there were a demonstrable connection between women dressing provocatively and rape incidence, suggesting that someone who knowingly increases the chances that a crime will be committed against them bears some of the blame has crazy slippery slope consequences.

Is little Jimmy responsible in any way for being hit by a drunk driver, because he had the audacity to play outside? Surely he would have been less likely to be hit if he'd been inside.

 

[Hive Mind]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13333013

So these women are proud of being sluts, think that there is nothing wrong with acting in that way, and rather then listening to advice on how to avoid rape, they want to protest?

Does anyone else find this type of behavior ridiculous and shows how warped/hedonistic parts of Western society is becoming?

Way to completely miss the point, OP.

They're protesting a Canadian police officer essentially saying that rapes happen because women dress like "sluts." Apparently, males are barely-restrained rape machines with the vision of Tyrannosaurus, except instead of being sensitive to movement, we're sensitive to miniskirts.

No, but rapists ARE.
Men are not. Rapists, who are often men, evidently do not have the same degree of self control as most men. It's like a soldier dressing like a soldier when there are snipers around. If you don't want to get shot, take off the uniform.

Yeeaaahhh. That's not how rape works; a rapist doesn't just see a pretty girl and decide to rape her.

Nice try, though?

 

[Cowabungaa]

If you dress in a way to attract attention from members of the opposite sex dont be surprised when you attract attention from members of the opposite sex.

"Attracting attention" is a far cry from "being forced to commit sexual conduct".

Fact is, we live in a society that values freedom. That includes the freedom of being able to wear what you want to wear without the fear of getting raped. As if rapists are just poor victims of those eeeevil women with their powers of lust.

 

[agrajagthetesty]

What you fail to realise is that some victims really do need blaming, and I'm fairly certain that a statement being 'obvious' and 'logical' is fairly good grounds for it still being held valid even if there aren't any statistics to back them up.

If you're really going to get into it then any statistics discerning crime are automatically to be held with skepticism due to what is referred to as 'the dark figure of crime', that being the difference between the crimes that are reported and the crimes that actually happen, see, not all crimes are recorded and presented in statistics (due to various factors such as criminals who get away, crimes which aren't seen as important enough, crimes where no action is taken by the police or crimes where the victim simply doesn't come foward to speak to the police out of fear or concern for their safety, all of which happen far more often than you may want to think), when you can back your opinion up with more than statistics which by their very nature must be held in suspect then I may be inclined to agree with you.

If you need a better analogy, were you ever told to dress warm when going outside in winter because you'll catch a cold? Well, medically speaking you can't actually catch colds as a result of the temperature outside but you'd still be an idiot to defy this 'common sense' advice because of all the other bad shit that can happen to you insted.

Dressing like a slut may not get you raped (although it might, 11% isn't an insignificant number if we're gonna trust your stats) but it could get you mugged, abducted, solicited for prostitution, drugged, be stolen from and all other assortments of lovely street crime (yeah, that can happen to anyone, but drawing attention to yourself with the way you dress certainly doesn't help matters).

Also wearing revealing clothing in winter means you'll probably catch a cold on top of that too.

I'm sorry, but I refuse to accept that "some victims really do need blaming". Rape is a terrible, horrible crime, and it is never all right to blame the victim. Not ever, not even if she was wearing nothing but nipple tassels, not even if she was stark naked. There is no excuse for rape. Also, you misunderstood me. I was trying to say that just because you think something is "obvious", that doesn't make it reality. In fact, overwhelmingly rape is not motivated by sexual desire, and therefore provocative clothing is not a factor.

Yes, statistics are prone to distortion. I'm quite aware of the shockingly high proportion of rapes which go unreported. But I'd still take my side of the argument, which has some evidence to back it up, over yours, which has had no evidence offered for it so far other than "it's common sense". Why do I need to back my opinion up with "more than statistics" when you haven't even gone that far?

Other "bad stuff" might happen if you dress provocatively, notably things like catcalls, stares, negative attention and so on. Ideally, there would not be so much stigma associated with dressing this way, so some of these factors may go away as attitudes change. But none of those things are even slightly comparable to rape, especially when considering motivation. A man might (for example) catcall a woman because a) he is attracted to her and/or b) he considers her clothing to be inviting a certain treatment. Hopefully, with more protests like this "slut parade" and more people standing up for the right to dress how they want, fewer people will be motivated by b), and when men start to have more respect for women they will find a better way to deal with a) without resorting to crude yelling. But neither a) nor b) is relevant to a rapist, and since rape is what the police officer who spawned the protest was discussing, rape is the only example of "bad stuff" relevant to this thread.

You've also misinterpreted the figure of 11%. Not all of those victims will have been targeted because of their clothing; the figure includes all those who were viewed by their rapist as having somehow "provoked" them. Which can include their attitude, their body language, what they've said, or any number of factors. These are rapists talking - they're sick people, and I wouldn't be surprised if they interpreted all sorts of behaviours as "provoking" them.

Please provide evidence that dressing "like a slut" makes you more likely to be mugged/abducted/etc. Otherwise these are just baseless claims and shouldn't be used to justify an attempt to control how women dress.

 

[Hive Mind]

If you dress in a way to attract attention from members of the opposite sex dont be surprised when you attract attention from members of the opposite sex.

"Attracting attention" is a far cry from "being forced to commit sexual conduct".

Fact is, we live in a society that values freedom. That includes the freedom of being able to wear what you want to wear without the fear of getting raped. As if rapists are just poor victims of those eeeevil women with their powers of lust.

Mmmm. It seems the rapist gets a free pass because the victim should have know better. That's funny. I don't seem to remember asking to be raped. My fault, I guess. I must have been wearing my jacket seductively.

 

[dibblywibbles]

you're obviously missing the point. the point of it was after a recent string of events in canada(man gets community service for raping a woman because she was asking for it according to the judge) was simple. to demonstrate that what you wear should have no bearing on a criminal case of sexual assault. clothes don't mean you're "asking for it".

 

[Hive Mind]

Your absolutely right... I should walk around in budgie smugglers & when women mention it, i should get all offended & then get some guys to march down the street with me...

Yes, because the way I was raped and assaulted are CLEARLY the equal to someone pointing out my clothing?