'Slut' Parade

[gamer_parent]

In the end, I think it would be more effective to actually address the fact that we as a society tend to judge a woman's worth based on her sexuality and sexual conduct.

Smaller battles do tend to help the larger war, though.

But that root right there is probably the deepest and hardest one to pull out. You'll notice here and elsewhere that a lot guys implicitly and explictly believe the worth of that crappy judgement.

that is definitely true, and from THAT perspective, I can totally get behind any movement that tries to win through subversion of norms. umm... GO SLUTS?

 

[Jimbo1212]

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*[/quote]

No one who dresses like a slag is innocent as there is no reason to dress like that unless you want sex/attention.

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.

Add some booze into the picture and yeah, some men are tunnel vision when it comes to sex, so to say that is not ridiculous at all.

Seriously? You're saying that a girl who you don't beleive wears enough clothes and goes out for nights on the town deserves to be raped? I hope you don't beleive this but your making it sound like you do so please put my mind to rest.
Personally I believe a lot of the responsibility in a rape case lies with the bloody rapist and not the victim. Girls should be able to wear what they like within reason and the action should be taken against those who would take what they want of them.

OT: Yeah I think it poor show and not the right way for a girl to comport herself, but its not my life. They can do what they want with their time and bodies and I shant interfere with thier freedoms. If they are putting themselves at risk, let them, try and stop the rapists instead.

I never said 'deserves to be raped' or anything like that.
What I said is 'would you feel sorry for them ?'. There is a reason why many rape cases get thrown out of court and that is because it is too confusing, just like if someone was going around trying to start a fight but gets knocked out. What did they expect? Why did common sense not kick in at any point and stop them from being an idiot? Of course this is not always the case, but sometimes it is.

 

[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.

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.

I totally agree, the levels of progressiveness here are two very different things. The level of institutionalized sexism in our western culture is not nearly as apparent and oppressive as it is in some of these middle eastern cultures. BUT with that said, I still feel that it's a fair comparison. Because these are still two sides of the same coin (again, on extremely different levels).

In our culture it's implied that maybe it's a teensy bit the victims fault, or they could have prevented the assault because they could've dressed "sensibly". In these other cultures it's not implied at all. They're seen as just as much at fault at times. But it's still blaming the victim, either way. It's still saying that THIS is an acceptable way for a woman to dress and THAT is not (and trying to moralize rape stories in a way which is all sorts of messed up), but the line between acceptable and unacceptable is always completely arbitrary.

I think the whole point here is that women in our culture could wear burkas, cover themselves from head to toe, and there would still be just as much rape and sexual assault and there would still be people saying (in a round about way) that these women put themselves in that situation because of how they dressed.

 

[omega 616]

To me this is just like parents falling back on there government to raise there kids. Forcing the responsibility onto somebody else and taking none for themselvs.

If you got raped think why, beyond "the guy is a lonely perv who couldn't get any, any other way". It's not like you can leave all your possesions in full view on your car seat and not expect somebody not to take them, it's the world we live in these days.

I am not saying you have to dress like a nun but your only making yourself a target by dressing as a slut, as they so elegantly put it.

To me a woman who dresses like that shouts at everybody "I am competing for attention 'cos my self esteem is that low I need guys drooling over me to make me feel good".

It's the whole take precautions to prevent yourself from being raped that I am getting at. Should men rape women? Of course not, do they? Damn right! So try to avoid it.

It's times like these I want to shake people till they get it.

So women aren't allowed to wear the clothes they want to?

They can wear want they want to, like I said "I am not telling any one to dress like a nun".

In the same breath, they can dress how they want to, as much as I can leave my flat door open or leave my cash/phone/wallet on the table in a resturant and go the toilet and not expect it to be robbed.

I think it's all about taking precautions and resonibility. We all know robberies shouldn't happen but they do, so what do we all do? Try and prevent them, we hide our stuff, we have locks and camera's etc etc etc.

With rape it's "I can dress and act anyway I want, if I am raped it is all his fault!".

Call it common sense or precautions or being pro active but think to yourself "am I making myself out to be a target here?".

I know if I said to my mum "I got robbed today, I left my front door open and went out for an hour or two and when I got back my flat was empty", she wouldn't say "how dare somebody do that to you!", she would say "WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN FOR? YOU STUPID BOY!" and I am pretty sure alot of other parents/family/friends would say the exact same to anybody else.

So why is it partly my fault for that, but if I was a girl and got raped by dressing like a "slut" and acting like a "slut" or in stupid way (walking home alone, maybe down a dark ally, pissed as a fart at 4 am) then it is all his fault? To me, it's not.

Rapists don't just sit around waiting for girls who show a little bit of cleavage, then pounce like panthers.

Besides, rape is often not about sex at all.

Never said they did. I am saying the rapist (who may not have gone out thinking "I am going to rape tonight") in a club when a sexy woman comes in dressed in very little, he downs a few for courage, mean while the girl he has his eye on is drinking heavily (like 99% of clubbers do) so by 2 am there both pretty smashed.

He goes over and starts chatting/dancing with her, she grinding her ass against his crotch and he is getting ... happier. There both flirting heavily, snogging alot etc etc etc, he decides to take the plunge and ask her back to his place, then shes all like "nah, I'm going him", he's left with the bluest balls so waits for her.

Or he thinks shes playing hard to get and things go to far ...

I am not a rapist or even a clubber but thats how I imagine something like that going down.

I know alot of people say that "rape isn't about sex, it's about empowerment and whatever else" but I could grab a girl, knock her out, tie her up and controller her anyway I wanted, choose when to feed her or whatever.

Hell, there are a select few girls in the world who love being dominated and being slaves. Why risk prison time for something you can do legally? Maybe adds to the thrill, I guess?

I just don't buy so many rapes AKA forced sex happens just for the thrill of controlling somebody and not sex. There so many other ways of getting to that goal without rape.

To me this is just like parents falling back on there government to raise there kids. Forcing the responsibility onto somebody else and taking none for themselvs.

If you got raped think why, beyond "the guy is a lonely perv who couldn't get any, any other way". It's not like you can leave all your possesions in full view on your car seat and not expect somebody not to take them, it's the world we live in these days.

I am not saying you have to dress like a nun but your only making yourself a target by dressing as a slut, as they so elegantly put it.

To me a woman who dresses like that shouts at everybody "I am competing for attention 'cos my self esteem is that low I need guys drooling over me to make me feel good".

It's the whole take precautions to prevent yourself from being raped that I am getting at. Should men rape women? Of course not, do they? Damn right! So try to avoid it.

It's times like these I want to shake people till they get it.

I'll just stick this here.

Patterns of Behavior in Adolescent Rape_ by Vinogradov et al. in the
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 58(2) April 1988 pp 179-87:

71% of the rapists were under the influence of drugs (inc. alcohol).
15% reported taking drugs less than 15 minutes prior to the rape.
21% premeditated the rape.
27% committed the rape while committing another crime.
16% were impulsive/spontaneous, "the victim was simply an easy
available 'innocent bystander'".
7% were committed after an argument with the victim.
6% after sexual foreplay with the victim.

89% of the rapists described the victims as not being provocative,
"The victims did not verbally provoke nor were sexually
attractive to the attacker".

Even an overwhelmingly large portion of rapists don't believe the crap about provocative dress causing rape. You'd think people would listen to the actual rapists rather than "conventional wisdom".

General population: dumber than rapists.

From the second page. As you can see, how the victim dresses plays no real part in most rapes. Better advice to women would be to make sure they have friends with them, instead of telling them to dress conservatively.

Yeah, you can stick it somewhere else aswell ! Hehehe, just joking.

Like I said up there, I don't buy that. I mean, where was that even pulled from, it could be from trollingamI.com or 100%facts.com I don't know.

Lets see, according to that, whats the best way to get raped is .... Be drunk, with no drugs, on a premeditated whim, while only raping, can't argue before it and don't have sexual fore play AND ABOVE ALL ELSE DRESS LIKE A NUN!

Two of those clash, 21% premeditated the rape but 16% were impulsive/spontaneous, "the victim was simply an easy available 'innocent bystander'". 16 +21 =/= 100%.

 

[AgentNein]

Like I said up there, I don't buy that. I mean, where was that even pulled from, it could be from trollingamI.com or 100%facts.com I don't know.

The source has been cited, and you can feel free to follow up in checking that source. Don't see what the problem is here.

 

[JonnWood]

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.

There was an incident recently when the members of an harassed a girl because they felt she dressed and acted inapporpriately. While I happen to agree with them, I think the appropriate response would've been to contact children's services, not make hundreds of threatening and obscene phone calls and post her school schedule online. When called out on it, the members of the harassing organization claimed that she deserved it for messing with them, and needed to be taken down a peg.

The girl's father was later charged with abuse, and the girl in question was taken to therapy, possibly explaining much about her behavior and clothing choices.

Jessi Slaughter was all of 11 years old.

 

[Hawgh]

I think you've totally missed the point of the article, I support them on this. They should be able to choose how they dress without the worry of being raped.

That's like me wearing a police officer's outfit down the street and then being suprised when someone getting robbed runs to me for help.

A police uniform identifies the wearer as a public servant, who is intended to help you.
There's not an established "I want people to put their genitalia inside me" uniform. This is just plain ridiculous.

 

[nolongerhere]

Snip.

It came from the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. And you're right, 16 and 21 don't make 100. Then again, it also listed other reasons why rapes were committed, so that's kind of a pointless argument.

 

[napmil]

I'm not going to comment the raping thing, 'cause that pretty much says itself. I just had no idea that there still were some countries that used the word "slut" in a derogatory way. I thought the Western world would have abandoned such conservative thinking that a promiscuous woman was a bad thing. Did the sexual revulotion not happen? To be honest I've never heard anyone use the word "slut" unless they were making a joke.

 

[Hawgh]

I think you've totally missed the point of the article, I support them on this. They should be able to choose how they dress without the worry of being raped.

That's like me wearing a police officer's outfit down the street and then being suprised when someone getting robbed runs to me for help.

A police uniform identifies the wearer as a public servant, who is intended to help you.
There's not an established "I want people to put their genitalia inside me" uniform. This is just plain ridiculous.

Dressing like a hooker isn't a "I want people to put their genitalia inside me" uniform?

There's a hooker uniform? Huh, who knew?

Anyway. Even if it was the case, your metaphor would only make offers of monetary compensation for sexual congress acceptable. Prostitutes have the same human rights as everyone else.

 

[omega 616]

Snip.

It came from the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. And you're right, 16 and 21 don't make 100. Then again, it also listed other reasons why rapes were committed, so that's kind of a pointless argument.

This comes from the university of Liverpool, 100% of rapes happen to drunk "sluts".

Yes, I just made that up. It isn't hard to put some professional sounding place before some percentages and pull a fact out.

How is that a pointless argument? A pointless argument would be like "only men and women get raped". That percentage list says 16% of rapes aren't thought about before hand but only 21% are thought about before hand, is the other 63% like them women who are a little bit pregnant? They just wanted to sexually assult them but things got out of hand? It just doesn't make sense.

From a "credible and reliable source" it sure is dodgy looking.

You can't just dismiss a flaw like that as a "pointless argument", it is leaving a grey area that is over half of all rape cases.

Even if you make the argument "all the precents make up the actual figures" 252% of rape cases happen like this? Even if you take out the obvious 89% one it still leaves 163% of rape cases happen them ways.

 

[Death_Korps_Kommissar]

Lemmy has slept with at least 1,200 women and most men would think that's awesome.
If a girl did that, she'd be disowned.
Just saiyan

But the point someone else made that if you dress extremely provocatively, it is like waving around a wad of cash in a dangerous neighbourhood.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

But if you've reached that point, the rapist is already a ticking timebomb. Most human beings aren't on the edge of their sanity, ready to unleash the one-eyed monster in their trousers when a pair of high-heels brush away their last shred of restraint.

Most humans aren't, but you never know when you are in luck and meet "The One" (not Jet Li) and possibly push him over the edge. Sanity is a weird state. You're in it..until you aren't any longer. Different people in different circumstances have different trigger events (when they "snap").

Yeah, but it's unreasonable to expect everyone to treat every stranger they pass as a hair-trigger psychotic. In fact, it's rather insane.

Ehh...I can argue the opposite. Women certainly have more opportunities than men to dress provocatively, but men certainly get the better end of the deal when it comes to actual sex. Because I love analogies so much, consider this: a key that opens many locks is a master key, but a lock that is opened by many keys is a shitty lock.

You're gonna have to elaborate on that one. It's a beautiful analogy...I just don't see the argument.

No problem: I was saying that while women have more opportunities than men to dress provocatively, but when it comes to actually having sex, a girl who gets laid a lot is generally regarded by her peers as 'easy' while a guy who gets laid a lot is regarded by his peers as 'awesome.' You had said that women can flaunt their sexuality without much reprimand, but it's generally only who men can actually have lots of sex without getting a negative reputation.

If an undercover cop approaches you and tries to sell you drugs, he can't press charges if you do so. That would be entrapment. But at the same time, police routinely leave a car or bike unattended in a rough neighborhood, and arrest anyone who tries to steal it. This is not entrapment because the accused are not being offered something illegal and accepting: they're being left in the presence of something perfectly legal and normal and choosing to do something illegal with it.

Similarly, if a provocatively-dressed woman walks up to you, bends over, and tells you to bone her, you're not going to be charged as a rapist. You might be charged with such things as "the luckiest bastard on the planet," but that's not relevant to the point. If that same woman simply walks by you without a word, and you decide to hop aboard the Rape Train, your next destination is going to be the state pen, and with good reason.

Heh...the way you put it sure makes "me" look like a predator, pouncing without provocation. In those circumstances, yeah...total rapist.

But what do you think about the hypothetical (of course) cocktease scenario gone bad? A woman who does not fancy a man but does everything to make him horny until, on the moment supreme (lean in for the kiss), she just laughs her ass off and tells him something along the lines of "in your dreams, loser"? I admit, you are more likely to see this in a movie or TV show...but still...it is bound to have happened in real life.

...that's a rather specific situation, isn't it? Like, really, really specific. My scenario only involved an attractive woman walking down an empty street. I don't think yours is realistic enough to base an argument around.

 

[Gunner_Guardian]

In the end, I think it would be more effective to actually address the fact that we as a society tend to judge a woman's worth based on her sexuality and sexual conduct.

Smaller battles do tend to help the larger war, though.

But that root right there is probably the deepest and hardest one to pull out. You'll notice here and elsewhere that a lot guys implicitly and explictly believe the worth of that crappy judgement.

that is definitely true, and from THAT perspective, I can totally get behind any movement that tries to win through subversion of norms. umm... GO SLUTS?

Again as I said earlier, the easiest solution right now would be to coin another word with a positive connotation. I've heard the term "sexually liberated women" that seems to serve the purpose but I think a shorter word should be coined.

 

[Char-Nobyl]

I think you've totally missed the point of the article, I support them on this. They should be able to choose how they dress without the worry of being raped.

That's like me wearing a police officer's outfit down the street and then being suprised when someone getting robbed runs to me for help.

A police uniform identifies the wearer as a public servant, who is intended to help you.
There's not an established "I want people to put their genitalia inside me" uniform. This is just plain ridiculous.

Dressing like a hooker isn't a "I want people to put their genitalia inside me" uniform?

Even if prostitutes had a dress code, somehow I don't think it also implies "for free and without my consent."

 

[JonnWood]

Similarly, if a provocatively-dressed woman walks up to you, bends over, and tells you to bone her, you're not going to be charged as a rapist. You might be charged with such things as "the luckiest bastard on the planet," but that's not relevant to the point. If that same woman simply walks by you without a word, and you decide to hop aboard the Rape Train, your next destination is going to be the state pen, and with good reason.

Ironically, said corrections facility may be another station on the line.

 

[nolongerhere]

Snip.

It came from the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. And you're right, 16 and 21 don't make 100. Then again, it also listed other reasons why rapes were committed, so that's kind of a pointless argument.

This comes from the university of Liverpool, 100% of rapes happen to drunk "sluts".

Yes, I just made that up. It isn't hard to put some professional sounding place before some percentages and pull a fact out.

How is that a pointless argument? A pointless argument would be like "only men and women get raped". That percentage list says 16% of rapes aren't thought about before hand but only 21% are thought about before hand, is the other 63% like them women who are a little bit pregnant? They just wanted to sexually assult them but things got out of hand? It just doesn't make sense.

From a "credible and reliable source" it sure is dodgy looking.

You can't just dismiss a flaw like that as a "pointless argument", it is leaving a grey area that is over half of all rape cases.

You've got a journal, the issue of the journal, the page number and the name of the author. That's an easily verifiable source. 27% of the rapes were listed as occurring during the another crime. I believe they were separating them from the impulse ones. I don't have all the information on why all those who were questioned committed their rapes, though that only leaves 23% unexplained. But then again, I can't read the article from this computer, and am taking the information I'm getting from one quote from the paper in question.