I don't understand the "Slutwalk"

[Pierce Graham]

I assume you've heard about the Slutwalks going on worldwide. If you haven't, look it up.
I just don't understand it. These protestors seem to think that people assume that dressing sluttish-ly means "I want to get raped." But it's a simple fact: if you dress like a slut, you're more likely to get raped.
Imagine the following: A rapist sees two women, one at each end of a street. Both are alone. One is wearing pants/jeans and a t-shirt/longsleeve shirt, while the other is wearing a tube-top and a mini-skirt. Which, in your opinion, would be raped? The one dressed provocatively. If I leave my doors unlocked, I'm more likely to get robbed. If I cross the street, I'm more likely to get hit by a car.
I'm not saying that it's a good thing. But it's true. Women, in a perfect world, would be able to dress however they want without fear. But this is far from a perfect world. Dressing provocatively means you'll be more likely to get raped. Sure, people who don't may still get raped. But they're less likely to.
Thoughts?

Edit: Since some people are so monumentally stupid, let me just say this:
I AM NOT BLAMING THE VICTIMS. I DO NOT CONDONE RAPE. I DO NOT APPROVE OF RAPISTS. I DO NOT OPPOSE A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO DRESS THE WAY SHE WANTS TO. SIMPLY SAYING I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SLUTWALK DOES NOT MEAN I AM A RAPIST.
Now, if we can all start using our heads for something apart from holding up hats, shall we?

 

[BrailleOperatic]

It's protesting victim blaming. The idea is that what they wear is irrelevant; there are other factors at play. Specifically there are more important factors, such as the rapist's psychology. The slutwalk is designed to raise awareness for rapists getting off easier, or even completely, and the predominance of women being told it's their fault they were physically and emotionally violated. And the actual numbers of reported rape incidences suggest there is in fact no correlation between what women we and if they get raped. On top of which, provocative is an entirely subjective term, because where do you draw the line between modest and seductive?

 

[OmniscientOstrich]

It's protesting victim blaming. The idea is that what they wear is irrelevant; there are other factors at play. Specifically there are more important factors, such as the rapist's psychology. The slutwalk is designed to raise awareness for rapists getting off easier, or even completely,and the predominance of women being told it's their fault they were physically and emotionally violated. And the actual numbers of reported ape incidences suggest there is in fact no correlation between what women we and if they get raped. On top of which, provocative is an entirely subjective term, because where do you draw the line between modest and seductive?

I agree with this guy, really I have nothing else to add he pretty much covered all the bases.

 

[Pierce Graham]

Certainly, there are more factors than appearance when it comes to rape, and women shouldn't be victimized, but if you dress provocatively, you are more likely to be singled out.

 

[ResonanceSD]

snip

The idea behind it is that it's not the victim's fault. This is correct. It is never the victim's fault. That's why they're the f'ing VICTIM.


"Certainly, there are more factors than appearance when it comes to rape, and women shouldn't be victimized, but if you dress provocatively, you are more likely to be singled out."


The idea that you've so wonderfully missed is that there are no mitigating factors for a rapist. "because of the way she dressed" is not a good reason. there are NO good reasons. Why's that hard to grasp?

 

[J-dog42]

And the actual numbers of reported ape incidences

What you say is very true, and I know it's a serious subject but this typo just cracked me up.

 

[BrailleOperatic]

Certainly, there are more factors than appearance when it comes to rape, and women shouldn't be victimized, but if you dress provocatively, you are more likely to be singled out.

That's not true though. Rape isn't an act caused by sexual arousal. It's not about the pleasure of the attacker: it's about control. Rapists don't care about what their victims look like. The only care about inflicting pain and suffering.
However, sexual harassment, which is in fact motivated by sexual arousal, does scale with provocativity of the victim's clothing. But rape and harassment are really comparable in the way most would think. There's an order of magnitude of difference between them. And the motivations and victimology tend to be significantly disjoint and distinctive.

 

[AGrey]

Women dressed "slutty" get blamed for being raped.

That is pretty atrocious - blaming the victim - and needs to stop.

 

[BrailleOperatic]

And the actual numbers of reported ape incidences

What you say is very true, and I know it's a serious subject but this typo just cracked me up.

I fixed it.

 

[Princess Rose]

These protestors seem to think that people assume that dressing sluttish-ly means "I want to get raped." But it's a simple fact: if you dress like a slut, you're more likely to get raped.

I'm not saying that it's a good thing. But it's true. Women, in a perfect world, would be able to dress however they want without fear. But this is far from a perfect world. Dressing provocatively means you'll be more likely to get raped. Sure, people who don't may still get raped. But they're less likely to.
Thoughts?

No, you are 100% wrong. There is no correlation between dress and likelyhood to be raped.

Serial Rapists (the rarest) follow a specific MO.

Date Rapists (the most common) rape their date, no matter what she happens to be wearing. Wearing more revealing clothes doesn't alter that in any way.

Rape as part of another crime (robbery, assault, etc) is based on the target having valuables or being attacked for some other reason. Wearing slutty clothes has no impact on that either - in fact, it can have a negative impact (make you look less wealthy). Generally, assault is personal, so again, your dress has nothing to do with it because your attacker knows you.

So NONE of the main types of rape have anything to do with how you're dressed.

Yet, people persist in making ignorant comments about how one's dress makes them okay to assault. This is offensive and these women (and myself) are doing our best to draw attention to this idiotic, outdated, and chauvinistic belief.

 

[BanicRhys]

Imagine the following: A rapist sees two women, one at each end of a street. Both are alone. One is wearing pants/jeans and a t-shirt/longsleeve shirt, while the other is wearing a tube-top and a mini-skirt. Which, in your opinion, would be raped?

Neither, because the girl that doesn't get picked will be a witness to the crime.

Women should be able to wear whatever they want (with in reason) but seeing as they can't without the fear of being raped they should have enough common sense to know what they shouldn't wear, yada yada yada.

 

[CM156_v1legacy]

There are better ways to protest this I think.

But I agree. They are the victim. You don't say "Well, it's your fault your house got broken into. If you didn't have nice things, this wouldn't happen"

 

[Canadamus Prime]

It's protesting victim blaming. The idea is that what they wear is irrelevant; there are other factors at play. Specifically there are more important factors, such as the rapist's psychology. The slutwalk is designed to raise awareness for rapists getting off easier, or even completely,and the predominance of women being told it's their fault they were physically and emotionally violated. And the actual numbers of reported ape incidences suggest there is in fact no correlation between what women we and if they get raped. On top of which, provocative is an entirely subjective term, because where do you draw the line between modest and seductive?

Well if that's the case, then I'm not opposed. I do despise the whole victim blaming thing, but that's just another thing I blame lawyers for and I fucking HATE lawyers. They're one of the 3 things I'm convinced will bring about the downfall of society.
I'm not entirely sure this slutwalk will have the desired effect though. Certainly not with a name like that.

 

[Volkov]

snip

The idea behind it is that it's not the victim's fault. This is correct. It is never the victim's fault. That's why they're the f'ing VICTIM.


"Certainly, there are more factors than appearance when it comes to rape, and women shouldn't be victimized, but if you dress provocatively, you are more likely to be singled out."


The idea that you've so wonderfully missed is that there are no mitigating factors for a rapist. "because of the way she dressed" is not a good reason. there are NO good reasons. Why's that hard to grasp?

Are you implying that Pierce said that there were mitigating factors for a rapist?.. Cuz I really don't see where he did.

 

[Princess Rose]

Certainly, there are more factors than appearance when it comes to rape, and women shouldn't be victimized, but if you dress provocatively, you are more likely to be singled out.

As I noted above, no, that isn't true. That is a myth.

Rapists aren't just men who happen to be "turned on" walking down the street - they are criminals with specific patterns.

There are many different kinds - but none of the many kinds target individuals based on their dress (except serial rapists, and then sexiness isn't the main factor - resemblance to a specific individual or a certain type of individual is).

 

[NeutralDrow]

Yeah, I was gonna comment on the "which one would get raped" (the answer, of course, is whoever looks the easier target; if the "sluttily dressed" woman is clearly more alert, she's at less risk than the other). But I think I've been overshadowed by the seven or eight "you missed the point and this is how" comments.

 

[Pierce Graham]

And where do I say that the way they dress means: "I want to be raped?"

 

[BrailleOperatic]

And where do I say that the way they dress means: "I want to be raped?"

Right there!

Sorry...couldn't resist.

 

[Pierce Graham]

Nice one XD