I don't understand the "Slutwalk"

[game-lover]

I've had a long time to think about this kind of thing and I got a grip on my stance after watching this show on the Bio channel.

No, it's never the victim's fault but I tend to follow the idea that it's a matter of people knowing better. Or at least, I think that's what people are trying to say.

Take for example: Hitch hiking. Everyone has surely heard all the warnings by now. Don't pick up strange people on the road. Don't hitch a ride with a strange person, etc. If you take the risk and do those things and then something unfortunate happens to you, can you really be that surprised?

 

[Agayek]

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 This is offensive and these women (and myself) are doing our best to draw attention to this idiotic, outdated, and chauvinistic belief.

While I actually do agree with you, I need to point out that no one said it was okay to assault anyone because of what they are wearing.

The point is less "Oh god, you were asking for it" and more "Don't bait criminals". It's the exact same logic that stops people from walking through a dark alley in a bad neighborhood. It's simple common sense to not put yourself in a situation where you are needlessly at risk, whether that means taking a less direct route between two points or wearing somewhat more conservative clothing.

You said it yourself, clothing can affect your odds of being robbed/assaulted, it's just common sense to minimize the risk.

Edit: I'm gonna make this clear before I get 30,000,000 quotes telling me I'm a terrible person: THE VICTIM OF AN ASSAULT IS NOT AT FAULT, REGARDLESS OF ANY EXTERNAL FACTORS. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THEY DID NOT DO SOMETHING STUPID AND LEAVE THEMSELVES OPEN TO IT.

 

[fiddles_stix]

It's also about taking the pejorative nature away from the word. Believe it or not "slut" didn't always have the same negative connotations it has currently has. It's always meant a woman who sleeps around but the point in 21st century western societies is that this is not a negative thing or at least shouldn't be seen as such. So the walks are about freedom to dress as wanted and reclaiming a word from negative connotations.

Try reading John Gay's The Beggar's Opera and you'll see what I mean. "Slut" while being derogatory in the play is a sign of freedom for the women in the play. It's derogatory and prevents them from socialising with the elites of society but it's shown there that in the early 18th century it's far better to be a slut than a wife!

 

[easternflame]

It's not about dress, it's not about rape. Not because I dress provocatevely, I should get raped(I'm a guy but u get the point). I can dress however the fuck I want to dress.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

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?

No, it isn't a "fact". Blaming the victim is not okay and you need to cite some sources, fast.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I guess not simple enough for femenists.

I guess spelling isn't simple enough for anti-feminists.

Where's the cause? Where's the effect? Give me evidence, not hyperbolic bullshit about what you think feminism is like, because you've already demonstrated your laughable ignorance in that regard.

 

[Phisi]

I do understand the point of trying to take the word 'slut' as I find it very sexist that women are treated differently because of how much 'company' they keep. However I'm not sure if it will work as it will probably still be used in an offensive manner. As a male, I come into this quite often but I think you'll find most guys use 'slut' in a very joking manner but they do provide a place where it is acceptable to be used by those that don't :S. As for trying to promote that women should be allowed to dress how they won't; go for it, but don't expect the outcome you want as it may take some time. Though I think it'll be more effective to show people when they make sexist assumptions etc then to accuse them of it. personally though I find the style of dressing like a near empty thread spool not very sexy at all. So feel free to miss-quote my useless opinion and call me the demonic reincarnation of a sea sponge, as that is the wonder of the internet my friend.

Oh forgot, on a related matter I think that rape law should be changed so that the 'victim' is the 'accuser' or so as the law should be as neutral as possible.

 

[runnernda]

I've had a long time to think about this kind of thing and I got a grip on my stance after watching this show on the Bio channel.

No, it's never the victim's fault but I tend to follow the idea that it's a matter of people knowing better. Or at least, I think that's what people are trying to say.

Take for example: Hitch hiking. Everyone has surely heard all the warnings by now. Don't pick up strange people on the road. Don't hitch a ride with a strange person, etc. If you take the risk and do those things and then something unfortunate happens to you, can you really be that surprised?

I'm not sure what YOU'RE trying to say here. You can't equate rape to hitch hiking. A matter of people knowing better? Wearing a certain type of clothing is not a risk women take despite their knowing better. Sometimes, I'll put on flattering clothing because I want to feel attractive. Should I know better than that? What you said is basically a paraphrasing of "she was asking for it." Maybe that's not how you meant to come off, but that's certainly what I took from it.

Also, I would just like to comment that I was once walking home with a friend a couple years ago through a decently safe part of town. I was wearing jeans and a t-shirt. My friend was wearing a skirt, low-cut top and heels. I was the one who got grabbed and nearly forced into a car by a stranger. Just saying.

 

[WolfThomas]

It's also about taking the pejorative nature away from the word. Believe it or not "slut" didn't always have the same negative connotations it has currently has. It's always meant a woman who sleeps around but the point in 21st century western societies is that this is not a negative thing or at least shouldn't be seen as such. So the walks are about freedom to dress as wanted and reclaiming a word from negative connotations.

From what I understand the sexually promiscuous aspect was for a long time only a minor secondary aspect to the original meaning which was an untidy or slovenly woman. It's not unusual in old films or books to hear a character told she looks like a slut, the meaning being that she is untidy.

 

[TriggerOnly]

But it's a simple fact: if you dress like a slut, you're more likely to get raped.

If it's a simple fact, then can you support it with any numbers?

As far as I'm aware:

1) The jury is out on whether clothing has any impact on the likelihood of being raped. Since stranger rape (not 'date rape', fuck you Charles Clarke) is relatively rare and dealing with victims raises ethical problems, it would be extremely difficult to perform any kind of balanced research on the subject. Sure, if you were willing to brave an ethics board, you might be able to produce a rough idea of how many of a sample of stranger rape victims were wearing 'slutty' clothes at the time, but that means nothing without other numbers.

2) The vast majority of rape cases are not stranger rape. In the majority of rape cases, the victim and the attacker have a previous sexual relationship, in most other rape cases the victim and the attacker have known each other for a significant period of time. Stranger rape is a tiny fraction of overall rape cases, and yet since it's the most likely to be reported that tiny fraction is already massively overeported relative to other forms of rape.

An enormous majority of people who are raped will be raped by people who already know them and have seen them in a range of clothes already. Again, there is no evidence that it is in any way statistically significant.

But all this is besides the point..

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.

A female body (or male body, let's not be narrow minded) is not a car. It's not a piece of jewellery. It's not a handbag. It isn't a possession to be owned or stolen. It's amazing how common it is in rape discourse to see people comparing female bodies to commodities with logic along the lines of 'well, I lock my car to discourage thieves so you should wear an unflattering top to discourage rapists'.

No. That kind of discourse is not helpful, in fact it's worse than unhelpful in that it's actively promoting the kinds of attitudes which often make rape justifiable to those who do it. Rape is not a preventable theft which you can solve by metaphorically locking your car. The preventive logic of theft does not apply, and if you apply it (without any real evidence, I might add) then you send the message to society that an uncovered female body is fair game.

Yes, you lock your car. But you never have to go out wearing a burlap bag because if you don't random guys might assume you want to be stabbed in the stomach. And if that happened, I'd presume you wouldn't expect everyone around you to tut and tell you that you should have been wearing your bag. I'd hope in that situation you'd have the spine to assert your right not to have to wear the burlap bag, especially if there was no real evidence that those guys wouldn't have stabbed you anyway. This is exactly what these women are doing, and fucking power to them!

TL;DR

There was alot of text here and I feel you make a good point with all them words!

kidding I read it most of it is common seance but you make a good points about the examples people like to give. 1+ a star and cookie for you sir.

 

[Cenequus]

There are 2 major different types of rape: the one that was covered with good use here about "normal" women dressing provocatory which sadly is still seen as an excuse by some people. But there is one even more spread, brutal,ignored and even more people see it as excusable. It involves prostitutes which not only have a high risk of having as client someone with serious behaviour issues but more than often they are ignored even when they denounce it.

Mostly it's a cultural thing and as long sex will remain a taboo not much will change of how the victims of sex crimes are seen no matter their profession.

 

[Sariteiya]

Rapists actually generally choose victims based on factors that have nothing to do with "Sluttiness." Things like vulnerability, arbitrary physical preferences (they like 40 year old brunettes, etc) and physical stature. Many times rape victims were dressed conservatively, or quite often in the "saftey" of their own home. Often prostitutes will be raped, but this has more to do with their vulnerability than their clothing.

Blaming a victim for their rape because of clothing is like blaming someone not wearing armor for being murdered.

 

[JET1971]

Bring outcher dead threads!

*ding* *ding*

Bring outcher dead threads!

*ding* *ding*

Sorry i just had to do that.

I thought this was discussed 3 monthes ago?

 

[AlexNora]

I don't get whats so confusing. Even if you think that cloth have anything to do with rape (witch they most likely don't) why would you dwell on it. If there's a parade in my home town I don't necessarily need to attend or know what its is being held for. but since your thinking about it you might as well see what they have to say.

me personally I think rapist should be put to death (if there is absolute evidence)

 

[zpm4737]

I'm rather offended by the implication that if a girl is dressed all slutty, I, as a man, will completely lose control over myself and just whip it out and start raping her.

 

[KaiusCormere]

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?

My thought is that the focus should be solely catching and punishing rapists, and just ignoring however the victim was dressing completely.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Nicely said. If I remember correctly, these walks started after a case in which a police officer - or was it a politician? - in the Southern states blamed the victim in a rape case, and criticised her for wearing such a provocative dress, saying that she could expect to be raped, or somesuch.

It was a police officer in Canada. Came as a surprise to me, but Canada seems to get more than its fair share of this sort of thing.

That being said, the Slutwalk is full of idiots. You don't change minds by shoving a caricature of your position in the faces of the already misinformed, a problem this movement shares with various gay pride parades. Feminism is not going to make any progress if feminists keep acting like shitheads.

Alot of feminists have come out and said that the protesters weren't feminists...the word "fun-fem" has been thrown around (the difference being similar to that between people that enjoy attending Greenpeace rallies 'cause all the cool kids are and people that know and care about the environment).

Protesting against victim blaming? Fine, could do with alot more of that.
Getting everyone to dress "sexy" to get media exposure? Um...

Added to that, it generally became the sort of feminist event about rape that didn't want to associate with people who weren't middle class and white, didn't want to use the word "feminist" because it might frighten people away, and wouldn't dare say that most rapes are committed by men because it might hurt mens feelings.

As you'd expect, this has gotten ALOT of criticism by actual feminist feminists.

There are 2 major different types of rape: the one that was covered with good use here about "normal" women dressing provocatory which sadly is still seen as an excuse by some people. But there is one even more spread, brutal,ignored and even more people see it as excusable. It involves prostitutes which not only have a high risk of having as client someone with serious behaviour issues but more than often they are ignored even when they denounce it.

Mostly it's a cultural thing and as long sex will remain a taboo not much will change of how the victims of sex crimes are seen no matter their profession.

Well, actually the main type of rape is by a friend of family member, so it doesn't count as rape in many people's eyes, but yes, rape of prostitutes is a serious issue. Especially in areas where prostitution is illegal so they have no legal recourse at all, but even in other places they aren't likely to be believed or cared about.

 

[Sir Thomas Sean Connery]

My god people, quit whining! He is NOT blaming the victim!!!

OT: I completely agree. While not harmful, these walks seem quite pointless.

 

[BrailleOperatic]

snip

I think you meant to quote Bobbity, not me. I didn't say that.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I'm rather offended by the implication that if a girl is dressed all slutty, I, as a man, will completely lose control over myself and just whip it out and start raping her.

Don't you know? We can't control ourselves! Because as we all know, how much skin is showing is directly proportional to how much my self control decreases. Why won't someone think of the real victims here? Us men.
Yeah, it is a viewpoint that degrades all parties involved.