'Slut' Parade

p3t3r

New member
Apr 16, 2009
1,413
0
0
well sure the woman should be able to wear what they want and i think most guys don't have problems with slutish clothes. ;)also i mean if a guy has a lot of sex it's a good thing everyone is like ya, but if it is a girl then everyone is like no. so when i originally saw the title i thought they were talking about changing that as well
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Feb 18, 2010
3,907
1,774
118
Country
United Kingdom
Guy Jackson said:
Spoken like someone who has no understanding of what constitutes a proof.
I'll settle for any evidence at all.

I'm still waiting though.

And proof is perfectly possible in psychology to the extent that it's possible in any science. I don't get your point.

Guy Jackson said:
Then by all means, do explain it to me.
The clue is in the name. Look up what 'autonomic' means.

Seriously.. did you ever get a random erection in maths class (for example)? Would you assume that if someone did they were mentally aroused by maths and actually wanted to fuck their teacher or their maths textbook?

Guy Jackson said:
I didn't say that mental stimulation is the only kind of stimulation that counts.
Considering that you implied that a large proportion of the people can achieve orgasm through experiencing massive pain, serious physical injury or paralysis simply through 'mental arousal', you might need to clarify what you actually think here. Because I've lost the plot of what you're even saying.

Or are you implying that rape is actually not painful and causes both physical and mental arousal in a significant proportion of women? Because if so, damn.. I don't know where to start. I hope noone who has been through the experience ever has the misfortune to meet you.

Guy Jackson said:
There are two conflicting assumptions here:
1) That a woman having an orgasm from rape is in no way related to her mental state.
2) That the above assumption is false.
Seriously, don't use Occams Razor if you don't know what it means.

Assumption 1 is an original assumption. It relies on an entirely new logical infrastructure to sustain it which is not well integrated into current understanding of the topic. Even the people who do claim (anecdotally) to be suggesting that orgasm does occur during rape are suggesting that it is not voluntary. You are making this assumption from nowhere, and it contradicts the vast, vast majority of established information.

Assumption 2 is not even an assumption, it covers a whole range of assumptions from across the board of existing understanding of the topic. It is the existing rule, it is sustained by tested logical infrastructure.

As said, Occams razor does not determine truth, but it is a good model to allocate the burden of the proof, and the burden of proof must always fall with the original assumption. A nuclear engineer doesn't get up in the morning and decide that the power plant he works at is powered by magic, the established assumption carries the most weight. Anyone who wants to claim that the power plant is powered by magic recieves the burden of proof.

It has yet to be evidenced to me that women do orgasm during rape. I cannot find a single reliable study suggesting it, just a bunch of anecdotal evidence. That evidence is hard to ignore, true, but a consistent point comes out of it. The people who experienced it did not want it. It did not bring them pleasure or joy. It is always described as unwanted physical arousal, as a betrayal of the mind by the body, or in similar terms.

Actually, the most common answer to the question of why this happens in the anecdotal cases is not that it represents not a voluntary desire for the act, but rather a bodily defence mechanism. This implies (with reasonably sound evidence from anyone who has ever got turned on) that the components of the response cycle are in some way linked, so in order to loosen or lubricate the vagina a person has to become aroused. If they become sufficiently aroused, they may orgasm. Forced penetration of the vagina is extremely painful and physically damaging, it may well be that the autonomic response is to attempt to lubricate the vagina, which may result in physical arousal.

That is an assumption. However, I'm inclined to take it infinitely more seriously than yours because it depends on fewer original assumptions to sustain it. We know that rape is terrifying, we know that it is painful, we know that it causes immense physical harm. We do not know of a correlation between light D/s practices and rape. Occams razor that.
 

Kpt._Rob

Travelling Mushishi
Apr 22, 2009
2,417
0
0
lostzombies.com said:
Kpt._Rob said:
TB_Infidel said:
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.
 

Divine Miss Bee

avatar under maintenance
Feb 16, 2010
730
0
0
the point is, that men have no right to rape a woman no matter how she is dressed. men have been found innocent of rape because the woman in question was wearing a low-cut top or short skirt, and the "slut walks" protest that sort of sexist injustice. women should be able to wear what they want-the only way to prevent rape is to make men see that women are not just sexual objects, and all the "advice" in the world won't do any good if it's aimed at women alone. anti-rape education should be aimed mostly at men, as they are the ones who usually rape.
 

TheDarkestDerp

New member
Dec 6, 2010
499
0
0
Idiocy. Pure idiocy.

I dress pretty provocatively, as a slut would, by most people's standards, I've even been a 'sex worker' in the past, but my actions are not the designs of 'a slut' nor would I be so stupid as to walk around proclaiming myself one. I'm engaged to a great guy and I wouldn't cheapen myself or our relationship by calling myself 'a slut'. Because I'm not... UGH...

If these little girls want to dress as they would without fear of being raped and make a statement about that, more power to them. They should have that right in a world peopled by mature human beings etc etc etc... I will support such an endeavor wholly. But walking around proclaiming that you are a slut and proud of that is not the way to do it. This is juvenile and somewhat esque, missing their own point.
 

Arizona Kyle

New member
Aug 25, 2010
371
0
0
sethzard said:
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.
Well hey good with them let me know how that works out for them XD
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Feb 18, 2010
3,907
1,774
118
Country
United Kingdom
TheDarkestDerp said:
If these little girls want to dress as they would without fear of being raped and make a statement about that, more power to them. They should have that right in a world peopled by mature human beings etc etc etc... I will support such an endeavor wholly. But walking around proclaiming that you are a slut and proud of that is not the way to do it. This is juvenile and somewhat esque, missing their own point.
I should say, knowing a good number of these girls (at least the ones organizing the event in London), that most of them are well educated middle class feminists. Most are in long term relationships or happily single. Most actually dislike wearing highly sexualized clothing.

That said, a few are 'sex workers'. Even so, most of them are in long term relationships.

The point is not that they want to be sluts, it's that they want to draw attention to the fact that we have a word which, by its very nature, is highly unfair and used to restrict the sexuality of people like you.

Because to a large extent it doesn't matter how you see yourself. Other people will judge you regardless of your assertions to the contrary.
 

Ericb

New member
Sep 26, 2006
368
0
0
HG131 said:
Never before have I wanted to EXTERMINATE large sections of the Escapist's population. Now I do. Lets get buildin' some Daleks.
Put the hardware together and I'll program them for ya.

Gunner_Guardian said:
I like the idea of it however I honestly think it's going to be nearly impossible to flip a word like "slut" into something positive or neutral. Instead I wonder if it would be easier to coin a new word that has a positive connotation.
It probably would. But the overall effect of flipping a pejorative and widespread word into something positive would be much more powerful.
 

gamer_parent

New member
Jul 7, 2010
611
0
0
I feel the article and the parade itself is muddling their own point. Is the point of the parade reappropriation of a word or is it to raise awareness on rape? While I can get behind both messages, I feel that this is just not effective way of delivering it.
 

Volkov

New member
Dec 4, 2010
238
0
0
TB_Infidel said:
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?
ANY protest is ridiculous, because NONE of them have work for many years. There doesn't seem to be a cause (i.e., are they trying to say that being a slut doesn't make you a bad person? if so, then I agree with them) or a goal they are after, so it's impossible to judge their position.

if you think that this protest will lead to them getting raped, you are mistaken. dressing like a slut in a bad neighborhood at night, with no escort, may lead to rape. a protest will not.

the western society is by no means becoming MORE warped and hedonistic. i mean fuck, as little as 50 years ago segregation was federally enforced in the states. So no, the society is not becoming MORE warped. However, casual sex is becoming more mainstream - and that is a good thing.
 

Shifty

New member
Apr 21, 2011
121
0
0
Look up the research, rapists will choose victims that are easier for them to attack, they will still try someone if they dont find an easy target. Does this mean that women shouldn't dress they way they like within societies limits (for their own sake, no need to be locked up for gross indecency) Women should be able to dress however they like and as far as I see it, it is the duty of the police officers to protect that and them... to protect and serve. as for the Amish.. that is like me commenting on how Eskimos need to dress to keep themselves safe in the snow.
 

Arizona Kyle

New member
Aug 25, 2010
371
0
0
Julianking93 said:
Wait, since when does the term "slut" refer to a style? o_O

Also, I thought this thread said "Slut Panda"
Am I weird for being disappointed that it isnt'? >.>

Seriously though, I dont' think rapist choose victims based solely on dress or even appearance.
They target those who are vulnerable or what they see as "weak."
Even though there are cases where someone has been raped due to promiscuous dress or things like that, it isn't purely based on one's attire.
1st wee bit

2nd id have to say that the dress helps alittle i mean its not a desiding vote but it helps a bit just like when you go out and look for women your going to notice the skimpy dressed ones easier then the ones that have 4 layers of clothing on
 

cobra_ky

New member
Nov 20, 2008
1,643
0
0
gamer_parent said:
I feel the article and the parade itself is muddling their own point. Is the point of the parade reappropriation of a word or is it to raise awareness on rape? While I can get behind both messages, I feel that this is just not effective way of delivering it.
Both. The point is reclaiming the word so it can no longer be used to justify or excuse rape.
 

TheDarkestDerp

New member
Dec 6, 2010
499
0
0
evilthecat said:
TheDarkestDerp said:
If these little girls want to dress as they would without fear of being raped and make a statement about that, more power to them. They should have that right in a world peopled by mature human beings etc etc etc... I will support such an endeavor wholly. But walking around proclaiming that you are a slut and proud of that is not the way to do it. This is juvenile and somewhat esque, missing their own point.
I should say, knowing a good number of these girls (at least the ones organizing the event in London), that most of them are well educated middle class feminists. Most are in long term relationships or happily single. Most actually dislike wearing highly sexualized clothing.

The point is not that they want to be sluts, it's that they want to draw attention to the fact that we have a word which, by its very nature, is highly unfair and used to restrict the sexuality of people like you.

Because to a large extent it doesn't matter how you see yourself. Other people will judge you regardless of your assertions to the contrary.
That's great, and I'm happy for them doing... whatever they feel they're doing. I've never questioned their education, or the existence/nature of their relationships, nor do I care. Thank you for your knowledge and opinions.

This still seems juvenile and poorly conceived to me, about akin to 'pride parades' I've seen, making a rather foolhardy spectacle of yourself, proclaiming yourself 'a slut' but then quantifying it by saying "you really aren't...you don't even like to dress like one... but you should have the right to do so..." Not the way I'd go about it, or have gone about it. There are many other words I've been called, some rightfully so, which are still only words, and still used by people just as ignorant and awful. This 'protest' is as I said, a decent idea, just carried out poorly.

Being as I stated, female and a former sex-worker, an activist for transgender rights and same-sex couples in the 'bible belt' of Amerika, I need no objective lessons on people pre-judging me, but thank you for your statement. Thank you for taking the time out of your evening/day, to provide me with this new information, however unnecessary.
 

gamer_parent

New member
Jul 7, 2010
611
0
0
cobra_ky said:
gamer_parent said:
I feel the article and the parade itself is muddling their own point. Is the point of the parade reappropriation of a word or is it to raise awareness on rape? While I can get behind both messages, I feel that this is just not effective way of delivering it.
Both. The point is reclaiming the word so it can no longer be used to justify or excuse rape.
But I never thought that the word itself was the justification. I mean, I get that used in THAT context, it's supposed to paint a poor picture of the victims and so on but... I don't think reclaiming the word will make the victim slamming go away. That's what I mean. It's not just the word itself, it's the image that it brings. The image that brings forth by the word "slut", "whore", "harlot", etc all bring to mind a woman of loose morals, and sexual promiscuity and denigration of their character. Isolating a single word, in this context, I feel does nothing, and that's why I question the effectiveness of the message.

Again, I agree with the sentiment, but I'm not sure if this is an effective way to go about it.
 

Gunner_Guardian

New member
Jul 15, 2009
274
0
0
Ericb said:
HG131 said:
Never before have I wanted to EXTERMINATE large sections of the Escapist's population. Now I do. Lets get buildin' some Daleks.
Put the hardware together and I'll program them for ya.

Gunner_Guardian said:
I like the idea of it however I honestly think it's going to be nearly impossible to flip a word like "slut" into something positive or neutral. Instead I wonder if it would be easier to coin a new word that has a positive connotation.
It probably would. But the overall effect of flipping a pejorative and widespread word into something positive would be much more powerful.
It would be, but I still doubt you could pull it off. Some people are still going to have the belief that women who are promiscuous are "immoral", "bad", etc and use slut as negative insult. Creating an entirely different word would be much easier because you'd separate people who have the former belief from those who think a women being promiscuous isn't a big deal.

Now what this word would be, I have no idea, someone come up with something that could become popular.
 

easternflame

Cosmic Rays of Undeadly Fire
Nov 2, 2010
745
0
0
I don't think you understand. These women don't want to be raped, regardless of how they dress.