'Slut' Parade
- Thread starter Jimbo1212
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Speaking as a member of one of said groups, who grew up in a country where said group was the majority, I don't see the point in bothering to "reclaim" a word at all. Instead of a new meaning, you almost always just end up with a double-standard. Woman calls another woman a "*****"? Fine. Gay man calls a woman a "*****"? Fine. Ostensibly straight man calls a woman a "*****"? Storm and thunder. Just stop using the word, and let the legacy of hate it's attached to die off.conflictofinterests said:
No.AgentNein said:
That's exactly why I deliberately added "physical appearance" as an example.
Thinking "hey, I look good" is a perfectly justifiable source of confidence.
Thinking "i only look good when i wear this exact outfit" is not.
Clothing was invented, first and foremost, for comfort and functionality.
Frankly, i'll be damned if i'm dragged into using it as a social tool too.
So you're saying that she (or anyone) would dress up even if nobody were there to see it?JonnWood said:
You're saying that if if a girl was lost at birth and raised by wolves in the wild, she'd still like to dress up (assuming she found some dresses lying around somewhere)?
I think you're missing the point. The point of these protests is that people still blame the victim in a lot of rape cases, and that women should have the right to wear what they want without being raped.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?
First you said you dress up for yourself, and now you're saying that you dress up because of pressure from other people. Fucked up.AgentNein said:
(this post was edited)
Wow, The Escapist has surprised me again. I knew this place was a bit of a sausage fest but I never thought we had this much sexism :-/
Kahunaburger said:
Regardless, my point is that it WONT change. Loose sexual morals has never been an accepted practice. Sorry, it has been "accepted" in the sense that there were brothels, mistresses and whatnot. But those women were still inflicted with the negative name of "whores" and "sluts". What is the word suppose to mean otherwise? It's suppose to be a good thing? It's like trying to turn the word "disgusting" into something positive. I don't like being called disgusting, so I'm going to make it into a positive word so I feel better.AgentNein said:
I get that their main goal is to force sexual promiscuity into a positive, or less negative, thing, but with today's mentality and just the general morals passed down, it's really unlikely to happen.
Furthermore, on their website they say that they want to take the word "slut" back. This implies that they even want to keep the negative term, just change people's view on it.
I don't agree with the police officer blaming their dress for rape, men shouldn't rape and it's not an excuse to. But I disagree with them trying to make their promiscuity sound better.
That is a huge assumption you are making. Why do you care how someone dresses? How does it effect you or anyone else? Oh wait. It doesn't.TB_Infidel said:
Orgasm is an autonomic function which a person, man or woman, has little control over. (Consider "performance anxiety" and wet dreams.)Guy Jackson said:
As such, saying a victim had an orgasm during rape is similar to saying a woman wet herself during childbirth.
In any case, rape is a very traumatizing event not only in the instance of it, but in the remembrance of it, as one questions whether or not it was their fault, whether or not they fought hard enough, whether or not to turn the attacker in, whether or not one somehow inadvertently screwed up the case or let something slip (if the victim decides to keep it secret). Orgasm during rape is something that would make the questions about deserving it tougher to cope with.
Devil's advocate: Would you honestly not think negatively if the girl you were going to propose to told you she had had 20 sexual partners before you? Would you not be disappointed if your sister or daughter slept around at say age 16, increasing her chance of catching an STD or becoming pregnant?CarlMinez said:
The concept is valid. Leaving valuables on display in your car for example, increases the likelihood of it being broken into. Leaving a window or door open in your home increases the likelihood of your home being burgled. Being white in ceratin parts of S. Africa are almost certain to get one killed. Similarly, dressing extremely revealingly could increase the risk of a sexual assault.Zeekar said:
It is a crime, it is not the fault of the victim but she could have done more to lower the risks. Dressing more modestly, travelling with friends, taking busy, better lit streets home, not accepting rides from unlicensed cabs/strangers, and so on. In this regard there is for all intents and purposes, no difference between your examples.
2. No it's not blaming the victim. It's advising that the victim might've helped him/herself by making themselves less appealing a target and not having to be a victim at all.Ladette said:
3. No (s)he shouldn't, it's good advice. (S)he's not saying it's the victim's fault. (S)he is saying that women should try to minimise the risk of themselves ever becoming a victim. That is no worse advice than suggesting contraceptive use to prevent STDs, wear a seat belt to not-die in an accident and so on.
4. It's not double-standards. Male rape does happen, but female rape is more common and women are generally more vulnerable. The police are quite right to want to protect women and minimise sexual assaults.
Not to avoid rape but to lower the chances of it happening. Dressing like a nun will not avoid it but if a woman can lower the risk of becoming a victim, wouldn't it be worth keeping in mind? Then there's time and place...wandering the street alone, at night, dressed revealingly increases the risk of being assaulted. It's not the vitim's fault, but if that same person did any of those things differently, perhaps they might not have become a victim. They are not suggesting blame, they are not telling you how to dress nor saying it will prevent being a victim but suggesting that less revealing clothing could help prevent it.amucha98 said:
No it is not sexist, that is what the word means. Look up the definition in a dictionary. Or just click here [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/slut]. You can apply the term to a man though it is most often used for women.Levitas1234 said:
When I first read the thread title, a song started playing in my head...
When I was
a young boy
my father
took me into the city
to see a marching band.
He said, "Son when
you grow up
will you be
the Savior of the broken,
the beaten and the Damned?"
He said, "Will you
defeat them,
your demons,
and all the nonbelievers;
the plans that they have made?"
"Because one day
I'll leave you
a phantom
to lead you in the summer
to join the Slut Parade?"
*awesome guitar riff*
*repeat previous lyrics once more, with feeling*
When I was
a young boy
my father
took me into the city
to see a marching band.
He said, "Son when
you grow up
will you be
the Savior of the broken,
the beaten and the Damned?"
He said, "Will you
defeat them,
your demons,
and all the nonbelievers;
the plans that they have made?"
"Because one day
I'll leave you
a phantom
to lead you in the summer
to join the Slut Parade?"
*awesome guitar riff*
*repeat previous lyrics once more, with feeling*
What? Are you disputing the fact that skin is inherently corrupting and that the more you see the more depraved you become? Are you mad? What next, the sky is orange? Haw haw haw.RedEyesBlackGamer said:
I would like to point out that Western culture, and European culture in particular, is not the only culture, and there are plenty of people with less harsh views on women embracing sexuality.G33kGoddess said: