'Slut' Parade

[Keith Reedy]

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.

In a perfect world this would simply be taken in stride and not a person would care, sexism is only sexism long as you consider it that way. If you think man versus woman you shall see sexism if you don't, no sexism TA DAH!

To quote the old internet saying "LOL WUT?!" This is like saying "well yeah, if the slaves didn't notice that only black people were getting enslaved, it wouldn't have been racist." The idea that sexism exists only because we perceive its existence is the kind of dismissive conservative nonsense which has allowed its existence to continue. Sexism is the genuine gender inequalities which are present within our society.
Dealing with diversity, whether it be gender, racial, or any other sort is a difficult issue because while there are genuine differences between these groups (often these are sociological, but that doesn't mean they're not real), we still have to treat all the different groups as equal. To recognize and celebrate difference, but treat all entities the same, at times that's a seemingly paradoxical task. But that doesn't mean that it's unimportant, and ignoring or pretending it doesn't exist it is not the solution. The solution is to recognize difference but look past it to the core of who a person is.

When you say, however, that someone got raped because they were "dressed like a slut." You're not looking at that person as a person at all. You're just looking at them as a slut, and we don't use pejorative terms like "slut" against people who we intend to treat as people. It is sexist because it's treating a group of people (victims of a horrendous crime nonetheless) without the respect and love that they deserve on the basis of a sociologically imposed gender difference.

You missed my point so hard you landed in a different galaxy. I was saying in a perfect world not only would we not think of this man versus women sexism but the events that caused them wouldn't of happened. The same goes for racism, if the world was perfect no slavery, no black versus white no racism. Same for sexism, good world, no bad treatment of women, no sexism no rape. Maybe one day we will stop thinking this way and doing the things that cause us to continue to think in this manner such as the terrible crime of rape. Then this won't be an issue and we won't have stupid cops saying things like this.

 

[maninahat]

Whilst yes, outfits down't come into the majority of cases (where rapes are committed in a home by people who know the person personally), that doesn't change the fact that there are factors that increase the odds of a woman being attacked in those rarer situations. Wearing scanty clothes, getting drunk, and travelling alone in a night time social scene is the equivalent of waving a 9 iron at the heavens.

In those minority of stranger rapes, being alone is probably the biggest factor. But it's extremely offensive to suggest that women not go out on their own "for their own protection". Especially when they're more likely to be abused by someone they know anyway. It's cherry picking. Only around 20% of all rapes in the U.S. are even stranger rapes to begin with, and there's no data specifically linking stranger rapes to provocative dress, so it's just a massive assumption.

I don't think it's safe to make massive assumptions in a topic so plagued by "false facts" and incorrect "common wisdom" as rape.

How is it offensive? It is fairly good advice for men as well as women; going out alone at night in an urban area is potentially risky, especially if you live in a bad area.

So there is no data, but it is not a massive assumption at all. I can say with all confidence that men tend to prefer to have sex with voluptuous and attractive women, and a women who dresses in such away as to emphasize her "assets" is thus going to command greater interest whilst out on the town. That is blindingly obvious and should go without saying. The only real assumption I'm making is that the rapist prefers to go after vulnerable targets who he finds to be sexually appealing: it is hardly a stretch of the imagination is it? How exactly is one supposed to survey a rapist's sartorial preferences, I don't know. Until then, I think I am safe to make such a small assumption.

 

[blazedart]

I agree that rape is wrong and that women can wear whatever they want, but I'm just putting this out what if one of these women decide to go out with a skirt and no panties on what would you think about that?

 

[JonnWood]

the rapist prefers to go after vulnerable targets who he finds to be sexually appealing[/b]: it is hardly a stretch of the imagination is it? How exactly is one supposed to survey a rapist's sartorial preferences, I don't know. Until then, I think I am safe to make such a small assumption.

The critical error, here, is not trying to find sources to prove, support, or disprove your assertion. In fact, you assume that even finding out a rapist's clothes preferences would be difficult or impossible, because you can't think of how to go about it(Argument from incredulity.), despite the study already quoted here.

And it's not a small assumption, not that one of those would be any less correct or incorrect. Let's see if we can find anything on the bolded portion of your post, shall we?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation_for_rape
Plenty of citations.

The research on convicted rapists has found several important motivational factors in the sexual aggression of males. Those motivational factors repeatedly implicated are having anger at women and having the need to control or dominate them.[1]

Factors increasing men's risk of committing rape include alcohol and drug consumption, being more likely to consider victims responsible for their rape, being less knowledgeable about the impact of rape on victims, being impulsive and having antisocial tendencies, having an exaggerated sense of masculinity, having a low opinion on women, being a member of a criminal gang, having sexually aggressive friends, having been abused as a child and having been raised in a strongly patriarchal family.

If you don't like Wikipedia, how about a paper, cited by other papers as recently as 2009?

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/134/11/1239

Accounts from both offenders and victims of what occurs during a rape suggest that issues of power, anger, and sexuality are important in understanding the rapist's behavior. All three issues seem to operate in every rape, but the proportion varies and one issue seems to dominate in each instance. The authors ranked accounts from 133 offenders and 92 victims for the dominant issue and found that the offenses could be categorized as power rape (sexuality used primarily to express power) or anger rape (use of sexuality to express anger). There were no rapes in which sex was the dominant issue; sexuality was always in the service of other, nonsexual needs.

 

[Kahunaburger]

I agree that rape is wrong and that women can wear whatever they want, but I'm just putting this out what if one of these women decide to go out with a skirt and no panties on what would you think about that?

How would I know they this hypothetical woman isn't wearing panties?

 

[maninahat]

Most people who get struck by lightning are out in the open, which includes your hypothetical person standing on a hill. Therefore, someone standing on a hill is already at higher risk of getting struck by lightning than someone indoors. All you had to do is make the conditions specific enough for your straw man.

It is entirely about the specifics: a person who throws around statistics without taking into consideration the context is wasting their time. The point of my (baseless) hypothetical was to illustrate how you fail to examine the context of statistics; That the odds can be altered by confounding variables which need to be considered.

Whilst yes, outfits don't come into the majority of cases (where rapes are committed in a home by people who know the person personally), that doesn't change the fact that there are factors that increase the odds of a woman being attacked in those rarer situations.

Statistics, please.

Do I really have to? Do I need to provide statistics to prove that a woman is far less likely to be raped whilst isolated on a desert Island, or can you at least take that for granted? No, I don't have data for finding out a rapist's sartorial preferences, I'm simply making what I thought were obvious observations.

Wearing scanty clothes, getting drunk, and traveling alone in a night time social scene is the equivalent of waving a 9 iron at the heavens.

Yet many people do it all the time, without injury. Weird.

At least read the next paragraph before passing comment; I went to the trouble of providing a qualifier. To go back to my analogy, a man could easily go his whole life not being struck by lightning whilst holding up his club, but it still would be advisable for him not to do so.

Well dress is only one factor, and probably more minor. Many women dress scantily on nights out and have never had a problem, but that is because they are usually taking other precautions, like traveling with friends and watching what they drink.

Statistics please. Cause you keep making assertions, but I see no backing for them.

And you seem very confident to ignore any suggestion (no matter how self-evident) if it lacks statistics. Some assumptions can be safely made without research. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ7J7UjsRqg] Is it much of a stretch to assume a rapist is less likely to attack a woman who is among a group of people? Or that he is less likely, on proposing to a woman at a club, to try to take advantage of her if she is sober and clearheaded? Finally, is it too much to guess that a rapist might be more attracted to a sexy looking woman?

 

[JonnWood]

Most people who get struck by lightning are out in the open, which includes your hypothetical person standing on a hill. Therefore, someone standing on a hill is already at higher risk of getting struck by lightning than someone indoors. All you had to do is make the conditions specific enough for your straw man.

It is entirely about the specifics: a person who throws around statistics without taking into consideration the context is wasting their time. The point of my (baseless) hypothetical was to illustrate how you fail to examine the context of statistics; That the odds can be altered by confounding variables which need to be considered.

Well, that's strange. I could've sworn we were discussing the role of sexy clothes vs. non-sexy clothes in causing rape. That's fairly simple. If you add in dangerous situations, drunkenness, night, being alone, and we're suddenly talking about something much different than with we started with.

Whilst yes, outfits don't come into the majority of cases (where rapes are committed in a home by people who know the person personally), that doesn't change the fact that there are factors that increase the odds of a woman being attacked in those rarer situations.

Statistics, please.

Do I really have to?

Yep.

o I need to provide statistics to prove that a woman is far less likely to be raped whilst isolated on a desert Island, or can you at least take that for granted?

Depends. Is there anyone else on it?

No, I don't have data for finding out a rapist's sartorial preferences, I'm simply making what I thought were obvious observations.

You know how it's obvious Chameleons change color as camouflage? It's actually in response to heat. The camo thing is the "obvious observation". It's also, in this case, wrong.

Wearing scanty clothes, getting drunk, and traveling alone in a night time social scene is the equivalent of waving a 9 iron at the heavens.

Yet many people do it all the time, without injury. Weird.

At least read the next paragraph before passing comment; I went to the trouble of providing a qualifier. To go back to my analogy, a man could easily go his whole life not being struck by lightning whilst holding up his club, but it still would be advisable for him not to do so.

In fact, it would be a good idea for him not to be outside in the first place, as I pointed out. Just being outdoors increases his risk of being struck by lightning as opposed to the alternative (going inside). No such correlation exists with sexy clothing and rape.

Well dress is only one factor, and probably more minor. Many women dress scantily on nights out and have never had a problem, but that is because they are usually taking other precautions, like traveling with friends and watching what they drink.

Statistics please. Cause you keep making assertions, but I see no backing for them.

And you seem very confident to ignore any suggestion (no matter how self-evident) if it lacks statistics.

It's called "asking for evidence", and is a standard tool in a debate.

Some assumptions can be safely made without research. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ7J7UjsRqg]

Which does not mean that all of them can The assumption that women who dress sexily are at higher risk for rape is not borne out by the statistics, and it is based on an assumption of rape psychology(ie: rape is about sex) that is itself false. The only way you've been able to make it so is to create a specific situation where it would be true.

Is it much of a stretch to assume a rapist is less likely to attack a woman who is among a group of people? Or that he is less likely, on proposing to a woman at a club, to try to take advantage of her if she is sober and clearheaded? Finally, is it too much to guess that a rapist might be more attracted to a sexy looking woman?

Nope. However, without any actual evidence, they are just assumptions, and should not be given the same weight as actual arguments supported by evidence.

Bottom line, you've admitted you're pulling facts out of your bum. Good day!

 

[zeldagirl]

Speaking as a man how a woman dresses is irrelevant to how she ought to be treated by a man, and in no way does her manner of dress excuse the behaviour of boys.

I agree, I honestly do. But if there are steps a person can take to protect themselves, and they choose not to take them, there's a lesson in that too.

It's like knowing you're going in a live fire area and refusing to wear kevlar body armour: its not your fault if someone else shoots you, but you still bear some responsibility for not having properly protected yourself.

I think we as a society needs to change how we view women as being victims of crimes. The onus is on women to "protect themselves" always...despite the fact that men are actually more like to be victims of most violent crimes except rape: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States


Yet, we don't teach men to dress in a way that 'protects' them from attack. We don't teach men to always walk with friends, or to not drink at night.


And let's take this one step farther - let's envision a society in which we don't teach women to protect themselves from rape, but we teach men to protect themselves from RAPING WOMEN. Statistics show that men who are under the influence of drugs or alcohol are more likely to rape. So let's change the script to "men, don't drink or do drugs, you may be more likely to rape someone."

Our society is very much a reactive society to rape. We need to be more preventative. The responsibility to prevent rape should NOT be put on the victims of rape.

That's not to say that women should not take self-defense or prepare herself for situations. I'm not naive to think that. But it saddens me that we only look at rape prevention from a potential victim's point of view.



(this isn't necessarily a rant against you, but your point provided a good segue)

 

[AgentNein]

Snip

The fun part of statistical evidence is that it helps us cast light on supposed "common sense". Which a lot of the time turns out to be flawed.

Snip

Maaaan, you still here? Kudos, I don't know if I have the energy anymore. I feel like Sisyphus trying to push that dumbass boulder up the stupid hill.

 

[blazedart]

I agree that rape is wrong and that women can wear whatever they want, but I'm just putting this out what if one of these women decide to go out with a skirt and no panties on what would you think about that?

How would I know they this hypothetical woman isn't wearing panties?

maybe a gust of wind or she walks up some stairs

 

[maninahat]

Well, that's strange. I could've sworn we were discussing the role of sexy clothes vs. non-sexy clothes in causing rape. That's fairly simple. If you add in dangerous situations, drunkenness, night, being alone, and we're suddenly talking about something much different than with we started with.

I am arguing that dress does factor into rape as well as, the night, being alone etc. You are claiming that it has no influence at all. Whilst I concede that in the majority of circumstances it doesn't (at home with familiar people), I think it does in the minority of cases involving strangers in outdoor/public settings.

Do I need to provide statistics to prove that a woman is far less likely to be raped whilst isolated on a desert Island, or can you at least take that for granted?

Depends. Is there anyone else on it?

No, she is isolated. In other-words, it is physically impossible for her to be raped by someone, and statistics aren't necessary to illustrate that fact.

Some assumptions can be safely made without research. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ7J7UjsRqg]

Which does not mean that all of them can. The assumption that women who dress sexily are at higher risk for rape is not borne out by the statistics, and it is based on an assumption of rape psychology(ie: rape is about sex) that is itself false.

Whilst rape is primarily about anger and power, sexual gratification is usually an element as well. Also, I'm only asking you to accept some assumptions, not all of them. In fact, I am only asking you to accept a couple which I feel are reasonable to make.

Is it much of a stretch to assume a rapist is less likely to attack a woman who is among a group of people? Or that he is less likely, on proposing to a woman at a club, to try to take advantage of her if she is sober and clearheaded? Finally, is it too much to guess that a rapist might be more attracted to a sexy looking woman?

Nope. However, without any actual evidence, they are just assumptions, and should not be given the same weight as actual arguments supported by evidence.[/quote]
Perhaps, but in light of the lack of studies into whether dress is a specific factor, I'm afraid that assumptions are all we have. Pointing out that clothing doesn't statistically factor into the majority of rapes doesn't deny that it can be a factor at all in some circumstances. For that reason, we are on a level playing field in terms of accuracy: you don't have definitive evidence to prove that clothing definitely isn't a factor, and I don't have definitive evidence that it is.

Also, don't most women in a nightclub dress sexily anyway?

True. Most women though are also keep aware of the men around them when they go out. They acknowledge the risk.

 

[maninahat]

Snip

The fun part of statistical evidence is that it helps us cast light on supposed "common sense". Which a lot of the time turns out to be flawed.

It can also be misused to draw false conclusions by treating correlations as causation. Without someone going to the trouble of providing context, a statistic can be as misleading as an flawed common sense. In the absence of statistical proof, one can only rely on anecdotal evidence and observation. That doesn't mean the common sense is wrong; it just means that it can be wrong.

 

[Yokai]

It's a great idea in theory, and I certainly support the notion that you should be able to wear what you want, but what exactly is this protest going to help? I'm pretty sure rapists don't pay attention to activism.

 

[SmilingKitsune]

People can dress however they damn well please, freedom of expression and all that.
I don't think the negative use of the word "slut" will disappear that easily though.

 

[xdiesp]

Fact: getting drunk contributes far more to being raped than your slutty dress.

 

[LondonBeer]

You completely missed the point. The parade was to support rape victims and tear down the whole "she dressed like a slut, she was asking for it" stance.

"Just because I look hungry doesn't mean I want random people showing sausages down my throat".

but if dressing like a slut increases your chances of getting raped and you don't want to get raped, then it's pretty obvious to not dress like a slut right?

and if i were a homeless person and was very hungry, i wouldn't mind random people giving me food. the metaphor isn't really as applicable.

You've twisted the metaphor. Being very hungry and looking hungry are completely different things. Just like dressing like a slut doesn't mean you want to get raped.

yes, i agree about the dressing part, in a perfect world everyone should be able to wear whatever they want. but if it actively increases your chances of getting raped by doing so, then it's a pretty small and easy step to wear something else instead. keep the sexy stuff at home for your partner.

How dare you. Rape is not about sex. Rape is about assault. How the woman dresses or does not dress has nothing to do with it. Fucking is not the fucking point. Don't you dare blame the victim of a crime for the actions of the criminal.

EDIT: suggesting that the manner of dress or the actions of the victim of a rape is the cause of the rape - even if only partially - is also to suggest that the rapist would be a fine, upstanding individual were it not for the woman's state of dress. It is to suggest that your house would not have been burglarized if not for your desire to have nice things. It is to suggest that the victim of murder would not have been murdered were it not for his desire to be alive.

ah internet, when will you ever learn to read?

if dressing like a slut increases your chances of getting raped

As people have told you, it doesn't. When will you learn to read?

then why would girls hold a slut parade as protest that women should be able to wear whatever they like without fear of getting raped?
did you even read the article?

and still you didn't READ. IF. IF it does, THEN.

High five dude . Agree & isnt it sad so few people can follow a logical arguement.

I've been leaving a few minor logical holes in my posts and waiting for you to notice. You still haven't.

So your trolling since thats an admission of deliberately inflaming an argument by omission ?

 

[Tanner The Monotone]

Does anyone else find this type of behavior ridiculous and shows how warped/hedonistic parts of Western society is becoming?

Nope, I don't see why it should be socially acceptable for men to sleep around, yet if a women does they're a "slut" or a "slag".

It's called a man-whore

 

[SillyBear]

People can dress however they damn well please, freedom of expression and all that.

No one is even questioning that. This is about what should happen when people respond violently to freedom of expression. Lots of people do, especially in lower socioeconomic areas.

Looking at the thread, there are two arguments here.

Idealist: "I know rape is happening but we have to keep expressing the importance of acceptance and freedom of expression. It doesn't matter if girls are targeted whilst wearing certain types of clothing, they have a right to wear it and we should solely concentrate on the rapist, not the victim."

Realist: "Rape happens. It is always going to happen and it always will happen so the best plan is to educate people on how best to avoid it. If that means urging girls to wear less revealing clothing in dangerous areas, then so be it. People's perception of other people counts for a lot. Like it or not, it's the world we live in."

 

[Altorin]

our world is too prude. Everyone likes sex, but discussing sex, or god forbid admitting you like sex makes you some sort of degenerate. I've finally gotten over some of my own sexual hurdles, I see this as it is, basically people who are struggling with their own sexual problems and are overemphasizing their sexual freedom. Which is fine, it's a phase, and it's also an IMPORTANT phase.

 

[Trolldor]

fine by me, remember "to each his own." Sorry if i like to follow societal norms instead of rebelling against it.

There is a distinct irony in you using posting that bearing the name and likeness of a gunslinging priest.

lol ah you caught me good sir! I follow societal norms in the outward appearance only

Lets just say i don't go getting the wrong kind of attention

I am reminded of Dave Chappelle's skit on a whore's uniform.

i don't mine them dressing to they way they do so long as they don't object to me treating them like a whore.

Meaning you walk up to them and ask how much for the night?

well you cant be that direct as soliciting is quite illegal, but yes more or less. Dont be mad if you get treated that way is all im saying.

Then you can't object to me treating you as I see fit based on what I think of you, no matter how insulting it might be.

if how im dress lets you think that, of course not. I was asking for it

Oh, that's not only what I'm going to judge you on.
Maybe I just don't like the way you walk. Or the sound of your voice. Maybe you have a lisp.
I love judging people for arbitrary reasons and taking a high road for it.

fine by me, remember "to each his own." Sorry if i like to follow societal norms instead of rebelling against it.

I know man! Aren't societal norms just the greatest?

Girl on the left is such a slut, right?

and exactly what is wrong with what the woman on the right is wearing compared to what the women on the left is wearing? Or the simple fact that they following their social norms has any bearing on how you live your life or your particular sensibilities?

you must live in a pretty idealized world if you think strangers don't pass judgement on you based solely on your outward appearance. Do you know what a first impression is?

You can dress as a skank if you want, and i'm all for it. But to believe any stranger will treat you as a classy lady doing so is pure naivete. I do believe in never judge a book by its cover, but if the cover is a naked woman, i'm going to expect it to have some naked women inside the book too.

watch the dave chappelle skit will ya?

I've seen it,I was unimpressed when I was teenager and I'm unimpressed by it now.
I've seen funnier, more intelligent ideas expressed by wood rot.
You must live in a fairly narrow world if you presume that your personal opinion is a 'societal norm'. I disagree with you, so do many other people on this thread. How many other people might we find in your society who disagree with you?
I find it hilarious that you assume your judgement should just be accepted.

Oh, and you completely failed to understand the point of the image, which doesn't surprise me.

at this point i've already lost track of what tangent your on but please enlighten me, what is the point of the image? and what does it have to do with what i originally said about sluts and there choice of clothing.

i really thought my message was very simple.

You want to dress like a slut, i'll assume and treat you like a slut. you don't want that kind of attention, don't dress like a slut/whore/skank.

exactly y is that such a foreign concept to you?

i'll repeat this a third time, I'm completely fine with how anyone, including you, perceives me. if i get attention that i don't want, i'll correct it. I don't just keep doing the same thing and expect a different result. I believe they call that insanity.

end of the day you and i have differing opinions, that is excellent, because to each his own [http://www.wisegeek.com/what-does-to-each-his-own-mean.htm]

How old are you? Cause that might help me make sense of your complete inability to grasp a simple image.

Right, so, the image is a fairly blatantly obvious attempt to point out the absurdity of applying a subjective value as an objective fact, which is what you are doing.
But that might have been a little confusing so let's simplify it:

Just because you think she looks slutty, it doesn't mean she is. How you think she looks doesn't mean that's how she does look. What you deem slutty I could deem fine, just as in the image above the girl in the modest sun dress is 'slutty' in the kind of cultre that thinks the Burqa is modest.
If "to each his own" then stop forcing your opinions and attitudes on women, or do they not qualify for your statement because they are women?
Do you not see the ridiculous hypocrisy you're practicing?