The slut issue

[clayschuldt]

Also, I think it comes down to whatever you define as "a lot". Is three a lot? How about 25 sexual partners. Is 25 still a lot if it's over a period of 30 years?

Some people drop the term slut at the drop of hat. A lot of times it used just out of fustration. The person they call isn't really a slut, they just have more sex than the person using the term. Think about how many times a jealous girlfriend or gilted ex used the term. The term might be accurate for some but needs to be used a person with no bias.

 

[Smeatza]

Okay, you keep using high crime areas like it means something, it doesn't. this is not something that happens to people in the same way as showing off expensive items leads to theft.

Are you saying that no rapes are opportunistic? If so that's willfully ignorant.

Rape is not about desire, it's about power and control.

In some cases.
It is a myth that is always the case, do some research and you will see that the older you are, the less likely you are to get raped.
AKA. The less attractive you are, the less likely you are to get raped.
This is especially relevant when referring to opportunistic rape, the rape that the slutwalk movement refers to.

 

[Stasisesque]

The quotes got all messed up here so it was pretty hard to follow.

Yeah, sorry about that.

My remark that there is an overwhelming suggestion that if a girl is a "slut" she is not entitled to respect was not in reference to any points made by you, or even in this thread, but simply a continuation of the explanation for why Slut Walks happen. They are there to dispel the myth that a "slut" is somehow a lesser human being.

So, when did being criticized become being treated inhuman?

The rapist should be on the receiving end of all of the vitriol, but they often are not.

Sure they are. Saying "You know, you could have avoided this." is not giving someone vitriol. That's just common sense and I could apply it to anything. "You wouldn't have been shot if you and the shooter would have been at different places." Given, it's pointless for the victim after the fact, but maybe some other woman won't be quite as foolish after hearing it. Like I said, if you are a woman and you are dressed provocatively and alone you are a easy victim. And yes, it is your own fault if you are a easy victim. It isn't your fault if somebody acts upon you being a easy victim, but it is your fault that you were a easy victim in the first place.

Arguments like yours that the victim should shoulder some of the blame are the most frequently chanted. I find it very difficult to argue successfully against such a claim, because to me it's a baffling stance to take.

Here's the thing though. The concept isn't difficult to grasp, it's really really simple even. It baffling you...well...what is that supposed to make me think about you? If the concept is so simple and you just don't get it, what am I supposed to think?

In my mind the thought of a victim of rape or sexual assault having to assume any blame is ridiculous. It's like asking someone who's been stabbed to apologise for being near a person with a knife, or someone who's been mugged accepting that maybe they shouldn't own valuables. If either of those retaliations seem insane to you, that is how your argument sounds to me.

And this makes me think what we both know I am thinking even more. I mean, really? Seriously, your analogy is terrible. No, it isn't anything like asking someone who was stabbed to apologize for being near someone with a knife. That would be the case if I said "Silly women, of course you are going to get raped if you are EVER around ANYONE who could potentially rape you." but I didn't say that. You know what would fit better? If your analogy was "That's like saying that someone is a moron to be surprised when they end up stabbed after they jumped between 2 people having a knife fight."

Because that's pretty much what I'm saying. You don't get to act surprised when you recieve harm after putting yourself in harms way, maybe you shouldn't put yourself in harms way if you don't want to be harmed. This isn't rocket science, it's common sense.

I did say that if my analogies seemed insane to you, you'd know exactly how you sound to me - so in that respect they appear to have done their job. However, to counter your improvement of my analogy, that would be suggesting any woman who dresses provocatively is deliberately putting herself into a situation in which she may be raped. So, is a man in a nice suit doing the same? I mean, he looks rich so there's an increased risk he'll be mugged? We should all start advising men to stop dressing like businessmen, for their own safety of course. They won't mind they're being told how to dress because it's in their own best interests?

On January 24th, 2011, a representative of the Toronto Police gave shocking insight into the Force's view of sexual assault by stating: "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized".
As the city's major protective service, the Toronto Police have perpetuated the myth and stereotype of 'the slut', and in doing so have failed us. With sexual assault already a significantly under-reported crime, survivors have now been given even less of a reason to go to the Police, for fear that they could be blamed. Being assaulted isn't about what you wear; it's not even about sex; but using a pejorative term to rationalize inexcusable behaviour creates an environment in which it's okay to blame the victim.
Historically, the term 'slut' has carried a predominantly negative connotation. Aimed at those who are sexually promiscuous, be it for work or pleasure, it has primarily been women who have suffered under the burden of this label. And whether dished out as a serious indictment of one's character or merely as a flippant insult, the intent behind the word is always to wound, so we?re taking it back. "Slut" is being re-appropriated.
We are tired of being oppressed by slut-shaming; of being judged by our sexuality and feeling unsafe as a result. Being in charge of our sexual lives should not mean that we are opening ourselves to an expectation of violence, regardless if we participate in sex for pleasure or work. No one should equate enjoying sex with attracting sexual assault.
We are a movement demanding that our voices be heard. We are here to call foul on our Police Force and demand change. We want Toronto Police Services to take serious steps to regain our trust. We want to feel that we will be respected and protected should we ever need them, but more importantly be certain that those charged with our safety have a true understanding of what it is to be a survivor of sexual assault ? slut or otherwise.
We are tired of speeches filled with lip service and the apologies that accompany them. What we want is meaningful dialogue and we are doing something about it: WE ARE COMING TOGETHER. Not only as women, but as people from all gender expressions and orientations, all walks of life, levels of employment and education, all races, ages, abilities, and backgrounds, from all points of this city and elsewhere.
We are asking you to join us for SlutWalk, to make a unified statement about sexual assault and victims' rights and to demand respect for all. Whether a fellow slut or simply an ally, you don't have to wear your sexual proclivities on your sleeve, we just ask that you come. Any gender-identification, any age. Singles, couples, parents, sisters, brothers, children, friends. Come walk or roll or strut or holler or stomp with us. This has become a global movement, with Satellites happening all over the world. See if there?s one in your city.
Join us in our mission to spread the word that those who experience sexual assault are not the ones at fault, without exception.

This is the blurb from the first official Slut Walk website [http://www.slutwalktoronto.com/]. If you want to argue your points, I suggest you take them up with any of the men or women who are part of that movement. All of them will share my views, quite a lot of them will be much less stupid than I.

 

[Hoplon]

Okay, you keep using high crime areas like it means something, it doesn't. this is not something that happens to people in the same way as showing off expensive items leads to theft.

Are you saying that no rapes are opportunistic? If so that's willfully ignorant.

Rape is not about desire, it's about power and control.

In some cases.
It is a myth that is always the case, do some research and you will see that the older you are, the less likely you are to get raped.
AKA. The less attractive you are, the less likely you are to get raped.
This is especially relevant when referring to opportunistic rape, the rape that the slutwalk movement refers to.

I would suggest most rapes are opportunistic, but that how you have dressed isn't a meaningful causal or correlatory link in any literature I can find.

No, I applied reasoning, you simply made a claim. I'm not even asking you for "facts", I'm looking for reasoning.

Also, that link of yours? Doesn't say a damn thing about motivation.

Sorry your reasoning is as much a claim and anything I have said.

The link, and any other link I can find, don't say anything about motivation because there isn't any meaningful causal or correlatory link to the way the victim comported them selves.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

So I have a question...
So then why is it "wrong" to call someone a player/slut if they sleep around a lot? It seems to me like you're just stating the obvious with this, you know?

Because lying and cheating are bad things.

The gamer term doesn't parallel because "slut" does not mean "someone with an interest in sex" - sadly there isn't a non-judgmental word for that.

Now, personally, I have always tried to reclaim the word slut. I proudly refer to myself as a slut, attend events like "Slut Walk," and so forth - but that's because I am trying to call attention to the language.

Here's the thing though - just because a group uses a 'shaming term' to self identify and thus defuse the term, it doesn't make the term less bad when it is used for shaming and hatred. See also: the N-word, Fag, Dyke, and ****.

 

[monkey_man]

If you're a slut, you're probably not in my friendcircle anyway, so I cant really care about those people, both male or female. But if you are, and you knock someone up/get knocked up, only you are to blame.

calling people with a decent sexlife a slut is not right. There's a difference between someone who has an easy and sexfilled life, but who's responsible and not over the top, and someone who sells themselves for a drink. Calling a person who bangs someone else every few days a slut is perfectly justifiable, and if they're hurt or offended(which they could be) they should look at themselves a bit better.

Someone who dresses like a prostitute being called a slut is also justifiable, because the only reason to dress like that is either peer pressure, or stupidity. It's not pretty, it's not decent, it's not comfortable. it's showing off as much body as possible, for one reason.

 

[Daveman]

"Slut" is associated with negative connotations whereas we modern people don't view having sex with lots of people as being necessarily a bad thing. Lies are bad so liars are bad. Cheating is bad so cheaters are bad. By using a word like "slut", whatever meaning you may want to impose on it is overridden by the fact that it implies you believe having lots of sex is a bad thing.

So basically calling a person a "slut" is an insult because it has been established as an insult and "player" is typically meant positively. Had a damn similar discussion about the N-word.

You may as well ask why anyone is insulted by anything. If I call a policeman "a massive ****" why doesn't he respond "you are incorrect, I am not large female genitalia" and leave it at that? And that, your honour, is my defence. I rest my case.

 

[Hoplon]

No, I applied reasoning, you simply made a claim. I'm not even asking you for "facts", I'm looking for reasoning.

Also, that link of yours? Doesn't say a damn thing about motivation.

Sorry your reasoning is as much a claim and anything I have said.

Sure it is. Do you know what the difference is? What I have said has actual discussion value, because there is something to discuss, I have given examples and reasoning. You have not, all you did was throw a claim without rhyme or reason into the room. Sorry, but that doesn't allow for any kind of discussion.

No, you have stated an opinion on something, you have presented no facts just what you consider an argument. I have presented data that says more than half of these incidents happen in people homes, their own or friends, some how that doesn't speak to me of strangers stalking scantly clad women around the streets.

The link, and any other link I can find, don't say anything about motivation because there isn't any meaningful causal or correlatory link to the way the victim comported them selves.

The problem being you trying to argue that dress is not a factor with a link that says nothing about it at all. Why post a link that says nothing? Next time I want to prove something to you I guess I can just link the Wiki article on Spongebob and call it a day, right?

You are trying to argue that it does based on nothing at all other than your opinion. When generating mean statistics they publish anything that has a significance, that your supposition doesn't show up in any of the statistics leads me to believe that is it not statistically significant if it is relevant at all.

 

[Smeatza]

I would suggest most rapes are opportunistic, but that how you have dressed isn't a meaningful causal or correlatory link in any literature I can find.

Then you aren't looking very hard.
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus0701.pdf
Physical attractiveness is more than just how you dress, how you dress is a part of physical attractiveness though. And when you realise that the less physically attractive, the less likely you are to be raped, how you should be playing the odds becomes very clear.

I will re-iterate. The victim of a rape is never to blame for the rape. However if one intends on never being raped in the first place, there are a number of risk management steps you can take to minimise the chance of it happening.
One of these factors (and a lesser one at that) is not dressing provocatively. Please note this does apply to males as well as females.

I wish we lived in a perfect world where minimising the risk of rape wasn't necessary for anybody, but we don't, and simply pointing out that fact (what the slutwalk movement does at best) really doesn't help anybody.
I also wish it really was as simple as "rape is only about control and power" but again, it's not. Sometimes it's about a crazy person and sexual attraction.

 

[rbstewart7263]

The problem it's that it doesn't just categorize, it judges. "Liar" just mean "person who tells lies," but "slut" means "person who has a lot of sex and is a bad person because of that."

So a sexer would be more in line with cheater and liar than slut would.

 

[Spearmaster]

So I have a question...

We call someone a liar if they lie, especially if they lie a lot.

We call someone a cheater if they cheat, especially if they cheat a lot (Whether we speak from a videogame sense or a marriage-breaking stance)

We call someone a gamer if they play a lot of games... I could go on, you get the point.

So then why is it "wrong" to call someone a player/slut if they sleep around a lot? It seems to me like you're just stating the obvious with this, you know?

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck....its probably a duck, even if its insulting.

Honestly I think the problem is that the term is judgmental, I don't think its "wrong" to call someone a slut/player just remember that its just your opinion and nobody has to agree with it.

 

[Flight]

So then why is it "wrong" to call someone a player/slut if they sleep around a lot? It seems to me like you're just stating the obvious with this, you know?

Because the word "slut" carries with it a tone of judgment, and a person's sex life is not subject to moral judgment so long as everyone involved in it is a consenting adult.

As for "player," I've never heard anyone argue it's wrong.

I was going to add my own two cents to this, but this underlines the double-standard involved in slut-shaming nicely. As long as no one gets hurt and everyone has fun, I don't see the problem in people of any gender sleeping around, nor do I see how judging it is anyone's right or business.

 

[dagens24]

So I have a question...

We call someone a liar if they lie, especially if they lie a lot.

We call someone a cheater if they cheat, especially if they cheat a lot (Whether we speak from a videogame sense or a marriage-breaking stance)

We call someone a gamer if they play a lot of games... I could go on, you get the point.

So then why is it "wrong" to call someone a player/slut if they sleep around a lot? It seems to me like you're just stating the obvious with this, you know?

The issue is that slut gets tossed around way too easily. People see an attractive girl and will be like 'what a slut' without having ANY concept of how many people she has sex with.

 

[Lonewolfm16]

I would say that it is comparable to the dreaded N-word. If I walk up to a African-American and refer to him as a... well you know, he would be justifiably upset. I could say but it only means person of African descent. Are you denying you are African-American? No then the term applies. You can clearly spot the problem here, right? It may only strictly mean person of African descent, however it carries lots of negative conotation and is just about always used as a insult. Slut is much the same, it may techincally refer only to a women who has casual sex but be prepared when they are insulted.

 

[hickwarrior]

I just listened in to some kind of discussion going on here, and it doesn't seem to go anywhere. The only thing I have to say about that is: Let people be.

Whatever they like to do, if they were sexually assaulted, the offender should be punished, not the victim. It wasn't consensual and someone's probably left with a trauma. You can't blame the victim here, they were being used as some kind of rag, instead of being seen as a real human. I honestly don't know why you would blame, or shame, a victim because someone else wanted to have sex with you real bad that they'd resort to sexual assault.

Anyway, it seems to me that the OP's question's been answered. Slut was always a perjorative term, and people use it as such. (Slut Walk notwithstanding, I only think I've read of it either through an escapist news article, or in this thread.)