Irish Slutwalk

cowzerp

I abhore rape but if someone was going to do a rape it makes sense that it would be on someone in easily accesible clothes, Mini skirt for example is easy access, so although it's not and never should be an excuse for rape you are definetly putting yourself at higher risk of it, also mini skirts are quite sexy so it would attract someone easier too

I like girls dressing sexy so don't want this to change! but let's get real-it definetly highers chances of attack, groping etc

Not even due to you looking slutty-sexy and easy accessible i'd imagine would be the reasons.

Paparazzo

DeVore wrote: »

these are my thoughts on the matter. I dont necessaraily have a conclusion but maybe we can enlighten each other.

Firstly, when I use the word "rape" I'm talking about a violent attack on an unsuspecting person (I'll use "woman" for ease of reading).
I'm not talking about a sexual encounter that gets out of hand and potentially involves misunderstanding/miscommunication/ whatever. While I believe "No means No" I just want to discuss "on the street" attacks, as thats what most people mean when they discuss clothing affecting "rape".

So, here are some "seemingly" contradictory thoughts. They arent contradictory but they might seem so if you dont think them through carefully and logically.

1. No woman should ever be raped. Nothing the woman can do can excuse or lessen the guilt of the rapist. She could be nude and it wouldnt matter.

2. Women absolutely have the right to wear whatever they see fit to. Thats their choice and they should not be vilified for it. It shouldnt matter what she was wearing.

3. Just as women should be allowed to wear what they like, I should be able to walk where I like, when I like. I should not get robbed regardless of time or place where I choose to exercise my right of freedom of movement.

4. If I walk down some inner city streets wearing a suit and carrying a briefcase at night (as I have had to at times, i lived in North Central for a long time).... that should not excuse the thief if I am robbed.

5. It does make me rather silly if I insist on doing it repeatedly.



Now. we can all agree I shouldnt be robbed. Its not right. Its not right that I am constrained from walking where I like, when I like. Thats just wrong.

But until its safe, I would accept criticism from others to say "well, what the hell were you doing there at that time? You were foolish and bound to be robbed".

It doesnt make it right but if you want to believe we live in a perfect society you are going to find out in a very unpleasant way that we just DONT.

We *should* and we should never stop trying to.... but right now, we just dont.

DeV.

I'd agree with that if there are stats to show that if a woman dresses provocatively she is more likely to be raped. Is there any truth in the whole thing? It's been pointed out that rape isn't so much a sexual thing, more a power thing.

4leto

Besides the Slutwalk is not only about rape it is about sexuality and a woman's right to freely express hers without infringement.

Perhaps a woman dresses sexy to impress men or other woman. But a man dresses in suits, brands or tracksuits to impress their peers who are usually men. Otherwise we would all shop in Dunnes all the time.

We are just as capable to dress to impress other men as women are.

smash

If all women wear short skirts and fishnets, then it wouldn't be slutty, it would just be the norm. Win!

Monty Burnz

Here's my attitude to the whole 'revealing clothes'/rape thing:

If I want to, I should be able to leave the doors and windows in my house open when I go out to work. However, due to human nature, it's quite likely that when I get back the place will have been robbed.

Now, I did not help myself when I left the house open, but that in no way excuses the people who came into my house and robbed my stuff.

Wattle

Does this mean I can finally parade down the boardwalk with my rainbow thong disappearing up the crack of my arse?

4leto

Wattle wrote: »

Does this mean I can finally parade down the boardwalk with my rainbow thong disappearing up the crack of my arse?

Jesus NO

That would just be offensive and you would turn to many people into stone.:D

LeeHoffmann

don't they?

No of course not. Don't any of you know the meaning of the word 'cause'?

this notion that women should be able to wear whatever she wants, whenever she wants, and somehow be immune from negative attention is a pipe dream.

strawmen - strawmen everywhere! Nobody said she should be immune from negative attention. But she shouldn't be told that she ''caused'' the rape.

In an ideal world we could all wear what we want, when we wanted, but we don't live in an ideal world. A woman can't wear what she wants and demand only one kind of attention,

one kind of attention? as opposed to the violent rape and sexual assault kind, is it? The claim isn't 'we should only get positive attention' - it's 'we shouldn't be held responsible for being raped because of what we're wearing' and/or ''what I'm wearing shouldn't make it more understandable if I'm raped'

I do think women who wear revealing clothing on a night out are morel likely to be interested in finding a man for a sexual relationship. I think it fairly obvious that's the case.

No it isn't. Nearly all women wear revealing clothing on a night out. They aren't all looking for a man. Getting dressed up is the standard thing to do. People dress up on nights out more to fit in than to attract men.

Just because I walk the streets with two grand in fifties hanging out of my back pocket, I am more likely to be robbed. If I get told doing that increased my chances of being robbed, is that wrong?

You are not comparing like with like. Women don't have 'rape me' signs hanging out of them either. Getting dressed up is standard practice - it's what is expected and it's seen to be the appropriate clothing for a night out. Likewise, having some money with you on a night out is standard, expected and appropriate. If somebody said to you that having money with you on a night out caused others to think you were up for a bit of violent robbery..then you could compare.

But until its safe, I would accept criticism from others to say "well, what the hell were you doing there at that time? You were foolish and bound to be robbed". It doesnt make it right but if you want to believe we live in a perfect society you are going to find out in a very unpleasant way that we just DONT.

Nobody is acting like they live in the perfect society. Are you saying that women dressing in revealing clothes are ''foolish and bound to be robbed raped''? Do you think all the women who get dressed up for nights out are behaving in a foolish and risky manner? If so, should we all make sure all skin and body parts are covered? Is there ever a point where what you're asking of women becomes too much? e.g. if it's foolish to dress up, should all women dress down? If it's riskier to drink, should women abstain from alcohol? If it's risky to be out at night on your own, should women never go out unaccompanied after dark? Seeing as most sex attacks are perpetrated by partners, friends and acquaintances, should women avoid being on their own with men?

LeeHoffmann

If I walked down an alley in a dodgy are wearing an expensive suit and watch, and tapping at an iPad, I would be partially to blame for being mugged,

no you wouldn't.

I like girls dressing sexy so don't want this to change! but let's get real-it definetly highers chances of attack, groping etc

...and so women are stuck between two conflicting messages 'dress up - it's hot' and 'you're partly to blame for being raped/you were asking for it/your fault for wearing those clothes'. If you were a woman, what would you do? Would you dress up and accept whatever you get as being partly your fault, or would you cover your body at all times and accept rejection and ridicule because of it?

longhalloween

bradolf pittler wrote: »

thought that was the walk of shame?

I woulda called it the stride of pride

Dublin_Gunner

No woman is ever even remotely partly responsible for being raped.

For fcuk sake people, some of you need your head checked.

A rapist, is a fcuking scum rapist, no matter what the woman was wearing.

I'd be certain that if someone got the numbers together, what the woman was wearing had no bearing on the incident.

donfers

what is this thread about?

we all agree rape is terrible

we all agree women can wear what they want


sometimes i feel like people just want to go on a bitter tirade against the opposite sex because they are bored or want to justify their existence or they never got a text back from the person they snogged at the club last night


if someone gropes you in a nightclub and if it bothers you so much then take it up with the individual responsible and take any measures/action necessary you can with bouncers/management etc


personally i am so tired of hearing men are like this/men are like that/men are more likely to do this that and the other - deal with the specific problem and individual involved and take your tired crazed generalisations far from my eyes please or I'll organise some kind of walk where i protest about being constantly associated with people who do horrible things when I am an angel, yes we'll call it angelwalk, now i'm off to purchase some wings, eyre square 4pm tomorrow anybody?

LeeHoffmann

personally i am so tired of hearing men are like this/men are like that/men are more likely to do this that and the other - deal with the specific problem and individual involved and take your tired crazed generalisations far from my eyes please

I don't know who you're aiming this at but I don't think most people are arguing ''all men are xyz''

prinz

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

No woman is ever even remotely partly responsible for being raped.For fcuk sake people, some of you need your head checked.

Cross wires once again.

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

strawmen - strawmen everywhere! Nobody said she should be immune from negative attention. But she shouldn't be told that she ''caused'' the rape..

Well done Lee. Except we've moved on from telling people they caused rape, to people in pubs and nightclubs getting the attention they were looking for, and then when it crosses a line freaking out. There is more to dressing extremely 'provocatively' than being blamed for getting raped. There is also the women who will dress up to the nines and then act shocked or roll their eyes if they get a wolf whistle for example. I remember listening to a friend of a friend in a pub complaining that a group of lads at a table near us were 'leering' at her. She was also wearing a skirt so short she wouldn't sit down while she was wearing it because it 'would give everyone a show'. Of another aspect of this scenario is if the table of lads looked like Leonardo DiCaprio she probably wouldn't have been complaining at all.

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

one kind of attention? as opposed to the violent rape and sexual assault kind, is it? The claim isn't 'we should only get positive attention' - it's 'we shouldn't be held responsible for being raped because of what we're wearing' and/or ''what I'm wearing shouldn't make it more understandable if I'm raped'..

Perhaps you could take a breather and catch up to the rest of us. We've diversified the discussion.

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

No it isn't. Nearly all women wear revealing clothing on a night out. They aren't all looking for a man. Getting dressed up is the standard thing to do. People dress up on nights out more to fit in than to attract men...

Lol, seriously? ..and why would they need to dress up to 'fit in'? Is it perhaps because others are dressed up? ...and why are they dressed up? Why is it the standard thing to do? You are just being daft if you are going to argue that people in a social context do not primarily dress up as a means of getting attention from the opposite, or possibly same, sex.

Wompa1

Typical Galway horsesh!t in fairness....

There isn't a cause people won't march or protest against because it's what they've done for decades. Even during the Celtic Tiger Years Galway was an employment blackspot full of hippies and wasters...there, I said it...

Slutwalk pffffttt...the whole concept belittles their cause. which is a serious cause but playing dress up is just bringing the wrong kind of attention.

LeeHoffmann

Lol, seriously? ..and why would they need to dress up to 'fit in'? Is it perhaps because others are dressed up? ...and why are they dressed up? Why is it the standard thing to do? You are just being daft if you are going to argue that people in a social context do not primarily dress up as a means of getting attention from the opposite, or possibly same, sex.

now now refrain from name-calling. It isn't daft. I'd say I've dressed up to attract somebody about 10-15 times in my life. I've dressed up to fit in countless countless times.

Perhaps you could take a breather and catch up to the rest of us. We've diversified the discussion

I've taken a (lunch) break and caught up with the discussion but it's essentially the same. You claimed that women cause men to think they're ''up for it''. You still seem to think the same. Some posters (male and female)have talked about being assaulted in nightclubs. The line of argument seems essentially the same - do women's clothes cause men to attack, assault etc them? And now I'm asking is there any demand that can be made for the sake of women's safety that is a step too far.

prinz

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

now now refrain from name-calling. It isn't daft. I'd say I've dressed up to attract somebody about 10-15 times in my life. I've dressed up to fit in countless countless times.

To fit in with who? Other people who are dressed up. What are the other people dressed up for? :rolleyes: Jesus wept.

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

I've taken a (lunch) break and caught up with the discussion but it's essentially the same. You claimed that women cause men to think they're ''up for it''. You still seem to think the same..

You've just stated that you have dressed up to attract someone. Therefore you dressed up with the intention of hoping to give someone the impression that you might be 'up for it'.... notice up for it does not equate to up for being raped before you go down that cul de sac again. Now you are trying to say women dress up to attract men, but not to cause them to think that they might be 'up for it'?

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

And now I'm asking is there any demand that can be made for the sake of women's safety that is a step too far.

Of course you are, because you're fighting windmills. There's a red chauvinist/misogynist/taliban mullah/rapist under the bed.


By the by it's a sad state of affairs if you have to dress like a slapper so as to 'fit in' and not to be ridiculed.

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

Would you dress up and accept whatever you get as being partly your fault, or would you cover your body at all times and accept rejection and ridicule because of it?

..and there's a huge difference between dressing up sexily and maturely and dressing like a €50 Reeperbahn hooker. No one has argued you shouldn't/can't dress up, or dress to impress or look good, or that you have to cover every inch of flesh.

Dublin_Gunner

prinz wrote: »

Cross wires once again.

Who's crossing wires?? I responded to a number of times during this thread that this particular insinuation has occurred.

So where are wires crossed, or are you incapable of actually reading a thread?


I don't recall directing anything at you anyway.

LeeHoffmann

You've just stated that you have dressed up to attract someone. Therefore you dressed up with the intention of hoping to give someone the impression that you might be 'up for it'...

.
I've asked you already to explain the meaning of ''up for it''. If you mean ''up for sex'', then no that is not a valid argument. Wanting to attract somebody does not necessarily entail wanting to have sex with them. I don't want to have sex with everyone I am attracted to. Likewise I don't want to have sex with everyone I want to attract - often, I'd just like to get their attention and get to know them better

Of course you are, because you're fighting windmills. There's a red chauvinist/misogynist/taliban mullah/rapist under the bed.

I don't know what you're trying to say here. And you haven't answered my question

pikachucheeks

The King of Moo wrote: »

Seeing as it's not based on any high-profile case, I think it's going to send mixed messages at best.

So, on the basis that there haven't been any major rape cases in Ireland - that have been reported - of late, these women don't have any real reason to protest? :rolleyes:

There aren't any mixed messages; Just a clear one - They're driving the point that what a person chooses to wear does not mean they have the right to be violated, assaulted or used for someone else's pleasure.

It shouldn't need to come to another horrific crime for these people to feel the need to express their point.

Matthew23

midlandsmissus wrote: »

Of course the March isn't going to change everything :rolleyes:, what it is aiming to do is get in the news the message that it is okay for women to dress like that and not be groped. Which it has achieved, It is in the news, and we are discussing it here.

"The vastest majority of men are as far removed from rape', how could you possibly know? How do you know what anyone is thinking apart from yourself? Or how could I know? All I know is the many friends who have said to me about being groped in nightclub.

And obviously it has happened to enough women, that they are organising marches about it in several countries.

"No sense, bawling nonsense" it is you sounding bitter not me.:rolleyes:

I know because the vast majority of men are not rapists, and that has always been the case. What you want to construe their thoughts as is up to you and your type, but stats show that rape is committed by a tiny minority, and therefore is for removed from the vastest majority of men. Quite simple really.

Who is talking about bitterness, apart from you? You are the one using the "rolleyes" smilie if you want to get down to that level.

4leto

Any musicians among you, I am sure you could get a dance song and craze up called the slutwalk, you never know, it might become an Anthem and make you sqillions, if it wasn't for illegal downloads.

Scanlas The 2nd

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

now now refrain from name-calling. It isn't daft. I'd say I've dressed up to attract somebody about 10-15 times in my life. I've dressed up to fit in countless countless times.

I've taken a (lunch) break and caught up with the discussion but it's essentially the same. You claimed that women cause men to think they're ''up for it''. You still seem to think the same. Some posters (male and female)have talked about being assaulted in nightclubs. The line of argument seems essentially the same - do women's clothes cause men to attack, assault etc them? And now I'm asking is there any demand that can be made for the sake of women's safety that is a step too far.

Why do you think it is women spend so much money on their clothes hair and just so happen to expose parts of their body that attracts men?

For the most part women attract men through how they look and men do the approaching, this is why you dress the way you do when you go out. If men weren't attracted to breasts you and the rest of women wouldn't expose part of your breasts when out.

prinz

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

.
I've asked you already to explain the meaning of ''up for it''.

Ah please, come on will you?

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

.
If you mean ''up for sex'', then no that is not a valid argument. Wanting to attract somebody does not necessarily entail wanting to have sex with them. I don't want to have sex with everyone I am attracted to. Likewise I don't want to have sex with everyone I want to attract - often, I'd just like to get their attention and get to know them better.

Yes, anything, anything to get away from the notion that a woman might actually be trying to attract someone for the purposes of an encounter of a sexual nature. Next you'll be saying the ones you see in the city centre on a freezing wet November night dressed like a prossie from Patayya are only dressed that way because they find it comfortable. Pretty pointless from here on in tbh. 'I'm dressed like a Hustler centrefold because I'd like to find out more about your personality silly'

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

.
I don't know what you're trying to say here. And you haven't answered my question

It's a stupid question and when you work out what I was trying to say you'll understand why it's a stupid question.

FetchTheGin

pikachucheeks wrote: »

It shouldn't need to come to another horrific crime for these people to feel the need to express their point.

Oh come on, this is a big giant crusade by some big giant women on their bitter protest against the "evil menz".

It isn't illegal to dress a certain way so they have no need to protest.

Scanlas The 2nd

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

If men weren't attracted to breasts you and the rest of women wouldn't expose part of your breasts when out.

I expose my breasts when I go out? Who knew!

Cianos

I don't really see the whole point in the line of debate around why women dress in a revealing manner. What's your point Prinz?

4leto

FetchTheGin wrote: »

Oh come on, this is a big giant crusade by some big giant women on their bitter protest against the "evil menz".

It isn't illegal to dress a certain way so they have no need to protest.

They are not protesting about what they wear. They are protesting against attitudes and assumptions taken about what they wear. Attitudes like yours, which to be frank, is saying to me a woman is complicit in her rape by what she is wearing and a woman deserves to be treated derogatory and as a sex object by what she chooses to wear.

I know what you are saying, they have an option, to dress in sexless clothes like a nijab or as Mao Chinese women use to.

All they want to do is highlight attitudes, that's all, that may not change anything but it will add to awareness of the women's cause in general.

strobe

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

I don't know who you're aiming this at but I don't think most people are arguing ''all men are xyz''

Well exactly, and I don't think anyone is arguing "if you wear x then you deserve to be raped" either. People seem to be inventing positions to argue against. On here, in Galway, everywhere...

See, it's just like I've been saying all these years, you're all idiots and as usual I'm right about everything. We can agree on that much surely?

stupidusername

The King of Moo wrote: »

While I don't condone women groping men either, I believe that there usually is a difference in terms of power relations.

If a girl gropes a guy it's a rare event, but guys grope girls much more often, you can see that in any nightclub on any night. Therefore it's much more tiresome for women.

More importantly, by and large, a guy will be much physically stronger than a girl meaning if he chooses to grope her forcefully or even rape her, there might not be much she could do to stop it, physically. And lots of men persist in trying to chat up or grope a girl who's not interested, which can be very intimidating.
So a guy groping a girl can be threatening.

Think of it like the principle behind bullying. It's the more powerful (physically, in this sense) attacking the weaker.

exactly what I wanted to say but couldn't figure it out

like it or not there are double standards in society, and they're there because they're accepted. many girls like to play the dainty helpless pretty role, many guys like to be seen as tough masculine types that people don't mess with. and before all the girls on boards come in saying ':eek: I don't do that!', just about every girl does it in one way or another.

but anyway that's not what this is about.

I'll hold my hands up and say that I am one of those people that would automatically wonder what the circumstances were of a rape taking place (including how a girl was dressed). I realise it's wrong, and I don't know where it comes from. I also would think less of a guy getting his bum pinched in a bar than a girl.

LeeHoffmann

Pretty pointless from here on in tbh.

Pointless from the beginning it seems. You've failed to answer my questions and ignored a lot of my points. We'll leave it there so. Clearly we're not getting anywhere with each other

midlandsmissus

stupidusername wrote: »

exactly what I wanted to say but couldn't figure it out

like it or not there are double standards in society, and they're there because they're accepted. many girls like to play the dainty helpless pretty role, many guys like to be seen as tough masculine types that people don't mess with. and before all the girls on boards come in saying ':eek: I don't do that!', just about every girl does it in one way or another.

but anyway that's not what this is about.

I'll hold my hands up and say that I am one of those people that would automatically wonder what the circumstances were of a rape taking place (including how a girl was dressed). I realise it's wrong, and I don't know where it comes from. I also would think less of a guy getting his bum pinched in a bar than a girl.

At least you're honest enough to say so. It's the singular crime where the victim gets blamed. Imagine going through the horror of a sexual assault, and then being told it's your fault on top of that.

It's a big societal view that needs to change.

Unless the girl was a virgin and the rapist broke in to her house with a knife at her throat, people tend to question what the girl did to "lead him on",

Whereas the huge percentage of rape/ sexual assault is caused by partners/acquaintances/friends. One of my friends who said to me, "a minute for the man, a lifetime of pain for her", is on anti-depressants and getting counselling ten years later.

Let me re-iterate, I'm not for a minute calling all men rapists,or potential rapists, it's just good that the slutwalk and this discussion happened to air people's views, and maybe look at your own thoughts on the issue.

The King of Moo

pikachucheeks wrote: »

So, on the basis that there haven't been any major rape cases in Ireland - that have been reported - of late, these women don't have any real reason to protest? :rolleyes:

There aren't any mixed messages; Just a clear one - They're driving the point that what a person chooses to wear does not mean they have the right to be violated, assaulted or used for someone else's pleasure.

It shouldn't need to come to another horrific crime for these people to feel the need to express their point.

It's not that there hasn't been a rape case, more that there hasn't been an inflammatory comment like the one by the cop that started the original Canadian slutwalk.

I'm not questioning their right to protest at all, or their reasons for protesting, rather the nature of the protest.

The original one with protesters dressing as a "slut" made sense as most people in Toronto would've been aware that they were commenting on the cop's comments.

Being far from Canada and after a long time, I don't think dressing in such a way is as relevant here and now.

I do think it would also possibly muddle their message or make people not take the protesters seriously.

But they absolutely have the right to protest in that way. I'm just not convinced it's the best way to do it.

midlandsmissus

The King of Moo wrote: »

It's not that there hasn't been a rape case, more that there hasn't been an inflammatory comment like the one by the cop that started the original Canadian slutwalk.

I'm not questioning their right to protest at all, or their reasons for protesting, rather the nature of the protest.

The original one with protesters dressing as a "slut" made sense as most people in Toronto would've been aware that they were commenting on the cop's comments.

Being far from Canada and after a long time, I don't think dressing in such a way is as relevant here and now.

I do think it would also possibly muddle their message or make people not take the protesters seriously.

But they absolutely have the right to protest in that way. I'm just not convinced it's the best way to do it.

It might make some people confused, but it will make people stop and think, rather than a march with a few "no to rape" placards, which people wouldn't even look at before driving on their way.
People are desensitised to most kind of marches/protest these days. You need to think of an unusual angle. At least this has got people talking.

panda100

prinz wrote: »

When is the march for men against being groped by women? I can confidently say I have been groped more times by strange women than I have by strange men. Any chance the slutwalk is going to raise the question about that phenomenon?

I also seem to remember an ad from tv where a man (a waiter I seem to recall) without his asking had his arse pinched by someone at a table of women. But sure it was all in good fun, tee hee hee.

what would men wear on the slutwalk? men can take their tops off in public, and are not labelled as being 'provocative'. It doesn't matter what clothes men wear they will never be labelled 'sluts' in them.

Maybe you can organise a slut walk when you are judged for what you wear?

DeVore

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Why do you think it is women spend so much money on their clothes hair and just so happen to expose parts of their body that attracts men?

For the most part women attract men through how they look and men do the approaching, this is why you dress the way you do when you go out. If men weren't attracted to breasts you and the rest of women wouldn't expose part of your breasts when out.

Um... yeah, so?

I wear nice aftershave, gel in my hair and a tight t-shirt (cos I iz fit ladiez! )

But if a woman grabbed my crotch, I will be far FAR from impressed and not slow to let her know.

I'm not sure what your point is, yes we all like to attract the opposite sex. Thats perfectly legal and cool.

DeV.

wild_cat

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Women have randomly grabbed my crotch on numerous so occasions without my permission so maybe women's perceptions need to change. Maybe it's a power and dominance thing too. You are not entitled to grab my crotch.

The majority of women wouldn't do this... and those that do usually are of a certain breed anyway...

The King of Moo

midlandsmissus wrote: »

It might make some people confused, but it will make people stop and think, rather than a march with a few "no to rape" placards, which people wouldn't even look at before driving on their way.
People are desensitised to most kind of marches/protest these days. You need to think of an unusual angle. At least this has got people talking.

I see your point, and agree that overall the most important thing is that they're raising the issue.

I do feel conflicted about it though. I know that it grabs attention, and for every person who gets confused by them, or thinks they're just a bunch of silly eejits, there'll hopefully be more who support them.

But it reminds me of how I feel about some of the Occupy Wall Street protesters. I admire their ideals and that they're actually getting out and protesting, but I can't help thinking that those who dress and act like exactly the people Wall Street suits despise and don't take seriously aren't helping the protest.

But then of course they're free to do what they want, and I don't think they should all have to dress in nice suits to be taken seriously.

I'm clearly a bit conflicted about the whole thing!

wild_cat

stupidusername wrote: »

like it or not there are double standards in society, and they're there because they're accepted. many girls like to play the dainty helpless pretty role, many guys like to be seen as tough masculine types that people don't mess with. and before all the girls on boards come in saying ':eek: I don't do that!', just about every girl does it in one way or another.

Those are the type's that go around grabbing men's crotches. Not a very nice view to have of your own sex btw... very generalised to. Perhaps we just keep much different company.. or I stay away from complete ****.

Robdude

stupidusername wrote: »

exactly what I wanted to say but couldn't figure it out

like it or not there are double standards in society, and they're there because they're accepted. many girls like to play the dainty helpless pretty role, many guys like to be seen as tough masculine types that people don't mess with. and before all the girls on boards come in saying ':eek: I don't do that!', just about every girl does it in one way or another.

but anyway that's not what this is about.

I'll hold my hands up and say that I am one of those people that would automatically wonder what the circumstances were of a rape taking place (including how a girl was dressed). I realise it's wrong, and I don't know where it comes from. I also would think less of a guy getting his bum pinched in a bar than a girl.

I don't think it's wrong.

Life isn't black and white. Whenever I hear of a crime, I wonder what circumstances happened before it.

In most legal systems things like the situation and intent play a huge role in determining whether a crime was committed and the punishment. And, while it doesn't *justify* the crime; I believe there are high-risk activities that increase the likelihood of a crime and we should educate people on how to avoid them.

If I tell you, 'Oh man! Someone broke into my car and stole my 50" HDTV, my new PS3 and the stack of 10,000 euro I had sitting on the dash' you'd probably say, 'Why would you leave that in your car?!'

Had someone told me, I could reduce the risk of being a victim by NOT putting valuable items on display in front of people who want to steal them; that information could have prevented me from being a victim.

midlandsmissus

wild_cat wrote: »

The majority of women wouldn't do this... and those that do usually are of a certain breed anyway...

Drunk on a hen night? Some women need to cop on as well. Crotch grabbing a stranger is not cool by any-one's standards.

minidazzler

skregs wrote: »

A slutwalk is a girl in a raggedy dress walking home at 8 o'clock on Sunday morning after spending the night with some guy she just met.

That's called a walk of shame. Not a slut walk.

midlandsmissus

minidazzler wrote: »

That's called a walk of shame. Not a slut walk.

minidazzler 12 pages ago, and the stride of pride walk :mad::D

DeVore

wild_cat wrote: »

The majority of women wouldn't do this... and those that do usually are of a certain breed anyway...

To be fair, the majority of men wouldnt do it to women either. I know of none of my mates who have or would ever do it.

Thats part of the male annoyance with the "feminist" thing. It just tars all men, so a touch more care about that would be appreciated because imho its pretty dirty brush.

DeV.

midlandsmissus

Robdude wrote: »

I don't think it's wrong.

Life isn't black and white. Whenever I hear of a crime, I wonder what circumstances happened before it.

In most legal systems things like the situation and intent play a huge role in determining whether a crime was committed and the punishment. And, while it doesn't *justify* the crime; I believe there are high-risk activities that increase the likelihood of a crime and we should educate people on how to avoid them.

If I tell you, 'Oh man! Someone broke into my car and stole my 50" HDTV, my new PS3 and the stack of 10,000 euro I had sitting on the dash' you'd probably say, 'Why would you leave that in your car?!'

Had someone told me, I could reduce the risk of being a victim by NOT putting valuable items on display in front of people who want to steal them; that information could have prevented me from being a victim.

I don't understand this analogy at all. How are they comparable crimes?

I leave my window open with 10,000 euro sitting on the windowsill.
I see a girl wearing a tight fitting dress so I overpower and rape her.

How are they even on the same spectrum?

DeVore

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I don't understand this analogy at all. How are they comparable crimes?

I leave my window open with 10,000 euro sitting on the windowsill.
I see a girl wearing a tight fitting dress so I overpower and rape her.

How are they even on the same spectrum?

The crimes arent comparable and he's not comparing them. Dont be deliberately daft.

Whats comparable is the concept of "it isnt fair or right but you need to take some steps to protect yourself from crime".


We shouldnt have to, but we do.

DeV.

Logical Fallacy

Robdude wrote: »

I don't think it's wrong.

Life isn't black and white. Whenever I hear of a crime, I wonder what circumstances happened before it.

In most legal systems things like the situation and intent play a huge role in determining whether a crime was committed and the punishment. And, while it doesn't *justify* the crime; I believe there are high-risk activities that increase the likelihood of a crime and we should educate people on how to avoid them.

If I tell you, 'Oh man! Someone broke into my car and stole my 50" HDTV, my new PS3 and the stack of 10,000 euro I had sitting on the dash' you'd probably say, 'Why would you leave that in your car?!'

Had someone told me, I could reduce the risk of being a victim by NOT putting valuable items on display in front of people who want to steal them; that information could have prevented me from being a victim.

So lets see all the links to studies and expert opinion that show how a woman dresses plays a major role in her likelihood of being raped.

Oh....wait.

4leto

But there is more to then rape and freedom of how women want to express themselves. It is not only about sexism, or how a woman is judged by her attire. It is about liberation from men and women's attitude to the societal demands placed on women.

They are also reclaiming the word slut, for instance a man can be a slut and proud but a women reputation can be destroyed by being called such.

I post this article by Germaine Greer who is a very vocal supporter of the movement


http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CDAQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fhealth%2Fwomen_shealth%2F8510743%2FThese-slut-walk-women-are-simply-fighting-for-their-right-to-be-dirty.html&rct=j&q=slut%20walks&ei=YtL1TejYHcSxhQfRmrH5Bg&usg=AFQjCNE58jggzQ_DyrZRCfx3sodTmg9Ing&cad=rja


[ISlut-walkers are apt to say that the purpose of their action is to "reclaim the word". It's difficult, probably impossible, to reclaim a word that has always been an insult. And yet here are women spontaneously deciding to adopt it. Before we decide that thousands of our sisters are simply stupid or misguided, an attempt must be made to understand what's going on. The slut walk manifesto states: "Historically, the term 'slut' has carried a predominantly negative association. Aimed at those who were sexually promiscuous, be it for work or pleasure, it has primarily been women who have suffered under the burden of this label. We are tired of being oppressed by slut-shaming; of being judged by our sexuality…"][/I]

............A little knowledge here misleads. Historically, the primary attribute of a slut is not promiscuity but dirt. The word denotes a "woman of dirty, slovenly, or untidy habits or appearance; a foul slattern". A now obsolete meaning connects it with a kitchen maid, whose life was lived in soot and grease. She was too dirty to be allowed above stairs, but drudged out her painful life scraping pans and riddling ash, for 16 hours a day, and then retreated to her squalid lodging where hot water could not be had. The corner she left unswept was the slut corner; the fluff that collected under the furniture was a slut ball. People who thought of sex as dirt suspected the lazy kitchen maid of being unclean in that way as well.

Robdude

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I don't understand this analogy at all. How are they comparable crimes?

I leave my window open with 10,000 euro sitting on the windowsill.
I see a girl wearing a tight fitting dress so I overpower and rape her.

How are they even on the same spectrum?

If we collect data about crimes and see a pattern it is reasonable to explore the idea that altering the pattern can prevent the crime.

It doesn't matter what the crime is or what the data is; if there is a correlation it's enough to consider avoiding that behaviour.

If we have data that shows cars parked in dark parking lots are more likely to be broken into than ones in well lit areas; it's reasonable to educate people that 'parking in dark parking lots' might be dangerous. Likewise empty streets verse crowded public streets.

If we look at data surrounding rape and see patterns, regardless of how we feel things 'should' be; we can say, 'Maybe you should avoid doing X because X is involved in many cases of rape'.

The Slutwalk people take offense to this. They believe no girl, ever *should* be raped, so girls should be able to do whatever they want and not be raped. I agree, in theory. Just like no car should ever be broken into.

In practice, until the world is a more perfect place, let's do what we can to prevent being a victim of a crime.

For example, excessive alcohol consumption is a factor in the vast majority of rapes. The vast majority of rapes happen when someone is alone. The vast majority or rapes are not perpetuated by strangers; but people you know, at least a little.

So, I think it's reasonable to tell people, 'Look, nobody deserves to be raped, it's a horrible crime, BUT data suggests that you should avoid heavy drinking or at least be more aware of the potential for being a victim when you are drinking. You should not be alone (alone with someone else) *especially* if you have been drinking. And, you should be worried about a person you've just met less than a stranger breaking into your house and raping you'.

In short, don't go to a bar, get smashed, leave your friends, and go home with a nice guy you've just met.

It's not a moral judgement, it's just practical based on evidence we've collected. If dressing a certain way does, in practice, increase the odds of being a victim, and a policeman conveys that information, he's doing a GOOD thing. It's about prevention, not what is morally right.

That's *IF* the data supports it. I don't know if sluttily dressed girls are more likely to be raped or not, but if they are, why not tell people the truth? I'm assuming a cop would know about these things.

DeVore

I will be in the North next weekend.

I'll be travelling through some pretty hardcore areas.

I wont be wearing my irish-flag shorts and Celtic jersey.

Its not right, I should be able to without fear of death, but I still wont be doing it.

Protest to change things is fine and absolutely necessary but protest the right thing against the right people cos "men" are getting sick of getting it in the neck.

It is, ironically, sexist. :rolleyes:

DeV.