🤬🤬🤬🤬 Walk Toronto

[Charlie09]

I'm not sure where this post is coming from, I don't see the relationship to my quoted post. But I think you are completely missing the point if you believe the Slutwalk campaign is meant to celebrate the right to sleep with whomever you choose, whenever you choose with no responsibility. I don't see it like that at all.

IMO it is meant to celebrate your right to NOT sleep with someone you wouldn't have chosen but who forces it upon you, and to make a point that if you're victimized you're going to be further victimized if people say it happened because you're a . That's all.

I do not believe that all the participants are promiscuous in their personal lives. Some of them may be but it is irrelevant. I think most people agree that a woman's promiscuity is not a licence to rape and it's very odd that it still continues to be brought up as if it were. The whole notion also ends up hurting a great many victims who were not promiscuous under anybody's definition of slutty.

We are in agreement that promiscuous does not equal the right for a man to take advantage of a woman ever, nor is a woman asking for it. We also agree that women and children have horrible things happen to them by taking every precaution available.

What we are in disagreement in, is how effective participating in a walk is to get that point across.

 

[Charlie09]

Yes, quite likely. What I mean is, they want to make a point that women's "slutty" clothing choices or behaviors (whatever it means to different people) do not mean an invite to rape and it is easier to do if they themselves identify with the "" yet are very clearly and definitely far from inviting rape and hotly against it. By owning the term (and slutty clothing choices, for those who prefer) the participants make the "us", and not "them", "some other people who are fundamentally different from us", and "You should not rape us" is more direct and more effective than "you should not rape them". Sorry - this is skewed . It's redefining words when it's convenient. It's not redefining the behavior of rape.


If they'd called it Modestly Dressed Walk and waved signs saying "It is very wrong to say sluttily dressed women invite rape but of course we never dress slutty because we value ourselves as women and do not participate in reckless behaviors..." the "but" would have cancelled much of the effect of the previous statement. So risky behavior shouldn't be discouraged?


Even if I don't value myself as a woman no one has any right to rape me.

I totally agree with your last statement, no one has the right to rape anyone else.

 

[Donjeta]

We are in agreement that promiscuous does not equal the right for a man to take advantage of a woman ever, nor is a woman asking for it. We also agree that women and children have horrible things happen to them by taking every precaution available.

What we are in disagreement in, is how effective participating in a walk is to get that point across.

IDK about that... IMO it is quite possible that its effects are limited. Some people get it already and don't need this demonstration to show empathy to victims. Some people will probably never get it and seeing an article about another demonstration isn't going to change their blame-the-victim attitudes. But you aren't going to change anything if you don't try and if it helps even a few people to understand the effects of their casual words it's been a good thing. There are some people in between who might say hurtful things because they just don't think although they don't want to victimize and if the slutwalkers get them talking and thinking they might be more careful with their words in the future. Hopefully.

The Walk won't do a thing to rapists, IMO. For the most part they already know they shouldn't rape people and have just chosen not to care.

 

[Donjeta]

Posted by me:
Yes, quite likely. What I mean is, they want to make a point that women's "slutty" clothing choices or behaviors (whatever it means to different people) do not mean an invite to rape and it is easier to do if they themselves identify with the "" yet are very clearly and definitely far from inviting rape and hotly against it. By owning the term (and slutty clothing choices, for those who prefer) the participants make the "us", and not "them", "some other people who are fundamentally different from us", and "You should not rape us" is more direct and more effective than "you should not rape them".

Posted by Charlie 09
Sorry - this is skewed . It's redefining words when it's convenient. It's not redefining the behavior of rape.

I'm not sure what you mean. I was not trying to redefine the behavior of rape. It does not need redefinition IMO. I am quite happy with the definition "a violent sexual crime against another person".

What I was talking about was our perception of who the victims of rape are. If the victims of rape are , they're "some other kind of people" (unless you consider yourself a ). If the victims are some other kind of people their victimization can be blamed on their "otherness". But of course in reality the victims of rape are not "some other people", they're just people. They can be me and you, anybody really.

Posted by me:
If they'd called it Modestly Dressed Walk and waved signs saying "It is very wrong to say sluttily dressed women invite rape but of course we never dress slutty because we value ourselves as women and do not participate in reckless behaviors..." the "but" would have cancelled much of the effect of the previous statement.

Posted by Charlie09
So risky behavior shouldn't be discouraged?

I didn't say that. Just bear in mind that it easily starts to sound like victim blaming. Again, I was talking about the way that the demonstrators owned the possibility (or for some, the sad reality) of themselves being victims of rape instead of "some other people who act differently".

 

[Charlie09]

I'm not sure what you mean. I was not trying to redefine the behavior of rape. It does not need redefinition IMO. I am quite happy with the definition "a violent sexual crime against another person".

What I was talking about was our perception of who the victims of rape are. If the victims of rape are , they're "some other kind of people" (unless you consider yourself a ). If the victims are some other kind of people their victimization can be blamed on their "otherness". But of course in reality the victims of rape are not "some other people", they're just people. They can be me and you, anybody really.



I didn't say that. Just bear in mind that it easily starts to sound like victim blaming. Again, I was talking about the way that the demonstrators owned the possibility (or for some, the sad reality) of themselves being victims of rape instead of "some other people who act differently".

I didn't say redefining rape, I was talking about the term .

Look there are always men who will abuse and take from women (and children) what is not legal or moral for them to take. So we work hard to ensure our legislators understand, we invite them to listen in at rape counseling phone centers, we invite them to hospitals, we encourage them to attend victim counseling services, we invite them to hearings so they can hear first hand. We write letters about personal experiences either or own, or of people we can speak on their behalf.

Then we encourage women to do all they can to accept personal responsibility - not to blame, but to protect because we can't always count on someone being a good guy when we aren't capable of making a fully informed consent. To me that doesn't include redefining as something to be proud of, it's being self aware and taking charge of my environment.

 

[Donjeta]

I didn't say redefining rape, I was talking about the term .

Sorry, I must have misunderstood because you said:It's not redefining the behavior of rape.

Look there are always men who will abuse and take from women (and children) what is not legal or moral for them to take. So we work hard to ensure our legislators understand, we invite them to listen in at rape counseling phone centers, we invite them to hospitals, we encourage them to attend victim counseling services, we invite them to hearings so they can hear first hand. We write letters about personal experiences either or own, or of people we can speak on their behalf.

No argument from me.

Then we encourage women to do all they can to accept personal responsibility - not to blame, but to protect because we can't always count on someone being a good guy when we aren't capable of making a fully informed consent. To me that doesn't include redefining as something to be proud of, it's being self aware and taking charge of my environment.

I'm not sure anybody is redefining as something to be proud of, at least, not in this context. (I've seen some myspace postings that seem to use it as a compliment though.) It is still a derogatory slur and that's precisely why people objected so forcefully they were even moved to organize walks when a policeman used it to describe rape victims.

Of course there are choices that everybody can do to reduce their risk of encountering various bad outcomes in their lives. I don't think anybody can disagree with that. But it's kinda tricky to talk about women accepting personal responsibility for not getting raped because if you in fact got raped it is almost invariably going to sound like you're personally responsible for getting raped, which is going to sound like victim blaming.

Being self aware and taking control of one's environment does not make us invulnerable.

 

[Donjeta]

I have nothing against educating people of risks, it's just that the words used to do so matter. If it's a fact based warning and not a derogatory stereotype it can probably be phrased in some non-offensive way.

 

[Charlie09]

I think it could be a defence mechanism. The thought of being raped is so disturbing that people want to think that they're safe, personally. If they can somehow attribute other people getting victimized to something stupid, dangerous or wrong that the victim did they can feel safer because they know better than to do X. But if it's just a random act of violence the victim could be anybody, it could be me.

So we take no responsibility for our own safety because there are the random acts?

 

[Charlie09]

I have nothing against educating people of risks, it's just that the words used to do so matter. If it's a fact based warning and not a derogatory stereotype it can probably be phrased in some non-offensive way.

Rape is offensive, I don't really care if someone is offended if it keeps them smarter about personal responsibility.

Trying to change the term - to be some form of empowerment doesn't do anything to change the offensiveness of rape.

 

[Donjeta]

So we take no responsibility for our own safety because there are the random acts?

I was talking about the reasons why people so very eagerly want to find things to blame the victims for. I did not mea people shouldn't try to stay safe if they can, I meant they shouldn't blame the victims.

A lot of the time the rape victims get blamed for a bunch of untrue stereotypes anyway. The notion of a rape victim instantly conjures up images of hardly dressed young women who flirt with all the boys in the party, then pass out drunk. But instead, a rape victim may be an old woman who dresses in demure old lady clothes and never touches a drop and got raped her own home by her lawfully wedded husband. Very slutty and irresponsible, to get married, huh?

 

[Donjeta]

Rape is offensive, I don't really care if someone is offended if it keeps them smarter about personal responsibility.

Does it work? Do people not get raped if offending remarks are directed at them?

Trying to change the term - to be some form of empowerment doesn't do anything to change the offensiveness of rape.

No, I agree, but I think it's somehow beside the point. Even *IF* somebody is trying to change the term into an empowering word (which I don't think the Walk is trying to do) I don't think anybody has claimed that changing the term into an empowering word is gonna change the offensiveness of rape, and IMO no one has said it even should. Rape is and always will be offensive, no matter what.

 

[Charlie09]

I was talking about the reasons why people so very eagerly want to find things to blame the victims for. I did not mea people shouldn't try to stay safe if they can, I meant they shouldn't blame the victims.

A lot of the time the rape victims get blamed for a bunch of untrue stereotypes anyway. The notion of a rape victim instantly conjures up images of hardly dressed young women who flirt with all the boys in the party, then pass out drunk. But instead, a rape victim may be an old woman who dresses in demure old lady clothes and never touches a drop and got raped her own home by her lawfully wedded husband. Very slutty and irresponsible, to get married, huh?

I disagree that's the stereotype of who gets raped anymore. I totally disagree with that - maybe it's all the crime shows that show so many ordinary janes in their ordinary lives.

 

[Donjeta]

I disagree that's the stereotype of who gets raped anymore. I totally disagree with that - maybe it's all the crime shows that show so many ordinary janes in their ordinary lives.

OK. Still, the advice about how to not get raped so often includes avoiding the above scenario (don't get drunk, don't dress slutty etc.) and completely glosses over the dangers of being an ordinary jane in her ordinary life.

It is very hard to stop being an ordinary jane and feel safe.

 

[believe09]

Quick-someone pull some stats on who is most likely to be raped and what they are wearing...oh right. It is an under reported crime, so that wont work.

I think it is fair to take on one stereotype at a time regarding rape. The next one to take on is whether or not men get raped, and what the circumstances of their rape is. I wonder if any member of LE has ever asked them what they were wearing when they were raped? A male that is? Or if they are a ?

 

[Charlie09]

Quick-someone pull some stats on who is most likely to be raped and what they are wearing...oh right. It is an under reported crime, so that wont work.

I think it is fair to take on one stereotype at a time regarding rape. The next one to take on is whether or not men get raped, and what the circumstances of their rape is. I wonder if any member of LE has ever asked them what they were wearing when they were raped? A male that is? Or if they are a ?

I think it's a misguided effort - period.
Personal responsibility + harsher laws will accomplish much more.

 

[Charlie09]

OK. Still, the advice about how to not get raped so often includes avoiding the above scenario (don't get drunk, don't dress slutty etc.) and completely glosses over the dangers of being an ordinary jane in her ordinary life.

It is very hard to stop being an ordinary jane and feel safe.

So now who's stereotyping? We're powerless because we are ordinary janes?

How about carrying some sort of safety protections - I would say guns, but realize that will cause a stir.
Or mace/pepper spray on your key chain
taking self defense classes
being aware of who is lurking in your carport/apartment buildings
locking up windows and doors


And by the way I've never seen a safety campaign that says "don't get raped so often"

 

[Donjeta]

As I said, there are all sorts of choices that people can make to reduce the risks of various undesirable outcomes. I don't think you'll get an argument about improving women's ability to self defend because who could be against that? It is a very good idea but IMO it is again a little beside the point for the Walk discussion because not having mace and not locking up your doors and not taking self defence classes is probably not what people are thinking of if they imply someone got raped because she's so slutty.

 

[wfgodot]

and meanwhile....

Slutwalking phenomenon comes to UK (Manchester Guardian)
British cities to host mass anti-rape demonstrations as part of global movement sparked by Canadian policeman's remarks

---
Thousands of women are expected to descend on Trafalgar Square in central London for a SlutWalk on 4 June, with other events planned for Cardiff and Edinburgh, and possible meetings in other cities including Brighton and Birmingham.
---
Holly Dustin, director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said the police officer's comments were "deeply disturbing" but rife in society. "Polls show that this kind of victim-blaming attitude is prevalent throughout UK society, too. The appallingly low conviction rate of less than 7% of reported rapes indicates it is likely to pervade our criminal justice system as well," she said.

A 2009 Home Office report into violence against women in the UK found that 36% of people believed a woman should be held wholly or partly responsible for being sexually assaulted or raped if she was drunk, and 26% if she was in public wearing sexy or revealing clothes.
---

much more at Guardian link above

 

[reportertype]

So now who's stereotyping? We're powerless because we are ordinary janes?

How about carrying some sort of safety protections - I would say guns, but realize that will cause a stir.
Or mace/pepper spray on your key chain
taking self defense classes
being aware of who is lurking in your carport/apartment buildings
locking up windows and doors


And by the way I've never seen a safety campaign that says "don't get raped so often"

This is all good, but it doesn't really take into account date rape. I think nearly every woman knows all the basic rules of stranger danger. Just like any other predator, many rapists take advantage of women who trust them - and in many cases it happens after knowing the guy for months with no inkling what he will do.

 

[Donjeta]

Organisers say they are protesting against a culture which puts the blame for rape and sexual assault on to the victim, makes women less likely to report rape and contributes to low conviction rates for those accused of rape and sexual assault.

This was an important point IMO.
If a woman fails to report rape because she is afraid of being shamed and blamed for it or the attitude gets the accused off the hook because the victim was doing X [insert reason that doesn't really justify rape] it leaves the rapist free to rape again.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/09/slutwalking-phenomenon-comes-to-uk