Why I Will Not Walk Like a Sl*t

Disclaimer: The asterisk in the title was used in order for this post to come out on our Facebook pages. Just to make it clear, I’m as much of a pottymouth as the next person. Kepyas kepyas kepyas.

“Slut” is a derogatory term, and it should stay that way. This is coming from someone who dry heaves at the term “making love,” and made casual sex her sport of choice when she was single. No matter how comfortable I am with the idea of mindless sex and its pursuit, I believe that there is a difference between being in full control of one’s sexuality, and just being plain promiscuous.

SlutWalk - "Why I will not walk like a slut" by Marguerite de Leon
Walk like a slut

A group of female activists inToronto, however, have started a pride march of sorts dubbed the “SlutWalk” last June. It was sparked when a local police officer suggested that “women should avoid dressing like sluts” to avoid sexual harassment. In protest, these women have taken to the streets in an effort to redefine slut-dom, with many of them donning tacky, skimpy clothing and daring men not to ogle or wolf-whistle. The movement has become so popular that SlutWalks have been held across the world ever since, including in uber-traditional, harassment-heavy New Delhi.

I am totally for women speaking out not only against harassment, but also in support of their right to be open about their love for sex, whether mindless or meaningful. What I find very weak about these women’s concept, however, is their dependence on the image of a scantily-clad slut to further such a well-intentioned cause.

SlutWalk - "Why I will not walk like a slut" by Marguerite de Leon
Who you callin’ hot mama?

If you go out on the street in a low-cut blouse, hot pants, and heels, and then feel bad that people are staring at you, you should probably reassess your situation. What other reason is there for women to wear revealing clothing other than to attract attention? “To make me feel good about myself and/or my body” may be a valid sentiment, but  the fact remains that at the very root of your feeling good about yourself and/or your body via clothing is your being found sexually attractive by others.

Why bother wearing something revealing if sexual attractiveness is not the message you’re willing to convey? For the love of fashion, you say? Most skimpy haute couture wasn’t meant for the commute to work in the first place. Heterosexual men are predisposed to like boobs and legs and butts, and if you feel offended that your halter top/micro-mini/low-rise jeans has garnered you unwarranted attention, then it would be best for you to sit down and read up on biology and gender studies before heading out again.

SlutWalk - "Why I will not walk like a slut" by Marguerite de Leon
Frankness and foresight

The odd wolf-whistle or two, of course, is absolutely nothing compared to rape, and the best way for any individual to avoid it is to avoid vulnerable situations. Marching the streets in a bikini and waving a placard that reads “This is NOT my I WANT YOU face!” is not going to keep some depraved schmuck from taking advantage of you.

Instead, try lucid communication. On a night out, for instance, not only should you verbally make your intentions with your date clear, but also look and act that way you want to be treated. Want sex on the first date? Go for it – drop as many double entendres as you deem necessary. Want to play it slow or show that you’re not interested? Then stop trying to spill your cleavage onto your plate and laughing at every other thing your date says. Better yet, for either case, just say what you feel. “I like you. Want to come up to my apartment for a drink?” “I like you. Maybe we can have dinner again this week. When are you free?” “You’re very nice, but I don’t think we’re a good fit. I should go on ahead. I hope you understand.”

At the end of the day, however, anyone, regardless of what they’re wearing, can become a victim of rape. There are bad people out there, and they will not listen to what you tell them. The key to eradicating such a horrid crime is more about advancing an intelligent, empathetic, and conscientious society and less about pitting men against women through the Pussy Power Patrol.

So, if you want to redefine how men and women interact with one another, don’t parade yourself in your panties and dare people not to stare at you. Don’t try to alleviate the perils of mixed signals with even more mixed signals. Just quit the ambiguous bullshit, period.

Click here for a follow-up to this piece. 

(Images from IBTimes, TnT Magazine, Lisa VanDyke, and The Guardian)


  1. I'm a bit confused as to what precisely the author abhors. Is it women wearing scant clothing in the context of general 'sluttiness', or in the context of SlutWalking.

    For me it's simple: to directly and aggressively respond to 'outsider' allegations that women get raped because they dress 'slutty', SlutWalkers *have to* dress using precisely the 'outsider' definition of slutty. It's what makes it a protest.

    With regard to sluttiness outside the context of this protest, these women don't dress like this 100% of the time. But you assume that all self-professed sluts don't work in banks / schools / wherever and don't wear 'average clothing' as you deem (and are rape-prone in any of these given settings), and spend 100% of their time parading their panties. You say they can benefit from your expert slut techniques of "frankness and foresight", but what does that have to do with rape / unwarranted attention? Claiming that women have the power to lessen the probability of encountering rape means you don't even know what rape *is*.

    • “Claiming that women have the power to lessen the probability of encountering rape means you don’t even know what rape *is*.”

      No, that just means that not all women are as weak and stupid as you are assuming. Let’s re-think your statement. You are saying that there is absolutely NO FUCKING WAY a woman can reduce, even slightly, the possibility of rape?

      Are you saying that a woman who crashes a party alone, wearing a flimsy skirt and no underwear, who has a habit of telling random strangers that she has rape fantasies, who drinks until she passes out in one of the rooms is just as likely to be raped as any other woman in any other circumstance?

      Regardless of how stupid and irresponsible this decision was on this girl’s part, she doesn’t deserve to be raped and, personally, I will not blame her if she does get raped.

      But don’t tell me that this situation is just as risky, just as rape-vulnerable, as any other situation a girl might find herself in because that is just fucking false.

      “But like it or not, PC or not, slut friendly or not, promiscuity does lead to the enhanced likelihood of rape. As even the most obtuse rape advocate will acknowledge, most rapes of women happen from known assailants, often potential or previous sexual partners.” – Paul Elam, “SlutWalks: Stupidity in a Tube Top”

  2. Uhm, if Freethinkers is trying to get a web award maybe they shouldn't post dumb articles contrary to their causes. Or can somebody already plaster a "This is meant to be satirical" banner somewhere over this article?! Hope the writer is just a newbie in the group and not somebody who actually makes decisions in the group. If she is… oh no for Freethinkers…

  3. i think we’ve blurred the line of getting attention and being actually harassed. If you wear slutty clothes and then cries offensively for being stared at (note: only stared not whistled) then i guess that wrong. Well I agree that heterosexual male are predisposed to like boobs, asses and butts but then raping someone because you got aroused by the type of clothing these women are wearing is never justifiable and never the fault of these women. Take note, you can stare but you cant touch unless given permission. Being horny doesnt give anyone the permission to rape. Its like window shopping, no matter how you like the newest i-Pad in the rack as long as you dont have money then you could never get it. You can drool all your life but getting that without permission is stealing. Just like rape.

    Another thing, Wes mentioned about managing the risk. That for you to decrease the risk of getting raped then you should atleast cover your boobs and your butt. Can someone substantiate with facts that most of the rape victims were actually wearing slutty clothes. Because if you could, then atleast women should be warned for their clothing and bikinis should be banned in boracay . But actually raped happens not because of the slutty clothes but because someone is just an asshole who cant get a hook-up.

  4. para sa akin lang, mali yung objective ng movement nila. Sana nag focus na lang sila sa pagturo ng self-defense for women, i-advice nila na magdala ka ng pepper spray o stun gun. safety first. Sure ok lang magsuot ka ng gusto mo, pero dapat alam mo ring proketahan ang sarili mo kung may kupal na abusado na.

    but the best advice I can give to women out there kung ayaw mo pagahasa sa mga manyakis, sabihin mo na may STD ka. matatakot sila agad

  5. Tulad ng kinanta sa Glee :

    "I wear tight clothing, high heeled shoes
    It doesn't mean that I'm a prostitute, no no
    I like rap music, wear hip hop clothes
    That doesn't mean that I'm out sellin' dope no no no"

  6. So funny how a simple article can get so muddy at times! There are two simple issues here: how a woman dresses and rape! The former deals with how any woman chooses to dress up. If she chooses provocative outfits, then she may be inviting all kinds of troubles for her. If she opts to dress appropriately, then she may not invite as much attention to herself and, consequently, may not get even a stare! But, however she chooses to dress herself up, that is ultimately her right and should accept whatever consequences it may bring. Regardless of her outfit, it should not diminish her being a female, a human being!

    The latter is a crime, plain and simple. Regardless of the attendant circumstances (how the woman was dressed, whether he was intoxicated, etc.), it is still a crime and a provocative attire does not justify the crime! It's that simple…

    • Yup! This one summarizes everything. Those confused must read org59’s take on this matter. It is plain and simple. Go express yourself. Be responsible. Rape is rape and it’s a crime no matter what.

  7. How about you get over your own legalistic views on sluts and slut-shaming them. Whatever being a slut means. A slut is defined as having "loose sexual morals" whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean–in any case if you're enjoying pre-marital sex you are a slut.

    In addition, I find your views on rape as being the victim's fault (because they put themselves supposedly in a vulnerable situation) as wrong on so many levels. And this causes me to think that you are one of those disgusting conservative people who pretend to be all forward-thinking but at the end of the day, the crux of your philosophy, your thinking, is still very patriarchal and not equal. Rape is bad. Rape is the fault of the rapist, not the victimized.

    Let me say that again: Rape is the fault of the Rapist, not the Victimized Person.

    Get over yourself, please. We don't need pretentious people who like to pretend that they think progressively when they're just forwarding the old kind of thinking that got us here in the first place.

    Feel free to read this: on "sluts" http://www.lawsonry.com/964-the-myth-of-being-a-s
    and for your own thinking, http://www.coketalk.com

    • The issue is not about blaming the rape victim for dressing provocatively, its about risk management.

      If you're going to do something that calls attention to you or may put you at risk, you should have a contingency plan in case it attracts unwanted attention. Its no different than flashing an expensive phone in snatcher-infested territory. If you're willing to take that risk, that's your call. If you get robbed, it's *obviously* the snatcher's fault. But you took a risk of calling attention to yourself, increasing the likelihood of you being the victim-of-the-day, instead of someone else.

      Criminals are like predators, they will always look for prey. Whether you "dress slutilly" or wave an expensive gadget around, you are unfortunately sending out a signals that go "pick me! pick me!". If you're sending out blood in the water, you better have a way deal with the sharks.

      • @Wes tama hindi lng ang rapists ang may kasalanan kundi ang biktima rin. Dapat kasi mag ingat kayo! It is all about risk management.

        • You're so full of shit. So you're saying if you raped someone while drunk and they were dressed provocatively it wasn't your fault completely, it was the woman's fault too because she was dressed looking like she wanted to be fucked? Based on what you just said that's a yes.

          Mahiya ka naman sa sarili mo.

          • @_daybreaks Okay…..I get your point I said something not nice that provoked you.
            I just do not know about gender equality.

      • I am appalled. And to think you probably claim to be an open and free thinker. Open your mind.

        Sure there is a point to what you're saying–but here's the catch, you see: men should know that even if a woman is dressed provocatively, they should not be harassed. It isn't the woman's fault that she gets raped because in the first place, RAPE SHOULDN'T HAPPEN! Is this clear enough for you? A patriarchal mindset says that women are sex-objects, and it's only a milder form of this mindset that says, "if a woman looks really promiscious, she is probably asking for it" when in fact, NO MEANS NO. A woman may dress provocatively but to be sure she has one guy in mind. Or at least, not the creepy guy who tries to harass her.

        To make it clear: your mindset says that women are sex-objects if they dress up like one. Well, fuck you.

        It's bullshit and so much arrogance for men to say it's the woman's fault. That it's the victim's fault. Rape happens regardless of what the victims are wearing. Do your research. Why do children also get raped? Is it because they dressed provocatively? How about men who get raped? Is it because they dressed provocatively? NO. RAPE HAPPENS WHEN A PERSON LACKS CONTROL AND RESPECT.

        So what you're saying is that you, as someone who thinks that it's the woman's fault for dressing up all provocative, you're saying that you support the kind of thinking that disrespects a woman. A woman should be respected whether or not she looks like she's a sex worker simply because she's a human being. Get that? No ifs, no buts.

        This article doesn't get why these women dressed up as such. Have you ever heard of the word RECLAMATION? Try looking it up smart-ass. They're reclaiming their right to dress however way they want without being judged. And men shouldn't be disrespecting them by being such an asshole to think that these women are "asking for it" because, no, they're not especially not from you.

        Right now this is your Catholic + Conservative side, and obviously you aren't someone who thinks openly, rationally, and freely. I hope you don't get married, I already feel sorry for her. You're definitely the typical Male Chauvinist Pig also, one of those Pinoys who are so into Machismo and the Colonial culture the Spaniards left us that you think that it's their fault for being raped. It implies that if you were in the rapist's position, it would be okay because the woman was "asking for it".


          • Please. We all cuss. Even the author of this article cusses. Oh please. Also just because you're ignorant of gender equality doesn't mean it's okay to harbor views that aren't fair to all genders. Research. Study. Look it up. You're supposed to be thinking, remember? Freethinkers?

            I thought so. And what makes you think I'm a guy? Hahaha

        • You may say that this is my Catholic + conservative side because I became a freethinker recently so I have mix thoughts. I hope you understand.

        • f you read Wes' comment, he said "If you get robbed, it's *obviously* the snatcher's fault."

          NO victim-blaming here. And yeah, "A woman should be respected whether or not she looks like she's a sex worker simply because she's a human being."

          Like what Wes' said, this is about risk management. We all know women should be respected but i doubt you can tell rapists that when they see attractive women with very revealing clothing in a dark alley. The point is not to put yourself in a position where you will be extremely vulnerable to harassment with your choice of clothing inadvertently sending wrong signals.

          While it is the rapist's fault and heck he needs to be punished for that, you still cannot undo rape. If you can do something to prevent the entire thing from happening, why not?

          And oh,

          "I hope you don't get married, I already feel sorry for her. You're definitely the typical Male Chauvinist Pig" – Uncalled for

        • Oh, so your suggestion is to tell rapists not to rape women? Wow. Telling rapists pala not to rape women will stop them from raping. We should also tell robbers not to rob, liars not to lie, corrupt government officials not to be corrupt and thieves not to steal. Bro, I think we just solved all the problems in the world.

          • I think the main message of those who criticize the "risk management" line of thinking is this: In a world where the government and police have done their job well, a person can walk along the well-lit alley to his home in the wee hours of the night without fearing greatly for his life. In short, although the "get home early so that you won't get robbed" line of reasoning will work in the short run, if we want solutions that are more than just the band-aid type then we must fight for a reformation of the social system that will effectively decrease the number of potential criminals via a combination of effective policing and the lowering of the unemployment rate.

          • Given my above reply, an extension to the case of "slutty" dressing follows naturally. Although the "don't dress 'provocatively' to avoid getting harassed or molested" line of thinking is effective in averting risk in the short run, what is desired is more than the myopic, short-sighted solution of dressing modestly for the sake of safety. Because if we accept the short-term solution as the only solution to the "provocative" dressing issue, then we might as well advise all transsexuals and transvestites to avoid cross-dressing if they want to avert the risk of hate crime. After all, we know that society suffers from a high level of hate crimes against openly gay people. Does this mean that "acting gay" (whatever the hell that means) in public is risky behavior and should therefore be avoided? Or should we change society's views of gay people instead?

          • "Wow. Telling rapists pala not to rape women will stop them from raping."

            If you look at how the local media portrays the rapist and the rape victim, you will understand that the cause of gender equity in the Philippines still has a long way to go. If you talk to people in the streets, you will discover that they're not as appalled as they should be at the rapists they see in the news. However, their feeling of pity for the rape victim knows no bounds. Does this reaction sit squarely with the fact that rapes happen because of the rapist and not because of the victim? No. And this is where the Slutwalks come in: they aim to tell society: "Hey, people out there in the streets, it is never our fault!"

            "We should also tell robbers not to rob, liars not to lie, corrupt government officials not to be corrupt and thieves not to steal."

            We should should elect a working government, cut the unemployment level, increase the minimum wage, be vigilant about the government spending of public funds, ect. Of course, the actual solutions to the above listed problems are never simple, and they are always in long term solutions. The same goes for the problem of sex-related crimes, whether it be committed by a man or by a woman.

        • In one of the anti-kidnapping talks I attended before, 2 critical factors were identified that would increase one's risk of being a victim of violent crime:
          1. calling attention to yourself (ie. by overt display of wealth)
          2. presenting an easy target (frequenting high risk – low security venues/activities, repeated patterns of habit..)

          One of the above might not make you a suitable target for kidnapping but if you do both, you are increasing your risk factor greatly. Example: you can be a rich politician who flaunts his wealth everywhere but if kidnappers know you have powerful military backing, they will be afraid to touch you for fear of retaliation.

          I believe the same case is applicable in the "provocative dressing" issue: dress flashy but carry a big stick… or at least be with people who have bigger sticks than the would-be offender

          Now, can we finally move on from the rape-rape-rape strawman? I believe the main contention of slutwalk we are trying to address is the social acceptance issue, not the rape-victim angle.

      • "If you get robbed, it's *obviously* the snatcher's fault. But you took a risk of calling attention to yourself, increasing the likelihood of you being the victim-of-the-day, instead of someone else."

        The whole point of slutwalks, it seems to me, can be stated as follows: "Hey, police, your job is to protect us no matter how we dress and to pursue our assailants no matter how we ourselves look!"

        While I concede that the "don't wag your expensive phone out in the streets if you don't want to get mugged" line of reasoning is an effective risk-aversion strategy in the short run, overusing this line of reasoning at the expense of long term solutions is criminally short-sighted. Why not demand for better-lit streets? Or for higher police visibility? Or for a swifter and more effective justice system? Or, better yet, for lower unemployment rates and higher minimum wages?

  8. I think the real problem that people are facing is the fact that everyone looks at things differently, that they are urged to act based on their biases and preferences.

    If a person wears revealing clothing it cannot be avoided that he or she will attract attention. It is human nature to be attracted to things, and these attractions are triggered by biases and preferences. The same thing works the other way around that if a person sees someone attracts his or her attention he or she cannot help it but to react. But we forget to look at the fact that if a person wears revealing clothing that is his or her choice, that he or she acted out on his or her own volition and freewill. It is a human act, the same way as criticizing them.

    We must not dwell only on first impressions unless we are 99% sure ( I say 99% because we can never really be 100% sure on everything in a qualitative perspective). A person may look like a slut, act like a slut, but does that make that person a slut? Definitely not unless we can prove it somehow.

    If these women likes to look like a slut in any reason fathomable then I guess we will just have to respect their decision in doing so because, as I would like to believe, they mean no harm on looking like one because they are speaking to us in a manner that they believe would make a greater impact so we have to listen to them. If we believe that what they are doing is awkward, then we have to understand them.

    I mean no disrespect to anyone in saying these, but if we are offended by something that is not entirely and/ or offensively directed at us then we are the ones with the problem because we failed to understand them. Perhaps if we look at things at a non-biased/ respectful perspective then I guess we will find the peace that we are missing.

  9. If there are two equally beautiful and sexy ladies walking in Makati where the first is wearing a business attire or casual clothes and the second is wearing a short and tight, ass-hugging shorts, short blouse with plunging neckline, bra-less with her nipples clearly showing and walking very sexy, which lady do you think will get all the whistles, catcalls and salivating stares???

    • What's your point? Did any of the women ask any of the men to whistle? Don't the men have the free will to look away or shut up? Are the male species mere plants who have no choice but stare blankly on women, whatever they're wearing. If this is the "nature" of men, then men are inherently dangerous and should be locked away from the rest of society because they are a natural threat to our safety and security.

      • @benedictbernabe
        What's my point? Several actually:
        – people, in general, dress up the way they would want others to "see" them. Otherwise, people would tend to dress up as comfortable as they would want to, unmindful of how society will view them and basic dress codes!
        – a person who dresses in a provocative manner, or wears outlandishly-colored hairstyles, or body pierces, does so to call attention to him/herself. Let no one deny this! Feeling good about how 'hot' you look, or how kwela your new hair looks, or how beautiful your new body pierce looks, is actually meaningless unless appreciated by others! If nobody notices, that may even make you feel 'bad'.
        – everything a person does, has consequences! If you dress up provocatively, you may get howls, stares and even sexual expletives. If you dress up appropriately, you may get admiration and respect. If one still chooses to accept these consequences, then so be it.
        – while men, in general, admire beauty, this admiration can be expressed in so many ways! If a provocatively-dressed sexy lady walks by, a guy can give her an approving smile, approach her and tell her how beautiful she looks, howl like a dog, open your mouth and salivate, or sexually molest her. Whichever option he chooses to take, he should be prepared for the consequences as well!
        – while a lady has the right to dress up how she feels, a guy also has the right to react in the way he feels appropriate at the time. However, as the saying goes, his right ends when her right begins! If his chosen reaction already tramples on her dignity, or demeans her being a lady or human being, or is offensive to public morals, then he should suffer the consequences, regardless of the reasons behind his reaction!
        – lastly, neither male or female gender is inherently dangerous that should be locked up, as you implied. Rather, it is that person's, male or female, character/personality that will ultimately determine whether he/she is dangerous.

  10. Its all power-play. Dressing provocatively indicates that one wants to feel desired. Its human nature. It projects an "I'm hot, but you cant get any of this until I say so" sense of control.

    But the trick here is that we don't want to lose power either. Cat-calls and wolf-whistles transfers the power over to the viewer, they become the judge and you become the objectified judgee. Reversal of power makes for a lot of pissed show-offs.

  11. "What other reason is there for women to wear revealing clothing other than to attract attention?"
    "Why bother wearing something revealing if sexual attractiveness is not the message you’re willing to convey?"

    I mean no offense when I say that it's really unusual to hear these sexist and condescending questions from none other than a woman. Clothing (and the connotations attached to it), propriety and modesty are all human constructs, and, like all human constructs, they are prone to being taken as is without question. But that shouldn't necessarily be the case. We only have to look at the many tribes that find nothing wrong with topless women and and the many tribes that find nothing wrong with pants-less men to see through our own biases.

    Our prevailing negative conceptions of propriety could thus be addressed in two ways:

    1) Attack the pieces of clothing themselves as well as the individual's motivations to wear such "revealing" articles (as your question implies) or

    2) Attack the prevailing negative biases and mindsets among individuals and the groups they belong to by de-sensitizing them to these biases.

    Religion often resorts to the first option. Jeiel's example captures this best. The first option does nothing to challenge the inherent sexism within our biases, and it probably even reinforces the negativity within these biases.

    The second option, I believe, is the method of attack chosen by these women who dare engage in these "Slut Walks". And rightly so, if I might add. It certainly worked for the African-American movement in the 1950's. No doubt it also worked for the LGBT Civil Rights movement in the 1960's.

    Sure, it is well within your rights to reserve your own preferences, but movements such as these seek to address exactly these kinds of preferences and try to keep them that way – merely as preferences – and not as some moral impetus that women such as yourself should conform to.

  12. I agree! If I walk around with my penis out, I should not be harassed or arrested because I should not be responsible for whatever offense, disturbance, arousal, agitation, or disgust I cause in other people. Walking around with my soft penis exposed is the only way I can fully express myself, so in no way, shape or form should I be prevented from doing so and neither should society judge me for when I choose to expose myself. Just because I walk around with my penis out does not mean I'm a bad person, and neither should I be treated as a man with loose morals despite the fact that many men with loose morals also expose themselves in public 🙂

      • no it doesn't 🙂

        if a guy goes around in slutty clothes, he wont be getting stares of desire from the girls 'cause he'll be setting off everyone's gaydar. Try walking around like the Village People

      • All I’m saying is what a person wears affects the people around him/her. Although no one should be “punished” for their choice of clothing, certain assumptions are going to be made based on what a person wears.

        Provocative clothes are often associated with promiscuous behavior. A person who is promiscuous is perceived to be more open to sexual advances. Therefore, by wearing provocative clothing, one might (even if it were not the original intention) send the message that one is open to sexual advances (verbal or otherwise).

        I would agree that it is an error on the part of the sexual “harasser” to make these assumptions, but these men/women who are provoked by the sexy clothing can’t read minds. All they recognize is a girl parading her ass and they might make decisions based on that (mis)information.

        Some women who dress provocatively want to be approached, other’s don’t, others want to be offered money for sex, others don’t.

        If you don’t want to be mistaken for someone who exchanges sexual favors for money (which is what a slut [prostitute] is), or someone who is willing to sleep with anyone (another definition for slut), then maybe you shouldn’t dress in a manner that is similar to how these people (prostitutes) dress. And if ever you decide to dress provocatively, then you have to be aware of the context of the situation.

        If you hang around Quezon Ave in “slutty” clothes, a car might stop and ask you how much you are charging for a blow job. Now that assumption maybe offensive but it was not a personal attack on the character or dignity of the female person involved. She was simply mistaken for being a prostitute because she wore the type of clothing prostitutes would wear and was seen in an area where prostitutes are often found. It’s not victim blaming. It’s common sense.

        Provocative clothing, although some would argue that it should not, does invite sexual advances. And many people wear them for that reason.

        • Okay, if I understand this correctly, the only point you're defending is that it is unrealistic to expect not to receive attention for your manner of dress and that one should not be offended when they do.

          If I got that correctly, on some level, I can agree with you. However, I think both you and the OP are misunderstanding the point of Slut Walk and the points it's protesting.

          There is a clear and visible difference between attention (be it unwanted or negative) and harassment. Even given your hypothetical scenario, if they mistook her for a prostitute, fine, I don't think anything can be done about that, realistically speaking. However, when she ultimately tells them she is not and basically rejects them, that should be that. The person making the assumption should just stop right there and leave her alone.

          Her dressing a way the prepositioner equates to being like that of a prostitute does not mean he should disregard her rejection. Hell, even if she was a prostitute, if she refused them, that's that. Anything more done by the aggressor becomes their fault and their fault alone. That's what Slut Walk is about.

          No means no. Rapists and harassers are not excused from their actions because of how anyone is dressed. I don't believe the Slut Walk has an actual stand on mere harmless attention, but the sad thing is that there are a lot of instances where attention turns into something that isn't harmless.

          I have no qualms about agreeing that the way you dress does invite attention and that is natural people react this way, but if you were told to stop, were rejected, or were made to feel like your attention was not wanted, you should give people you perceive as dressing 'sluttily' the same respect you would someone who was dressed in what you deem 'modest' clothing.

  13. I think one of the points of the slut walk is that it speaks out against blaming the victim of rape. When police officers say, “oh you shouldn't wear those clothes if you don't want to get raped”, they're putting the blame of women getting raped on the victim, not the rapist.

    It's the same logic that some men from Islamic countries operate under. Oh woman, you should have been fully covered from head to toe! Don't you know the sight of ankles inflames my passion woman? It is totally not our fault if we rape you! What those countries have in addition though in those countries, their misogyny is backed up by their religious leaders.

    • precisely. the slut walk is just a bit overdone on the lack of clothes department but their message should not get lost in the process. different cultures have different states of undress to be categorized under the term "slut". (btw, i think the word slut is not negative.)

  14. I'm sorry OP, but what exactly is the difference between 'being in control of one's sexuality' and 'promiscuity' to you? I really cannot deal with the tone of this right now because it reeks of condescension. The way it's written makes it sound as if you feel so much more above these women because of their choice of dress, well guess what: That's slut shaming.

    The whole purpose of SlutWalks, since you seemed to have missed the mark a little, is not only to express that women should not have to face shame and harassment for their sex life but also for the way they dress. Yes, women may dress more provocatively because they want to be seen as attractive or whatever else reason have you but that does not give anyone the right to physically or sexually harass them. There is a line between getting attention and harassment.

    But can you not wrap your head around the concept that maybe, just maybe, some women dress 'slutty' because they like those clothes, like how they look in them and they make them feel comfortable without caring what others think about them? Do you not consider that a possibility at all?

    You also say that you understand that anyone can be raped regardless of what they wear but I can just hear the subtle victim blaming in the way you talk about how they should just do this and that to avoid getting into trouble.

    SlutWalk's message is that no one should be ashamed or dressing the way they want because 'it invites people to take advantage of you'. SlutWalk's message is that it should not matter how you dress, it is never your fault someone else was a bad person and took advantage of you. SlutWalk aims to say 'I dress this way and I like it and that's absolutely none of your business if I do and the doesn't make me less of a person'. Just because society at large expects you to dress a certain way because you're a woman doesn't mean you deserve any bad thing that happens to you if you don't.

    And about slut being a derogatory word? Reclamation, I'm sure you've heard of it.

    I get that you see eye to eye with these women in some aspects, but your article still indicates that even among people who are 'comfortable with their sexuality', the culture of slut shaming is evident.

    Lastly, I'm rather personally offended by the heterosexism of that 'Men are biologically predisposed to like boobs and legs and butts' line.

    • "Just because society at large expects you to dress a certain way because you're a woman doesn't mean you deserve any bad thing that happens to you if you don't. "

      This is my point exactly. 🙂

    • (Lastly, I'm rather personally offended by the heterosexism of that 'Men are biologically predisposed to like boobs and legs and butts' line.)

      Why get offended by a fact? It is one thing to appreciate anatomical parts of a woman and another to have lustful thoughts of that woman, or worse, actually molest or rape her! Just like women are predisposed to liking handsome hunks, men too have their quirks. :p

Leave a reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here