If you don't include women being stoned to death, flogged for doing something as heinous as wearing pants under the tent, hung for being raped, beaten and jailed for asking a husband's nephew for food, etc etc etc etc...... Oh yes! And if a woman is raped, she must have at least 4 male witnesses testifying on her behalf.... or is that another ME rathole?
So, are you're suggesting if a woman doesn't dress in outfits w/her boobs hanging out of it and skirts up to her crotch - she's a prude? And since when has the subject of sex been locked up in the closet? The subject of sex has been out there, exposed, in our faces for a long time now - in the movies, tv shows, written about in books/magazines, on tv commercials on talk shows, - it's all over - and now the state of CA wants to teach the kindergarten kids about homosexuality! You mean you haven't noticed any of the above? Are you saying that having a loving, sex life in the privacy of your home is not enuf? And your last sentence - the high-lighted - can only come from a sick, twisted mind...........
You make some very good points. Unfortunately none of them support this crazy idea of walking around dressed like a "slut". When I think of female supreme court justices sex is the last thing on my mind. Those ladies did not get where they were by dressing like "sluts". I went to court once for a minor traffic infraction. I of course was dressed in a very nice conservative dark suit. The rest of the rabble in the court room was dressed like they just found out about their court date five minutes before. The FEMALE judge actually tossed one woman out of her courtroom because she was not dressed appropriately. When it was my time to grovel before the female judge she smiled and dismissed my case. I didn't go onto internet forums and complain about sexism because a woman made some assumptions about me because of the way I was dressed.
From New Jersey? Pass. There's a difference between dressing in less clothing and dressing provocatively. The two are not strictly correlated. A woman can be completely nude and not be provocative, just as a woman can be covered up and be dressed provocatively. It's not the amount of clothing that necessarily makes the difference. Within the gay community? Quite possibly. And need I point out that, within male prisons, there is an entire rape culture that is cued on clothing symbols - men make themselves available (or declare others to be "available") based on their appearance. Well, first of all, the overwhelming majority of victims are young, so yes, that is pretty much all we see. Secondly, the line that "rape is about power" is nothing more than feminist nonsense. Rape is about the rapist getting off. I don't see anyone blaming the victim. I see a lot of people preaching common sense. Is it blaming the victim to recommend people lock their doors when they go on vacation? I mean, sure, if they are robbed while they are away, it's not their fault, but it's common sense. The problem, however, is that VAWA does this by both marginalizing male victims of violence and by trampling on Constitutional protections of the accused. For example, there are 60 passages in the Act that exclude men from their protection. The Act also trivializes the definition of domestic violence so as to make "domestic violence" whatever a woman says it is. It contains draconian restructuring of penalties against both the accused (and not yet convicted) and guilty, but contains no "mirror" provision strengthening sanctions against those who exaggerate or flat-out lie about their "victimhood." Lobbying related to VAWA (paid for by taxpayers, due to a provision in the law) has resulted in laws which require mandatory arrest (aka if you get called to a house arrest the man regardless of what any investigation shows) and no-drop prosecution (forcing prosecutors to press cases that should be dead because the primary witness has refused to testify or recanted). Why? Why does that affect anything? The acumen of people in the criminal justice system does not depend on their superficial attributes. What's "underrepresented"? Are qualified women being denied jobs? You can't force someone into a particular career.
What a positive message for kids. So... women parade (literally) around in hooker uniforms, hoping to draw the attention of men who will attend because of the sexualized nature of the event... and believe that this display will impart the message that rape is bad. (*)(*)(*)(*)ing brilliant.
Are you aware of what type of message your pearls may be sending? Some men are pigs and can pervert anything. I've been subjected to the boys making me feel dirty for eating a freaking ice cream cone, sitting reading a book, walking down the street in a "demure" suit, anything. Your right sexy clothing in no way justifies rape and I don't think you should have to send any more of a signal than "no". I understand the anger when people try to shift the blame from the perverts, rapists, etc to the victim. For everyone bringing up date rape, don't get wasted to the point you aren't aware of whats going on, don't go home or anywhere secluded with a person you do not know/ trust. Dressing provocatively does not equate to risky behavior.
Yeah, that's the truth. Men can sexualize anything, and we try to sexualize everything. We're horny. All the time. So why tempt us? Society would benefit greatly if women would spend one month of their life with the sex drive of a man. It would clear up miscommunications and misunderstandings that have started (*)(*)(*)(*)ing wars. For real.
Well.. have you looked at the clothing lines for small girls lately? Its Brittany Spears vulgarity... Why is America dressing 8 year olds like streetwise tarts? I am getting old, but I wore sweater sets, petticoats, pleated skirts and loafers or lace up shoes. Dressing provocatively may be your choice.
wonders never cease this is something we can agree on Margot. child beauty contests are child abuse in my opinion. I wonder how many convicted and future sex offenders watch/attend those shows. My daughter was not allowed to wear makeup till she was 13 and even then it had to pass the wife's approval
I believe society would greatly benefit if men had to spend one month of their life being subjected to the skeeviness some of them project on women. I don't buy the sex drive crap I've known men who didn't have as high of a drive as mine, it varies from person to person. Now if you would like to put testosterone on the plate as a culprit for idiocy (miscommunications and misunderstandings that have started (*)(*)(*)(*)ing wars), I would agree with that.
While I agree with you that it is inappropriate and damaging for a young child to objective herself as a sexual object, it is a different issue. This is discussing grown women, not children. Some women may choose after coming out of a very conservative upbringing that she wants to dress less modestly or provocatively, that is her choice and I don't think it means she is engaging in risky behavior.
Probably. But the skeeviness is almost entirely dependent on the attractiveness of the man. Put 1000 women in a room. Have Danny Devito come through and say to each woman, "You look gorgeous, want to come back to my hotel room?" Then have George Clooney do the same thing. Men don't know what's skeevy because (1) women don't tell us and (2) women are horribly inconsistent and indecisive on such things. Winston Churchill was once (drunk) at a party. He approached a socialite and asked, "Ma'am, would you consider a night with me for 100,000 pounds?" She replied, "I'd certainly consider it." He said, "Well then, how about sleeping with me for sixpence?" She said, "Of course not, what kind of woman do you think I am?" Churchill said, "We've already determined what kind of woman you are, we're merely negotiating over the price." You are using anecdotal evidence to try to dispute a fact that applies generally, that's a logical fallacy. The fact is, on average, men have much, much, much more interest in sex than women. Umm... testosterone = male sex drive = men's urges with respect to women. That's what I was saying. By and large women do not understand and cannot sympathize with what it's like to be a man in this society. Women simply do not comprehend the power of that urge or the things they do when tempting it.
From personal experience I disagree. Creepiness does not necessarily coincide with being ugly, it is a mixture of a gut feeling, your mood at moment, and the vibes you get off the person, I have been creeped out by hot guys too. Initially a physical attractiveness is important, but since we are generalizing the sexes, it becomes far less important more quickly for the majority of women in my opinion. Perhaps that's your experience because you are creepy (just kidding). It comes down to the gal and the guy, everyone is different. Women can complain about mixed messages from men too. In general, in your opinion ...... You just refuted my first hand anecdotal evidence then continued to provide an argument using third party anecdotal evidence? Testosterone does not equal the male sex drive, though it plays a role in it for both men and women. The reverse could be said of your statement to sympathize. Do you avoid going to the beach or pool so your don't have to be tormented with your urges?
OK.. you're a guy.. at 14 I was allowed to put vaseline on my eyelashes and shave my legs. And I am another generation.. But, I still hope that girls value themselves and dont grow up too quickly.. As Bull Dan said.. boys and men are highly charged.. Thanks God for that. Girls and women can seek to be elegant and modest (and still sexy) without being overtly provocative.
Actually, this is what some men say is their excuse to hate homosexuals! These guys cry: "Its really gross when some guy puts his hand on me, or makes a rude suggestion!" Well, boys, that is exactly how women say they can feel about men doing the same unwanted behavior! How does it feel?
My point applies to overall attractiveness, I was using a simple comparison. The bottom line is, someone you find attractive can say something to you that would absolutely be considered "skeevy" if a man you didn't find attractive said it. I'm just pointing out that saying something "skeevy" is not something that can usually be blamed on men. I'll unmix them for you: Men want to (*)(*)(*)(*). Period. If you're at all desirable in any way, they want to (*)(*)(*)(*) you. If you listen to every statement a man makes with that in mind, I'm sure you'll find there's no mixed messages. The Churchill quote was just a pithy aphorism. I was thinking that the fact that men have a higher sex drive than women was so generally known it was simply an accepted fact. But, if you're asking for evidence, no problem: http://www.webmd.com/sex/features/sex-drive-how-do-men-women-compare No, because that's just it... So long as we sometimes have an outlet for our urges, they don't torment us at all. Also, bathing suits don't do much for me. I greatly prefer the sexy librarian/secretary look.
Why the hell does anyone care about what some constable from Toronto said? Also, what is dressing provocatively for the protest going accomplish; aside from attracting men in the area looking for loose women? [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8K1KHqi9bXc]Whore's Uniform[/ame]
Personally, I find it absurd and insulting to women in general to dress like a hooker, but to each her own. I agree with the proposed walk, for there should NEVER EVER be an excuse for rape . A woman dressing provocatively doesn't give any man the right to take without permission.
I understand where they're coming from, but honestly... A certain amount of modesty is a good thing -- whether you're a woman or man. Obviously, the act of wearing something never justifies being victimized, but if you dress in a way that attracts negative attention, bad things are more likely to occur. For example.... If I dressed up as a KKK member and walked through the middle of the ghetto, I'd have a much higher chance of getting beaten or killed than if I dressed normally. By the same token, if a young woman goes to a party dressed in a way that most would refer to as "slutty", then there's a higher chance an intoxicated man might treat her accordingly. Obviously, it doesn't justify abusive actions though. The cop phrased his warning very badly, but I think the reaction to his comment has been rather ridiculous as well.
Your comment made me think of something. I understand why women put on their "slut walk" in Toronto or wherever to protest what the cop said but what is the point of a "slut walk" in nowhere Pennsylvania or anywhere else? I mean, yeah there are the occasional old fogies who still have these outdated views about what is "proper" but overall, people, at least in the US, don't give a (*)(*)(*)(*) what a woman chooses to wear and most sane people reject the notion that dressing provocatively is "asking for it". This protest might have made sense in 1951 but 2011? Not so much. Seems like just an excuse for exhibitionists to...exhibit.
I agree that this Slut Walk thing is more like high school rebellion than legitimate activism meant to affect change. I'm not opposed to it, I just don't really think it's all that useful. But I think a lot of people are missing a very crucial point. Does the act of a woman dressing immodestly actually trigger some kind of "rape reflex" in the male brain that men cannot be held accountable for? No. If a man has the intent to sexuaully assault a woman, he's going to do it whether or not she's dressed like a nun or like a whore. And furthermore, how come people say women dress immodestly at a club when no one seems to have a problem with, say, bikinis at a beach, underwear models, or casual nudity around one's spouse/girl friend? I mean, hell. My girl can walk around nude and I can tell you that I feel NO desire to rape her. None at all. Modest dress is not going to discourage sexual assault. Regardless of whether or not you think it's appropriate for women to dress "slutty" is irrelevant. The issue that is at the heart of the matter is the inability of lechers to be accountable for themselves. Afraid you might be tempted by short skirts and cleavage? Don't go out the bloody clubs, then. Come on. When have you ever heard of a serial killer being let off because he claimed that all those people walking around with all their tempting skin waiting to be sewn into a parka were "totally asking for it?"
This is a strawman argument. No one is defending rapists or trying to give them a way of getting off (no pun intended). All we are saying is use common sense. If you don't want to be raped one thing you can do is to not dress provocatively. Your dress will affect the way people treat you. Dress is only one thing that contributes to the way people treat you. If you dress like a "slut" and show up at a public library or church chances are you won't get raped. You may be asked to leave but you won't get raped. If you dress like a "slut" get drunk and stumble home with a complete stranger you met at a meat market then bad things may happen to you. If I don't lock the doors of my house and my property is stolen it doesn't mean the thief was correct and should not be prosecuted. But at the same time the cops will tell me I should lock my doors. I refer you to my example about my experience in court. A woman showed up before a female judge dressed in revealing attire. The FEMALE judge sent her home without hearing her case to give her the opportunity to use some common sense and dress appropriately. Do you think the FEMALE judge had a rape reflex she was trying to suppress?
