16 May, 2011

Slut Walks?

We all have things we wish we could take back saying. For Constable Michael Sanguinetti of the Toronto police department, I bet it's the comment that, "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised."

Constable Sanguinetti is voicing an opinion that is (unfortunately) often held. He is not the first to say it. But it has now sparked dozens of protests around the world of women walking around in bras and jeans (like "sluts") to fight the idea that how a woman dresses is justification for her getting assaulted.

Good point.

Unfortunately, it misses thea mark.

Jenny McCartney (not McCarthy) of The Telegraph, wrote a very interesting piece asking if these "Slut Walks" aren't a step backwards.
This is the point, surely: that "slut" – or its global equivalents – is not a category that conforms to clothing choice: it is an insult that can be flung at any woman the moment she triggers desire, anger or disapproval. ...  A "slut" looks like whatever a misogynist wants her to look like. I am familiar with arguments about "reclaiming the word", but why reclaim something you don't want? (emphasis added)
She goes on to point out that, the walks, "do not engage with the wider way in which a hyper-sexualised society is sending out dangerously mixed signals, to young men and women alike."

We tell girls to look like tramps. And while I am all for women being able to dress how they want, and I don't give a poo about what she was wearing or doing - it is never justification for rape or assault, I have to question if there isn't a double standard in these walks. So women want the right to dress like sluts, which is very often done to gain male attention, but then want to get upset when a guy does what she is dressing for him to do? Sluts dress to become an object, and these women are fighting for the right to do that. Or maybe I've missed something.

I am one of the biggest advocates for women's safety and the right not to be raped. Having worked with, and on behalf of, sexual assault victims for years - I can tell you there is no justification for what is done to them. Yet, there has to be accountability on both sides. We are all ultimately responsible for our actions. But you cannot use your sexuality to gain control and then get upset when that toying leads to consequences. How can these feminists (of which I am not one) march for equality saying they don't want their form to be an issue, and yet demand the right to flaunt it and have it celebrated?

I don't want the term "slut" applied to women. Like McCartney pointed out, it is linked to negative ideas and images and does not bring about the equality I think these women are striving for. Women should not be sluts, and that is exactly what society is telling them to be. It's like people who use the term pimp as if it's a good thing - someone who protects you - um, yeah -- no. Pimp = control, abuse, exploitation, enslavement, etc. And slut has the same connotations. It is used by men to justify abuse. Why are women trying to reclaim this word?


"I have a feeling that clumsy Constable Sanguinetti – if one overlooks his stupid use of words – might have been trying to hint at precisely this. Girls shouldn't be cheered on to be "sluts", but encouraged just to be themselves. The trouble is that, as the pressure on them increases, it gets harder to know what that looks like. (link)"