"Slutwalks" in N. America

[Streamline]

Well said.

 

What seems to be forgotten is that women who wear sexy clothes do it because they bloody well want to. They are not ignorant of the fact that men will "have a neb", in fact some might positively welcome it.

 

 

Interesting, so you know women who delibrately dress provocatively to get a reaction in men?

 

 

The purpose of law is to protect our freedoms, not restrict them. The police officer was advocating the restriction of freedoms, with the unevidenced threat of rape, which is totally contrary to the objectives of the police ... as well as being offensive misogynistic nonsense.

 

 

The police officer was talking at a health and safety lecture at a school, he could have just as easily been talking about wearing a helmet when on a bicycle but the misandrists amongst us put it out that this is in some way a threat to a freedom. The law is a balance of freedoms against responsibilities, so if for example women do indeed dress in a particular way knowing it will cause a reaction in men then they are not being responsible in their behaviour.

 

unevidenced threat of rape

 

Odd isn't how you know it is possible to create a reaction in men and yet there is no evidence to suggest such a claim. Seems to me certain groups would go up the wall if indeed such a study concluded with your opinions.

 

It is cowardly easy for person A to excuse the idea of person B's harmless freedoms being restricted, but the same logic can always been turned against the freedoms enjoyed by person A on something else.

 

Some people, mainly feminists would do away with pornography if they could and will almost definately make the claim it causes sexual assaults to increase. What are the chances that it was these same people doing slutwalk?

 

Earlier you admitted that some women do dress provocatively, how is this harmless knowing it can affect another person's state of mind?

[danot]

Ironic and/or reclaimed.

 

Something that's been entirely ignored in this whole debate (to my knowledge - I haven't read the whole thread) is the fact that some women laugh in the face of terms like slut as they're traditionally employed - i.e. to shame women who have had more than a few sexual partners, or women who openly enjoy sex, or women who are sexually proactive and confident.

 

So much of traditional discourse around sexuality is predicated around the (damaging and false) assumption that men's sexual urges are stronger, more pressing and more aggressive than women's; that men are or should be the initiators of sexual contact; that men who have sex with multiple partners are somehow less liable to be condemned for it than women...and so on.

 

All the usual ill-thought out gender-biased nonsense, of course.

 

''Slut-shaming'' is something that goes on a lot. It's as pathetic as most of what passes for concern about women's safety on this thread.

Well said Jessica.

 

I actually share your views on this which is why I get so annoyed whenever I see or hear scantily dressed women whining when horny hot blooded fella's quite naturally leer at them or stare at their cleavage when talking to them.

 

It beggars belief that a woman who deliberately dresses in such a provocative style with the sole intention of mimicking the commercially sexualised image of women widely criticised by their female counterparts(who claim that these misogynistic, sexist practices are responsible for men viewing and treating women as sexual objects)have the audacity to complain when men treat them like sexual objects.

 

What a refreshing change it is to finally hear a woman acknowledging that women are fully aware and solely accountable for the way in which others perceive them.

[Chris_Sleeps]

Earlier you admitted that some women do dress provocatively, how is this harmless knowing it can affect another person's state of mind?

You need to see a doctor if a woman in a dress affects your ability to think. You'll spend your life dribbling and mumbling "leggies" to yourself.

[Jessica23]

Well said Jessica.

 

I actually share your views on this which is why I get so annoyed whenever I see or hear scantily dressed women whining when horny hot blooded fella's quite naturally leer at them or stare at their cleavage when talking to them.

 

It beggars belief that a woman who deliberately dresses in such a provocative style with the sole intention of mimicking the commercially sexualised image of women widely criticised by their female counterparts(who claim that these misogynistic, sexist practices are responsible for men viewing and treating women as sexual objects)have the audacity to complain when men treat them like sexual objects.

 

What a refreshing change it is to finally hear a woman acknowledging that women are fully aware and solely accountable for the way in which others perceive them.

 

*shudder*

 

Do not, for the love of god, ascribe views to me that I have not stated.

 

If you want to go back and read my post again, nowhere did I say anything about clothes. I referred to the use of the word slut in relation to sexual habits, not sartorial.

 

And I certainly don't think it's outrageous for women to complain about being treated like sex objects regardless of how they're dressed.

[danot]

*shudder*

 

Do not, for the love of god, ascribe views to me that I have not stated.

 

If you want to go back and read my post again, nowhere did I say anything about clothes. I referred to the use of the word slut in relation to sexual habits, not sartorial.

 

And I certainly don't think it's outrageous for women to complain about being treated like sex objects regardless of how they're dressed.

I do apologise Jessica. I've quite clearly made a presumption that your comments were related to and in reference to this thread topic. They obviously weren't.

 

Sorry once again Jessica. Is there anything else off topic you'd care to discuss with us? If not we'll return to the topic at hand.

[Jessica23]

I do apologise Jessica. I've quite clearly made a presumption that your comments were related to and in reference to this thread topic. They obviously weren't.

 

Sorry once again Jessica. Is there anything else off topic you'd care to discuss with us? If not we'll return to the topic at hand.

 

It's not off topic in the slightest. It was a response to a discussion earlier on in the thread about the use of the word slut as employed by organisers of the Slutwalks.

 

But, you know, you GO FOR IT with that laboriously heavy sarcasm. It's a really effective discussion tactic.

[Frank Sidney]

Ironic and/or reclaimed.

 

Something that's been entirely ignored in this whole debate (to my knowledge - I haven't read the whole thread) is the fact that some women laugh in the face of terms like slut as they're traditionally employed - i.e. to shame women who have had more than a few sexual partners, or women who openly enjoy sex, or women who are sexually proactive and confident.

 

So much of traditional discourse around sexuality is predicated around the (damaging and false) assumption that men's sexual urges are stronger, more pressing and more aggressive than women's; that men are or should be the initiators of sexual contact; that men who have sex with multiple partners are somehow less liable to be condemned for it than women...and so on.

 

All the usual ill-thought out gender-biased nonsense, of course.

 

''Slut-shaming'' is something that goes on a lot. It's as pathetic as most of what passes for concern about women's safety on this thread.

 

That's a great post. I'd have to agree with the fact that some women are as, if not more so, responsible, for all this sexism that's claimed to be about.

[Jessica23]

That's a great post. I'd have to agree with the fact that some women are as, if not more so, responsible, for all this sexism that's claimed to be about.

 

I'm starting to wonder if everyone else is reading DIFFERENT WORDS to the ones I wrote.

 

How, please, did you get the idea from my post that I'd said 'women are as, if not more so, responsible, for all this sexism?'

[danot]

I'm starting to wonder if everyone else is reading DIFFERENT WORDS to the ones I wrote.

 

How, please, did you get the idea from my post that I'd said 'women are as, if not more so, responsible, for all this sexism?'

So what did you mean Jessica?

 

Are you suggesting that you find it acceptable if a woman sexualises herself but unacceptable for women to be commercially sexualised?

 

If so, would you care to explain why this is please.

[Jessica23]

So what did you mean Jessica?

 

Are you suggesting that you find it acceptable if a woman sexualises herself but unacceptable for women to be commercially sexualised?

 

If so, would you care to explain why this is please.

 

I meant exactly what I wrote. There's nothing complicated about it.

 

What I wrote is also in no way incompatible with finding sexual harassment and assault, sexism, the misogynistic double-standard around sex and/or certain aspects of commercial sex problematic.

 

Your implication that it must be, and that I've somehow tripped up by stating - OH THE TEMERITY - that women who own their sexuality are allowed to do that, is laughable.