The world has always been

The world has always been ruled by violence, double standards, prejudice, invented by ruling sectors, using religions and ideologies to enslave and extort benefits from others, especially women, with the misuse of the words of long dead prophets, who claimed that God whispered orders for exploitation into their ears.

Known in our society as the "economy" and "wealth creation". In reality the legalization of theft, which includes the subjugation of women, who have always been and still are important victims of "wealth creation" in our "conservative" society.

Big deal was made of the fact that Kate requested the word "obey" to be removed from her wedding ceremony with William.

I requested the same thing 60 years ago, as I couldn't see either of us obeying the other for any reason.

Of course, when we had our 50th anniversary, somebody asked me how we did it, with half the marriages breaking up?

My answer was : "After I've learned to say "Yes dear!" with the necessary degree of humility, we never had any problems".

But if the Muslim Brotherhood have their dreams of world dictatorship come true, all women will be covered under the tents of burquas and won't have to worry about being accused of dressing like sluts, while fulfilling their divinely ordained roles as baby factories to spread the faith.

Because it is written!!!!!!!

Ed Deak.

Bullshit Gods and Control...

"The world has always been ruled by violence, double standards, prejudice, invented by ruling sectors, using religions and ideologies to enslave and extort benefits from others, especially women, with the misuse of the words of long dead prophets, who claimed that God whispered orders for exploitation into their ears." Fait Lux

And we're having one hell of a time getting society and its human relationships out of this deep, dark hole. This issue of sexual and class "control" of human beings by other human beings is the primary measure, in my view, that tells us we are still rather primitive as a species, with some evolutionary distance to go yet... assuming we make it of course. And I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that we will indeed make it.

Though let it be said, as these women are helping to demonstrate, "Resistance Is Not Futile". Indeed, it is the only hope that we will all win out... in the end.

Slut

The cop put it in a very undiplomatic way. If a woman dresses in very revealing cloths and walks down a dark alley in the "bad" side of town she is putting herself at risk.

There are men you have been brought up to believe that woman who dress like that are evil and inferior. It is often their "mommy" who put that idea in their heads.

Do not walk down a streambank during a salmon spawning run in grizzly bear country wearing a very brief bikini (or hiking clothes that you rubbed fish on.

GROW UP AND USE YOUR BRAIN!

Manipulation, Bullying; Greed

Both genders capable of all three; and politicians too!

What would our society really be like if we had no manipulators, bullies and insatiable greed?

a real civil society?

But what about the REAL issues with Canada's police forces?

So one woman is told not to dress like a slut and it provokes a nationwide reaction. Wonderful. Women are now fighting, not for their rights as people, but for their right to dress in skimpy clothing and NOT get a reaction from men.

I want to point out (actually, I want to scream it from the rooftops) that there are far more serious issues with Canada's policing and more particularly with Vancvouver's RCMP.

1. Robert Dzeizanski was [ALLEGATION NOT PROVEN IN COURT REMOVED HERE...] on video three yearsd ago. The four officers involved are still on the force and have only now been charged with perjury. I guess the FBI nailed Al Capone for tax evasion, but this is ridiculous. [...HERE...] All four cops stood over Mr. Dzeikanski as if he were a trophy kill and not one of them checked his pulse, airway or breathing. [...HERE...]

2. [...HERE...] a drink to hide his blood alocohol level under the "last drink" clause, and has only now been charged with obstruction of justice. What a joke!

3. Two Vancouver cops attacked and beat a newspaper delivery man because they were drunk and he was East Indian. They are still on duty.

3. A Kelowna RCMP kicked a man in the face when he was down on the ground. He is still on duty.

4. There are half a dozen RCMP on drunk driving charges in the Greater Vancouver area as we speak.

5. RCMP Nick Sharma has been charged with the theft of a $400.00 casino ticket.

The list grows longer every week. People have been dumped in cold, wet alleys to die in Vancouver, a young man died in police custody in Vanderhoof, and a 68 year-old man was Tasered for giving lip to a cop. An 11 year-old boy in Prince George was too.

We have some very serious problems with our cops in BC and across Canada. They strike at the heart of our democracy. The only person who has commented on this publicly was Ken Finkleman on the CBC a couple of months ago. He was concerned about police conduct during the G8 summit.

All the above is true, and it is the tip of a very large iceberg. Yet the Tyee carefully avoids reporting on it. What rankles with me is that Gerry Rundle, one of the RCMP present when Dzeizanski [...AND HERE...] is in Nanaimo, my home town. I only hope I never meet him in person, because I would most assuredly NOT cooperate with him, knowing that he watched a man die and is now charged with perjury. His presence in my home town casts a shadow over all the other RCMP in Nanaimo and I want the commissioner to know that.

[POTENTIALLY LIBELOUS COMMENT REMOVED HERE. -MODERATOR.]

burkas...

An important point you made about the burka there, Ed, for in essence the Toronto police officer is endorsing the western version of the burka. As is anyone else who says that to dress in a particular manner is 'slutty', while to dress in another particular manner is not. The point of the burka is to say: "keep your distance, these females belong to me". The point of defining a woman as 'slut' is to say she belongs to nobody, has no power, and therefore is an easy target for violence. (In comparison with women who may be defined as 'not slut', say, for they are obviously more well-off and statistically therefore, likely to belong to someone.) Yes, 'slut' partakes of class divisions as well as gender.

I have to laugh at the idea of fishnet stockings and high heels and miniskirts being considered 'slutty' - real estate agents, bank executives and lawyers have been known to dress thusly, and one must take into account the thousands of female servers who are required to dress a certain way by neanderthal employers...all of whom presumably walk about on the streets. Of course,badly-paid servers are more likely to walking the streets late at night due to their hours and lousy pay, but it does not follow that they should be more subject to violence as a consequence of this.

I could care less what you call me - here I am referring to the TO police officer and any others stuck in a time warp, and frankly, I am unlikely to follow your fashion advice. When you say that makes me more at risk for violence, I say we need more intelligent police officers committed to upholding the law, and of course, a little less moralizing from the female chattels of well-off men who can afford to shop, as well as devote hours to their image."Slut" is an approbation only in your mind...I prefer it to "chattel".

But whether we are 'slut' or 'chattel', all of us deserve to be free of the fear of violence, and to know that if we are a victim of it, that the law will work equally on our behalf. I am with slutwalk as a call to action.

SlutWalk fashion statement

The "walker" is going SlutWalking this Sunday. Fuchsia bra and black stockings will be part of the oh so lovely slut fashions.

Iwonder said:

This is a common fallacy. There is absolutely no evidence that women who dress provocatiovely, so-called, are raped with any more frequency than those who dress plain.

In fact, there is some evidence that the opposite is true. Probably because rape is not about sex; rape is about violence and control. And who looks easier to control? Someone in self-empowering provocative clothes, or someone in mousy brown dress-downs?

southdeltawalker...

Black stockings before 5 p.m. are really a fashion faux pas.

what happened to common sense?

If the police warns you that leaving packages on display in your car, may cause a criminal to break in and steal it, would you get offended?

Do not blame the messenger!

Realize that this world is full of people who have no morals and who would rob you blind or molest you, if they could get away with it!

If this was a perfect world, then this site would not exist!

Let's be fair

I support the overall message of these women, about victim-shaming and a culture of violence. But I don't see the need to chastise the Saanich police force for issuing public safety warnings. Let's think about what the main roles of that institution are.. They cannot change global gender politics, but when there are criminals loose in a known area, it is their job to pursue them, and warn other local residents of the presence of danger. That is what they have done here. I'm sure that after that incident, worried local mothers probably warned their daughters not to walk alone at night, just as they teach their kids to wear helmets when skateboarding. The police perform the same task publicly. I know my mom never let my sister wander alone at night, and it wasn't because she thought she would be DESERVING of rape.

Surely we can promote women's right to safety without these manufactured controversies?

Any male that has to touch,

Any male that has to touch, or attack women is stupid to figure it's OK. Anyone who suggests it's her fault is wrong. Drinking is no excuse either.

Women hold up half the sky is a fairly old expression and until the males figure that out, I guess women calling themselves sluts to get their side of the story out is OK with me.

A very qualified environmentalist with a PHD rode a horse down the street in Vancouver years ago, dressed as Lady Godiva,pink wig and body stocking said( If that's what it takes to get attention to an issue that's what she would do.Brioney knew her audience.

don't confuse the issues

I agree with the other posters here that throwing what TO police said into the same bucket as with Saanich police said is just wrong. I read the CBC report where the Saanich police statements came from, and all they are saying is to be cognizant of their environment. And to characterize them saying "women are more at risk of sexual assault when walking alone at night" as victim blaming is just stupid. I can't understand how being aware somehow is wrong. Everyone would rather it were different, but just that doesn't make it different.
I'd be much happier if I could go anywhere anytime without any regard for my safety. But that's not the world we live in.

Issues of male power and control

Thank you, John Greg, for pointing out that "rape is not about sex; rape is about violence and control."

Power and control over women is the crux of what constitutes rape (not sexuality) which is why the argument and blameshifting of the rapists actions onto the woman depending on what she's wearing, where she's walking, if she's alone, yada yada yada (insert a million other lame excuses) is absurd.

Only when non-abusing men (including police officers) openly and publicly voice their disgust and rejection of violence towards women in it's myriad of forms, then those inclined to abuse will have less support to do so. Blaming women for abusers behaviours only serves to perpetuate the culture of belief that women are either "sluts" or "chattal."

When the majority of men choose to stand up and make a fuss like these women are doing with Slutwalk, then there will be no place for abusers in our society.

As it is now, abusers are quietly supported and condoned in society if the crime is against a woman because she most always "had it coming."

Excuse me, but rape IS about sex.

If a man beats on a woman and punches her black and blue, that is using violence to control and create fear. If he rapes her, THAT is about forcing her to have sex against her will. Trying to extricate the sex out of rape is like saying that guns don't kill people; it is stupid hair-splitting claptrap. EDITED FOR PERSONAL INSULTS -- MODERATOR

This sudden wave of "I'm-a-slut-and-proud-of-it" nonsense is just the latest salvo in the Sex War. some women are now saying that they should be free to dress any way they like without getting a reaction from men. I think not. They are just pushing buttons and they know it.

There are norms and accepted practices with regards to how men and women dress in public, and we all send a message with our dress code, whether we like it or not.

The basic problem I have with the "Its-OK-to-be-a-slut" slut movement is that it trivialises the more serious inter-gender issues.

It is NOT OK for young men to show their backsides by letting their pants ride down around their knees and if women want to dress slutty, they are going to have to live the consequences, whatever that means.

Some women ARE sluts. If you have had more pricks than a second-hand dartboard, and charge money for sex, then yes, you are a slut.

Getting the Excitement Right...

Hmmm. Too bad that fishcounter doesn't know just how sick he comes across.

I like women in slutty clothes. They turn me on. That said, IF I am going to be a man in full control of myself and my faculties, who understands the dynamic of the sexual interaction between men and women, and its consequences, and the "life dynamic", I also need to understand the need to control myself, and not abuse my relationship with women. Jerk off if you have to. There is more going on here than the simple excitement of your loins: attraction, at the very starting foundation of the male and female relationship, reproduction, fulfilment, and the raising of the fruit, or not, if you are unworthy, ill-equipped or incapable... or unwanted. And many, more than we might realize, especially who delay overlong, wind up "unwanted". (It's a boat that actually sails away quite quickly, for both men and women.)

I like a slutty woman. Always have. But there's more to it than that too, of course. For like a lot of things, there's a lot more to it than appears on the surface of a thing. Which fishcounter doesn't seem to get... though he's got the excitement right. :-) And he is clearly excited.

Seriously. Jerk off, fishcounter. Then move on. :-)

Such a fragile thing it is. This relationship between men and women... resilient, always being negotiated and renegotiated, but very tenuous and fragile too. :-)

The Final Cut I...

In much of the animal kingdom, and certainly that of birds, it is the male that displays, either strength, courage, or bright, colourful plumage… in an effort to attract the female… She typically sits back and controls the sexual selection process in that way.

In the sexual behaviours of humans however, despite the insistence of women of a shared “sisterhood”, which a sense of oppression can certainly foster, the “display indications” are that it is women, the female in fact that works more mightily to attract “desirable/suitable” males. In short, it is the female that is in fact locked in a “competition” with other females, for the attention of desirable males. A reversal of the order in other species.. Which is NOT to say that women are powerless in the equation, but that males have much more “selection power” than they themselves generally seem to realize.

And the most striking and concrete indicator of this reversal of sexual facts in the human “display order” is, the typical “relative” plainness of males, mirroring females in other species, and the “slutty” or, more accurately, relatively “more colourful” displays of the female… clearly working harder than the male to attract a suitable mate.

The tendency is, of course, for the male to not see or understand it in quite this way. When all he has to do really is… indicate his choice, in a way not entirely different to the female in nearly all other species… again, especially birds. (Assuming he fulfills essential “mating” criteria.)

The reality is, we human males have it “relatively” easy in the human sexual order of things. It is clearly the female who has to do the bulk of the “attraction” work… and deal with the most dangerous/ risk aspects of her efforts. Which is, in part, again in my view, what women are attempting to deal with here.

continued next "kick ass" post... :-) (Am I ever in shit.)

The Final Cut II...

From previous post...

And of course, everything is more complex than the mere stating of it, as I have attempted here… and women certainly are not as powerless as may seem to be implied here. But still, it is odd that it is males who “feel” the most beset upon , when really, all they have to do is show up reasonably presentable, treat women with respect, and treat sympathetically and with understanding the effort women are putting into initiating and sustaining the human male-female relationship… as distinct from most other species.

And there are other complex issues, of course; the tendency of the more attractive females to be attracted to males of greater wealth and power standing, which needs to be understood better too, and of course, “smart males” do make some effort to make themselves physically and otherwise attractive to the female. Still, the overarching reality is, first, women are locked in a competition for “desirable males”, more than even they may understand themselves, and males have more power in the selection process than they MAY understand.

In the final shakeout, there are no small numbers of unwanted males, who failed the cut, and there are no small numbers of unwanted females similarly.

It is nice to know you like sluts, Jerry Munro

Perhaps you are one of the 20% of BC adults who have herpes - and maybe not yet.

The slut movement has to be tongue-in-cheek. It should be the best place for pickups, either way.

Ask Kenneth Brown, the Kamloops RCMP officer who is being charged by his own police force, after watching a lesbian, who was known to have AIDS, have sex with a drunken woman in a Kamloops jail cell. The other woman was too drunk to know what was happening but Kenneth and his buddies watched to get their jollies. The facts of this case are not in question. The whole thing was videotaped. The only question is the culpability of the officers. They are sluts too.

If the women at these slut marches are for real, let them prove it. Otherwise, get real.

What a FAKE "ISSUE"

An over the top, out of proportion, PURPOSEFUL, misquote, misinterpretation of what ONE cop in Toronto said. He did NOT "blame victims", what he DID, was TRY and illustrate the REAL WORLD on the street. NOT "How it's SUPPOSED to be", but how it really is.
Now, read this slowly, so you "get it":
Women CAN REDUCE THE CHANCES OF ATTACKS by not dressing like a slut. The KEY WORD is REDUCE, not "sluts".
And yes, I expect the politically correct extremists to twist and manipulate this post for their own purposes.

A vision for healthy sexuality

I think it’s true that we are in a gender war. Personally, I’m ready to move past it, but that means we need to find common ground and a vision for the future. Feminism was necessary to emancipate women, and rape is a relic of the power relations of the past. It’s got to stop. How about this vision of sexuality:

A woman walks down the street dressed ‘slutty’. Not everyone will approve of her aggressive flaunting of her body. That’s fine. They don’t have to approve of her style. But everyone will recognize her basic moral value, and her fundamental right, equal to everyone else, to control her own body and sex life. Now, many guys will find her hot. She can expect their eyes to spring out of her head, and their jaws to drop, cartoon-style. In fact, that’s probably her goal: understanding that fashion is a language, when you send a sexy message, you can expect sexy responses. Now, a guy who feels lust for her, should be proud of that feeling. That rush he feels proves that he is virile and alive! Male sexuality is a wonderful thing, to be celebrated. If he is interested in sharing an experience with this hottie, it would be wise for him to be bold - not timid. He should approach her and try to flirt with her. He should be respectful to her, and refuse to accept any disrespect from her – walking away if necessary. If she’s interested, that’s great. If not, he congratulates himself for being so bold, and moves on to the next thing. He recognizes that, however she is dressed, the girl is not his property. Sexuality is put in its proper place.

gender war?

And I thought this was about violence?

In certain Islamic countries, it makes a great deal of sense to comply with the burka regime, for women risk stoning and other atrocities if they do not. However, the one virtue of the burka is it is defined and delimited very precisely: a burka is thus. There is no such refined definition of 'slutty', and anyone who doubts that ought to read the OED definition of the word. Yes, 'slutty' is in the eye - or the mind - of the beholder. At one time it was considered very risque to wear black stockings; as I mentioned above, never before 5 p.m. and only with evening dress would they have been considered acceptable. Aren't we fortunate to have become so enlightened as to find that fashion dictum quaint? I dare say though, there are a few oldsters around who find black stockings distinctly 'slutty'. Now, most female lawyers and judges I know wear black stockings during the day, and I do believe they would be horified to be viewed as 'slutty'.

"Slut" is more of a class definition than one of taste. The fact of the matter is that women who are single,and single with children, and divorced, and widowed seniors make up the majority of the poverty-stricken in this country. The fact is that women earn less than men. The fact is that women attached to men are much better off - statistically if not in actuality - income wise. Dressing 'well', then, is more a matter of income than anything else...of course, we would never think to call the man mowing our lawn a 'slut' in spite of his working class garb: dammit, he's a worker! I would also direct your attention to what the Toronto police officer said was about how women dressed, not about how they acted. Quite a big distinction there, I would think.

I can think of a number of prominent women in the news these last few years (I will be kind to the Tyee and not name them) whose fortunes reside with the man they married: and they are able to dress delightfully. It's great work if you can get it,I suppose. But neither the poor woman nor the rich woman ought to be derided/complimented for things out of their own control. And neither should be subject to violence, nor condemmed for inviting that violence if such a thing happens.

Jerry, I laughed out loud at your posts and thoroughly enjoyed them. We part company here: there are those of us women who are proud of our intellect, and our contribution to society, and who aren't looking to marry for a meal ticket. As I reiterated above, if the choice is slut or chattel I will take slut.

But make no mistake, neither you, not anyone else here has the right to make that judgement. I invite you to check out the EARN website of the BC Federation of Labour, and read some of the complaints of female servers who feel that their employers are requiring them to dress in ways they don't feel comfortable - or lose their jobs. Maybe the woman you think is 'slutty' is really just trying to feed her kids.

Sheesh

Fish-counter, I (we) am not trying to "extricate" sex out of rape. Rather, I am trying to put it in its place, which is either secondary, even tertiary to the issues of violence and control. Yes of course sex is involved in rape; don't be daft, no one said otherwise. But the sex is not the prime motive for the rape -- it is, as I've said, secondary or even tertiary to the prime motives of violence and control.

And it is not at all "stupid hair-splitting claptrap." It is being specific in an issue that demands specificity, accuracy, and so forth (as your deeply ignorant comment so clearly shows) so as to ensure that the right action is taken and the right education is provided.

Your black and white simplified outlook is very dangerous and inevitabley leads to confusion of issues, motives, etc. I suspect from your comment that you are one of those people who can only see the black and white of an issue and is constitutionally incapable of seeing and comprehending the importance of nuance, accuracy, and specificity.

The rest of your comments are deeply offensive and indicative of rape culture and the tendency for insecure and angry mysogynistic people to blame the victim. Very ugly indeed.

cboo44 said:

"Women CAN REDUCE THE CHANCES OF ATTACKS by not dressing like a slut."

Balls. I repeat: There is absolutely no evidence that women who dress provocatiovely, so-called, are raped with any more frequency than those who dress plain. If you have evidence to the contrary, provide it please.

Instead of "not" doing something....

We need cops who will say "Women can reduce the chance of attacks by carrying a short blunt object at all times to smash over the head of a potential attacker, or hit the gym and start building some muscle tone so you scare off most guys who aren't sure you won't put up a damn good fight."

But then, I'm all for empowerment through good, old fashioned physical strength. One of the best books I ever read was 'The Frailty Myth' by Colette Dowling:

http://www.colettedowling.com/work1.htm

Women need to start tapping into their inherent physical power as much as their emotional and sexual power. Imagine!!

Fashion

Hi VivianLea. Yes, 'Gender War' may be a strong term. People can take it or leave it. But there's definitely a struggle going on to re-negotiate gender relations for those of us growing up in a post-feminist world. We are all contributing to it here. Some people have a more war-like mentality than others. I'm hoping that many in my generation will switch from strife to collaboration.

I can appreciate your point about the class component of the idea of 'dressing like a slut'. I think the loaded term "slut" does have a class connotation. But there's also an axis of dressing sexy that is independent of class. Working class people I know tend to wear track suit style clothes, which is not slutty at all. But, they can choose to dress more scantily to be sexy. Rich people have the same choices, though the styles may differ.

Fashion is a language. So, sluttyness is in the eye of the beholder, AND the wearer. If they speak the same language, they will understand each other. Thank goodness we judge each other based on how we dress, because this allows us to speak this rich and nuanced language to each other, to allow us to communicate so many different things before we even speak - our personal values, our mood, our sub-culture, our marital status, and the nature of our sexuality. The ability to speak to each other through clothing is a gift.

This is off-topic, but of course, a person will never communicate "rape me" with their clothes, because a person never invites a rape.

wow!

"frankly, I am unlikely to follow your fashion advice. When you say that makes me more at risk for violence, I say we need more intelligent police officers committed to upholding the law, and of course, a little less moralizing from the female chattels of well-off men who can afford to shop, as well as devote hours to their image"

Gawd, this is good. Bang on, VivianLeaDoubt!

fashion a language?

Really? Of which country?

I am astounded, Plicata, that you live in a 'post-feminist world' - do you also vote Liberal? That might explain it. Because, you see, in the event I didn't make it clear - I don't believe there is such a thing as 'dressing like a slut'. Although your description of the genteel track suit of the working class leaves me gasping at the complete and utter patronizing tone...

I have no doubt that you have a version of 'sexy' or 'slutty' that does not fit mine, and as zalm has ably pointed out - no doubt I would find your version repulsive. No offense here...I mean, the fact that you clearly have no clue should not be taken as a metaphorical 'fuck you', no not at all.

I would wager - based on prose alone - that I don't want to dress like you. You are free to make of that what you will, because I just don't give a shit.'Fashion' is perhaps a language for the wealthy; as for myself, I speak three actual languages, thank you. In the event that you missed the point: we are not our clothes.
I am tempted to repeat that, but I will forego. Just let me say this: if "The ability to speak to each other through clothing is a gift" - why, imagine what conversation and genuine communication might accomplish.

Carrying power

The Slutwalk marches would be more effective, I think, if women came dressed as teachers, nurses, mothers, scientists, gardeners, waitresses, doctors, truck drivers, mechanics, clowns, astronauts, musicians, fisherwomen, symphony conductors, yoga instructors, bus drivers, ballet dancers etc. etc. etc.

And they all carried signs saying: "So what, I'm a slut".

It's not the dress code that's the problem, it's that the word 'slut' intentionally denigrates any woman who has an open/public association with sex....

And sex is made into a dirty thing, and so is the woman.

It's puritanical at heart.

It's also complicated.

We have to ask ourselves why openly sexual behavior when it comes to women is often described in pejorative terms, and often called 'slutty', when quite the opposite is true for men?

It's also complicated because a lot of women who end up on the streets are there because of abuse when young - they have often been emotionally, physically and sexually abused. Many of them continuing to act out the same sad power/victim scenario that life sadly presented to them when young....less about choice, and more about chains that need to be broken.

Women may be physically smaller than men but our power, I think at least, comes from how we feel inside...and how we carry that power in our bodies.

Come to think of it, that is probably true for men as well.

It is easy to see how distorted some people's perceptions

have become by living in large cities. Just because Vancouver folks dress like tramps, sluts and pimps, that does not mean everyone does.

Zalm needs to look at crime stats, not Cosmo magazine. To try to separate slutty dress from slutty behaviour and miscommunication is like trying to separate the proliferation of casinos from problem gambling. Neither works.

Here is one example, related to me by a Montreal woman, an Italian lady who knew the people involved. Four of her male friends entered into an agreement with one woman that they would all have sex. After "doing" three guys, the woman had had enough. The fourth guy didn't want to hear her say "No" so he did her anyway. She charged him with rape and he got two years. The woman who told me this story was in sympathy with the guy, not the woman. Her attitude was, What did she expect?"

I was horrified at her indifference and sickened by the tale, but she took it in as part of life. This is a horrific little yarn by my standards, but Zalm and Jeff Munro will probably just shrug their shoulders and accuse me of living in a small town - a crime in their minds.

If women want to march for the right to dress like sluts, all I can say is that we really do live in a democracy and if that is their biggest complaint, we are all very lucky.

On balance, I would rather have women showing a bit too much navel and loving it, than have them forced to wear burkas and hide their ankles. A true slut would have her phone number on her sign, with a dollar figure.

As for the cops; there were no fewer than three back-to-back headline stories on tonight's 11 o'clock CTV news about cops who were being charged with crimes, or failure to do their duty. It is no longer the exception to the rule to hear about bad cops, and that is worse than having them call someone slutty.

Wrong again, fish-counter

There was contract law involved in the judgment you quote, and sex can't be used to justify upholding or breaching a contract because it's a trade in flesh, which the law does not allow. It had nothing to do with sluts or antyhing else.

Like I said, that's why judges decide these things, not you or I.

Fashion a language, yes indeed

"Really? Of which country?"

In every country where people wear clothes. Actually, it's several languages. It's a set of symbols that people use to communicate with one another. That's why choosing a wardrobe is so fun, because it's a form of self-expression that we hope other people will understand. I hope that you enjoy it as much as I do, when you're not spazzing out on strangers on the internet.

Zalm : I am not quoting anything

And judges do not decide morality or ethics. If you believe they do, or should, you have a greater faith in them than I. Look at Justice Gustafson's decision on Malik et al on Air India Flight 182. "These men are probably guilty, but..." Sir, you are a fool.

This slut movement is a hysterical over-reaction to a comment made by a cop to a neurotic woman. Neurotic women across Canada are still over-reacting. That should come as no surprise because that is what women do. It reminds me of the hysteria surrounding the "Paul is dead" thing in ther 1970's.

There are far more serious issues in play today and I just wish that this cop's off-the-cuff comment was the worst thing a cop has done in the past five years. Sadly, men are dead because cops have made very bad decisions, for which they still have to be brought to account.

zalm

Thanks for the kind remarks.

Plicata, apparently 'spazzing' is a word in your post-feminist world, but it is not in my lexicon ( nor my dictionary), so I am unclear what you mean. I stand behind my ideas and remarks with my name, unlike you. The only strangers here are those that like to hide behind anonymous user names.

The Fishy Taliban...

"It's puritanical at heart." Lynn

Which cuts to it, what is really at work here in the heart of the Canadian Rightist Taliban, as is exemplified by such as Fishcounter and his "Burka Buddies" here. For make no mistake, like the Taliban they themselves profess so much to despise, they are trying to control the dress code and behaviours of women, to clean them up and dress them in ways "non-threatening" to themselves and their weaknesses... the Taliban-minded Male minority of this country.

Indeed, if they thought they could get women to stand still for it, make no mistake, women would all be dressed in their sack-cloth equivalent of the burka, with nothing enticing showing. This Canadian Taliban are sexual illiterates as well as distorted moral purists, and the only gender war coming is being brought on by them and the likes of this Taliban Cop in question.

The reality is what Lynn describes... women in our modern world are many things, from doctors to bus-drivers to mechanics.That they still have to fight for the right to wear whatever the Hell they want, and males just enjoy it without acting as if it gave them some special license, is really quite shocking. All the arguments being advanced here by the Taliban Mentality males of the likes of Fishcounter and company are echoes of the same ones being used by the True Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan... to keep women covered in burkas and bound by Sharia Law.

Women have "the right" in this part of the world, as long a way as we still have to go to a better society ourselves, to wear and be whatever the hell they want. Ditto males... though you might catch a disgusted eye or two from ladies if males started appearing on the streets in make-up and heels... at least amused. (Many women too, we should make no mistake, have their issues and "purist" misconceptions about males too, and how they should dress and behave... though it is not near as much a problem, it seems, as with men.)

In any case, males will benefit from, as most do now actually, some modicum of tolerance, discipline and greater degree of control of themselves and their own behaviours... in order to live and let live. Instead of fostering their Taliban right=wing, Christian moral purist "gender war".

Yes, as we have seen here from Fishcounter et al, we have our own Taliban Mentality loose in the land... including not only men, but also "some" women no less, I am sure. Just like "over there."

ReallY?

How many rapes are happening at Wreck Beach?

How many erections do you see there, where females let it all hang out?

The differende is perhaps that people who have a more natural attitude towards their bodies, have no desire to flaunt it?

The old adage goes, "be carefull what you ask for, you may get it"!

There is no such thing as innocent flirting or a right to behave outrageously!

VivianLea

By "spazzing", I mean "flipping out". Expressing extraordinary anger. Would you say you were angry when you wrote that long message?

VivianLea, I've learned a lot about myself from you. I've learned that I vote Liberal and have poor taste in clothes. But, I don't want it to be all about me, maybe you can share a little bit more about you? How did you come to speak three languages?

There's the way it ought to be, trhen there's the way it is....

My ex-wife thought she could travel across Italy alone, without being assaulted, beaten and robbed. In a perfect world, she could have. In this one, we all need to watch our backs.

Women who crave attention should not be surprised if they get it. In Elizabethan England, men wore codpieces and cravates. Alas no more. In a world with seven billion people, what are the odds that one of them is nasty?

Romance

"There is no such thing as innocent flirting"

Alive, I disagree. Innocent flirting is how healthy romantic relationships start! Or, do you prefer a more formal approach, with two copies of a contract and a lawyer present? :)

I don't know how many rapes occur in the forested edges of Wreck Beach, but I doubt that many occur on the main beach in daylight. Wreck Beach is not a very sexual place, because people there are choosing not to be sexual. One can be totally nude in a completely un-sexual way, or be much more sexual with a bit of clothing on.

Who are the real majority rape victims.

And we should acknowledge, it is less often women dressed as "sluts" who are raped, than young girls dressed as young girls, 11 or 12 or less, snatched off streets, raped and murdured, even young boys by priests, women in the privacy of their bedrooms at home by deviant intruders. There is no dress code for rape. Some males are simply out of control, sick in their ideas and notions, with an abusive and assumptions right and control about women.

Though the reality is, and we need to recall it, the per 1000 women rape figures for this country are amongst the lowest in the world... recently released. So, in fact, we have few Fishcounters and ilk, who assume that the way women dress is the problem. Rape of burka clad women in Afghanistan is still a problem.

Get over yourselves, guys.

Frightening Stuff From the Burka Buddies

Fascinating.

What reality_check, Fish-counter, et al, are actually saying is, as Jerry Munro has accurately pointed out, exactly like the Taliban, to wit, it is not the responsibility of men to control their darker urges. No, no, not at all. It is the responsibility of women to not dress in some way that may provoke or incite those darker urges. Women must dress in a style that follows the dictates of reality_check's, Fich-counter's, et al, sense of fashion ... which is what exactly? Is it uniform across all cultures, countries, provinces, cities, towns, neighbourhoods?

Frightening stuff. Regardless of the time of day, I wouldn't want to walk in their neighbourhood.

With respect

John Greg, I don't want to speak for Fish-counter et al, but consider this:

If I tell my children to wear a helmet when they ride their bicycles, I'm not saying that drivers aren't responsible for driving responsibility. But I still want my kids to wear a helmet, because I know that not all drivers will drive responsibly.

So

When I do have kids, I will want them to be safe. If that makes me the taliban, then I guess this atheist became a religious zealot overnight.

Plicata

I understand your sentiment, but it fails because it tries to make rape concommitent with accidents. Rape is not an unavoidable, unanticipatable accidental occurrence.

Secondarily, it fails because, as I have stated a couple of times, and as Jerry Munro expanded upon, there is no evidence showing any kind of causal relationship between so-called provocative clothing and rape; the opposite is the norm. Rapists generally go after non-sexy children, women asleep in bed, women in isolated locations (utterly regardless of clothing type) and on occasion, non-sexy and utterly defenceless older women.

Plicata 2

Obviously there is nothing wrong with wanting your kids, if you ever have them, to be safe. But are you going to lock them away in the closet until they're 18 years old to ensure such safety? Of course not.

On the other hand, forcing them to dress down in the false hope that that will have any effect at all on potential for rape is naive at best.

If we want to decrease occurrences of rape, education and vigiliance are the better way to go.

yes, that is what they are saying, John Greg...

As I posted earlier, the actual 'burka' is more straightforward than what these folks are advocating, because of course we have no way of ascertaining precisely what is meant by 'slutty'. It is certainly different for everybody...much like spoken or written language, the signals that clothing sends may be misinterpreted. But the signals that clothing sends are also culturally specific - it is doubtful that I would recognize Gucci shoes or a Rolex watch, for example, because these sorts of accoutrement would be, in my particular world-view, just a touch vulgar. Of course, I am not suggesting that anyone should not wear these things...and the idea that in a free and democratic country we would constrain women or men from certain modes of dress is pretty horrifying.

There is also a sad trend I remarked on that no one here has really take up, and that is the growing complaints (from mostly younger women) that they are being asked to dress for work (as servers, or hosts, or bartenders, etc.) by employers in ways that they do not normally dress: for example, in shorter skirts or shorts, and lower cut blouses, and higher heels. So on one hand the pressure from one's employer, and source of livelihood, and the other, remarks from the police that leave these same young women devalued.

The slut movement has a long and honourable history in BC, though clearly we must redouble our efforts.

Plicata 3

Also, although you might not be aware of it, your kids and bikes analogy is actually closer to my argument than it is to yours, so to speak. In this sense: You are not saying "Kids, there are careless drivers out there so no, you cannot ride your bikes." You're saying, "kids, there are careless drivers out there, so let's be forewarned and prepared. And ride your best bikes 'cause you look great!"

So, "women, there are rapists out there; let's be forewarned and prepared, but dress nice 'cause you look great!"

You see?

VivianLea Doubt said ...

"There is also a sad trend I remarked on...."

Yes, the dreaded "Hooters" syndrome, now happening all over the place. Actually, wasn't that a topic of an article/post here several months ago? I seem to recall....

Good point though VivianLea Doubt. Dress up as sexy and provocative as you can, you server people, AND add come-on and flirty type behaviour to your server duties, because after all, sex sells, guys are led around only by their you-know-whats, and servers are only slaves in mufti anyway.

Munro: Who said that women's dress code is a problem?

I didn't. The problem is that there are men who will follow a scent trail, just as some dogs are bloodhounds.

You completely miss my point, which is that Canada's police have killed people in their custody, they have killed people who represented no threat whatsoever to them, they have kicked people in the face while they were on the ground and are getting away with it.

Some cop made an off-the-cuff comment that a woman found insulting and women across the country are marching.

Where is the march to protest the death of Robert Dzeizanski? Where is the march protesting the death of 21-year-old Orion Hutchinson, who died under Monty Robinson's front wheels? Where is the march to protest the death of Ian Bush while in the custody of the Houston RCMP?

I am sorry that a cop told a woman that she should dress appropriately. It must have really hurt her feelings, but compared to the three deaths above, which are the tip of the iceberg, it doesn't rank anywhere near.

The slut movement has my full support; sluts keep the world turning. That said, there should be hundreds of thousands of people marching for these dead guys, who died at the hands of our police force. How many more people have to die in custody before we realise the cops are part of the problem?

Fish-counter

"And judges do not decide morality or ethics."

You're right. And that's exactly what I said. The Law is (and has to be) prescriptive, so judges are needed to ensure that breaches are deliberate, and not merely due to misunderstandings. What you (and the convicted) fail to understand about the sitauion you quoted is that the actual breach was a trade in flesh, something that is deemed not only illegal but completely harmful to our society. The accused merely tried to enforce a contract agreement he felt was due him, and forgot that there was a sovereign body on the other side of the agreement. He could have sued her for refusing to screw him - instead he raped her.

That's the whole issue with the Bountiful community - some feel that the Bible constitutes the whole of contract law, while others recognize the sovereignity of each human being.

John Greg

Thankyou for being respectful and not trying to assassinate my character simply because we don’t yet see eye to eye.

“Rape is not an unavoidable, unanticipatable accidental occurrence.”

Can we consider drunk driving? It is avoidable. Our culture, as a whole, is still pretty tolerant of drunk driving, which is why it still happens so often. But there are many groups, including the police, are handling this in a pretty responsible way: Education to persuade people not to drive drunk, punishment for those caught doing it, and warning the rest of us to be vigilant on the streets for our own safety.

Can we take the same approach with rape? Raise boys to see how immoral it is, prosecute men who are guilty of doing it, and advise women on how to stay safe? There are people who believe that warning women not to dress too scantily is an aspect of that third prong, to keep them safe. In the minds of these people, it has nothing to do with blame, it is just practical safety advice. Yet people respond to them as if they’re condoning rape.

I appreciate your point that “there is no evidence showing any kind of causal relationship between so-called provocative clothing and rape”. I believe that’s probably true. I haven’t read the studies. It would be easy for someone to post a link to some research, and we could all read it, and some of us would realize we’ve made a factual error. But in all of this hysteria, it’s not being treated as a factual error, it’s being treated as a moral error – as though the people who haven’t done the sociological research are archaic religious authoritarians, rather than simply uninformed citizens.

Haha... who even got past this:

"It is well known that women want desperately to get attention"....
Wow. In your muddled world, buddy. In your muddled head.

Gender divide

This appears, to me, the source of much gender conflict right now:

Many decent guys feel threatened by feminism because they feel that feminists are trying to heap shame on them, simply for being men and having a male sexuality. Rightly or wrongly, many vague statements made about gender issues are placed within this narrative.

Many women are deeply aware of the power dynamics between men and women, and feel that society is continuing to keep them in their historical role as subservient property. Rightly or wrongly, many vague statements made about gender issues are placed within this narrative.

If you try to imagine yourself (as best you can) in each of these situations, as a person that believes each of these narratives and is blind to the other, you can see why people have such visceral reactions to these debates, and why we immediately charicature each other as evil enemies. But, as long as we keep up that approach, we’re screwed. We are the people who need to re-build gender relations. If we wanted to, we could change tactics and find common ground. This could be a forum to do it.

Vision

I would like to hear what peoples' vision of healthy sexuality is, taking into account both sexes. What should we be teaching boys and girls?

Zalm: you seem to know an awful lot about the Montreal case

Were you there? were you one of the four guys? You like to dwell on the trading of flesh. Having sex is not something that can wait for the jury to come in.

I am more concerned with the fate of the cops who have done far worse than the unnamed officer who spoke at Osgoode Hall. Clearly, the Toronto Police sent the wrong guy to the meeting. His error can be corrected with sensitivity training. Robert Dzeikanski and Orion Hutchinson are still dead last time I heard.

Otherwise, here is a list of five reasons to not dress like- or behave like a slut:

1. Treponema pallidum
2. Neisseria gonnorhea
3. Chlamydia
4. Genital herpes
5. Human immunodefficiency virus

There's no use standing on the toilet seat.
The spirochaete can jump six feet.

Um ...

Dressing or acting like a so-called slut causes STDs?!? Wow. Whoda thunk it?

Just let women walk naked, just because they should be ....

allowed to, if I follow the logic of some to the extreme!

Others say that we should educate men or boys.

I wonder how much effort it will take to educate (or eradicate) robbery, but in the MEANTIME, I will continue to lock my door at night. I know! I know! I should be ALLOWED to leave it open, but ... I am not an idiot! I am realist! If my views are like the ones of a religious extremist like some purport them to be, then I suppose the ones who believe that women should wear pretty well what they damn want to wear is an extremist too! For the record, I never suggested that women should wear a burka! When women will not have to resort to selling their ASSets to attract males they might be freer IMHO, but clearly the ones who don't will get more fish! I wonder why there are dress codes in schools? Or, should girls be allowed to wear whatever they want in schools too?

I wonder if Gwen Jacobs is going topless these days?

Remember Gwen Jacobs? She fought for the right to go topless in Guelph in 1991. She won the right, but does she still exercise it? Does she exercise it every day? At the office, at parties, on the beach? I doubt it.

It is a matter of time before someone challenges the law that says we have to wear clothes in public at all. After all, it is just the norm today, but why?

When men forget to zip up their pants, they get a bad rap. Why is that? Let's question everything and start with a blank slate.

Let's face it, this debate is about trashing other people's values. It is about getting attention and nothing else.

fish-counter

Now you're reaching and grasping empty air. If you want to start a bad-cops thread, go ahead - somewhere else. This was a totally different issue - the point of which seems to elude you as you are totally unable to make a coherent argument about it. I think most of us understand where you're coming from - it's you who is totally unable to make any connection with where the rest of us are.

So enjoy arguing with yourself.

Gwen Jacobs

I don't know about her but Linda Myers still does in Maple Ridge.

Zalm: so you do not think this is about cop behaviour?

I do, and this is an open forum. I will stick to my message in spite of your criticism.

The slut protest is about women grasping for attention, in a world with much larger issues. Issues such as men being killed and kicked by cops with no justification. If you happened to be walking down Front Street in Nanaimo with your fly open, you would expect a cop to tell you to zip it up, and you would appreciate the advice. You would not expect to get beaten up, Tasered or killed for it.

Perhaps where you live, it is common practice for guys to flash, but not here. Robsonstrasse and Davey are quite different.

My larger point is that women are striving for attention, in a world where they already have it. I work with high school students, counting fish and improving fish habitat. Fully 90% of the students who volunteer to work with me are girls. Every teacher I have spoken to in the last 15 years tells me the same story: the boys are getting left behind and the girls are being given extra coaching to kick-start their careers. The same teachers tell me that in their opinion, it is a minor crime in progress.

This "dress like a slut" movement is a piece of complete misdirection. It is in the same league as Stephen Harper's $13 billion jail program, the $1 billion G8 security price tag and the $5 billion 2010 Olympics bill.

There are real police issues in Canada that go beyond a cop at Osgoode Hall telling women to think about how they dress. Perhaps it was an insult to the women present, but it has been blown out of all proportion.

Where are the protests for the death of Robert Dzeizanski, Ian Bush and Orion Hutchinson? If you don't get my point, move on, but I think human life is far more important than an off-the-cuff comment resulting from bad judgement.

I have become used to seeing high school girls in skimpy clothing. When they work with me, I insist they wear rubber boots and warm clothing, so they don't get hypothermia.

reading for comprehension...

It has been interesting to watch the way various posters have attempted to turn this into a forum about sexuality - it not about sexuality, but about the freedoms of democracy. Let me reiterate here for you part of the article's opening sentence:

"When a Toronto police officer controversially advised women to "stop dressing like sluts" earlier this year, suggesting preventing sexual assault was a woman's responsibility..."

Preventing and punishing those who sexually assault others can certainly be construed as a wider societal responsibility, in addition to the responsibility of the police and the court system, but it is hardly responsible to suggest that we curtail the freedoms of one segment of society in order to eliminate sexual assault. Focusing on the criminals is likely to be much more productive, in terms of eliminating crime.

Plicata asked what we should teach our children, and this is indeed the heart of preventing criminal activities of all kinds, so here goes...

We should teach our children that being a citizen in a democracy requires respect for others, as well as an ability to look a little further than first glance. That language (and first impressions) can be misleading, and that the true character of people, situation, and institutions, requires more than a cursory overview. That it is neccessary to look at that with which we disagree, in order to be fully informed, and attempting to understand the viewpoints of others is almost always fruitful. That whether we agree with others or not, they have a right to their ideas, and that everyone has a right to be free of physical violence or coercion, particularly from those in authority (ie, police officers, burka buddies).

The traits and capabilities and responsibilities of good citizens in a democracy translates to healthy relationship, as well - one need not even change the language. Quite simply,inculcating the values of respect, tolerance, and critical thinking in our children is a sure-fire way of ensuring we do not raise sexual assault criminals.

I agree that feminism (the extreme kind) has ...

and will continue to divide rather than unite women and men. From totally unfair divorce laws to women sticking it to men on dates (and after), some women feel it is their right to do and say as they please. Do you think I would be smart to walk on Hastings street at 2 a.m. and not expect me to be killed, assaulted, and/or robbed, if I walked alone? WHat about Paris, London, Mexico City, or Johannesburg? What would be the odds, if I showed off my Gucci shoes and my Rolex watch? I am a guy! I would not be offended by what the police is advising. It is common sense. Of course, I am not likely to be raped, but killed or beaten, probably.

reality_check ...

You watch too much TV or too many dystopic fantasy movies. Either that or you're just paranoid. Real life is nowhere near as fraught with such ludicrous and excessive disaster. If it were the murder rate in the DES would be ten to twenty times what it is. You begin to sound like a Harperite: trolling for crime fear.

VivianLea Doubt ...

Indeed. Good post.

Charter of rights and freedoms...

"...some women feel it is their right to do and say as they please..."

It is. Read the Charter. Get over it.

Thanks, John Greg.

When women dress like sluts, they are competing with other women

Women don't so much dress to attract men, as they dress to outshine other women. They are actually competing with one another for an imaginary or potential mate. The cosmetic and fashion industries are based on selling to women's sense of insecurity and their urge to compete with one another. That is why men are completely irrelevant to this argument. And I am not talking about lesbians, either.

As any marketing specialist will tell you, demand increases with population. The larger the city, the higher the consumption of all products and services.

What has this to do with the slut movement? Well, it started in Toronto, Canada's largest city, and it is spreading to other large cities like Vancouver.

Do women in Prince George, Yak, or McBride feel the need to dress like sluts and brag about it? I think not. It is only in the large, hormone-heavy halls of overcrowded, metrosexual Max Factor factories.

Women should stop plastering themselves with make-up, dress like women and stop fantasising about being slutty. The reality isn't as great as it may seem.

Women who dress like sluts might at least stop to consider their position as role models. If the would-be sluts were under-age, there would be hell to pay.

What Lynn and Jerry Munro Said

Yes, yes, yes. What Lynn and Jerry Munroe said.

Women are objectified so they become "objects". This gives men power over women.

Yet not only do most women resist this oppression, most guys don't even like it. Because the abusive male paradigm really only benefits a tiny minority. Identified by sociologists 100 years ago as "elites", they exist then and they exist now. They benefit most from the deeply abusive social controls that give them all the loot, and us what's left over. Most men are disempowered in this system, and even more women.

When people understand the freedom real equality gives to most real people (men and women both), it is liberating. Guys don't have to swagger around, get drunk, fight and call women sluts. Women become equal and treated as such.

But the deeply warped, toxic paradigm of the "virgin girl" vs the "slut" was perfected by the Catholic church, and has tried to keep women locked into this no-win mind control for many years.

Now, we all know it is wrong, and needs to be sent into the dustbin of history. Starting with articles like these and the women's movement.

Great discussion.

Dear John Greg....

You figure it out for yourself. Suffice it to say that the self-proclaimed sluts would probably not want their daughters to dress like...sluts.

The best example I heard was of a 14 year-old girl who was planning to go back to school in September dressed inappropriately. Her mother could not reason with her. She kept telling her mother, "I am going to school in this outfit, no matter what you say!" Her 16 year-old brother looked her straight in the eye and said, "No, you are not!" End of story.

He knew the score, and he did not want to fight his own friends for calling his kid sister a slut. Now you can argue till you are blue in the face, but there are norms in society, and women ignore them at their own peril.

If women were protesting some of the judgmements passed in rape trials recently, I could understand that. The Manitoba judge who let the guilty party off with a warning because his victim was "dressed provocatively" for example, deserves to lose his job.

This story has gathered way too much momentum. No one has challenged my statement that women dress to compete with other women. We all know it is true. They should stop trying to be the centre of attention. It is the reason that women in North America spend more on cosmetics than the entire combined GDP of all the nations of Africa. For what? It is obscene, it is disgraceful and it makes me sick to think of it.

Nothing to see here

Mae West said it's better for a women to be looked over than overlooked. Not so. Even scantily clad women have the right to be treated like wallflowers.

This, of course, is perfectly clear to the male of the species.

the heart of the matter...

Fish-counter:
"...there are norms in society, and women ignore them at their own peril."

Sounds like you are advocating rape here, Fish-counter. 'Norms' and 'laws' are two very separate things. Sexual assault is against the law. Violating a 'dress standard' imposed by various communities happens every day, particularly with young people unsure of themselves and their forming identities. If the 14-year old you described did indeed proclaim her fashion sense in an unfortunate way, does it follow that she ought to be raped?

I think your posts come very close to hate speech, myself.

Gail Dines is Correct: Slutwalk is a Waste of Time

You cannot reclaim a word that was never yours.

As a woman impoverished and just barely eeking by in the DTES, I think Slutwalk is a waste of time.

If you really want to accomplish something then be inclusive of all women and realize that there are many women who cannot walk around with 'slut' signs to gain some sort of false individual empowerment.

The key here is to look at the larger picture of why this word is used. Admitting that it comes from a rigid prescriptive from Patriarchy and is gendered means that the enemy to fight is the structure of our society, not a word.

Walking around in fishnets isn't going to accomplish anything but a spectacle lost in a charged word that doesn't belong to most women and should NOT belong to women.

We already have Take Back the Night. We need a Take Back Our Society.

Vivien Leight Doubt: for god's sake, grow up.

"Sounds like you are advocating rape"

What a vile thing to say. My ex-wife was raped, OK? So I know about the consequences first-hand. It destroys lives. To suggest that women act with propriety is not to advocate violence of any kind.

These women are acting like the irresponsible teenagers they once were, and in some cases, still are. They need to grow up and stop wanting to be the centre of attention.

At some point in all our lives, we realise that it is not always about us. As children, we often want to do things that are unwise.

As adults, we realise that we are the roles models that our children - or the next generation- are going to become.

The slut movement has the "ME! ME! ME!" label plastered all over it.

but...

You still haven't explained:
"...there are norms in society, and women ignore them at their own peril."

What peril then,are you referring to? As I said, 'norms' are violated every day, 'norms' are not laws. I have no problem with women acting 'with propriety', I am just not sure that you should get to define 'propriety'. That is indeed why we have laws to distinguish between what is unacceptable behaviour, and what is merely unfortunate or ill-advised. After all, 'normal' courtesy would be to hold a door open for someone following one into a place, but no law is broken when someone does not do so. Sexual assault, on the other hand, breaks the law.

Now that I have educated you as to the difference between 'norms' and 'laws', perhaps you would explain what peril you were referring to in the above quote, Fish-counter.

Vivian Lea Doubt:

"Ignoring the norms at your peril" includes, for the 14 year-old girl, being ridiculed, taunted and called a slut by her own girlfriends for showing her navel in school. The slut-calling craze started as a high school girl thing, if you remember.

For an adult woman, it includes being called an attention-whore, like Gillian Guess, for example.

Where I grew up, wearing shorts in town was considered very unusual. It was a backwards place, which is one reason I don't live there any more. Here on Vancouver Island, wearing shorts is just normal.

It is fine for women to dress provocatively, in fact it makes life interesting. It is a matter of time and place is all. Propriety without puritanism, if you like. You define it as you wish.

I love a good slut.

Women are really interesting creatures, it is so fascinating to see how they respond in different circumstances, personally I love a good slut, they are fun.

Gender troubles part 1

Thankyou VivianLea, for providing an answer to my question.

“We should teach our children that being a citizen in a democracy requires respect for others, … Quite simply,inculcating the values of respect, tolerance, and critical thinking in our children is a sure-fire way of ensuring we do not raise sexual assault criminals.”

I agree with and second everything you said (except the bit about “Burka buddies”, which seems to be a veiled shot at some of the posters here). Given the on-going struggle to re-define gender relations in our society, I think we should take such opportunities to discuss sexuality, because I think that’s what has touched off the firestorm of controversy here.

I want to ensure my children will not be sexual predators. But for me that is not enough. I want them to be proud of, and assertive with their sexuality. Thus living a full and exciting life.

I’d like to explain why some men have emotional reactions to some feminist statements. In the course of 1 generation, almost everything that it meant to “be a man” was shattered. Of course, if we understand how things were before the women’s movement (as demonstrated in the show Madmen, for example), we can see why this was necessary. But, as a result, modern men are still picking our way out of the rubble. Many men in my generation (Gen Y), didn’t get much instruction on how to “be Men”, because our baby boomer parents’ advice was now obsolete, and they could sense that. In the wake of the explosive changes in society, there is a lot of confusion about the new gender roles among both men and women.

Part 2

One such place of confusion is male sexuality. Many Gen Y guys grow up believing it is wrong to hit on women. The following messages are hammered very hard into our heads in school:

1. Respect women at all times
2. Don’t touch women.
3. Don’t stare at a womens’ body.

The result is that many modern young guys are ashamed of their sexuality. They feel guilty about being attracted to womens’ bodies in the first place, and they certainly wouldn’t act on it by being sexually assertive. One of the greatest fears men have is that this is systematic in feminism, that it unconsciously tries to re-shape male sexuality to resemble female sexuality. Regardless of the intention, the message that is given to modern guys is very muddled. Often times, it seems that shame is being heaped on men merely for having a male sexuality.

This may seem minor compared to the problems women face under patriarchy, but they cause significant long-term damage to boys’ self-esteem. Relationships are about more than just respect, we must teach our kids how to offer something to each other. Excitement!

But this isn’t about complaining, it’s about finding common ground about what we should be teaching our sons to come. I believe we must teach our sons about respecting everyone else’s right to their own personal space. But we need to couple that with positive messages, so we are not neutering them, but empowering them:

1. That they should be proud of their male sexuality
2. How to be sexually assertive (respectful but bold with women)
3. That, not only is it okay to notice the attractiveness of a woman on the street and approach her respectively to tell her, it brings excitement into everyone's life.

Anyway, I’ve rambled enough. I will now break to allow people to tell me why I'm the Taliban (or... perhaps.. engage in constructive criticism...?)

ah, the perils of a 'slut'...

I suppose I could reiterate all the reasons that being a 'slut'is preferable to being a 'chattel', but I fear it is pointless. Never the less, a 14-year old is not a 'slut' for showing her navel, although some people may believe so. Still and all, the article is about why women might be outraged at being advised to dress a certain way in order to avoid sexual assault...and many posts here have amply demonstrated why. Because every person deserves to feel safe...even the giggling group of pre-teens walking home from the local pool in their swimsuits.(They do that in my little town) Because no person deserves to be blamed for 'bringing on' a crime - a crime is a crime, after all.

And while quite often the discussion ranges all about the map in these Tyee threads, nothing can obscure the fact that we are talking about people who are being blamed for the crime visited upon them. While there have been cases of men sexually asaulting other men, never has any police officer advised these male victims to stop dressing like 'sluts'. Is this a feminst issue? Well, yes and no I suppose,but clearly it is not limited to being an issue for feminists, it is an issue for everybody. If you were a parent of one of that giggling group of pre-teens whose innocent daughter was assaulted,I dare say your outlook would not be improved by the TO police officer's remarks. I suspect your outlook would not be improved by an attempt to turn the discussion into what constitutes healthy sexuality, either - because neither of these things has any bearing on the fact that a crime has been comitted.

As much as some of you would like this to be all about the 'angry feminists', it is actually about the crime of sexual assault.

Slut

• Jeffrey J.
"It is clear that women are constrained and shaped by language. Slut, a term condemning a desire for sex and sexual partners, is aimed at women (how dare they!). For men, this is a badge of manliness, sexual prowess and the essence of male identity (if he's called a 'manwhore', it's coupled with bawdy laughter and envy)."

Nonsense! "Men" who "jump" from woman to woman are called boys. MEN do not admire them MEN tend to hold them in contempt. That is not to say that one must forever be constrained to one partner but constantly jumping from one sexual partner to another is stupid and immature for both men and woman.

If a woman "dresses like a slut" immature male humans may well attack them. Their mommys have taught them that such woman are sluts. Personally I think that some of the "costumes" worn by some young woman look silly; when they are worn by middle aged woman they look ridiculous.

"sluty"

John Greg

3 days ago

Suggest as offensive

Iwonder said:

Quote:

If a woman dresses in very revealing cloths and walks down a dark alley in the "bad" side of town she is putting herself at risk.

This is a common fallacy. There is absolutely no evidence that women who dress provocatiovely, so-called, are raped with any more frequency than those who dress plain.

In fact, there is some evidence that the opposite is true.

Don't be ridiculous. "Men" who attack women will do so no matter what they are wearing but will more likely do so if the costume is "slutty"

We are talking about inadequate nutcases here.

Furthermore "slutty" costumes look dumb except to juvenile boys. What is particularly ridic is some woman standing on the corner shivering because she is cold in the winter rain because of what she is not wearing. DUMB!

Thread gone bad

Don't waste your time, VivianLeaDoubt. Trying to sort through tortured logic to differentiate whatever "norms" organize fish-counter's society from the concepts and images the rest of us are using to differentiate our own, seems pointless.

How else to explain taking offense at suggesting he advocates rape after he just finished accusing another poster of being a gang-rapist? Not to mention the ultimate in bad taste - using the rape of his ex-wife to somehow indicate empathy with a ending a societal ill he's just finished abusing?

This thread's gone bad, and I don't see much help for getting it back on track.

Well

From a single sentence, I don't suppose there's any way to ever know if that particular cop meant to blame women for sexual assault, or whether he thought he was giving legitimate safety advice. Someone would have to be inside his head. Or ask him.

I guess it doesn't matter that much. These incidents are obviously just being used as flashpoints to address deeper cultural issues. I've never heard anyone in my own circles blame rape victims for their assaults. Maybe it's happening in other circles. If there's really still a culture in Canada that blames assault victims, then I'm glad people are marching for that reason.

Zalm: it is you that has gone bad

No one on this thread is justifying any kind of violence against women. Cetainly, no one is accusing anyone of being a gang-rapist. You have become unbalanced and I suggest you get professional help.

Talk to a school principal about school dress codes and they will put you straight. Showing navel is not accepted in school anywhere that I am aware of. To suggest otherwise is ridiculous. Girls are sent home if and when they break the rules, and quite rightly so.

Radical Tulip called it right when she said that these "I am a slut" women are living in a different world; one in which they justify everything they do in terms of their rights and freedoms. Why do they never talk about responsibilities?

The far end of the spectrum is Gillian Guess, who screwed a man accused of murder, during the trail on which she was a jury member, then she told the judge it was HIS fault for not protecting her against herself. The judge reminded her that he DID warn her and gave her 18 months in jail to think about it.

I suppose Zalm and Vivian think she was right. There is no cure what ails thee. It looks terminal.

I know about the damage done by violence and it is profound, lifelong and harms more people than the immediate victim. For you to make light of it is very, very sick.

zalm, I agree...

This thread stopped being interesting a long time ago, and has become eerie and dangerous-feeling.

But the comments reveal important psychological insights about what we advocates of law and order have to fight: the people who insist that women are to blame for the crime of sexual assault. They have attempted to frame the discussion in a myriad of ways that inevitably, reveal much about their own personal, inner struggles.

The story of the 14-year old who would not obey her mother, but was cowed by her older brother into a dress norm is a perfect example of the dichotomy of 'sluts' and 'chattels'. The thing is: that ultimately there is much more dignity in being a 'slut' and thinking for oneself, than there is is being 'chattel' and accepting 'norms' imposed by others, most notably men.

What I have learned from

What I have learned from this thread is that people are not drawn to the Tyee comments forum to have real discussions. Watching people here do their best to personalize the debate, character-assassinate one-another, construe each other as extremists at the slightest whiff of disagreement, and generally take all of their pre-conceived baggage out on one another, it appears that people come here for the bloodsport of it all. Enjoy your battles, folks. I hope you don't speak to each other this way in real life.

Is there a prize??

For demonstrating that we are the most degenerate of degenerates?
When did we become so vile and self degrading? It didn't happen overnight, but pretty much only took one generation.

Plicata ...

While there is often a sort of bloodsport glee to some of the comments here at the Tyee, I think it would be more accurate, or at least more fair, to acknowledge that a comment section like this simply is not the proper place for a long drawn out serious discussion (for one thing the comment threads are closed after a certain number of days anyway).

Few online venues are.

Also, I think Fish-heads really has brought about his own demise, so to speak. His posts are rather schizoid, wherein with the same breath (so to speak) he will say he does not blame women for being sexually assaulted and then say that if they dress slutty (which he still refuses to define) they get what they deserve.

It becomes tiresome, and eventually deeply frustrating trying to have a discussion with someone who is so vividly blind to their hostile rhetoric and harsh hypocrisy.

Debate away!!!

Let's keep talking about this issue...
Yes, there are many issues with police/public interface, and many of them are gender based; racially based; class based (i.e., a junkie is just a junkie).
The problem is not caused by the police, but by the people who sexually violate others!!!! The public and the police must learn to be allies in combatting the problem of sexual violence. Especially in the courts. Evidence at sexual assault trials is the most important area of potential progress on this issue. If police can earn the trust of victims, more accurate evidence will be available.

Women, men, awareness of your surroundings is crucial for self preservation (see comment above about not rubbing fish on oneself in the wilderness where there are bears).

I don't think the word SLUT helps emancipate women from the gender inequality in our society, but individual and collective respect for all people will. Parents, respect each other, teach your children. Police, legislators, men and women - respect each other!!!

@ John Greg...

Oftentimes I have noted, especially over weekends, that discussions get really interesting here at the Tyee...insightful, thoughtful, and genuinely curious about other's views. In fact, that is why I come here.

I think we need to consider that some posters have an agenda, which is to discourage the very thoughtful discussion we speak of. After all, it is only by hearing the viewpoints of others than we can become truly educated, yes?

And Plicata, I have absolutely nothing to apologize for in my use of language: I attempt to be precise in my use of it, as well as forceful. I think that perhaps you have a pre-conceived view of what constitutes discussion - does it involve happy agreement all around? (Note: question mark denotes a question.)
I call that ideology.

Good call, Krenit.

What happened to the serious side of the feminst debate; the side that was concerned about representation in government and equality of opportunity?

Did that get shelved in favour of who has the reddest lip gloss? Women can wear whatever they want. I don't care, and that is exactly what they DON'T want to hear.

In Nanaimo, in the last four days, we have had a home breakin, and the female occupant was raped in her own home, by a guy who smashed a window to get in. We have another guy, naked but for a gorilla mask, accosting women in the park. A third guy was seen masturbating in a retail store, and rubbing himself against a female customer before he escaped in a black Ford F150 truck.

This is sick stuff. I hope the cops catch these guys and that they pound the crap out of them before they even get to headquarters. I don't care what these women victims were wearing because it is not relevant. This isn't a fashion show.

This is real violence against women, and it needs to be dealt with. The cop at Osgoode Hall was guilty - of bad judgement.

This slut movement is just a distraction from reality.

So What I'm a Slut

I believe it was the late Golda Meir, former Israeli Prime Minister, (and I think their only woman P.M. so far)who responded, when she was asked to impose a curfew on women to keep them off the streets at night and thus safe after a series of high profile rapes: ""But it is the men who are attacking the women. If there is to be a curfew, let the men stay at home."

In other words, why do we restrict the victim rather than the perpetrator?

The older generation's view

I was quite shocked when my elderly mother-in-law came out with a remark that suggested that any woman who rented a ground level apartment was of questionable character. If she got assaulted by some man who broke into her apartment, then she had implied that was okay because she willingly lived in a ground floor unit.

Prejudices about women's chastity run very deep in our culture. I see the point and support the goals of SlutWalk's organizers. I just don't see this as an easy battle.