With luck, “Slut Walks” will be coming to a city near you!

Saturday, May 7th, 2011

Women are holding protests called “Slut Walks” in reaction to a comment made by a Toronto cop to the effect that they should alter their style of dress to reduce the likelihood of rape.

I like seeing this kind uproar.  I think the sexual revolution burned out way too soon and a lot was left unfinished.  One of the attitudes that remains quite strong is that women owe it to their sex and society in general to avoid the appearance of an “unladylike” enthusiasm for sexual adventurism and by not doing so, they are fair game for insult (or worse) and have only themselves to blame.

Just as the drug war violates our natural right to control what we put into our own bodies, women live under a myriad of laws and attitudes that trample their right to control their own bodies when it comes to sex and nudity.

Not only did that cop’s comment insult women, it also impinged on men because we are a major beneficiary of the beauty of women’s fashions  Personally, I do not interpret the terms “provocative” or “slutty looking” as negative (and if I ever do, you can just bury me because I’m already dead).

The idea that women have a responsibility to dress conservatively so as not to excite men is precisely the same kind of idiocy we see violently enforced in some Muslim counties.    In deciding what to wear, a woman has only one authority to answer to and that is herself.

[Posted by Dave Krueger]

Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

91 Responses to “With luck, “Slut Walks” will be coming to a city near you!”

  1. #1 |  Joe | 

    I was waiting for this to be an agitator post.

    What a great protest.

    What’s not to like?

  2. #2 |  Scott | 

    The cop’s comments were stupid. Women don’t have a responsibility “not to excite men.” Both those being said, those who dress in a way which might attract attention, should not be upset when they get it. I remember in college when a friend of mine complained that her professor had stared at her chest. I don’t think she could have worn a much tighter top nor much less of a miniskirt. I’m not saying that justified the Prof’s leers, but we all need to accept the consequence of our actions.

    There are many who make statements with their dress everyday, and they should be allowed to make them without being preyed upon or have a crime committed against them.

    For instance, the guy I saw today while eating at a Chinese buffet, wearing a sleeveless / muscle shirt (which exposed his VERY tatooed arms), a kilt, and combat boots, should probably expect that EVERYONE in the restaurant to have looked at him. Should he expect to be challenged to a fight or something? No, of course not. But people gawking – both he and the “sluts” should expect to get some.

  3. #3 |  Marty | 

    they need to team up with the Ukrainian topless protestors.

    I wish these girls were as upset about the wars, swat raids, etc- they could put a lot of people in their place all at once.

  4. #4 |  Gretchen | 

    I blogged about this today, too.

    Not only did that cop’s comment insult women, it also impinged on men because we are a major beneficiary of the beauty of women’s fashions

    It also impinged on your sense of decency by suggesting that to some extent a woman’s dress can be like a red cape to a bull– that men simply do not have full responsibility for their own behavior when confronted with a woman who is dressed sluttily enough.

    But yes, you’re absolutely right. We could make a syllogism out of it:

    1) Women are more likely to be sexually adventurous (however you define that) when they feel safe.
    2) Straight men like it when women are more sexually adventurous.
    3) Shaming women makes them feel unsafe.
    4) Therefore, straight men who enjoy sexually adventurous women should not shame women for exhibiting that very characteristic.

    I’m guessing that when (if ever) slut-shaming dies out as a practice, so too will attempts to blame rape on how women dress.

  5. #5 |  Athena | 

    I love it. While reading this, the advertisement to the immediate right illustrates three pairs of platform, stiletto-heeled shoes. I really hope it shows up that way on everyone’s machine (as opposed to targeted ads).

    I couldn’t agree more with the sentiment of this post. I support politically-incorrect comments so long as they hold water, which I don’t believe the officer’s comment does. While I hate to rely upon personal experience, I’m forced to in the absence of statistical evidence, and I’m not familiar with any research dealing with what a woman was wearing when she got raped.

    That said, the one time I was attacked, I was 17 and walking home one night. I was not only dressed like a male, I was dressed like a hoodlum male (I was a skater at that age) – baggy, long-sleeved hoodie, wide-legged “raver” jeans with thick wallet chain stretching from a belt loop down toward my knee and back up to my wallet. Nothin’ sexy about that. Oh, and I’m 5’11”. Nonetheless, this man (who was several inches shorter than me) tried to stop me verbally, followed me for several blocks, then tried to drag me into some bushes. He was unsuccessful.

    While I don’t subscribe to the belief that rape is about power and control (despite some exceptions like rape as ethnic cleansing) and very much believe that is it sexually driven, I do think it is typically an opportunistic crime and that, if ones style of dress is of any consideration at all, it is far, far down the list.

    So, bring on the Slut Walks!

  6. #6 |  RomanCandle | 

    Wow. The last time that many angry feminists protested, they were demanding that the Duke lacrosse players be castrated.

  7. #7 |  Maggie McNeill | 

    #4: “While I don’t subscribe to the belief that rape is about power and control (despite some exceptions like rape as ethnic cleansing) and very much believe that is it sexually driven, I do think it is typically an opportunistic crime and that, if ones style of dress is of any consideration at all, it is far, far down the list.”

    Bang on! My sentiments exactly! I haven’t heard of any rape victim dress studies, either, but all the anecdotal evidence I’ve ever heard suggests otherwise.

    What I’d like to see is an extension of the “slut walk” philosophy to point out that prostitution laws are based in the same mentality as that cop demonstrated, and that “the nature of your being is not determined by how many sexual partners you have…” or the reason you choose to have sex with those partners, either.

  8. #8 |  JS | 

    #5 lol nice!

  9. #9 |  Dallas Vamp | 

    I can only hope a Dallas cop would make a dumb remark about womerns clothing…

  10. #10 |  Athena | 

    #6: A girl can dream, can’t she?

    It takes me back to high school. I had finally made captain of the debate team and decided to challenge myself by taking a controversial (but important) issue to Student Congress. My first – and, ultimately, only – piece of legislation dealt with legalization and regulation of prostitution. It was there that I learned that some people are absolutely immune to logical arguments. Despite my mounds of evidence illustrating the social and economic good legalization would do, it fell on closed ears.

    My favorite counter argument came from another girl who asserted that we should not legalize, lest our young girls aspire to become hookers. I asked her how many young girls she knows currently who aspire to become strippers and porn stars, and she just shook her head at me.

    My bill failed overwhelmingly, despite being delivered by a seasoned and charismatic orator to a bunch of hormonal teens in a particularly liberal city (I’m a Seattle native). I walked away in utter disbelief. I pushed that bill at numerous tournaments only to experience the same results every time. It was disheartening to discover that even the most sound argument could not dislodge people’s superstition.

    Sex sells. We should let it, damnit, especially given the current economic climate. And, while I think that Slut Walks would be more than capable of accommodating such an extension, I can’t imagine it would be at all welcomed by the participators. Not if the percentage of young women who show up to protests against “bikini baristas” is any measure.

    /rant. Sorry, I’m pretty passionate about legalized prostitution.

  11. #11 |  Mario | 

    I’m sorry, but I’m with Dave Chappelle on this one.

  12. #12 |  RomanCandle | 

    #10:

    Things I am for: legalized prostitution.

    Things I am against: castrating non-rapists.

  13. #13 |  Luke | 

    I have the legal right to walk through South Central LA at 2 AM wearing a suit made of $100 bills and pulling a Radio Flyer wagon full of gold, but I’m behaving in a way that is likely to get me beaten and robbed or worse. And I doubt that anyone is going to organize a “let’s walk through bad neighborhoods flaunting wealth” event in order to protest blaming the victim for his poor judgment.

    Camille Paglia caught hell 20 years ago from other feminists for daring to point out that it is just as stupid to get drunk and follow a frat boy up to his room, as it is to leave your purse unattended in Central Park

    Of course, adults get the distinction between blaming the victim for the crime and blaming the victim for poor judgment, which also explains why neocons howl that Ron Paul is “blaming America for 9/11″ when he talks about terrorist attacks as inevitable blowback from our foolish foreign policy.

  14. #14 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/05/04/hooker_teacher_what_i_was_thinking/

    Teacher fired for being ex-sex worker– I have no idea what can dislodge this level of craziness, but I hope slut walks help a little.

  15. #15 |  David | 

    #13: I’m right there with you, assuming anybody has actually established a link between dressing “provocatively” and being assaulted. Not everybody carries a lot of cash with them, so wearing a suit of $100 bills makes you stand out from the crowd to a prospective mugger. I don’t think it takes a miniskirt and halter top to let a rapist know that a woman does in fact have a vagina.

  16. #16 |  Law Prof | 

    I don’t care what women wear. But if they choose to wear something they KNOW is attention getting, like a very tight single layer white cotton dress on a hot and humid summer day in Georgia, they had better expect to ACCEPT the leers that they have sought.

    I’m biologically programmed to look and like. As you like it, ladies.

  17. #17 |  Maggie McNeill | 

    #10: “Sorry, I’m pretty passionate about legalized prostitution.”

    No need to apologize; as you know if you’ve ever seen my blog, I am as well. :-)

  18. #18 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #14 | Nancy Lebovitz

    http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/05/04/hooker_teacher_what_i_was_thinking/

    Teacher fired for being ex-sex worker– I have no idea what can dislodge this level of craziness, but I hope slut walks help a little.

    Melissa Petro posted a link to that article the other day on her facebook page. Of course, I just couldn’t resist leaving a little comment.

    Well, you clearly brought this on yourself.

    First of all, you mistakenly thought you, as a woman, own your own body and have a right to earn a living by your own consensual interactions with other adult citizens. What is wrong with you? …If you want to use your body to make extra money, you should have picked a respectable occupation like a model or a sports star because those are occupations specifically approved by our freedom loving society.

    Then, as if that weren’t enough, you had the nerve to be honest about it. I mean, what friggin’ planet are you from? Sure, we live in “the land of the free” where freedom to speak your mind is worshiped, but you’re not actually supposed to do it for Christ’s sake. Were you dropped on your head as a child or something? Sheesh!

    I hate to pile insult upon insult, but you’re setting new records here. After engaging in sex-related work, you apparently thought that society would welcome you with open arms as if you were an ordinary human being and not punish you for your past indiscretions. Wrong. The work you engaged in marks you for life. You don’t just dabble in commercial sex (SEX!) and then escape the fact that a highly moral society like we have in the U.S. sees you as an open target for perpetual persecution. As bigotry and discrimination are frowned on more and more, there are fewer and fewer targets upon which god-fearing people are able to focus their self-righteous indignation. They are not going to let you deny them the pleasure they will get by torturing you forever.

    And I’ll leave you with one final thought. Your utter lack of shame for your blatant attempt to earn a living and get yourself through school on your your own terms is a poor lesson for our children. How are they supposed to learn to respect laws that regulate sex between consenting adults after what you pulled? How are kids going to learn to keep secret their unpopular beliefs and unapproved behavior after what you did?

    I could go on and on, but I wanted to keep this very brief.

    Unfortunately, one person didn’t pick up on the sarcasm (a problem I have from time to time).

  19. #19 |  Leah | 

    I don’t understand comments about how “well, then men are going to stare!” I am fairly sure that most women don’t mind an appreciative look if they picked out their clothing. What women DO mind is 1.) creepy leering (I’d define leering as the appreciative look with an undertone of scariness instead of an undertone of friendliness), 2.) slut-shaming comments, and 3.) rapists.

    Take a look, give a friendly smile, don’t act like a creep, and don’t rape people. Why is that so hard? And why the backlash?

  20. #20 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #5 Athena

    …I do think it is typically an opportunistic crime and that, if ones style of dress is of any consideration at all, it is far, far down the list.

    I too have heard that rape is far less influenced by dress than people think, but I wasn’t sure and didn’t feel like looking for references so I left that out of my post. I’m glad you brought it up. Common sense tells me that conditions like a woman’s level of intoxication and whether there are other people around will play a greater roll in whether she’s viewed as potential target of assault than what she’s wearing.

    This cop’s comment almost comes across the same as telling someone not to drive a nice new expensive car of they don’t want to be car jacked or not to dress well if they don’t want to be mugged. Even if there is some truth to the advice, it doesn’t redeem the implications of what is being suggested.

  21. #21 |  Law Prof | 

    Rape is a power crime. So it makes sense that it “is far less influenced by dress than people think.”

    Thus, if you are deliberately going to attract attention, simply shut up about. You wanted looking, you got it. Leering (WHATEVER that is) only makes you “scared” because YOU think that rape is sexually motivated.

    You can’t have it both ways.

  22. #22 |  D. Nevels | 

    Well, ladies, the thing is, the way you dress combined with the the way you act not only tells a lot about yourself but also the likelihood of bad things happening to you. No woman deserves to get assaulted or raped. However, when you dress provocatively, drink to excess, and get into cars with strange men you increase the likelihood of getting assaulted, and the people going on these slutwalks will not be there to protect you.

    The people that go on these slutwalks do not care if women get assaulted as long as they can go on “you can’t tell me what to do” tirades. Just because men and women are equal socially doesn’t mean we are identical. We do things for different reasons and yes, women are more vulnerable to assaults. When people say don’t dress like sluts, they are not saying “get back in the kitchen,” it’s more about doing things to protect YOURSELVES. Because no amount of take back the nights rallies will do it for you.

  23. #23 |  Judas Peckerwood | 

    Luke @ #13

    Awwww….someone unironically quoting that useless, pseudo-intellectual attention whore Camille Paglia. How…um, uh…quaint!

  24. #24 |  J.S. | 

    “Take a look, give a friendly smile, don’t act like a creep, and don’t rape people. Why is that so hard? And why the backlash?”

    Leah, the backlash would be because there are people out there (feminists usually) who actually promote the idea of “visual rape”. How is someone creepy? Who defines it exactly? You can dress up how you want but sorry you’re gonna have to deal with the gawkers and comments from people while in public, good or bad.

    Or just go watch SNL’s “sexual harrassment” skit.

  25. #25 |  JOR | 

    “I’m biologically programmed to look and like.”

    Well, everything that everyone does is what they’re “biologically programmed” to do. Obviously you think some things that people do (things they are biologically programmed to do, necessarily) are worth criticizing; and so, claims of biological programming clearly are no defense.

  26. #26 |  RomanCandle | 

    @#24

    Exactly. Unfortunately, “creepy” has been defined down to “an unattractive or socially awkward guy who interacts with women”. Just like “misogynist” is too often defined down to “someone who doesn’t support all the tenants of third-wave feminism”.

    Ironically, it’s kind of the male equalivant of “slut-shaming” that feminists are always complaining about. Like the old cliche goes, if you really want to insult a man, don’t call him a cad. Call him a virgin.

  27. #27 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    I do not, ever, want to go back to the days when a defense lawyer could plead “Look at how she was dressed, she was asking for it.”

    That said, the Supreme Court has ruled that non-verbal communication as visceral as stripping is “speech” for the purposes of the First Amendment. Can we extend this notion to the idea that a woman who dresses to show off has, in a non-verbal way, initiated a conversation about her sexual availability? Not too far, mind you. One verbal, “no” or “buzz off” should end things. BUT she shouldn’t be able to scream “harassment” about the FIRST comment or pick up from any one guy.

    That, or the Guys should be able to charge that SHE is harassing THEM.

    I’m sorry, ladies, but it is a fairly well established scientific theory that primates are programmed for sexual response to visual stimulation. So, when you dress provocatively you are getting my inner proto-human all worked up …. and he isn’t very sophisticated. The prevalence of nubile skin all over the place means that he’s worked up a lot, which (at my age) is a drag. Maybe asking you to cover up a little isn’t strictly fair, but neither is carbonating my hormones if you have no intention of doing anything about it.

  28. #28 |  Maggie McNeill | 

    #23: Have you ever actually read Paglia (a couple of her Salon columns isn’t enough to count)? Or do you just dismiss her because you’ve been told to, just as many “intellectuals” dismiss Rand without actually reading her? Just wondering.

  29. #29 |  SamK | 

    Mmmmm…sexy women showing off in sexy clothes…

    Is it bad that that is nearly the entirety of my reaction?

    “omg there’s a socially important debate about violence…blah blah blah”

    is immediately drowned by:

    “Boobies!”

  30. #30 |  megs | 

    There is no way you can dress that won’t get you leers or rude looks/comments. Especially if you’re short and busty. I can wear my husband’s hoodie and get catcalls (okay, maybe that’s because it’s a Leafs hoodie). I’ve been accused of dressing provocatively even in a uniform, because my body is what it is. I’m not asking for it by dressing the way I dress or having the body I have. And yes, I get the difference between rudeness and harassment. So whenever people say “I’m not victim-blaming or slut-shaming, but did you SEE her…?” I get a little wary. Yes, yes you are. And it wouldn’t have mattered what she was wearing. Have you been on the internet? Based on past experience and rule 34, there’s tons of burka fetishists out there.

    So hooray for women dressing however and making the body and clothing less of an issue in the long run by making it an issue now.

  31. #31 |  Helmut O' Hooligan | 

    “The idea that women have a responsibility to dress conservatively so as not to excite men is precisely the same kind of idiocy we see violently enforced in some Muslim counties. In deciding what to wear, a woman has only one authority to answer to and that is herself.”

    Excellent Dave! This point needs to be driven home consistently, especially to flag waving types that turn Talibanesque when it comes to issues involving sexuality.

  32. #32 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    Megs,

    Yes, cat calling a woman who is completely covered (unless we are talking completely covered in PVC) is rude. On the other hand, a young woman in a belly shirt with a plunging neckline, and shorts with the word “sweet” across her cheeks, who is offended when she gets hit on needs to be given a quarter so she can buy a clue.

    Or, to put it bluntly; “Honey, if it ain’t for sale, why are you advertising?”

    A man who hits the street in a muscle shirt and speedo is widely recognized to be an attention seeking jerk. I don’t see why that judgement shouldn’t go both ways. And I see no reason to give female jerks special protection from male jerks.

  33. #33 |  Timothy | 

    Fellas, is it really all that hard to not be a total douchebag? “Well, I mean, I just get excited via stimulation because LIZARD BRAIN and I can’t help it and it’s not fair that you get me all riled up and don’t do anything about it!”

    Really? What are you fifteen? As an adult you a solely responsible for your actions and behavior. Is it okay to look at people? Generally speaking, sure. Is it kosher to, like,stare at a woman’s breasts for an extended period of time with your creepy rape eyes? Decidedly not. You should expect that other people will, you know, see you when you leave the house. What that doesn’t mean is that you should expect other people to stare, leer, harass or insult you*. I mean, for fuck sake, women are people and in my experience typically respond well to being treated as such.

    ACCEPTABLE: “Hi, I’m Tim, pleased to meet you, may I buy you a drink?”

    UNACCEPTABLE: “I’ve been whistling at you for three blocks now and I can’t help but notice you have really fantastic tits in that slutty tank top may if you won’t let me suck on them YOU ARE CLEARLY A COCKTEASE YOU BITCH!”

    The latter is clearly the sort of thing a sociopath thinks.

    *I mean, I guess you should, because this thread is amply demonstrating that the world is full of chodes, but that should not be the default setting.

  34. #34 |  VikingMoose | 

    Women don’t have a responsibility “not to excite men.” Both those being said, those who dress in a way which might attract attention, should not be upset when they get it.”

    wtf? and where is the objective scale that says “this is a way that might attract attention”.

    that bullshit is 8th grade. if you don’t want Tito Ortiz mocking you and getting up in your face, for example, don’t dress like a dork who’s “just asking for it”. see?

    Timothy, above shows the difference. and he’s right: the world is full of twaddlenocks.

    fucking bullying, whether by giving continued unwanted attention or mocking a “geek” is fucking bullying.

    and it’s wrong

  35. #35 |  the innominate one | 

    “Looking at a cleavage is like looking at the sun. You don’t stare at it. It’s too risky. You get a sense of it and then you look away.”

    /Seinfeld

  36. #36 |  Highway | 

    This is one of those things that reminds me of that Onion article with God saying “Listen people it’s not hard: Don’t Kill People. Ever”.

    There’s no excuse for raping. None. Not clothes, not attitude, not location, not *ANYTHING*. All these people trying to make excuses might think they’re being ‘realists’, but what they are is enablers. And a ‘Well, it’s wrong, but…” lists are just as bad. Stop at ‘wrong’.

  37. #37 |  Dave Krueger | 

    There’s a difference between thinking something about someone and doing something to them. If I see a woman who is dressed sexy (my particular fetish happens to be business attire), I don’t feel a shred of guilt for looking at her. Not a shred. Because, folks, I just don’t see the evil in sexual attraction. It’s bred into us and is a rather crucial element in the survival of the race. When you’re out in public, you’re going to be looked at no matter how you’re dressed.

    I can understand a woman not wanting to be annoyed by gawkers with no manners, but like it or not, gawking is not a crime. Rape is.

    Are these “Slut Walk” women complaining about being looked at or are they complaining about the implication that they are to blame for their own violent assault. I think the latter.

  38. #38 |  Gretchen | 

    Right on, Dave.

    Having these sorts of conversations many times has taught me that people will disagree about what exactly “leering” and “being a creep” means, and it’s really hard to articulate it through a written conversation rather than being out in a bar together, pointing out someone, and saying “That guy. He’s being creepy.” The second thing it has taught me is, of course, that no one thinks of himself as creepy.

    I don’t think most rapists think of themselves as rapists, either. Part of the problem with considering women’s clothing as a factor in the responsibility for rape, aside from the obvious element of blaming the victim, is that it blurs the lines and aids them in that delusion.

  39. #39 |  D. Nevels | 

    But how can you tell the difference between blaming the victim and acknowledging that women do have some responsibility for protecting themselves?

  40. #40 |  RomanCandle | 

    There’s alot of strawmen burning in this thread. Let’s stop conflating “rape” with “staring”, okay?

    Asking a man not to rape or overtly harass a woman is obviously reasonable. Asking him not to look is not. To me, this just seems like further attempts to pathologize normal male sexual behavior.

  41. #41 |  Leah | 

    The only people I see in this thread who are conflating rape with staring are the people who are getting angry and defensive about the issue. I said that women don’t mind getting looked at but do mind getting leered at, then a bunch of people decided that leering and looking and raping are the same thing and got offended. Timothy admirably summed up my reaction to this thread, though I’d add in a bit of bafflement as this is not the place I’d have expected to see it. Reason comments? Yeah. Newspaper article comments? Absolutely. Here? I’m pretty surprised.

  42. #42 |  JOR | 

    “I’m sorry, ladies, but it is a fairly well established scientific theory that primates are programmed for sexual response to visual stimulation.”

    Well, whatever. I don’t think there’s anything wrong, necessarily, with looking at women (or anyone else), or even fantasizing about them, or with showering them with all manner of (respectful) flirtatious attention. And I do think that a lot of the stuff about “creeps” is just high-status women disliking more or less innocent attention from low-status or awkward males, e.g. it’s more about classism (on the part of some women and their male sympathizers) than it is about feminism, sex-positive or otherwise. But appeals to lizard brain/primate biological programming/whatever are stupid, and non-starters. We are biological entities. Whatever we do is something we are biologically programmed for. Primates are biologically programmed to opportunistically assault, bully, rob, rape, torture, and murder each other. They’re biologically programmed for infanticide and ritualistic cannibalism. We’re biologically programmed for a lot of things that nobody would be stupid enough to use biological programming as an excuse for.

  43. #43 |  JOR | 

    “But how can you tell the difference between blaming the victim and acknowledging that women do have some responsibility for protecting themselves?”

    Everyone has the responsibility to defend themselves, in the purely practical (and trivial, and uninteresting) sense of “responsibility”. What victim-blaming does, is try to conflate this purely practical, trivial, uninteresting sense of responsibility (the sense in which one is responsible for absolutely everything that happens to them, whether by the acts of others or some other forces) with some morally relevant sense of responsibility, or blame (the sense in which violent criminals are wholly and entirely to blame for their crimes, even though in 100% of cases their crimes would not have occurred had their victims been stronger/faster/tougher/more skilled/more vigilant/more knowledgeable/wiser). How to tell whether you’re blaming the victim or simply offering practical (if ill-timed) advice? Well, if you ever find yourself attempting to invalidate a rape victim’s feelings of violation – of having suffered a genuine wrong and injustice – or if, god help you, you ever find yourself waving off a case of rape by insisting that the victim “should have known better” or in any way brought the rape on her (or his) self, then you are not simply offering practical advice, but engaging in honest-to-god all-out victim blaming and rape apologism.

  44. #44 |  RomanCandle | 

    @ #41
    “The only people I see in this thread who are conflating rape with staring are the people who are getting angry and defensive about the issue.”

    You haven’t been reading all the comments then. Two examples:

    #36: “There’s no excuse for raping. None. Not clothes, not attitude, not location, not *ANYTHING*. All these people trying to make excuses might think they’re being ‘realists’, but what they are is enablers.”

    #19 “What women DO mind is 1.) creepy leering (I’d define leering as the appreciative look with an undertone of scariness instead of an undertone of friendliness), 2.) slut-shaming comments, and 3.) rapists.”

    And hey, you wrote that second one! Number one on your list is leering, and number three is rape. In my book, that’s conflating. You really need to get your story straight.

    And of course I’m being defensive! I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been called a misogynist, rapist, or “rape apologist” for the crime of not buying into some of the more absurd beliefs of third-wave feminists.

    @33
    “Fellas, is it really all that hard to not be a total douchebag?”

    No. But I’ve found that being a bit of a douchebag makes me alot more successful with women. Confidence, charisma, and good old-fashioned masculinity go a long way. It certainly works better than walking up to a woman and offering to buy her a drink. That’s the sort of thing that gets you alot of Appletinis billed to your debit card, but not alot of phone numbers.

    That’s why I’m so skeptical when people tell me not to stare at women, for example. Not many women are attracted to awkward, supplicating men with their eyes at their shoes.

  45. #45 |  Leah | 

    Hmm, I guess I took conflating to mean that you considered one as bad as the other. You take it to mean something that is on the same list. To quote Dalton, “Opinions vary…”

    Enjoy your success with women…

  46. #46 |  Athena | 

    #12, RomanCandle: We’re on the same page, there. My inner-child is a public defense attorney (with any luck, the rest of me will be able to practice in the next decade). I don’t even support castration of convicted rapists. I don’t find mutilation to be a reasonable means of justice in any circumstance.

    Aside from that, I brought this post up to my husband last night after I commented. Immediately, he went to the old joke/saying/what have you: “Well, if you dress up like a cop, someone’s likely to ask you for help. If you dress like a hooker…” at which point I cut him off and said, “Someone’s likely to ASK you for sex.” A little different than the message behind Slut Walks; something that some commenters here seem to have difficulty grasping.

    I believe in the concept of comparative liability (the concept – the application of said concept gets murky). It seems crimes are rarely 100%/0%. Often, I find them to be 90%/10% or 70%/30%. Perhaps the drug dealer wouldn’t have been robbed if he wasn’t dealing drugs and keeping large amounts of cash on hand. The same logic absolutely applies to some rapes. Of course, putting yourself in a position to be taken advantage of does not excuse those who take advantage of you. That said, reality is just that, and unless you want it to happen again, one should alter the behavior that contributed to that situation. People should always learn from their mistakes.

    My assertion, however, is that style of dress is inconsequential in the absence of evidence to the contrary. Drinking to excess around unknown males? Not a good idea. But intoxication on the part of the victim is a KNOWN contributor in cases of rape. Dressing provocatively is not. And, until it is, I’m with Dave: Guys, think twice before supporting this kind of logic.

  47. #47 |  Dave Krueger | 

    We wouldn’t have this idea that hookers have a “uniform” if more non-hookers would only dress like sluts (a strategy I enthusiastically support).

  48. #48 |  D. Nevels | 

    @43

    I see what you are saying but I can’t help but feel trying to give this kind of advice is lose-lose. I mean if I were to say something about a woman’s dress and behavior before something happened, I might be accused of “slut shaming” and all those other kind words designed to shut people up. Second, no one can make others feel differently about what happens to them. In this case I haven’t heard that the law enforcement told any particular victim what she could have done to prevent the assault, that would be pointless, but women in general to avoid bad things happening. It would be kind of absurd to expect people to hold their tongues because their words might offend someone who has been a victim at some point. We are given tips on how to avoid other types of crime all the time, and yet we have to walk on eggshells because anything to do with sex and gender is a touchy subject.

  49. #49 |  root | 

    A key that opens many locks is a master key. A lock opened by many keys is a shitty lock.

    The legal system in rape works like this:
    A presumption of innocence.
    A requirement of proof of all criminal elements *beyond reasonable doubt*, often including meeting some standard (laws vary wildly about this) of criminal intent.

    These are often he said she said situations, where the only way you’re going to get proof of rape beyond reasonable doubt is an admission by the defendant. In such a regime, being alone with a boy you don’t intend to sleep with is pretty stupid, given acquaintance rape statistics. Given the number of rapes involving alcohol, being alone with someone who’s drunk doubly so. Then given the hugely onerous burden of proving this in court of law, well, you’re an enormous fucking idiot for putting yourself in that position in the first place.

    Yeah, the lion is the one responsible and at fault for eating you for covering yourself in steaks and walking out into the jungle. It doesn’t mean you’re not an idiot in the first instance for deliberately and willfully putting yourself in that situation.

  50. #50 |  DonM | 

    women have a need to protect themselves. One way to do that is to be aware of their surroundings, carry a gun, and be trained in self defense (with a gun). Another approach is to devolve the requirement to defend themselves to someone else, who will be aware of their surroundings, be trained in defense, and carry a gun.

  51. #51 |  Gretchen | 

    @48 I mean if I were to say something about a woman’s dress and behavior before something happened, I might be accused of “slut shaming” and all those other kind words designed to shut people up.

    And rightly so. Here’s a thought– don’t say things about a woman’s dress. It’s not helpful. There’s no evidence that they will be more protected from sexual assault if they take your dubious advice. Women go out at night in all kinds of stages of undress, and it doesn’t affect their likelihood of being assaulted at all. What matters is how drunk they get, around whom, whom they go home with, etc. And expressing concern about those things doesn’t sound like slut shaming– it sounds like caring, because that’s what it is.

    @45I believe in the concept of comparative liability (the concept – the application of said concept gets murky). It seems crimes are rarely 100%/0%. Often, I find them to be 90%/10% or 70%/30%. Perhaps the drug dealer wouldn’t have been robbed if he wasn’t dealing drugs and keeping large amounts of cash on hand. The same logic absolutely applies to some rapes.

    It absolutely doesn’t. An example of a situation in which both parties share responsibility would be a fist fight. An altercation in which one party doesn’t aggress on the other in any way whatsoever does not qualify.

  52. #52 |  Gretchen | 

    Helpful: “Do you have a safe way to get home tonight? Do you need a ride?”
    Slut shaming: “You look like a ho in that dress, just asking to be raped.”

    It’s really not that hard.

  53. #53 |  Mike T | 

    #13: I’m right there with you, assuming anybody has actually established a link between dressing “provocatively” and being assaulted. Not everybody carries a lot of cash with them, so wearing a suit of $100 bills makes you stand out from the crowd to a prospective mugger. I don’t think it takes a miniskirt and halter top to let a rapist know that a woman does in fact have a vagina.

    It’s not as much about dress as it is behavior. A woman who behaves like she is sexually available around men she doesn’t genuinely want to pursue her is asking for trouble. A woman who goes home from a party with a man with whom she really doesn’t want to have sex is taking a substantially higher risk of being raped than one who gets in a taxi or has a friend drive her home.

    I don’t know why this concept is so hard for a group that prides itself on intelligence and rationality. It should be obvious that if your actions say one thing and your actual intent is something else, you increase your risk of an undesirable action occurring to you.

    Or as Vox Day recently put it:

    The reason the slut-walk is ludicrously counter-productive is because encouraging more women to dress and act in a provocative manner in public places is literally asking for more rape and sexual assault. The slut-walkers are daring men to respond to their provocations, and there can be no question that the predatory part of the male population will be quite pleased to do so at the earliest opportunity. Just as you don’t teach a tiger to stop devouring steak by continuously waving a bloody t-bone in front of it, you can’t encourage rapists not to rape by appealing to their visual senses. Even animals understand that an effective way to avoid becoming prey is to not look like prey, so it is remarkable that feminists have managed to functionally lobotomize themselves to such an extent that they are now operating below the level of lower animal intelligence.

  54. #54 |  Maggie McNeill | 

    #47: Actually, Dave, I’ve never once met a whore of the non-streetwalker variety who dressed remotely as provocatively as girls going “clubbing” these days. Most escorts dress conservatively and indeed, some of the stupider sort of client find this disappointing.

    To all: The fact that Gail Dines (a major anti-porn feminist) and Wendy Murphy (a “rape is a tool of the Patriarchy” feminist) are against Slut Walks (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/08/slutwalk-not-sexual-liberation) is more than enough reason for me to endorse the protests. These are women who are so against women’s sexual freedom anything they dislike MUST have some good in it.

  55. #55 |  dhex | 

    a lot of you guys don’t live in a place with a robust street harassment culture. spend some time in nyc in the summer.

  56. #56 |  Mike T | 

    a lot of you guys don’t live in a place with a robust street harassment culture. spend some time in nyc in the summer.

    Pffft, that’s nothing. Do your slut walk in downtown Johannesburg in the middle of the summer.

  57. #57 |  Mike T | 

    These are women who are so against women’s sexual freedom anything they dislike MUST have some good in it.

    And the enemy of my enemy is friend…

  58. #58 |  Dave Krueger | 

    #54 Maggie McNeill

    #47: Actually, Dave, I’ve never once met a whore of the non-streetwalker variety who dressed remotely as provocatively as girls going “clubbing” these days. Most escorts dress conservatively and indeed, some of the stupider sort of client find this disappointing.

    I’m mostly familiar with the stereotypical street walkers because they’re out in the open and tend to accost anyone who looks like they are sexually deprived (precisely the kind of look I was born with).

    But, I understand your point that not all prostitutes fit the typical slutty looking stereotype.

  59. #59 |  Boyd Durkin | 

    After some thinking, I’m going to have to side with people looking sexy rather than not looking sexy.

  60. #60 |  Libby Jacobson | 

    Dave, I’m so, so happy you wrote about this (so I didn’t have to write an 800-word ranty post). :)

  61. #61 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dIv47EnCaQ

    8 minute talk from a Slut Walk. It makes the issues pretty clear.

  62. #62 |  M. Steve | 

    My major issue with Slutwalks is that they ostensibly derive from the idea that “women should be able to dress however they want without being raped” (clearly, and that judge is a moron to boot), but then the tone of the event seems to veer into “women should be able to do whatever they want and suffer no consequences at all, socially or morally”. When people start conflating “misogyny” with “risk management” (i.e., not drinking to inebriation, not accepting rides from strange men, etc.), my bullshit-o-meter starts ringing off the charts.

    I’ll be honest: I’m not “sex-positive”. I mean, yeah, I think sex is great, but I also think it’s something to be shared in stable, monogamous relationships (of any gender combination). In my opinion, socially-sanctioned promiscuity is an absolute danger to the family unit.

    To me, it’s a libertarian issue: the fact of the matter is, *someone* has to raise children, and there are pretty much two options: the family unit, or the State. If you are against the latter, then you must work socially to support the former. (Of course, I’d lay wager that plenty of the Slutwalk attendees are proponents of some flavor of Marxism, so they probably are unconcerned with such an outcome.)

  63. #63 |  Gretchen | 

    Comments like Mike T’s make me wonder if it were better if all women were indistinguishable from prostitutes, because then at least there would be an understanding that sex is an agreement as payment is involved.

    That’s a very dark thought, but that’s where the frank assertion that women who dress a certain way are asking for it will take you…

  64. #64 |  dhex | 

    Pffft, that’s nothing. Do your slut walk in downtown Johannesburg in the middle of the summer.

    like i said, i don’t think you get it – it’s not uncommon to watch men walk behind women (dressed professionally, unprofessionally, or otherwise) for half a block or more. if you ask someone “man, what’s the deal with that shit? does that ever work?” they look at you like you’ve got three heads.

    of course it doesn’t work (i.e. result in a date) because it’s got nothing to do with that. it’s got nothing to do with what someone’s wearing and everything to do with this “i can’t help it, i’m a man/did you see what she was wearing?”* excuse for what is an act of aggression.

    * weakest of the weaksauce

  65. #65 |  demize! | 

    #24 that is determined by how attractive the “leery” finds the “leerer”. These semiotics are so subtle and amorphous that it really can’t be described in anything other than an ad hoc basis.

  66. #66 |  Peter | 

    @33: What planet do you live on? Your “unacceptable” is what the vast majority of heterosexual men think though most wouldn’t admit outside the veil of full veil anonymity.

    @63: The only way they are distinguishable now is one admits to taking your money and actually give you what you pay for while the other just takes it.

    I have followed this conversation on a couple blogs and #13 nailed it. Also the issue we have here is the semantic muddling of the word rape in the past couple decades. I think we all agree that true rape, per book definition, isn’t sexual in nature but we don’t have an easy word for “violent sexual assault” that conveys the same feeling as “rape”. I think we can ALL agree that violent sexual assault is dependent on sexual factors and you are more likely to get sexual assaulted if you dress like a whore. Go walk to any place where anonymous groping is pervasive (rallies, standing concerts (i.e. mosh pits), dark packed basement clubs, any western women in the Middle East not fully covered (I lived in SWA for years and women are groped / masturbated on regularly in malls, walking down the street, etc)) and you see dress / mannerism is the key. Obese man-hating dyked out fully covered women (think the meatpacking chick from Boondock Saints) are of magnitudes less chance of “assault” than the skinny bimbo with plastic double D’s in a wet half T and daisy dukes. Let’s quit arguing over how the world should be and understand how it is.

  67. #67 |  Gretchen | 

    Lovely. It’s always nice to hear from men who assume that because they’re misogynistic assholes, all other men must be as well but are just hiding it. It’s like they feel alone and threatened in their assholery if that’s not the case.

  68. #68 |  Leah | 

    True dat, Gretchen.

  69. #69 |  RomanCandle | 

    @44
    “Hmm, I guess I took conflating to mean that you considered one as bad as the other. You take it to mean something that is on the same list.”

    To me, you weren’t implying that “leering” and “slut-shaming” (like “rape culture”, not one has bothered to explain the definition of this to me) were as bad as rape, but you seemed to imply that it was in the same ballpark. That’s what conflating is.

    Am I being overly defensive? Perhaps. But as I’ve mentioned before, it’s virtually impossible for a man to have an honest, good-faith discussion about gender politics without being labelled a misogynist at some point.

    “Enjoy your success with women…”

    Hey, it’s better to be a jerk who gets laid than a nice guy who’s involuntarily celibate.

  70. #70 |  Mike T | 

    That’s a very dark thought, but that’s where the frank assertion that women who dress a certain way are asking for it will take you…

    Asking for it is sloppy terminology because it conflates morality and causality. A woman has a moral right to not be raped. As a matter of causality, exhibiting certain behaviors while wearing certain types of clothing will not only raise the probability of being raped, but reduce the level of sympathy one is owed for being the victim of such an attack. When a woman chooses to engage in behaviors which are known to put her at elevated risk of being an available target for a would-be rapist, that certainly would cause any right-thinking individual to feel substantially less sympathetic to her as a victim.

  71. #71 |  Mike T | 

    To put it further in perspective for you, Gretchen, a woman has a moral right to run through the poor sections of Johannesburg wearing pasties and a thong and not get raped. If by “asking for it” you mean “an obvious causal link” between her doing that and getting raped (since Johannesburg has one of, if not the highest, rape rates in the world) then yes, she’d be “asking for it.”

  72. #72 |  Dave Krueger | 

    What exactly does “asking for it” mean? There is nothing wrong with wanting to attract the attention of men. Hell, I think women should be able to safely walk around completely naked (and I am dead serious about that). Even a woman who specifically dresses to go out and get laid is not inviting forcible rape. She’s simply playing the mating game. She will no doubt attract a lot of male attention and some of it will, no doubt, be unwelcome. But there is no way that a rational human being can claim that she is “asking” to be raped.

    To say women should cover up to avoid the risk of assault is the same argument that the Taliban uses to rationalize the burqa, except that the line is being drawn in a different place. We ridicule fundamentalist Islamic cultures that stigmatize women who don’t cover up or have a male escort, but by telling women they should dress more conservatively, we are essentially doing exactly the same thing. You could argue that, to reduce the risk of rape even further, they shouldn’t go out at all.

    Recording a cop will very likely get you illegally arrested, but we don’t later scoff and tell them that they had it coming because they recorded a cop.

    What kind of friggin’ cops comes out and says, “It would sure make my job a lot easier if you women didn’t keep going out and getting yourselves raped”.

    Finally, the fact that a jury is more likely to see the victim as complicit in her own rape because of the way she dressed is not a problem with the way women dress. It’s a problem with the prejudices of the population from which the jury is picked.

  73. #73 |  Gretchen | 

    Mike T,

    It’s true that “asking for it” can have the different meanings you describe. We might, for example, say that a person who leaves a fancy car running is asking for it to be stolen, and that doesn’t mean he’s morally responsible for its theft. However, when you’re talking about assault women are described as having “asked for it” almost universally because of how they dress, and that’s not okay. Even aside from the victim-blaming connotation in general, it suggests that the woman’s dress was the primary reason she was both selected for rape and actually was raped, which I would hazard to guess is almost never the case. Factors such as how drunk she was, whether she was alone with a rapist, etc. are astronomically more important in that regard.

    Women go out scantily clad but remain safe through the evening every single night because they are careful about making sure they have friends around, know where their drink came from, made sure to have a safe way to get home, and so on. That’s why singling out how they’re dressed as the only or even primary item of attention sounds a lot less like concern for their safety and a lot more like attempts to make them ashamed for their clothing choices. If you’re genuinely thinking about the actual cause of rape, not being vulnerable around rapists would be the actual top thing to worry about.

  74. #74 |  M. Steve | 

    @ Gretchen 73

    “Women go out scantily clad but remain safe through the evening every single night because they are careful about making sure they have friends around, know where their drink came from, made sure to have a safe way to get home, and so on. ”

    Very well said.

    It’s my observation that events like the Slutwalk have a tendency to shout “dress how you want”, but only whisper “have friends around, keep an eye on your drink, don’t drink too much, and know how you’re getting home”.

  75. #75 |  Gretchen | 

    Well, true M. Steve, but I don’t think the Slut Walk is really about telling women how to protect themselves from rape. It’s just a bunch of people saying that “Try to avoid dressing like a slut” isn’t it.

  76. #76 |  M. Steve | 

    Gretchen, I agree, which is why I criticize it. As always, the message has two parts; what’s said, and what’s left unsaid.

  77. #77 |  Peter | 

    That rational just doesn’t work Gretchen as it’s alleviating all personal responsibility to not be stupid.

    “Why should I have to watch what I drink, it’s not my fault they spiked it”

    “Why shouldn’t I not get totally plastered, snort a bunch of coke, go home with some guy I just met, and take my clothes off, finger myself in his bed, and then just go to sleep, it’s not my fault he had sex with me when I passed out afterwards”

    “Why should I have to keep friends around, it’s not my fault”

    Let’s have Drunken Cocktease Go Home with Random Stranger Princess Walk.

    We all get it’s a mosaic of independent behaviors and individual actions but it’s just irresponsible to condone those independent components or, if we wish to, understand and accept the increased risk that comes with that behavior and accept yes it was partially the victims fault.

    Nothing is 100% and yes the victim always shares some responsibility regardless of the crime, it’s called the risk/reward ratio of not committing suicide or waking up in the morning.

    If I jump out a plane with no parachute it’s not 100% I will die but it does significantly increase my chances. Sure that is gravities fault but I share some of the blame here if I go splat.

  78. #78 |  Gretchen | 

    Peter, go back and read what I said again. I was careful to distinguish between practical responsibility and moral responsibility and explain why “don’t dress like a slut” switched from the former to the latter. And that wasn’t the first time, considering that JOR first articulated it back at post #43.

  79. #79 |  D. Nevels | 

    I saw the youtube clip. Can anyone tell me the point other than the speaker saying that barely anyone asked her about what she wore?

  80. #80 |  dhex | 

    the victim always shares some responsibility regardless of the crime

    try explaining that to raped toddlers. they’re screaming “ouchy!” and sobbing and i’m all “you should have known better than to walk into your local parish wearing nothing but a onesie and a diaper” and their parents are all “how dare you!” and i’m all “i’m just telling it like it is, lady – stretchy pants are like candy to priests.”

    but do people listen? no. it’s hard being a messenger of righteousness.

  81. #81 |  Peter | 

    @ #80: In the context of adults yes. Let’s not chase the strawmen of infants, permanently mentally disabled (i.e. retarded, not a drunk person who is temporarily impaired), advanced Alzheimers, etc etc

  82. #82 |  Peter | 

    @ #80: And I would blame the parents/guardian in those cases. I wouldn’t excuse the parent who dressed their eight year old daughter up in Abercrombie’s new push-up/stuffed bra for kids, gave them a Tesco pole dancing toy, and sent them to the latest female equivalent of NAMBLA.

    Don’t want a priest to molest your kid, put your kid around priests; that is a risk decision made by the parents to trust priests.

  83. #83 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    D. Nevels, thanks for watching the clip I recommended at #61

    The speaker made a number of points– a major one is that rape is a random event which results from being targeted by a rapist.

    As far as I know, there’s no strong co-relation between what one is wearing and the risks.

    General points: Those of you who’ve been positing scenarios about women wearing unusually revealing clothes are just guessing about the risks, and also guessing that there’s a bright line between what’s safe to wear and what isn’t.

    In general, behavior which is made more expensive is less likely to occur. Do you want a world where women feel safe in sexy clothes? In that case, don’t say it’s their fault if they get raped. Being blamed adds to the cost of being raped.

    As nearly as I can figure it, something like 5% of men are rapists– the highest percentage of women having been raped that I’ve seen is about a quarter or a third. Rapists typically don’t do it just once.

    My impression is that a lot of men who aren’t rapists are sufficiently afraid of being accused that they supply cover for actual rapists by inventing scenarios where it isn’t entirely the rapist’s choice and thus not entirely his fault.

  84. #84 |  Peter | 

    @ #83:

    Those numbers seem high to me. Do you honestly believe 1 in 3 women are raped (using the definition that has been argued in this thread by others where rape isn’t sexual assault nor has anything to do with sex in a sexual way and is purely random/power trip) and 1 in 20 men are rapists? Sorry but those numbers don’t pass the common sense test.

  85. #85 |  dhex | 

    And I would blame the parents/guardian in those cases.

    of course you would.

    the point yer missing is that the idea is the same. it’s not about kids “dressing slutty” that resulted in a slew of molestations – a great deal of those cases were kids going to catholic schools in uniforms. it’s that some men are rapists.

    i come back to the point about places with “robust street harassment cultures” a la nyc – i have seen and heard pregnant women getting catcalled. it’s got fuckall to do with “dressing slutty” and everything to do with exercising power over someone else. if you want a more simple demonstration, imagine another man follows you down the street calling you names. are you getting ready for a fight? or are you looking at your clothes and thinking “man, i dressed too slutty today”?

  86. #86 |  Leah | 

    Ha, dhex, funny you’d mention that – I’ve gotten catcalled quite a few times here in Chicago. What was I wearing? Business casual attire, mostly (pants and button-down shirts) but on one memorable occasion I was 8 months pregnant. Was someone hot for maternity clothes? Or just a douchebag? Hmm…

  87. #87 |  Peter | 

    I don’t put myself in situations where men might call me names (i.e. if you don’t like to get cat calls in NYC, then move somewhere else) and in the same way, as a middle age white guy who has a come fuck with me look and mannerism (was born with that, lots of fights as a result), I don’t hang out around basketball courts in the ghetto …. if I want to play ball I go to the Y. The point here is I accept the reality of life and make conscientious decisions as a result to minimize risk to the lifestyle I choose to live. I don’t blame the dog that bites me, I blame myself for getting bit understanding that no matter how “civilized and progressive” I may be the world isn’t nor are most people. The way it is and the way it should be don’t match and the cop giving the advice understood that in a way that many of the folk on this board don’t.

  88. #88 |  Nancy Lebovitz | 

    Peter, my point was that even starting from a very pessimistic assumption, only a small minority of men commit rape.

    However, what proportion of women having been raped would you find plausible, and why?

  89. #89 |  Peter | 

    Nancy:

    That is a difficult question as I am aware that many rapes go unreported, many reported rapes aren’t actually raped (defined as non-sexual in nature per earlier in this thread by others that aren’t me), and anecdotal evidence is unreliable. I know from personal conversations I have had with folk I would put it well under 1% of women to the point of maybe one in a thousand and the FBI (I looked this up after I asked myself the question so I wouldn’t bias my answer) tells me I am overestimating (~100,000 a year out of around 150 million women or roughly 1 out of 1500). Of all the women I have known over the years ranging the entire economic spectrum I have only known one women was raped as we are defining rape and even that is questionable as the guy was never caught (or reported) hence I don’t know his intent. That being said I know four men who have been raped and plenty of women who were sexual assaulted, sometimes violently in manner that would be considered rape in a layman’s terms.

  90. #90 |  John David Galt | 

    What the cop said is only common sense. It’s fine to dress as you please if you can defend yourself and aren’t averse to having to do so. But if you look like a minnow, and you insist on trying to swim across the shark tank, guess what’s going to happen. Just because an attacker would be in the wrong should not mean you bear no blame for doing something that stupid.

  91. #91 |  May Miscellanea, Part One « The Honest Courtesan | 

    […] didn’t really feel it lay in my sphere of coverage.  But when Dave Krueger, who guest-blogged on The Agitator for the past two weeks, asked for my opinion about the story I thought about it a bit harder and […]

Leave a Reply