Slut Pride

[tiagosilva29]

Clothes help in raping people, just like guns help in killing people.

So we should all dress in full garments, all white, to reduce the colour stimulation that triggers some neurological or psychiatric impulses?

[Emily_June]

Yes, when a woman dresses like a "slut", I'll be the first to admit that she definitely wants your attention. But noticing is quite a ways from raping. Regardless of all of the jokes saying otherwise, men aren't rampant animals. Mentally healthy men can control themselves, no matter how inviting an attractive half-naked woman. I'm no ultra-feminist, but I will be the first to agree that once a woman says "no", it's over, regardless of how she is/was dressed. If any man lacks the common sense to stop once a woman says "no", then he's asking to be treated and prosecuted as a rapist. Once she says "no"--at any point, by the way--you have a choice whether you want to cross that line into rape, or back off--but that choice is yours, and yours alone and you should be held entirely accountable for your decision.

Whether or not a woman wants to have sex with you should never be judged by what she's wearing, but by what she says.

We're really not that mysterious, guys.

I can admire the point of this "parade", but I have to agree that it is maybe a bit overboard.

[LiquidSolstice]

Alright, so I'm failing to see why so many people are missing the difference between "root cause of" and "slightly increasing chances of".

[tiagosilva29]

We're really not that mysterious, guys.

No, you're just complex and with a lack of proper documentation.

Alright, so I'm failing to see why so many people are missing the difference between "root cause of" and "slightly increasing chances of".

There is no difference in this context. You don't get raped because you drink or have a short skirt. You are raped because someone rapes you. If you are so eager to control the impulses of a few, let's all dress with white blankets, so there's no colour or flesh stimulation. We should also use industrial odor neutralizers to remove our body scent, while we're at it.

[LiquidSolstice]

No, you're just complex and with a lack of proper documentation.There is no difference in this context. You don't get raped because you drink or have a short skirt. You are raped because someone rapes you. If you are so eager to control the impulses of a few, let's all dress with white blankets, so there's no colour or flesh stimulation. We should also use industrial odor neutralizers to remove our body scent, while we're at it.

What the hell is wrong with you people? I'm at wit's end here.

~ I'm not trying to mandate dress code.

~ I'm not trying to oppress women.

~ I'm not trying to say that dressing "slutty" will suddenly equate to rape.

Point and simple, if you spare a minute out of your day to do something to make yourself a little bit more secure, whether it's locking your door before you go to work or putting on a slightly longer skirt, it can add up to make a difference. Not will, can.

That's it, stop putting sensationalist words in my mouth that I never said. Thanks.

[tiagosilva29]

That's it, stop putting sensationalist words in my mouth that I never said. Thanks.

Alright, so I'm failing to see why so many people are missing the difference between "root cause of" and "slightly increasing chances of".

"Dressing a long skirt" is not remotely equivalent to "locking a door". Rapists (specially serial rapists) do it because they can. Sub-reasons: because they want to hurt you, because they are superior to you, because it's free, etc. Rapists display a predatorial behavior and like true hunters they mostly disregard the presentation over the prize itself, unless they have a strong urge for specific characteristics of man/woman, like "big booty girls", or "she is just like my late mother, I miss her so much, she was the only one that loved me, I love you, I want to love you back".

tl;dr Dressing a long skirt is not the same as locking a door and it won't make you more safer from a rapist.

[compl3x]

Alright, so I'm failing to see why so many people are missing the difference between "root cause of" and "slightly increasing chances of".

Looking back on the topic some people made some pretty callous statements suggesting that if you dress provocitively don't be surprised if you get raped. People weren't making the case for your point which is that dress in some cases might contribute to rape or sexual assault, which I personally reject.

Rapists exist as well, and while yes, there are many incidents in which it is unprovoked and has nothing to do with clothing or anything superficial of the sort, it is still your responsibility to understand that there are people out there that react differently due to the way you dress, and that dressing in a certain way can attract a certain crowd.

Unprovoked rape? As opposed to provoking someone to rape you? I don't hink that is even possble, is it?

[Seizure1990]

LS, the point you are missing is that it doesn't even lower the chances. We're not trying to say "well, yea, it could help to dress respectably, BUT DON'T SAY THAT BECAUSE IT'S STILL THE RAPIST'S FAULT!!!"

Despite common sense and what you may believe, there is NO connection. None. Nadda. Zip. Zero. Nothing. When you understand that, and when you realize the damage that your assumptions cause to the rape victims and the kind of negative reaction to victims it breeds in our culture, then you will understand why it is so important to rid this ENTIRELY INCORRECT idea from people's minds. All it does is give legitimacy to the crime, and place unneeded blame on the victim. That's all.

[Solid Knight]

According to the statistics that were posted dress doesn't drastically increase the probability of being raped. ("A Federal Commission on Crime of Violence Study found that only

4.4% of all reported rapes involved provocative behavior on the part of the victim.")

I'm not arguing that his statement was correct. I'm only saying that the two ideas I outlined are separate. Some people seem to think they are one in the same.

[zombieChan]

Sluts unite, It's my right to dress as slutty as I want.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

What the hell is wrong with you people? I'm at wit's end here.

~ I'm not trying to mandate dress code.

~ I'm not trying to oppress women.

~ I'm not trying to say that dressing "slutty" will suddenly equate to rape.

Point and simple, if you spare a minute out of your day to do something to make yourself a little bit more secure, whether it's locking your door before you go to work or putting on a slightly longer skirt, it can add up to make a difference. Not will, can.

That's it, stop putting sensationalist words in my mouth that I never said. Thanks.

I would have to agree with you.

It would seem logical to me that if you were passing by a person who would commit a rape then dressing in a way that would increase his sexual arousal may increase the chance he may try to rape you. For instance, that rapist in hiding, that they know personally, may be more inclined to rape them.

[sava700]

This thread needs more pictures of sluts!!

[ThaCrip]

Facts don't lie: it's easier to rape someone wearing a skirt than it is to rape someone wearing jeans. I'm not saying women shouldn't dress provocative, by all means, do so for my viewing pleasure. But when you wear something "slutty", expect...attention. Both wanted and unwanted. Also, don't dress slutty and then go to a bar down the alley at night with no friends...

Agreed. because there is a fine line between showing a little and to much. when in doubt show less it's best long term.

those who dress slutty/act slutty won't be respected by a guy (i.e. no chance for long term relationship) and they will get attention but it will be in a bad way, that's pretty much a fact. sad thing is all these young girls don't see it as they think, "cool, i am getting attention etc" but they can't SEE IT til they get a little older. most teenage girls and probably most early 20's for that matter just can't SEE IT. that's the ages they seem to be most naive.

[Seizure1990]

I would have to agree with you.

It would seem logical to me that if you were passing by a person who would commit a rape then dressing in a way that would increase his sexual arousal may increase the chance he may try to rape you. For instance, that rapist in hiding, that they know personally, may be more inclined to rape them.

It may seem logical but rapists aren't logical. did you see the statistics on the subject?

Agreed. because there is a fine line between showing a little and to much. when in doubt show less it's best long term.

those who dress slutty/act slutty won't be respected by a guy (i.e. no chance for long term relationship) and they will get attention but it will be in a bad way, that's pretty much a fact. sad thing is all these young girls don't see it as they think, "cool, i am getting attention etc" but they can't SEE IT til they get a little older. most teenage girls and probably most early 20's for that matter just can't SEE IT. that's the ages they seem to be most naive.

There is a difference between "bad attention" and raping. Is it hard to see that?

[TheElite]

So we should all dress in full garments, all white, to reduce the colour stimulation that triggers some neurological or psychiatric impulses?

We could. But then Americans could also drop their homicide rate by banning guns. It goes either way.

[Seizure1990]

We could. But then Americans could also drop their homicide rate by banning guns. It goes either way.

and knives, and brass knuckles, and baseball bats, and hammers...

I do agree on limiting the availability of guns though, depending on are, purpose, and individual. But that's all besides the point, and not a good comparison in the first place...

[Fred Derf Veteran]

if they want to dress up like a slut, be my guest. lets see what happen if they get raped...

That is the attitude that they are trying to change. You just proved that these slut walks are needed.

[ThaCrip]

There is a difference between "bad attention" and raping. Is it hard to see that?

obviously. i was just making a general point that those who dress slutty are more likely to attract negative attention.

because those who dress overly slutty are pretty much asking for it. they need to have some standards.

We could. But then Americans could also drop their homicide rate by banning guns. It goes either way.

Banning guns = Bad. (no way to protect yourself etc. because with guns it basically levels the playing field. if it came back to knives/bats etc then it tends to favor the bigger guys. plus if at least a moderate amount of competent gun users had guns they could put a stop to those psycho's who go on shooting spree's etc)

i am pretty sure i posted statistics a while ago that shows American's are generally safer WITH guns than without. i am not going to bother finding them now but if you search google i am sure you will find them.

plus it's in the constitution so there is no way i would ban them. i barely used guns myself but i am 110 percent against banning guns.

[Prince781]

That is the attitude that they are trying to change. You just proved that these slut walks are needed.

Not necessarily. It is quite basicly logical to assume that human behavior is subject to the way how a person dresses. Are you suggesting otherwise? Try asking yourself these questions then:

A person just got robbed, and is looking to get the help of a police officer. Would the person go to someone wearing normal clothes or a person wearing a police uniform? And just because the person is wearing a police uniform, does that mean that he has to constantly account for the possibility of the person just "dressing up"?

A person is wearing a Turban. Do people assume that he is a person of the Seek religion, or just someone "dressing up"?

In a hospital, do you automatically assume that the people wearing doctor uniforms are doctors, or do you account for the possibility of them dressing up?

The fact is, most people assume what others are based on the attire that they presently wear. So therefore, if a woman is wearing a rather provocatively revealing outfit, society tends to view her as the type of person generally associated with that type of attire. Even women do this; it's not just men. So therefore, the victim is at some fault here for dressing somewhat inappropriately and presenting herself in a vulnerable situation (lack of guard, perhaps)?

Aside from the behavorial side to this argument, in my opinion it is just plain insulting and barbaric to be dressing like that, regardless of your gender. I get pretty offended when I see someone dressing like that, and it ruins whatever I'm currently doing (such as watching TV, looking at the beauty of the beach, viewing nature, etcetera). Why I find it offensive is because women generally dress like that to objectify themselves to men (this has been proven constantly throughout psychological and scientific studies), and therefore are unconsciously assuming that all men or boys are simply uncontrollable idiots whose behavior is subject to change based on what a woman or girl wears (which I guess is true for this pervert in this case). However, not all men are like this, and I find it offensive to assume so--which most women do. I view all men, women, girls, and boys as people who should be respected and NOT objectified. Sadly, not all human beings conform to my way of thinking. :(

[sweetsam]

No one deserves to be raped. But making the choice to walk scantily clad in a dark alley is like walking around in the amazon jungle with bacon strapped to your back. That does not mean you are safe without the bacon. It just means your chances of being harmed went up.

In other words if everyone respected others rights and stayed with in their boundaries we wouldn't need a police force or military. Unfortunately that isn't the case. When such is the case expecting to be safe walking down a dark alley scantily clad is a very bad choice.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

It may seem logical but rapists aren't logical. did you see the statistics on the subject?

I have not read the links in the thread, but I read a lot on the subject while taking a few courses in university about two years ago. I understand the current understanding of rapist archetypes. I'm not saying all this information isn't accurate. I'm just saying I agree with Liquid that dressing provocatively can increase your chances of being sexually victimized.

This isn't illogical. If a girl decides to skip wearing her under garments and decides to wear an extremely short skirt and run around town she's going to draw a certain type of attention. She knows this as she dressed proactively to get attention and to make a statement. Is she going to be raped by every guy who notices she's missing her under garments? No, of course not. Does she deserve to be raped for skipping her under garments? No, of course not.

We're merely saying she increased her chances of getting harmed by dressing in that fashion. It doesn't make it right it just is what it is.

I liken it to a white guy deciding he wants to dress up like a Klue Klux Klan leader and parade through North Philadelphia (majority black section of town). He doesn't deserve to get his head beat in, but he will.

Getting raped by a stranger isn't the most common method of rape. By far the most common rapist is a person who first knows the victim much like how the most common type of child molestation is done by someone the child knows. Sexual criminals like to attack those they feel they can control due to the risk of their crime I am sure and the fact that seeing their victim probably feeds their insanity. That doesn't mean there are no rapes conducted by strangers against strangers.

[Seizure1990]

But it doesn't increase her chances. That is the thing.

The leap between attracting negative attention, and attracting rapists, is a huge one, and is in fact, FALSE.

There is no connection. The people who would rape someone, and the people who merely cat-call and make disgusting remarks, are two entirely different sets of people. One does NOT lead to the other. That's all there is to it.

If you say that what you wear has an affect on your chances, you are wrong.

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

A rapist looks for a victim that can easily be raped. By that, I mean a victim with clothes that can easily be removed or long hair that can be grabbed. Unfortunately, dressing provocatively means dressing in very little clothing which can make you more of a target than someone with jeans and a jacket.

[Emily_June]

The comparisons in this thread are a little ridiculous. A woman in revealing clothing, and a white man in klu klux klan attire? Unwanted attention and rape?

And why are we talking about men like wild animals who can't control themselves, or don't know the difference between yes and no?

I realize there are men (and women) with some psychological disorder or urge to rape--but, without doing the research, I'm going to go ahead and make a guess that most rapes are committed by psychologically sound men who know the difference between yes and no, but chose to ignore it. Again, just a guess.

Even if it's not violent, even if it was consensual at the beginning, and even if you're not doing it just for a power-trip or because of some mental illness, if you continue after a woman says no, it's rape.

No one is arguing that a woman dressed like a "slut" shouldn't turn your head or get your attention. No one is arguing that her being dressed that way may make you want to pursue her, sexually--and as a woman, I'll admit that if I were to dress that way, I probably want to be pursued. There's nothing wrong with that. But the line you have to cross into rape isn't all that fine, and choosing to cross that line is entirely up to the rapist, not the victim or her attire.

[Seizure1990]

A rapist looks for a victim that can easily be raped. By that, I mean a victim with clothes that can easily be removed or long hair that can be grabbed.

You are making this crap up. Statistics clearly prove you wrong.