Support NeoGAF

[Shanadeus]

You get it.

I doubt everyone have been told this as much as they've been told to "not dress as a slut", "don't be flirty", "don't even look at them or you'll be inviting them in for a grope" and many other relatively useless tips.

 

[Devolution]

You defend women, and in the same instance claim there is nothing they can do to prevent groping. Wtf?

My friend got groped on a subway, turned and punched the dude's fucking teeth in. Literally, knocked two of his teeth out. And it was crowded.

That's a great answer to harassment and wouldn't get a woman arrested! And just how did she prevent it? Oh wait she didn't you're talking about her response to said action. What's the point here? Women are supposed to all react like your friend? Pfft.

I just don't defend women, unlike most of the people posting in this thread I actually am one who gets to deal with the realities of sexual harassment. Guess what? Most of the times I've dealt with it, there was nothing I could do, unless I could magically turn myself into a man. It comes from the same place every time, a lack of respect for my bodily autonomy.

Since people don't actually care about discussion in order to broaden understanding and are more interested in "winning" I sadly have to state that I'm not arguing women are to blame because they have the ability to do something about about sexual aggressors. I'm simply stating that I find it just as offensive that people believe women are useless, powerless, in the face of aggressors.

It's insulting to argue in any fashion, that women somehow should be capable of fending off their attackers or living their lives different just to prevent an event, that for the most part they will never see coming. We already live in fear, take precautions for ourselves, and do many of the things a bunch of men like to tell us as if it's new fucking information. It gets old. Even women with bodyguards get assaulted, like Lara Logan, and then men have the audacity to ask why she wears certain things or why she was there in the first place.

If you take that kind of thinking to its next logical step, you might as well ask women why they exist in the first place. Since apparently we always have to talk about what a woman wore, who she has previously slept with, or what kind of attitude she displays instead of talking about the society that encourages the objectification and violation of women. Men, often times, don't want to be introspective and look at how they might be helping to encourage the atmosphere that allows sexual harassment to thrive. That's what angers me the most. Let's just keep putting the onus on the victims (or would-be victims) when they are just the targets of aggression and disrespect of certain men. But we don't want to go there right? The actual cause of these events? Just don't walk around in slutty clothing women, jeez.

 

[faceless007]

Thanks, I was looking for this earlier to post it.

 

[Vincent Alexander]

That's a great answer to harassment and wouldn't get a woman arrested! And just how did she prevent it? Oh wait she didn't you're talking about her response to said action. What's the point here? Women are supposed to all react like your friend? Pfft.

You are correct. She wasn't arrested. And yes, if someone gropes you, I expect you to hit him. Is that really so crazy? I understand one won't always be in a position to be able to lash back, but when you have the capability of doing anything at said moment, do it. And I want to stress, even if you can't hit back, or you do and it doesn't stop, I'm still not putting any blame whatsoever on women. Not a single fucking bit.

It's insulting to argue in any fashion, that women somehow should be capable of fending off their attackers

Why? Please, explain this to me. Again, I'm not arguing that in all instances women have the capability of doing such, but to argue they will NEVER be able to fight back, or do anything at all, is what I find insulting. I give people a little more credit than that.

...or living their lives different just to prevent an event, that for the most part they will never see coming. We already live in fear, take precautions for ourselves, and do many of the things a bunch of men like to tell us as if it's new fucking information. It gets old. Even women with bodyguards get assaulted, like Lara Logan, and then men have the audacity to ask why she wears certain things or why she was there in the first place.

I never made a single comment about life style.

If you take that kind of thinking to its next logical step, you might as well ask women why they exist in the first place. Since apparently we always have to talk about what a woman wore, who she has previously slept with, or what kind of attitude she displays instead of talking about the society that encourages the objectification and violation of women. Men, often times, don't want to be introspective and look at how they might be helping to encourage the atmosphere that allows sexual harassment to thrive. That's what angers me the most. Let's just keep putting the onus on the victims (or would-be victims) when they are just the targets of aggression and disrespect of certain men. But we don't want to go there right? The actual cause of these events? Just don't walk around in slutty clothing women, jeez.

And now we are in whacko world. I hope this isn't in response to anything I said, since I've commented zero on the "slutty clothing" aspect.

 

[Shaka]

That's a great answer to harassment and wouldn't get a woman arrested! And just how did she prevent it? Oh wait she didn't you're talking about her response to said action. What's the point here? Women are supposed to all react like your friend? Pfft.

I just don't defend women, unlike most of the people posting in this thread I actually am one who gets to deal with the realities of sexual harassment. Guess what? Most of the times I've dealt with it, there was nothing I could do, unless I could magically turn myself into a man. It comes from the same place every time, a lack of respect for my bodily autonomy.




It's insulting to argue in any fashion, that women somehow should be capable of fending off their attackers or living their lives different just to prevent an event, that for the most part they will never see coming. We already live in fear, take precautions for ourselves, and do many of the things a bunch of men like to tell us as if it's new fucking information. It gets old. Even women with bodyguards get assaulted, like Lara Logan, and then men have the audacity to ask why she wears certain things or why she was there in the first place.

If you take that kind of thinking to its next logical step, you might as well ask women why they exist in the first place. Since apparently we always have to talk about what a woman wore, who she has previously slept with, or what kind of attitude she displays instead of talking about the society that encourages the objectification and violation of women. Men, often times, don't want to be introspective and look at how they might be helping to encourage the atmosphere that allows sexual harassment to thrive. That's what angers me the most. Let's just keep putting the onus on the victims (or would-be victims) when they are just the targets of aggression and disrespect of certain men. But we don't want to go there right? The actual cause of these events? Just don't walk around in slutty clothing women, jeez.

Jesus Christ I feel like I'm under attack :/

 

[samus i am]

Jesus Christ I feel like I'm under attack :/

If you didn't want to be attacked you wouldn't look so sluty.

 

[Devolution]

You are correct. She wasn't arrested. And yes, if someone gropes you, I expect you to hit him. Is that really so crazy? I understand one won't always be in a position to be able to lash back, but when you have the capability of doing anything at said moment, do it. And I want to stress, even if you can't hit back, or you do and it doesn't stop, I'm still not putting any blame whatsoever on women. Not a single fucking bit.

Assaulting someone who's just touched you, which others have not necessarily witnessed is not a good suggestion no matter how many times you want to spout off you think its justified. Many women have assaulted men who have tried to or explicitly said they will harm them, guess what has happened to those women? Charged with assault. Think harder about what you're posting here.

Why? Please, explain this to me. Again, I'm not arguing that in all instances women have the capability of doing such, but to argue they will NEVER be able to fight back, or do anything at all, is what I find insulting. I give people a little more credit than that.

Because it's been used as a defense tactic to say that a woman wanted it. Do you not get this? It's been literally used as a legitimate defense for lawyers to say, well she didn't fight back so it must be consensual. No where have I said that women can't fight back but its not always in her favor or not always an option.

I never made a single comment about life style.

And now we are in whacko world. I hope this isn't in response to anything I said, since I've commented zero on the "slutty clothing" aspect.

This whole thread has been a commentary on women's clothing. And the funny part is no one ever explicitly said what "slutty" clothing is and how women can somehow help to prevent their own rape/sexual assault has mostly been talked about from very privileged people who've never gone through an ordeal or never really thought about the implications of what they're saying.

 

[WickedAngel]

WTF.. DON'T put drugs in their drink? I swear I heard otherwise.

I've been doing it wrong all these years...

 

[Vincent Alexander]

Assaulting someone who's just touched you, which others have not necessarily witnessed is not a good suggestion no matter how many times you want to spout off you think its justified. Many women have assaulted men who have tried to or explicitly said they will harm them, guess what has happened to those women? Charged with assault. Think harder about what you're posting here.

Because it's been used as a defense tactic to say that a woman wanted it. Do you not get this? It's been literally used as a legitimate defense for lawyers to say, well she didn't fight back so it must be consensual. No where have I said that women can't fight back but its not always in her favor or not always an option.

I understand the legal ramifications that may or may not occur, but here is my question, and I mean this in all seriousness (and I have no idea how to word this in a more subtle way): Would you rather take your chances that you might be charged with assault, or take the chances you might be raped? Our legal system can be fucked up, but it does right every once-in-a-while. I'd have faith, play my odds, and knock the shit out of the aggressor .

This whole thread has been a commentary on women's clothing. And the funny part is no one ever explicitly said what "slutty" clothing is and how women can somehow help to prevent their own rape/sexual assault mostly from very privileged people who've never gone through an ordeal or never really thought about the implications of what they're saying.

And on behalf of mankind, I apologize. I personally don't even like to discuss the idea of women's clothing being a factor, simply because more than not people turn it into a joke rather than seriously discussing it. Or when "serious" discussion happens, it turns into a yelling match.

 

[Neki]

This whole thread has been a commentary on women's clothing. And the funny part is no one ever explicitly said what "slutty" clothing is and how women can somehow help to prevent their own rape/sexual assault has mostly been talked about from very privileged people who've never gone through an ordeal or never really thought about the implications of what they're saying.

I've asked this before, but no one seems to want to answer. What is the difference between me saying "Dressing conservatively may help reduce the chances of sexual assault" and "Reducing the amount of frat parties and dark allies you go down may reduce sexual assault," the first is more morally wrong than the second statement? I'm somehow blaming the victim by saying the first quote? Both are choices of the woman, and both quotes act to minimize sexual assault by reducing sexual advances that may occur.

 

[SapientWolf]

Not sure about sexual assault in general, but doesn't a high proportion of rape occur between people who know each other pretty well...? or is that an urban legend...?

That is true. Associating with someone that has a controlling personality and a lack of empathy is a greater risk factor than wearing skimpy clothing. Low self esteem and poor self concept can also prevent a person from resisting unwanted or inappropriate advances.

 

[Devolution]

I understand the legal ramifications that may or may not occur, but here is my question, and I mean this in all seriousness (and I have no idea how to word this in a more subtle way): Would you rather take your chances that you might be charged with assault, or take the chances you might be raped? Our legal system can be fucked up, but it does right every once-in-a-while. I'd have faith, play my odds, and knock the shit out of the aggressor .

I think I would fight back depending on the circumstance. I say "think" because hell it's so much easier to say I'd fight back, but faced with an actual event in which my life is in danger? I might freeze up. Many women don't fight back for many reasons (and this is brought up at trial), and some who do get charged with assault. What I'm saying here, is damned if you do, damned if you don't.

And on behalf of mankind, I apologize. I personally don't even like to discuss the idea of women's clothing being a factor, simply because more than not people turn it into a joke rather than seriously discussing it. Or when "serious" discussion happens, it turns into a yelling match.

I apologize for getting frustrated but as you can see with this thread, it's hard to pick out the decent guys who actually do listen and don't just parrot the same twisted "logic" over and over.

 

[Devolution]

I've asked this before, but no one seems to want to answer. What is the difference between me saying "Dressing conservatively may help reduce the chances of sexual assault" and "Reducing the amount of frat parties and dark allies you go down may reduce sexual assault," the first is more morally wrong than the second statement? I'm somehow blaming the victim by saying the first quote? Both are choices of the woman, and both quotes act to minimize sexual assault by reducing sexual advances that may occur.

The whole issue here is that dress is so low on the radar, it doesn't really matter. A rapist is about control, dominance, and doesn't give an honest shit about consent. At what point do you think clothing actually factors into this line of thinking?

If you want to keep making arguments like this, you might as well tell women not to be alone with a man, ever, because of how common rape is perpetrated by acquaintances. But that's not very fair is it? And that argument actually makes a bit more sense than the clothing one. But it's terrible from the same perspective, it is effectively telling women they should be limiting what they do under the assumption it will somehow prevent rape, but it doesn't look at the cause. You're just telling would-be victims there is something they can do to prevent it, and in all honesty, it's fucking untrue and an insult to those who have been already violated.

I've never been raped, you know why? Luck.

 

[Neki]

The whole issue here is that dress is so low on the radar, it doesn't really matter. A rapist is about control, dominance, and doesn't give an honest shit about consent. At what point do you think clothing actually factors into this line of thinking?

If you want to keep making arguments like this, you might as well tell women not to be alone with a man, ever, because of how common rape is perpetrated by acquaintances. But that's not very fair is it? And that argument actually makes a bit more sense than the clothing one. But it's terrible from the same perspective, it is effectively telling women they should be limiting what they do under the assumption it will somehow prevent rape, but it doesn't look at the cause. You're just telling would-be victims there is something they can do to prevent it, and in all honesty, it's fucking untrue and an insult to those who have been already violated.

I've never been raped, you know why? Luck.

So then both statements are morally wrong then?

 

[Devolution]

So then both statements are morally wrong then?

Morally and logically. Both arguments only serve to limit what women do, where they go, etc. How does that stop rape at its source?

 

[Neki]

Morally and logically. Both arguments only serve to limit what women do, where they go, etc. How does that stop rape at its source?

It's good that you find both arguments illogical and immoral because they're both doing the same thing. I don't agree with it, but I recognize that you believe it is wrong and I respect that.

 

[Arcane Hayter]

If you took the title of this list and put it on a billboard with an 800 number who do you think would call?
smh

 

[Shanadeus]

If you took the title of this list and put it on a billboard with an 800 number who do you think would call?
smh

That's the point.
People always expect measures against rape to be aimed at potential victims, which this picture makes fun by for once making measures that are aimed at the potential violators.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

I wrote an article on this subject. I can't really post it here because it has an audio interview with someone who wants to organise a similar parade in Cardiff, Wales, tackling the connotations surrounding this parade in it's defence. I then link to a video which I felt perhaps best captures the reasoning from the other side of the debate. So here's the link

Read/Watch/Listen

 

[Meus Renaissance]

Any opinions?

 

[Biff]

It's really well written and you make excellent points but man, you are late to the game with this.

I know you didn't write it because of hits but the reason no one has an opinion is because everyone has moved on, including the SlutWalk attention whores.

You have skill as a journalist and your research is stellar. Just get your work out quicker and it'll be appreciated much more.

 

[xelios]

Late but OP is a stupid comment, and encourages victims to not come forward.

Rape is inherently against someone's will, and without their consent. Wearing that dress, being in prison, flirting, or even giving someone oral and they decide they want more (intercourse), but you say, "No," and they force it anyway -- none of that should make the victim feel guilt or at fault. No means no. Period. He should be encouraging potential victims to learn self defense and be carrying an equalizer (mace, tazer, gun).

That said, lying about being raped for some type of sick revenge is something different entirely, which I would like to see an equally harsh punishment for.

Victims deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt, but until there is sufficient evidence there shouldn't be a mob out to get the alleged rapist either.

 

[Roto13]

I know you didn't write it because of hits but the reason no one has an opinion is because everyone has moved on, including the SlutWalk attention whores.

Sadly, there are still Slutwalks going on. Ugh.

 

[Zaptruder]

Unfortunately, as shown by this chart... (more specifically, the last statement)

Sexual spontaneity and certainty of sexual desire do not go hand in hand.

I guess for some that's A-OK. For others, you've kinda just killed sex.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

It's really well written and you make excellent points but man, you are late to the game with this.

I know you didn't write it because of hits but the reason no one has an opinion is because everyone has moved on, including the SlutWalk attention whores.

You have skill as a journalist and your research is stellar. Just get your work out quicker and it'll be appreciated much more.

Thanks for the comment. I wrote it a long time ago but was too busy or banned to actually publish it. Whilst the premise is based on the slut walk protest, I think the actual argument is based on attitudes surrounding sexuality of women in society. The question is: are we as a culture too conservative or too liberal and you'll have conflicted answers to that. Whilst doing some reading, I came across one protester who commented:

"drivers honking in our support. Pedestrians and people in shops stopped what they were doing to watch us. Even the police who were blocking off traffic for us were cheering and clapping!"

The image of drivers honking and men clapping at women dressed in fishnets, panties and bras evokes a different meaning altogether most of the time but in this case she claims they were in support. Support of what they were wearing for their own gratification or support for message of their protest? This is one of the aspects that crept up often and that's the 'culture' of men in regards to women who are proud in their 'sexual liberty' or 'promiscuity'.

 

[Biff]

Whilst doing some reading, I came across one protester who commented:

"drivers honking in our support. Pedestrians and people in shops stopped what they were doing to watch us. Even the police who were blocking off traffic for us were cheering and clapping!"

The image of drivers honking and men clapping at women dressed in fishnets, panties and bras evokes a different meaning altogether most of the time but in this case she claims they were in support. Support of what they were wearing for their own gratification or support for message of their protest? This is one of the aspects that crept up often and that's the 'culture' of men in regards to women who are proud in their 'sexual liberty' or 'promiscuity'.

That was the entire problem with their whole 'movement'.

While they may understand, or think they understand, what they are protesting (which I really call into question), the way they went about promoting their opinion was entirely backwards.

Instead of promoting women equality, they instead turned it into a sexualization of anyone involved. With signs saying "We <3 Sluts" or "Sluts Say Yes", their message was entirely lost by their conflicted attempt to reclaim the word 'slut'. But that wasn't the point. Reclaiming the word had nothing to do with what they were trying to achieve.

It was a very poorly organized demonstration that gave attention-craving women an excuse to have a halloween party in the streets of Toronto in the middle of February. Just an embarrassment to the city which simultaneously set women back a few years.

 

[Dude Abides]

Hyperbole much?

 

[Meus Renaissance]

Hyperbole much?

The OP? The title?

 

[Dude Abides]

The OP? The title?

The statement that a parade of women in their underwear was a catastrophe that set women back years.

 

[Roto13]

Not so much women in general, but I know it makes me like feminists less.