SlutWalk
Your house gets robbed. Police catch the criminal. You're in court and he's about to get his sentence. The judge looks down at the evidence and says:
"Well, the fence of your house is shorter than everyone else's in the neighbourhood. So I'll give the defendant a few years off his jail sentence because of the message you were sending."
What a ridiculous notion.
Well, not too ridiculous for it to take place in the incidence of rape charges according to some courts. Earlier this year a Canadian Judge, Robert Dewar essentially told a rape victim that what she was wearing was sexually suggestive enough for him to have grounds to reduce her sex offender's punishment. Dewar gave the man a two-year conditional sentence as opposed to the minimum three-year jail sentence for raping the woman along a darkened highway.
The backlash to this and other incidents of the same philosophy, has lead to the public protests known as SlutWalk. These walks have taken place all over the world and Melbourne is now about to have its own.
For many, Judge Robert Dewar's decision can be interpreted as a judgement on the victim being less worthy of receiving justice because of her choice of clothing. Not only have people reacted to this as a shocking legal decision, it seems he has crossed an ethical boundary by making a value judgement on a person because of what she wears.
The argument being made against 'slutty' clothing, by Dewar and others, is that it sends a sexually inviting message.
Sure, what people wear does send a message. If you see a woman wearing a Metallica t-shirt she's likely to be a fan of heavy metal music. Not always, but likely. If you see a woman in a burka she's probably into Allah. If you see a woman at a bar with see-through leggings and a g-string, many would assume she's into sex; it may not necessarily be the case but many would identify this clothing as having sexual connotations. Assumptions are one thing, but a judgment that any of these three individuals deserves fewer human rights than any other person, I think, is immoral.
The clothes one wears, whether they represent you well as a person or not, cannot alter basic treatments of decency and humanity. If we do that, soon we’ll be seeing this scenario:
"Yes your honour, that man assaulted me at the bar by punching me in the face"
"What were you wearing at the time?"
"An Ed Hardy t-shirt"
"I find the defendant NOT GUILTY!"
We may all be judgmental, yet it's our ethical responsibility to account for that bias when important decisions are made and fellow human beings are to have their human rights upheld.
Check back weekly for Moral Melbourne with @MrSimonTaylor (Twitter)
Breaking News
Gig of the Day
all gigs »Discussion
4,057 views 0 comments
810 views 3 comments
1,237 views 0 comments
252 views 0 comments








Comments
While I totally support the idea behind Slutwalk, and I find the idea that a woman could be responsible for her own rape completely insane, I have some issue with this being a public protest.
In the end, how much good does a public protest actually do for a cause? I wonder whether it might be more effective to approach taking action on this issue in a different way, through working on legislation, writing articles (like this one!) and that kind of thing.
I feel like public protests alienate a lot of people (particularly probably some victims of sexual assault who might be still in trauma?). I also think they are very easily misinterpreted and the people involved get ridiculed and judged (often in a really horrible sexist way) by more conservative people or people who can't be bothered trying to understand the 'concept' behind the walk.
With Slutwalk in particular, the name bothers me a bit too. I don't think that walking along a street makes 'slut' an acceptable word. 'Nigger', 'Kike', 'Mong' etc similarly can't be salvaged by perambulation... It is attention-grabbing though and I appreciate the cleverness in bringing issues of sexual assault back into sharp focus by cleverly using a word like 'slut'.
I really support people standing up for this cause, but walking for it doesn't make much sense to me. I don't know how big Sluwalk will be, but I hope no-one is hurt or arrested.
Well, these public demonstrations got enough attention to the topic for me to write the article. I wouldn't have considered the subject otherwise.
I was raped and I don’t support SlutWalk.
They’re not subverting the word ‘slut’ they’re reinforcing the sexual objectification of women - the slut or ‘temptress’ is a powerful cultural archetype, and always will be, which lawyers in particular use as a well-worn legal tactic that’s about money not human rights. Should they use it? Of course not! But an ideology doesn’t stop having negative social connotations or ramifications overnight just because people say it should.
Misogyny is rampant in our culture and the pornification of women dominates popular media. It’s so deeply disappointing that young women have bought into their own objectification to the point whereby they’re willing to reinforce it and promote it because it’s been marketed as cool. I believe they’re naive to allow themselves to be photographed as ‘promiscuous’, too – it may not seem so empowering when their images are taken out of context later.
Raising money for rape services or walking against rape would have been much more useful than fighting for their right to be a sex object. I’m pleased the sensationalism has stirred wider debate about victim blaming and I believe feminists can learn from their clever marketing techniques to communicate more valuable messages.
But those who walk are not walking, or speaking, for me.
I endorse any opportunity too meet new women dressed in scantly clad clothing. However, from the looks of it they're just a bunch of hairy arsed dykes
Thank you for your insightful and valuable input Phykz, you win the prize!
Anyway, I can see both sides of the argument regarding the walk. What I like most about this entire media frenzy though, is how it has prompted public discussions about the very real cultural trend of victim blaming. A woman's outfit should never be an issue in alleged rapes. This 'skinny jeans defense' case in Sydney last year is a really relevant (and disgraceful) example: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2010/05/skinny-jeans-defense-clears-australian-man-of-rape-charges/24550/
I also like this article by Clem Bastow, one of the event organisers for SlutWalk:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/hey-girls-were-all-sluts-now-20110523-1f0n9.html
Nowhere along the line does drinking alcohol, wearing tight or revealing clothing, or being a flirt mean that you give up your basic human right of consent. It’s about time that we stop victim blaming and place the responsibility where it belongs. Real men don’t rape.