Women wear provocative clothing to attract attention

The double standards of the prudish slutwalkers

10.08.2012

Commentary by Abigail Ross-Jackson

Who wants to live in a world where women wear what they want without men being allowed to make suggestive remarks? A criticism of the human and (men) image of the slutwalk movement.

Last summer, 4,000 women (and some men) took to the streets in Toronto, Canada to protest a provocative statement by a police officer. He had said women shouldn't dress like "sluts". Because in doing so, they would invite men to treat them accordingly. Since then, the phenomenon of so-called slutwalks has gained momentum around the world. There were demonstrations in many cities in the western world, such as Berlin. But the movement is contradicting itself: On the one hand, women should give in to their most unusual fashion ideas. At the same time, however, this should not provoke any reactions.

Regardless of whether a woman wears jeans, T-shirt, corset or miniskirt: Of course, your clothes should not be viewed as an invitation to sexual assault. But it cannot be said that provocative clothing is not an invitation to anything at all. Because the way we dress serves very well, and sometimes even predominantly, to attract attention. Our potential partner dresses up appropriately at the rendezvous for a reason. Some women seem to think that they can evade any reaction - that is, they want to live under a cheese dome, as it were.

I don't want to live in a dream world where women can wear what they want without causing unwanted reactions from men. Some slutwalkers have said that they are not just interested in a "war" on rape - no, they also oppose lewd exclamations in response to women's erotic self-portrayal. This shows a “feminism” that disregards women. Because women are very well able to reject men, that is, to independently distinguish undesired advances from desired advances and act accordingly. Once again, feminists don't just show their latent disdain for men. Rather, their outlook is fundamentally misanthropic.

Why shouldn't men be allowed to whistle or react in any other way at the sight of pretty girls? The demand for a right “not to be judged” is very backward - and anti-social. Some of the banners you see at the Slutwalk protests depict the men more as animals - not as rational beings. A banner trumpeted: “Why am I dressed like a slut? Why do you think like a rapist? ”Here you can see how the term“ harassment ”, which is already legally problematic in any case, is broadened. The idea that a glance or a mere attempt at flirtation is no longer acceptable because it amounts to potential rape intentions suggests that everyday relationships are increasingly subject to the accusation of "harassment". What's next? No eye contact without written permission?

A woman who took part in a slutwalk protest in London later complained that she had been photographed without her permission. So she apparently thinks that even at a public demonstration, no one is generally authorized to do so and that taking photos offends her dignity or her well-being. The magic word "consensual" wanders from the sphere of unwanted sex into the world of everyday actions - and is now also used in public places. But if we had to seek approval for every form of human interaction, nothing would have happened. That would be a boring world.

Another slogan is on the rise: "A kiss is not a contract". Here sex is reduced to a kind of contract between two people. But sex is by its nature very unpredictable and spontaneous - it arises and develops according to no precise script. Sometimes you regret an erotic experience. But should we therefore try to prevent the possibility of an unpleasant experience by formalizing all aspects of human interaction? That would also do a lot of damage because it would prevent surprising and intimate experiences.

Millions of people negotiate their relationships with one another every day without us drawing up contracts. And we almost always get along very well without written consent or clearly defined limits. The endeavor to formalize human relationships and thus limit the spontaneous and unexpected is based on a deeply anti-freedom impulse. The Slutwalk feminists seem to want to shape public life and also the private sphere according to this image of man - regardless of others. One slutwalker said: “I wear what I want. That's why I'm not a bad person. But I get upset when a girl dresses seductively to attract male attention. ”That goes to the heart of the double standard: Slutwalkers can apparently wear what they want. But when other women dress nicely to attract male attention or admiration, they are looked down on arrogantly. Meanwhile, men have to be careful if they want to flirt, because that can be interpreted as a preliminary stage of undesirable physical rapprochement.

I don't want to live in a world like that. In my experience, men are not animals who lightly pounce on female “prey”. And women are able to fight off undesirable personalities themselves. If it were not so, it would indeed be bad, because that would effectively mean that we are unable to cope with our social relationships with others without watchdogs and regulations.