The SlutWalks have not just driven many MRAs to distraction; they’ve also driven one of the bloggers at the Gates of Vienna to set aside her usual Islam-bashing for a few moments to take on the awful bullies marching in the SlutWalks. Yes, bullies, for how else can we describe young women who go out of their way to highlight their foul sexiness whilst denying their bodies to the helpless males who happen to catch sight of them?
According to the blogger who calls herself Dymphna:
Women who walk around in slutty clothing in order to “voice” their opinion about male sexual aggression are indeed acting out a hugely immature power trip. … Call it for what it is. Strutting your stuff and daring anyone to stop you isn’t real freedom. It’s a sneaking, sadistic bully-girl game.
So evil is the behavior of these slutbullies that if any man decides, upon catching sight of one of them, to grope or otherwise assault her, well, she’s at least as much to blame as the dude who lays his hands on her.
If the act of strutting your stuff results in an equal reaction, a girl must take at least half the responsibility for whatever transpires as a result.
Dymphna seems to mean this quite literally, suggesting that a slut who gets assaulted should be charged
as an accessory before the fact — i.e., if some dolt grabs her, then at the very least she is his partner in crime. And the offense in which they both participate is a serious transgression against civil order. Sadistic provocation is a breach of the peace.
Ironically, Dymphna the blogger has apparently named herself after Saint Dymphna, a 7th century Irishwoman who, legend has it, was murdered by her father after she refused to marry him.
In the light of Dymphna the blogger’s airtight logic, we have to wonder if Saint Dymphna was wearing something really, really slutty. I mean, what else could have inspired her father’s foul desires?
“Every single society, that has followed the path we in the west are running to embrace, has met the same fate. They all became quite “liberal.” They all gave women great power within the State. They all allowed women unrestrained sexuality. And every single one of them met the same destructive fate.”
Yeah, and that’s the only thing that happened to those societies. None of them engaged in colonialism and warfare. None of them overextended their empires or over taxed their citizens. There were no plagues, no changes in weapons technology, no advances or regressions in agriculture. There were never famines, civil wars, invasions, espionage, corrupt rulers, and weak monarchies.
The only thing that ever happened in any society or empire that ever failed throughout the entire history of humanity was their refusal to keep their women on a leash.
ClioPersephone, you and I are clearly the same cat.
“Hurrah for women’s lib, eh?”
“The lib?” Impatiently she leans forward and tugs the serape straight. “Oh, that’s doomed.”
The apocalyptic word jars my attention.
“What do you mean, doomed?”
She glances at me as if I weren’t hanging straight either and says vaguely, “Oh …”
“Come on, why doomed? Didn’t they get that equal rights bill?”
Long hesitation. When she speaks again her voice is different.
“Women have no rights, Don, except what men allow us. Men are more aggressive and powerful, and they run the world. When the next real crisis upsets them, our so-called rights will vanish like—like that smoke. We’ll be back where we always were: property. And whatever has gone wrong will be blamed on our freedom, like the fall of Rome was. You’ll see.”
@Nobinayamu: Clearly :3 Mrow!
Qwert: This is where you defend the status quo,”I’m speaking objectively as in what I think might be to the benefit of society: as it is now or has been in the past.”
And:
I don’t think it much of a stretch to say that a society or civilisation that accepts or encourages such ‘slutty behaviour’ is not going to be able to continue on as it has in the past. Something has got to give, or at least change. I would assume that the ‘slut walkers’ believe this because they appear intent on doing just that, on changing society
And you think slutwalks are bad, because they will harm society (the one you say can go fuck itself… so why do you care again?).
You are arguing against Slutwalks. Since Slutwalks are an attempt to change the status quo, you are, ipso facto supporting that status quo.
Yes and he’s talking complete shit.
With this I agree with you completely.
@Holly Pervocracy
“If men are really that volatile and vulnerable, maybe we really shouldn’t trust them with major responsibilities. If NWO’s right, female domination is saving the world from chaos right now.”
Well lets see how that stacks up against history which has already done that time and time again. Oh hell, lets look at today.
Are people wealthier today than say 40 years ago? No they’re not.
Are people healthier today than 40 years ago? No they’re not.
Do they have more leisure time than 40 years ago? No they don’t.
Are they happier than 40 years ago? Not a chance.
Do women wield far more social, political and economic power than men? Yes they do.
If women are our saviors, why does the world become shittier the more women are given power? Of course if you judge wealth, health, happiness and leisure by the number of men commiting suicide, things are just ducky.
Shorter NWO: LogicShield, ACTIVATE!
@ ClioPersephone
(I’ve tried to word the following as sensitively as possible for those who may have personal experience of rape.)
I know that Holly doesn’t believe all men to be rapists: she’s clearly a highly intelligent woman. But I don’t fully believe that all these ‘slutwalkers’ or their supporters don’t suspect all men to be ‘potential rapists’.
“She’s saying that if women were as manipulative as MRAs claim, why wouldn’t they keep rapists from raping them?”
As horrible a thought as it might be, I don’t actually believe that you can prevent rapists from raping, beyond imprisonment or execution that is. Up until the point a man (or woman) rapes he is just a man (or she a woman) not a rapist, this is not the same as being a ‘potential rapist’ but some men will believe it okay for them to rape, or at least they think they can get away with it. Others I doubt pay any consideration to any of these things, they just do because that’s what they are, unhinged, disturbed, whatever. So I think rape will always be with us and will always be a problem, this is of course, not to say that I think nothing should be done, or attempted to try and stop it from happening or lessen it’s frequency. I just think that there will always be rapists just as there will always be murderers. And I don’t believe that these ‘slutwalks’ are going to do much in the way to change this.
@Qwert: You talk about PEOPLE and you talk about WOMEN. You did say once you would call a promiscuous man a slut, but generally (see dictionaries plus common usage), the term slut is only used to shame women, and generally you are not talking about men ruining or changing society by their sexual behavior, and few do. And the slut-shaming can be done by men and women, although women are the target of it.
And the slutwalks are NOT about promoting a society of promiscuity. They’re challenging the idea that if women dress in a way that an observer finds sexually arousing, they (the women) deserve to be raped–and in a misogynistic rape culture, any woman can be accused of being a slut based on perceptions of her appearance — NOT her actual behavior. People have told you this before, but you seem remarkably resistant to the the purpose of the protests.
If two or more people are adults and consenting, then what they do with each other in their spaces is their own damned business–if you’re so set on going your own way and not being criticized for it, I think you ought to stop criticizing others who are going their own way (whatever that is) regardless of what a male-dominated society says.
And since NWO is posting out his ass and disagreeing with common reality again, I present to you: A man in a bear suit dancing on a seawall. During a hurricane. Because, presumably, he can.
The world has less poverty, starvation, and civil strife than it ever has before. There are still millions of people affected by warfare, hunger and poverty and these are things that humanity still needs to make great strides in but, in the aggregate, the world is in a better place than it has ever been.
Your failures are your own. Your unhappiness is your own. You have not been held back because you are heterosexual White man. You have failed to succeed, despite this.
You also have an understanding and knowledge of world history more shallow than the water accumulating on my patio.
Unions have also declined in influence over the past 40 years. I think the decline in leisure time and the increase in income inequality have more to do with that than with feminism.
“If two or more people are adults and consenting, then what they do with each other in their spaces is their own damned business–if you’re so set on going your own way and not being criticized for it, I think you ought to stop criticizing others who are going their own way (whatever that is) regardless of what a male-dominated society says.”
Now there you go again, Ithilana, using facts and logic!
Unions have also declined in influence over the past 40 years.
Unions are evil. And socialist. If unions had their way, we would all be calling each other ‘comrade’ and living on communes like dirty hippies. (all hippies are dirty, don’t you play Kingdom of Loathing?)
All men are potential rapists. And all men are potential trapeze artists. “Potential” isn’t an accusation.
The majority of men (despite what NWO says) are not LIKELY rapists. (And I am a slutwalker, so I can speak for at least a few of us.)
NWO: A woman who doesn’t dress, act and flaunt sexuality is exercising sexual control.
No. A woman who doesn’t drag random people off to have sex with them without their consent is exercising sexual control.
A woman who gets consent before she grabs a man’s ass, or fondles his crotch or kisses him, is exercising sexual control.
Crap, Slaveman, why not blame the shittier socioeconomic situation on the Internet? Or Sesame Street? Post-it notes? ATMs? The Rolling Stones? The Gap?
Or, you know … Reaganomics or something that actually makes sense?
Is anyone else completely disturbed by this constant conflation of sexual arousal and sexual assault?
@KathleenB
“NWO: Call me crazy, but I seem to recall that the rampaging Goths has a good bit more to do with the collapse of the western part of the Roman empire. And something to do with lead in the pipes… But hey, I’ve only got a ladybrain, what do I know?”
Then perhaps you should direct your ladybrain at the “cause.” How could an empire, which ruled the world, where all roads led to Rome fall so easily. You do know at the end of the Roman Empire in a last gasp attempt to save Rome the State was offering gold for men and women to marry, remain faithful and raise a family. It seems the social trend at the time was women being sexually liberated. Not to be a downer or anything, but I’m guessing Dark ages didn’t pertain to it not being all that sunny.
I don’t believe the Taco Bell story. Men stare at me; I ignore them. This type of interaction is not remarkable. I don’t spend that much time worrying about whether the look is a leer, a glare, an attempt to catch my eye. When the attention is unwanted, there’s really no reason for me to respond. I’ll briefly respond to a greeting or a smile, but I don’t have enough time in my day to worry about every guy who decides to check me out. Some guy leering and honking his horn rises to the level of annoyance, but unless there’s no one else around and it looks like he’s planning to come after me, I don’t need the police on speed-dial. I find it incredible that a woman who “struts” about in transparent and brief garments would be so unused to garden-variety harassment that she would call the cops to deal with some guy beeping his horn. If that’s all this upstanding gentleman was doing, why was he still in the Taco Bell parking lot when the police arrived? Why not just honk, shout some uncouth comment, and peal out of there? And can anyone imagine a woman calling the police to state some man was looking at her and then he honked his horn? I doubt even Andy Griffith and Barney Fife would have rated this incident as a priority for law enforcement. Either the story was concocted, or something of far more consequence happened.
“Crap, Slaveman, why not blame the shittier socioeconomic situation on the Internet? Or Sesame Street? Post-it notes? ATMs? The Rolling Stones? The Gap?”
i blame those little stickers on fruit.
Right, time to go. I’m getting nowhere here as usual. It is probably not good for my mental health to spend so much time arguing the toss with people who hold views which are the polar opposite to mine, especially when I have to address several different counter-arguments simultaneously from different corners. As it happens, I think I did a pretty decent job of explaining myself, or at least, trying to. Doubtless most, if not all, of you will disagree with me on this: but there it is.
I’m going to bed now (I’ve got a big day tomorrow working in the ER during a hurricane, being a useless society-destroying woman and all), but I’m still deathly curious for NWO to post a picture, or even just a description, of a woman NOT manipulating men with her sexuality.
If you can’t think of ONE, then you really are just using “slut” as a synonym for “woman,” and essentially arguing that the existence of women is destroying society.
It’s been explained to you, time and time again, qwert666: you are free to leave at any time. And whether or not you choose to come back is, as always, your choice.
@Pecunium
“NWO: A woman who doesn’t dress, act and flaunt sexuality is exercising sexual control.”
You disagree with this statement?
If that’s the case, a woman who “does” dress, act and flaunt sexuality is exercising sexual control. Gotcha. And here I thought self control actually pertained to self control. What was I thinking?