Slut Marches – A rose by any other name?


The recent “Slut Marches” in Sydney have a good point behind the slutty dress – ie: violence against women is not acceptable regardless of what they are wearing when the violence happens – but is the name just playing to the same old stereotypes and furthering a view by some that only “those types of women” dress like that?  Or that only “those types of women” are militant feminists and therefore to be dismissed?  Violence against anyone is not acceptable just because they are wearing something that offends you, or stirs up feelings in you that you don’t think you can control.  Of course some modes of female clothes are more sexually appealing than others, the same as some forms of mens clothes are more sexually appealing to women, but much of this is in the eye of the beholder.   We are all so programmed by social pressures and attitudes of centuries to think either this way or that about what we see – and we think it in a split second giving us an almost immediate impression of the person wearing the clothes whether it be true or untrue.

Over the centuries we have come to believe what form of female dress is the most sexually exciting, you only have to look at the way prostitutes are portrayed in movies to see this stereotype.  We have come to believe what form of female dress is acceptable for a mother, for a career women, for a slut, for a “nice” girl and the list goes on.  Isn’t it about time that we actually all started to think about what is acceptable in our society and take some responsibility for our own actions instead of blaming our actions and feelings on someone else?  Our societies have been mindlessly blaming women since Adam and Eve.  Eve didn’t force Adam to eat the apple, he did it on his own and ever since we have this idea of what women should be and how they should behave, and how they should dress to be acceptable and what their role in society should be.  Much of this view was first decided by men and then reinforced by women.  I think much of it is to make sure that a women’s true sexuality is contained so it can be managed –  so that a man is not “distracted” by a women’s charms.  Come on you guys, don’t you think that many of us women get distracted by the odd gorgeous sexy guy?  We have just been programmed over centuries to not act on it – certainly to not throw the man to the ground and have sex with them because what they were wearing was just so exciting that we can’t contain ourselves any further!

Whilst I applaud any attempt by anyone to correct this imbalance,  I wonder if the Slut March name just continues to play to a man’s fantasy instead of changing their overall perception of women – are heaps of men putting down their Playboy Magazines for the day and heading out to watch the march?  I think what the Slut March is trying to do is get society to recognise the women within.  It’s still OK to admire a women’s external beauty but it’s not OK to act on base level sexual energy in a derogatory, violent or intimating way and then shirk your own responsibility by saying “it was the way that she dressed that provoked me”.  Whilst we women may get the meaning of the Slut March – do most men?

Advertisements

One thought on “Slut Marches – A rose by any other name?

  1. Thank you for your writing…my thought exactly. i get it and would even join it but do those who have this archaic way of thinking, will they get it or use it an an excuse? Thanks!

Your opinion is important to me, please leave your comment

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s