Back in April, a Canadian policeman told students studying at a Toronto Law School to ‘…avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised’. The comment made by PC Sanguinetti (who has since been disciplined but remains within the police force) sparked uproar amongst young women causing them to protest with their own ‘SlutWalks’. Thousands took to the streets in Toronto, Boston and other cities across the US in their underwear, parading the message that your choice of clothing does not give men the right to sexual assault nor does the word ‘slut’ need to be associated with marginalisation.
Due to the popularity of these ‘SlutWalks’ they have been brought to the UK with the largest and most publicised in London on June 11th with over 5,000 women expected to attend.
As for my stance on the subject, young women are right to protest about this. I think that if a woman were to dress in a particularly provocative way then you are looking for some form of attention, usually from men. The automatic assumption is because a woman wants attention; she wants sex and means it should lead to rape or abuse. However, no matter what you wear, no matter how provocative it seems you are certainly not ‘asking for it’.
Calling a woman a slut, like many derogatory words, wasn’t always seen pejoratively as it is today. In fact, it was used in ‘playful sense’, in the 17th-19th century, without focusing on the negative qualities of a young girl or woman. For example, a 17th century author by the name of Pepys in his work ‘Diary’ included highlighted that ‘Our little girl Susan is the most admirable slut and pleases us mightly.’ Although, now the word is defined to mean ‘a woman of low or loose character’ and is something that has been driven into influencing our social attitudes and perspectives. Reclaiming slut is definitely the most obvious symbol of empowerment, as is say doing the same for something like retard or spastic. But then, I still think it is ludicrous to get angry over a word or more specifically, the connotations that it presents. Really, for me, it just doesn’t seem worth the bother.
Essentially, though, the way women are portrayed in the media is demeaning. The simple fact of the matter is: sex sells. Whether it is songs, magazines or anything else- it’s very much exploitative. Some young children and people, it seems, have become sensitised to the idea with control of the media and the lack of individual ability to question it, means they fail to recognise how wrong it is.
Examples from popular music:
A four year old girl singing along to Britney’s ‘Hold It Against Me’ (A song with the lyrics: ‘Cos you feel like paradise/ I need a vacation tonight/ So if I said I want your body now/ Would you hold it against me?).
Snoop Dogg featuring David Guetta ‘Sweat’.
When I first saw this I was shocked and I still am. The girl seductively dancing on a sofa with a bra and knickers on. Snoop Dogg as pimp sitting on some kind of throne chair while this poor girl is all over him. Snoop, mate, you have three kids and a wife. Enough said.
If these are anything to go by, they show that women are shown in a position which highlights that they are asking for sex. What is apparent is that, if you want sex, it is not just what you wear but actions that you take to engage in it. Although, really, most of the time, it’s not what we want.
All in all then, this a great cause. An opportunity to resist against the constraints of society and the exploitative nature of media and just to stand up for what we believe is right.
J
