So, I just read about Toronto's Slut Walk, at http://www.fangirltastic.com/content/slut-walk (Thank you Minerva Li of The Renfield Trading Company!) This event was held in light of some comments made earlier in the year by a Toronto police officer, which amounted to:
"If a woman dresses like a slut, she deserves to be assaulted".
This is a stigma that has been kicking around for a long, long, long time. It is tremendously outdated. It has caused judges to be sympathetic with rapists, and apparently causes our law enforcement to be unsympathetic with victims.
Here's the thing. Unless a woman verbally asks to be advanced upon sexually, or instigates sexual contact, she is not asking to be advanced upon sexually. Period. It doesn't matter what she is wearing. Clothing is its own sort of language, but it can be easily misinterpreted, and so should not hold up as evidence of a woman's sluttishness and intent to seduce in court. Those short shorts she was wearing? MAYBE IT WAS HOT OUT, DIMWAD.
If a man with a chicken fetish were to rape a woman in a chicken suit, would her outfit be held as a valid reason for his actions? I really don't think so. She was just going about her job selling fried chicken, for chrissakes.
In retaliation, I think women should start running around shoving baseball bats up the asses of any good looking men wandering around shirtless, or wearing a nice suit, or with a few too many buttons undone at the bar. We'll see how the courts and the law enforcement like that.
And remember, Toronto cop, women find men in uniform sexy. By your own standards, you could be next.