Join MultiplyOpen a Free ShopSign InHelp
MultiplyLogo
SEARCH

Bitch Brat

Blog EntryDec 25, '07 10:27 PM
for everyone
This piece from the Women's Direct Action Collective reflects my belief that a woman should be able to dress, act and live her life exactly as she wants and not be persecuted or prosecuted for it. Of course that would be the ideal world, but then no one ever listens to me cos I'm apparently a whore. Ha ha...

Sluts Against Rape

 

We are feminists. We call ourselves "Sluts Against Rape" because we believe that a woman should have the right to be sexual in any way she chooses and that she is never at fault for rape. We choose to focus on sexual promiscuity-straight or queer-as a positive assertion of sexual identity and to focus on women as sexual agents as opposed to sexual victims. We remember that this embrace of sexuality in the public sphere has been particularly difficult for people of color, women-especially sex workers-and queer women. Each of these group's "supposed" inability to sexually control themselves has been used as justification for violence. At the same time, each of these groups have continued to explore and refine the place of sexuality in their lives and insist that public spaces remain open to them.

Promiscuity is often used as a justification for rape and violence-it is used as a justification for rape by rapists, by the legal system, and even at times by other women who attempt to impose their own rigid morality upon others. Discourse on male violence tends to centralize male sexuality and demand women's safety in relationship to it. In this context, our own sexualities become peripheral, almost non-existent. When female sexuality does become visible-when we put on a sexy dress and say naughty things-we are seen as colluding in our own oppression (read: we invite rape). When women's innocence is invoked as a reason to curb male sexual violence, the usual assumption is that this innocence is only something white, middle class, heterosexual women can have, all women of color are presumed to be already sexually available. Thus, we argue, innocence has never protected any of us and we need to recognize the racist and classist assumptions behind any embrace of innocence.

We participate in this year's "Take Back the Night March" to protest rape and to protest the lack of safety in public spheres shared by all women, all people of color and all sexual minorities. But we will not erase our own sexual adventures, our own sexual displays to occupy this public space.

We support the rights of prostitutes to be prostitutes, the rights of strippers to be strippers. We support the rights of porn stars, transgendered people, transsexuals, lesbians, bisexuals, gay men, all self-defined sluts (and there is no hegemony of style here), and all sexual minorities made invisible by the institution of compulsory heterosexuality. Though we are often victimized, we will not be passive victims. We are active sexual agents strutting our stuff in the face of rape.



20 CommentsChronological   Reverse   Threaded
psychocow wrote on Dec 25, '07
?
joey08 wrote on Dec 25, '07
?
precisely...:D
abbemay wrote on Dec 26, '07
well said, my friend... well, said.
joey08 wrote on Dec 26, '07
heheh...it's the piece i wish i'd written but this women's group has been working on this stuff for years and recently sponsored a Take Back The Night walk thingy.wish we could have this here soon.
abbemay wrote on Dec 26, '07
yeah... i wish so too... for those close-minded, self-righteous, hypocritical losers who know nothing better than persecute those like us just because we aren't like them... ;)
joey08 wrote on Dec 27, '07
ditto. ;D
tehryanx wrote on Oct 8, '09
ALPHAMALES AGAINST SLUTS

We are masculists. We call ourselves ALPHAMALES AGAINST SLUTS because we feel that it is unfair for women to tempt our most baser instincts. We are not rapists, or sexually aggressive. We are instead standing up against the disgusting matriarchal concept that women should have no responsibility in harnessing the lowest level of the sexual dynamic between males and females of our species. We respect women, but we do not respect the selfish culture of feminists that believe they exist in a world where a woman exists above human instinct.
psychocow wrote on Oct 8, '09
Tehryanx: You are a fucking idiot. If you can't keep it in your pants, if you have to make excuses for your behavior, then you really have no respect towards women. All your pretty words cannot mask the stench of macho bullshit you are emitting.
paulyarbles wrote on Oct 8, '09
Why is being assaulted in a sexual manner worse than being assaulted in a non-sexual manner?
paulyarbles wrote on Oct 8, '09
I should add:

If being assaulted in a sexual manner is no worse than being assaulted in a non-sexual manner ,then it's strange that you should emphasize it so much.
xenophonic wrote on Oct 8, '09, edited on Oct 8, '09
Don't conflate rape with being sexually suggestive in dress and action. Part of living in culture is recognizing the written and unwritten languages that exist therein, body-language and dress being among them. Obviously dressing sexually is no excuse for rape. But dressing sexually and being angry that it elicits a response, if only of a man looking where our culture says he's not supposed to, points to irrational expectations. This applies to men and women alike. If a person is willing to wear sexually suggestive clothing, then they should be willing to be stared at. And to take it a step further, for a person to use and have the right to use actions/tones/language that can easily be interpreted as sexually forward, it should not be an outrage for said actions/tones/language to be interpreted as such. Again - this does not condone rape. No means no. People have the right to their own bodies. But sexuality is nevertheless primal, and dressing as a "slut" WILL arouse some.
tehryanx wrote on Oct 8, '09
xenophonic: exactly. psychocow clearly didn't read my statement. nowhere did I say that an overly sexual expression excuses rape. I just said that it is an unfair allowance to afford one gender while the other is expected to avert or hide their reaction.
joey08 wrote on Oct 10, '09
If a woman seduces you, by all means sleep with them. Don't rape them if they don't want to
.
xenophonic wrote on Oct 13, '09
Yes. Obviously. You are talking in extremes. Dressing sexually does not equal seduction and obviously does not equal any kind of assent to sex or rape. But dressing sexually will have an effect on people. People will look, stare, gape etc. Someone might make a pass at her. These things should not come as a surprise when someone dresses or acts sexually. They are not offensive responses.
qwertus wrote on Oct 29, '09
"Hipster Chicks Once Again Politicize Sex And Think It Makes Them Edgy"

Hilarious!
unfrozencaveguy wrote on Nov 18, '09
"Under Roman law it was not considered a serious crime to rape a prostitute:
A man could not violate the modesty of a woman who had none to violate."
- F. Roger Devlin

I once encountered a hooker who was crying that she'd been raped, while working security in a lovely area. I assumed that meant she didn't get paid.

"If a woman seduces you, by all means sleep with them. Don't rape them if they don't want to"

I've been "seduced" more than once by a chick who decided against sex right at the last second. I have little sympathy for a girl who does this and gets "raped." The expectation that you can do whatever you want without any cost is completely unreasonable.
joey08 wrote on Nov 23, '09
1) I really can't believe people are still commenting on this when it was written almost 2 years ago.
2) This is a repost from another organization related to their Take Back the Night event.
3) Rape is not about sex, it is about violence. It's not S&M, it's not really about being horny, it's about hate or getting excited when causing real, genuine pain to other people (not just women, men get raped too).
4) Seriously, why are all the commenters who are not in my network using blank, empty profiles?
joey08 wrote on Dec 27, '09
Hi thehuntard. Sorry it took me so long to finally comment on the link you posted in Dec. 2 for your blog post dated Oct. 29. Comments were closed on your post and your multiply account was empty so I thought to answer you, and everyone else, here.

1) I appreciate all the attention this piece has garnered. I was mostly surprised by this, but it is the Internet so, ta-da!

2) Reminding everyone again that this piece was written by someone else.

3) I'm not a white Caucasian woman. I am a Filipina who lives in the Philippines. I don't know the person who wrote this, I've already forgotten how I got this piece and the link is already dead.

4) Rapists typically like women whose clothes are easy to take off, because of the convenience, this can mean anything from a skirt to a nun's habit.

5) Didn't want to exert too much effort to research statistics, but here: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/776945.html
http://www.survivingtothriving.org/factsandmyths

6) I agree there are fallacies in the essay. I've reread it several times since I re-posted it 2 years ago. But I believe it's core message. That while a woman in a provocative dress opens herself up to attention (some of which may be unwanted), it does not permit rape.

7) I know it would be impossible to attempt to change something as basic as ideology. And, if some of you commenters have bothered to read some of the other parts of this blog, you'd know that this is nothing more than random spewings from a wandering brain.

8) Objecting to one of thehuntard's analogies on his post:

"Yes, a woman is “never at fault for rape,” like how a white supremacist who walks into a black neighborhood wearing white sheets and throwing burning crosses onto front lawns isn’t at fault if he gets the shit beaten out of him and possibly arrested. It’s not like he put himself in a bad situation or did something incredibly stupid!"

Your white supremacist example actively threw burning crosses. A woman dressed provocatively walking down the street is simply walking, unless you believe that provocative dress in itself (provocative actions or unwise decisions) is a trigger for rape.

9) There are cultural differences when defining provocative dress and promiscuous actions. Some countries may consider exposed arms or skirts above the knee provocative, while some cultures are used to both genders being nude. Yet, rape is present in almost all cultures because it is a psychological problem linked to power and violence.

10) This is going to be my last comment on this post because I understand all the arguments are the same and it will really never end because we can't change each other's minds. Just wanted to clarify some things.
joey08 wrote on Dec 27, '09
11) Regarding sexual promiscuity, what one does in their sex life is none of our business unless it actually hurts someone. In fact, most labels of promiscuity are read from clothing or actions, which is often not accurate in itself. But stating that promiscuity excuses rape (which is basically what most commenters are saying) disregards the hundreds of unsuspecting mothers, nuns and virgins who were raped. This does not mean that one form of rape victim should be pitied more than the other. All rape victims were forced to submit due to violence. Men, women or children. And nothing can excuse that.
Add a Comment
   
© 2012 Multiply · English · About · Blog · Terms · Privacy · Corporate · Advertise · API · Help · Sitemap
Template design Copyright © 2005 Jeff Miller