The "Slut Walk" protests.

So there was a walk today. and on the facebook event there were photos posted from the walk, and there was one of a young girl, about 4 or 5 years old, and she was wearing like, a leopard print costume type thing over her clothes. and stuck to her stomach is a small paper sign that says "does this make me look slutty officer?" and i dont know, i thought that was a bit much...putting that message on a small child? really?

Originally posted by AdamsMurmur
Dressing promiscuously creates temptation (or pity), temptation often leads to you-know-what. Women are asking for something when they wear clothes that barely covers them, or at least covers them tightly. They just don't want to admit that they love the attention it brings.

Oh but when it attracts the wrong kind of attention... Just do anything that will lower the risk of some kind of abuse and wear normal clothing when you go out. Yes I know that it doesn't matter what you wear when you pass a dark alley with a serial rapist hiding behind the dumpster... but all in all the more revealing you dress the more likely that something negative will happen to you.

The majority of women are raped by someone that they know or have at least spent time with. Dressing in an overtly sexual way in such circumstances, combined with alcohol and the lowering of inhibitions, can lead to rape when a women allows herself to be in a vunerable position with someone she should not trust and probably wouldn't under more sober conditions. If women wish to dress provocatively they should ensure that they take care not to place themselves in vulnerable positions. The majority of men, in my experience, would under no circumstances take advantage of a girl or woman who placed their trust in them, but some will, and sometimes, especially with multi-culturalism and language barriers, signals are misread, but still, a woman needs to consider her own safety and the safety of her female friends and most importantly, utilise her common sense. Then, she can wear what she likes and people can think what they like.

Women aren't raped because they are provocatively dressed, that may make it easier, but they are generally raped because they make a silly decision at the wrong time, in the wrong place and learn the hard way. I know of a number of women who took someone home and 'decided' to consent because that way it'd at least be over quicker, it had nothing to do with how they were dressed, much more that the guy put on good act and 'seemed nice'. They disengaged their common sense because the guy knew how to act to be trusted. The majority of such rapes are never reported.

It's not what happens when they say yes or no, it's what happens in between yes and no and who it's directed at. Some guys are out of their #%@#! minds. Treat em like a loaded gun.

Most rapes, btw, are perpetrated by people the women ALREADY know, not random perverts.

So keep that in mind. The guy that rapes you will probably be someone you know already.

As far as I can tell, whether the majority of the protesters know it or not, what they're trying to draw attention to is the f###ed up nature of the collective views of male-female rape we hold as a society. The fact of the matter is that there are people, men and women alike, in all strata of society that genuinely believe that a woman raped is somehow at fault, and the people we entrust to uphold and enforce our laws and govern our lives are no exception. No matter how you look at it, the man raping has made a conscious decision to violate another person, who obviously doesn't consent to their involvement, and should be held entirely accountable for his actions. For the same reason, women should not be the ones held responsible for doing things to prevent rape, because if a given woman were capable of fulfilling that 'responsibility', she would not be a victim of rape. Instead of telling young women not to dress a certain way, we should approach rape prevention as a society by making clear to men the devastating and permanent consequences that can arise from such a deliberate and selfish act.

That being said, dressing provocatively is just as deliberate a choice to express one's sexuality and solicit attention of a sexual nature. We would all do well to remember that there's a time and a place for everything, and even though we shouldn't blame women and their sexuality for rape, we should certainly remind them that irresponsible choices certainly don't help the matter.

I was invited to a slutwalk in my city...
it's not a name a lot of people can get behind as slut means exactly what it means... a slut.
Everybody from professional pencil pushers to hood rats get raped... but they will never relate to the word slut just because of a comment sparked by a Toronto Police officer....
I kept getting the same rebuttals.
"Bring slut shaming to an end!"
"your work or amount of sexual partners is not an invitation to rape"
"survivors get branded sluts, they are told they asked for it because of the dress they chose to wore"
"if this was not a successful protest then there would not be 70 other protests being organized across the world"

yea... ok... fine. talk about tunnel vision...

Effective and meaningful protests have specific targets and objectives.

But the "slutwalk"? Ummmm....seems like they are protesting general attitudes and gender relations. Very hard to say who the targets of the protest are, or by what objective criteria success or failure could be evaluated. Therefore, it seems kind of meaningless to me; a cosmetic, superficial, and self-indulgent exercise in "poor me, poor me, acknowledge my victimhood."

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Its not abrahamaic religions... It's semitic peoples

Originally posted by InnerTruths
I was invited to a slutwalk in my city...
it's not a name a lot of people can get behind as slut means exactly what it means... a slut.

i don't understand.... What's wrong with a slut? Personally I like a good slut.

Originally posted by silent thunder
Effective and meaningful protests have specific targets and objectives.

But the "slutwalk"? Ummmm....seems like they are protesting general attitudes and gender relations. Very hard to say who the targets of the protest are, or by what objective criteria success or failure could be evaluated. Therefore, it seems kind of meaningless to me; a cosmetic, superficial, and self-indulgent exercise in "poor me, poor me, acknowledge my victimhood."

Really? A protest against gender relations is meaningless to you?

Wow....

Originally posted by jonnywhite
The guy that rapes you will probably be someone you know already.

That true in Muslim countries as well, or do your facts break down when stress is applied? Tell us more about what you know about this subject.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
Its not abrahamaic religions... It's semitic peoples

Not sure what you mean, but in a way, it is true.

See, the key event in the bible, was at Peor.

At Peor, we have the true nature of the priestly-splitting. In one tribe of priests, we have the Levites-Amarna-Akhenaten group who essentially worshipped naked women and princesses. Then on the other side we have the secretly gay, sodomic priests who competed with Amarna, for power. These evil boyloving priests are who are in power today, hence the projection of all evil Genesis onto "Eve".

As you may know, Ralph Ellis has suggested Amarna itself, was Eden. Yes I have looked into it and I agree with him, as I have described on other domains here in the IP gamespace. Anyway, also consider that Robert Graves explains how the Hebrews inherited the Pelasgian creation myth of the serpent and the woman. He is talking about sex of course.

At Peor, there was a murder, which debt the Judeans of today, carry onward, and try to deal with. It was the murder of a whore, by a man they call Phineas. Now, if you go look up Phineas' name in the Encyclopedia Judaica for example, you will see that it says plainly "many rabbis feel that he preceded the messiah" also these same rabbis say that it is Phineas who actually resembled Moses/Elijah --contrary to Jesus who was shown with Moses and Elijah in the gospel account. So there are two messiahs in the bible, two priestshoods, also two tellings of many stories.

As for the whole of it, either Phineas was presumptuos when he rushed ahead of Moses and slay a whore, or Jesus was presumptous 1300 or so years later when he stepped in front of a "whore" destined to be slain in the holy way: By chucking rocks at her.

So Jesus is actually, the anti-Phineas, the anti-messiah, similar to Bar Kokchba. Two messiahs, one a woman love, one a woman hater.

I should also mention the events at Peor, are simply the later results, of the events at Sodom. See, at sodom we see the meaning of sodomy, not today's mis-meaning where it is applied to women. NO sodomoy never ever applies to women. Sodomoy means: hating females, hence the biblical example where Lot's divine daughters' gifts, are refused. Can you imagine what sort of confused sumbyotch would turn down Lot's apples and instead demand to rape some dudes?! Wow, no wonder that was the final straw in the bible, cause then's when the angels said "get the hell out of here, there's no saving this place."

FACTS ABOVE are easily verified by researching at your local library.

If you want more, go to google and search the words "goverrments" and "cornucopia" and you will find some gems I have left along these lines. I feel that there is a movement toward the golden apple, and I for one, am gratified.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka

Really? A protest against gender relations is meaningless to you?

Wow....

Yes. yes it is.

A sit-in of 500,000 people on Wall Street, blocking all traffic and bringing the global financial system to a halt = meaningful (and possible) protest.

The slutwalk....well, not so much.

As stated, an effective protest has both an objective and a target. For example:
"Target = the Federal Reserve."
"Objective = to flood the lobby, areas outside, access points, and parking lot with sit-in protesters working in 24-hour-shifts, disrupting normal operations and sending a message of passive resistance that wil not be stopped until (insert specific, realistic goal here) has been achieved."

By those standards, the slutwalk lacks both a well-defined target and a well-defined goal.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


lol to each their own...

There is nothing wrong with a "slut". I personally have nothing against "sluts"...

I was raised with standards, and the standards I carry do not identify me personally with or as a slut.

Just because you are raped doesnt mean you are or dressed like a slut though... but naming the protest slutwalk is kinda backwards to the feminism movements.

two aspects, the rapist is always the one to blame and should be punished-- but a little bit of common sense is no bad thing, you wouldn't leave your car door open

Originally posted by silent thunder
As stated, an effective protest has both an objective and a target. For example:
"Target = the Federal Reserve."
"Objective = to flood the lobby, areas outside, access points, and parking lot with sit-in protesters working in 24-hour-shifts, disrupting normal operations and sending a message of passive resistance that wil not be stopped until (insert specific, realistic goal here) has been achieved."

By those standards, the slutwalk lacks both a well-defined target and a well-defined goal.

Uh, not really!

TARGET: HYPOCRISY
OBJECTIVE: WRECK IT

Do you want me to define the target? Shall I talk about what complete and utter hypocrites people are? I am sooo ready for that.

I do not think that having a bunch of sexy ladies taking the term "slut" upon themselves is a bad thing. I enjoy seeing human flesh.

Also, "slut" is just another phoneme, a sound. The meaning of it though, is a value-judgement. Like when i hear the phoneme, that sound, I have a totally different value judgement than some other person.

The difference is this: When that other person tries to defend their value judgement? I destroy them. and do you know why? It is because many mothers have many of the behaviors associated with the generally-negative phoneme in use "slut". Therefore, motherhood itself, is the hated idea, and we use dialectic nlp without even knowing it. Motherhood is to sluthood what Homerun is to at-bat. Ponder this and then go hug your mom and a hooker.

Jesus is the anti-Phineas. You will see this if you are ever faced with a dozen or so well dressed men wanting to throw rocks at you. If it is you who is on the ground, facing death, would you want Jesus or Phineas the whore-slayer, as your defender?

Because, Levi was given a priesthood, before Phineas. Therefore how is it that Phineas by his whorehating, gains a "priesthood for all eternity"? How totally ghey is that? It is sodom-like, in that moment where the desire for man-rape aka war, or "stabbing the foe" is so great, that you will brush aside, divine and nubile girls who are ready to make babies. That describes a seriously screwed up mentality. I mean think about it!

The events at Peor are part of a collection of books called by another phoneme, "bible". But in fact, the key early texts have been massaged by later writers. So the story of Joseph for example, has been colored-in, if you will, by those who wished to make certain points. Similarly also with later events after Joseph, like the events at Peor. It is said that Phineas slew these two nobodies, zimree and himras or whatever, that's all cover story by later redactors. In fact, this is where the Hebrews gained their "Day of Atonement". For what, did Moses make them suddenly begin atoning?

You see, the Hebrews are actually birthed at that time, along with their language, Hebrew, which is actually the Levitical language of the Thutmosides and which language was thrown open by their Promethean son, Amenhotep IV, aka the guy who built a city devoted to naked women. So rather than slut walks, it would be more historically accurate to call them, celebrations of the divine.

You will find what evidence of Hebrew before Amenhotep IV? None. These people did not exist until Amarna, which was Eden, just as Ralph Ellis and others have surmised. The serpent and the woman, have animosity between themselves from Eden onward.

Essentially, enough "slut" walks = Eden on Earth.

And the men will either react like Phineas or like Jesus, or like the priests holding the rocks. Truly those priests have not only the power to take-away life by throwing their rocks, they also have the power to gift a Kingship of almost Satanic Proportions, onto the head of their chosen messiah. They can kill any whore, and also make any man who emulates them into a "priesthood for all eternity".

Can someone please explain to me why the Pope and his Lieutenants have such a problem with half-naked women?

They have zero interest in women as such, so why the hatin'?

Then they make their followers into such bisected, dialectic, black-versus-white creations. Through their neurosis-creation machine, they create the desire for the confessional. This confessional box is the world's greatest HUMINT network on Earth. And yet the guys who run it and benefit from it, are all about man-on-man love! Wot an evil scam to turn the love for women, into something for which we must confess?

Think about it: Jesus did not invent the holy phone-booth to call god and confess your sins. No, Jesus did not invent the holy phone booth into which you rush when you get a dirty thought from some juicy-momma and her capri-pants. No, Jesus did not even have anything LIKE capri pants on women, in his day, and yet he STILL found reasons to love them! What a guy!

No, it was some other crusty old farts who invented the holy phone-booth. How can we even heal these neurotic memes that have been whispered into people's brains from infancy up?

I think the poster above who complained about lack of Goals, might be right, so I think for example that these slutwalks or whatnot, could also have phonebooths (like i dunno, giant fridgerator boxes with hole cut in side?) that each citizen can then go into (like the other phonebooth to confession) and confess their love for sluts, to a caring person on the other side who understands.

Think about the anti-confessional in this form. Well it would be confession, but to a different type of ear. A caring, loving, little mouses ear, who loves you very much. Not like the other phonebooth where they tell you to hail Mary and so on. Hail Hail Hail! What the hell, is she Hitler or something that everyone is Heiling her?

Anyway, with a few refredigerator boxes or some better booth-type construct, a lot of healing could be done on planet Earth, and if nothing less, you would thereby establish a HUMINT commo network which would fight and destroy the other phonebooth. If men go into the evil phonebooth to confess their love for women and feel bad about it, then women need their own phonebooth so these same dudes can instead get praise and love for their feelings. The result of the output of the better phonebooth, would be, better men.

very badly constructed posts above- meandering and barely intelligible at times

Originally posted by blueorder
very badly constructed posts above- meandering and barely intelligible at times

True. Yet, you might just be unable to grasp them. But also, you might be right, so it is good that you are there, to do whatever you do.

One thing your comment speaks to: It is easier to have order, when you say nothing.

Perfect order is perfectly silent. Like a one line post that says nothing. The established system, suits the one line, say-nothing, response.

Bravo sir or madam called 'blueorder', [clap clap clap] ...Bravo indeed tiny little hewn block of blue, for doing your part for the big blue wall, and the big blue order. By saying nothing, in your clarifying that I am saying nothing, you say so much.

reply to post by devilishlyangelic23


The Slut Walk is a sort of "Take Back the Night" event where the massive number of 'sluts' acts as protection against goons. It is called Slut Walk to protest the Police, which is evidently harbouring misogynists who probably have no real stake in preventing rape, considering that they blame the victims. The Slut Walk encourages female solidarity and protests the inherent sexism of our society and the people who are supposed to be protecting it.


reply to post by Somehumanbeing

Stupid slippery slope argument. There is no systemic problem of people having consensual sex in the streets and being persecuted for it.

And you might not be able to associate with women without sexualizing them, but surprisingly, there are men who can walk with 'sluts' in solidarity!


reply to post by crookedj0k3r

"You had it comin'"

reply to post by devilishlyangelic23


Yes. Yes it is. Sorry that you are a prude that can`t control his urges and assumes the same of everyone else!

reply to post by Wonders


This is still a crude generalization, but at least it`s a little more thoughtful than "women r askin to b raped"
reply to post by HunkaHunka


I wish that I could give you a dozen stars. There is too little good sense in this thread. (BTW I starred the other sensible people in here, I am not singling HunkaHunka out!)


ATS is maddening, it used to be a little bit more, I don't know, fun? It used to have fun and well-researched threads about Rome or alien encounters or things like that. Now it's all sociopathic, misogynistic, racist, christian fundie white boys and their auxiliaries (or some combination thereof). It's sickening to think that ATS members think that they represent the "Silent Majority."

Originally posted by smallpeeps
Anyway, with a few refredigerator boxes or some better booth-type construct, a lot of healing could be done on planet Earth, and if nothing less, you would thereby establish a HUMINT commo network which would fight and destroy the other phonebooth. If men go into the evil phonebooth to confess their love for women and feel bad about it, then women need their own phonebooth so these same dudes can instead get praise and love for their feelings. The result of the output of the better phonebooth, would be, better men.

I think that you may actually be on to something

But, to go back to the other points you made, for it to be Eden, universally, shouldn't the males be naked too? Otherwise isn't it just an Eden for men and over exposure for women?

Originally posted by BadPenny

Originally posted by smallpeeps
Anyway, with a few refredigerator boxes or some better booth-type construct, a lot of healing could be done on planet Earth, and if nothing less, you would thereby establish a HUMINT commo network which would fight and destroy the other phonebooth. If men go into the evil phonebooth to confess their love for women and feel bad about it, then women need their own phonebooth so these same dudes can instead get praise and love for their feelings. The result of the output of the better phonebooth, would be, better men.

I think that you may actually be on to something

But, to go back to the other points you made, for it to be Eden, universally, shouldn't the males be naked too? Otherwise isn't it just an Eden for men and over exposure for women?

Goodpenny! Good!

Hah, you make a good point of course but I will be plain here: Penii are boring to me so why would I argue for them? I mean, I have one and it's my favorite one, yet I find myself not so concerned about the millions of others. Therefore I perhaps am not uh, 'equipped' to answer your question? Aheh.

Frankly I would again point to Amarna. They always had naked dudes, soldiers, prisoners and so forth, naked men were everywhere back in the pre-18th dynasty Egyptian days. Nakedness itself was part of life. Sure you could say its due to climate, but Scandinvians are notorious for their beachside nudeness and frank awareness of these matters. So it is not climate, it is the image of the female.

See, long ago, dudes did not even know that semen, resulted in babies. Because sex was all there was to do, so there was a lot of semen around, and nobody really connected sex to pregnancy until someone ABSTAINED from sex, then they realized, "Oh damn, no white stuff means no babies!" This I think was a major revolution in human thinking because in that moment, men realize they make babies.

Well, really their part is localized and they inflate their part in it, because it is divinity, the womb, the mother force, that makes life. The man just give his "spermission" for the events, if you will. It is SHE who has to carry that baby and care for it for 18 years at least if not more. And how many retarded men will the average mother have to deal with in her 18 years of motherhood?

So as a man, I am gratified that my gender is doing well, but I think we are also dying due to hypocrisy. I am not the sort of man who would ever feel bad for loving the female, but that doesn't mean sex-acts, it means love. Sex is not love, so if you can't give a hooker 20 bucks just because she's a mom, but you ask her to perform a sex act for that money, then right there as a man, you fail. Having never needed the services of a hooker maybe I am not qualified to say, but I am sure I have given meaningful hugs to a few moms that also used their sex to survive at some point. Mothers have to do that you see, whereas men, never have to do that. Simple stuff here, as simple as a princess in sheer garments.