The only thing more irritating than people doing absolutely nothing to make the world a better place are those actively trying to make it worse, but coming in a strong third? Those whose well-meaning efforts to make the world better are so misguided that they make things worse by default.
I was reminded of this when I happened upon the SlutWalk protests taking place in New York this past weekend... with my mother. (If you're looking for something super memorable to do with your mom in the Big Apple, Broadway shows have got nothing on watching a bunch of adults parading around in their underwear in broad daylight in the name of allegedly making a serious political statement.)
Now before the SlutWalk army gets their undergarments in a twist and adds me to their enemies list, let me state for the record that we are on the same side when it comes to the issues. But when it comes to execution in addressing said issues? Not so much.
For those who don't know SlutWalk (yes that's the actual name) originated in Toronto when a group of students organized a protest in response to a police constable's comments that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."
Months later, the first so-called SlutWalk was held.
As I noted on MSNBC's The Dylan Ratigan Show, like every person with a brain and any person with a heart, I find that constable's comments appalling. Just as I found the acquittal (on the most serious charges) of the so-called NYC "rape-cops" appalling. But we've all heard the saying, "Two wrongs don't make a right." Well two stupids don't make a smart, something SlutWalk is a powerful reminder of.
According to CBC News in Canada, the event's website at the time read, "Toronto Police have perpetuated the myth and stereotype of the slut, and in doing so have failed us... Barnett [the organizer of the event] said she wants to use the walk to reclaim the word and also demand that victim-shaming change."
That's certainly a worthy goal. But here's a newsflash for Barnett and the organizers of the other SlutWalk protests which have begun to spread throughout the world: you can't "reclaim" a word defined by a predominant group in power unless you are a part of that group. Just ask all of those people on a mission to "reclaim" the N-word for black Americans or the F-word for gay Americans. (How's that working out by the way? Perhaps we should ask critics of Rick Perry.) As long as heterosexual white males in power (or anyone else) can use a particular word as a pejorative to denigrate a particular group -- and you acknowledge that them doing so will offend you as a member of that group -- then you using it is not "reclaiming" it but simply perpetuating it.
My point? Me walking through the streets of New York with a group of black Americans to protest any of the nonsense that comes out of the mouths of David Duke, Don Imus or the like by proclaiming the protest a "N*****walk" doesn't do anything to make the world better at all -- except for perhaps members of the media, who will get a great story out of it, just as they did this weekend.
Let me be clear. I have no problem with sexually liberated women defining feminism on their own terms. As I have written before, I consider a woman who chooses to make her living shedding her clothes no less of a feminist than myself, as long as like me and every other feminist out there, she supports gender equality. But I do have a problem with SlutWalks. Not because they play into the stereotype of women being "sluts" but because they play into the stereotype of women being intellectually inferior. Fair or not, the images from SlutWalk send the message that when push comes to shove, young women will always fall back on taking off their clothes to get attention, even when it comes to making a serious political statement. The same women who probably ridicule the Kardashian sisters essentially employed the same tactics -- a little T&A -- to get a lot of camera time this weekend. And the sad part is that doing so didn't really make any difference, at least not to victims of assault, but perhaps to members of the media who got a few nice soundbites and some sexy images to broadcast.
Watching the fishnet- and bikini-clad SlutWalk protesters strut around Union Square Park, I did not think of any of the women participating as "sluts" but I did think of them as pretty silly. Because when it's all said and done, "SlutWalk" will make very little difference in the lives of sexual assault survivors and those doing work to make their lives better (some of whom I have written about). Of all the pressing issues facing survivors -- including the need for eradicating the statute of limitations for sex crimes that remain on the books in some states, tackling the DNA backlog that has slowed countless rape prosecutions, increasing funding and training for sexual assault nurse examiners (who can make a huge difference since they are the first line of defense survivors interact with following a crime) -- I have a hard time believing that dressing in underwear while walking down the street is the issue that keeps most of them up at night. Because you know what keeps a lot of them up at night? Actually making sure our criminal justice system works better for them and every other assault survivor, something SlutWalk will have very little impact on. (For the record, I am far from the only feminist critic of SlutWalk.)
If you'd actually like to make a difference in the lives of sexual assault survivors -- a real difference -- that doesn't involve taking off your clothes, feel free to click here.
Keli Goff is the author of The GQ Candidate and a Contributing Editor for Loop21.com where this post originally appeared.
www.keligoff.com
Follow Keli Goff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/keligoff
Rachel Ryan: Are Women to Blame For Immature Men?
Glenn W. Smith: Rick Perry, Racism and America's Soul
Justin Beach: Dear Toronto Police, Stop Blaming Victims of Sexual Assault
The other thing to take into consideration is the audience you are attempting to reach. Men that would be given to the notion that a woman asks for rape based on her appearance are not going to look at women scantily clad and "get it". More likely, they will see this and engage their selective listening skills. "What are they marching for?" "Damn if I know but look at the knockers on that one!" You're just giving them something to ogle for a few minutes.
How do you feel about giving a single word so much power, that it reduces a multitude of people to react defensively?
Who is the person that allows that?
It's not under the radar ed. It is Male Issue. Period.
It is only women who are speaking up about it.
Where is your voice in regard to 'The Men' who do this!? This is Your Gender under the microscope ed. You say nothing.
" I doubt we would see any of those women marching for our sons unless they happen to be gay."
We march every single day for our sons and daughters.
It is why we are here.
women= more than 1
Not trying to criticize, just trying to help.
I don't agree with the Slutwalk thang in N.Y. However, I do agree with that officer. Where I'm from, Texas, if a young woman walk around in some skimpy little outfit with her butt hanging off of her, she leaves me no choice by to look at her in "one" way.
Now, the question is, why would any woman do that to herself and not expect a man to violate her in thoughts or actions? Be real, this isn't the days of the Garden of Eden. These are the days where sexuality is through the roof so, it'd help to lower the testorone of men who have no self-control to contain himself if a woman walking around in "revealing" ---------- clothes communicates louder than humans! Just saying.
Yes, you do have a choice to look at her just like she has a choice to dress the way she wants. If you want to live in society where a women must dress a certain way to ward off would be attackers, move to Pakistan.
The way a women dresses has nothing to do with sexuality. It's social norms. In some places being topless is not considered reveling or sexual. It's normal. In other places a women would be crazy to wear something as revealing as a tank top.
Women were protected in for thousands of years because the world was hostile nightmare. Men were sent off to die to protect their families and better that than have every adult dead due to endless battles for territory and resources. Be you a man or women your life was hard, women would die in child birth and men on the battle field assuming you made it to adulthood which occurred in your early teens.
Feminist have distorted our view of history to favor this ridiculous obsession with he oppression of women which in reality was the protection of women in their gender role. The man in the coal mine was not living his life to the fullest while his wife toiled at home. Like most humans both genders worked their but off until they died and the oppression came from their rulers who cared little for either of them.
Being a slut was bad because men wanted to know their children. Any thinking person would come to this conclusion except for feminist bound to a man hating agenda. Working this hard to hate men is hurting our sons and in the long run our daughters.
That's the problem Ed. Some humans have evolved, many have not. We want you to catch up. We're trying to help.
the physical, psychologiÂcal, cultural, emotional, and political rapists of women will never "get the message" of the Walk - they're just not emotionallÂy, culturallyÂ, and psychologiÂcally evolved enough - and never will be - no matter how much you try to educate them.
"
That is so distressing, it's something that I don't want to agree with, yet I do. It doesn't leave room for much hope. Assuming you are male, how is it you see this? Why are you different than so many? Environment, education, intelligence?
I concur with your entire post. In particular, "reveals what lessor evolved male primates secretly perceive women to be: powerful - and therefore - unacceptabÂle."
If the criticism is "slutwalks does not change the behavior of rapists" then any rebuttal must show how slutwalk does change the behavior of rapists.
If the criticism is "slutwalk reinforces an already existing negative association between bondage gear and rape" then any rebuttal must show how slutwalk eliminates that association in the mind of a rapist.
If the criticism is "slutwalk conflates women's liberation with women's pornification" then the rebuttal must establish how such a lop-sided woman-only pornification qualifies as "equal".
If the criticism is "slutwalk marginalizes and excludes the concerns of poor women, and women of color" then the rebuttal needs to show how slutwalk is addressing the concerns of poor women and women of color.
If the criticism is "slutwalk only reinforces an already existing derogatory slur" then the rebuttal must show how slutwalk is eradicating the negative association.
If the criticism is "taking off your clothes to protest rape won't stop rape" then the rebuttal must show how taking off your clothes will stop rape.
Get it? Refuting the actual criticism is how honest people respond to criticism. Instead, slutwalkers keep minimizing and trivializing all objections while changing the subject entirely.
Please notice that it is FEMINISTS who are objecting to slutwalk. You don't get to just dismiss our objections out of hand.
The Cops were vilified for talking straight talk.
He was probably a nice guy who was trying to point out a reality to some less than clued in women.
Okay Sure, you have the RIGHT to wear a pork chop around your neck, but while we are here in this Tiger-Infested-Swamp, maybe you shouldn't ?
I LOVE KELI GOFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Apologies for my exuberance, but this is without a doubt the best article on slutwalk, ever. And that line was just the icing on the cake. Oh god you're awesome Keli :)
But, do you also mean "most white people will never stop making excuses for slavery"? Because after awhile, crimes against specific classes of people become particularly offensive and after awhile, the justifications which perpetuate those crimes are no longer acceptable, even behind closed doors.
No it's not going to stop like murder, robbery, assault and all kinds of other criminality.
Protests that actually have immediate political impact are far more intense and serious and often involve people being killed and come to be called "revolutions" like the Mid-East Spring. Or they're acts of extreme civil disobedience like Gandhi or MLK, Jr organized in which the media films protesters being brutally beaten without fighting back.
Slutwalks are a totally different ballgame and there's not the slightest thing wrong with them!
My comment ended with a dismissal, but it was based on the refutations that preceded it - did you only read the last sentence?
The author was criticizing the protest for - to her apparently conservative tastes - turning off the wider public. I replied that changing public attitudes was not the point of this type of protest - and I pointed out the types of protests that are about that sort of thing - like revolutions and civil disobedience. I pointed out that this type of protest - extremely similar, as other posters have noted, to gay pride parades - is for the benefit of the participants in terms of networking, learning, and having a kick-ass party in the streets with like-minded folk.
This is a refutation - and a pretty good one, at that!
...except conservatives. So people, hang on to those micro-miniskirts and aѕѕless chaps, just in case another parade is necessary.
normals, plural
1.The usual, average, or typical state or condition
- her temperature was above normal
- the service will be back to normal next week
2.A person who is physically or mentally healthy
3.A line at right angles to a given line or surface
adjective /ˈnĂ´rmÉ™l/ 
1.Conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected
- it's quite normal for puppies to bolt their food
- normal working hours
2.(of a person) Free from physical or mental disorders
3.(of a line, ray, or other linear feature) Intersecting a given line or surface at right angles
4.(of a salt solution) Containing the same salt concentration as the blood
5.(of a solution) Containing one gram-equivalent of solute per liter
6.Denoting a fault or faulting in which a relative downward movement occurred in the strata situated on the upper side of the fault plane