Alas, the first Munich SlutWalk took place on Saturday and I missed it.
When I first saw the poster (spotted by my friend Kate), my initial thought was, “I do not think it means what you think it means.” But as it turns out, they do know what it means, and they are using it ironically (according to one interview, anyway). The walk is meant as a demonstration against sexual violence, regardless of what clothing one is wearing. “No means no!” declares the poster. OK, I admit it: the message is a good one. Your slutty little hearts are clearly in the right place.
Munich isn’t the only place holding a SlutWalk; several other cities around Germany are also participating. And, as it turns out, the SlutWalk has its origins in Canada of all places. So I can’t even blame the Germans for this creative use of English. I apologize for ever suspecting you, Germany. I’ll just shut up now and go back to reading this copy of AssCompact magazine.
At the end of the day it seems to me that SlutWalk is mostly an excuse for women to put on their trashiest outfit and parade around for a day. We have a similar thing in the US: it’s called Halloween.
DC had a Slut Walk this past weekend as well…of course, I think people there will use any reason to march.
Crazy. I had no idea this was such a popular form of protest. I suppose my complete avoidance of US news is working.
I first read about this in Australian feminist blogs, then in British ones. It is very popular. I have an issue with “reclaiming” the term slut, but I understand the concept and the origin is because a young girl protested a police officer giving a safety lecture at her high school, who apparently stated that the way a girl dresses has an impact as to whether she is at fault when sexually assaulted.
The scary thing is, even people one thinks are normal do apparently believe (in some cases) that the way one dresses has bearing on fault at being assaulted. Ask around and you may be shocked, horrified, and a bit frightened at how your friends answer this question and the questions that are brought up in the wake of a local “Slutwalk”.
http://www.slutwalktoronto.com/about/why
The protest was started to argue against the concept that it should ever be considered a woman’s fault if she is victimized. A Toronto police officer said to a room full of University students that women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized. The logic here, of course is nuts. It’s like saying “If your car was stolen, it must be your fault for having chosen a porsche, because how could a guy possibly resist stealing a porsche?” It’s even crazier, actually, since both women and men have the equal right to be topless in public in Toronto, so clearly the ACTUAL codes of dress by law are fairly equal and liberal.
The ladies who started it decided that they didn’t like the word slut being used, particularly by an authority figure, to demean women while implying that women who do flaunt their figure a little while out clubbing or whatnot deserved to be assumed “accessible” even by the officers who are supposed to be protecting them from anyone who doesn’t understand that you can look but not touch (without permission.)
I’m for it, particularly because there are a lot of women who have been assaulted by men who claim “she was asking for it” when the woman was doing very little other than wearing an office-appropriate v-neck and heels. A judgement of a woman’s moral character by dress or even by her behaviour should never be the basis for an assault. No means no… and even if you do think she’s a slut, she gets to decide if she wants to slut it up with you or not. That’s the law, and in 2011 that’s the message our police departments (I’m from Toronto originally) should have been putting out there.
Why in Canada, “of all places?” It’s the best place, as we all know…
@ian – Because when I first saw the sign, I was convinced it was the result of non-native English gone wrong. Nope!