Home

TheSinner.net

Slutwalk

This message board is for discussing anything in any way remotely connected with St Andrews, the University or just anything you want. Welcome!

Re: Slutwalk

Postby G13 on Wed Jun 15, 2011 6:14 pm

And, returning to Slutwalk...

Hennessy's understand of what reclaiming a word means is somewhat incomplete. There isn't really a hope of changing the general usage or mindset, at least within many decades. However, as jollytiddlywink wrote earlier wrt "fag", the experience of being a person who has an offensive word thrown at them can change completely when one uses that word to describe oneself. The primary aim of reclaiming a word is not to change everyone else's usage, but to change one's response to that usage. For the people who choose to do it, it's one way of claiming back power and not accepting oppression. Reclaiming a word like "slut" would mean saying "so what?" or "yeah, so?" to oneself, at least, when called it. It's a way of stopping the policing and control which is really behind the motivation for calling someone a slut. If one doesn't care if one is called a slut, one has no reason to worry about behaving in a way which might cause someone to call one that. It's also impossible to dress and behave in a way that guarantees no-one will call one a slut, so it seems just a waste of time, thought and effort to try.

And yes, I would say that "slut" is a patriarchal concept, in that it's used to police and control women's sexual behaviour and/or appearance, coming from a mindset where women have a commodity value as a pure sexual item and are expected to give up that value to some suitable man who demands it in return for appropriate recompense (gifts, a family, etc.) I've heard "slut" used about women who've never had any sexual contact, seemingly because "too many" different guys apparently wanted sex with them. "Slut" is most often used by men to demean women, complain that their own entitlements to ownership and sex are not being upheld, and attempt to control so that those entitlements are met, and by women to emphasize that they are not like that, they are good women, in fear of losing the societal approval that is so damn fickle and hard to retain.

It's also important to massively question the use of the word "slut", because as I wrote previously, its usage doesn't tend to correlate with actual behaviour or appearance, but more with how much the speaker wants to judge and control. Quoting myself, mostly for diddums Hennessy who doesn't want to contend with the unknown that is unreg posts (and I assure you that G13 is the same writer throughout, as would be apparent from the style to anyone actually reading),
Partly humorously, partly entirely seriously, a woman's frigid when she won't be sexual with the man who wants her to be with him, and a slut if she appears sexual with anyone else. And possibly a slut if she appears sexual with a man who another woman wants or whose friend wants.
and
Hennessy, what is a "slut"? Someone who has lots of sex, someone who's had several different partners, someone who's had different partners in a short space of time? All those definitions and more are used by different people. "Slut" is also sometimes used on a woman who enjoys sex, who's having sex with someone the speaker doesn't want her to have sex with, or someone the speaker just plain doesn't like. Consequently, I don't consider it a very useful word. I don't think it's ok to call anyone a slut, because it's shaming and policing. I don't think that women should be exempt: I think that people shouldn't be shamed for sexual choices that are consensual, not manipulative or deceitful. And I don't think "slut" is an effective way of censuring behaviour that's wrong for those reasons, as it's so sexually coded, it implies that the sex was what was wrong with the behaviour.


Hennessy, being a man, and one who has written nothing to indicate that he has any awareness or concern for women's issues and some things which demonstrate man-centricism if not misogyny, is on very contentious ground throwing the word "slut" around quite so much. It certainly doesn't come off as someone whole-heartedly supporting the reclamation, but as an immature male chauvinist delighting in the apparent opportunity at demeaning women, particularly those holding beliefs and advocating for rights in ways that he doesn't approve of, without fear of censure. This isn't that opportunity; Hennessy, you're coming off as a bigot, a male chauvinist and a misogynist. As such, "slut" from you will always sound offensive.

The issue that "slut" has a different effect on different demographics of women has certainly not escaped at least the vaguely thoughtful feminist spaces. There are a number of good pieces around discussing how and why "slut" can be very different to non-white women than white women, for example, and why non-white women generally wouldn't feel so "empowered" by reclaiming the word. Feminism in general is not clueless about this, nor about the fact that it is a movement which centres white, western, educated, able-bodied women. It's not as clued up as I would personally like, nor as active about changing it, but it is aware of the fact.

Believing that Slutwalk is first and foremost about reclaiming the word "slut" is a misconception. My first post on the first page gives a pretty good overview, and I'm not inclined to repeat it and annoy everyone else just because one (or a few) person doesn't want to read it. It's there.

My personal opinion is that "Slutwalk" is a problematic name outside of the immediate Toronto situation. However, I'm totally in line with the general aim of saying that victim-blaming is just not on and that women should be free to do what's right for them without fear or influence of the "frigid" or "slut" labels. At the same time, I'm fine with anyone who prefers to stay away because they can't associate with the name, and I do wish that that didn't exclude people; but this movement took off so fast and was truly grass-roots so that it didn't go through all sorts of committees and discussions to check that it was getting everything "right".
G13
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 11:37 am

Re: Slutwalk

Postby RedCelt69 on Thu Jun 16, 2011 12:18 am

Jesus Christ but I hate feminists so very very much.
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and celt
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Red Celt's Blog
RedCelt69
User avatar
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: Slutwalk

Postby Hennessy on Thu Jun 16, 2011 6:11 pm

G13,

The problem with the nebulous concept of Slutwalk is that it is exactly that, nebulous. If reclamation of the word "slut" isn't on the agenda then it seems to have no core beliefs or ideas for change besides what seems to be a very schoolgirl titillation at dressing up and adorning yourself in slogans in public

Feminism is largely the same these days anyway because it fights no obvious foe - not inequality in wages, not unfair dismissal over maternity leave, not a woman's property rights or legal entitlements, not her right to her children nor her right to divorce. These are law. We may call this the formal fight for women's rights.

What seems to have taken the place of these fights for justice and legal rights is exactly what you seem to be arguing for, which is the continuing oppression of women through language and attitude. Is that correct? You've swung around so much since that first post I admit finding it hard to keep up. If so, then this is a more informal approach not based on changing a woman's legal standing, but on equitable treatment in society.


Now we've got our terms down let's look at the 'world views' shall we? Unlike what I assume to be Redcelt's position, I don't really believe everyone is equal as a human, stripped of all their cultural traditions and personal beliefs. What I also don't believe in, however, is your espousement that woman are one group, or that as that label they are oppressed by a patriarchy, or most amusingly, that you seem to identify me with that patriarchy (I'm flattered by the way). The problem is you've gone too far the other way - now women are one group and deserving a form of special treatment how do you keep up the appearance of equality? I'm genuinely intrigued.

You cited the example of the catch 22 of a woman raped if she goes back with the man and raped if she doesn't. How does this link up, if at all, with the idea of a woman to a man? We quickly identified rapists don't think like ordinary men in this thread, so where does your justification for limiting the rights of men to provide for the rights of women come from? You're confusing men with rapists, and women with virginal nuns - echoes of the patriarchal views of the 19th century.

My mimicry of the style of a red top analysing the Giggs scandal aside, sometimes sex is something done to women and sometimes it isn't. There is no neat black line running down the middle of (mostly) drunken sexual forays where one episode becomes rape and the other doesn't. Even if there is in a woman's mind how do you propose a judge works that out when she can't remember anything after the eleventh shooter? Rape statistics bear this out - if there is a clear-cut totally unprovoked attack the law is quite good at trying to get to the bottom of it. When nobody knows what facts are there to go on? Rape statistics - often berated by Guardianistas because they show such a low rate of convictions bear out a more complex picture than that which you've simply taken for granted - predatory men and innocent women.

Of course you can blame a vast patriarchal conspiracy amongst men to ignore and repress women - and imply support for implementing the most barbarous and restrictive chasm between the sexes since the nineteenth century. Or you can admit that sometimes women put themselves in dangerous situations and should be well informed about them - or is that too much repression for ya? Thought so. Clockwork Orange style re-education for men it is then.

Any argument about male and female relations and roles in society defies the kind of suffocating gender analysis you find in academia because in the real world there aren't norms along which you can neatly align men or women. If you want to have an" academic" (read: "unrelated") argument then you're welcome to - don't be so offended when I stir the pot a little with my posts - you're welcome to browse my back-catalogue with Senethro any time tho, you'll see I like to provoke a little gut-feeling now and again.

And I won't care what you call me, although "bigot, a male chauvinist and a misogynist" is pretty strong ;)

EDIT: I urge you to read this article with reference to my post & your comments so far as well:
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_campus_rape.html
Last edited by Hennessy on Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
The Sinner.
"Apologies in advance for pedantry."
Hennessy
User avatar
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 12:08 pm

Re: Slutwalk

Postby Senethro on Thu Jun 16, 2011 6:28 pm

p sure we're done here, redcelt isn't even pretending hes capable of discussion anymore and henessey has declared he won't debate on any terms except his own with his digestive system as the arbiter
Senethro
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 9:40 pm

Re: Slutwalk

Postby Hennessy on Thu Jun 16, 2011 9:56 pm

Well until G13 comes back at me or declares him or herself tired of the debate we'll leave it just a little longer and hopefully Lonely Pilgrim can do one of his wonderful touchline homilies and tell us the score. :-P
The Sinner.
"Apologies in advance for pedantry."
Hennessy
User avatar
 
Posts: 1012
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 12:08 pm

Re: Slutwalk

Postby RedCelt69 on Sun Jun 19, 2011 3:18 am

Hennessy wrote:Unlike what I assume to be Redcelt's position, I don't really believe everyone is equal as a human, stripped of all their cultural traditions and personal beliefs.

That's a curious position to take.

Allow yourself to have an imaginary journey.

You are having an OBE. You have no idea what country you are in, but you are in a maternity ward of an unknown hospital. You are in a room surrounded by babies. They are wrapped up, so you have no way of knowing their genders (and whether they deserve to be spoken to in the repugnant manner that G13 managed). You don't have a time machine, so you have no way of knowing what their sexual inclinations will eventually be. You can see the colour of their skin but, as the country is unknown, you have no way of knowing which skin colour belongs to the ruling elite.

Now. Tell me. Which babies have more value than the other babies? Which of them has (or should have) more rights than the others? If you are able to say that they are not all deserving of equality, then please tell us how you decided.
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and celt
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed

Red Celt's Blog
RedCelt69
User avatar
 
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2008 4:28 pm

Re: Slutwalk

Postby Senethro on Sun Jun 19, 2011 8:18 am

RedCelt69 wrote: (and whether they deserve to be spoken to in the repugnant manner that G13 managed)


This is such a cute dig and just shows that RC has internalized privilege to the point where questioning the status quo re. womens rights is repugnant. He feels secure enough in this belief that he can call out others on equality.
Senethro
 
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat May 22, 2004 9:40 pm

Re: Slutwalk

Postby Anon. on Mon Jun 27, 2011 1:37 am

RedCelt69 wrote:Allow yourself to have an imaginary journey.

You are having an OBE.


Am I the only person who immediately pictured himself at Buckingham Palace?
Anon.
 
Posts: 2779
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Previous

Return to The Sinner's Main Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

cron