Activist Women Create "Slut Walk" In Retaliation To Comments from Officer

[TBoneTX 45,284]

You can't get mad at a guy who says "nice tits" to you when you are flaunting them in his face, etc.

I once had a pal who would hang around the produce section of supermarkets during the heat of summer. When a stacked young lady in a halter-top would walk in, he'd go up to her with a cantaloupe in each hand and say, "Excuse me, Miss; it seems that you would know a lot about THESE. Can you tell me if they're fresh?" He got slapped a couple of times, but other times his boldness (bra-zenness?) paid off, si man.

Thought for the Day: Can't-elopes must have traditional weddings, si man.

[Darnell 8,478]

I haven't yet read any discussion about guys who wear codpieces, no man.

Get to the big library, ask the librarian to review the archives - you want circa 1422 to 1896

Good Luck !

[Peikko 1,575]

Perhaps not sexual availability, but clothing does say a lot about a person usually.

You are missing the entire point in all of this.

The problem with people like you, is that you cannot comprehend one being against something, yet at the same time saying how things really are. You try to equate stating reality with being the same as a person's views.

As I said, I don't think these women deserve to be attacked, however when they get unwanted attention, they did ask for attention in the first place. That negative attention doesn't necesarrily mean them being 'raped' either. It could be unwanted sexual advances of any sort. You can't get mad at a guy who says "nice tits" to you when you are flaunting them in his face, etc.

Paul, you are the one missing the point. In our culture clothing is not a means of communication that overrides all other forms of communication. You are saying that if a women dresses a certain way she deserves unwanted attention period, that's poppy #######. Unwanted attention is exactly what it says it is, unwanted and any woman, however she is dressed has every right to express the fact that attention from any particular individual is unwanted. A woman who shows some cleavage is not saying, here you go boys, have at 'em and if I say no piss off, I'm not interested in you; the way that I am dressed actually means, 'yes I'm available for your sexual advances so come ahead.'

Oh, I know you think you are saying something else but this is what you are saying. You are saying that a woman who dresses in certain ways has no right to tell another individual to piss off. This is not the western way Paul.

Whether in fact some men believe this to be true or not well, clearly reality says that they do, you do for one.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Paul, you are the one missing the point. In our culture clothing is not a means of communication that overrides all other forms of communication. You are saying that if a women dresses a certain way she deserves unwanted attention period, that's poppy #######. Unwanted attention is exactly what it says it is, unwanted and any woman, however she is dressed has every right to express the fact that attention from any particular individual is unwanted. A woman who shows some cleavage is not saying, here you go boys, have at 'em and if I say no piss off, I'm not interested in you; the way that I am dressed actually means, 'yes I'm available for your sexual advances so come ahead.'

Oh, I know you think you are saying something else but this is what you are saying. You are saying that a woman who dresses in certain ways has no right to tell another individual to piss off. This is not the western way Paul.

Whether in fact some men believe this to be true or not well, clearly reality says that they do, you do for one.

Not what I am saying at all. You can say "piss off" to whomever you want, but the fact remains that you cannot go out and be dressed like that without expecting some unwanted attention. You can say piss off when it's present, but you're welcoming it to be present in the first place.

[Peikko 1,575]

Not what I am saying at all. You can say "piss off" to whomever you want, but the fact remains that you cannot go out and be dressed like that without expecting some unwanted attention. You can say piss off when it's present, but you're welcoming it to be present in the first place.

Please try to understand if something is unwanted it is NOT WANTED. Clothing is a piss poor substitute for verbal communication. Whatever a woman wears she has the right not to be harrased on the basis of her clothing choices here in the US. No matter how many times or in how many ways you say that a woman who chooses to wear certain types of clothing is welcoming UNWANTED attention you are wrong. It boils down to that tired old idea that if a woman looks a certain way, even if she clearly says no, what she is actually saying is Yes, Yes YES! You obviously believe this is true which is why you keep saying it.

[Peikko 1,575]

Btw Paul, when you engage in sexual activity would you disengage if the women clearly became distressed for some reason or would you just carry on because once started you can't stop, you being simply an animal and a slave to your animal instincts?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Please try to understand if something is unwanted it is NOT WANTED. Clothing is a piss poor substitute for verbal communication. Whatever a woman wears she has the right not to be harrased on the basis of her clothing choices here in the US. No matter how many times or in how many ways you say that a woman who chooses to wear certain types of clothing is welcoming UNWANTED attention you are wrong. It boils down to that tired old idea that if a woman looks a certain way, even if she clearly says no, what she is actually saying is Yes, Yes YES! You obviously believe this is true which is why you keep saying it.

keep proving your illiteracy.

[Danno 1,228]

keep proving your illiteracy.

Whats strange about MC is, she not only will disagree with you over and over.... she will also disagree what you never said or never meant.

[Dan and Judy 614]

I haven't yet read any discussion about guys who wear codpieces, no man.

I just read something about lead codpieces a couple of days ago

[Peikko 1,575]

No one 'deserves' to be harmed, but the officer was originally right. These women do NOTHING to help their situation when they dress like little temptresses who want attention. They want the attention and they expect it, but sometimes it goes way too far. These women need to reaize that there are some people out there who are going to be jerks who will attack them based on the way they dress/act.

If it looks ike a #######, acts like a #######, walks like a #######, then it's probably a stupid ####### and or stupid girl trying to gain attention and YES she is going to get unwanted attention.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's disgusting these pigs who attack women for any reason, but leading people on is wrong in its own way as well.

This is just another meaningless 'walk' for a stupid cause at the end of the day.

I've highlighted the pertinent sections, just to make it easy for you Paul.

In the US the only clothing standards that matter are the ones that are determined by law. As far as I am aware the only legal restrictions that are currently in place address obscenity and these laws apply equally to men and women.

As long as a women dresses within the legal parameters what she chooses to wear is up to her and no one, NO ONE has the right to imply, suggest or infer that her choice of clothing has a sexual message for any passing stranger who observes her.

Everything that is bolded is completely subjective, it is your interpretation of what women who dress in certain ways (which still remain hopelessly vague) are 'saying'. You claim that women who dress in certain ways (these as yet undefined ways) are sluts, you can tell they are sluts SIMPLY BY THE WAY THEY DRESS. You also claim that dressing in this way (whatever way that ends up being defined) is done to attract attention and because it is done to attract attention it is ok that it attracts not only the attention that she might or might not be seeking but any unwanted attention as well.

Finally, to add insult to injury , you claim that women who dress in this undefined way are 'leading people on' (you even used the words dress like temptresses). Yes, you said that Paul, that women who dress in this undefined way are provoking sexual arousal at some level and that doing so is WRONG. How is dressing in any legal way wrong? Explain it to me Paul, because I'm not understanding how it can be wrong if it's legal.

Now, you seem to think that's just a statement of fact, how things are. Paul, you are completely and utterly wrong. People can and do dress as they choose in the US exactly because what you wear contains no coded messages. Whatever a woman chooses to wear is simply a clothing choice, nothing more. There is no skirt length that indicates that the wearer is a ####### or a #######, no neckline that indicates that the wearer demands the sexual attention of passing strangers, no heel height that says 'here I am, come #### me'. Perhaps you need to go back to basics and learn that It is your responsibility Paul to ensure that you don't excuse your own bad behaviour by blaming the legal clothing choices of someone else. The law, and this is what the article is about Paul, not your interpretation of women's dress sense, is firmly on the side of women having the choice to dress as they choose and it is the job of those who upload the law to support that law, not undermine it.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I've highlighted the pertinent sections, just to make it easy for you Paul.

In the US the only clothing standards that matter are the ones that are determined by law. As far as I am aware the only legal restrictions that are currently in place address obscenity and these laws apply equally to men and women.

As long as a women dresses within the legal parameters what she chooses to wear is up to her and no one, NO ONE has the right to imply, suggest or infer that her choice of clothing has a sexual message for any passing stranger who observes her.

Everything that is bolded is completely subjective, it is your interpretation of what women who dress in certain ways (which still remain hopelessly vague) are 'saying'. You claim that women who dress in certain ways (these as yet undefined ways) are sluts, you can tell they are sluts SIMPLY BY THE WAY THEY DRESS. You also claim that dressing in this way (whatever way that ends up being defined) is done to attract attention and because it is done to attract attention it is ok that it attracts not only the attention that she might or might not be seeking but any unwanted attention as well.

Finally, to add insult to injury , you claim that women who dress in this undefined way are 'leading people on' (you even used the words dress like temptresses). Yes, you said that Paul, that women who dress in this undefined way are provoking sexual arousal at some level and that doing so is WRONG. How is dressing in any legal way wrong? Explain it to me Paul, because I'm not understanding how it can be wrong if it's legal.

Now, you seem to think that's just a statement of fact, how things are. Paul, you are completely and utterly wrong. People can and do dress as they choose in the US exactly because what you wear contains no coded messages. Whatever a woman chooses to wear is simply a clothing choice, nothing more. There is no skirt length that indicates that the wearer is a ####### or a #######, no neckline that indicates that the wearer demands the sexual attention of passing strangers, no heel height that says 'here I am, come #### me'. Perhaps you need to go back to basics and learn that It is your responsibility Paul to ensure that you don't excuse your own bad behaviour by blaming the legal clothing choices of someone else. The law, and this is what the article is about Paul, not your interpretation of women's dress sense, is firmly on the side of women having the choice to dress as they choose and it is the job of those who upload the law to support that law, not undermine it.

are you seriously going to be this ignorant? I get that's it's hard for you to comprehend beyond simplicity, but stop using your damn gut and use your damn brain.

Think of it like this.

If I dress like a local cop and just walk around (just dress like mind you, don't act like) and people come up to me for help... I should be able to dress like the cop without that attention. I mean come on.

I should be able to wear army fatigues and not have people asking me about where i served.

I should be able to dress like a hobo and walk into Neiman Marcus and buy a product without being harassed by security following me.

You see, what you fail to realize, is that even though we can wear what we want, be who we want to be, etc. That DOES NOT change the fact that there are negative consequences for the way we dress or even positive ones for that matter.

It's not about what you are allowed to wear, it's about the nature of people to treat you a certain way based on the way you look. This happens each and every moment of every single day.

[B_J 2,752]

even though we can wear what we want, be who we want to be, etc. That DOES NOT change the fact that there are negative consequences for the way we dress or even positive ones for that matter.

It's not about what you are allowed to wear, it's about the nature of people to treat you a certain way based on the way you look. This happens each and every moment of every single day.

I have to agree with this.

If I walk through a bad neighborhood, at night, with $100 bills hanging out of my pockets; there's a good chance I'll get beat up and all money taken away. There are laws that will punish the people who did this to me; but that will be after I'm beaten and robbed. It's not my fault what happened, but I can still do things to prevent it happening. Therefore I've made a choice, for my own safety, to never have any money and stay away from scary people.

And, for the gun people, if I had a gun, they would beat me up, take my money and my gun. And then probably shoot me with my own gun.

[TBoneTX 45,284]

I just read something about lead codpieces a couple of days ago

An immortal post that deserves enshrinement in the pantheon of all-time classic and memorable VJ posts, si man.

[luckytxn 2,264]

I like babes that dress as sluts.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

are you seriously going to be this ignorant? I get that's it's hard for you to comprehend beyond simplicity, but stop using your damn gut and use your damn brain.

Think of it like this.

If I dress like a local cop and just walk around (just dress like mind you, don't act like) and people come up to me for help... I should be able to dress like the cop without that attention. I mean come on.

I should be able to wear army fatigues and not have people asking me about where i served.

I should be able to dress like a hobo and walk into Neiman Marcus and buy a product without being harassed by security following me.

You see, what you fail to realize, is that even though we can wear what we want, be who we want to be, etc. That DOES NOT change the fact that there are negative consequences for the way we dress or even positive ones for that matter.

It's not about what you are allowed to wear, it's about the nature of people to treat you a certain way based on the way you look. This happens each and every moment of every single day.

Go ahead Paul - dress like a #######.