Londons SlutWalk

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The first bit makes like it's mutually exclusive. Is it impossible to both respect women and oggle? Most straight blokes will enjoy the sight of strong, independent women dressed scantly or not-so-scantly. That doesn't mean we revert to cavemen banging drums and making sandwich jokes.

The second. Why not? It's her right to wear whatever she likes.

I was using the word "oggling" to refer to unrestricted leering, not every wayward, or admiring, glance. "Oggling" is starring.

I always get a bit worried when I hear about "objectifying" as a universal, a priori evil. If I strap on sparkly chaps and body glitter and dance onstage to a crowd of howling women, I am, in fact, hoping to be objectified in a very pleasant sort of way. I'm not abrogating my dignity as a human being, or defining myself strictly as an erotic cowboy dancer. I'm not making myself less of a human being. At that moment, in my chaps and body glitter, I am hoping to become an object of sexual desire for that crowd of women. But if we accept that all objectification is evil, then I'm somehow making myself sub-human. Which is bogus.

We all want to be desired at times; we all want to be objectified at times. What separates good from bad is volition and consent. And just because someone is dressed or is behaving in a way that excites a sexual response does not mean anybody has the right to force themselves on them.

At least that's how I see it.

Yes, objectifying is a universally bad thing - it is dehumanising. It is possible to look and oppreciate without turning someone into an agentless "object" without thoughts, feelings, or human rights. That is what some women invite from some men by the way they dress.

I guess that how successful it is boils down to interpretation, but as a whole... I agree, the walks aren't going to change much, but then that's just the culture we live in, I don't think any form of medium will change that; if I ask people to stop being sexist on the internet, for example, I'm more likely to get "where's my sandwich?" than a positive response!

Well, if it makes you feel better, I personally believe the proper position for a man, in relation to a woman, is on his knee, head down, arms crossed, sword on the floor in front of her; it looks better if you have a long cloak on.

Also, I do my own cooking and ironing.

Nor is there anything to say that she shouldn't, right?

Well, I don't know, I'm not a fan of using your physical body for effect on the opposite sex - men do it less than women, and in a completely differenet way - but I don't like it in either gender. A lot of the more revealing woman's clothes aren's just about showing what's there, but also emphasising and teasing (or taunting).

It's not just men though, women are wired to look at one another too, though the context might not be the same; while a man might be thinking about that plunging neckline, I might be thinking of how horizontal stripes don't flatter her figure, for example.

And yes, we know that people are going to look...

Yes, I know you know. Here's what I think though: Women dress to provoke a fairly primative response from men, as a sexualised way of showing off, and they judge each other as sexual competition. That's fine, but it somewhat cuts across the claim that women "want to be appreciated for their mind".

Men compete physically as well, but we do it by carrying things, putting up shelves, killing deer with javalins. So now we're coming back to the proposition that men and women are fundamentally different - and that we need an agreed pattern of behaviour to comunicate across the divide. Then you're only one step ahead of different gender roles.

Can we really say that works on a gender level as it does with religion or culture? I don't think so, because these other factors get in the way; European and American men collectively saying that objectifying women is bad doesn't mean that their counterparts across the world are going to share the same view, particularly when there's things like religion that portray women in a certain fashion.

Yes, I think we can because gender can cut across religion and politics too. Just because not all men think something doesn't mean that men cannot make collective decisions as a group.

That's good to know. :3

Doesn't mean I agree though :-D

But I still don't get it. I don't see where in this scheme of things those upset men (or women, as Secura notes) lose their ability to keep their mind? I don't see how it follows that how she dresses “provocatively” is of any concern to you. Where exactly are you in any way disadvantaged if some random woman decides to walk around in naught but a few pasties?

They don't. Just because a woman walks past in a miniskirt doesn't mean you have the right to put away the Guardian, hit her over the head with a rolled up playboy and drag her off by the hair. The point is, some men do do that at least figuratively. Pretending otherwise is potentially dangerous for a woman. My concern is that women are being encourage to disregard generations of inbred caution around men and flaunt themselves, just because they think they should be allowed to.

That's akin to me claiming I should be allowed to barge into 10 Downing Street and demand that David Cameron expalin why he has gutted out armed forces and raised tuition fees - and then complain when I get arrested.

Life just isn't like that.