(source)
Boston SlutWalk 2011
I've been blogging a lot about SlutWalk lately. SlutWalk is a response to a Toronto police officer who made the comment that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized". Not only is it outrageous that someone would make this comment, (although it is a sentiment shared by many men and women alike) it is even more tragic to know that this comment came from a person in the position of law enforcement.
The first SlutWalk took place in Toronto and then spread internationally. The most recent SlutWalk march took place in the county in which I love. SlutWalk Los Angeles 2011 landed in West Hollywood, California.
The fact that the that event has the word "Slut" in the title has been enough to trigger criticism. Not only has "Slut" earned a badge of shock factor from the media but also from fellow feminists.
I came upon an article in The Guardian written by Gail Dines and Wendy J Murphy entitled "SlutWalk is Not Sexual Liberation."
Within the article Dines and Murphy state that, "The organizers claim that celebrating the word "slut", and promoting sluttishness in general, will help women achieve full autonomy over their sexuality. But the focus on "reclaiming" the word slut fails to address the real issue. The term slut is so deeply rooted in the patriarchal "madonna/whore" view of women's sexuality that it is beyond redemption. The word is so saturated with the ideology that female sexual energy deserves punishment that trying to change its meaning is a waste of precious feminist resoures."
I think that Dines and Murphy miss the point. I will say that I have been a long time fan of much of Dines' work, but sometimes I think she misses the mark. This article is a prime example.
Although there were some women at the SlutWalk march who held signs that said things like, "We're Taking Slut Back" and "I'm a Slut Don't Assault Me", the main goal of the event was not to reclaim the word "Slut."
Reclaiming language is a tricky issue and is not as black and white as some believe it to be. I won't get into my views on the issue of reclaiming language here. I'll save it for another post.
I think Dines and Murphy zipped past the purpose of the SlutWalk event. The participants were putting forth the belief that sexual assault is never warranted. Furthermore the participants were responding to the specific word used by the Toronto police officer. "Slut."
I believe that many of the men and women holding signs that referred to themselves as sluts were doing so sarcastically and not literally. In fact many of the women who were dressed scantily were women who would not normally feel comfortable doing so in other arenas. The lack of dress was serving a point.
Later in the article Dines and Murphy went on to say, "While the organizers of the SlutWalk might think that proudly calling themselves "sluts" is a way to empower women, they are in fact making life harder for girls who are trying to navigate their way through the tricky terrain of adolescence."
Again, these two authors miss the mark. Not all of the men and women referring to themselves as "Sluts" were doing so because they felt that the word is empowering. They were doing so to make the statement that even if a person does all the things that socially deems them to be a "Slut" or if they dress in a way that is considered "Slutty" this does not warrant sexual assault. A woman could walk down the street naked and it would not warrent sexual assault. A woman could initiate sex and then change her mind and that would not warrent sexual assault. NOTHING warrents sexual assault and that is the message of SlutWalk.
To learn more about SlutWalk visit the official website here.
No comments:
Post a Comment