You see, back in January, Toronto Police Const. Michael Sanguinetti told a personal security class at York University that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized" and since then the man has been crucified. That one statement set off a tidal wave of angry responses and in turn began a movement called SlutWalk, in which women gathered together in the streets of Toronto, some (though not all) purposely dressed in slutty clothes, some even going as far as scrawling the word “slut” across their bellies, and marched against what they deem to be the misogynistic and archaic mentality of slut-shaming and victim-blaming that the officer had apparently displayed.
Now first of all, call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure that dressing like a slut and putting your goods on display for all to see while carrying around signs that declare “No Means No!” isn’t actually going to send the message “No Means No!” Because what you’re wearing is screaming “Yes!” and that’s EXACTLY what the officer was trying to say. You see, the thing is, though the police officer certainly made a bad decision in using the word “slut,” his advice was still sound, because the way you dress as a woman MATTERS, and it will play a large role in whether or not men actually respect you. What he is quoted as saying was in fact a tip in a long slew of statements he was giving to help women make safe decisions and lower their risk of being raped. He did not by any means say, “If you dress like a slut, you deserve rape.” Nor did he say, “Dressing like a slut causes rape.” He really just made the suggestion, though certainly not very tactfully, to dress modestly because it does factor in to the situation. He wasn’t excusing rape, as these women seem to be portraying him as doing. The fact is that no matter what you wear or what situation you’re in, rape is indeed an inexcusable crime and a violation against humanity that nobody deserves. But the truth is---whether or not you want to admit it---there are many instances (though certainly not all) in which the events leading up to a rape were a string of unwise decisions carried out by a woman, and had she made safe and wise decisions---instead of wild ones---the whole instance could have been avoided. This police officer was honestly trying to help women, and now women everywhere are crucifying him for it.
Yup, EVERYWHERE. That’s right, folks. SlutWalk has gone international. Boston, St. Louis, New Delhi, London, Seoul, and just recently, right here in our own backyard…Kansas City. Here are some fun pics from the event... (Taken from the SlutWalkKC website)
A large task many are taking on is that of taking back the word "slut" and no longer allowing it to have a negative connotation. Why? Because according to this frame of mind, women have suffered from slut-shaming for far too long and should be given the same sexual freedom that men have without any societal consequences...Including the consequence of shame. They demand society to accept immodest and promiscuous behavior as good.
Sorry for the language. I just want you to grasp the extent of the protest. Just imagine how much fun parents had explaining all of these signs and inappropriately dressed women to their kids on September 17th.
Now here's the thing. I get the "no means no" tagline. I understand the point that they're trying to get across. But here's the problem: Over 90% of communication is nonverbal. Only about 7% of communication is done through actual words...the rest is determined by tone, facial expressions, appearance, body language, etc. Don't you think it's a little idiotic, then, for us women to think that the way we behave and dress DOESN'T MATTER? Do you REALLY think that your appearance, your behavior, and even the tone of voice you're speaking to someone in can't possibly play a role in leading up to a scenario even as heinous as rape? Should women not have to be accountable for anything anymore? For example, if you're present at a bar or party or rager or whatever you wanna call it where drinking and drugs and sex are a regular and expected occurrence, should you not take responsibility for the fact that you went there? If you're there, you're already giving the people around you the indication that you are there to do those exact same things. You may not want to do those things, but they don't know that. Though “no means no,” the environment in which you have placed yourself already says “yes.” The same goes for the way you are dressed. If you’re wearing a short, tight dress and fishnet stockings, or perhaps you’ve just got all your goods hangin’ out, what you are wearing also says “yes.” It is ridiculous for you to take on the mentality of “I’m going to dress like a slut, but how DARE men notice that I’m dressed like a slut. I’m going to make the areas of my body that I know men are sexually attracted to clearly visible to them and then get upset when men make it known that they're sexually attracted to me.” The same goes for men’s grabby hands. If you’re on the dance floor rubbing up against a guy, dancing provocatively, then again…your body language is saying “yes.” Don’t be surprised if his hands begin to wander, because as far as he can tell, you’ve given him free reign of your body. No guy in that environment is going to wait for you to say “Okay, you can put your hands here, but not here. And over here, but not there,” because as is the case, no woman ever actually says that. He is going to determine what your boundaries are by the boundaries that you are demonstrating to him.
And if you start touching and making out with a guy, then go to a private place with him, I can guarantee you that you are screaming “yes.” You’re not in the kind of place where guys and girls go off to a closet to discuss the latest in politics or how much you both love Star Wars. No, you’re going there because that’s where people go to have sex. He is expecting and hoping for sex, and you are signaling just by going there with him that you’re going to give it to him.
This isn't to say that men shouldn't be held accountable for THEIR actions, because yes, they absolutely should. They know better than to ogle, grab, make lude comments, push a woman for sex, and especially rape a woman. They shouldn't pursue those situations and they should definitely be punished when they do. But seriously, this feminist crap is getting out of hand. Teaching women to do whatever they want sexually, to dress provocatively, and to send men mixed messages and expect no negative consequences isn't helping women, it is hurting us. There is a reason instances of rape have tripled since the feminist and sexual revolutions of the 1960s...and it's certainly not because society was pushing moral standards upon us women---it's because women rebelled against those moral standards that were already in place and men didn't hesitate to take advantage of it. After all, how many men AREN'T going to support a cause that gets them free sex? And now, after having peaked in the 90s, we're seeing a decrease in rape instances again. But let's not deceive ourselves into thinking it's because rape education is a raving success. It's most likely because younger generations of girls are being taught that it's healthy for them to sleep with whoever they want. We're teaching young boys that "no means no" while teaching young girls that it's good to say "yes," and hey, a greater number of willing women means less instances of rape. And let's not even think about the number of girls who don't even report rape because the lines are so blurred these days. But hey, as long as it looks good on the charts, I guess...
I am so tired of women teaching young girls that it's healthy to give their bodies away as if they have no worth. That it's healthy to behave or dress in a way that demeans them. That it's healthy to stomp on men and strip them of their manhood. That it's healthy to hate and distrust all men because of bad experiences in the past. Really, it's healthy? Eating is healthy. But eating too much isn't. Nor is eating the wrong kind of food. Blowfish is a food that's healthy, but if you eat the wrong part of it you die because it's poisonous. Sex is good...within the boundaries God has given us. Outside of those boundaries, it's poisonous...to our hearts, souls, minds, relationships, and yes, bodies. So no, giving into every sexual desire you have is NOT healthy. What is healthy is healing the scars that are leading you to behave as you are, and giving your body away doesn't bring healing. Sex does not heal. Beauty does not heal. Attention from men does not heal. Hatred and bitterness does not heal. Profanity does not heal. Inappropriate protests do not heal. And trying to change the definition and perception of what is bad to good does not and will not heal.
I wish I would have known this was taking place in Kansas City. I would have loved to create signs that said "God loves sluts...AND rapists" or "God redeems sluts AND rapists. Who are you redeeming today?" I know they're claiming to try to redeem rape victims. To point out that they are in fact victims. But honestly, the way in which they did so only made things worse. It's sad that they took such a good cause and turned it into such a filthy display. But hey, if anything, I hope this whole SlutWalk thing opens our eyes and reveals to us the immense need for us to teach young women that God loves them, has redeemed them with the blood of Christ, and that because He loves them he really does care what they do with their bodies. He created them with worth, and has proven their worth to them on the cross. He gave us boundaries because they're what's best for us. Yes, it's true. Not even science has been able to disprove those boundaries in terms of what is considered physically and emotionally healthy. So if you're a "slut" and proud to be one, know that Christ became a slut in the eyes of God and took on the punishment of being one so that you would no longer be called a slut, but a child of God. Christ's refusal to protest on the cross has accomplished far more than any SlutWalk protest ever could to redeem women. His lack of words puts their plethora of empty words to shame.
So let us learn from 1 Corinthians that just because the world and the law allows such behavior, and just because some twist it and deem it "healthy," does not mean it's BENEFICIAL.
And now I'll just leave you with these three videos. One is coverage from the Toronto SlutWalk and the other two help shed light on the history of feminism and its effects on our culture. I hope the eyes of those who watch it will be opened:
“Everything is permissible for me”—but not everything is beneficial. “Everything is permissible for me”—but I will not be mastered by anything. 13“Food for the stomach and the stomach for food”—but God will destroy them both. The body is not meant for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body. 14By his power God raised the Lord from the dead, and he will raise us also. 15Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never! 16Do you not know that he who unites himself with a prostitute is one with her in body? For it is said, “The two will become one flesh.”b 17But he who unites himself with the Lord is one with him in spirit.
18Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. 19Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; 20you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body.
---1 Corinthians 6:12-20
