‘Slut’ ‘cunt’ ‘bitch’ ‘slag’ ‘whore’ ‘slapper’…..these are words that have been spat at women by misogynists, rapists, harassers and abusers since time immemorial. They are loaded words straight out of the lexicon of hate speech; sexist epithets, hurled by those who would seek to intimidate, humiliate and degrade us.
Because of their history, and because I’m a feminist, they are words I would never use to describe any other woman, just as they are words I would never ever use to describe myself.
And that’s why I have a problem with Slutwalk, an initiative that started in Toronto in April following the heinous comment by a law enforcement officer there that “in order to avoid being raped “women should avoid dressing like sluts,” and that’s now set to take place in London on June 4th this year.
Now obviously I don’t have any problem with the motivation behind the event. I hope it would go without saying that I’m fully in support of the notion that no matter what women wear, no matter where we go, no matter how we behave, none of us are responsible for the rapes and sexual assaults perpetrated against us. Rape and others forms of sexual assault are the sole responsibility of those men who choose to rape and assault. They are not the fault of short skirts, high heels or lipstick, and neither are they the fault of those who wear them.
What I do have a problem with however is this move towards ‘reclaiming’ a language that has never been a part of ‘our’ language in the first place. This move towards adopting what has been a key tool of our oppressors – hateful misogynist invective – and using it to label ourselves.
When we start legitimising the hate speech that’s been used against us for so long in this way we’re capitulating to the sexists and the misogynists. We’re giving the message that this abusive language is okay, that it’s so okay in fact that we’re even prepared to use it ourselves.
And feminism is about liberation, not capitulation.
Too Much To Say For Myself 
Thanks Cath, Well said. you have very eloquently described what I was thinking on ‘slutwalk’.
I just don’t understand how women can see this reclaiming as a positive at all – but I suspect they will be along shortly to explain it to us.
I’m kinda torn on the issue… I think there’s some value in reclaiming words, because it removes their power to hurt and oppress us, such as the reclaiming of the word “queer” (or would you say that reclaiming “slut” is a very different thing?). I suppose that by reclaiming the word “slut”, perhaps we’re sending out a message that being “slutty” isn’t a negative or an insult anymore, but a personal choice, thus removing its hate-speech status?
But I see your point about capitulating to misogynists; I wonder what the value is of using misogynistic language to describe ourselves when we could use our own language instead… it’s as if we’re still operating within a framework where patriarchy gets to define our roles; changing the connotation of a word doesn’t change its origin or meaning… I don’t know.
Sorry about the rambly comment, just my messy thoughts on the issue. Great post!
It’s a tough one. I see what the women are trying to do with the Slutwalk, but they run the risk of playing right into the hands of those who love to bandy about abusive terms. The problem with attempting to ‘reclaim’ degrading names – be it ‘nigger’, ‘bitch’, ‘queer’, ‘slut’ or what have you – is the assumption that your target audience are intelligent and enlightened enough to understand how language can be deconstructed and reshaped. Unfortunately, if your target audience are those dumb enough to think that short skirt has anything to do with rape, then I think your quest is doomed to fail. I think the ‘This is not an invitation to rape me’ campaign was much better and smarter (it showed women wearing short skirts, drinking and getting married with that tagline over the picture) – the Slutwalk just risks muddying the message further which is the last thing we need in the fight against rape apologists.
Good post.
To play devil’s advocate for a moment – one of the reasons why I’ve always used (some would say “overused”) this sort of language is not to reclaim it, but to render it meaningless.
My view has always been that it’s possible to take some of the heat of this type of language if you say it often enough and use it in silly ways. Granted, that’s not exactly what the Slutwalkers are doing, but it’s a thought. It’s especially a thought online, where it is almost impossible to stop people using that language simply by asking them to. I’ve almost stopped calling people cunts on twitter, because I called them cunts so often that they seemed to get sick of it, or, at least, weren’t getting the reaction they hoped for, and have moved on. That’s not to say that they won’t be back (they may be back in droves if they read this), or that I won’t continue to be abused if I continue to post in places like CiF and LC, but that there can be different ways of taking the heat out of some language.
Is that capitulation? I don’t feel that I am a woman who has capitulated. I do feel that I am a woman who deals with a lot of misogyny, though.
I just tried writing a response to this, but could find reasoning for both sides of the argument on n levels so I gave up. Context is everything now and will be everything for all time, I suspect.
The word “slut” has some history of being reclaimed already:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ethical_Slut
I’m opposed to all language used for either mysogeny or misandry. I’m also against the misuse of words, but I think it’s also important to understand them. Such words as ‘cunt’ or ‘fuck’ for example, predate the conquest and originate from genuine old English, and their common useage among the ‘lower’ classes is a relic of King Harold’s folk, whereas those who sold out to the Normans and rose up the pecking order were only allowed to have sexual intercourse, poor things, which I understand not to be half as much fun, took a lot longer and, a bit like the mass, could apparently only be done in Latin for centuries.
Tend to agree a bit with all the comments so far. Sex workers (yes, you KNEW I’d get on to sex workers!) have tried to resurrect the word ‘whore’ a lot for precisely the reason Catherine states, examples can be found all over the show.
Adding a great deal of geographical variation in, it all makes being politically correct a nightmare and worthy of recognition as a subject at PhD level.
Twisty covered this issue already. <a href="http://blog.iblamethepatriarchy.com/2011/03/31/toronto-activists-take-back-the-slut/"
I have nothing else to add. I agree with you, Cath.
I don’t think the intention behind SlutWalk was to ever necessarily reclaim the word slut (I think those who march have mixed views on whether this is possible, good or bad) but to call out the use of language used by the officer.
By calling it out and using it as the title of the protest, it might make people question the usage of the word as a whole. It’s a way of making people question the power of the word, a word that has always been used to oppress, control, demean and dehumanize women through their sexuality – to make people question their beliefs towards rape and rape victims. It’s sad but true, as I’m sure you know, that there are so many people still who believe she was “asking for it” and sadly the belief is upheld by people like that police officer, an authority figure, using it and therefore perpetuating this belief further… I don’t believe he realised how much damage that word causes.
So in answer to this post, it’s not about reclaiming necessarily – but showing that the word has no power over women, of all sexual orientations and “sexual liberalness”, to indeed, as a poster above said, render it meaningless and help in the fight to remove the stigmatism around women’s sexuality all together. It’s a small step but hopefully each step will help along the way.
I’m horrified by the language in this article. It could easily confuse and upset any number of innocent and sheltered young football supporters.
Shouldn’t this article have been posted after the 9 o’clock waterworks anyway?
Shocked and Disgusted
Southampton
(nr Tunbridge Wells)
Audre Lorde the late radical lesbian feminist stated it very succinctly – ‘the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.’ Meaning using male supremacist hate language against women will not work. Our male supremacist society believes all women are either s…. or virgins whereas all white men are autonomous individuals.
Women and men of colour have consistently refused to refer to themselves as n……s unless of course they wish to gain brownie points from white male supremacists. So too the male created women hating terms s….t and c…t cannot be reclaimed. Focus on the real issues which are how and why male supremacy continues unabated and why men who engage in sexually promiscuous behaviour are never ever labelled s….s.
Ask yourselves why men immediately whinge and cry they are being subjected to ‘man-hating’ whenever a feminist speaks out against male violence against women. It is not because the term ‘man-hating’ is vile but because men believe women must never challenge male power and male domination over women. That is why these misogynistic male hating insults were created because men cannot insult other men and know their insults will ensure men as a group remain subordinate to other men, but whenever men hurl these women-hating insults at women they know these words are not just words they are the tools of male supremacy and male domination over women.
Forget s…t walks – call out those men who hate women and hold them accountable for their promotion of women-hating.
As regards prostitution the euphemising of prostituted women into supposedly ‘sex workers’ is the same male supremacist language used to hide and/or maintain male right to define what is and is not ‘reality.’ Prostituted women does not hide the male sexual exploitation of women rather it focuses on what exploitation women in prostitution are being subjected to. If prostitution is ‘sex work’ why are not men flocking in their droves to become prostituted males? Is it because men know prostitution is never work – it is male sexual exploitation and male sexual violence against women who are deemed to be ‘just men’s disposable sexual service stations.’ So too are the misogynistic terms s…t and c…t both are used by men and their apologists to make the claim that women’s essence is ‘sex’ and it is ‘sex’ which defines whether or not a woman is respectable according to male supremacist lies/dogma/doctrine.
Women are human – but male supremacists say otherwise – that is why misogyny exists because it makes the claim only men are human and men are not defined as ‘just sex.’
It made some sense as a reaction to something. It makes less sense when it isn’t reacting to something.
I’ve seen a lot of positive reaction to this, so obviously it does resonate with some women – and I’d say you CAN reclaim terms even if they were originally intended as wholly negative – eg ‘dyke’. But it only functions really as a reaction to the original statement. Without setting itself against that it seems a bit daft.
Mind you, I have equal problems with ‘reclaim the night’, because of the implication that rape happens by strangers after dark, and the nonsensical idea that women are afraid to walk around alone at night. Maybe some are, but if I was, I wouldn’t have a job or a social life.
Ah yes, the “claiming” of misogynist or racist language (I’ve never been quite sure why people say they’re “reclaiming” the language, given that like you said, it was never ours to begin with). I have a number of friends who think they’re being all clever and ironic when they greet each other with a “Hey, bitch!” or “Hey, Slut!” I’ve asked them to never call me that. Because, for me, these words are connected to being raped. As in, “Shut up, bitch, or I’ll kill you!” Not something I want to be reminded of when I’m meeting friends for drinks.
As for rendering these epithets meaningless through frequent “friendly” use, it doesn’t work. Apart from the fact that these words are potentially triggering to survivors of hate crimes, a friendly “Yo, bitch!” between friends won’t make the word any less venomous when spewed by a misogynist who’s raping, beating, or harassing you.
I agree with Polly that it makes sense as a reaction to a derogatory term; it’s a specific repost to a specific insult. And I’ve also seen a lot of positive reaction to the idea of a Slutwalk from women who are quite keen on calling themselves whatever the hell they want, wearing whatever they fancy, wherever and whenever they want to. They would not agree that they are bowing to patriarchy by using the word slut to describe themselves.
If I call myself a slut (with tongue firmly in my cheek and a sneer at the those who want to put me down with the term) then it can be mine. It doesn’t hurt me. That’s why the use of words in different contexts can defuse their power: if slut is only ever used as an insult then that is what it remains. I think the analogy with queer is a good one: changing the way language is used may not hold all the answers but it is a useful, powerful, interesting and complex tool and stirs up the debate that needs to be had and challenges assumptions that need to be challenged. It’s not as if either queer or slut (or any other appropriated term) is a straightforward replication of conventional meaning: they are rich with pride, wry humour and quite conscious snook cocking at those who’d use them as insults.
Women should be aware that slut is a word often used when violence (not insults) is meted out to women of all ages from prepubescent girls onwards. For some it is a trigger to the violence they suffered. It is shouted in hatred as the fists pound down.
Is this just a bunch of white, middleclass women dressing up as ‘tarts’ to make a cheap political point? Cause that’s what it looks like.
…Because only women who aren’t white and aren’t middleclass are allowed to protest? Let’s not start hating on each other when in reality – although some disagree with others tactics – we all are fighting the same fight, otherwise we wouldn’t looking or commenting on this blog. Discussion and debate is healthy and way to see other perspectives, but I have to disagree with that last sentence.
Also, the attendee’s of SlutWalk in Toronto or the UK were/are not dressing in a particular way for the protest, that’s an assumption.
I agree with a lot of the points made here, but as a supporter of Slutwalk, my belief is that the word slut is used so often to demonise female sexuality, and I think that any objection to that must be a positive. I understand the problems people might have with being greeted in such a way, and that is a matter of personal choice, and should obviously be respected. However, to me the march signifies something on a larger scale, and is more of a matter of removing the stigma and damnation from being a woman who is comfortable and happy with expressing her sexuality in any way she pleases (whether she chooses to express it at all – but that should be her choice and not the choice inflicted upon her by the bizarre standards of a misogynistic society). By opposing these ideas of the woman as an evil temptress, and a man as a slave to his instinct, i hope that it will make people question thier ideas about victim-blaming, why a sexual woman is so terrible anyway, and where the true causes of rape might lie.
It’s wonderful to see such discussion! xoxo
Up north and UK generally, “cunt” as insult is more often hurled at men, and flippantly in large part. My gut reaction when used to describe a woman is one of “misnomer” and some shock/horror when used to degrade a woman. As stephenpaterson says above though,”cunt” is old as (“)fuck(“) and reclaiming a word this ancient is a tough ask. It’s proper import as a naughty word for naughty bits also makes appropriation challenging.
“Slut”, by contrast, is made for it’s purpose – to denigrate female promiscuity as “stud” elevates male wantonness. The point’s already been made about the reclaiming of “queer” with some success, but the void in the bigot’s lexicon was quickly filled with “faggot”. Part of the black community are happy to use “nigger”, with mixed results and response. UK (South) Asians have tried similar with “Paki”, but I personally can’t get past the derogatory connotations, and it makes me cringe when I hear it said by another Asian.
Of more immediate comparability is the self-titling of “bitch” by women. To me, this seems sad, reminiscent of vapid glamour pusses like Paris Hilton, high school juvenility – and a celebration of caprice, exclusion and vanity. That said, I won’t be calling any women bitches anytime soon, so I guess it’s free for the taking if women want it.
Sticks and stones break your bones, words break your heart; and you could draw tears with a sonnet if you spat it at someone like a curse. I think ultimately if the speaker conveys hate, the content will be hateful, and individual terms of abuse cannot add much more bile to the file, as it were. Reclaiming a word is fine, but there’s a lot of them and even if “slut” loses power, there’s always “easy”,”skank” and new ones just waiting in the wings.
I was first called a slut at age 8 by my mother (my room was untidy), as a teenager by a boy I wouldn’t have sex with, a policewoman, several members of a gang who raped me and later by an ex-partner whom I was leaving. All were trying to invoke a sense of control and shame over me with a loaded word to shut me up. I am removing their ammunition by looking them in the eye and saying “Slut? Me? Sure thing, whatever. Bring any word you like along, dear abuser. How do you feel now?”
AFAIK the word before the twentieth century only had connotations of uncleanness and untidiness – the same Nordic roots as ‘slattern’. The Victorian street rhyme about the weekly wash went :
“Them as wash on Monday have all the week to dry,
Them as wash on Tuesday do little that’s awry,
Them as wash on Wednesday are not so much to blame,
Them as wash on Thursday are them as wash for shame,
Them as that wash on Friday most likely wash in need*,
But them as wash on Saturday, they are sluts indeed.”
(* they have run out of clean clothes, so have to start washing again)
Having recovered my composure sufficiently to read about the slutwalks that have already taken place, I must say that I am with the slutwalkers all the way. I could easily have been born one myself! The point is not whether “slut” is a pejorative term, but that women should be free to dress in any style they wish, however earthily alluring, without any automatic presumption of consent.
So I’ll be joining the London Slutwalk on 4th June – it’s open to “all genders, races, ages, religions and sexualities”, so I must be included in there somewhere!
No longer Shocked and Disgusted
Southampton
(miles from Tunbridge Wells)
I’ve been watching the usual anti-feminist trolls come out in favor of Slutwalk and wondering about what that means.
Men who regularly demand the right to stare at women’s bodies in public, think quotas for women are reverse sexism, and brush off sexual slavery as an exaggerated modern myth are all un-ironically thumbs up on the media outlets I follow. Men who have hovered over feminist sites doggedly criticizing Take Back the Night marches have only words of support for Sexy Take Back the Night.
The argument that the underdressed victim is guilty is a tacit admission that the general sexuality is perverted into a power relationship, and that society is sick. That is the point of Slutwalk. To force people to confront their own reactions to ‘offensive’ dress and language. Offensiveness is not an inherent quality, but created by social convention. ‘Chav’ was once a lovely, useful word for a child. Look at it now.
Same thing with cunt, which is in Shakespeare. Far more offensive are the spineless euphemisms we’re currently spattered with. When did anyone over 7 continue using words like ‘loo’, which they do now well into adulthood.
Well that’s a point of view, but as somebody once said nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. And much as I like to congratulate myself on belonging to a vastly intellectually superior race, do you really think the average punter will get all that?
Or will they just think ‘cor look at them birds with nearly nothing on?’. There was a phone in on Radio 5 this morning about this, and it just devolved along tediously predictable lines. I think you are overestimating the ability of an event like this to change accepted cultural meanings – people need an incentive to confront their own reactions, and such an event doesn’t necessarily force anyone out of their comfort zone. It’s attention grabbing, but for all the wrong reasons – it simply allows the reinforcement of myths about uncontrollable male lust if radio 5 is anything to go by, and has very little subversive power.
Polly – I pulled up that Radio 5 phone-in, it’s here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b01113r9
I agree with the college teacher who joined the debate from 0:44:54 until 0:48:37. He made the point that enforcing sex was not normal but a form of deviancy.
If we want to live in a liberated society where people can express their sexuality as they please there still have to be some bedrock rules that should never be breached. Informed consent is the key issue here.
Slutwalks aim to emphasise that point, which is why I’ll be there on 4th June. But whether I’ll get forced out of my comfort zone remains to be seen!
BTW – It’s on the 11th June now.
Well I only heard the start GS5, which was some woman blahing on about how men had natural unsuppressible desires and were driven into a frenzy if women didn’t wear burkas basically. I stopped listening because I had to go to work, but I also wanted to hang on to my sanity….
I’m really on the fence about this – I know a lot of people who are right behind it, and I can see why, I just don’t know whether or not the message will get through. I fancy not, cos I’m such an old cynic.
Polly – I think you should be there on the 11th, any dress code is acceptable. And bring Cath with you!
Men who have hovered over feminist sites doggedly criticizing Take Back the Night marches have only words of support for Sexy Take Back the Night.
Absolutely. The question to ask ( and for any so-called empowerful activity) is “which men approve of this and why ?”
Then try “women are human” and see how much approval is gotten for that.
Don’t need to GS5, there is going to be one in Manchester – not trotting all that way to London just for a walk. I don’t attend reclaim the night because I’m not sure about the message it sends, and it’s the same with this one frankly – no matter what the dress code (though I would be really tempted to wear a niqab, just out of mischief).
A spot of irreverence probably wouldn’t be out of place, Polly, and the occasional niqab would make the event seem more inclusive!
AllyF of Cif fame said in one of his recent comments that he would probably attend the Manchester event.
Hmmm, I have more to say on this, but I need to get it clear first.
I’m a bit late to this discussion, but it seems to me that too many people are on the fence about SlutWalk because it seems to be ‘reclaiming’ the word ‘slut’, and that its message is that women and girls have the right to act and dress like ‘sluts’ without fear of sexual violence.
But I think this is missing the point – what I expect to see when I attend SlutWalk on 11th June (it’s changed, everyone!) are many, many, many people protesting the very IDEA of ‘slut’.
‘Slut’ as a term is extremely powerful, mainly because it can be used to put down anyone (especially women), for any aspect of their behaviour or the behaviour of those around them. A young girl can be called a slut if she has large breasts, a girl can be called a slut if she has small breasts, a girl can be called a slut if she will not kiss/touch/have sex with someone, and she will almost definitely be called a slut if she wants to and does. A girl can be called a slut if she laughs, socializes, dances, dresses, or even walks too ‘freely.’ In short, any girl can be called a slut if someone wants to shut her up.
The people at SlutWalk will be dressed as they like. Some will make it a party and go all out, others will wear everyday clothes, perhaps a boring hoodie and jeans like they were wearing when they were raped, but all of them will have been called sluts at some point in their life, and all will be declaring, ‘If we can ALL be called sluts, then NO ONE is a slut.’
I will not be reclaiming the word ‘slut’ at SlutWalk, but will be joyfully breaking it open to reveal how hollow it is inside.
Ok, so here’s my issue with slutwalk, and it’s neatly encapsulated by Liz Jones of all bloody people.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2002646/LIZ-JONES-Class-real-problem-sisters–slutty-clothes.html
Presactly Ms Jones. The women who have enthusiastically embraced slutwalk are privileged. They are NOT pressurised over the way they look to the extent less privileged women are – which isn’t to say they aren’t pressurised at all, but they still have wiggle room less priivileged women don’t.. And anyone who thinks that pressure on some women to look acceptably “sexy” in isn’t an aspect of female oppression isn’t thinking at all. But these (overwhelmingly) middle class educated women who leapt the chance to look like ‘sluts’ – in a way they probably wouldn’t dare to day to day in a lot of cases I reckon, were participating in nothing more than a superannuated vicars and tarts party. Without the vicars.
It’s just an excuse to parade through the streets in corsets innit? Which is why they media love it, of course. Far from tackling the idea that how you dress causes rape, the message that’s coming across is ‘women want to walk around in fancy dress and say it’s a feminist statement’. But also – oh so paradoxically – ‘rape is related to how you dress’.
Well what ever floats your boat. Wear whatever you want. But the idea that this is an expression of female empowerment is ludicrous. Corsets are NOT empowering. No clothing that crushes your rib cage and impairs your ability to move around is. You know what would have been revolutionary? A bunch of women with cropped hair, no makeup and wearing trainers and tracksuits. Would the media have bothered to cover that? What do you think?
However I will be starting a ‘PE teacher walk’ soon…
oh and jeans and hoodies aren’t ‘boring’…
Having looked at some of the photos coming out of yesterday’s event, I’m glad I took the decision not to go. Placards that say “”Blame the c*nt that did it, not the c*nt he did it to”? hmmm, stay classy sisters.
Oh, and I’m wondering just how sensitive to the survivors of rape and sexual abuse certain demonstrators thought they were being when they strapped those giant inflatable cocks to their groins….
Here’s the MEN’s report…
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/news/s/1423405_hundreds-join-slut-walk-protest-through-manchester
Basques, stockings, and suspender belts were the dress code as Manchester hosted its first-ever ‘Slut Walk.’
Hundreds of protesters donned racy outfits as part of a global equality campaign.
Traffic ground to a halt as the column of scantily-clad demonstrators went along Deansgate.
Around 600 women, joined by a handful of men, braved the evening chill. Slut Walks are the response to comments by a Canadian police officer who advised schoolgirls to ‘avoid dressing like sluts’ in order to prevent sexual assaults.
In Manchester, stunned shoppers were halted in their tracks by protesters in barely-there clothing, who handed out sex-equality leaflets.
And to repeat what I said earlier…
“I think you are overestimating the ability of an event like this to change accepted cultural meanings – people need an incentive to confront their own reactions, and such an event doesn’t necessarily force anyone out of their comfort zone. It’s attention grabbing, but for all the wrong reasons – it simply allows the reinforcement of myths about uncontrollable male lust, and has very little subversive power.”
To which I would add – and the media will overwhelmingly say it’s all about women in basques, stockings and suspender belts. (apart from Ms Jones surprising outburst of analysis of class privilege in the Fail).
Hey Polly – not all middle class educated women are embracing slutwalk :-p (i know you didn’t mean it that way but just wanted to say that i am those things and not embracing slutwalk!).
I have tried and tried to get what the aims of slutwalk are, i have tried to understand about why women i admire and respect are marching and i still admire and respect them obviously even if i cannot agree with them on this issue.
Because no matter what way i look at it, to me slutwalk is focusing the behaviour back on the women and what clothes we wear, and not on the rapist. i don’t know what the solution is, but to me reclaim the night still has that difference message of saying ‘we belong here on equal footing’.
And, unfortunately i still feel that whatever happens, the media are always focusing straight back on what women wear rather than what men are doing.
And finally, i really feel strongly that what Rebecca Mott said on Facebook yesterday about marginalising the voices of women who have exited/are still in prostitution is a truly troubling and upsetting part of slutwalk. It isn’t good enough and it isn’t acceptable. Someone shared a link of Rebecca’s with one organiser of a certain city’s slutwalk and the response i got was that ‘oh, but some women choose to go into prostitution’ as if therefore it didn’t matter. I was like, listen to what is being said here! Hear her truth, her perspective! don’t ignore it because it doesn’t fit with what you’ve been thinking.
It’s just not acceptable!
Oh and the other thingthat I’ve not seem mentioned anywhere is the extent to which slutwalk seems aimed at heterosexual/bisexual women.
I had to laugh when I read Liz Jones’s latest DM rant on slutwalkers! Now they’re apparently:
What a joke! In reality many were associated with left-wing organisations such as the Socialist Workers’ Party, as her first picture shows. The ECP and similar organisations were also there in force, one from Ireland. Liz Jones must have very poor powers of observation.
There were also quite a few men there, whom (of course) she doesn’t mention at all. I was one of them, with my home made placard. Hope you approve!
/
There’s a piece in the Manchester Evening News by celebrity lawyer “Nick Freeman” on this theme. A stream of nasty, whiny, rape-apologist, misogynistic bigotry it is too.
http://menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/comment/blogs/s/1423562_nick-freeman-take-responsibility-for-how-you-act-and-what-you-wear
Oh come on GS5. SWP are rent a protesters who invade every demo and give out placards – the fact that someone is carrying an SWP placard DOESN’T mean they’re SWP, but also SWP aren’t usually working class in my experience – most seem to be students. Last SWP member I met worked for the BBC. Left wing doesn’t equal ‘not privileged’.
All the women I know of who were supporting slutwalk seemed to be late teens/ twenty something graduates or student, there was a very definite and fairly narrow demographic. Liz Jones has a very valid point. Working class women by and large would NOT go on an event entitled ‘slutwalk’, they really wouldn’t. It’s fair to say that that’s a criticism that could be aimed at a lot of feminism of course, but the women on slutwalk were, as a group, privileged. And the same can be said of sex workers who organise themselves into unions. If you’re just trying to get enough money to pay for your next fix, you’re not going to bother turning up to a protest.
Polly Well, Liz got quite a pasting for this article in the comments section which followed. I’m surprised the Mail even printed some of the comments. Liz says that “Class is the real problem, sisters” (a distinctly odd remark from a Daily Mail columnist), without explaining what that problem actually is. Even if working class women couldn’t or wouldn’t turn up, I don’t see how that makes the message any less valid.