Sluts on Parade: SlutWalk SF 2012
Various socialist and communist groups trolled the rally, handing out flyers to everyone.
I took one of these flyers and later scanned it for your amusement: It tells the hilarious tale of in-fighting within the Freedom Socialist Party and the Peace and Freedom Party, and the outrage that erupted when celebrity usurper Roseanne Barr swooped in and stole the presidential nomination from a true radical. VP candidate Cindy Sheehan even comes in for some deserved vitriol, for double-dealing and making contradictory statements.
The extreme left always commits political suicide in a flurry of self-criticism and internecine battles. But at least they provide amusement for the rest of us.
Speaking of the extreme left: Here’s a video taken by a fellow SlutWalker of one of the rally’s main speakers, a woman named Natalie Hrizi representing a new feminist group called WORD — Women Organized to Resist and Defend. Something about her near-hysterical levels of outrage made me suspicious.
That suspicion was amplified when professional-seeming WORD protesters fanned out in the crowd with their professionally printed signs. Something about the design of those signs set off alarm bells. What was it, what was it…I know! The graphic style of having all-caps text above and a black box below containing the group’s identifying info looks exactly like the signs made by the ANSWER Coalition, a communist group that organized many of the anti-war protests in the Bush era. [WORD even uses the exact same color for its signs as ANSWER uses for some of theirs.]
Since ANSWER has a long history of setting up front groups to co-opt various subsets of the left, luring in prospective new members without at first letting them know they’re joining a communist organization, I suspected that perhaps ANSWER was moving in on SlutWalk as well with their latest incarnation, “WORD.” Sure enough, a quick check of the WORD web site reveals a big Thank You to ANSWER for help setting up the group. One of the WORD phone numbers is actually the same number that another ANSWER-related socialist party formerly used for a different (now defunct) front group back in 2009. I guess it’s more efficient to just recycle phone numbers than having to get new lines for each passing front group.
As always, ANSWER has big, big plans for its latest front group, positioning themselves at the vanguard of whatever social movement is au courant. Despite this boundless optimism, their plans repeatedly fail, over and over. The sign of a True Believer is to never ever give up, change beliefs or get disheartened in the face of constant failure.
Oh, politics politics politics. Enough already! Let’s look at pictures!
Local sexpert and activist Carol Queen gave a sort of droning academic-tinged speech, while wearing an “I Love Female Orgasms” shirt and some unfortunately ill-fitting granny pants.
Nearby, a slut showed off her Dome of the Rock Palestinian kaffiyeh. Because everyone knows how sluts are welcomed in Muslim culture!
“Greater” in the sense of “larger,” or “more significant than”?
Miss “My Very Existence Affirms the Inevitability of Looksist Appearance Hierarchy” announced to all and sundry, “My short skirt, believe it or not, has nothing to do with you.” OK. But then why are you wearing a short skirt (and lipstick and the rest)? So that people don’t turn their heads and look at you? In order to make yourself look unappealing? Then who or what does your short skirt have to do with?
Once again, the simplest SlutWalk sign raises the deepest questions. In this case, all that is missing to make everything clear is an emphasis on the final word in her message: “My short skirt, believe it or not, has nothing to do with you.” In other words, she’s dressing up to attract only those people who are in her league, but not you, you disgusting troll.
This actually was my favorite sign of the day: “Modest clothes? Still rape.” True, so true. In reality, no one in Western society condones rape — the entire SlutWalk concept is a straw man fallacy. They’re arguing against a position that no one professes. And this sign, in an un-self-aware way, subtly undermines the whole thesis of the rally. This particular protester wasn’t really on board with the whole “dress provocatively” thing, so fashioned a message from her point of view: Doesn’t matter what kind of clothes the victim is wearing, including modest clothes: rape is still rape. But that just exposes the tautology of the overall SlutWalk message, which is reduced to: Rape is bad. Period. But that isn’t controversial, so the message has to be dolled up in radical festoons to make it seem exciting.
A bunny collar. One has to hope she’s merely ignorant of history. The alternative is worse.
The alternative is simply, as I suspect, “I can be Top Girl in this setting. I win!”
Feminism is a very flexible concept to the young these days.
This isn’t just an effect of feminism. It’s common to all attention-whores in any “identity community”.
They want to do things with their appearance to gain as much attention as they possibly can, but then complain when it isn’t praise and positive awe.
I’m not saying that they should be sexually harassed, of course (nobody should, gender aside), but they shouldn’t complain if people look on with disapproval.
“They want to do things with their appearance to gain as much attention as they possibly can, but then complain when it isn’t praise and positive awe.”
Not just that, they want to be the center of attention, but you can only be the “type” of person “they” want to pay attention to “them” or your the problem.
Hang it out girls and MEN will look. And yes some scum will do bad things, but they would no matter how you dress. So your “slutwalk” just means nothing.
They don’t need to be mindful of history. How about simply getting a grip on yesterday’s admonitions from the minbar:
“Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. Surely God is high, supreme.”
What’s lost in all this is the fact that skimpy clothes do indeed draw more attention than a long wool overcoat or sweatsuit.
Ask any woman whether they would choose to wear skimpy clothes or modest clothes while walking through a bad downtown neighborhood and they’ll nearly-unanimously opt for the modest clothes. Why? Because at a certain point, and in certain situations, skimpy clothes cease to be a mere attention-getter and instead become an indicator of profession. And rapists are more likely to target hookers because hookers are less likely to seek out law enforcement after the fact.
But these facts get in the way of attention whores who want to have their cake and eat it too.
Street whores, maybe, will look somewhat like these sluts. Higher class prostitutes will dress and act like ladies, at least when in public. But of course you will not find them in the bad neighborhoods, and most of them make sure that there is somebody who knows where they are, with whom they are and how long they are supposed to stay when they see a client. If a woman wants to be smart and avoid unpleasant stuff like being raped she should emulate the real life escorts, not play act the the image media paints of whores.
As always, great photos, and a good essay.
To be honest, I didn’t have much to work with this time around. Here we are, in the heat of a game-changing national election, in which the word “slut” is the #1 topic of conversation — and they can’t draw a decent crowd to a slut-themed political rally in protestiest city in the country? What gives?
This looked like a 4H Pig Prominade!
BTW, Q: Whay does it take a woman longer to orgasm?
A: Who cares!
Well, it seems there was almost no mention of this around some internet boards I check out, but Seattle had what appears to be a larger one, with more attractive participants.
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Photos-2012-Seattle-SlutWalk-169113716.html?tab=gallery&c=y&img=0
Yes there are a lot of confused messages, a lot of sex workers, and certainly a lot of liberals. I wish they would start to be more rational, ie realize that the oppression of the Muslim countries is the serious threat and that socialism and liberalism actually wants more control on personal liberty (beyond the ‘Choice’) than Conservatives / Libertarians / and GOP.
If you are dressed up as if you are ‘for sale’ don’t be insulted if someone asks “how much”. At the same time we shouldn’t denigrate sluts, many are very good people that deserve our appreciation.
Yes, I noticed that the Seattle SlutWalk got a lot more attention this year than the SF edition. Seattle’s was somewhat bigger, altough still not huge — looks like about 500 people. And yes, there does seem to be more of a focus on the “sexy streetwalker” look than the “scary dyke” look.
Also disturbing to see how many signs at both marches were exactly the same — they seem to just copy them off a list of pre-approved suggestions. Only the freelance signs are worth noting.
In that Seattle photo essay you linked, this image is the most disturbing, looking as it does to be something from a pedophile’s photo album. Note to moms: DON’T SEND YOUR 12-YEAR-OLD DAUGHTERS TO A SLUTWALK.
you missied the one with the four year old with I guess is the mother. THAT is creepy as well
Surely, Zombie, you could have found at least *ONE* good looking one out of the bunch. Why did you miss her?
The girl with the “My short skirt…” sign was supposed to be the red meat to lure in you cavemen. Was my impartial and neuter assessment of her eye-catchingness inaccurate?
She definitely is an attractive young lady. No question about it.
I actually found her to be very pretty. The hairstyle and glasses and lipstick all seem to hearken back to the 50′s, I think. The rest of her did nothing for me, but a great face and look.
I laughed at so much of this. 6-inch heels do not mean I want to hump? Umm, yes they do. That’s why chicks call them f___-me pumps. That’s why guys want you to keep them on during sex.
Of course, their real belief is that they want to be able to choose with whom they have sex. I get that. But when you dress like prey, you draw the predators.
Well, I certainly wouldn’t kick her out of bed for eating crackers, but in a public Sabbath I expect better. Wearing the collar does not a bunny make. Guys don’t make passes at girls who wear glasses, and all that.
You would probably kick her out of bed as soon as she started talking.
There’s an attractive pair behind the Hey Control Your Lust sign.
I’m sure that they’re very smart also.
In a country of 300 million, I’m pretty sure you can get 300 to show up for anything.
Do you think 300 from San Francisco will show up to repel a Persian invasion? And I am not talking about over aggressive Iranian American realtors!
Slut MacGuffin. The story is otherwise.
Odd.
“No politicians gave us rights. We took them.”
Sounds like a Republican variation on “I did build that”.
Do these yoyos even read their own signs?
Actually, I found that phrase fascinating as well.
More significantly, she seems to be completely unaware of how a constitutional republic works. In the United States, no politician gave you your rights, nor did you yourself “take” them — but rather they are GUARANTEED by the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, to wit:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”
No politicians involved. Nor do rights obtain as a result of your personal willpower. They pre-exist. You already have them. Poiliticians (and activists) can only take them away.
That’s why this particular sign reveals the fundamental ignorance of the Left.
Actually, politicians did give them the rights. The suffrage movement was backed by Republicans. It was very contentious. Just like abolition and civil rights were backed by Republicans. Also very contentious.
Of course, the majority of them now vote Democratic. This was predicted back then, too, in the arguments against suffrage. Unintended consequences does not mean unpredicted consequences.
It depends on which “them” you are referring to. Those of us who are married actually prefer to vote for Republicans. It’s the single women who persist in voting for Democrats by a wide margin.
That is why they are single!
I definitely prefer “we took them” to “the government gave them to us”, though agree that it’s not quite right. At least they are realizing that the government is not necessarily their friend.
The point is that you were born with them — they are an aspect of your humanity.
Except it was a liberal holding the sign…
projection is a leftists best weapon for targeting the ignorant voter-
Idiots
There are some people I always read. Zombie is one of them.
Every time.
No matter what.
And this march is really “no matter what” proof.
somehow, i can’t take the serious subject matter seriously with a bunch of unserious demonstrators around…
also, what kind of freak show is SF? i would hate to have to explain that parade of ugliness to my kids
“I ♥ female orgasm”
I think we can all agree on that. Except for a certain Middle Eastern religion, anyway.
I’ve you’d ever seen any Carol Queen videos, you’d probably go join a nunnery in two seconds flat. Even I, who have an extremely high tolerance for “gross out,” couldn’t take it.
Us penised people also like it when the woman underneath turns into a surf board. At least those of us without severe mental disorder.
What a pathetic bunch of losers. What a confused and conflicted message. What a waste of time.
I would have been very interested in hearing the crowd’s collective opinion on gender selection abortion. I suspect it’s one of those subjects that much like Islamic persecution of females is simply not discussed by a proper PC group.
The outrage only applies when it can be directed at white America and capitalism. Any anti-women customs, laws, attitudes and behavior committed by misogynistic Third World people or by the Protected Underclass is strictly off-limits and Must Not Be Mentioned. Thus, sex-selective abortion in China/India/elsewhere, legal wife-beating in Islam, abduction-marriages in Mexico, the epidemic of rape of Black women by Black men, second-class personhood for women in Palestine/Saudi Arabia/etc. is NEVER discussed at these things.
Black-on-white rape is a serious problem, too, much more than many people would want to admit. White-on-black rape, by contrast, is essentially a non-occurrence (I’m sure some exceptions could be found, NOT including hoaxes like Duke Lacrosse and Al Sharpton’s girl Tawna).
Actually, this is an issue that is discussed in feminist circles (same with Islamic persecution of females… I’m wondering where your assumptions arise from). Not surprising, seeing as it relates to reproductive rights and gender discrimination.
Personally, I believe a woman has the right to choose, regardless of her reasons for doing so. Yes it’s appalling, but policing women in terms of why they’re getting an abortion is a turn down the wrong path.
…so the message has to be dolled up in radical festoons to make it seem exciting.
Everybody wants to jump on the bandwagon, have their own special slot in the gripe industry.
This particular search for relevance is a bigger stretch:), reaching pretty far down to get to a gripe…main message seems to be…”I’ll bash you over the head with this sign if you think my provocative dress is an invitation.”
Anti-Israel, sluts, Soros front groups, ANSWER, flotillas, occupiers, the democrat cult, one giant gaggle of disgruntled and miserable Useful Idiots.
It’s like the prostitute of 22 years (hopes for another 22!) is selling municipal bonds…
“You could be a web cam dancer, which is the fastest growing part of the erotic services industry right now !”
Thanks for drawing attention to the prostitute’s speech. I really wanted to transcribe the whole crazy thing, but didn’t have the time.
I just cannot fathom the depth of hate these people have. Sluts, socialist, communists, anarchists etc..
Can you imagine what it’s like having only 300 ppl on this planet you agree with? How long is their Sh!!te list of ppl they hate? Is all their free time taken up figuring out someone new to hate that day? These poor misguided, jealous, slackers…. would not last 3 minutes in the “utopian lands” they wish to emulate.
Classic leftist projection!
So, was there a pro-rape counter protest?
It’s like those anti-breast cancer events. It’s hard to find the pro-breast cancer folks.
Precisely. Like I said in the essay,
“In reality, no one in Western society condones rape — the entire SlutWalk concept is a straw man fallacy. They’re arguing against a position that no one professes.”
No one in the west. If there is any group they are protesting, it’s the islamos. But that’s not the narrative. The narrative is it’s the Christiban. And knucklehead statements like the one Akin made aren’t helping.
Precisely! As a woman, I have the right in this country to unload all of my personal guilt, confusion, regret and/or poor choices onto the man I’ve just slept with – whether he’s done anything wrong in his mind or not. I can kill his child without his permission, ruin his career without so much as a single shred of evidence, or have him labeled a sex offender for something that he truly believed was consensual (because I can, of course, withdraw my consent after we’ve already done the deed). Women already have the ultimate power when it comes to rape laws. What more do these women want, if not the freedom to act irresponsibly with no consequence?
What I’d like to see them teach little girls in school is exactly the message these Slut Walks are seemingly protesting – keep yourself safe and avoid putting yourself in a “date rape” or “party rape” situation in the first place (which does legitimately exist). Which, sorry to say, involves not dressing like a slut…
The point is not to protest rape itself but rape culture. Many people, whether they realize it or not, contribute to rape culture in ways big or small. I first became acquainted with it when my friend, who was 15 at the time, was drugged and gang raped by a group of men twice her age. There was even proof on video, yet despite this a good bulk of the trail seemed to revolve around what a “whore” the kid supposedly was, and in the end the men got off with a light sentence.
Yes, I know it was the defense attorney’s job to do what he could for those men, but the fact that bringing up a girl’s sexual history is even considered a good way to defend the act of rape speaks volumes. People make the argument “If you don’t want to get mugged, don’t wear expensive clothing or jewelry – the same applies to rape and short skirts”, but the thing is, you don’t see muggings being trivialized to the same extent as rape. Defense attorney’s don’t try to bring up the person’s attire, because they know that’s fucking ridiculous. Why doesn’t the same apply to rape?
““Don’t you dare call me a slut — I’m a slut!” doesn’t make much sense as a political stance.”
Perhaps if you grew up female, and you understood the feeling of being ashamed of your sexuality, you’d understand why these women feel the need to celebrate it whilst drawing attention to the issue of “slut-shaming”. I personally don’t agree with the idea of reclaiming the word “slut”, but I certainly understand where they’re coming from.
I don’t usually think we need more laws in America, but I would put forward one more: the Truth In Protest Signs Act of 2012. Protest signs would be vetted for content and honesty. That would mean that the approved signs for this rally would be limited to “Daddy Didn’t Love Me”, “I Was Cute Before I Discovered Ben and Jerry’s” and “Picked Last In Gym Class, Damn You!” Other than those, attendees would have to carry blank squares of cardboard.
You left out “I have been brainwashed into internalizing illogical thought disorders.”
The Washington D.C. breast protest at least has one attractive protester (NSFW). Could they not find one in San Francisco? Apparently not.
If you are going to protest about exposing the human body, you should at least have the courtesy of having some attractive bodies to expose. Is that too much to ask?
– her beauty is appreciated in capitol D.C.; see congressional committee staffers seated behind representatives on C-Span. Those not so endowed must content themselves with provincial Frisco.
Yes, they do smell like dead fish. On the bright side, there is HIV.
All of life is a fashion statement. Paraphrasing Andy Warhol circa 1960 something.
One thing I like about Andy Warhol is that, although he may have been a charlatan, he was an honest, self-aware and insightful charlatan. The P.T. Barnum of art.
His soup cans are on sale this week at Target! Only $.75 for tomato soup.
If it was not for Rahab the Harlot the walls of the city of great grapes would have never fallen. If it was not for that SLUT Bathsheba Solomon would never have been born building great great Temple for the Ark of the Covenaunt and he write the beauty Song of Solomon although his other books show he had mother issues carrying shame of nation gossiping how his Mama was a Slut. Jesus would not be born except by way of the SLUT Bathsheba
The Queen oF Sheba visiting Solomon after she see his great wisdom he gave her all her desire whatsoever she asked and she left satisfyed 1 Kings10:10
Behold the “base” of the Democratic Party. (Pun very much intended.)
While this SlutWalk may have seemed diminished compared to last year’s, one has to take into account that in a sense, that’s just because their message (such as it is) has made the Major Leagues; for what was the DNC shindig in Charlotte, except SlutWalk writ large? There, too, we saw a confusing melange of gratification-oriented identity politics, with little or not appreciation for the actual challenges facing our nation. Was not the DNC’s first primetime speaker, the inimitable Ms. Fluke, not the ultimate SlutWalker?
Indeed. As I said in the essay,
“…many delegates at the Democratic convention [were] wearing “Sluts Vote” pins…Or perhaps it’s because anger over the term “slut” has since become mainstreamed, and it no longer feels particularly radical or avant garde to discuss the word anymore? “
What’s depressing is that this puerile, incoherent message seems to resonate with something close to a plurality of the American electorate.
You realize that Rush Limbaugh had to apologize for speaking the truth you just spoke, don’t you?
I don’t understand (although, actually, I do) why they were bashing Republicans – didn’t the whole slut walk thing originate in that notoriously Republicna stronghold of Toronto, which is in Canada? Oh, that’s right, Limbaugh andAkin. I wonder, though, if you surveyed actual rapists, what their D/R/I leanings would be.
Just going on the anecdotal evidence in the news during the OWS poo fling scene it would be a good bet that the numbers would heavily favor the letter D and/or C.
One has to wonder what the racial makeup of actual rapists is. My bet is a greater proportion of the diversity crowd than their actual population numbers. Other crime stats reflect this reality. Yet I see virtually no “persons of color” in these wildly popular protests; only people of pallor.
Shhh…you’re not allowed to suggest things like that, even if they’re statistically true. White. Male. Christian. Equals Bad. Everything else. Equals Oppressed Minority. Ya dig?
How many forgot how to breathe and had to be carted off?
I think there might be a little more philosophical coherence here than you give them credit for.
To reconstruct it quickly: they are protesting the need for prudential precautions and that is what leads into their various utopia leftist ideologies. No one, except perhaps a few extremists from the religion of peace, believes that women who dress like sluts deserve to be raped. However, plenty of folks would say that it can be a foolish thing for a woman to do, just as they would say that it’s foolish to leave a car unlocked with keys in the ignition, or to flash wads of cash in a bad neighborhood, or any of the many other behaviors that can make one a target for predators. The Slutwalkers, it seems, are angry not because such prudential concerns sometimes seem to shade into blaming victims, but are angry that such prudential concerns are even needed. In the socialist utopia, there wouldn’t be those who prey on others, hence their anger at those who they see as obstructing the advent of said socialist paradise. If the goal is a world without sin, then these prudential concerns are at best distractions, and at worst in the way, from bringing about that wonderful world where the lion lies down with the lamb.
Wow. It’s like the Rocky Horror Picture Show met Gloria Steinem.
Interesting that you mention Gloria Steinem. Remember the politician in the first video who said she wanted to be a slut until she was 120 years old?
From her wikipedia page:
Sally Lieber:
I recall an interview with Steinem from several years ago (on Dick Cavett, or something along those lines), in which she casually dropped the rather irrelevant factoid that she had been a “beauty queen” at some point in her early life. (I have no idea whether it’s true.) Okay, Gloria. Why does that matter?
Ah, cognitive dissonance.
That’s not cognitive dissonance. She probably didn’t win, and that’s why she went on a feminist tirade. There is nobody more narcissistic than a beauty pageant contestant. If she would have won, she’d have just been Gloria Steinem the beauty pageant winner.
Just think, each one of these geniuses has the capacity to cancel out your vote. Sometimes democracy sucks.
Democracy is always bad.
I’m glad we don’t live in one, and we all need to fight to keep from being dragged down into one.
Now, go do your homework, Greg.
Damn I missed it again. First I miss the bare chest day here in Los Angeles, now I miss the Slut Walk in San Francisco. I just can’t get a break.
You need to subscribe to Slut-o-List, as I do, to get all the notifications.
That won’t help. My wife still won’t let me go!
I couldn’t help chuckle at the name of the park where this took place. I wonder if that was intentional. Maybe not. Delores, Dolores? Probably isn’t pronounced the same.
Almost all SF protest marches start or terminate in Mission Dolores Park.
The park is located in the Mission District. The Mission District was formerly a latino neighborhood that has been largely gentrified by industrious techies. The vanguard of this gentrification the caucasian leftists who formed latin american solidarity movements back in the 1980′s. The goal of these solidarity movements was to assist latin american communists in Nicaraugua and El Salvador.
The Central American wars passed, but the lefties stayed in the Mission soon to be followed by high paid techies. The Mission District is one of the few neighborhoods in the United States with a declining latino population.
Mission Dolores Park was named after the Mission Dolores which was founded by Franciscan Priests back in 1776 — with the goal of bringing Christian Civilization to the local Indians.
The Mission District just keeps on churning. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse.
What a bunch of losers.
‘It tells the hilarious tale of in-fighting within the Freedom Socialist Party and the Peace and Freedom Party, and the outrage that erupted when celebrity usurper Roseanne Barr swooped in and stole the presidential nomination from a true radical. VP candidate Cindy Sheehan even comes in for some deserved vitriol, for double-dealing and making contradictory statements.’
That flyer is hilarious for a reason: the script and actors are rightist smear agents. When other countries do this, it’s called corruption or a human rights abuse. But then other countries don’t do this half as much as in the U.S.
The other dopes pictured are the sad product of the system they are protesting. It’s not a lack of rights that makes protest rarer overseas, but a lack of losers to protest.
“… the script and actors are rightist smear agents. When other countries do this, it’s called corruption or a human rights abuse”
What on earth are you talking about?
I guess Roseanne Barr and Cindy Sheehan are very very clever CIA double agents, in deep cover. Or something like that.
Roseanne is Roseanne. I doubt she’s sponsored.
Sheehan is with the Code Pink/ANSWER bunch. Their goal is to exhibit and marginalize their own members and other dissidents.
It’s not a bad thing really, I just don’t like double standards…
In fact, Roseanne’s entire career has been a diabolical Machiavellian plot to make loudmouth leftists look foolish.
This smacks of the People’s Front for Judea vs the Judean People’s Front.
Splitter!
“As you might expect, it’s all capitalism’s fault. There is no rape in a socialist utopia!”
Ummm, you might want to talk to a German woman in 1945 Berlin about that.
I don’t want to sound like I want to compete; but, maybe we should have a march/parade for old farts like me. We could call it Drag Your Balls On The Ground Day. The only problem is that this parade would last only about ten yards.
Or if you have a right to be proud, a skate board…
Hey, I’ll try anything. I did what you recommended and used a skateboard for my proud walk. It was going fine until I hit a pothole. I get out of the hospital in two days. But, I’m still proud and almost made it around the block.
Are we supposed to infer from this that SF has heterosexual men now, albeit ones of appallingly poor taste in women?
rage against the machine called it “bulls on parade”.
To the woman with the Hey! Control your lust! sign:
Hey! No problem!
Apparently, there is a spin-off group, akin to NAMBLA that wanted it’s voice heard.
The National Unwilling And Non Consensual Engagers want to be heard. They say that consent is not all that’s it’s cracked up to be. Roman Polanski and Whoopi Goldberg were asked to speak it is rumored, but scheduling conflicts being what they are, they couldn’t get…you know…a commitment commitment.
Also, the band Bumping Uglies had to cancel as well. They had to pipe in Chicago’s hit Questions 67 and 68. Thankfully,ANSWER never requested an encore.
I’m fine with their premise – if I have it right. Rape is bad. mmkay.
As far as executing the whole optics and messaging thing – major stupendous flaming point and laugh fail.
After that wonderful speech, I fell in love with Sally Leiber. I have to say that she’s plum purtifull……………as long as you keep you eyes closed. I haven’t seen sich women since I been on the farm in the Ozarks.
They seem proud of their imbecility. Amazing.
So take that, all you rapists.
They think they’re Hot?! Most of them look like bull dykes from Cherry Grove. ‘Slut’ doesn’t work here. I think the word they’re really looking for is skank. (Imagine the smell at that protest. Whoa.)
Remember, slut clothes are to intimidate and impress other women, so as to have more men available for those with slut clothes.
Of course, they lie when they say slut clothes are not, in the end, to attract a man.
All of their neo-Marxism is lies. The attractive ones are just playing because they know they can find a good man anytime. The ugly ones are just jealous and taking their rejection by men out on men by lying and accusing men of rape.
I absolutely respect the right of any and all idiots to express their idiocy.
If anyone wants a more substantial respect from me, they have to earn it.
I guess I’m going to have to clarify that. I absolutely respect the right to express ideas and beliefs through the various mediums of free speech and the right to lawfully and peacefully assemble for such purpose. Such mediums do not include trespassing, threats of violence, violence, destruction or vandalism of public or private property, kidnapping, rape, or murder. It seems some folks in Egypt and Libya don’t understand the mannered methods of free expression, but they are awfully good at displaying their mindless, hateful, stupidity.
Zombie, first of all, you are the greatest. But to all the little leftist out there pushing this crap: You win. We take you for your word. You truly are an assemblage of sluts. And your moms are *so* proud!
I’d probably listen more if they were naked.
This is just an excuse to play dress up and get attention on a nice day.
I would like to thank the Jezebels for walking by my old High School.
I expected to be able to comment “Aren’t sluts supposed to be hot or something,” but actually, 3 or 4 of them looked pretty good. Which is only about %3 or the total, but still. But then, this is a new breed of frigid slut, or temperance movement slut, or really church-lady slut, when you think about it. So none of them really deserve the elevated title “slut.”
They would aspire to be a ‘quean’, but are ignorant of what that word means…….
Instead we have a public display of collective distemper directed at a society that doesn’t share in their rather high opinion of themselves. I will not have it. I am not a slut, I am a lady. Calling yourselves sluts is inaccurate – you are at best minges……….
Nobody is guaranteed safety out there . If you are flashing a wad of cash somebody may be looking to rob you. If you are yelling for the opposing team you may get some nasty comebacks. If you are acting slutty you may get some unwanted attention. The pretty bird flies away for fear. the Rose has thorns.
Well, it used to be that being a cock-tease (more accurate than slut here, just being anthropological) was considered very bad manners.
Also sorta dangerous and dumb.
You know, like walking around in your underwear and your birthday suit on the STREETS, girlfriends. You can’t expect the men to exercise ALL the restraint.
Tho the moistly liberal weenies we can see on this march look like they’ve been gelded already, so no worries! (but you know they’re hoping desperately for a scrap of kindness when the march is over! poor suckers.)
I remember when we were proud to be called “Ladies”.
Sigh.
But where was inflated scrotum man?
Gee – thanks for the pics Zombie. My penis just committed suicide…
SF looks more and more like a career fair for Barnum and Bailey.
A number of the photos presented here were recycled from last year’s event, were they not?
All you’ve got to do is go look at last year’s event (which I linked to several times in this new essay) and check for yourself.
Short answer: No. All new material in this post. What would I possibly achieve by re-using photos, other than looking like a fool?
The only reason that some of the messages may seem the same is that SlutWalk, at its core, is pretty repetitive — after the first few minutes of folks trying to wrap their heads around the message, they “get it,” at which point there’s nothing more to say, so the participants just end up saying the same things over and over.
It’s like having a protest insisting that the sky is blue. No one disagrees with you, and there’s only so many ways you can say “The sky is blue.”
No chance of a stud walk then…….
The sluts were kind of dull (been there, done that, as it were), but the Durham/Lopez 2012 flyer gave me a giggle fit. It’s like reading the summary of a soap opera episode. As the Little Red Book Turns?
(maybe Peta Lindsay withdrew her canidacy because she got involved with WORD/ANSWER and was therefore too busy to be president? Her name is on both flyers–GASP! Intrigue! I can’t wait until next week’s episode)
What a motley group of misfits! Not a keeper in the bunch and I do not have high standards.
I wonder why Sandra Fluke wasn’t there. That is where she needs to live as that is her mentality.
It’s insane that I have to preface this with the disclaimer that I, too, would never, ever condone rape under any circumstances. However, it is obvious to all, except perhaps to these self-proclaimed “sluts”, that if a woman DELIBERATELY selects provocative clothes the DELIBERATELY goes to places where she might not be that safe then DELIBERATELY mingles with the wrong sorts of men in those places, eventually the inevitable will occur. Far be it from me to blame HER in any way, yet obviously she made three choices that pretty much made the end result inevitable. Would the guy probably rape even if she didn’t make those choices? Yes, no real doubt about that. But the point is, NOT HER! He wouldn’t rape her. Rather some other stupid self-proclaimed “slut” who did. Get it?
This has nothing to do with logic. It is merely one more incoherent passive aggressive tantrum from the Leftocracy. They are hell-bent on a course of conduct which will provoke somebody to react. Then, of course, that reaction is automatically an act of oppression, which of course proves that they are all oppressed, and need a government department, $100 billion worth of grants and studies, not to mention whole new University departments, and last, but not least, an entire new philosophy of law to take care of them. “Slut Justice”, anyone?
Uh, thanks for sharing. You evidently worked hard (whoops! that’s not being slutty, no wait. it only applies to females, unless you have a different dictionary than I do. In which case, uh, never mind). You put in (I’m not implying anything by that phrase) a lot of work. Some how, though, I feel like I’m rather dumber for having read what you wrote. Or, it could be that the material, while bountiful (that’s not trampy is it?) just didn’t add much to our collective intelligence. Anyway, keep up (whoops!) the, the, well, whatever it is that you do. And, uh, please know that I mean well.
It’s amazing to think there are actually creatures out there that totally stupid. Figures the speaker was a joo, too. There IS a lot to be said for corrective rape!
Comparing the two, the Seattle one looked more mainstream and less freaky. Also the women better looking and more “hetero-normative” than the San Francisco one, at least from the shots, which I know is not a scientific sample.
Also odd, I have noticed many less Obama stickers in San Francisco than in Seattle.
Can’t quite figure that one out.
I don’t know, but I think I liked the the Hookers Ball, the Cow Palace, 1978 better. Speaking of the Cow Palace there was some real heffers in that slut walk. I can just see ‘em line dancing to Ian Dury and Block Heads:Sex and drugs and rock and roll! Sex and drugs and rock and roll… Whoa! Ian’s on You tube, the 77 concert, live. Yeah. Far out! Maybe the girls will have a hooker walk next year?
dude check out the bearded dude with the huge rack!
It’s funny how most of you, including this author, do not seem to do well enough research on Slutwalk itself (I can count a a handful of ASSUMPTIONS and very one-sided comments that do not reflect Slutwalk ideals.) Get your facts straight. Oh and also, your reader’s comments well reflect what kind of audience you attract. WOW.
I can count about a thousand inaccurate ASSUMPTIONS underlying the SlutWalk philosophy and nothing but one-sided messages coming out of the SlutWalkers.
My facts are very straight. If you want a deeper analysis, then (as mentioned repeatedly in the essay) check out my original 2011 SlutWalk essay.
As for the “kind of audience” — that itself proves my point. Men in general are brutes. Deal with it. Wishful thinking that you can change them with self-defeating mindgames won’t make any difference.
Gender is not a cultural construct. And that goes doubly for men. The sooner we all admit this obvious (and previously unquestioned) fact, the quicker we can face reality.
If you can’t see that SlutWalk is based on a variety of ridiculous and unproven feminist theories, combined with circular and meaningless tautologies, then you still got a whole lot of learnin’ to do. And SF State is definitely NOT the place you’re going to get that learnin’.
Ths Slutwalk looked kind of like the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, NC. except that Slutwalk did not have enough blacks and Mexicans.
yuckies
are you out of your mind ? …Me: yes.
I got the vague idea that some of them wanted to protest about rape.
Hmmm. If they really don’t like rape, why are they leftists?
Oh, yeah. Ignorance.
As usual.
I would 100% support a SlutWalk in the Middle East. These people have it bad compared to what? I visited a Soviet nostalgia forum some time ago. I read some posts by the true hardcore socialists (not the phony liberal western types, the real totalitarian ones). They advocated banning both pornography and prostitution. Because it “exploits” women. These girls will turn into the Junior Anti Sex League should the real socialists win.
“Gender is not a cultural construct. And that goes doubly for men. The sooner we all admit this obvious (and previously unquestioned) fact, the quicker we can face reality.
If you can’t see that SlutWalk is based on a variety of ridiculous and unproven feminist theories, combined with circular and meaningless tautologies, then you still got a whole lot of learnin’ to do. And SF State is definitely NOT the place you’re going to get that learnin’.”
Now, I am an attendee of this year’s SlutWalk, and I have my two cents to contribute. So before you shut me down as a loose, uneducated, foolish girl who just can’t get any, at least listen. I don’t ask that you agree, just hear me out.
Gender is probably not a cultural context in the way you (assuming, sorry) meant to say. X and Y chromosomes are very real things, and I understand that. However, the expectations that people make for men and women to be are very much constructed. Boys are expected to be burly and sporty, women quiet and docile.If you don’t agree with said statement, then I give up. But it’s true.
It’s also true that anyone who doesn’t perfectly fit into the mold assigned by their sex chromosomes is somehow devalued. A skinny man who plays violin is not “manly”, and a woman who is outspoken and sporty is “too masculine”. These are cultural constructs.
Feminist mean to say that people should not be EXPECTED to fit these molds. I, for example, am a girl who dresses in skirts and dresses and florals. I don’t believe that that makes me any more of a woman than a girl dressed up in basketball shorts, and I certain don’t think that I am “worth” more than her.
And, I will have you know that many of my fellow feminists are incredibly highly educated (Ivy leagues, Stanford, you name it). And even if one did attend SF State, as you blatantly infer applies to all of us, that doesn’t mean that s/he deserves any less respect.
Not only is gender as a biological reality not a cultural construct, but gender roles are mostly not a cultural construct either. When academics say “gender is a cultural construct,” what they really mean is that “gender roles are a cultural construct.”
But — and this is the core of the matter that they refuse to accept because it undermines their entire worldview — gender-related behaviors, attitudes and personality traits are strongly determined by your biological sex. What do you think those chromosomes do, aside from give one side an outie and the other an innie? Chromosomes affect the brain, and the brain determines our behavioral gender roles.
Yes, some small percentage of people will be variants at the edges of the spectrums, but the vast majority of men act “like men” because they are bioloigically determined to do so, and women tend to act like women because they are biologically determined to do so. This is so obvious that no one even bothered to “defend” this position until it was baselessly attacked by feminist academics starting in the ’70s, with absolutely no data to back up their attack.
Men have much more testosterone being generated constantly in their bodies which makes them more aggressive, more violent, more domineering, and more muscular. Men are physically larger. Men are more amoral when it comes to the sexual drive — they tend to want to screw anything that moves, regardless of the emotional or moral consequences. Etc., and in reverse for women.
Practically none of this is “cultural” – it is biological. Study after study has proven this.
But the denial of this is what drives academic feminism.
Perhaps it IS biologically determined; that’s not the point. What I mean to say is that, just because a woman is “masculine” and a man is “feminine” does not mean that they are worth any less, or that they should be treated as such. Like, take for example, the Olympics this past summer. Muscular, strong women were called “butch” and “gross”– as if that should be any reason for them to be disrespected and downright insulted in such a way! And the same goes for men.
A perfect example is you commentators’ treatment of the bearded woman. So what if she IS bearded, and doesn’t look like you want her to look? That doesn’t mean she’s not a woman. Calling her unattractive doesn’t make you any smarter than her, and these kind of unsupported connections that you all are making between her appearance and her intellect are rude and (dare I say?) pretty stupid. She deserves just as much respect as the next person.
When it comes down to it, feminism is all about respect. As your parents and teachers probably told you when you were young, “Everyone deserves respect”. NOT “Everyone deserves respect (unless they’re ugly, poor, too masculine, too feminine, or otherwise ‘different’ from you)” This kind of maltreatment is unnecessarily rude and really just messed up, and definitely no way to conduct any sort of efficient political discourse.
You’re going off on an irrelevant sidetrack. SlutWalk is NOT about giving respect to manly women. In fact, quite the opposite. It’s about giving respect to women who are perceived as extra attractive or feminine. All of the signs say, essentially, “Just because I’m sexy doesn’t mean you can rape me.” What the signs don’t say is “Just because I’m bearded and masculine doesn’t mean you can rape me.”
But to address your point: This whole modern insistence on “demanding respect” is absurd and invariably counter-productive. The more that you insist that someone “respect” you, the less likely you are to get it. Telling people how and what they are allowed to feel only pisses those people off.
Why should you or anyone care what others think of you? If you have self-respect, then you don’t need to manipulate the emotions of others to prop up your own esteem.
It is the nature of humankind to seek normalcy and reassurance in group uniformity and predictability. Doesn’t matter what era, tribe or culture you come from, if you are unusual or unexpected in some way, then you are going to have to deal with stares, remarks or rejection. Doesn’t matter if you have three arms growing out of your chest, or are 19 feet tall, or are a woman with a beard or a man with breasts, people are going to look askance at you and/or ostracize you. I’m not saying that this is good or desireable, it just is, an inescapable part of human nature.
The same would apply in reverse as well: If a woman showed up at SlutWalk holding a sign that says, “Well, actually, with me at least, sometimes ‘No’ does mean ‘Yes’; a little faux-resistance and play-acting makes the sex more fun,” that woman would be ostracized and treated like a despicable outsider — and you would be doing the ostracizing, because you doesn’t like what that woman’s message.
Wrap your head around that for a while.
I would disagree. It’s about giving respect to all women, regardless of appearance. It doesn’t take too much research to find that women of all shapes, sizes, colors, what have you are raped. I’m not saying that none of us women would take these “safety precautions”, we’re trying to insist that it’s a “necessary evil”– one that needn’t be, and one that people need to speak out against. When you say that a woman is raped for dressing provocatively, you are a. perpetuating what is essentially a myth; it has been proven over and over that women aren’t raped because they sexually provoke the perpetrator (as you all imply with the comments about sexy attire = rape), it’s usually because a man desires to exert control over them (it’s more about the power trip than about the sex), and b. you lessen the fault of the perpetrator. That’s like saying that, if a psycho murderer decides to kill someone who’s maybe a little annoying, it’s the victim’s fault for being annoying. Who’s committing the crime here?
I don’t particularly mind the mockery and derision; I’m all for effective debate. However, when someone steps over using sound logic and resorts to complete lack of tact (from your commenters: “they do smell like dead fish. On the bright side, there is HIV.” “Figures the speaker is a joo” “I’d probably listen more if they were naked”, among a plethora of others), that’s when I have a problem. That’s not effective argument, that’s not efficient, and that certainly does COMPLETELY NOTHING to make us question our convictions. If you or your commenters just want to be rude, you have the right to do so– just don’t expect us to find any iota of value or reasoning in your statements.
Also, there is a HUGE difference between “faux-resistance” and ACTUAL resistance: it’s what separates playfulness with RAPE. And if you or any other man ever feels like his actions could ever be considered rape, stop and make sure. Clearly there’s some miscommunication going on. Rape is NOT an accident.
Is it really that much to ask to make sure your sex is consensual?
Also, what I’m getting out of your comment about ostracism being “an inescapable part of human nature.” is, “it’s okay to be a bully because that’s just what people do.” Sure, it is a human instinct to reject what is unfamiliar, but just like it isn’t a justification for racism, it’s not justification for ostracizing people who look a little different.
Also, hate to break it to you, but I know for a fact that the young girls in your picture were never asked for their permission for you to take a picture of them: a big no-no for any journalist, especially considering that they are minors. Luckily for you, they aren’t suing… but you should really be careful. Avoiding litigation is what I personally would consider a “safety precaution”. Honestly, that’s pretty dumb.
If you go to a public political protest, you are giving permission and in fact seeking out to be publicized. That has been resolved legally countless times. I addressed this issue in my original essay and in its comments extensively.
This meta-extension of the absurd SlutWalk message of holding a public protest, and seeking out coverage and publicity, and then when you don’t like the publicity you get, retroactively withdrawing “permission” for anyone to discuss you, is exactly what I discussed at length in my original essay — the whole “Look at me/Don’t look at me” thing.
This is the real world, Michelle, so it’s time to get used to it: When you present yourself in public, you neither have the ability to nor the right to dictate how or if people respond to you. You may want to get kudos, love and respect from everyone, but you may instead get mockery and derision. That’s life. If you don’t want to take that risk, then don’t insist that everyone take note of you.