Hallelujah and amen and all those things that agnostics rarely say. Seriously.

Amen indeed!

i think it's awesome. i *heart* the sluts against rape.

I have to say, I heart them too.

I like! Three cheers and more!

Awesome.

Women who enjoy sex are used as the scapegoats for blame and denying rights all over. Blame the rape on the short skirt. Don't even call it rape if she's a sex worker. Don't give her a rape kit if she appears drunk. Who needs to support reproductive freedom, birth control, emergency contraception and abortion access and affordability if only sluts need such things?

Awesome!

Reminds me of the group "Sluts for Choice".

Hmm. I like it! I like it even more after reading their statement.

Also... Merriam-Webster defines slut as "a saucy girl."

Any votes for *Saucy Girls Against Rape*?

Well, this is a no brainer. There is no justification for rape and violence. Predators should be strung up by their small berries and gutted like fish. Period.

But (and it's a big but) common sense, risk avoidance, and personal safety precautions should not be tossed aside for blind, hedonistic thrills simply because 'you desire'.

In short, women, in particular, should not dis-engage their brain to the realities of the very course, sometimes brutal horrors of an imperfect world.

It's dangerous out there. There are wack jobs who want to hurt you. So don't be analogous to a dickhead. Be smart. Be safe. Learn self-defense. Don't travel alone. Avoid 'pack animals' and their watering holes.

It shouldn't be that way, but it is. Good luck. God bless. Be careful.

Merry Christmas!

Reading their full manifesto, I heartily agree with everything except the first and last paragraphs. "Promiscuity is often used as a justification for rape and violence" "we need to recognize the racist and classist assumptions behind any embrace of innocence" "we will not erase our own sexual adventures" Wonderful.

I like the group's idea a lot, but I worry that they gloss over the effect of the patriarchy on encouraging women towards a certain type of sexual expression- prostitution, stripping, etc, which is male-approved. Simply saying "we support the right of prostitutes to be prostitutes" glosses over the fact that women rarely choose sex work freely, they are forced into it by poverty, lack of education, and other effects of the patriarchy.

JadeWolf, how "freely" do most people in the world chose their line of work? Sex work is more scandalous and titillating than waitressing or farm work or being a "legitimate" model, but not necessarily more exploitative. I'm not trying to paint some rosy picture of sex work, the industry sucks, but capitalism in general kinda sucks.

That said, I don't really see how this manifesto encourages women to go into sex work by acknowledging the fact that sex workers have particular obstacles in their path so far as public sexual expression goes. Can't we get acknowledgment for these struggles without a finger-waggle every once in awhile? I also don't read the manifesto as limiting (or even necessarily including in all cases,) sex workers' public sexual expression to their work, as it is o often reduced to. I don't want to make generalizations, but I think it's safe to say that at least a sizable percentage of sex workers do not see their work as personal sexual expression--we see it as a job. Yet this job puts us in a bind whereby we may be deemed 1. unrapeable and 2. whatever else anyone chooses to project in so far as sexual proclivities go. This makes sexual expression especially risky. So far as I can see, this is all that Sluts Against Rape were (rightly) saying. I don't understand what is problematic about this from any feminist position.

I know that slut is supposed to be a *bad* word, but I think that the best way to make it a *good* word is to own it! I'm a self proclaimed slut, even if I'm in a monogamous relationship right now. And locomotivebreath, while I agree that it's a harsh world out there, and women should be careful, all the careful in the world won't stop rape, and all the slutty, irresponsible, drunken behavior in the world doesn't make it justified. I had an ex who just absolutely would not stop saying shit like "Oh, look at her, she's asking for it," when we would see some provocatively dressed woman, and I just wanted to punch him in the mouth for those sorts of comments. Being non-violent though, I left him instead.

Oh, and I had a friend who was a sex worker, and guess who pushed her into the business and then spent all her money so she was trapped? Her husband . Now, she came out of that experience relatively unscathed, and in fact has told me that she often enjoyed it (she's a slut like me =)), she definitely would not have gotten into it without her husband pushing her. She's grown a lot since then, but she only regrets it because it was what her husband wanted, not what she wanted.

Oh, and yes, she left that asshat.

Constantina, I absolutely did not mean to wag my finger at sex workers. I am sorry if I came across that way.

I did not say that the manifesto encourages women to go into sex work, I said that Patriarchy does. I agree with your point that the patriarchy tries to reduce sex workers’ sexual expression to their jobs, and thank you for writing it out more explicitly than the manifesto. And sex workers should not be “unrapeable� or victims of other’s projected issues.

Perhaps I was bringing up an issue with which the group has chosen not to engage. The issue triggered for me by the phrase “the rights of prostitutes to be prostitutes� is how the patriarchy creates, then demonizes, sex workers. However, all groups have to limit their mission, and it’s totally reasonable of Sluts Against Rape to decide which issues are their focus.

The group's general message is a good one and one I completely agree with. However, I take issue with the use of the misogynistic term 'slut'. Why do women who engage is sexual activity freely, willingly and when and where they so choose need to be called anything other than women? It feels like they are playing into the very hands of the patriarchal constrictions that they are trying to throw off.

By this group's standards, I am a 'slut', but I don't consider myself one, I consider myself an autonomous woman. A human, with healthy human behaviors and sexuality. Why the need to take on the patriarchal label? To reclaim it? To speak the 'enemy's' language and thus get through to them? I could care less what a patriarchal asshat thinks of me. Slut? Nay, I say.

Does the term 'slut' seem problematic to anyone else?

JadeWolf, thank you for your thoughtful response, and sorry that I misread part of your comment...The thing is, I absolutely support the right of prostitutes to be prostitutes. I think one can do that most effectively by focusing on the rights of prostitutes, which of course should include freedom from corescion, etc. I see these concepts as interdependant, not opposing. I also don't think it's useful to point out "but of course, the patriarchy..." every time one speaks out in favor of the rights of prostitutes and other sex workers, unless one is in the habit of doing so in all relevant labor issues--in which case, more power to you cuz this needs to be done hells of a lot more than it is--because of how it further stigmatizes and marginalizes sex worker and obscures the oppressive role of patriarchy in women's labor in general. Women are trafficked against their will into sweatshops maybe much more often than into prostitution, but that doesn't make headlines. Instead in the name of stopping the horror of forced prostitution, legislation gets passed adn programs get defunded that completely fuck over the women supposedly being helped. The global white supremacist capitalist patriarchy absolutely, for example, puts many third world women in a position where sex work is their best option and that's fucked and it's crazy to see that as a free choice, but it's paternalistic and concretely harmful to hinder her ability to work in the area she chooses, if I'm not digressing too much, this is obviously a huge subject...I guess what I'm trying to get at is that a radical critique of WSCP is neccesary to any viable sex workers rights movement, but I'm only really interested in a critique of patriarchy and sex work within an explicit context of a sex workers rights, anything less is dehumanizing. If that made sense. I'm hungover.

Anyway, I think getting into any of this is beyond the scope of a short mission statement, and it troubles me that people feel the need to qualify a sentence fragment in support of sex workers' human rights.

I agree with you AngryYoungFemale, JadeWolf and locomotive. While rape is not a womans fault and we should be allowed to do whatever we want to do, we don't live in a perfect world and we have to protect ourselves by using knowledge and common sense.
I also wanted to add that it is so funny that what we say for women is not what we say for young girls. I was reading an article about this the other day. We say "woman should have the right to be sexual in any way...We choose to focus on sexual promiscuity-straight or queer-as a positive assertion of sexual identity" but if a 12-year-old girl were to say "I want to have sex with whomever I want whenever I want" we say no, you need to slow down. Why can't a young girl make her own (educated) choices regarding her own sexuality. Why is promiscuity good for a 25-year-old but bad for a 12-year-old? Shouldn't they be afforded the same choices?

In short, women, in particular, should not dis-engage their brain to the realities of the very course, sometimes brutal horrors of an imperfect world.

It's a pretty good thing that nobody was suggesting that they should, then, isn't it?

Is this supposed to be enlightening information? Is this supposed to be useful in some way? Because it's not. It's the same old song-and-dance that women have been being told for ages. Women are constantly told this. "Be careful. Don't go out alone. Don't go out drinking. Don't do X, Y, and Z." Repeating these paternalistic warnings as though they haven't been repeated a million times or more isn't helping. I mean, seriously, am I just in a sour mood today, or is this:

It's dangerous out there. There are wack jobs who want to hurt you. So don't be analogous to a dickhead. Be smart. Be safe. Learn self-defense. Don't travel alone. Avoid 'pack animals' and their watering holes.

just absolutely insulting? Don't be analogous to a dickhead?! What does that even mean?! Don't travel alone? That's supposed to be helpful, new advice? For real?

Fuck.

HardCandy, if you need to have the difference between a twelve-year-old and a twenty-five-year-old explained to you, I'm not sure it would do much good to try. Children are not adults. It's pretty basic. In fact, it's so damned simple that I'm pretty sure there's no reason to bring it up other than to derail the conversation.

Those offering sensible, well-meaning "advice" need to understand one thing: When you tell a woman, "Don't do X, because you might get raped." you are REINFORCING THE IDEA THAT WOMEN ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR RAPE. Please stop.

You know who's really responsible for rape? RAPISTS.

I know, I know: "In a perfect world, no one would be raped, but this isn't a perfect world, so I'm just telling people to be careful!"

But where does it stop? Women hear this stuff repeated ad nauseam, practically from birth:
"Don't get drunk."
But sober women can be raped, so obviously that's not enough.
"Don't dress/dance/act "provocatively."
But Muslim women, nuns, elderly women, unconscious women, women in wheelchairs or even comas have been raped, so clearly that's not enough either.
"Don't go out at night."
Women are raped during the day, and in their own homes. Still not enough.
"Don't be alone with a man, ever."
Getting a bit ridiculous now, isn't it? Do we expect married couples to have a chaperone with them at all times? Because wives can be and have been raped by their husbands. And what about men who are raped, or women who rape? Is the next rape-avoidance tip "Avoid all human contact?"

Do you see how in the end a woman (or a man for that matter) can take every conceivable precaution, and still end up a victim of rape? It's not about what the victim does or doesn't do. It's about what the rapist does or doesn't do--namely, commit rape.

I appreciate the good intentions behind what you're saying, but please understand what you're advocating every time you say it.

Kimmy I'm not trying to derail the conversation the post is about sexual promiscuity and rape I just added the age factor. However, I would like for you explain the differences between a promiscuous women and promiscuous, sexually educated teenager who uses condoms and birth control. Is it simple enough to say that teens don't have the same access to resources if she were to become pregnant, isn't that why we advocate for teens to have the right to terminate their pregnancy if they chose so? Also their is the argument of emotional maturity. At what age does someone become emotionally equipped to handle sex? Do we ever become emotionally prepared for sex, or is it something that happens as we grow and have different sexual relationships?

I just want to state for the record that I am not advocating teen girls to have irresponsible sex, but why is sexual freedom ok if you're over 18 but not if your under 18?

*Please, if you're going to attack the post or be rude don't bother responding.*

A twelve-year-old is a CHILD. A child. Not an adult. A child. A child, a child, a child. Do you get it now? Most of us are intelligent enough not to advocate for children going out and indulging in adult behaviors (sex, drinking, driving, and drugs are just a few) that they are probably not ready for (in a multitude of ways which, again, require no explanation for any rational person). I will mention, however, that most twelve year olds are no physically matured enough to handle sex. "If there's grass on the field, play ball" is not a good method for determining readiness.

Children are not adults. They are children. Oddly enough, this tends to result in their being treated like children, rather than being treated as adults. There is a very good reason that children are not turned loose on the streets to fend for themselves. They have legal guardians (most often their parent(s)) who are responsible for taking care of the child. This is because children require taking care of. Because they are not adults.

Do you understand now, or would you like to equivocate some more about how children and women in their mid-twenties are basically the same thing? Because either you've never met a child, or you're infantalizing women in their mid-twenties. Either way, it's disturbing.

If you prefer not to have me disagree with you, you might consider saying something that makes more sense and is less disturbing. Otherwise, I think I'm pretty well in line here.

AngryYoungFemme: I HATE the word slut. I don't want to "take it back" either because I just hate it. I wish we could come up with a word that means "sexually promiscuous woman" that was positive and invented by women as an empowering thing. I just think there's too much baggage implicit in "slut" and too many people using it to put women down.

Meownette: my question is why there is a need for a special term for women who engage in sexual activity regardless of the number of partners they have or how often they engage in such activities. Even the term 'promiscuous' is distasteful to me as it infers the term 'slut'--it's almost the formal, "polite" version of the word.

Men are simply men no matter how many people they sleep with or how often they do so. So, again, why do we need to label women as anything other than women?

I've been thinking about HardCandy's post about age. My first reaction was, obviously, 'no, that's just wrong, they are children', but the devil on my shoulder prompted me to think a bit deeper, think about why my reaction would be that way and whether it was MY reaction or whether I was reacting in the way I had been indoctrinated.

So, I compared some of the 12 year olds I know with some of the young, 20 somethings I have met.

On average, except for roughly 10 years of experience and a few inches in height, not all that different.

They are both by turns, silly and immature, unexpectedly deep and thoughtful, lazy, industrious, determined and lacksidasical. I know a 12 year old who changes dodge ball teams more often than he changes his socks and it reminds me of a college roommate who made it a goal to have a different bedpartner every week for the entire semester.

Let me repeat that: except for the maturity and height they will gain in time, a 12 year old that has passed through puberty is not all that different from a person in their early 20s. On this, I have to agree with HardCandy.

However, and this is where we differ, just because it's entirely possible for a 12 year old to have sex, doesn't mean that 12 year old should.

Young teens are already going through so many changes, changes in their minds, in their bodies, in they way they perceive the world and the way they are perceived, that adding yet another burden to the pile - sexual activity - I think would be the straw that broke the camel's back.

If I'm not mistaken the average age of first intercourse is about 16. By the time they reach their mid-teens, they are more settled in themselves and in their bodies, better able to understand the consequences - both good and bad - that come along with deciding to have sex with someone.

I'm not saying they will always make the right decision when it comes to sex - does anyone? - but at 12 the focus is very much immediate gratification and not responsibility, which most in their mid/late teens have at least an inkling of.

I support early, constant and thorough sex education, but just because it's possible to have sex, doesn't mean you have to have sex.

Let me repeat that: except for the maturity and height they will gain in time, a 12 year old that has passed through puberty is not all that different from a person in their early 20s. On this, I have to agree with HardCandy.

I just... I just I cannot BELIEVE anyone would compare a 12 year old to a 20 year old. I really can't. What planet are you from?!

Well, AngryYoungFemme, ideally we wouldn't have to use special nouns to describe sex-positive women who act on that impetus. However, given that the group in question calls itself "Sluts Against Rape," a term different from "women" is called for. That is all I mean; women are autonomously sexual beings with the choice (again, ideally) to exercise that right. I just hate the term "slut" and I wish it could be eradicated.

Interesting.

Methinks some of the responders should learn how to spell 'BITTER' in much larger letters.

I stand by my original post as good advice in dangerous world.

Barkeep! Another round of piss n vinegar.

RoyMacIII is a Guy Who Gets It.

Locomotivebreath1901 is a Guy Who Doesn't Get It, and who is clearly not interested in Getting It.

i love the sluts against rape! and yay for radical shit in champaign, IL! when i was in school there they lead the take back the night march.

RoyMacIII. Thankyouthankyouthankyou.

locomotivebreath: frankly, I think we have every right to be bitter when subjected to "tips" that don't work to prevent sexual assault, but work very very well to confuse the issue, mask the true nature of sexual assault, excuse perpetrators and, most importantly, blame survivors. "Risk avoidance"? Like what? Don't walk alone at night? But (in Canada) 85% of sexual assaults are acquaintance sexual assaults--93% on my university campus. And, oh yeah, on that list of risk factors, miles above walking alone at night is being a university student. Should I drop out in order to avoid risk? Wanna know what the number 1 risk factor is? Being in an intimate relationship. Should I leave my partner? If not, why on earth would I avoid walking alone at night? Also, re walking alone at night: I live in a city wherein it is dark by 4pm during the winter and remains dark until 9am. How am I going to get to my morning classes? How will I make my way home at the end of the day? How offensive is it to require women to limit their behaviour in the ways you suggest so that other people won't assault them?

Basically, tips don't work because they are misguided and constructed out of blatant misinformation regarding the issue. They're dangerous and irresponsible. Please stop.