SlutWalk - the feminine herd being hopelessly misled

Are they really protesting? Or are they enjoying the attention?

Why does a wife buy lingerie for the husband to be worn at bed-time? Why does a husband gifts lingerie to his wife?

To put it very crudely, a man gets a hard-on by seeing a skimpily dressed, sexy looking woman. And a woman loves to attract a man's attention.

To put it mildly, a husband loves his lovely wife to dress sexily on bed. And a wife loves to dress sexily for the man she loves.

If we relate this psychology, sexual behaviour, and biology into the mad rush of 'slut walk', you can understand how the feminine herd is being completely misled.

I am in no way supporting rape (I support public execution for convicted rapist). I am in no way supporting eve-teasing, sexual harassment at work. I am completely for a gender indifferent society.

The concept of SlutWalk was born in January after a member of the Toronto Police force, Const. Michael Sanguinetti, suggested to students at York University that “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized”.

Would it be a sin for the by-standers to feel naughty? 

It is a glory to democracy that these kinds of statements can cause such a stir. This particular statement has two inherent connotations that the feminists have taken offence. Firstly, the use of the word 'slut' and secondly the slight implication that women are inviting rape, molestation and other kinds of sexual harrassments.

There is surely some sense in re-defining the meaning and connotation of the word 'Slut'. One statement on the SlutWalk website reads. "'Slut' is being re-appropriated."



Many women argue that the very word slut is an embodiment of the double standards employed when discussing the sexual appetites of women and men. Women are described as sluts, while men are often referred in a less derogatory light as "studs" or a "ladies man".



It is a noble cause, but the method to go about doing it is definitely not 'SlutWalk'. You cannot re-define Slut by being conventionally slutty in public. In fact, all the girls with their semi exposed boobs and bums are re-emphasizing the definition more strongly.

The second cause is also mention worthy. Nobody should imply that women are inviting rape, molestation and other kinds of sexual harrassments by dressing in a certain way. It is a good news that SlutWalks have become a global phenomenon to protest against sexual violence, and to challenge the mindset that victims of sexual assault should be blamed for the crime against them.

In either of the causes, there is no sense in being semi-nude to protest. It looks more like a parade in colourful frivolous dresses.

In a civil society, there can never be a concept like 'Its my hot body. I do what I want.' In fact, there can be a protest against such a callous & irresponsible statement in public.

Isn't it common sense that exposure of the sensual parts lead to sexual or sensual attraction? Isn't it natural and more importantly involuntary? One can't get horny if he or she wants to get horny, whereas a sneak preview of a good round pair of boob-cleavage, even for a second, can get one horny on a bad day.

In that context, SlukWalks in revealing 'do I care' clothes is impractical, immature and is not well thought through, to achieve the desired objectives. Or perhaps, there is a subliminal sexual sensitivity in women which is making SlutWalk so popular. There is perhaps an inherent desire to expose and garner male attention in women which is indirectly getting fulfilled by these protests.

There is a need that feminists understand the real consequences of these semi-nude walks and direct their energies into a better methodology to address the rightful concerns.