Slut Walks UK

[Bernie174]

Vic
There are indeed 2 kinds of rape. Firstly, the vast majority, at some point the consent of the woman is misinterpreted or ignored. Thats not to say it is less wrong, or less traumatic, it certainly isn't about power, it is all about sexual satisfaction.
Those are the cases where avoidance of a situation, either by behavior or dress may reduce the instance.
In exactly the same way as you are perfectly entiled to leave £500 on the front seat of your car, but you'd be fairly stupid to do so. In the real world, if you put temptation in the way, someone will take advantage if they can. It doesn't make it right, but it's the nature of humans.
The other sort of rape, which is what you assume is the majority, isn't, and thats the kind that is about power. It wont be changed by mode of dress and it wont be changed by protest marches.
If women really wanted to do something about the way rapes are dealt with they could help themselves more by condemning the women that make false allegations, thats what muddies the waters on the first type of rape.

Russ
A woman can't commit rape, for fairly obvious reasons. If a man's not interested, then the act can't happen.

 

[Russ77]

Bernie, maybe not in law but it happens.....

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Man-gang-raped-by-3-women-20050824

http://www.thelocal.se/12046/20080527/

Rape may be the wrong legal term when a woman forces herself on to a man but in essence it's the same.

I think main reasons it's very are generally speaking women are smaller/lighter than men making them less likely to be able to overpower them and in the case above a weapon may be used. As you said for the act to happen a man needs to be aroused which is unlikely if it's against his will but I suppose you don't know what would happen in that situation and finally, women are as sexually "wired" as men (again generally speaking) and are less driven by physical/visual features.

 

[big soft moose]

Russ
A woman can't commit rape, for fairly obvious reasons. If a man's not interested, then the act can't happen.

strictly speaking that isnt true - a woman could if she were so minded sodomise a man with a blunt instrument, lesbian rape also occurs - plus there have been offences in the states where a woman has been held to have 'raped' a man after exciting him against his higher mental judgement - the offence concerned involved a preist iirc

 

[big soft moose]

Hi Vic, I think the point Nick and myself was trying to make relates to two different kinds of rape, one being someone who is psychologically different to "normal" people where apprearence and clothing makes no odds and the second scenario being where a scantily clad woman is seen by a drunken man as "up for it" when she's just out for a night with the girls and he doesn't take no for an answer, in this situation it's purely a sexual thing but equally as appauling as the first scenario.

theres an interesting bit in 'picking up the pieces' by forensic pyschologist Paul Britton were he expounds on the conection between appearance and assault/rape /murder.

In short he says that a woman who is dressed 'provocatively' or in a way that is sexually confident, is likely to engage the attention of a predator who gets his kicks from overwhelming sexual confidence, or from an inadequate who is angered by the 'type' (stereotype in his head) that has rejected him before - but equally a woman who is dressed down can attract the attention of predator types who look for someone not confident or who they perceive as easily intimidated.

he also says that the victim profile is generally related to the offenders masturbatory fantasies (which is why peaking toms and flashers etc frequently are index offences for more serious offences later) and in the case of an offender these are less likely to centre on sexy women (as they would for 'normal' men ) but rather on one key appearance that relates to the pysche such as mother figures, old women, children, teachers, nuns, prostitutes, whatever (to the extent that it could be keyed by a particular colour, scent, look, hairstyle etc)

so in short what he's saying is that as far as stranger rape (as oposed to date rape or molestation) goes while appeasrance may key the offender, a woman dressed provocatively is no more likely to exhibit the key trait than one who isnt.

 

[Vic]

Vic
There are indeed 2 kinds of rape. Firstly, the vast majority, at some point the consent of the woman is misinterpreted or ignored. Thats not to say it is less wrong, or less traumatic, it certainly isn't about power, it is all about sexual satisfaction.

No rape is for purely sexual satisfaction, there are always other factors. Pure sexual urge is not enough for a man to commit rape.

In exactly the same way as you are perfectly entiled to leave £500 on the front seat of your car, but you'd be fairly stupid to do so. In the real world, if you put temptation in the way, someone will take advantage if they can. It doesn't make it right, but it's the nature of humans.

What a disturbing analogy. Sorry it isnt human nature, its a selection of disturbed men and by the looks of it the thinking of a lot of men, that scantily clad women automatically equals a sexual object or temptation as you call it. Sorry it isn't the way a woman dresses that needs to change, its the mens (and a lot of womens) thinking that needs to change.

If women really wanted to do something about the way rapes are dealt with they could help themselves more by condemning the women that make false allegations, thats what muddies the waters on the first type of rape.

And you don't think women do deplore this and have spoken out against this now and in the past.

 

[Gary Coyle]

No rape is for purely sexual satisfaction, there are always other factors. Pure sexual urge is not enough for a man to commit rape.

And you know what goes on in every single rapists mind and his/her reasoning behind his/her actions !!!!!!!!!!

 

[KIPAX]

You are somehow implying that rape is about sexual satisfaction which it isn't, sex and masturbation are. Rape is about power, humilitation and abuse

No rape is for purely sexual satisfaction, there are always other factors. Pure sexual urge is not enough for a man to commit rape..

Is this the ten minute argument or?

 

[Vic]

And you know what goes on in every single rapists mind and his/her reasoning behind his/her actions !!!!!!!!!!

Of course but we all have sexual urges. Are you saying at someone can commit rape just because of a sexual urge with no other psychological factors? Perhaps they can but personally I doubt it. (I'll not bother with the ten exclamation marks if you dont mind)

 

[Gary Coyle]

Of course but we all have sexual urges. Are you saying at someone can commit rape just because of a sexual urge with no other psychological factors? Perhaps they can but personally I doubt it. (I'll not bother with the ten exclamation marks if you dont mind)

Im not saying anything, it's you who are making unsubstantiated claims about the mindset of every rapist, but now you're changing your mind when challenged and are now saying perhaps then can but you doubt it.

We wouldn't want facts or the lack of them to get in the way of a good debate now would we.

 

[Vic]

Im not saying anything, it's you who are making unsubstantiated claims about the mindset of every rapist, but now you're changing your mind when challenged and are now saying perhaps then can but you doubt it.

We wouldn't want facts or the lack of them to get in the way of a good debate now would we.

Isn't reflection part of a debate?

As far as I am aware there are only a few people who are actually debating while a few are only popping in a few pedantic posts here and there.

But 'you're not saying anything' so there is probably no point in my responding to this. As you were.

 

[big soft moose]

Of course but we all have sexual urges. Are you saying at someone can commit rape just because of a sexual urge with no other psychological factors? Perhaps they can but personally I doubt it. (I'll not bother with the ten exclamation marks if you dont mind)

in the right circumstances (ie if it was seen as socially acceptable) then yes it could be purely motivated by a sexual urge - for example throughout history rape of captured females after battle has been seen as 'acceptable' by the winning side - not by our moral compas but by theirs which is what matters

in the uk today clearly this is not the case, so no it isnt likely to happen purely through a sexual urge unless its in someone with sociopathic tendencies and an unduly high sex drive.

that said if you do take a sociopath with an unduly high sex drive he is likely to rape the first woman he finds desirable - which as per my post above might not be someone dressed provocatively.

(and incidentally for those who are talking about outraged fathers not wanting daughter to go out in miniskirt and boob tube - that is more likely to relate to not wanting their baby girl to attract any male attention - not just the unwanted kind )

 

[KIPAX]

As far as I am aware there are only a few people who are actually debating while a few are only popping in a few pedantic posts here and there.

But 'you're not saying anything' so there is probably no point in my responding to this. As you were.

Gary.. you must have missed the point where Vic decided only people she thinks are contributing should be allowed to post... She pulled me up on that score (Typical student)... So i took her on and I kinda gave up when we got to the point where she thinks all the dads in the world are wrong for worrying what there young daughters wear when they leave the house..

Vic.. i think you need to live and experience life a little more before you start preaching it to adults.. Some things dont come out of a book.

 

[KIPAX]

(and incidentally for those who are talking about outraged fathers not wanting daughter to go out in miniskirt and boob tube - that is more likely to relate to not wanting their baby girl to attract any male attention - not just the unwanted kind )

True....oh so true But it does include the darker side of worrying what might happen..

 

[Vic]

Gary.. you must have missed the point where Vic decided only people she thinks are contributing should be allowed to post... She pulled me up on that score (Typical student)... So i took her on and I kinda gave up when we got to the point where she thinks all the dads in the world are wrong for worrying what there young daughters wear when they leave the house..

Vic.. i think you need to live and experience life a little more before you start preaching it to adults.. Some things dont come out of a book.

Nice. It's really refreshing to hear so many empty stereotypes in one post as well as the odd personal jibe popped in there for emphasis. Thanks for the advice but I'll take books over the Daily Mail for now.

 

[Vic]

in the right circumstances (ie if it was seen as socially acceptable) then yes it could be purely motivated by a sexual urge - for example throughout history rape of captured females after battle has been seen as 'acceptable' by the winning side - not by our moral compas but by theirs which is what matters

in the uk today clearly this is not the case, so no it isnt likely to happen purely through a sexual urge unless its in someone with sociopathic tendencies and an unduly high sex drive.

that said if you do take a sociopath with an unduly high sex drive he is likely to rape the first woman he finds desirable - which as per my post above might not be someone dressed provocatively.

(and incidentally for those who are talking about outraged fathers not wanting daughter to go out in miniskirt and boob tube - that is more likely to relate to not wanting their baby girl to attract any male attention - not just the unwanted kind )

Good post and your first point of course brings up the history of rape and male dominance which is crucial to examining todays. I might have a gander at the book you mentioned.

 

[Flash In The Pan]

No rape is for purely sexual satisfaction, there are always other factors.

Whilst I agree with the majority of what you have said, that is a fairly sweeping statement. Unless you have carried out indepth empirical research and have the data available to back it up then that is only your opinion, not fact, sorry.

 

[Vic]

Whilst I agree with the majority of what you have said, that is a fairly sweeping statement. Unless you have carried out indepth empirical research and have the data available to back it up then that is only your opinion, not fact, sorry.

Cheers Graham. Gary brought it up too and I concur, it is only my opinion, albeit a strong one.

 

[Bernie174]

Firstly
in the UK, because thats where we are, rape is an offence that can ONLY be committed by a man.
Forced buggary, is a different offence, it is not rape.
In the context of male/female the reason why it cannot be committed against a man is to put it bluntly, if a man is not interested, he wont have an erection. In legal terms if he did, he would be seen as a willing partner. However, thats not relevant, as the definition of rape only provides for a man to commit it.
The legislation therefore does not allow for a woman to commit an offence of rape. Ok, it may be a throw back to an earlier time in history, by think it through, it makes sense.
UK law is full of that sort of thing, for example the old legal principle that a man could not rape his wife, was based on the marriage vow, "love honour and obey". He says I want some, and by virtue of the marriage vows, thats that. That principle has now been changed.

Vic
What a load of tripe! Example. Boy meet girl, they go somewhere quiet for a quicky, girl is willing, until the guy enters her. She then says no. Man is past the point of caring, and continues. That is rape. It is not about control, it is pure sexual gratification.
Like it or not, the majority of rapes fall into that or close to that category. I don't base that on propaganda, I base it on being trained to deal with them!
Unfortunately, a friend of mine fell foul of just the above, that does not make him disturbed, nor a bad person, he simply didn't hear or realise that half way though sex with someone who'd been a willing partner, she remembered her boyfriend.
Logically, the man involved in that example is not 'disturbed', nor are his neurons firing wrongly.
Yes, I agree it's thinking that needs to change, man and womans, and that is what I suspect our Canadian friend was getting at. As for human nature, come out of the feminist pages of the Guardian, and take a few steps into the real world, it'll be shocking, but an eye opener for you.
Lastly, you say that women do condemn other women that make false allegations. Can I draw your attention to a number of photos on Flickr of the London Slut walk. One placard in particular is in support of and draws attention to a number of women convicted of wasting police time after making false claims of rape.
The required evidence to convict someone of that offence is of such a high calibre, it happens very rarely. Therefore the few women doing time for it are obviously serious offenders. It seems that not all women therefore condemn false allegations.

 

[Wookee]

This is lifted from the Rape Crisis website:

Are rapists motivated by sex?

Men who rape do so to secure power and control. Men who rape children do so to secure power and control. Rapists are therefore motivated by power and control using a forced sexual act to achieve this is just a way of gaining power - not a way of gaining sexual relief.

There is a lot of information on there regarding myths etc.....clothing gets a mention.

 

[Vic]

What a load of tripe! Example. Boy meet girl, they go somewhere quiet for a quicky, girl is willing, until the guy enters her. She then says no. Man is past the point of caring, and continues. That is rape. It is not about control, it is pure sexual gratification.

Would you do this? Could this happen to any normal (a sticky definition anyway) man or would a decent guy stop? In my opinion sexual gratification is not the only factor, there has to be something underlying and that is where you and me disagree.

Unfortunately, a friend of mine fell foul of just the above, that does not make him disturbed, nor a bad person, he simply didn't hear or realise that half way though sex with someone who'd been a willing partner, she remembered her boyfriend.
Logically, the man involved in that example is not 'disturbed', nor are his neurons firing wrongly.

Going with your friends story, that sounds terrible and I hope it hasn't ruined his life in some horrific way, I know from personal experience it can.

As for human nature, come out of the feminist pages of the Guardian, and take a few steps into the real world, it'll be shocking, but an eye opener for you.

Ah a classic, hadn't heard that one before!

Lastly, you say that women do condemn other women that make false allegations. Can I draw your attention to a number of photos on Flickr of the London Slut walk. One placard in particular is in support of and draws attention to a number of women convicted of wasting police time after making false claims of rape.
The required evidence to convict someone of that offence is of such a high calibre, it happens very rarely. Therefore the few women doing time for it are obviously serious offenders. It seems that not all women therefore condemn false allegations.

If that is true and the person holding the placard does not have reasonable evidence to support her claim, then yes I am with you, I find it abhorrent. But I think both genders are equally disgusted by anyone throwing around false accusations that can ruin lives.

 

[Wookee]

Firstly
in the UK, because thats where we are, rape is an offence that can ONLY be committed by a man.
Forced buggary, is a different offence, it is not rape.
In the context of male/female the reason why it cannot be committed against a man is to put it bluntly, if a man is not interested, he wont have an erection. In legal terms if he did, he would be seen as a willing partner. However, thats not relevant, as the definition of rape only provides for a man to commit it.
The legislation therefore does not allow for a woman to commit an offence of rape. Ok, it may be a throw back to an earlier time in history, by think it through, it makes sense.

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 redefined the offence as:-

A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

This includes buggery as rape now.

The physical act of rape may only be committed by a man but it doesn't mean that women can't take part in the act and be convicted of the offence, either the recent one in this article or in terms of aid/abet etc or by way of conspiracy.

 

[Gary Coyle]

Gary.. you must have missed the point where Vic decided only people she thinks are contributing should be allowed to post....

Or only the ones who agree with her or don't challenge her ill informed opinions

 

[big soft moose]

just a thought but this is a photography forum and this thread started as a discussion of people photographing the slut walks - i'm not really bsure therefore that we should continue the discussion of rape and gender politics unless the mods move it to OOF (and possibly not even then) - certainly i'm not going to participate further

 

[Vic]

Or only the ones who agree with her or don't challenge her ill informed opinions

Hmmm interesting, who have my majority of responses been to then? Certainly not to people that agree with me have they? Another great post Gary.

 

[Vic]

just a thought but this is a photography forum and this thread started as a discussion of people photographing the slut walks - i'm not really bsure therefore that we should continue the discussion of rape and gender politics unless the mods move it to OOF (and possibly not even then) - certainly i'm not going to participate further

Good idea.

 

[Bernie174]

Yes, it is a photographic forum, but that doesn't mean people can't voice opinions on subjects that come from photography.
This does, and so people should be able to express an opinion, no ones forced to take part in it.
Wookee
Aid and abet is not the substantive offence, ie it isn't doing it, it's assisting or facilitating. Therefore rape cannot, as a woman doesn't have a penis, be committed by a woman, in any way shape or form.

Vic
Yes, I do disagree, in the most part rapes are not about control. They are mostly about a mix of alcohol and circumstances.
My point about the Guardian feminist pages was simply that if the feminist press is your source of information, then you are going to think they are correct. It's a great deal more complex than that and not as black & white as you have been led to believe.

 

[Matt]

right ive just read through the last page and a half. What do I do here, remove all the off-topic? Lock the thread? remove the arguments?

OR

why dont you all leave the discussion on rape and just concentrate on the photography.

 

[posiview]

right ive just read through the last page and a half. What do I do here, remove all the off-topic? Lock the thread? remove the arguments?

OR

why dont you all leave the discussion on rape and just concentrate on the photography.

I'll go for the later.

I'm sure there are forums where these discussions are more relevant to the forum genre.

 

[big soft moose]

Went to this in London yesterday. I found no hostility to photographers as previously suggested.!!

back on topic - i cant see any reason to fear hostility to togs - i'm sure most participants welcome the publicity that wider photographic coverage brings as it helps get there word out there (this applies to any legal demonstration/protest)

i'm sure the 99% of the people togging were doing it as a social documentary, anyone who did go with the desire to shoot women in sexy clothes for their personal gratification needs to get out more as there are easier ways of photographing provocatively dressed women - like hiring a model.

 

[garryknight]

I'm glad this discussion has come out in this thread, despite some differences in opinion, as I've been reading some comments in another thread referring to this topic that left me feeling queasy.

I was in Trafalgar Square on Saturday and got a number of photos as the marchers entered the square and during the rally as well. I won't post any in this thread as there are 23 of them in the set and I couldn't easily choose which ones represented 'the message'. So please feel free to have a look at them if you like. As they're on Flickr, the best way to view them is to click on the first thumbnail then press the 'L' key to bring them up in lightbox mode, then keep pressing the right arrow key for more.

My intention in going there was not only to support the marchers but to help spread their message in my Flickr stream - one of many photographers to do so, I'm pleased to say.

Slutwalk London 2011
http://www.flickr.com/photos/garryknight/sets/72157626827926799/with/5829118602/

 

[Russ77]

Looking at some of the images of the banners on display I could make a bold sweeping statement and say it looks like a load of women have got the wrong idea and gone off on one

Although joking aside I'm not sure all attendees really get the full extent of what's trying to be acheived.

Here's an article from my local rag http://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/9082915.Police_warning_over_spate_of_street_robberies/ for those who can't be bothered to read it the jist of it is don't have your mobile phones and/or iPods on display when you're in public as gangs are going around robbing people who do so.

Who's up for a protest march in London so we can walk around with our phones/iPods on display?

OK OK...... don't shoot

I know you can't compare the theft of material items to a crime as terrible as rape but there is a basic principle in common.........

 

[whiteflyer]

Boy meet girl, they go somewhere quiet for a quicky, girl is willing, until the guy enters her. She then says no. Man is past the point of caring, and continues. That is rape. It is not about control, it is pure sexual gratification.

Would you do this? Could this happen to any normal (a sticky definition anyway) man or would a decent guy stop? In my opinion sexual gratification is not the only factor, there has to be something underlying and that is where you and me disagree.

Having served on the Jury in such a case this can and does happen.

In fact the boy who knew the girl met her at 7 pm on a night out, and told her right from the start he was going to f*** her that night.
The girl did not walk away but stayed with the boy ALL night as he kept repeating what he told her, when he asked her at 11PM if she would like to go to a night club with him, she said yes.
At 2am when leaving the club, after still staying with the boy (after still telling her he was going to f*** her) he asked if he could escort her home, which she replied yes.. Now this girl lived less than 1/4 of a mile from the club, but when the boy suggested they take the long way home via a know lovers lane (2 mile walk) again she said yes.
So after some time of heavy petting and clothes removal he entered her at which point she then said no, this young man got sent down for rape.


Absolutely nothing to do with power or humiliation, pure sex.

 

[Bernie174]

Thanks Whiteflyer, thats an example of exactly what I mean.
I don't suggest that what the lad did in that case was right, but it is a world away from the few cases of attack and rape, which is where I think Vic is coming from.
Both are wrong, and both are rape, both are considered the same way in law, but in the above examples case, it's clearly a case where she could have avoided the situation.
The public don't object about advertising that tries to prevent theft, so why should we not do the same to prevent rape?