choosy moms choose jif

In January, a spokesperson for the Toronto Police Service caused controversy with the statement, "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized". These words and their implications have elicited a variety of responses, ranging from disgust and horror about the police Service's apparent acceptance of sexual violence to wholesale support of what some see as an effort to make women take responsibility for their actions and attire.

I must admit that, at first, I didn't see what the big deal was. Intuitively, this seemed like sound (crudely worded, but sound) advice; If someone is dressed like a slut, isn't it only natural that they attract a certain type and manner of attention? The quote actually reminded me of a portion of Dave Chappelle's stand-up routine where he makes a similar assessment:

Although it's comedy, Chappelle's theory that we judge and expect certain behavior from people based on their attire makes sense. Furthermore, if one chooses to wear clothing that is known to provoke particularly strong judgments and expectations, she/he must be willing to accept some of the burdens and negative consequences that are associated with it (more on that later).

Chappelle uses the example of a whore and a police officer, but this scenario can be applied to other outfits as well. If Jeff (Jeff is just a made-up person who makes this example more understandable) were to wear dark sunglasses and a Bob Marley t-shirt on campus tomorrow (tomorrow is 4/20/2011), it would be fair to assume that he is a marijuana user and treat him as such. Even if he has no affiliation or experience with marijuana, the mere facts of his clothing and the circumstance would cause his peers to treat him differently and, assuming that Jeff is aware of the implications of his outfit and how it relates to the date, he would be responsible and deserving of certain reactions from his them.

The Toronto Police Service representative would like to say that, in the same way that Jeff is responsible for and deserving of condescending stares from authority figures and a waves and nods of solidarity from actual stoners, a young woman in a slutty outfit is responsible for and deserving of unsolicited sexual violence from her fellow citizens. This is where I disagree with the TPS representative's quote; while I agree that young women (actually, all people) should be aware and mindful of the fact that clothing can potentially communicate negative and untrue messages about the person wearing it, I also strongly believe that clothing (non-harmful clothing... outfits with knives, bombs, poison and other dangerous stuff is a gray area) is never a justification to act in an inhumane, uncivil, or immoral manner against a fellow human.

In short, while a slutty outfit may warrant a few catcalls and free drinks (non-roofied drinks), it is never an excuse for non-consensual sex or violence. To argue otherwise is, in my opinion, absurd. If governments protect the rights of neo nazis, KKK members and the Westboro Baptist Church to publicly wear their offensive symbols and messages without fear of (actually, I bet they're at least a little scared) the millions of people who they want to harm or kill them, (I'm actually not sure what Canada's stance on this stuff is, but I assume that they don't condone retaliatory violence... let me know if I'm wrong) it seems silly that the Toronto Police Service would not at least support the women of Toronto's right to wear slutty clothing without being attacked. so... yeah. that's what I think

p.s. I wasn't trying to say that Dave Chappelle agrees with the view that people who dress like sluts deserve to get raped. I actually think he would agree with my view.

p.p.s. here's some info about the slut walk I referred to in the title: http://www.slutwalktoronto.com/ ... I guess they're doing one at ASU