In defense of SlutWalk protests

I THINK Helen Redmond's letter ("Why I won't call myself a 'slut'") makes some very good points, and I completely agree with her that we have to reject "raunch culture" and the pornification of sexuality. (Ariel Levy's excellent book on this subject, Female Chauvinist Pigs, is well worth reading.)

But I think Helen is wrong not to at least address the point the organizers explicitly state they're making by using the name "SlutWalk."

The use of "slut" isn't meant to be about reclaiming the word, though there are some people taking it in that direction. The name SlutWalk, as other SocialistWorker.org articles have outlined, was adopted in response to a police officer who, in giving a rape-prevention lecture to York University students, told students that they should avoid "dressing like sluts."

The point the organizers are making (and also the marchers Helen mentions who are deliberately dressing like prostitutes) is that "sluts" or not, sex workers or not, whatever we wear, however much we like and have sex, women do NOT deserve to be raped and it is NOT the victim's fault.

It might grate on the nerves of women who've worked our whole lives against being degraded by terms like "slut." But in this context, saying "I am a slut" is meant to be an expression of solidarity: the new movement's answer to "I am Spartacus."

Here is how one of the organizers put it:

[W]e as organizers have jettisoned the idea of reclaiming "slut" as an organizing goal as it is simply too problematic for so many people...as some of the thoughtful criticisms have mentioned, reclamation is rooted in certain experiences and certain privileges (being comfortable enough to apply that word to yourself without fear of reprisal or violence, for instance). Instead, I see the contentious name of our event--SlutWalk--as a name that both joins us to work being done by other organizers (including the original Toronto organizers) and gets at the heart of how sexual double standards and rape culture are connected (for instance, how perceived sexual availability is used to invalidate allegations of sexual assault).

The SlutWalks really aren't about whether "slut" is a label women should adopt. It's true that some within the movement are arguing for reclamation of the word; it's often used within sex-positive communities, such as the LGBT and polyamorous communities, and the book The Ethical Slut is a well-done primer on how to manage multiple sexual partners in a respectful and ethical way.

But these uses of the word play on its "naughty" connotations, and aren't meant to provide insight on how to build an organized movement against sexism. "Slut" is a venerable English word that dates at least as far back as 1400, so reclamation might be a bit of an uphill battle. I agree that there's a need for a word that means "has lots of sex and it's a good thing," but "sex-positive" is doing that job pretty nicely.

No, the SlutWalks are about the fact that being labeled a "slut" means that a certain chunk of the population thinks it's okay to harass, degrade and rape you. Even if you enjoy labeling yourself a "slut" within the confines of your relationships or your scene, it's REALLY, REALLY not enjoyable at all when a sexually aggressive man decides on that label for you.

SlutWalk participants are protesting the on-the-ground reality of how "slut" gets experienced: As in, "You wanted it, you slut. Your clothes/shoes/breast size/drinking habits mean that you're asking for it. And you've had sex before and enjoyed it, which means you're a slut who will give it up to anyone. That can't really be considered rape."

The police explicitly agree with this logic, as the students of York University found out. That is what victims experience from the police, in court, and throughout mainstream culture, and that is worth protesting.
Sarah G., Philadelphia