Flesh, cloth and rape

October 26th, 2006



Let’s say I wanted to seduce someone.

And let’s say, for the sake of argument, that said ’someone’ was a guy.

I would probably have a shower before I went out to meet him, and I may or may not shave my legs. I might wear make-up, and perhaps spray some perfume, or essential oil - and, more likely than not, some deodorant. I’d also probably spend a long time choosing what to wear. Heels, perhaps, or maybe flats. Earrings? Possibly. And, depending on my current curves, I might emphasise my waist or hide it; I might accentuate my breasts or rein them in. I’d certainly take a lot of care over my bottom.

In the moment when I meet him - at his doorstep, in a bar, outside the tube station - I would want him to experience attraction towards me. This wouldn’t (I’d like to think) necessarily require a cleavage, skirt, or heels - or even make-up or perfume. But, during the course of the evening, I would want my body to be clothed - or exposed - in such a way, that I could allure his attraction, play with it and incite it. I’d be expressing myself and communicating with him through my chosen appearance.

Let’s take another night out. This time, I might be in a committed relationship, and enjoying going out with girlfriends - say, to a School Disco club night. I might be wearing a short skirt and high boots; a tight white shirt and a tie saying ’sexy’. My hair’s perhaps in pigtails, and my eyes thick with the black kohl pencil I’ve kept since I was 13. I might wear these clothes as a frivolous tongue-in-cheek celebration of mock youthfulness, connecting in sisterly companionship with my friends who are all doing it too. For some reason it’s fun - even if I’m not sure why.

In this School Disco scenario if, say, my bottom was pinched, or slapped or squeezed by a bloke, I would be angry. I would in all likelihood turn round and punch him, even if he’d turned away and all I could thud was his shoulder. I am communicating something with my clothes; but I do not want him to assume that my skirt or boots or kohl eyeliner give him right of enjoyment over my buttocks.

I realise that I’m asking a lot of men. I want a (known) guy to read incitement into my clothes in one situation, but strangers to disregard it in another. Is this unfair?

Is it unfair to wear a short skirt if I don’t want to pull? Is it misleading to not wear baggy clothes? Misleading to not cover my legs, or breasts? Misleading to not wear a veil, as one Australian Sheik seemed to think last week? (Picked up by Philobiblon)

I don’t believe that male and female human beings exist wholly independently of one another. I don’t believe that wearing whatever I want should have absolutely no impact on the behaviour of the other sex, as though I exist in utter isolation from men, their gaze, their confusions, their desires and their vulnerabilities. In fact, I know that my power to allure depends precisely (though not only) on my power to send signals in my clothes.

I accept that signals can be misread; it happens all the time in all types of human interactions. I accept that I am responsible for my actions, in thought, word and deed - including those that mislead others. But I am not responsible for the final fact of others being misled. People, if you like, participate in misleading themselves.

An unveiled woman; a cleavaged, short-skirted, drunk or high-heeled lipsticked woman is not like ‘uncovered meat’ that’s fair game for ‘cats to come and eat’. A woman can send the wrong signals, or men can read the wrong signals, but this is a fact of daily life and a fact of all human communications - and of course we can talk; we can explain ourselves, we can ask each other questions, and quite quickly my words can say more, much more, than my flesh or cloth.

I want to be able to communicate clearly through the ways I choose to cover my body; and I aspire to get better and better at sending honest signals. But I also claim the freedom (should I wish to exercise it) to play games and tricks on people’s perceptions in the ways I choose to cover my body.

I want the law to protect my clothing freedoms. I want the law to accept that, for example, a cleavage in one situation communicates something different from a cleavage in another situation; and that the cleavage is utterly irrelevant to the question of my consent for a man to touch me.

I realise this is a lot to ask. But I don’t believe it is too much.

So, I’d like to follow the cue of Jess over at the F-word, in her post ‘Only rapists can prevent rape’, and repeat this advice to men:

If a woman is drunk, don’t rape her.
If a woman is walking alone at night, don’t rape her.
If a woman is drugged and unconscious, don’t rape her.
If a woman is wearing a short skirt, don’t rape her.
If a woman is jogging in a park at 5 am, don’t rape her.
If a woman looks like your ex-girlfriend you’re still hung up on, don’t rape her.
If a woman is asleep in her bed, don’t rape her.
If a woman is asleep in your bed, don’t rape her.
If a woman is doing her laundry, don’t rape her.
If a woman is in a coma, don’t rape her.
If a woman changes her mind in the middle of or about a particular activity, don’t rape her.
If a woman has repeatedly refused a certain activity, don’t rape her.
If a woman is not yet a woman, but a child, don’t rape her.
If your girlfriend or wife is not in the mood, don’t rape her.
If your step-daughter is watching TV, don’t rape her.
If you break into a house and find a woman there, don’t rape her.
If your friend thinks it’s okay to rape someone, tell him it’s not, and that he’s not your friend.
If your “friend” tells you he raped someone, report him to the police.
If your frat-brother or another guy at the party tells you there’s an unconscious woman upstairs and it’s your turn, don’t rape her, call the police and tell the guy he’s a rapist.
Tell your sons, god-sons, nephews, grandsons, sons of friends it’s not okay to rape someone.
Don’t tell your women friends how to be safe and avoid rape.
Don’t imply that she could have avoided it if she’d only done/not done x.
Don’t imply that it’s in any way her fault.
Don’t let silence imply agreement when someone tells you he “got some” with the drunk girl.
Don’t perpetuate a culture that tells you that you have no control over or responsibility for your actions. You can, too, help yourself.

12 Responses to “Flesh, cloth and rape”

  1. James Says:

    This list of “dont’s” is powerful stuff, and cannot be stated enough. I was astonished to read the Australian sheikh’s remarks, which have now made headline news on the BBC.

    But there is one “don’t” in all this that I find very difficult to fathom: “don’t tell your woman friends how to be safe and avoid rape”. In fact, I did exactly this only two hours ago when I suggested to a young female friend that her idea of walking home along the river’s tow-path was not such a good idea. More - I think if she had insisted I would have done what I could to stop her.

    I see the irony in that statement, but my impulse is to trust other men less than her. So I find myself in something of a vicious circle with this “don’t” (between trusting her and yet not trusting her judgement), and to escape the circle would involve my acting counter-intuitively - ie to say ‘OK,enjoy the tow-path, see you next week’. Any suggestions?

  2. natasha Says:

    Yep. This is a good point. I think that “don’t” sits the least easily - for exactly this reason.

    I’d like to think there is a line between saying “you’re asking for it” and “it’d be better if you avoided the tow-path”. One is blaming women; the other is being rightly realistic and pragmatic. (Good work, J.)

    I do think, though, that it *is* in women’s interests to ‘reclaim the night’ - to push the boundaries, to not be afraid and to not cloister ourselves. Which, surely, means risks must be taken?

  3. sabha Says:

    I second that comment Natasha, good work indeed James, of course it would be wonderful not to “have” to warn the woman of the dangers of the tow path, but it is realistic and correct to warn her of them. And in doing that you are not implying that she is “asking for it”, you are merely reminding her of dangers.

    I also didn’t understand that line in the poem. I think as long as advice isn’t given in a disempowering or blameful way then men should be active in the fight against violence towards women by mentioning it. What is the alternative? they pretend it doesn’t happen, how does that empower and help women to protect themselves?

  4. sabha Says:

    I think that it is very important to explore this idea of the effect clothing or its lack has on men. We just can’t say that walking around in high heels a tiny skirt and tight top is not giving out a message of sex.

    Of course rape is not forgiveable under absolutely any circumstance, and therfore it is absurd to blame the rape of a person on their clothing. But I feel as modern day feminists we must question some of our assumptions.And when doing that it is important to look at this issue historically, the way we dress in the West is a relatively recent phenomena, and we have come to associate it with being progressive and free thinking “A woman can choose to wear whatever she wants and be whoever she wants”. And by contrast women who “cover” either for cultural or religious reasons are somehow backward and unliberated. I know some muslim women who cover completely and are very liberated, they view their sexuality as being something sacred and private and therefore not to be shared- I completely understand where they are coming from.

    The rise of wearing very little clothing is unfortunately coupled with a rise in other elements, such as the availaibility of pornography (nowadays predominantly of the sort which denigrates, humiliates and oppresses women and their sexuality) and the explosion of binge drinking - (I am talking most specifically here about the UK).These create a potent mix which I feel combined with confusion about sexual mores and morality both on the part of men and women, can leave us with a sexual minefield, so it is not as easy as saying it doesn’t matter if a woman is wearing a mini skirt and boob tube completly drunk and on her own at 3 o clock in the morning, it does matter.

    Can I just throw in another question here at the end. How do people feel about men taking their shirts off in public in the summer and walking around with bare chests?

  5. Feminist Law Professors » Blog Archive » Links: Interesting Things To Read Says:

    […] “Flesh, Cloth and Rape” at Feminish. […]

  6. natasha Says:

    I have a moral objection to beer bellies.

  7. James Says:

    I have an aesthetic objection to them. It makes me shudder, when i remember in my travels the beautiful men I saw well-covered under the sun of Spain and Syria, and then come home to see the whipped-out flashes of pink at the slightest sign of sun. How can we have gone so quickly backwards?

  8. natasha Says:

    Male nakedness seems to be an assertion of power in a way that women’s nakedness isn’t. (The power to be not-beautiful, in some cases) They’re not objectified in the same way as women are.

  9. sabha Says:

    I agree with the objectification point, men are not objectified in the same way, and some tatooed beer bellied men do indeed take pride in flaunting their bodies whilst simultaneously flauntint their lifestyle - drinking beer, having tatoos, smoking and generally enjoyoing nakedness in a rather different way from shall we say naturists for example.

    I often feel offended by that sort of nakedness, you just think “i don’t want to see it and have to react to it, so please put it all away!”. I also agree with what you are saying James, when you go to hot countries and people are clothes in wonderful fabrics, especially men in jalabiyas etc and then you come home to yobbish nakedness you can’t help but feel that indeed they are going backwards!

    I also think that female nakedness is an assertion of power often, the power to attract and be sexually desirable.

  10. natasha Says:

    And, I think, the power to say: I can be sexually desirable and you can’t touch.
    In other words, I know that I rely on the law protecting me, and society saying it’s okay, to make it a powerful act on my part. (Making the women that initially pushed the boundaries even more impressive; they didn’t have the protection of the law or cultural norms…)

  11. natasha Says:

    I just came across this excellent post over at Moderately Insane.

    Sailorman talks about being honest and frank as to what, in the eyes of the law, is and isn’t rape.

    This is an excerpt:

    Back in college, there were occasional “take back the night” rallies, in which women would discuss rape. Sometimes they would say “if someone pressures you to have sex, it’s rape!” and “you can’t consent if you’re drunk!” and similar things.

    Anyone who frequents feminist blogs has seen similar claims, and more. Sometimes the claims are much more explicit: “drunk people cannot legally consent.” “Any pressure means it’s rape.” “If you didn’t want to have sex, it’s rape.”

    In many states, those are all lies. And it’s doing no favors to those women who hear them.

    In oregon, for example, all of those statements are clearly false. What do you want to bet that women in Oregon don’t know that?

    Let’s tell them. Let’s be honest. Let’s agree that what you BELIEVE is not always what IS.

  12. Pacific Views Says:

    Going Out Of My Way To Be Unattractive…

    In response to my post the other day on the many joys of having a near buzzcut, I got this comment: Yes because being socially conscious and intelligent means that you should not take pride in yourself (physically, emotionally, mentally,……

Leave a Reply

Flesh, cloth and rape

October 26th, 2006



Let’s say I wanted to seduce someone.

And let’s say, for the sake of argument, that said ’someone’ was a guy.

I would probably have a shower before I went out to meet him, and I may or may not shave my legs. I might wear make-up, and perhaps spray some perfume, or essential oil - and, more likely than not, some deodorant. I’d also probably spend a long time choosing what to wear. Heels, perhaps, or maybe flats. Earrings? Possibly. And, depending on my current curves, I might emphasise my waist or hide it; I might accentuate my breasts or rein them in. I’d certainly take a lot of care over my bottom.

In the moment when I meet him - at his doorstep, in a bar, outside the tube station - I would want him to experience attraction towards me. This wouldn’t (I’d like to think) necessarily require a cleavage, skirt, or heels - or even make-up or perfume. But, during the course of the evening, I would want my body to be clothed - or exposed - in such a way, that I could allure his attraction, play with it and incite it. I’d be expressing myself and communicating with him through my chosen appearance.

Let’s take another night out. This time, I might be in a committed relationship, and enjoying going out with girlfriends - say, to a School Disco club night. I might be wearing a short skirt and high boots; a tight white shirt and a tie saying ’sexy’. My hair’s perhaps in pigtails, and my eyes thick with the black kohl pencil I’ve kept since I was 13. I might wear these clothes as a frivolous tongue-in-cheek celebration of mock youthfulness, connecting in sisterly companionship with my friends who are all doing it too. For some reason it’s fun - even if I’m not sure why.

In this School Disco scenario if, say, my bottom was pinched, or slapped or squeezed by a bloke, I would be angry. I would in all likelihood turn round and punch him, even if he’d turned away and all I could thud was his shoulder. I am communicating something with my clothes; but I do not want him to assume that my skirt or boots or kohl eyeliner give him right of enjoyment over my buttocks.

I realise that I’m asking a lot of men. I want a (known) guy to read incitement into my clothes in one situation, but strangers to disregard it in another. Is this unfair?

Is it unfair to wear a short skirt if I don’t want to pull? Is it misleading to not wear baggy clothes? Misleading to not cover my legs, or breasts? Misleading to not wear a veil, as one Australian Sheik seemed to think last week? (Picked up by Philobiblon)

I don’t believe that male and female human beings exist wholly independently of one another. I don’t believe that wearing whatever I want should have absolutely no impact on the behaviour of the other sex, as though I exist in utter isolation from men, their gaze, their confusions, their desires and their vulnerabilities. In fact, I know that my power to allure depends precisely (though not only) on my power to send signals in my clothes.

I accept that signals can be misread; it happens all the time in all types of human interactions. I accept that I am responsible for my actions, in thought, word and deed - including those that mislead others. But I am not responsible for the final fact of others being misled. People, if you like, participate in misleading themselves.

An unveiled woman; a cleavaged, short-skirted, drunk or high-heeled lipsticked woman is not like ‘uncovered meat’ that’s fair game for ‘cats to come and eat’. A woman can send the wrong signals, or men can read the wrong signals, but this is a fact of daily life and a fact of all human communications - and of course we can talk; we can explain ourselves, we can ask each other questions, and quite quickly my words can say more, much more, than my flesh or cloth.

I want to be able to communicate clearly through the ways I choose to cover my body; and I aspire to get better and better at sending honest signals. But I also claim the freedom (should I wish to exercise it) to play games and tricks on people’s perceptions in the ways I choose to cover my body.

I want the law to protect my clothing freedoms. I want the law to accept that, for example, a cleavage in one situation communicates something different from a cleavage in another situation; and that the cleavage is utterly irrelevant to the question of my consent for a man to touch me.

I realise this is a lot to ask. But I don’t believe it is too much.

So, I’d like to follow the cue of Jess over at the F-word, in her post ‘Only rapists can prevent rape’, and repeat this advice to men:

If a woman is drunk, don’t rape her.
If a woman is walking alone at night, don’t rape her.
If a woman is drugged and unconscious, don’t rape her.
If a woman is wearing a short skirt, don’t rape her.
If a woman is jogging in a park at 5 am, don’t rape her.
If a woman looks like your ex-girlfriend you’re still hung up on, don’t rape her.
If a woman is asleep in her bed, don’t rape her.
If a woman is asleep in your bed, don’t rape her.
If a woman is doing her laundry, don’t rape her.
If a woman is in a coma, don’t rape her.
If a woman changes her mind in the middle of or about a particular activity, don’t rape her.
If a woman has repeatedly refused a certain activity, don’t rape her.
If a woman is not yet a woman, but a child, don’t rape her.
If your girlfriend or wife is not in the mood, don’t rape her.
If your step-daughter is watching TV, don’t rape her.
If you break into a house and find a woman there, don’t rape her.
If your friend thinks it’s okay to rape someone, tell him it’s not, and that he’s not your friend.
If your “friend” tells you he raped someone, report him to the police.
If your frat-brother or another guy at the party tells you there’s an unconscious woman upstairs and it’s your turn, don’t rape her, call the police and tell the guy he’s a rapist.
Tell your sons, god-sons, nephews, grandsons, sons of friends it’s not okay to rape someone.
Don’t tell your women friends how to be safe and avoid rape.
Don’t imply that she could have avoided it if she’d only done/not done x.
Don’t imply that it’s in any way her fault.
Don’t let silence imply agreement when someone tells you he “got some” with the drunk girl.
Don’t perpetuate a culture that tells you that you have no control over or responsibility for your actions. You can, too, help yourself.

12 Responses to “Flesh, cloth and rape”

  1. James Says:

    This list of “dont’s” is powerful stuff, and cannot be stated enough. I was astonished to read the Australian sheikh’s remarks, which have now made headline news on the BBC.

    But there is one “don’t” in all this that I find very difficult to fathom: “don’t tell your woman friends how to be safe and avoid rape”. In fact, I did exactly this only two hours ago when I suggested to a young female friend that her idea of walking home along the river’s tow-path was not such a good idea. More - I think if she had insisted I would have done what I could to stop her.

    I see the irony in that statement, but my impulse is to trust other men less than her. So I find myself in something of a vicious circle with this “don’t” (between trusting her and yet not trusting her judgement), and to escape the circle would involve my acting counter-intuitively - ie to say ‘OK,enjoy the tow-path, see you next week’. Any suggestions?

  2. natasha Says:

    Yep. This is a good point. I think that “don’t” sits the least easily - for exactly this reason.

    I’d like to think there is a line between saying “you’re asking for it” and “it’d be better if you avoided the tow-path”. One is blaming women; the other is being rightly realistic and pragmatic. (Good work, J.)

    I do think, though, that it *is* in women’s interests to ‘reclaim the night’ - to push the boundaries, to not be afraid and to not cloister ourselves. Which, surely, means risks must be taken?

  3. sabha Says:

    I second that comment Natasha, good work indeed James, of course it would be wonderful not to “have” to warn the woman of the dangers of the tow path, but it is realistic and correct to warn her of them. And in doing that you are not implying that she is “asking for it”, you are merely reminding her of dangers.

    I also didn’t understand that line in the poem. I think as long as advice isn’t given in a disempowering or blameful way then men should be active in the fight against violence towards women by mentioning it. What is the alternative? they pretend it doesn’t happen, how does that empower and help women to protect themselves?

  4. sabha Says:

    I think that it is very important to explore this idea of the effect clothing or its lack has on men. We just can’t say that walking around in high heels a tiny skirt and tight top is not giving out a message of sex.

    Of course rape is not forgiveable under absolutely any circumstance, and therfore it is absurd to blame the rape of a person on their clothing. But I feel as modern day feminists we must question some of our assumptions.And when doing that it is important to look at this issue historically, the way we dress in the West is a relatively recent phenomena, and we have come to associate it with being progressive and free thinking “A woman can choose to wear whatever she wants and be whoever she wants”. And by contrast women who “cover” either for cultural or religious reasons are somehow backward and unliberated. I know some muslim women who cover completely and are very liberated, they view their sexuality as being something sacred and private and therefore not to be shared- I completely understand where they are coming from.

    The rise of wearing very little clothing is unfortunately coupled with a rise in other elements, such as the availaibility of pornography (nowadays predominantly of the sort which denigrates, humiliates and oppresses women and their sexuality) and the explosion of binge drinking - (I am talking most specifically here about the UK).These create a potent mix which I feel combined with confusion about sexual mores and morality both on the part of men and women, can leave us with a sexual minefield, so it is not as easy as saying it doesn’t matter if a woman is wearing a mini skirt and boob tube completly drunk and on her own at 3 o clock in the morning, it does matter.

    Can I just throw in another question here at the end. How do people feel about men taking their shirts off in public in the summer and walking around with bare chests?

  5. Feminist Law Professors » Blog Archive » Links: Interesting Things To Read Says:

    […] “Flesh, Cloth and Rape” at Feminish. […]

  6. natasha Says:

    I have a moral objection to beer bellies.

  7. James Says:

    I have an aesthetic objection to them. It makes me shudder, when i remember in my travels the beautiful men I saw well-covered under the sun of Spain and Syria, and then come home to see the whipped-out flashes of pink at the slightest sign of sun. How can we have gone so quickly backwards?

  8. natasha Says:

    Male nakedness seems to be an assertion of power in a way that women’s nakedness isn’t. (The power to be not-beautiful, in some cases) They’re not objectified in the same way as women are.

  9. sabha Says:

    I agree with the objectification point, men are not objectified in the same way, and some tatooed beer bellied men do indeed take pride in flaunting their bodies whilst simultaneously flauntint their lifestyle - drinking beer, having tatoos, smoking and generally enjoyoing nakedness in a rather different way from shall we say naturists for example.

    I often feel offended by that sort of nakedness, you just think “i don’t want to see it and have to react to it, so please put it all away!”. I also agree with what you are saying James, when you go to hot countries and people are clothes in wonderful fabrics, especially men in jalabiyas etc and then you come home to yobbish nakedness you can’t help but feel that indeed they are going backwards!

    I also think that female nakedness is an assertion of power often, the power to attract and be sexually desirable.

  10. natasha Says:

    And, I think, the power to say: I can be sexually desirable and you can’t touch.
    In other words, I know that I rely on the law protecting me, and society saying it’s okay, to make it a powerful act on my part. (Making the women that initially pushed the boundaries even more impressive; they didn’t have the protection of the law or cultural norms…)

  11. natasha Says:

    I just came across this excellent post over at Moderately Insane.

    Sailorman talks about being honest and frank as to what, in the eyes of the law, is and isn’t rape.

    This is an excerpt:

    Back in college, there were occasional “take back the night” rallies, in which women would discuss rape. Sometimes they would say “if someone pressures you to have sex, it’s rape!” and “you can’t consent if you’re drunk!” and similar things.

    Anyone who frequents feminist blogs has seen similar claims, and more. Sometimes the claims are much more explicit: “drunk people cannot legally consent.” “Any pressure means it’s rape.” “If you didn’t want to have sex, it’s rape.”

    In many states, those are all lies. And it’s doing no favors to those women who hear them.

    In oregon, for example, all of those statements are clearly false. What do you want to bet that women in Oregon don’t know that?

    Let’s tell them. Let’s be honest. Let’s agree that what you BELIEVE is not always what IS.

  12. Pacific Views Says:

    Going Out Of My Way To Be Unattractive…

    In response to my post the other day on the many joys of having a near buzzcut, I got this comment: Yes because being socially conscious and intelligent means that you should not take pride in yourself (physically, emotionally, mentally,……

Leave a Reply