Brendan made an excellent point in the comments section of my Trapped in adulthood post:
The process of female reliance on peer group support and guidance will not be checked — it’s deep behavior, I think. The substance of the values of the peer group at present, however, are the problem.
This fits closely with a point my wife has often made; men have no idea how much their judgment of women impacts them. Women fear judgment from other women, especially those higher than them in the social hierarchy. However, even more than this they fear judgment from men. They don’t just fear judgment from men in the top of the male hierarchy, they fear judgment from any man who has the basic respect of other men (which is most men). Even women at the top of the female hierarchy fear the judgment of ordinary (respected by other men) men.
This is a form of power almost all men have but fail to exercise for a number of reasons, but of critical importance is the fact that most have no idea the power even exists. Feminists however do understand this, which is why they spend so much of their energy working to ensure that neither men nor women feel comfortable judging bad behavior from women. They have been wildly successful here, but they will always be extremely vulnerable to men figuring this out.
If you doubt this, consider the case of the slutwalks. Many (most?) have completely misunderstood what these are about. The stated point of the global demonstrations is to stop excusing rapists based on how women act or are dressed. However, note that there isn’t even a single case in the western world they can point to where a forcible rapist was let off or shown lenience because the woman he raped was a slut. If they had such an example, rest assured we would have heard all about it for months*.
So what is the global slutwalk temper tantrum really about? One respected man judged women in a minor gathering. Note that the officer who made the comments isn’t high ranking; when the feminists howled he was reprimanded and forced to attend “further training”. He didn’t even judge them in an overt way. The context of his statement acknowledged that there was such a thing as a slut, and that it isn’t a good thing to be one. Here are the exact words from a CBC article on the first slutwalk:
In January, Toronto Police Const. Michael Sanguinetti told a personal security class at York University that “women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.”
This is what the global temper tantrum is all about. A respected man acknowledged the existence of sluts. To men this is a throwaway comment. To sluts, it is a scathing indictment. It burns their souls and demands comfort to make the pain go away. They need the shelter of other women, but even more so they need to find a way to stop men from saying or even thinking such things ever again (emphasis mine):
Sanguinetti apologized for his comments, but his apology failed to satisfy walk organizer Sonya Barnett.
“It was evident that if you’re going to have a representative of the police force come out [and say that] then that kind of idea must be still running rampant within the force itself and that retraining really needs to happen to change that mentality,” she said.
A statement on the event’s website says: “Toronto Police have perpetuated the myth and stereotype of the slut, and in doing so have failed us.”
Barnett said she wants to use the walk to reclaim the word and also demand that victim-shaming change.
Don’t be misdirected. This has nothing to do with an actual rape case. Oz Conservative quoted Bonald at Throne and Altar to make the same point in his post How do we explain the slutwalks (emphasis mine):
The rape issue is a red herring. It has nothing to do with the real issue, which is the social legitimation of female promiscuity. These marches are not meant to intimidate potential rapists; they’re meant to intimidate social conservatives. The sluts are only tying together the issues of social disapproval and sexual violence as a rhetorical trick to cast themselves as victims even as they go on the attack…
The sluts are not victims; they are aggressors. Their victim is society itself. Their goal is social approval for female sexual promiscuity.
Most men don’t recognize this because the idea that a few words of mild unintended judgment from an ordinary cop would spark worldwide discomfort amongst sluts and their enablers is preposterous on its face. Why would avowed sluts fear being labeled as sluts? But the fact remains that it is true. They fear this instinctively. No matter how much they claim to have “taken back” the word, it still packs a punch to the gut that men simply can’t fathom. This is why Doomed Harlot is so intent on sheltering would be sluts by taking on the mantle of the term. Note however that even while she is doing this, she made it a point to inform us that she isn’t actually a slut. She tells us she has only kissed one other man than her husband in her life.
Again, men don’t understand this; the women proclaiming to have “taken back” this word seem quite confident in their professed morality. How could an avowed slut fear being called a slut in our thoroughly libertine culture? It makes no sense, so men discard the idea without giving it further consideration. But don’t take my word for it, Roissy makes a sexual living by sluts. Part of what he knows is how to avoid triggering a slut’s slut shield. Yes, even sluts are terrified of being identified as sluts. As Roissy wrote in his post No You Don’t Sound Bothered At All (crass site warning):
Sluts know this is true deep in the crevices of their souls, which is why, despite (or because of) their indignant protestations and transparent sophistry to the contrary, they really do get bothered when called out.
If Roissy’s word isn’t good enough for you, then consider the words of sex positive feminist and slut-in-chief Jaclyn Friedman. Jacklyn pleaded with the feminist community for moral support by posting the depths of her dysfunctional sex life for all to see. Of course begging for support for her actions wouldn’t fit her imagined mantle of feminist heroine, so she had to pretend she was being brave for others:
I’m telling you this because juries still think women who even look like they might possibly be sluts are “asking for it.”…
I’m telling you this because sluthood saved me, in a small but life-altering way, and I want it to be available to you if you ever think it could save you, too. Or if you want it for any other reason at all. And because even if you don’t ever want sluthood for yourself, you’re going to be called upon to support a slut. I’m telling you this because when that happens, I want you to say yes.
As you might recall, Susan Walsh instantly saw through this, which earned her a denunciation from NOW.
No matter how much formal power feminists wield, they are terrified of respected men judging them. They want nothing more than to convince you to voluntarily disarm yourself. Only a fool would do this.
Don’t be a fool.
*Note that even Jacklyn Friedman couldn’t find a legitimate case of a forcible rapist in the west being coddled because of the dress or actions of a slut. In her sentence above about women “asking for it” she is forced to link instead to a very strange corner case where one woman lifted the top of another. The author of the post she links to defines this as a “sexual assault”; feminists clearly have to dig deep on this one.
