Oh boy, Abigail Ross-Jackson steps in it
Of course there is absolutely no justification for rape. Whether a woman is wearing jeans and a t-shirt or a corset and a miniskirt, her clothing should never be seen as an invitation to sexual assault. But to suggest that clothing is not an invitation to anything is bizarre. The way we dress and express ourselves is, to a large extent, about attracting attention – whether that of potential partners when dressing up for a night out or of potential employers when smartening up for a job interview. The idea put forward by some Slutwalkers, namely that women should never be judged or looked at because of what they wear, is crazy. What kind of bubble do these ‘sluts’ think they live in?
I wouldn’t want to live in a world defined by Slutwalkers, one in which women can wear whatever they want but men are not allowed to react.
I'm confused by Ross-Jackson for it seems to imply that dressing a certain way for a woman is a provocation that creates certain responses from men, which are legitimate and 'natural.' My only question is whether she would make the same point about a child, that is argue that the way a child dresses will provoke inevitably certain reactions, which are legitimate and own to be expection. In short, are men really slaves to their passion and even if they are, does the legitimation of a reaction to a provocation means that nothing is forbidden.?