Israel's First SlutWalk Scheduled For Next Week

Canadian women did it, American women did it and even Singaporean women did it, and soon Israeli women will too: Israel's first SlutWalks - marches against male-dominated society's habit of blaming sexual harassment or even rape on a woman's appearance - take place next week.

Women march through downtown Boston during a 'SlutWalk,' May 7, 2011, held after a Toronto police officer said women shouldn't dress like 'sluts' if they wanted to avoid being raped. (AP)

Proud to be defiant sluts
Israel's first SlutWalks - marches against male-dominated society's habit of blaming sexual harassment or even rape on a woman's appearance - take place next week.
By Tsafi Saar • Ha’aretz

Canadian women did it, American women did it and even Singaporean women did it, and soon Israeli women will too: This month will see SlutWalks (Mitzad Sharmutot in Hebrew ) in Tel Aviv (March 16 ) and Haifa (a week later ), and in April there will also be one in Jerusalem.

The first SlutWalk was around a year ago in Toronto, Canada after a policeman said at a crime prevention safety forum that "women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."

His remarks reflected a very commonly held view that a woman who dresses in what is considered sexy attire is basically asking for rape, or harassment or any other degrading, abusive and criminal treatment. She is the guilty one. It is the very common and so-convenient-for-the-attacker practice of blaming the victim.

Women, fortunately, are no longer willing to accept this attitude. Following the march in Toronto, over the year many other SlutWalks were held all over the world, where some of the participants wore minimal dress. The marchers' message is clear: We will wear what we please, we do not need to apologize for our sexuality, and it does not matter what you think of what we wear or what you think we mean: When we say no, it means no.

Yaara Lieberman-Kalif, an organizer of the Tel Aviv march, says that in Israel the effort actually started in Jerusalem. "We hope it will be like it was abroad," she says. "We will not ask anyone to come wearing revealing clothes, because the goal of this march is the opposite of coercion, it is to highlight the option of every woman (and man ) to dress as she wishes, without social criticism."

The choice of the word "slut," much like lesbian, homosexual, transgender and bisexual takeover of the derogatory reference "queer," sparked a heated debate. Lieberman-Kalif explains that "it's a word [sharmuta] that is deemed shockingly blunt in politically-correct Israeli society, but we all use it. Even if its original Arabic meaning is whore, its Hebrew slang version describes a woman who is sexually open, of course, in the negative sense. And needles to say, there is no masculine equivalent. Our goal is to remove the negative connotation of the word, and present in a positive light feminine sexual openness, which is no less natural and legitimate than masculine sexual openness."

In the meantime, Internet debates focus on whether this activity will achieve its goal of combating sexual violence, or if many men will simply use the opportunity to come and gape at scantily dressed women.

For the Jerusalem group, the situation is more complicated because, naturally, the issue of the ultra-Orthodox surfaced. Is this march a part of the fight against efforts to remove women from the public sphere (i.e. exclusion )? Unlike those who tried to link these issues, it seems that the organizers want the march to remain faithful to the worldwide SlutWalk movement and its objectives.

Another fascinating discussion appeared on the Facebook page of one of the organizers: A man, who wanted to help in the organization, was welcomed, but very quickly commandeered the discussion, insisted on determining exactly how the march would be run, anointed himself the chief organizer and so on. Given that this is a protest against male violence against women, it is unclear if this is funny or sad.

It was an instructive example of what is referred to as "mansplaining" (a term included in the list of the New York Times' list of the best new words of 2010 ). Mansplaining is a common activity that every woman is well acquainted with: It refers to a man who explains to a woman, usually at length and patronizingly, how to do something that she already knows how to do, or why she is wrong about something that she is in fact right about, or lectures her about something that she is far more knowledgeable in than he is. The American writer Rebecca Solnit provided a fine example of this in a 2008 article in the Los Angeles Times. The article, entitled, "Men who explain things," described an incident where a man condescendingly told her about "a very important book" that was recently published. Somehow he managed to not hear the response from Solnit, who repeatedly noted that she herself wrote this book, which it turned out he had not even read, and only read a newspaper review of it.

According to Solnit, this is totally gendered behavior. "Every woman knows what it's like to be patronized by a guy who won't let facts get in the way." An extreme example of mansplaining is, of course, when a man explains to you that a comment you think is sexist is not - which brings us back to that guy, apparently well-intentioned, who was convinced he knew best how to organize the SlutWalk.

Comments

[Just Looking]

Please post videos of the sluts walking when it becomes available. I don't want to miss this one!

I only hope that this does not turn out to be a dog show :)

[Haimish McHorny]

It's my body and I do what I want too. So I suppose they won't mind if I jack off while they slutwalk past me.

[Dovit]

Please post videos of the sluts walking when it becomes available. I don't want to miss this one!

I only hope that this does not turn out to be a dog show :)
--------------

It's my body and I do what I want too. So I suppose they won't mind if I jack off while they slutwalk past me.
---------

Your sick attitude is exactly why women are tired of men.

[Just Looking]

Your sick attitude is exactly why women are tired of men.

Posted by: Dovit | March 06, 2012 at 06:08 AM

So will this be a lesbian event?

[phillip]

Wonder what Rushy will say about this
slut walk.

[Haimish McHorny]

Your sick attitude is exactly why women are tired of men.

Posted by: Dovit | March 06, 2012 at 06:08 AM

Your complete lack of sense of humour and irony is exactly why you can't get laid.

[Dovit]

So will this be a lesbian event?
-------------------------

Only if your mother is there.

[Malka Gittel]

Haimish, I can only guess your need to do yourself while you watch the footage means you can't get any.

The unfortunate thing about the Israeli slutwalks is that the Haredim will be scandalized and turned on by the mere exposure of elbows or knees. Maybe they'll be there looking for some eight-year old girls to flounce around in their uber-hot long skirts and long-sleeved shirts, like they do outside Religious Zionist schools.

[Beth Frank-Backman]

Actually, the attitude of some of the posters so far is exactly why there needs to be events like this.

Just Looking : I'm sure there will be some women who are very creatively dressed, but I also expect a good many of the people will be kind of frumpy. That's been the case in past walks. They just believe that women have the right to where what they want to wear without others doing more to them than looking.

Haimish McHorny: what you do to your own body while watching is your business, but keep in mind it reflects on you, not the people you are watching.

Philip: Rushy is so predictable, he's no longer interesting.

Dovit: Thumbs up.

[Malka Gittel]

Dovit - I think it's more likely to become a lesbian event once his wife gets there.

[Mike]

Society is very interesting. Women are always at the hands of the "blame the victim" mentality whenever something happens to them i.e. her clothes were to skimpy, she was asking for it, etc. Men on the other hand almost never fall victim to this mentality. Our society is still extremely male-dominant, whether we like deny it, or accept and start doing something about it.

They need to do this IN MEA SHEARIM. It is the Haredim who need this simple message, that they cannot tell people how to behave.

[מרדכי סטמר]

His remarks reflected a very """"commonly""""" held view that a woman who dresses in what is considered sexy attire is basically asking for rape,

-----------
Who knew??!!

You made me (who's locked up in the ghetto)all along that its "only us" who "think" that women should dress modestly, because of a mans nature.

At least we aren't concerned of rape .
Just for the sake of the "outdated" ולא תתרו אחרי לבבכם ואחרי עיניכם.

[Haimish McHorny]

I might engage you in conversation on this Malka if you indicated the slightest recognition that my post was ironic. The point seems to elude you however.

I think that this form of muddled thinking is a major contributor to the incoherence of feminism today; a point Wendy Kaminer makes in her excellent essay on this very topic in Free Inquiry magazine.

http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=fi&page=kaminer_31_5

[מרדכי סטמר]

I wouldn't be surprised that it will eventually come out ,that this whole idea of the "slutwalk" was started by a few "men" who were in the mood of a nice "slutwalk".....

Again men manipulating the women....

[netflix]

all the charedi men living in Israel should attend, all they ever do is think about sex

[Dovit]

Posted by: Dovit | March 06, 2012 at 06:08 AM

Your complete lack of sense of humour and irony is exactly why you can't get laid.
-----------------------
Hamish, talking like that about women is your idea of humor, I can only wonder what kind of pigs raised you.

[Haimish McHorny]

Are you 11 years old? Your mom insults are mildly amusing in primary school but rather lack any merit as a riposte thereafter.

Noting how uptight you seem to be I shall take it that my assessment of your sexual satisfaction was spot on.

[Zoobiemanyak]

The Haredi should partner with NAMBLA and counter with a "Slut Walk" of their own. Little boys leaving the mikvah wearing nothing by short little towels around their bottoms. Exposing just enough thigh and buttock to make a religious Jew swoon.

[Just Looking]

but I also expect a good many of the people will be kind of frumpy.

Like the beluga whale in the blue dress in the shown photo. I would rather see a rectangle in its place.

[elifaaz]

You stupid Nekaaaayva! You have a right to dress any way you want, and i have a right to rape anyone i want. What's the problem? You don't like it? Too bad! It's "survival of the most powerful".

[Big talker]

many men will simply use the opportunity to come and gape at scantily dressed women.

BINGO!

I hope they have one here in New York City when the weather gets warmer. I plan on coming with my raincoat "and do what I want" :)

[itchiemayer]

No man can justify a criminal act because of what the woman is wearing or not wearing. That being said I think the Jewish laws of modesty enhance a woman's (or anyone's) dignity. Not tznius like a Gerer Chasid, but a reasonable centrist orthodox modest manner. No self-respecting woman goes on a "slutwalk".

[who knows]

Idiots of the left (walking sluts and their crew), idiots on the right (spitting hasids and their crew). The normal reasonable center is being destroyed by the radicals.

[Mike]

who knows: You said it better than I could have. Thanks much!

[Gevezener Chusid]

I have the right to leave my unlocked car parked in Harlem too, and when it gets stolen, it's the fault of the thief, who is really really a bad guy. Yet few would have sympathy.

The analogy works for sluttily dressed women and rapists too, although the crime is so much more horrific. If you want to take chances, you might face unpleasant consequences sooner or later.

That's what the cop in Toronto was saying. He was not justifying rape.

[John Nagle, Silicon Valley, CA]

This should be amusing.

Women should carry cordless hair trimmers in holsters, in case of trouble from the beards.

[Yechiel]

Why is it so difficult to register?
Mankind acts on temptation...
Leave great valuables unlocked and exposed and EXPECT it to not be stolen. Every law officer in their right mind will tell you that YOU are to blame. As ironic as it may sound, but this holds some ground.

[Sarek]

Somebody call Rush Limbaugh to make sure he knows about this event. He loves to call women sluts.

[Beth Frank-Backman]

--- The analogy works for sluttily dressed women and rapists too, although the crime is so much more horrific. If you want to take chances, you might face unpleasant consequences sooner or later.---

No it doesn't. The equivalent "crime" for a scantily dressed woman is leering not rape. Men aren't supposed to leer at women according to Jewish tradition no matter how they are dressed, but if it is out in the open, it might be hard to resist. Leering is like taking the car keys and driving away with someone's dignity. That's plenty bad as it is since we're supposed to prefer death to shaming someone.

Rape is much much more. Jewish law is absolutely, unconditionally clear that one may not have intercourse with someone without their consent. Not even a husband can presume the consent with his wife even though they are allowed to be naked with each other. (Judaism recognizes spousal rape as far back as the Talmud).

Kal v'chomer, if a woman is scantily dressed you can't presume consent to sexual relations. Even if she wants to do it with someone, you can't assume it is you and not some other guy that is soon to show up.

As far as blame, Judaism is also unequivocal that it is strictly the agressor's fault. That is why Deuteronmy says that the man dies and the woman does not. She did nothing wrong even though one might argue that she "put herself in that position" by being in a field so far away from anyone that none could hear her when she cried out for help.

[eli]

http://thepartialview.blogspot.com/2012/03/have-we-no-busha-new-face-to-facebook.html

No more shame!!

[Just Looking]

The normal reasonable center is being destroyed by the radicals.

Posted by: who knows | March 06, 2012 at 10:31 AM

What we are seeing here is the marginalization of the middle. We see things through a set of glasses provided by the media. To paraphrase from the TV series, "The Outer Limits" - "sit quietly and we will control all that you see and hear". What we see and hear is a warped sense of reality. We are presented with the sick, the perverse, the shocking, the silly, the strange, the evil. Unfortunately we cannot change "the channel" since the "shows" are all the same. Simply put, normal people doing normal things are not entertaining so its images are not being passed into our "glasses". The end result is that we are left with a skewed sense of reality.

So the silent majority is there but not because they are silent, but they have no opportunity to be heard.

[Leo]

NEW INFO ON DEBORAH FELDMAN:
Explosive: Court Documents Undercut Core of New Best Selling Book

http://deborah-feldman-exposed.blogspot.com/2012/03/explosive-court-documents-undercut-core.html

[xddkd]

i was going to comment on how stupid this slut walk is and how the policemans words were totally misinterpreted but it has already been said. in the mean time...dont forget to post that video.

[Gevezener Chusid]

To Beth Frank-Bachman: I was referring only to what the police officer (in response to whose comments the first slut-walk took place) said, nothing whatsoever to what halacha says.

The bottom line is that if you do something stupid you should not be surprised if you achieve a negative result. Not talking about right and wrong - only reality.

99% of the haredi men I knew when I was frum would indeed avert their gaze from an improperly dressed woman. (Of course to the minds of many of the people who post regularly on this list, that means that they are somehow demeaning women as well.)

[huhuggi]

Like Kant I cannot think straight with all the sexual temptations and delights that surround me, so I masturbate nightly.

I've given up on having a real relationship (for now), as most women have turned out to be extremely selfish at best and downright evil at worst. I think this is a good example of the latter.

[ah-pee-chorus]

Beth Frank-Backman-

dont ruin your good comments by being misleading about the torah. if a man rapes an unmarried woman his punishment is to have to marry her. if she doesnt want to spend eternity with her rapist then the rapist has to pay her father an amount equivalent to the reduction in her value as a non-virgin. this makes sense since the torah considers a woman the property of her dad and then her husband.
the halacha of which you speak refers to when a MARRIED woman is raped . and that punishment is due to the rapist having taken that which belongs to another MAN, not because rape is seen as horrible, because if the act of rape was so abhorrent there would be serious consequences regardless of her marital status, and there is not.

as a side point, according to the rambam if a jewish man has sex with a non-jewish woman (or an animal) the woman (or animal) is put to death.

[ah-pee-chorus]

and a woman who is raped in an area near people is herself killed for not having cried out.
jews are instructed to take for themselves the pretty women they want after military victory.
painting the torah as anything other than completely misogynistic is dishonest.

[Haimish McHorny]

Is a skank walk better or worse than a slut walk?

[Korbendallas72]

Everything is wrong with this event.

[Beth Frank-Backman]

ah-pee-chorus: First, I'd be careful about assuming that the monetary damages in k'tubot mean that rape isn't all that bad and only the father is injured. The death penalty is almost impossible to apply and the Talmud often tries to substitute a financial solution when the literal remedy in the Torah isn't a possibility.

Second, the kind of damages awarded to the rape victim make it very clear that the Talmud sees rape as a very serious matter. In Mishnah Kettubot 3:4it says the seducer owes three kinds of monetary damages (boshet,pgam,knas) and the rapist four (boshet, p'gam, k'nas, and tzar). That's a lot of pentalties.

Note the extra penalty of tza'ar for the rapist? Tza'ar (pain and suffering) never goes to the father even if the girl is a minor when everything gets to court. That's because she's the one that suffered, not the father. She also gets the other three damages if she is an adult or if her father has died when the case goes to court. If she were property and we were merely compensating the father for damaged goods, she would get nothing.

Third, you seem to be interpreting Deut 22 as if rape was defined solely based on a woman's relationship to a man. that is not however how the sages saw it. The passage has two things that change from case to case: marital status and consent/force.

If the rabbis read the passage solely based on marital status, then any married woman would be killed even if she was forced. But that isn't halacha. Rather if she is forced as in Deut 22:25, then she is innocent even though she is married. Esther, for example, is innocent of adultry even though she is married to Mordachai while she is doing it with Ahasveros. This is because he had the power of life and death over her and the rabbis considered that a form of hehezik bah. Similarly if a man acts like Deut 22:25 to a virgin, he is a rapist. If it is consentual

Finally it is important to look beyond Ketubot. For example, Sukkah 29a tells us that the suffering and moral wrong caused by a rapist seizing someone and no one coming to help was considered so great that it could cause a solar eclipse. Eruvin 100b tells us that all intercourse requires consent. Nedarim 20b enumerates categories of coercion that are considered the moral equivalent of hehezik bah/rape

[Haimish McHorny]

Tortured analysis of a system that is impossible to apply, on your own argument.

Do you even realise just how stupid you sound?

[Haimish McHorny]

While you are at it do provide some historical evidence for the Purim myth. Outside Judaism it just, well, doesn't exist. Despite what it says in chapter 10 of Esther.

Arguing the validity of what you proclaim from the very sources you proclaim is dishonest. You know that but have, presumably, been taught to ignore that. Like a seal jumping through hoops. Except more stupid. The seal has the defence of instinct. What's yours?

[disillusioned]

Haimish McHorny,

Your crude remarks about jacking off are somewhat may be considered offensive by some but who cares.

What I don't understand is why do you have to be so mean and nasty in your posts to Beth Frank-Backman? What did she ever do to you? Can't you allow someone to say things that you disagree with without resorting to insults?
Seriously, I just don't get people on this blog who are so intolerant of other opinions and interpretations. You could just say something like "You are totally wrong about this". It's not necessary to call someone stupid or dishonest.

[YN]

Can't you allow someone to say things that you disagree with without resorting to insults?

"You are totally wrong about this". It's not necessary to call someone stupid or dishonest.

If you follow this blog you will note that Shmarya himself on many occasions calls posters "idiot", "jerk", "Shoteh", so it is within this forum's decorum to insult where appropriate.

[Shmarya]

Can't you allow someone to say things that you disagree with without resorting to insults?

"You are totally wrong about this". It's not necessary to call someone stupid or dishonest.

If you follow this blog you will note that Shmarya himself on many occasions calls posters "idiot", "jerk", "Shoteh", so it is within this forum's decorum to insult where appropriate.

Posted by: YN | March 06, 2012 at 09:10 PM

Don't expect to troll here and get away with it.

You've already been caught lying once.

No more warnings.

If you lie or if you troll again, I'll ban you and delete your comments.

As for the person you quote, the rules are the same. You lie, you troll, you get banned.

[Malka Gittel]

Gee Haimish, I might have given you credit on the irony front if your comments had suggested that they were in fact ironic. Given the usual level of male discourse about female sexuality around here, why should your comments have been interpreted as ironic in contrast to those of anyone else making the same sort of comment with intent to offend?

[Henry]

Here comes another wave of pollution into the Holy Lands. From a moral standpoint, sluts are people who have no respect for themselves. In turn, it brings down the image of the Holy Lands through people who morally hates G-d. If "self-determination and democracy" is ruining religion's good side, then it proves how much of burden Zionism is.

[ah-pee-chorus]

Beth Frank-Backman-

youre using statements from amoraim which amend in certain instances the meaning of the torah on the issue. ayn mikra yotzei medai pshuto. the 'divine' source for jewish law treats rape as a tarnishing of the womans value. it calls for payment to her father. and think about what the torah is saying to a rape victim when it states that if the rape was in a populated area SHE will be killed for enjoying it. what woman would EVER come forward and say she was raped ? she knows that even if she is believed that it happened, if the beit din ruled that the rape took place in a subjective and undefined 'populated' location, she will be killed.
claiming the torah as a source which comes out strongly and clearly against rape is odd.

[ah-pee-chorus]

From a moral standpoint, sluts are people who have no respect for themselves. Posted by: Henry

first of all, what is your definition of slut? second, i think most of the marchers wouldnt fall under that definition. they chose the word for its effect.

and even if slut is defined as being highly promiscuous, there is nothing immoral about it. what consenting adults do that doesnt directly affect anyone else cannot be immmoral. you may not like it since you were raised thinking that sex is bad, wrong or dirty, but thats your problem.

[Lemur Rick]

The SlutWalks in Israel are ON
This battle has yet to be won
My wife? I can't find her
She gave me a blinder
You think she has joined and is gone?

[Haimish McHorny]

@malka. It's called context. You see the sign in the picture? It proclaims they gonna do whatever they want. My response to that is a reductio ad absurdum by suggesting I'd do whatever I want. It's ironic because it's the opposite of what the stated aim is. But when you need to explain it, it gets a bit tedious. Perhaps you might try hanging out with men who are educated and not misogynists and your reactions will be different.

@the offended. Youre offended. Noted. What's your point?

[Waiting4Moshiach]

How is this news? whenever seculars walk together there is a slutwalk. Just go see what they do on the upper east side or in midwood!

[Mieskeit]

Many will be slut-wanabes. Mieskeits that most men wouldn't want to touch with a ten foot pole.

[Malka Gittel]

@Haimish - the other lawyers with whom I associate tend to be sexism-free. I consider them educated. The men in this crew? No. Which crowd of men are you in, and which do you sound like? The latter rather than the former. I didn't go to a top women's college (not a Jewish women's school) and law school to hang out with uneducated boors - but then I came here and saw the sexist garbage that this crowd posts. If you don't care to be considered part of that crowd by the women here, then do not ape them and presume it to be understood as "irony".

[Yom Tov]

.Funny how these supposed liberals think it is OK for women to participe in these "Slutwalks".They never stop to REASON that all those who march are stupidly and willingly participating in an event,not created by them,following what is fashionable,modern and trendy,and jokingly calling themselves SLUTS.What can be more insulting to a woman than to call herself a SLUT even as a joke?Looks like people nowadays are even incapable of simply THINKING about their actions and the consequences.I wonder how many of these "liberals" would allow their mothers,wives and daughters participate in such event.

[Malka Gittel]

Gee, Yom Tov, your slip is showing. I don't know of "liberals" who would "allow" legal adults in their families to do something like participate in a slutwalk - because they would assume it is those adults' right to participate in the event and that their own opinions would not prevent it.

Are you still in "man rule house, what he say to wife or mother be law" mode? Most of the "liberal" world is in the "well, you have a right to do that" mode.

Besides, that group of men tends to agree with the women that their position is correct regarding women's right to dress as they please and be safe.

[Askan]

They're making one in lakewood also!!
Stay tuned.

[Yom Tov]

.Malka,I should have used the word agree instead of allow,because that was in my mind.Of course,they have the right to participate,but is it wise?Are they going to be taken seriously,the way they are protesting?Probably many of these women,would slap a man in the street,if they were called sluts,and with reason.If they want to protest against rape,there is no need to use silly adjectives or to dress in underwear.They are demeaning themselves and weakening a just cause: a march against rape.