The Funny Thing About the “Slutwalk”

“Slutwalk” protest in Toronto, April 3, 2011

I’ve never understood feminism. I know, like ice cream, it comes in a cornucopia of flavors and melts away quickly when held in a man’s hand (just kidding, ladies!) but I never understood its more… paradoxical expressions. I’ve been accused from time to time of being a woman hating woman (occasionally here on Thought Catalog) but that couldn’t be further from the truth. It is simply that, as a woman,  I am often expected to agree with general sentiments that don’t sit easily with my sense of reason, never more so than with things like this.

For those of you who haven’t heard, there was a “Slutwalk” yesterday in Toronto where women took to the street to raise awareness for their right to… dress like sluts. Apparently, a police constable made the unfortunate choice of publicly saying, “Women should avoid dressing like sluts in order to not be victimized.” I think we can all agree here that this was not the most delicate phrasing, but I would be lying if I said that there wasn’t a good amount of truth to what he said.

We can all laugh when Dave Chappelle does his routine about women dressing like sluts at clubs getting offended when men make unwanted sexual advances, especially when he makes the apt comparison of dressing like a police officer and then getting offended when people ask for help on the street. That, to all of us, is funny and relatable. “Yeah,” we seem to think, “women shouldn’t dress like prostitutes if they don’t want to be propositioned for sex by a stranger.” Yet when a police officer makes a very similar assertion, we no longer see what he’s saying. We can only think of it in black-and-white terms. This is an officer of the law, and anyone who is victimized should immediately be 100 percent innocent and showered with sympathy and understanding.

As he does not specify in his statement what “victimized” means exactly, I’ll assume it runs the gamut from being cat called on the street to being raped. And just like a young man dressed like a gangbanger and walking through a bad neighborhood with a menacing, threatening stance could be met with verbal aggression or a gunshot wound to the chest – all things are not created equal. He does not deserve to be murdered because he walked down the street, but he (as an adult) understood the risks he was taking.

The truth of the matter is that rape, murder, battery, verbal assault, and everything in between have existed for as long as humans have. There is a constant threat, especially in concentrated urban areas, that you will be a victim at some point. I myself live in a relatively dangerous urban area where men are quite verbally forward. You learn quickly to not make eye contact, to keep your posture upright, and to keep walking. And beyond that, if you want to further increase your chances of remaining safe and flying under the radar, you do not dress like a prostitute. You do not dress like someone who is out tonight to find sex by any means necessary. You can look pretty, feminine, elegant, attractive – without stripping your appeal down to its basest, most physical level. Women know the kind of attention they attract when they dress like that. And just like the Supreme Court can’t define porn but knows it when it sees it, we know when we look into the mirror before we go out if we look like we’re trying to lay down for the first man that looks at us. Even if we don’t want to admit it.

I have, like pretty much every 22-year-old girl, gone out looking like a slut occasionally. And I got a significantly higher amount of leers, cat calls, and uncomfortable attention. I was not surprised; I had no one but myself to blame for the sudden nervous feeling that flared up in my stomach as I walked passed men checking out my shape in my revealing dress. I don’t dress like this anymore for that very reason. I want men to look at me and have thoughts other than, “I could have sex with her tonight if I wanted.”

And perhaps the most compelling reason to put at least some of the responsibility on women here is that often, dressing in an extremely suggestive manner can be the tipping point in a sexually charged situation. Not all sexually aggressive acts are perpetrated by a violent repeat offender hiding in an alley. Often times the situations that can make women the most uncomfortable, and in some ways the most vulnerable, are in situations where alcohol and socialization are involved. Women are pressured, followed, and hounded by men who, when sober and in the light of day, often would never do such a thing. And for a man, a sexually and visually driven man not in full command of his wits, having a woman tell him “no” while wearing the most provocative, arousing, blatantly sexual outfit possible is, to say the least, confusing. And while that does not give him the right to violate her, it also cannot be claimed that women are entirely innocent in this situation.

I know that the knee-jerk reaction to this kind of scenario is that women are unequivocally the victims, but they are also adults. They are also capable of assessing risks, the kind of risks that we live with every day. And if they choose to ignore these risks, to feed into them, to put themselves further into danger – they are not being the most intelligent, capable adults they could. They are being, to some degree, irresponsible. That just may not look quite as catchy on a pink sign. TC mark

Chelsea Fagan

Chelsea Fagan founded the blog The Financial Diet. She is on Twitter.


More From Thought Catalog

  • Michael Koh

    “You can look pretty, feminine, elegant, attractive–without stripping your appeal down to its basest, most physical level.” You're right on point. Sundress up!

    • professor bum

      omg problem solved. I would much rather be reduced by strangers to my prettiness than my sluttiness! thanks

      • ZaneEatsWorld

        He knows what he's talking about. He's a professor.

      • Michael Koh

        This comment is clever.

    • Hannah

      Yup! As long as you don't send out a general “rape me!” signal with your clothes, you'll be totally safe from sexual violence! Wow. Since I don't own anything that resembles the outfit in the opening scenes of Pretty woman, I will never have to experience rape. Phew.

      • Bruce D Bailey

        Maybe not, Hannah, maybe so. But you’re being very unrealistic if you don’t consider what your clothes signal. Dressing like a slut will raise the probability you will get noticed, and maybe harassed as much as driving drunk will raise your probability of getting in a wreak. I’m not talking wearing shorts and a halter top, I’m talking being provocative. Would you be surprised if you waved a red flag at a bull when he charged?

      • Gaz

        a) Bulls are no more bothered by red than by green – they’re red-green colour blind.
        b) There is no evidence rape victims are selected by their outfits (less than 4% of rapists could tell you what their victim was wearing, and most of that is by way of anecdote – “I ripped her jeans down”/”I grabbed the hood of her parka”).
        c) “Slutty” is a subjective term, predominantly used by those who wish to degrade another person.

        I have never been so turned on by a woman that I absolutely had to strip her of her dignity, take control of her sexuality, abuse power or position, use violence or coercion, employ drugs or alcohol, or disregarded age, mental status or dis/ability. Have you? If you have, you’re a rapist. If you haven’t, stop making excuses for them.

    • Laura Panopoulos

      Are you insinuating your can't get raped in a sundress or are you being sarcastic?

  • Oh

    this is insane

    unless the sexually driven man in question is an animal or retarded i don't think a woman saying no repeatedly is really that “confusing” no matter what she's wearing

    doesn't mean the slutwalk isn't ridiculous but w/e

    • oh please

      They are just playing hard to get, obviously. Ever heard of no means yes, yes means anal?

      • Laura Panopoulos

        I hope you are being sarcastic…

    • shoehorn

      “unless the sexually driven man in question is an animal or retarded”
      have you been inside of a club or bar recently ?
      these descriptors seem to fit a number of patrons

    • Oh Dear

      Aren't humans animals and driven by an underlying base desire to procreate with the most suitable mate? When females slut-it-up they're only promoting this base need and desire. It is indeed unfortunate that there are such aggressive (understatement) males that pursue the courtship so fervently, but a purposefully set voluptuous bosom is no defence against this. Doesn't mean dressing with sex appeal as the main intent isn't ridiculous, but whatever…

      • Oh

        “aren't humans animals” is always a great way to start a dipshit argument about why people shouldn't have rules/morals/standards

      • Oh

        also i tried to make sense of half the sentences in that post but gave up so you could be right who knows

      • Oh Dear

        Only responding to the “unless the sexually driven man in question is an animal…” in yours, dear.

      • El puto

        Umm… human beings indeed fall under kingdom animalia. Oh Dear +1 tbh

      • Oh

        no shit bro we're also capable of higher levels of cognition than every other species what's your point

      • El puto

        my point is that according to your original post,

        “unless the sexually driven man in question is an animal or retarded i don't think a woman saying no repeatedly is really that “confusing” no matter what she's wearing.”

        a man (whether sexually driven or not) is an animal and falls under your supposed exception. bro

      • Cheesecake099

        rrright. and you couldnt interpret what was being implied by the use of the word “animal”. women are animals too. but i am a female human (an animal) and would never permit myself to violate someone because of what they are wearing.

        and plenty of male animals can and do restrain themselves. the point is humans are animals that are capable of more restraint and the rest are just excuses. or if someone actually isn't capable then they really need to be locked up and they are going to violate people regardless of what women wear, lets be real.

      • El puto

        women are animals? had me fooled. you can restrain yourself? good for you! some women can not just like some men. the main point here is that OPs post was flawed literally and logically.

      • Oneiric

        I loathe dingbats like you that reduce men to cavemanish brutes ruled not by their cognitive abilities but by their testicles.

      • Tammi L. Coles

        Again, the confusion of sexual interest with sexual assault. That's not courtship. They're not looking to procreate, enter a loving connected relationship, or otherwise date. What the fcuk is wrong with you?

  • Nicholas Cox

    luke slutwalker

  • Andrew F.

    Gutsy. I don't know if I'm allowed to say anything, not being a woman. But I enjoyed this article.

    • kieran

      Feel exactly the same, as a male i feel so disempowered, by all these angry females, that this article has created. I WANT A VOICE!

      • professor bum

        we're not just females gettin' angry brah.

        you should also talk to some angry females sometime, it will stop seeming so irrational to you.

      • sarah

        lol it must be so hard being a guy, so oppressed by the angry wimminz. bitches never shut up do they?

      • Ariveeh

        ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Disempowered men? WOMEN HAVE TO BE ANGRY BECAUSE OF YOU. The only reason we are angry to you is because we are fighting a flawed system that you believe in. Its the same thing with the black Americans and the civil rights. You have a voice, but all your gonna do is speak out about how women need to stop fighting for respect.

        If you ant to use your voice, speak out for the right things. Basic human rights and respect.

    • uhnon

      No one's stopping you. You might get replies if people disagree, but that is the nature of conversation.

  • christopher lynsey

    Sweet article.

  • JusticeRuthSlutsburg

    One Supreme Court Justice once said ( on obscenity):
    “I know it when I see it”
    So therefore, according to you (legal scholar), the Supreme Court “can't define porn.”
    Well done, slut

  • Kyle Angeletti

    you wasted a lot of words on an argument here that is stemming out of misconstrued facts, and in no way related to the circumstance that led to the 'slut walk'.

    the officer in question was giving a campus safety information session to a class of law students. at their school. in front of the dean and other officers.

  • inflammatorywrit

    Which is why I always wear my burka when going to the club.

    Seriously? There are so many things wrong with this article.

    • Anon


      • inflammatorywrit

        Good point.

  • Nic

    I think the point is that rather than targeting someone who has been victimized and analyzing what SHE could have done to avoid being raped, the primary focus needs to be understanding why a man thinks that a revealing dress gives him any right to sexually assault her. Rape happens to people dressed conservatively as well, likely more often, than a girl in a mini skirt; hence cases involving children, the elderly, soccer moms, etc. – I was once followed while wearing jeans and a sweater, however it was my location (secluded, dark street) which made me a potential target. If one were to evaluate ways to AVOID rape, the dialogue should begin with understanding the impact of location and vulnerability. A man in khaki's and a button down shirt is probably just as likely to get shot in a bad neighborhood as the man who's dressed like a thug, but the issue isn't the clothing, it's the environment. It may be easier to disrespect a woman who dresses like a whore, but the man who thinks that it means he can penetrate her regardless of whether she wants it or not, clearly has an issue.

    Evaluating how a rape victim was dressed (irrelevant) is just a mechanism in a rape case to try to lay blame upon the victim, rather than addressing the underlying social problems that likely contribute to a man reasoning that he could get away with unwanted intercourse.

    • El puto

      “Evaluating how a rape victim was dressed (irrelevant) is just a mechanism in a rape case to try to lay blame upon the victim,”

      perhaps some scientific research could be done to justify this argument in court. maybe we can sample some rape victims along with non-rape victims. we can generate a ratio of body surface area which is covered by clothing to that which is uncovered – the nakedness ratio.

      then, we can take the measurements of both rape and non-rape victims, measure the size of the clothing physically (because the size label is somewhat subjective and changes over time), and create what i would call – the spandex ratio.

      I believe these two ratios encompass all of what visually contribute to the sexual stimulation of heterosexual/bisexual men, although some guys may find more clothing sexually stimulating, but its kind of hard to have sex with a woman while she's wearing bluejeans.

    • Oneiric

      Also, rape is not a crime of desire, but a crime involving exerting power and dominance and humiliation… it is an attempt to strip a victim of dignity.

      And it's awful when society helps a rapist do that… it's disgusting that society tries to shame the victim, that it adds to the humiliation… that a society that claims to be about dignity is complicit in an act that seeks to take that very thing away…

  • Katie

    Only question is… what constitutes “slutty”? I can look classy in that short dress but still receive catcalls. It's all about culture as well. If you dress up with a short skirt in Paris, you're asking for it. If you do it in Miami, it's perfectly acceptable. I don't like to hide my legs just because it might make a sick man want to rape me (who'd prob do it even if I weren't wearing that). I find it sad that you think you can't dress sexy anymore just because you feel uncomfortable. Say FUCK IT, wear what you want, and just make sure to be with others.
    Other than that small controversy, I agree with what you're saying.

    • Specialkrj

      No one is ever 'asking for it'.

  • Chaoscossack

    way to go, Camille Paglia….let's blame some more victims.
    or better yet, let's wear burka, or simply hide inside walls

  • Nora Sawyer

    Even genuine, sex-for-money sluts don't deserve to be raped or assaulted. Blaming women for their assault is cruel, lame, and betrays a chilling lack of empathy, even if the woman in question was doing nude somersaults down main street.

    • Anon

      she isn't blaming, she's saying women should have common sense in order to reduce their danger of being raped.


      • wrong

        No, she's saying that people changing their behavior to accomodate that of rapists/criminals IS somehow 'common sense' …ie, that somehow as a society we should accept that, instead of protesting it/trying to change the societal norm towards something more positive

      • Anon

        well yes, i modify my behavior by not walking alone in dark alleyways at night. this IS common sense, surely? this is the real world. just because we don't want it to be a certain way doesn't magically instantly change it.

        in the same way, a simple modification of dress is something that is a reasonable modification of behavior, because the world is dangerous and there are easy, no-brainer things we can do to protect ourselves more.

      • anon

        sounds like something someone 'easy' would say =p

      • Anon

        i don't follow, but ok. apparently, according to everyone else here, a woman calling herself a slut is something that should be applauded! so i assume you calling me easy is also a compliment?

      • Tarded

        You are not supporting your argument by saying this world is “real”. Just by saying the world is a tangible thing make the act of rape justified.

      • Specialkrj

        There's a big difference between making sure you are never walking alone in bad neighborhoods and making sure you are never wearing clothing that might be considered provocative. I have to do a daily wardrobe check, making certain that my skirt is never shorter than my knee, making sure that my blouse is not v-cut or scoop-neck or too form-fitting; you have to not walk in dangerous neighborhoods after dark. You have to alter your route a few blocks, or take a cab, or walk with a friend. You have options, and your modification of your behavior is only necessary in certain situations that don't crop up that often, presumably, and are over within a few minutes when they do. Me? My entire life has to be catered to rapists because you don't have the guts to hold THEM responsible instead of ME.

  • George D

    Problem is still the patriarchy. While you have a society in which men are compelled to chase, and women compelled to say yes or no – and unempowered to say yes unless asked, then these situations will continue.

    Women are indeed innocent in this situation, insomuch as society presents them with an impossible situation – given that they have so few ways to signal their interest in being propositioned – and dressing to show any thigh or cleavage can be interpreted in this way. And for the same reasons, men are also innocent. Well, obviously not the person harrassing once a clear indication of disinterest has been established, but the reasonable guys who hit on women with decency. What is needed is for women to feel empowered to take initiative for themselves, so men can say no and women can say yes.

  • Sly Violet

    You are conflating the cultural situation with morality and accountability. There are ways to somewhat avoid attention, and these are things we know we can do, but we should feel outraged that we have to. A gay man can stay in the closet and be fairly certain to avoid gay-bashing; but is this morally acceptable? I'll give you this one: it isn't.

    We do what we can to get by, but that doesn't mean we should just shut up about it. I won't call you a woman hater because that kind of behaviour is counter-productive. I think you're comfy in your just world; good for you. I'll be with the women AND men demanding that a higher standard of responsibility be put on perpetrators (and btw, we should be demanding it, not asking pretty please). How about we stop letting predators and victimizers off so easily? If a women (or man) doesn't seem like she's into it, or seems confused, pass on that ass. If you are just horny, there's always someone WILLING.

  • tamara

    Ok I love Thought Catalogue and I usually feel you are quite on point about a lot of things, but I vehemently disagree with this article. I for one will be supporting the Slut Walk in Vancouver.

    I am merely a few years older than Ms.Fagan but even at 22 I had realized that without feminism, I wouldn't have been able to enjoy the choice to dress like a slut or sundress up if I wanted to. But while I embrace being a Feminist with a capital F, if Ms. Fagan wants to dismiss the effect of the multi-waves of feminism, that is her choice.

    The big issue that “Slut-Walks” are trying to raise is that it isn't JUST when a woman dresses like a stereotypical “slut” or prostitute that she is harassed. So many women get a lot of unwanted advances just in their regular everyday clothes. If I wear a sundress around town does that mean I'm asking for the cat-calls that are elicited from douchebags in limos? When my friend is wearing jeans and a heavy winter coat is she asking for a guy to drive up at a bus stop and tell her he likes her boobs?

    Women get attacked and raped in our cities, and not because they dress like sluts. They get raped because a sick person decided to rape them. And instead of teaching men that being aggressive is a shitty thing to do; we teach women to walk in fear in cities, carry their panic alarms and walk in groups. And I for one am kind of sick of living with that sort of fear.

  • professor bum

    At least you recognize that there's a lot of paradox happenin' with this this stuff, but then you proceed to kinda boil it down to a REALLY tired argument about women's personal reponsibility. I agree that a woman dressed provocatively will more likely find herself being advanced upon than a woman who isn't, but to pinpoint that dress as the “tipping point” – the actual DIFFERENCE between getting raped and not being raped – is ludicrous. That part, I'm sorry, has to be put on our rape culture, not women themselves. And if some sluts walkin' around in daylight does something to jar the rape culture, more power to them.

  • brittany wallace

    lol what

  • Bee Goode

    i'm sponsoring a “DTF” walk on my street outside my place. please contact me if you want to be involved and raise awareness 4 womyn's issues.

  • Tsf

    if you wrote/agree with this article you might need to sort some issues out

    • Anon

      NO YOU

  • Molly

    You are normalizing rape and other violent culture as something to be expected and inevitable. It's the 21st century and no one should have to worry about getting attacked because of the way they dress, and even more importantly no one should be defending those attacks as inevitable. No means no, and claiming that the way someone dresses can be 'confusing' to a man is absolutely ridiculous. You are excusing the inexcusable by essentially saying 'She was asking for it.' This really kind of makes me sick.

  • Teslaoconnell

    Oh yeah, let's just break out the burkas.

    We should be able to wear whatever the fuck we want, without having to deal with asshole, threatening behavior or other people victim blaming us. And your point is ridiculous; women are attacked and raped no matter what the hell they wear. I was in jeans and a t-shirt the night I got chased across a parking lot by a group of men.

    Also, implying that a woman is somehow guilty if she wears a revealing outfit and is raped is DISGUSTING. I'm not surprised you're called out on being a woman-hating woman.

    “And for a man, a sexually and visually driven man not in full command of his wits, having a woman tell him “no” while wearing the most provocative, arousing, blatantly sexual outfit possible is, to say the least, confusing.” CONFUSING? What part of NO, I don't want to fuck you is confusing, even if I'm sporting some impressive cleavage? My cleavage or a short skirt is not an invitation to rape me or assault me. No means no. ALWAYS. Jesus Christ, who the hell raised you? If you were a man expressing these sentiments to me, I'd be palming my taser right now, figuring out how to zap you in the balls and get away. Fast.

  • freddy

    Is it just me or does it seem like misogyny is alive and well on ThoughtCatalog lately?

    Although I do have to say, internet comment sections are usually derided for being inane, but there's been a lot of great responses to this and other articles on here.

  • Rosemy Glenn

    I'm sorry, I have to say it: you have COMPLETELY missed the point. I understand you think it's good advice, but even though it may reflect your conception of reality, both you and that cop are horribly wrong. Here's the truth (if you care to educate yourself)

    People aren't raped because they look like sluts. They're raped (usually) by people they know. Obviously, their outfits have no bearing on their sad fate.

    Other times, people are raped because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time, and to this point your article touches on a few common sense points, like: standing tall, avoiding eye contact and walking briskly through dangerous areas. Even though you, as many women, instinctively understand this, you still argue that a woman can be in some way to blame for being raped, as if her rapist wouldn't have touched her had her skirt been 6 inches longer.

    Do you really think that all men are inherently sexual predators, who finally cannot control themselves when they see a beautiful woman in a tight dress?

    Or, maybe do you – like the woman at the protest – think that some people are rapists, and that their victims are just that, and NOT contributors to the crime perpetrated against them?

    Women have come a long way in Canada, but this article proves to me we haven't come far enough.

    • Anon

      “you still argue that a woman can be in some way to blame for being raped”

      no. she is saying that women can take common sense steps (like not dressing like a slut) to avoid this

      • ECR

        “And while that does not give him the right to violate her, it also cannot be claimed that women are entirely innocent in this situation.”

        hmmmmm. I don't mean to argue over semantics, but claiming someone is not entirely innocent is very similar to asserting they are in some way to be blamed.

      • Sam

        Yes, but I agree with Rosemy. Dressing conservatively may not even be effective, because most of the time it has nothing to do with being chosen as a victim. Everyone is assuming that a slutty attire makes a woman more susceptible to rape, but what are we basing this off of? Intuition?

        I think Rosemy is right about rapists being inherently prone to raping. The grand majority of men will not force a woman into sex, no matter how much their animal instincts are telling them to do otherwise.

        And yes, women should always avoid being in dangerous places, but I think in most cases if a rapist sees a potential victim alone at night, the only thing that would stop them would be if they confused the woman for a man.

      • Gabrielle Bodek

        ANON, man up and admit you're Chelsea Fagan. You keep defending your same point of “avoiding rape”. There is NO excuse. You let mentally disturbed men off the hook waaayyy too easy here.

        But good luck on expanding upon your “I'm a COOL girl, just one of the guys” persona.

  • Duke ellington

    w/r/t the chappelle/cop thing you realize what context is right

    this shit is mind boggling

  • AES

    This is a very well-written and interesting article, but I am left with a few questions. First: in a multiethnic, multinational, and just generally diverse culture, how can anyone really draw a hard-and-fast line on where the “basest, most physical level” begins and ends? When I was doing research in central Africa, I could wear a tiny tank top without attracting a single wayward glance, but a pencil skirt (like the kind I'd wear to an office in the US) would have earned me a barrage of comments and dirty looks. So I know we like to think that “we know it when we see it” in the US, but the American “we” is a pretty big umbrella, right? It all depends a lot on context: city, neighborhood, community, etc. It's complicated.

    Now, look, I'm not totally PC-damaged. I understand that wearing spandex shorts with fishnets falls way below the aforementioned base level. But I also understand that a pair of D-cups in a tee shirt give off a very different impression than a pair of A-cups in the same getup. Does this mean that women with large breasts are beholden to different rules than women without them? Sometimes wearing something that even offers the vaguest outline of dangerous curves garners all sorts of unwanted attention. And I know that I'm not exactly looking for trub when I go for a jog in a wife-beater–LA can just get damn hot in March. I don't think I should have to suffer because I was blessed with an ample rack, and, similarly, I don't think that having big knockers should doom a girl to accidental slutdom if she feels like wearing less than a loose-fitting sweatshirt.

    Lastly, I wonder if there isn't some middle ground between the rhetoric of individual responsibility and the rhetoric of victimhood. No, women probably shouldn't wear a miniskirt into a dark alley, but you know what's an even bigger no-no? Thinking that a certain dress code constitutes an excuse for bad behavior. So instead of focusing on the fickle, narrow line between Lady and Tramp, wondering what the hell that woman was thinking when she wore than skirt down that alley, our time and energy might be better spent wondering what the hell the cat-caller, aggressor, or rapist was thinking when they thought it was okay to use another person's outfit as an excuse for their own shitty behavior.

    • Duke Ellington

      “Now, look, I'm not totally PC-damaged. I understand that wearing spandex shorts with fishnets falls way below the aforementioned base level. “

      agreed feel free to rape that cunt

      • AES

        Point taken. I was talking more about the author's concept of “base level,” though. I do think (oh wait, it's right there above…yeah!…) I ended my comment with a pretty definitive statement on how clothes do not excuse rape. But, well, fuck me for being calmly and methodically critical of an argument I disagree with. I'll be more shrill next time.

    • tee

      Excellent. Well said.

    • Tammi L. Coles

      “No, women probably shouldn't wear a miniskirt into a dark alley”

      I live in one of the safest metropolitan cities in the world. I walk through dark streets a lot. If I was randomly beaten up here or in Slutwalk city, no one would question what I was wearing. NO ONE.

      Skip these lines. You cannot concede even one typed letter to this b.s.

blog comments powered by Disqus