Womanly virtues Friday ...

A troubling little word
Note: I promised to explain why I think most men really want a woman Serena van der Woodsen and I have not forgotten. I'll get to that this afternoon in a post that is not entirely unrelated to this one.

Courtesy of a writer who tags themselves Why not over at Partial Objects, comes this fascinating quote from an opinion piece in the Chicago Sun-Times from Jamie Lauren Keiles, who is an organizer of Chicago's Slutwalk Protest:

It has to do with agency for me. A half-naked lady as a form of protest feels a lot different to me than a half-naked lady as pandering to the male-gaze. I think there is something somewhat terrifying, somewhat jarring, about a person, especially a woman putting herself out there as a “f___ you” as opposed to a “f___ me.” 

The reason all this has to fail is that there is a huge problem of logic lingering. Here is another quote from the Sun-Times piece from someone named Courtney Phillips who is describing as agreeing with Keiles:

Each woman is an individual and entitled to make these individual choices about sex, clothing, safety, and even the power of words. Feminism fails when it becomes so militant that it tries to make us all the same. There's more than enough room for conflicting viewpoints on the word slut, and having these arguments is a great way to keep the dialogue open and to keep ourselves constantly reevaluating our own choices.

You already know that argument and you already know what is wrong with it. It was probably one of the first logical issues you learned about:

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.' 

The lesson Alice learns, of course, is that in his desire to be master, Humpty Dumpty renders language meaningless and SlutWalk does the same thing.

The writer of the piece, Sarah Terez-Rosenblum,  is quite clear that for her, a prime goal of the event is "letting the air out" and making efforts to "neutralize" the word "slut". A word that is neutralized is a word that has no us. That wouldn't bother her.

I celebrate the neutralization of ‘slut,’ a sex-negative word both men and women employ to govern women’s bodies and lives ...

Hmmm? Is "slut" a sex-negative word? I have known more than one woman who used it to describe herself in ways that were decidedly sex positive. Sometimes during actual sex. And whether you like or hate the old Spanish proverb "En la sala una dama, una puta en la cama" (A lady in the living room, a slut/whore in the bedroom), you cannot reasonably claim that it isn't sex positive.

I could circle around the logical contradictions here forever, so let me cut to the chase. There are two unavoidable conclusions here.

The first is this. When you try to change the uses of a word, you are seeking power over other people. You may think you are doing so for their own good and you may even be right, but don't try and tell us that you are giving them freedom to do what they want.

The second point is that any word that actually does mean something means so publicly. The word slut implies judgment. It can be a positive judgment or a negative judgment depending on the context. As the old Spanish proverb had it, there are things that are good in the living room and there are things that are good in the bedroom. And being a woman or a man means being judged according to the public meanings of these words.

 And Terez-Rosenblum realizes this is inescapable and it worries her:

I worry that part of the attraction to Slut Walk is its relationship to the male gaze. Not to say that women, straight or queer can’t dress sexy for other women, but isn’t there a way in which what we view as slutty/sexy/racy is defined by the mainstream? Doesn’t then our participation in something like Slut Walk objectify us, even if by our choosing? What’s the difference between dressing like a slut to protest victim blaming and dressing like a slut to sell beer?

(She should also worry about its relation to the female gaze. )

But she has a point: no matter what you do, other people are going to make judgments about who and what you are based on your actions and one of those actions is the way you dress. There is language of clothing and the dress decisions send complex and variable messages. How you present yourself publicly has consequences and it is something you should think about.

Which leads right into my pal Serena. See you this afternoon.