That’s me told

I feel like I’ve passed some bloggers rite of passage as after leaving what i thought was a light hearted comment over at Captain Ranty’s I was roundly taken to task, and both myself and my humble witterings dismissed as as a young stripling of a Marxist globalist “trying to defend from a moral standpoint themselves living an immoral existence”. This as you can probably tell from my new “More vanity” section rather amused me

Now being an incorrigible sort, but also rather careful of my manners, I just had to reply to determine what insult I’d caused – and to correct what I felt where a few misunderstandings. I’d kind of decided to avoid doing the typical blog post of “ooh look someone said something nasty about me” and leave it there (after all others do it so much better than me), but then well there was the reply. I still don’t know what insult I caused as very little of my comment was addressed instead I seem to have hit a nerve in defending women’s right to dress as they like and the concept of the Slut Walk. So as Harbinger doesn’t want to continue the debate further and pointed out we’d rather wandered from our hosts topic of conversation I can but reply to him here. In a rather less light hearted tone than I’d initially planned.

(My comments in red)
“Giolla,

“I wish I was able to reach a judgement on someone’s character with such certainty and erudition as you seem to posses.”

Don’t worry, that will come with time and wisdom.

I shall assume he noticed by flippancy and responded in kind

“As to my support for the Slut Walk, why shouldn’t I support the right of women to not have the way they dress”

This is the only other part of my reply he bothered to comment on which is I think a shame, as I had hoped my reply was polite and might engender further debate and perhaps a meeting of minds.

Women dress in provocative attire because of the reaction that it gets. It’s got absolutely fuck all to do with “I just feel comfortable in it….blah…blah…” Women who walk around with their bras and their g-strings/thongs showing do so becuase of the reaction they know they’ll get. Most women are and always have been materialists. More so they are also superficial and use what they have to attract a mate. It’s why they are the way they are.

As he didn’t address my query as to what sort of attire he’d count as moral, I suggest ankle length skirts, I think it’s safe to assume that anything that shows a hint of flesh is probably beyond the pale for Harbinger. In another display of erudition Harbinger (and i do apologise for his swearing) has determined that any aberration form the purely practical, can’t be to do with anything other than the response of men. Nope if you’re not in a burka you’re just trying to attract a mate – that’s it no argument

There is that saying – if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it’s a duck. The same can be said for sluts (loose women, whores, hussies). A woman who walks around dressed like a slut shows that she is one and worse still has no respect for herself, which automatically means she has no respect for others. And this is modern society today, especially those of the 40 and under generation.

I can but take it from this that our erudite commentator has great personal and in depth knowledge of “loose women, whores, hussies”, perhaps he got turned down one time too many and it hurt his ego (ad hominem attack I know, bad Giolla no biscuit). So dressing in anything that doesn’t meet the yard stick of Harbinger and I’m afraid you’ve no respect for yourself or others – yep if you don’t dress as a (presumably) middle aged man dictates you’ve no self respect. It can’t possibly be a sign of confidence someone choosing how to dress purely for their own sake.

Again, this is all about reaction and this is why women dress as they do. This is why umpteen women will have tattoos and copy the styles of the likes of Gaga and Minaj in their attire.

Could someone please enlighten me as to who “Minaj” is I’m rather out of touch with the popular beat scene. But again this annoying assumption that everything is done for the sake of attention, I wonder how he explains tattoos that aren’t usually visible.

Simply Giolla, if sluts didn’t get the reaction they do from dressing and behaving like sluts, they wouldn’t dress and act the way they do. It’s image. It’s materialistic superficiality and if women send out the signals of being a loose woman then frankly whatever negative side effects befall them for doing so, such as winding a man/woman up and then turning the light switch off at the end, is entirely their own fault and own doing.

And wow, he does actually think that it’s ok for people to use the way someone was dressed as an excuse to attack them. If you don’t dress and behave as Harbinger thinks is appropriate all the time, and you get attacked it’s your own fault. I was rather hoping that he’d at least concede that it was wrong for anyone to attack another, and that a gentleman should always treat a woman respectfully no matter what. Guess I’m still just too much of an optimist. Though I can’t help but feel that from my immoral stand point I could possibly give a certain someone some pointers on polite behaviour, not to mention the function of the law.

Women have no respect for themselves today (of course I don’t mean all but a good whack) which automatically also means others. In the past lewd behaviour and dress sense was frowned upon. Women took respect in their attitudes and dress sense.

And a lovely move here from how someone dresses to how someone behaves, conflating the two. Of course given what he seems to think counts as lewd dress I’d guess that kissing in public might count as lewd behaviour. Mind you I’d much rather be of a generation that frowned upon people that attack women than one that frowned upon how women dressed – you know if that’s the only choices.

Put simply, women in today’s society who dress like a slut have a far higher probability of being raped than those who don’t. Again, slut behaviour and dress sense are clear signals to the opposite (or same) sex that carnal desires are sought. And lastly, again, sluts dress the way they do because of the reaction they get. Look at any film from the 80’s/90’s and look at how whores dressed. You will see that young women today almost copy that style.

We still don’t know just what he counts as dressing like a slut (bet he’ll love the outfit I’m planning for the walk – wonder if I can get a “walking for Harbinger” baby-T printed in time. ), and whilst he skirts perilously close to the problem he manages to avoid the leap to “it doesn’t matter what people wear attacking them is wrong”. Then just when sense was in sight he veers back to assuming that there can only be one reason for people dressing in ways he doesn’t approve of. Also I would note that just like everyone else “whores” have the right not to be attacked, I wonder if Harbinger is a descendent of Jack the ripper?

That is immoral behaviour, whether you like it or not. I won’t be discussing this anymore because firstly we’ve diverged from Captain’s initial post and secondly my point has been made.

Harbinger ”

It’s a shame that he won’t discuss this with me any more, but I do agree we did diverge from the Captains post and his point has been well and truly made. I don’t think it’s the point he was planning to make though. So to any men reading this that were thinking of not going along to support the Slut Walk, please do so because there are still people like Harbinger out there that think it’s ok to attack a woman because of the way they dress, and those people need to be seriously frowned at.

Oh and Harbinger a link just for you Pub Hassle – by Tom Robinson MP3 (Until I can find it on YouTube)

P.S. No going over to harass Harbinger on Captain Ranty’s palce that wouldn’t be nice to the Captain and wouldn’t teach Harbinger a thing. Not that any of my readers would be so impolite as to do such a thing I’m sure.

+1

0