Or “Boobquake.”
Try looking at it this way, Sexual Assault Prevention Tips Guaranteed to Work!
Respondents here are definitely projecting way too much onto that poster. Does a PSA warning people not to walk alone at night also imply that it’s their own fault if they get robbed and/or raped, because criminals just can’t help themselves for doing so? That’s an absurd notion.
No, but if a poster advised that, say, black people should refrain from walking city streets alone at night to ensure that overzealous cops wouldn’t tase them, that would be taken amiss.
That’s closer what we’re talking about here. This poster is specifically directed towards a group (women) with restricted social and political rights, and warns that if they stray slightly from the role that the local culture imposes on them, they bring the consequences down on themselves.
It’s a very slick bit of fear-mongering, designed to keep women “in their place” - and that’s why it upsets so many of the posters in this thread. A similar poster in the US might, indeed, be relatively innocuous (albeit misguided). But in this cultural context, it’s something rather more grim.
The font size of the Arabic text in that picture was too small to read. I searched around and was able to find a slightly bigger image. Did the best I could, but the text is in Egyptian dialect, which I have not studied. (The difference between Arabic dialects and the standard literary Arabic taught in schools is comparable to the difference between modern Romance languages and Latin; it’s only very recently that dialects have been put into writing. Imagine if all you knew was Latin and were asked to read something in Spanish.)
I made out that it says something like “You can’t make them stop it, but you can protect yourself.” The last line of text in the image file, like in an optometrist’s office, was too small for me to read. It’s saying “you” in the feminine gender and “them” in the masculine gender, indicating that it’s addressed to females, about protecting themselves from males.
The message then makes some sense then. But it’s typical sexism against males in assuming that their sexual urges are so powerful, that there’s no use in even suggesting that males should control themselves.
How about some posters that say, “A man who cannot control himself is not a man. He is an animal.” Or how about “If you wouldn’t want someone to do that to your sister, don’t do it to someone else’s sister.” Or some such?
But when keeping yourself safe from crime means altering your entire life, I think it’s gone too far. As others have pointed out, it’s one thing to say, “Keep an eye on your wallet.” But if I’m not allowed to choose how I want to dress, that’s a basic freedom. If there were roves of marauding bandits who beat people up for wearing plaid, would the answer be, “Well, don’t wear plaid!” or would it be to harshly penalize those who are committing the crime?
Plus, there’s no evidence that dressing modestly averts the problem. And no one can even decide what “modestly” is.
Kyla, that is a good point, and I didn’t mean to say we don’t have that problem here. It’s not as extreme but it’s still a huge problem.
And people seem to love to grasp at straws. What you were saying about the assault, not rape, thing happened to me–I was sexually assaulted in the street a couple years ago, and when I told a (former) friend of mine, the first thing she said was, “Oh, were you wearing a dress/skirt, maybe that’s why the guy got the idea to do it.” And again, it goes back to no one being able to decide what “modest” is–in some cultures, wearing trousers is inherently more sexy, whereas to others showing bare legs is. If someone told me to dress in such a way to avoid being sexually assaulted, I’d have no clue what to wear.
I remember seeing a project by women in India where women sent pictures of articles of clothing in which they’d been harassed to show that it doesn’t matter what they were wearing. And I think the point to take away is that to make the ad about what the woman is wearing is to miss the point. It’s not about the victim–it’s about the victimizer. No one would ever say “Don’t own a nice car” if someone’s car was stolen. Yes, they might say not to keep it unlocked. But you can’t make the parallel when it’s women’s bodies. We can’t keep our bodies locked up, and short of a full suit of armor, there’s no way to hide that we have bodies.
What a total fucking bitch. I’m glad to hear she’s a former friend. I’m assuming the split happened as a direct result of that question.
You might be interested in this essay. It rang very true for me, speaking as someone else who has been assaulted (and I felt a lot of misplaced shame and embarrassment about it), but not raped.
Aren’t these two statements contradictory? If women who don’t veil are harrassed how are those who do doing it of their own true volition?
If a man cannot keep his eyes where they belong it is not my fault. And if his urges lead him to assault me what I’m wearing at the time does not constitute an excuse.
-
AFAIK they aren’t actually disallowing anyone from dressing skankily, they’re just discouraging it.
-
If you weren’t “allowed” to walk alone at night, how would that not be a restriction on your freedom? My main argument is that telling people to minimize their risks of being targeted is not an implicit statement that there’s nothing wrong with the potential offenders, as many people in this thread are claiming. Agree about the questionable effectiveness of this particular method though.
There are a couple of translations provided in the comments to the article in the OP link. One of them translates the text as:
“You can’t stop them,
But you can protect yourself,
He who created you knows what’s best for you”
The two statements are not inherently contradictory. It would only be a contradiction if the reason women in Egypt choose (or were forced) to veil is because of the harassment they get when they do not veil.
I do not presume to speak for all Egyptian women, but I think it is safe to say that the vast majority are veiling for far different reasons - religious and political solidarity with the Moslem world and rebellion against the mores of their parents (yes, younger Egyptian women sometimes veil to the consternation of their more liberal parents!) come to mind as two prominent reasons.
Thanks for the essay, Kyla, I’m going to read it tonight now that I’m home for the night.
Yeah, it was sort of a, “With friends like this, who needs enemies” type moment for me.
Well, when it’s walking around late at night–I take that with a grain of salt. If it was actually, “Never leave your house past dusk or you could get hurt,” I’d find that nuts. I guess something like, “If you are out late/in a bad area, be careful” is a bit better. Something like, “Oh, you were out late? oh, you were uncovered and men could see your bare circuits? That’s a raping/assault/stealing/paddling!” kind of bothers me more.
And I guess what you’re saying is that the uncovered thing is along the line as just generally be careful. I think the difference is for me is that it just has a gendered quality to it. And yes, sexual assault is something skewered where women are the victims.
But if it’s something like, “People, as a rule, be careful when you’re out late and don’t go in strange neighborhoods, try to stick with a buddy,” that’s one thing. But if it’s just, “Don’t cover yourself,” it just feels to me like the trigger for the attack isn’t money or property–it’s a woman’s body. And there’s really no way to pretend we don’t have bodies. I know, a lot of people are going to read this and think I’m being oversensitive. But I get uncomfortable when being immodest and flashing a wallet are equated. Because to me, I don’t see the parallel–when I’m out and I happen to be wearing something that reveals my body, I don’t see that as, “Oops, could be raped, gotta be careful.” It’s just…well, me.
Plus, we’ve had these conversations before, and again, no one’s ever been able to tell me what modest means. I know what’s appropriate for a church or mosque or synagogue. I know what’s office appropriate. I know what’s appropriate for a night out at the bar. But which of these things do people think is going to result in rape or sexual assault and which is going to prevent it? Especially when most rape is committed not by a stranger, but by an acquaintance.
Plus, so much of this is after the fact. And I think a lot of it is the illusion of control. People might like to say, “Oh, she was raped–she was wearing those tight jeans” but again, what’s tight? how do we decide what’s “acceptable”? And hey, what if she were wearing a skirt instead of jeans–oh no, that floozy. Women get harassed in everything from hijabs to halter tops. I don’t think there’s ever something you can wear to make you safe.
Well, let’s put this in the right context: In Egypt, female genital mutilation is considered desirable.
Taking that into consideration, this poster is a big step forward.
Bookkeeper-- maybe I know understand the dialect better than I thought I did, after all 
All that listening to Natacha Atlas…
Everyone should read the attached essay. And make copies and hand them out. Put it up on phone poles and street lamps if possible. This essay is has something extremely important to say.
I posted this image somewhere else and today I had this response in my inbox:
Sigh… sorry, I couldn`t help myself, being a male and all, and seeing this gorgeous girl with such a low cut top…
I had to link to her picture.
Now theres a girl who wont be raped!
d&r…