Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site calmasd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc6!calmasd!gail
From: gail@calmasd.UUCP (Gail B. Hanrahan)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: "provocative" clothing
Message-ID: <413@calmasd.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 30-May-85 14:56:20 EDT
Article-I.D.: calmasd.413
Posted: Thu May 30 14:56:20 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 3-Jun-85 00:23:29 EDT
References: <734@oddjob.UUCP> <193@timeinc.UUCP> <766@mtgzz.UUCP> <180@kontron.UUCP>
Reply-To: gail@calmasd.UUCP (Gail B. Hanrahan)
Organization: Calma Company, San Diego, CA
Lines: 17

In article <180@kontron.UUCP> cramer@kontron.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>The only assertion
>is that provocative dress may push *a few* rapists over the edge;
>it would be safest to avoid trouble, just like I avoid trouble by not
>walking through Watts at night.

The only problem with this is that women have no way of knowing
what will be considered provocative.  Jeans and t-shirts have
been considered provocative.  Do you mean that I should not wear
my normal, everyday clothing on the street?  Should we, just to
avoid trouble, wear voluminous robes and veils a la Middle
Eastern cultures?  But someone, somewhere, may be provoked by a
voluminous robe.  Maybe we should, just to avoid trouble, stay
at home all the time?  

Sharon Badian was perfectly correct when she said (I paraphrase
here) that discussion of provocative clothing only confuses the
issue.