Skinny Jeans as a Rape Defense
Last week, I told you about Denim Day 2010, an annual event designed to promote sexual assault awareness. The event was inspired by a 1992 Italian rape case in which the guilty verdict was overturned because the appellate judge thought that, since the victim had to help her assailant remove her tight jeans, the sex must have been consensual. Well, the victim blaming hits just keep on coming: another case of the Skinny Jeans Defense has just surfaced. A jury in Australia refused to convict a man of rape because they doubted the victim's skinny jeans could "be removed without any sort of collaboration."
Italy and Australia aren't the only places where this warped logic has been used to acquit sexual predators. In 2008, a judge overturned a seven-year sentence of a convicted rapist because — you guessed it — his victim was wearing skinny jeans. It seems like the Skinny Jeans Defense is a worldwide epidemic.
How deeply infuriating and insulting is that? By that logic, any woman wearing tight clothing can't be raped. Now, I happen to own a pair of skinny jeans myself and I assure you, wearing them is not an open invitation for sexual assault, nor do they imply consent. They're just pants, people.
I shouldn't have to point this out, but just in case you weren't aware: Pants, even tight ones, can be forcibly removed from someone. Also, taking off your pants when you are being physically attacked does not magically turn an act of violence into consensual sex. It means that you are doing your best to stay alive. Okay? This kind of thinking has no place in civilized society. The victim, no matter what he or she is wearing, is never to blame. Plain and simple. The Skinny Jeans Defense is no defense at all.
Photo credit: ldhren







COMMENTS (51)