Caroline J. sent in a link to an anti-rape campaign in Scotland title This Is Not an Invitation to Rape Me. The campaign includes various posters with commentary on the myths associated with them. Some examples of the posters (the second one might not be safe for work, so after the jump):
The text from the website:
Myth: a woman raped after consuming alcohol is to blame for not considering her own security.
Text from website:
Myth: a woman raped whilst wearing revealing clothing is to blame for leading a man on.
Website text:
Myth: a woman raped after consenting to any level of sexual activity is to blame for ‘giving mixed signals’.
It’s not clear that the posters have any text with them except on the website; here is a link to the posters themselves, and there’s no text. Here are postcards, and they also don’t have any text.
The messages are, of course, that drinking, wearing revealing clothing, or being intimate with someone doesn’t mean a woman deserves to be raped.
Caroline pointed out a comment made on the website:
One (male) commenter on the site picked up on what I found interesting about the images: their titillation factor. The commenter writes, “I find this campaign shocking…posting educational billboards of the topic rather than suggestive and almost pornographic pictures of women would be a more sensible and less insulting approach.”
I don’t think of the images as “pornographic,” but I do think the question is valid: are these likely to change anyone’s beliefs about rape? They do address a number of beliefs people often have–that a woman shouldn’t have gotten drunk if she didn’t want to have sex, etc. But they do seem sensationalistic. On the one hand, they would get your attention. But are they effective at what they’re aiming to do?
I guess part of my skepticism is about this type of anti-rape campaign in general. Maybe I’m being really cynical or mistaken, but somehow I can’t imagine a person going “oh, I always thought if a woman was dressed provocatively I could force her to have sex with me, but now I see I’m wrong.”
I dunno. Do you think the majority of people looking at this ad campaign would get the take-away message (and care about it)? Or are they just going to go “ooooh, nipples!”?
UPDATE: Reader nakedthoughts says,
The benefit of these signs it they are addressing everyone in the culture. It may not stop particular rapists, but it may be a step towards reducing victim blaming. Which then in turn holds rapists responsible, which helps us move away from a rape culture.
I think that’s a good point–if these posters led juries, for instance, to be less likely to blame victims in court, or make people in general less likely to blame women, then rapists would be held more accountable and women would be more likely to come forward and report them.
For other forms of activism people have questioned (and I’m leaving out PETA, because all their campaigns are questionable), see Angry Green Girl, “starving African kids,” high heels as activism, stop smoking and get laid, “blasphemous” Italian anti-rape poster, Tila Tequila cares about human rights, get rid of immigrants for the sake of the environment, the white woman’s burden, appropriating American Indian identities for the environment, stay in school campaign, Spanish anti-genital-cutting posters, and opposing animal cruelty by showing domestic violence.
Comments 50
cooper — September 17, 2009
I can't see it being a revealing moment. But if there is one "ah ha" moment among thousands it will probably be more than you'd have with "educational billboards".
Referring to that gentleman's comment though "I find this campaign shocking…posting educational billboards of the topic rather than suggestive and almost pornographic pictures of women would be a more sensible and less insulting approach"
The fact he called these images "almost pornographic" tells me where he is coming from. and tells me also to disregard his comment.
nakedthoughts — September 17, 2009
The benefit of these signs it they are addressing everyone in the culture. It may not stop particular rapists, but it may be a step towards reducing victim blaming.
which then in turn holds rapists responsible, which helps us move away from a rape culture.
Marc Taro Holmes — September 17, 2009
It seems like any 'extravagant' ad campaign comes under immediate discussion on the web. but really isn't the entire *point* of advertising to spread the message as widely as possible?
If 'shocking' (which these don't seem to be) images penetrate the population more widely - then so be it! the message gets out.
As long as the message is clear. I find it a little odd that there's no copy on these images. If you didn't tell me the text, I wouldn't get the content. but I assume these are just the photos? not the posters as printed? Anyway -
If these were a bit MORE sexy they might end up blunting the "rape-is-bad-"message by propagating a "women-are-objectified" thing - but again, I don't see much line crossing here. So good enough for them. Message Received, and look - free PR on SocImages.
Maggie — September 17, 2009
Yeah, the women don't seem particularly objectified in these (except in the second image, where that was the point), and they do seem to represent, very clearly, the situations where people are much, much more likely to blame the victim in the case of rape. Since we live in a rape culture, and women in situations like these are all over the media (through the Male Gaze, when associated with objectification/dehumanization, and even associated with violence), I think it's interesting to make people re-evaluate what they see all the time. I think people are more likely to take an ad seriously if it actually manages to tap into the realities of popular culture.
The fact that we see the faces of the women, and no extra or exploitative focus is put on, say, their legs and breasts than necessary (except the second image, but again, that was the point), makes me feel that these images were indeed made with respect and education as the purpose.
Eline — September 17, 2009
I think there are several people who don't even THINK about this that will maybe get aware that this is indeed an issues. So in that aspect it's valid.
KD — September 17, 2009
I see body parts offered up for the viewer, not women enjoying their sexual freedom. It's telling that their faces are either out of the picture or obscured. It is a very contradictory message, objectifying women and then warning you not to touch. What else are you supposed to with objects you've been offered and made to feel entitled to? If they had done something as simple as giving the women faces (I've just realized that women are so often deprived of their faces in images that I don't naturally come to the phrase, "let them *keep* their faces"), it might have changed everything.
You know what I think would be a more useful campaign? Informing people of the definition of rape, since a shockingly high number of both men and women don't know what it is. I've read that many rapists are genuinely shocked when they find out they've been accused because they don't see anything wrong with something like holding a woman down and having non-consensual sex with her because he paid for dinner, or she 'led him on.' Before people can be told, "Don't rape," they have to know what rape is.
Sarah TX — September 17, 2009
I certainly think they're a step in the right direction (ie, a step away from victim-blaming campaigns). I also like how they're not targeted at rape victims or survivors, but at the "rest of us" who like to stand in judgment and give perpetrators a free pass.
rachel — September 17, 2009
Well...this, like any ad, relies on the audience BELIEVING the message being offered. for someone who already believes these women are not to blame for their rapes, or their "not-rapes", they will accept this campaign and think it's a good idea. but for people who don't think that way (ie, who hate women), they might see it and be, "yeah right; if a woman can think she can walk around in public with nipples showing like that and not be asking for it..." or, "look at that woman in the limousine, she's leaning into him; she started it. how is he supposed to believe her when she says no?" and etc. I realize these kinds of sentiments come from trolls that have nothing better to do, but i think in a lot of men's AND women's minds, they might be saying that to themselves in their minds. I think it would take more than this to crack through some of the hardened sh*t that some people truly do believe. Then again, perhaps there are people who just haven't thought about it enough, and I hope the campaign reaches some of them.
Shinobi — September 17, 2009
There is behavioral research which indicates that repeating myths in an attempt to debunk them only further underscores and encourages people to remember those myths. This is a common "Debunking" technique that backfires.
Labeling the statement a myth means that people may eventually forget the "myth" part and only remember the statement they have heard repeated over and over. (This is related to the availability heuristic in humans, the more they hear something the more they remember it, even though they may not remember where they heard it.)
A much more productive approach would be to simply claim the opposite, not label the prior statement a myth. An add campaign that said "This woman is not resposible if you choose to rape her" would be much more productive. There are any number of more active ways to phrase these things.
When attempting to disprove pervasive social myths the worst thing you could possibly do is to repeat the myth while labelling it false.
So yeah, the images, not so much the problem as the fact that the ads will likely have the opposite effect of what was intended.
/rant
Shinobi — September 17, 2009
ignore me, I like the "This is not an invitation to rape me" text.
stropharia — September 17, 2009
If I were looking at the women in the first two images in real life (I can't imagine the same for the third - it would just be weird to be present for that one), it's possible that I would see mere objects. I've never raped anyone, and I'm a feminist when I think, but when I'm casually taking in the visual stimuli of hot young women, I'm not idly wondering about how their day is going, or whether our society permits them the same agency a similarly-placed male would enjoy. Rather, my casual thoughts are of use and possession. I'm a basically good guy whose fucked-up implicit attitudes about gender leave me a few bad decisions away from being a rapist. Like at least a plurality of men, I'd wager.
I see these ads inviting men like me to engage in the familiar objectification of women and then presenting us in that context with the concept that women aren't mere objects. It's good conditioning, and I think it wouldn't work nearly as well if it didn't start from the kind of objectifying imagery that sets up the contradiction. And the contradiction is the basis of the teachable moment.
To belabor the point: Usually, when I see that kind of imagery in advertising, it's encouraging the dehumanization of the women in the ad so that their desirability can be transferred to some commodity. (So the ad is all "look at the sexy ladies!" and I'm all like "Mmmmm, ladies....") That kind of advertising gives me a safe place to indulge in some thinking that I know to be morally lazy and socially destructive. Because I know it's wrong, I don't just go around thinking that way about all women all the time.
If the PSAs being discussed here presented themselves differently -- say, by illustrating the harm done by rape, or even just by showing an eyes-forward head and shoulders shot of a woman looking serious (i.e., without a bunch of sexy-cues) -- the message "women doing ___ don't deserve to be raped" would fit right in to my worldview. I would probably end up thinking "yes, this is a good message that other, less progressive, men need to hear", and then forgetting about it. But these PSAs, I think, create tension and thereby deliver the message "women doing ___ don't deserve to be raped EVEN THOUGH YOU OBVIOUSLY FEEL OTHERWISE." A message delivered that way is more likely to make me reevaluate my thinking.
clodia_risa — September 17, 2009
The difference, to me, between this and PETA's ads is that the depiction of women in "sexual" situations is relevant to the message. It's attention grabbing but it is also on message. Is it sensationalist? Of course. However, sometimes a little sensationalism is what is needed. And sometimes it is a cheap trick to garner attention. I think that this is in the first category.
Andrea — September 17, 2009
I actually really liked these ads, because, as a victim, they were pretty refreshing to see. Maybe they won't change anyone's mind about rape, but getting told that it wasn't my fault is pretty empowering.
Graves — September 17, 2009
Advertisers need incentive for the viewer. As here, it's too ironic that titillation is the bait. This campaign and many others put the viewer in the mind of the rapist.
The terrible thing is this - surely the offender is last to understand the abuse they've committed.
I heard on Australian television that a campaign was run in America to this effect;
'One in four women are victims of sexual assault. Will it be your mother, your sister, your daughter or your wife?'
Positioning the reader with the victim seems much more effective. It only took two sentences and I obviously haven't forgotten it.
Matt K — September 17, 2009
The sexual imagery used in anti-rape spots like these always creeps me out a little. I have to wonder if the "myth" thing will work, too. As a previous commenter noted, it seems all too easy for the "myth" bit at the front of each statement to fall off in the reader's memory. Why can't we just have ads without the myth angle, which just deliver strong statements like: so and so behaviour is rape, don't do it. I agree with Eline, I think definitional statements are key.
On a relevant note, Shakesville posted this link today, a list of rape prevention tips "guaranteed to work": http://nonotyou.tumblr.com/post/168208983/sexual-assault-prevention-tips-guaranteed-to-work
Maybe something like that, albeit less satirical and more direct, would work well.
Kristen — September 17, 2009
My roommate has these hung on our door (except that there is text, which could just be Photoshopping on her part). I enjoy the conversations they bring up with friends that come to visit. Hopefully they think more about rape and how it isn't the woman's fault for doing any of the things depicted.
Sian — September 18, 2009
I have seen a number of these posters around Aberdeen: there is also one featuring a picture of a couple on their wedding day with the same "This is not an invitation to rape me." text underneath.
I was pleased to see a campaign challenging opinions which are relatively common in the UK (http://www.thefword.org.uk/blog/2009/03/one_in_five_bel), particularly as this is the first highly visible anti-rape campaign of this sort that I have seen here.
I agree with previous commenters that these posters may help to chip away at the societal prejudices that lead to victim blaming.
Catherine — September 18, 2009
I think that the wedding image is particularly powerful; the juxtaposition of the marital bliss and the stark message 'this is not an invitation to rape me' is quite shocking. It's good to see the issue of sexual abuse in relationships addressed in the media, as it's all too often ignored.
As for the others, I understand the sexualised imagery to be a necessary part of the intended impact of the imagery and the overarching message. The overt sexualisation of women in advertising is so commonplace that audiences become entirely accustomed to it. The campaign plays on both commonplace misconception about rape and the lazy acceptance of objectifying images. The text 'This is not an invitation to rape me' jolts the viewer our of this mindset and - hopefully - makes them reflect on the issue and address their preconceptions. I'd like to see the contrast between the text and the imagery made more distinct and powerful, but I think it's a good concept nonetheless. I can understand why the objectifying imagery may seem gratuitous and unsettling, which is why I think the contrast between the text and the imagery should stronger.
Rachel — September 18, 2009
I see a world of problems with the ads, but I think the advertisers are actually doing something clever-- these ads (without the text) could easily be ads for liquor or another product that is commonly sold using females and sexual objects. I can see how many heterosexual male viewers would look at the ad, react how they naturally react, and then be shocked and hopefully personally convicted to realize they are contemplating women as sexual objects. It may not work for everyone, but who knows.
Rachel — September 18, 2009
*females AS sexual objects
correction. sorry.
Tanz — September 18, 2009
I thought it was interesting that all the women featured were young and attractive. Plenty of older and unattractive women are raped too; it's about control, not sexual attraction. I think this campaign will probably work best on rape culture; possibly challenging people to re-think their "she asked for it" attitudes. But again, it backs up the stereotype that unattractive women are somehow 'safe' from sexual assault.
Edith — September 19, 2009
I think maybe these ads will catch a little bit more attention because they appear to be retail ads. The first one could be a light beer (or birth conrol), the second for a clothing or accessories line, the third for either alcohol or a fragrance. Maybe the intention of this series of ads was the blend in enough for people to read it unsuspecting of the messages they contain. Although, I would agree with an above commenter that the language could be a lot stronger.
Suzanne — September 20, 2009
If it's true that the ads include text on the actual posters then I don't have a problem with them, otherwise there'd just be random images! In regards to the "pornographic" comment, I don't find the 2nd poster to be as objectifying and exploitive as the PETA ads where she appears to me to simply be a woman walking down the street going about daily life. The PETA version would probably have her doing "sexyface" and dressed in a skimpy bikini with "pweeze don't rape me" painted on her body or something equally as vomit-inducing.
Also, there's a poster on the website of a young married couple with "This is not an invitation to rape me" which I think is rather good as I believe that it's not an issue that is given much attention, even in domestic violence campaigns.
Caitlin — September 20, 2009
I was standing outside the Reading Room at Glasgow University when someone came by handing out the postcards of these (which did say "This is not an invitation to rape me", btw). I thought they were really effective. And they were handing them out to men, women, young, old -- whoever was around. It's completely right to be targetting the whole of society, including potential rapists, rather than just the potential victims (the way normal anti-rape campaigns do). Particularly since they did it on a uni campus, where date rape is probably a common occurance.
All in all, awesome. Definitely a step up from the normal victim-blaming. (Restrict your movements, alcohol consumption and interaction with men, and then you will be a good Victorian woman- em, I mean, protected from sexual assault! Unless there's a man around who unaccountably doesn't follow these rules and decides to rape you anyway, that is. But you probably asked for it in some other way, like being born female. You disgust me.)
Caitlin — September 20, 2009
Also, the fact that people can't look at the second picture without seeing it as "titillation", "almost pornographic" etc etc is the whole fucking POINT. A woman can't walk down the fucking street without her body/dress automatically being evaluated based on how aroused nearby men might become as a result. Breasts are just a female body feature and it is totally inappropriate to sexualise them in every fucking situation. It's almost like we live in a society where women are just objects to be used for sex by men and so rape doesn't really matter much. Hmm.
Alex — September 24, 2009
I think these ads are perpetuating another popular and problematic myth about rape - that you have to be attractive to be raped. I think its problematic to associate rape with sexiness as these images do. The image they give of a rape victim is very monolithic - all the women are very similar in age and physical appearnace. Also these ads feel like theyre trying to clear up a misunderstanding - the tone of the images feels wrong to me.
depresso — November 2, 2009
Late to the party, I know, but reading the discussion here, I'd say that the ads have done what they set out to do - create a discussion. I recall hearing someone from Rape Crisis Scotland talking about these ads months before they appeared; they're an idea that was first used in LA, and they were found to be quite effective there. They caught people's attention and got them thinking, even if it was only for a second or two. And it doesn't really matter if they're thinking that this image or that image is somehow inappropriate to them, or that the women are too pretty or too sexy or whatever - they've read the text (This Is Not An Invitation To Rape Me was very clear from a distance) and whether or not the viewer is aware of it, it's filtering in, just the same as any other ad.
spinach — November 4, 2009
that text is also a bit suspect. minus the "myth:", every caption, along with its respective poster, serves as reinforcement of the very dangerous pattern of victim blame. that's a lot of weight for a single word to hold up.
Muse142 — January 6, 2010
And, taking these ads at face value.. this only applies to White, thin, cis, able-bodied women?
Liberal Media Bias at It Again … Oh, umm, wait « BackStage — March 12, 2010
[...] Huh? Umm. Well. Here’s my sociology class. Teenage suicide, Don’t Do It! If you get hit or raped it’s obviously your fault — of course I’d use all the “She was Asking For [...]
Dave — March 26, 2010
A new documentary looking into sensationalism:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1SYsvV9bYc
#47 - Most Discussed (Today)) - Education
#76 - Most Viewed (Today)) - Education - Canada
#74 - Most Viewed (Today)) - Education
#92 - Most Viewed (Today)) - Education - Netherlands
#15 - Top Favorited (Today)) - Education
#28 - Top Rated (Today)) - Education
Anonymous — April 10, 2011
www.slutwalktoronto.com is another step in the right direction.... we must continue to inform and educate ... and especially strive for systemic change in institutions like the police and the rest of the criminal justice system... and we muste take our message to the streets.... in big numbers and across as many cities as possible.....
mike ley — April 10, 2011
Watch out for a new movement that is now international.... check out www.slutwalktoronto.com for ways to start a slutwalk in your area...
MIKE MAC CLINTOCK — May 14, 2014
WHAT IS THE MOST ISOLATED , REMOTE , DESOLATE LONELY PLACE ON EARTH ?? ANSWER = THE SCOTTISH AA HALL