Authors
Jessica Wolfendale
Marquette University
Abstract
Numerous studies have found that many people believe that a provocatively dressed woman is at greater risk for sexual assault and bears some responsibility for her assault if she is attacked. Furthermore, in legal, academic, and public debates about sexual assault the appropriateness of the term ‘provocative’ as a descriptor of certain kinds of women’s clothing is rarely questioned. Thus, there is a widespread but largely unquestioned belief that it is appropriate to describe revealing or suggestive women’s clothing as ‘provocative’ and that women who wear such clothing could provoke sexual assault and harassment from men. Yet it is rarely noted that only women’s clothing is described as sexually provocative. Men’s clothing, no matter how revealing, is never described as provocative. Why is this the case? This Article challenges the assumption that it is appropriate to describe women’s clothing as provocative. Drawing on on models of the legal defense of provocation and research on objectification and responsibility, this Article demonstrates that continued use of ‘provocative’ term normalizes and entrenches deeply problematic attitudes about women’s responsibility for men’s sexual behavior. The social interpretation of women’s clothing as provocative arises from the privileged social and legal status of men’s sexual arousal and the objectification of women’s bodies. Describing women’s clothing as provocative thus reinforces a problematic conception of women’s bodies and sexuality that is connected to women’s experiences of their bodies, their clothes, and shapes their vulnerability to sexual assault and social and legal attitudes to such attacks.
Keywords Moral responsibility  Provocation  Sexual assault  objectification  Gender  sexuality
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Loose Women, Lecherous Men: A Feminist Philosophy of Sex.Linda Lemoncheck - 1998 - Philosophical Studies 89 (2-3):369-373.
Sexual Harassment in Public Places.Margaret Crouch - 2009 - Social Philosophy Today 25:137-148.
Rethinking Rape.Ann J. Cahill - 2001 - Cornell University Press.
Women, Sexual Asymmetry, and Catholic Teaching.Erika Bachiochi - 2013 - Christian Bioethics 19 (2):150-171.
Autonomy, Responsibility, and Women’s Obligation to Resist Sexual Harrassment.James Stacey Taylor - 2007 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (1):55-63.
Sexual Harassment: A Debate.Linda LeMoncheck & Mane Hajdin - 1997 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Treating Persons as Sex Objects.Linda Lemoncheck - 1981 - Dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-04-09

Total views
18,679 ( #66 of 2,454,732 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2,485 ( #62 of 2,454,732 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes