Rape Culture Makes Its Mark

AR Wear, a New York based company, is in the process of releasing a line of "anti-rape" clothing (http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/11/04/robyn-urback-anti-rape-underwear-is-actually-a-thing-and-not-necessarily-a-bad-one/). The specially designed underwear, shorts and running pants are made to frustrate perpetrators of sexual assault from the cut-tear-resistant fabric that cannot be pulled down. Other than this clearly problematic manifestation of rape culture, this products aims are skewed. The wearer also risks the potential of further repercussions of escalated violence because of the perpetrator's irritation. Additionally, the laborious routine of the padlock-like combination makes this a conscious, obvious step of victim blaming with the expectation of encountering sexual assault. Unlike measures of safety like self defense (although I recognize the similarities in victim blaming), this is a daily ritual of safety, keeping women's vulnerability at the forefront of their everyday interactions; whereas self defense is meant to ideally become second nature. A "symbol of victim blaming", AR Wear reinforces today's rape culture that responsibilizes women for violence enacted against them as a means of control. The "few legitimate gripes with the product" this article discusses, such as difficulty in medical emergency or washroom breaks, trivializes victim blame as outside of these "legitimate gripes". The discourse of safety for travelling women also racializes and Other's the typical perpetrator. This forces rape into a problem of the developing world's barbaric and uncontrollable desires. These "modern-day chastity belts" literally restrains women's sexual choices by making it difficult to engage in ANY sexual encounter, an extreme corseting of women's sexuality. In characterizing all men as potential rapists, this invention justifies, rationalizes and excuses sexual assault as a normal male behavior and minimizes men's experiences with sexual assault. While attempting "not to be naive", Urback operates under the assumption date rape is not inherently violent, forgetting the use of pressure and coercion fraught in these instances.

                "An assaulter can also demand a woman remove the garment by threatening

                bodily harm, or else, increase the level of brutality when frustrated by the clothing.

                But this type of product may prove invaluable in preventing date rape, for example."

Urback mentions several times the "peace of mind" these articles can provide, failing to recognize them as a constant reminder of women's vulnerability and of the looming gendered power difference. In comparing this invention to safety precautions taken in New York City, she fails to recognize several interlocking factors that distinguish sexual assault from other crimes. First of all, the gendered nature of sexual assault and the target demographic for AR Wear leaves the effort of prevention to women. This depoliticization characterizes sexual assault as individual incidents instead of recognizing it as a systemic problem. And while some may walk around New York with a should strapped bag, most don't don a bullet proof vest for just in case.

Works Cited:

Urback, Robyn. "Anti-rape underwear is actually a thing — and not necessarily a bad one." National Post. N.p., 4 Nov. 2013. Web. 15 Nov. 2013. <http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/11/04/robyn-urback-anti-rape-underwear-isactually-a-thing-and-not-necessarily-a-bad-one/>.