No means no.

I was amazed last week when I saw a news feature on the emergence of a new Playboy club down in London. What amazed me most is that here in the modern world, Playboy clubs still exist.

Essentially, Playboy is a brand that makes large amounts of money by using women as basic objects, however some would disagree arguing that the women involved are ‘modern-day feminists’ empowering themselves and getting paid well while they’re at it. The fact still remains however that although they are paid, the profit made by the business is far greater than the wage expense, or ‘maintenance costs’ as they may call it.

Attitudes towards women have improved since the days where they weren’t even given a democratic vote, but they’re still a long way off from where they should be. Women are still a marginalised group within society, which is astonishing considering they make up half of the nation! They are still paid much less than their male counterparts, are given fewer opportunities and every now and again are demeaned by David Cameron.

Take the BBC for example, a high proportion of the presenters within the organisation are male, and not just that there is a large pressure on women working there to stay young-looking and attractive. Would a woman of the newly-knighted Bruce Forsyth's appearance be on the tele? No, but Brucey still keeps on dancing! Would a woman of Jeremy Clarkson’s appearance be on Something for the Weekend? No, Louise Redknapp is, but even she has a use-by date.

Miriam O’Reilly was dropped from her presenting role on Countryfile by the BBC because she’d reached her use-by date. She was 53 years-old and yet David Dimbleby at the ripe old age of 72 seems to be presenting Question Time just fine. These double standards don’t just exist in the BBC, they’re everywhere across Britain, within every sector you can think of women are being discriminated against because of their appearance, age, or even just the biological fact they possess a vagina instead of a penis.

I noticed that there was another Slutwalk over the weekend, an event where women dress in a ‘stutty’ fashion and parade through the streets in protest. I have to admit at first I thought this was a ridiculous idea that wouldn’t help the female cause much at all. But after looking into it, it’s actually a brilliant way of removing the blame from women when it comes to rape or other forms of sexual assault or harassment.

The argument all stems from a policeman who said that women should “avoid dressing like sluts” to avoid becoming a victim, effectively putting part of the blame onto them. Obviously statements like these, especially from the mouths of policemen, are going to cause uproar, and thus Slutwalks emerged, events where women express the fact that no matter what they wear they are never ‘fair-game’ or at fault for being raped. Rapists are to blame for rape, no one else.

Unfortunately though, in the modern world there are many horrid people who are pathetic enough to sexually assault women and it could be fair to say that they do single out the women who dress in as few clothes as possible simply because their minds are simple enough to think visible flesh equals sex. Whenever I’m out at night and I see girls who are wearing precious little and are so drunk they can barely stand I have to say I do worry about them. Another man may see the same girls and think of them as an easy-target. And that’s what worries me.

Women do need to be smart when going out, not just in what they wear, but how much they drink. They have to be responsible and make sure they’re within a group at all times. I have heard too many horror stories and witnessed too many narrow escapes for me not to worry about drunken women when I’m out, whether they be a friend of mine or a complete stranger.

A woman being irresponsible when on a night out could raise their chances of being attacked, does that make it her fault? No. However they do run a risk if they do not take the necessary level of care, just as cyclists do when they leave the house without their helmet. They shouldn’t have to worry about what they wear, but unfortunately not all rapists are in prison. I just hope young girls don’t misunderstand what the Slutwalk’s message is and end up thinking it’s telling them to dress like a slut because it’s empowering them somehow like the Playboy bunnies in London would claim.

That being said, Slutwalk’s message is a good one: no means no. It’s brought through a new generation of feminists as a lot of people on the march, from what I could see, were quite young, and not just female, which is also heavily important. You don’t have to be female to be a feminist. This battle is not man vs. woman, although it does sometimes feel that way, it’s easy to fall into that snake pit and view it as a war between the sexes.

Unfortunately some feminists are in that very snake pit, using any given opportunity to bash the male populous in order to gain feminine superiority. As far as I’m aware feminists want a fair society, men and women with equal rights in every department, they don’t want to have more rights than men, that would be against what they believe in.

Germaine Greer was on the Question Time panel last week with the sprightly David Dimbleby and at first her message was a good one, but unfortunately she went too far and ruined it for herself and all feminists.

She spoke about how young girls were being sexualised earlier than they should be and that these days they want to emulate the likes of Jordan in order to be in fashion and be accepted in society. She pointed to the Barbie doll which she described as being a fetish toy that puts an unrealistic ideal of what a woman's appearance should be. All of this I agree with. However she started to rant, saying all young girl’s clothing dresses them as “little tarts” and said that when girls “kiss daddy goodnight” it is encouraging them to be flirtatious and provocative. 

It was at this point where she ruined it for herself. How can it be wrong for a young girl to kiss her father? This was actually brought up by a member of the audience, a father, who was obviously offended by what she was saying. How did Greer react? Like anyone is a snake pit she fought back, immediately drawing the conclusion that because he was a male, he was the enemy.

As the member of the audience observed, surely a young girl would kiss her father goodnight because she loves him. Greer simply dug her heels in further and would not be moved on the issue. I agree with the audience member, a father-daughter relationship is a special one, imagine if we put a stop to it. A six year-old girl is ready for bed, she kisses her mother goodnight and then goes to kiss her father, who holds out his hand and says “no, no kisses.” How will that make the poor child feel? Of course idiots would tell you we'd be creating a country full of lesbians by doing that as well.

Feminists such as this need to be more objective and stop treating male opinion as a scathing attack on all females. I’m male, and I want a fair society in which no gender is deemed superior to the other, and I bet there are many other men out there who feel the same. I’m not having a go at Greer, I do actually like her, if I wanted to have a go at someone saying ludicrous things on last week’s Question Time I’d point at Peter Hitchens. I get her point but I just think she went too far and I saw a side to feminism that I didn’t like during the show.

I am buoyed though, by the young men and women who are getting involved in the Slutwalk protests. It’s another small step towards a fair society, and a big slap in the face of those who blame the victims of sexual assault.