The “Skinny Jeans” Rape Defense
Like any red-blooded Bostonian girl, I like to regularly check in with Barstool Sports for my (sometimes) daily dose of bums, babes, broads and baseball. In addition to the four b’s, El Presidente likes to get newsy, scoping out teacher-on-student sex scandals and any arrest involving a hooker. Just last week, he picked up a piece from the New York Daily News about an Australian rape conviction that had been overturned based on the “Skinny Jeans Defense.” Intrigued? So was I.
The defense, which has been used successfully in both Australia in 2010 and South Korea in 2008, basically says that to get a girl out of her skinny jeans, a little “collaboration” must be used by both parties. Such collaboration, as it were, would mean the sex was in fact consensual, and therefore, not rape.
As absurd as this may seem, it rings a little true. If you’ve ever worn skinny jeans (or even more problematic: denim leggings), you’re quite familiar with the process one must engage in to remove them. It can involve, but is not limited to: lying down, squatting, turning the jeans completely inside out to get them off, explosive pockets that don’t want to stay tucked in, loss of blood flow, etc. It’s not an easy task and is definitely aided by a willing participant.
All joking aside, I’m hesitant to completely dismiss this defense as a one-off bout of ridiculousness on foreign soil. It rings eerily similar to the “She’s dressed like a slut, so she deserved it” rape defense that was oh-so-popular a couple of decades ago. Girls shouldn’t have to consider their clothing a liability when accusing someone of violating them.
If that were the case, we’d all forgo the slutty cat/nurse/Disney princess costumes and dress like nuns on Halloween. I don’t think any guy would appreciate that.
Posted by Amelia