But supporters of the slut walk, showing their affinity for Communist tactics, did not extend the same tolerance in return. The following account, with photos, was published by Matt Heimbach on Occidental Dissent:
“4 of us against the slutwalk, the Reds attacked us, surrounded us with sheets, screamed in our faces and praised the murder of women and children in the gulags, in Dresden, and in the Ukrainian Holodomor. They chanted, they shoved, they spit, they even tore our cross into pieces and spit upon the very name of Christ from a sign we had that sad “Jesus loves you” but through all of that, Trad Youth stood its ground. No one will intimidate us, no one will stop us, and these are our streets.”
The Indiana Daily Student addressed the Traditionalist Youth Network activism in their report, although they omitted any reference to the physical attack:
As the march began, participants were warned to refrain from interacting with any members of Trad Youth, who had set up a protest of the march at the corner of Kirkwood and Indiana avenues. Supporters of the Slut Walk attempted to cover the Trad Youth protesters and their sign with sheets.
Matthew Heimbach, a co-founder of Trad Youth, said the issue the group had was with slut culture, not with rape culture and sexual assault.
“We stand against both the slut culture and the bro culture that promotes sexual promiscuity amongst IU students,” Heimbach said. “We came to be able to encourage people to live a modest and chaste lifestyle, but also to stand against the rape culture.”
Trad Youth protesters set up at 6 p.m. with signs reading “Against Rape Culture, Against Slut Culture, Slut Culture Hurts Everyone,” among others.
Tensions were high among Trad Youth members and Slut Walk supporters attempting to hide their protest. One woman holding a sheet felt her breast grazed by a Trad Youth member and angrily called him out on it.
“Is that rape culture?” the Trad Youth member asked. “Do you feel triggered? You don’t look triggered.”
The Traditionalist Youth Network identified four purposes for mounting a visible opposition at the slut walk:
(1). The Slut-Walk movement and the “sex-positive” movement in general embraces the concept of chastity shaming. So-called “liberal movements” have taken to condemning and criticizing women and men who choose to wait until marriage for sexual relations.
(2). Highlighting under-reported sexual assault of men by women. Our culture seems to have a view that the rape of men by women does not happen, and if it did that it would not be as traumatic as when it happens to women. Where is the justice for underage boys and girls who are preyed on by women predators? When this itself is based on a misogynistic double standard that women can’t be assertive and the men should have to want sex. And how about frequent false accusations of rape directed against men?
(3). A “slut” is a sexual object. Consequently, embracing the title is contributing to sexual objectification which itself is at the basis for rape culture and slut shaming. Also, younger girls are getting exposed to looser sexual standards that cause them to lose self-respect. If our slut-walkers were really concerned with the rights of women, they would not be helping to contribute to harmful stereotypes and messages that actually harm young girls. Rather or not this is intentional, embracing the concept of a “slut” is harmful to young girls.
(4). The slutwalk movement fundamentally misunderstands human nature. Although we need further education into the nature of consent, simply “educating” (brainwashing) men not to rape will not solve the problem. Watching television does not create rapists anymore then women wearing provocative clothes. They are created out of an unfortunate surfacing of rage and misogyny. Human beings are not blank slates who are educated to act a certain way and act in accordance with the environment they were brought up in, they are unique individuals born with a free mind, together with pre-programmed feelings and which can be activated by their environment. It is a pure and unfortunate utopian naivety to say that rape can be eradicated through education. So advising women how to not get raped should not be seen as “misogynistic”.
The Traditionalist Youth Network does not want to place cameras in every bedroom. Instead, they object to the opposite extreme; the glorification of sexual immorality as a virtue. The mass media glorifies sexual immorality to the point to where we now have middle-schoolers performing sex acts upon one another; this did not happen when I was a middle-schooler. Rap music portrays women as nothing but "bitches" and "hos" worthy to be little more than cum dumps. The glamorization of sexual immorality has discouraged marriage and has triggered an explosion of single parenthood through out of wedlock pregnancies. And our national treasure is increasingly consumed by the proliferation of gimmedats directed towards women who get pregnant out of wedlock. Furthermore, how does sexual immorality correlate with the 14 Words?
When a man puts a baby in a woman's belly, but then does the right thing, take financial responsibility and marry the woman, it is THEIR business. However, when a man puts a baby in a woman's belly and then runs away from it, it becomes OUR business, particularly when OUR tax dollars are spent to support the mother and child. A woman also has a responsibility to accept a legitimate proposal of marriage from a man who impregnates a woman out of wedlock; Bristol Palin did not set a positive example by imposing impossible conditions of perfection upon Levi Johnson.
Perhaps the Traditionalist Youth Network protest seemed a bit amateurish on the surface, as some commenters to Occidental Dissent implied. But it also served to expose the totalitarian and prospectively homicidal nature of the opposition.