It’s hard to be a girl these days. Cover up with floor-length hemlines and high-collared shirts and you might be considered a prude. Wear a miniskirt and a tube top and you risk being called a slut.

These issues resurfaced during the Steubenville, Ohio, rape case with CNN’s overly sympathetic coverage of the two convicted boys. Many following the case blamed the victim for dressing too promiscuously.

When Victoria’s Secret fashion line Pink debuted its Bright Young Things campaign, which featured brightly colored panties with slogans like “Call Me,” “Wild” and “Feeling Lucky” on them, it angered so many parents that they started a Facebook page to end the campaign.

Parents were upset their teenagers were being “sexually objectified.” But do they really expect 16- and 17-year-olds to continue wearing Hello Kitty underwear as they mature?

The reality is this: The average American first has sex at about 17 years old. By 19, seven out of 10 teenagers are sexually active. If a teenager wants to wear undies with “provocative” sayings on them, so be it.

This got me thinking about how society can dictate what is considered “slutty.”

Fashion reporter Suzy Menkes wrote an article for T Magazine in which she praises long sleeves and hemlines, as shown in the Valentino spring collection.

Titled “A Modest Proposal,” the article says, “The new protagonist is Valentino and its design duo, whose modest capes, long-sleeved, calf-length dresses and general gentility has wiped out a decade of slut style on the runways.”

The gowns she refers to are long, floral, shapeless dresses that wouldn’t look good on anyone bigger than a size 2. So if you’re anything other than a skinny, statuesque model, you’d look ridiculous. Yet Menkes says that covering up seems sexier and more modern than baring skin.

My problem with this is that she is calling any style that isn’t completely covered up, “slut style.” This risks lumping any designer who uses shorter hemlines into a “slutty designer” category.

Is wearing a kaftan the only way to be considered classy, elegant or anything other than a slut?

One of the worst insults a woman can use on another woman is by calling her a slut. And that usually happens based on what the other is wearing. It’s like feminism hasn’t reached fashion.

If you want to cover up or want to wear Daisy Duke cutoff shorts, it’s your prerogative.

Obviously, certain situations call for certain attire. For instance, if you wear a low-cut top to the office, it’s probably inappropriate. Yet it’s still disheartening that fashion heavyweights like Menkes and T Magazine editor Deborah Needleman are reducing women’s fashion to two categories: “classy” and “slutty.”

What’s worse is that some people say women are “asking for” sexual harassment, or even sexual assault, when they wear revealing clothes.

Women should be able to wear whatever makes them feel comfortable, free of judgment. But that might be too much to ask for in a society of people who judge for sport in shows like “Fashion Police” and “What Not To Wear.”

It should be a part of modern feminism that women aren’t confined to a certain uniform. Fashion is a way of expressing yourself, and society shouldn’t dictate it.

In the end, people should look their best, whatever that means to them. If wearing revealing clothes to the bar makes you happy, go for it. If you feel more comfortable covered up, that’s fine. Just don’t label, ladies.

Allison Mariotti is a senior magazine journalism major. She has too many shoes to count, but could always use another pair. Her fashion column appears every Monday in Pulp. She can be reached at admariot@syr.edu.

Published on April 22, 2013 at 3:03 am