6 minutes
When I first heard about National Denim Day (April 24), I assumed it was born from the fashion industry in an attempt to sell more jeans, like Rice Krispie Treat Day (September 18) or International Coffee Day (October 1). I couldn’t be more wrong. If you’re not familiar either, you need to know the origin of National Denim Day. If you’re already in-the-know, please share this article with someone who is not.
Trigger warning: the content includes mentions of sexual assault. Due to the gravity of the content, we will not showcase denim for rent at Armoire in this article.
The origin of National Denim Day is rooted in a landmark case in Italy, where a young woman was sexually assaulted. The subsequent legal proceedings led to a controversial decision by the Italian Supreme Court which catalyzed a movement to raise awareness and support for survivors of sexual assault.
The Case That Sparked the Origin of National Denim Day
The landmark case in Italy, commonly known as the “jeans case” or “denim case,” sparked international outrage and led to significant legal and societal discussions regarding sexual violence, consent, and victim blaming.
In 1992, in the city of Ancona, Italy, an 18-year-old woman reported to the police that she had been sexually assaulted by her driving instructor. She recounted that during a driving lesson, the instructor had driven her to an isolated area, where he then sexually assaulted her. Following the assault, the woman sought legal action, and the case went to trial.
During the trial, the defense attorney for the accused driving instructor argued that the woman’s account of the assault was not credible, asserting that she had consented to sexual activity. The defense presented a controversial argument based on the fact that she was wearing tight jeans at the time of the assault. They contended that because her jeans were tight, she must have assisted her attacker in removing them, implying consent.
This argument gained traction in the courtroom, and ultimately, the Italian Supreme Court made a shocking decision in 1998 to overturn the conviction of the driving instructor.
The Movement
The court’s decision sparked widespread outrage both within Italy and internationally. Many viewed the ruling as an example of victim blaming, where the survivor of sexual assault was unfairly blamed for the violence perpetrated against her based on her clothing choice. The decision also highlighted broader societal attitudes toward sexual violence and consent, exposing deep-seated misconceptions and biases.
In response to the court’s decision and as a gesture of solidarity with the survivor, women in the Italian Parliament wore jeans to work, protesting against the ruling and expressing support for the woman and all survivors of sexual assault. This act of solidarity helped to draw attention to the case and ignite discussions about victim blaming, consent, and the treatment of survivors within the legal system and society at large.
The “jeans case” in Italy became a catalyst for advocacy and activism against sexual violence, inspiring movements such as Denim Day, which seeks to raise awareness, challenge misconceptions, and support survivors. The case serves as a poignant reminder of the ongoing struggle to combat rape culture, promote consent, and ensure justice and support for survivors of sexual assault.
The backlash was far and wide, gaining international attention and inspiring a group of women in Los Angeles to organize a similar demonstration. In 1999, Patricia Giggans, the Executive Director of the Los Angeles Commission on Assaults Against Women, alongside colleagues, established Denim Day in LA as a way to raise awareness about sexual violence and challenge misconceptions surrounding consent and victim blaming. They encouraged participants to wear jeans on a designated day each year, typically the last Wednesday of April, to show support for survivors of sexual assault and to protest against attitudes that blame victims based on their clothing or behavior.
Since then, National Denim Day has further evolved into a global movement, with individuals, organizations, and communities worldwide participating in this symbolic gesture of solidarity and activism. The campaign has been embraced by various advocacy groups, educational institutions, workplaces, and communities as a means raise awareness, educate others about the prevalence and impact of sexual violence, and promote conversations about consent, victim blaming, and supporting women.
Wear your jeans with purpose on Wednesday and tell anyone who will listen about the origin of National Denim Day. Societal norms can change. Together we can deliver a powerful reminder of the importance of challenging attitudes that perpetuate rape culture and victim blaming. By wearing denim and engaging in conversations about sexual violence, consent, and support for survivors, participants contribute to a collective effort to create a safer and more supportive environment for all individuals affected by sexual assault.
Confidential, free assistance for victims of sexual assault is available 24/7 through the RAINN organization.
Enough is enough
Unfortunately, we have a long way to go to change attitudes surrounding violence against women. Numerous court rulings since the denim case illustrate the pervasiveness of victim blaming within the legal system right here in the U.S. Here are just a few examples:
- State of Oklahoma v. Julius Jones (2002): Julius Jones was convicted of murder in Oklahoma. During the trial, Jones’s defense team attempted to raise doubts about his guilt by suggesting the victim had been killed by his own wife. The defense’s strategy included portraying the grieving widow as promiscuous and dishonest, drawing criticism for perpetuating harmful stereotypes and engaging in victim blaming.
- State v. Petersen (2019): In this case in Arizona, a woman who had been sexually assaulted by a police officer during a traffic stop faced scrutiny and victim blaming during the trial. Despite evidence supporting her account of the assault, including DNA evidence, the defense attempted to discredit her by suggesting she would have consented to the encounter based on her relationship history. The defense’s tactics, which included questioning the survivor’s credibility and character, drew criticism for perpetuating rape myths and placing the blame on the survivor rather than the perpetrator.
- State of Alabama v. Marshae Jones (2019): Marshae Jones, a woman in Alabama, was charged with manslaughter after she was shot in the stomach and miscarried as a result. The charges were brought against Jones despite the fact she was the victim of the shooting and had not initiated the altercation that led to her injury. Critics denounced the prosecution, arguing that Jones was being punished for the actions of her assailant and for the outcome of a traumatic event over which she had no control.
