However, men DO have the right, and can be expected to, treat women who dress like sluts like sluts. There is no reason to expect men to be able to differentiate between a woman who is dressing like a slut because she IS one and one who is dressing that way because she's stupid, naive, or fashion-illiterate.
Note that nowhere do I legitimize or endorse the rape of such women. I simply state that the reaction of men toward them is predictable and perfectly justifiable.
You've reinforced that reading in your response here. You write that men have a right to expect women to act according to the way you choose to categorize them, and thus when women fail, men are "perfectly justifi[ed]" in treating women who look or act like what you call sluts -- how, exactly? Again in this context, what can you mean if not that whatever men do to such a woman, it can't be rape? I don't see any reasonable reading of your comment in this context that doesn't suggest that non-consensual sexual contact is okay when the woman is dressed like a slut, and that's precisely what makes your argument fail. My point, which you conveniently ignored, is that you don't have any more right to force a woman you regard as a slut into a sexual encounter than a woman you regard as a lady. Only rape apologists insist men have a right to commit crimes against women as long as they're sluts, not nice women. The law doesn't define rape as a sexual assault against a woman the rapist, if he were being honest, would admit wasn't really a slut, but whom he attacked anyway. Rape is a sexual assault, and the rapist doesn't get to excuse himself by attacking the character of his victim.