20. That said, it has been shown that gender preconceptions have an undue impact on investigations, revealing that the punishment of aggressors may depend on an opinion founded on the victim’s physical appearance, her clothing. We are faced with a scenario in which women are unable to express their culture, individuality, ideas and religious beliefs without suffering coercion. 21. The normalization and frequent impunity of the violence specifically experienced by women whose clothes differ from those normally worn by members of society prevents clothing being used as a form of freely expressing the individuality, identity, social or political position of women. The implicit message of the ineffectual investigation in these cases is that expressing control of one’s own body by the free choice of clothes may place a woman in a situation of special vulnerability. 22. The choice of clothes may be considered not only as the exercise of a general personal right, but also as a right to freedom of expression. Thus, a judgment made on the clothes chosen has an impact on respect for a woman’s identity; and this, in turn, is connected to her conception of the world, her lifestyle and her identification with a specific social group. 23. In this case, the conduct of the State authorities determining the diligence in the investigation in keeping with directives based on the way the victim chose to express her identity, has the impact of pressuring other women to conform to standards of clothing considered appropriate, at the risk of experiencing maximum discrimination. Indeed, associating clothes not only with a woman’s status, but also with her membership of a socially and economically marginalized sector because she had a navel piercing and wore sandals, resulted in exposing the victim to multiple discriminations based on gender, social condition, age and economic status. Establishing a relationship between the protection of judicial guarantees and the way in which a woman decides to present herself to the world is a way of preventing the full exercise of freedom of expression and ideas owing to the evident punishment imposed. 24. Lastly, it is worth pointing out that the attitude of the State authorities revealed another serious error, because it did not relate to the reality of this case. It made clear that, if the victim had been a prostitute or gang member, she would not have deserved the same State protection against abuse and rape. It should be placed on record that it is evident that everyone has the right to equal protection of the State. 25. Thus, in addition to the considerations and conclusions of the judgment, with which I agree, I would add that there was also a violation of Articles 13(1) and 22(1), in relation to Article 1(1), of the American Convention on Human Rights. III. Concluding considerations 26. Based on the foregoing, it is undeniable that clothing is an important, even essential, dimension of human expression, whether cultural, national, regional, group, generational, gender, racial, spiritual or individual. In the latter sphere, it may be a component of a person’s identity, of personality, of individuality, of diversity and even of their sensuality. In the specific case of women, these characteristic traits may be accentuated and should not only be tolerated, but also accepted; and not just accepted, but respected; and not just respected, but protected and even promoted as a distinctive trait, provide this is what the woman decides. Any restriction, discrimination or stigmatization becomes abusive and to be condemned, especially if it is perpetrated by State agents, who have the obligation to educate, respect and protect the way women express themselves in society, and are definitively prohibited from denying assistance, or lessening the quality of the assistance, based on the clothing worn by a woman, revealing a sexist or unequal attitude. In different societies, women use clothimg with colors, 5