Rape-aXe condoms (anti-rape device)

I didnt mean to say that rape was a hallmark of civillized society, you were distorting what I said thus being fallacious but w/E. Well.. But the thing is you arguments are pretty strong but I dont have anything else to say but I still think the product itself is flawed, there are ways to go around it and then so much for self defense, also perhaps it would encourage anal rape? Isnt that even worse?
 
You're right, I should have said "Allowing women to aggressively defend themselves against rape is a step backwards from civilization? Interesting."

As far as encouraging anal rape... I don't know. I think you're giving rapists a lot more credit for thinking things through than they probably deserve. In many cases, rape is a crime of opportunity, so I doubt a rapist would put that much thought into it.
 
But then, if an object like this is popularised in the US and beyond, can't a rapist just work out a way to remove it? It wouldn't take much to use an object to trigger it and then remove it before business as usual :hmmm: and what about if it has accidental use? Say a woman sleeps with her boyfriend but forgets to remove it? Then lets say they break up and he has another girlfriend and she sees the permanent scarring, it could render his ability to date, sleep with or even marry women a far more difficult road than what it could initially be all because of one woman forgetting something like that. Or at least, I assume these condoms are designed to feel comfortable, even to the point you will barely know it's there after a period of use.
 
Hahaha, ah this...

This, isn't going to go well either way.

If it catches on, it will become nefarious even among the "non-rapists" for choppin' up dicks, because of misuse. If it doesn't, it sucks terribly for the people who rape is a very real threat to. Most likely the latter, as I'm gonna go out on a wing here an say that most people don't worry about getting raped (to such a degree) on their way to/from where ever they may be going.

Good product, but unfortunately it is only within a limited scope. Bad product, for the same reasons that carrying a firearm is a bad idea. Accidents and ill intent happens.

Think I have to agree, that raising awareness on alternative methods for avoiding rape is a preferred path (other terms of self defense, as this is very much a last ditch effort). Although, I've not been raped.
 
Rorolina Frixell I agree with your post at almost all points, to be completely honest, Damon. I would't be surprised at if this were to gain popularity in major markets like the US that someone would figure out ways to remove said device either from themselves or from the woman. But the point you brought up that I cannot get past, and I tried, is that you compare the physical scarring of a man having this device being used against him to be a greater hindrance to their own life than that of a woman's being raped. The emotional scarring that comes from trauma like that alone has been shown in psychologial studies to lead to relationship issues, family issues, possible loss of employment because the emotional stress can develop deep psychological disturbances that we cannot see on the outside. A man's genitals having been cut, accident or no accident, i'm sorry, cannot be compared to and called a greater emotional disturbance.
 
That's why I wasn't sympathising with the rapist, I was talking about this happening to a completely innocent man, I completely sympathise that rape is wrong whether it's man on woman, woman on woman, woman on man or man on man. And honestly, I think this kind of thing is a step backwards in a fight against crime of any kind, not just rape in the form of it's method. Meeting one violent act with another isn't going to lower rape cases that significantly imo just like in America's case, I expect owning guns to protect yourself in the home won't significantly drop the risk of a break in or other home related crimes, feel free to disprove me there, I can't say that with 100% certainty :hmmm:

And honestly, if I had to give an opinion on this, it's going to cause more harm to men than aid to women because contrary to popular belief, women aren't people that are pure of heart and can do no wrong and I expect it won't be long till some woman, modern feminist or otherwise uses this on a most likely innocent man to make an example of the male gender and no doubt will be met with applause for her, laughter for men and elevated among the modern feminist community.
 
Again good points. :hmmm: We females, not generalizing but just saying on my own perspective, are indeed not a 'pure' gender and all. We can be just as malicious. But again, stats tend to trend more toward male-on-female rape. And it could be just on the fact, and I'm thinking this waspointed out earlier, that men don't always admit to being raped and therefore don't report it. but beside that, wouldn't you agree with me on two points:
1. You must realize that your example of a spiteful woman using this on an innocent man is a rather extreme example. Though not completely out of the realm of possibility, it's still at the far end of the spectrum.
2. This device is really just better off non-existant. :hmmm:
 
I wouldn't say it's extreme to the levels you describe, not commonplace of course, but far from a rare example, especially with the skewed view of feminism the past decade or so. As for the stats, it's more a case of a misandry led society, men are the only evil ones, only men can be evil, only men can be abusers and so on and so forth, to the point a woman can make an anti man hate speech and get a standing ovation and whatnot, but that's a topic for another thread so i'll leave it there.

As for your second point, I completely agree there, in the end, a violent tool shouldn't be used to solve a violent crime imo and this perception that this device seems to carry that only men seem to rape women is a flawed one and after looking stuff up on this, all it would take is, as I detailed above, is an object of similar shape, say a dildo or perhaps something along those lines to trigger the condom and then remove it, risk averted for the rapist then. And in the case of women on women, they don't have to run this risk as much, certainly not to the point of getting physical harm of the same fashion so it falls flat in that regard too, if you want a true anti rape condom it needs to counter both genders, while men may be the primary rapists they don't make up the absolute sum of all rape and certainly don't make up the bulk of the figures.
 
I've got to say, you've argued your opinion very well about this. I've just been a bystander of this thread for quite a while, but, as I said a few hours ago, the comment of how a woman could 'simply forget about it' really stirred something in me and I just had to say something about it. Now i see though, despite some wording, your bare argument is really good. I've said my piece of this debate.
 
I think we should take into account that men can use this too. And not only gay men.

to explain further, A man can easily jam one of these on some poor guy. He doesn't need to be gay. He also doesn't need to have a vagina. All he needs to do is be psychotic and insane enough to corner someone, strip em, and wreak havoc.

And psychotic women, they can easily do this as well. Corner their victim. ECt Ect.

Personally, I feel this will become more of a weapon than a rape preventor. People will use this on men. And rapists will know what to look out for. Once someone uses it as a weapon, it's noteriety will rise. Thus people will use it more. I hate rape just as much as the next person, but this could easily become a terrifying weapon.

Maybe it will work though? Maybe it will stop rapists dead in their tracks and my ranting is just paranoia. I hope it is. But the possibilty is still there and we should be careful.

I also hope I didn't come off saying: "Women don't need something like this!" Because I really didn't. I'm just exploring the possibilities of this being used as a weapon.
 
Alright ... Koromaru and Rorolina Frixell couldnt have expressed my thoughts better. That was exactly what I was trying to say. Its like the death penalty, when it was removed in european countries several dozen years ago the crime rate didnt even rise. If we are trying to use this device as something to prevent rape, I think it might succeed a few times but then thats the end of it.
Also when I was being condescending about torture and all that, my point was exactly what Rorolina Frixell said afterwards. And I completely agree with Koromaru, I see this used more as a weapon than the original purpose itself.
 
Man what am I even reading from some of you... this is a tool to help women who are in a position where they may be raped E.G. The women in Africa have a higher chance of getting raped than learning to read.

You can't go out the house in Africa without being scared someone will jump you and rape you. It's literally like that, so why would't you want the women there to have a tool like this which can help them or at least mark the man that rapes them so he is forced to go to the hospital, which makes him easier for the cops to catch?

I actually highly doubt this will go to america where all these mental women you're talking about supposedly live, where every woman is apparently a psycho just waiting to use this device on any unsuspecting man. :wacky: and yeah, there are crazy people out there, men and women... but like I said, they're going to harm someone if they want to, using this thing or not... so I don't really see your point.
 
All my point is saying is that it could be used as a weapon. Not to prevent rape.

That's it. No matter where this actually is, it's the fact that it can be used as a weapon. I'm sure this will save someone's life and save them from a truly traumatic experience. But we still need to be careful with this. Just like we need to be careful with guns, or knives, or drugs, and so forth.
 
If it is specifically adopted in Africa, where the need seems to be crucial perhaps it would be okay. But outside it...no I dont trust people enough to use this kind of stuff the way they are supposed to be used. We live in a shitty world.
 
I'll just say that my first thought after reading this was "Oh great, so some psycho bitch can use this on her boyfriend/husband when she's mad at him and he'll automatically be assumed to be a rapist by anyone that treats him."

This is something that began with good intentions (probably), but I believe the execution would be rather poor. At least, in most of America. Rape is detestable, but women are not immune to callous acts of betrayal. And I would think stabbing your loved one during a very intimate time is the ultimate form of betrayal, second only to turning on your fellow soldiers in a battlefield, or giving a friend over to death.

No, this device is better left unused. Also, I would advise people to not use made up statistics. "Percentage of unreported rapes" is faulty logic. Unless a rape is reported, you have absolutely no idea if it happened. So, better to report the actual facts, such as the number of reported rapes. Generalized stats like "99% of rapes are women" and the like help no one. What are you trying to prove stating that? Focus on everyone that needs help, regardless of gender.
 
Stoic Hero said:
I'll just say that my first thought after reading this was "Oh great, so some psycho bitch can use this on her boyfriend/husband when she's mad at him and he'll automatically be assumed to be a rapist by anyone that treats him."This is something that began with good intentions (probably), but I believe the execution would be rather poor. At least, in most of America. Rape is detestable, but women are not immune to callous acts of betrayal. And I would think stabbing your loved one during a very intimate time is the ultimate form of betrayal, second only to turning on your fellow soldiers in a battlefield, or giving a friend over to death.No, this device is better left unused. Also, I would advise people to not use made up statistics. "Percentage of unreported rapes" is faulty logic. Unless a rape is reported, you have absolutely no idea if it happened. So, better to report the actual facts, such as the number of reported rapes. Generalized stats like "99% of rapes are women" and the like help no one. What are you trying to prove stating that? Focus on everyone that needs help, regardless of gender.
Click to expand...
This is an excellent fucking point.Women aren't innocent, and I personally can name too many to count that would use their gender to fuck up a member of the opposite sex. Discrimination against men is all too common in the courts.
 
I remember reading an article about this a while ago, both me and a friend first thought this was an excellent idea. Then both she and I thought more into it, and here is our argument against:

1) for the penis to be inside the contraption and inside the woman for the "jaws effect" to kick in, means that the rape has ALREADY occurred.
2) it presumes that vaginal rape is the only kind of rape.
3) it presumes that only women are raped.
4) it (according to patriarchal tradition) presumes that the onus for rape prevention is on the potential victim and not the potential rapist AND presumes that the onus for proving guilt should be placed on the victim.
5) it presumes that a woman would be able to quickly get away from her attacker and not get beaten to death by the rapist and/or his possible rape enablers.
6) it presumes that the woman does not know or live in the same community as her attacker/s, and would not face 'revenge' attacks from the perpetrator or his friends/family for using a dick shredder.
7) it presumes that rapists suddenly won't use the excuse and judges suddenly won't believe the age old "but she tricked me! It was consensual, then, once my dick was shredded, i realised she was getting back at me for stealing her lunch money/calling her fat five years ago/because she's a devious she-slut man-hater etc".
8) in cases where a woman was not using this contraption, it presumes that rapists suddenly won't use the excuse and judges suddenly won't believe a defence on the lines of "but she wasn't wearing a dick death trap, so she was asking for it".
9) any "think about teh menz" defence you can mansplain
10) it presumes that men won't simply start their rape by checking the victim's vagina with their fingers first.
11) it presumes that actual PIV penetration is the only violent, violating process at play during rape.
12) advertising this device as a scare tactic for rapists is more likely to increase the prevalence of anal/oral rape, than to reduce rape incidences themselves.
13) it presumes that anyone female assigned at birth (FAAB) will be physically able to use this contraption.
14) it presumes all women raped are FAAB
15) Cheesus, how many times do feminists/womanists have to explain this. The only way to prevent rape is for rapists to stop raping, for rapists not to become rapists in the first place.

Rape is not only a series of individual attacks, it is a prevalent, patriarchally endemic ideology. A device that reinforces the patriarchal message that potential victims (abso-fucking-lutely anyone) can prevent their own rapes, in this case by inserting teeth into their orifices, is victim blaming, nothing more, nothing less, and it sure as hell doesn't do anything to stop rape.

One small step towards actual progress would be for the money spent on inventing crappy dick shredder devices to be used instead on developing effective community/school programmes a) educating men about how women are in fact human beings and not fuck holes, b) demonstrating that misogynist masculinity is not the only type of masculinity and offering alternative models, and c) ensuring a proper system of accountability is in place whereby the whole legal system is not patriarchal and male dominated, with misogynists working at every level of the "justice" system from police officer, legal council to judge and all that's in between, so rapists actually do get convicted for their crimes more than once in a blue moon.

If nothing is done to change mentalities around rape among the general public and within the criminal justice system, a penis trapper will do nothing to prevent rapes, it just means that more rapists are going to walk free with dick scars.

Thats about all my rage can muster now...I will probably add more later. Over and out
 
Katie Kool-eyes said:
I remember reading an article about this a while ago, both me and a friend first thought this was an excellent idea. Then both she and I thought more into it, and here is our argument against:

1) for the penis to be inside the contraption and inside the woman for the "jaws effect" to kick in, means that the rape has ALREADY occurred.
2) it presumes that vaginal rape is the only kind of rape.
3) it presumes that only women are raped.
4) it (according to patriarchal tradition) presumes that the onus for rape prevention is on the potential victim and not the potential rapist AND presumes that the onus for proving guilt should be placed on the victim.
5) it presumes that a woman would be able to quickly get away from her attacker and not get beaten to death by the rapist and/or his possible rape enablers.
6) it presumes that the woman does not know or live in the same community as her attacker/s, and would not face 'revenge' attacks from the perpetrator or his friends/family for using a dick shredder.
7) it presumes that rapists suddenly won't use the excuse and judges suddenly won't believe the age old "but she tricked me! It was consensual, then, once my dick was shredded, i realised she was getting back at me for stealing her lunch money/calling her fat five years ago/because she's a devious she-slut man-hater etc".
8) in cases where a woman was not using this contraption, it presumes that rapists suddenly won't use the excuse and judges suddenly won't believe a defence on the lines of "but she wasn't wearing a dick death trap, so she was asking for it".
9) any "think about teh menz" defence you can mansplain
10) it presumes that men won't simply start their rape by checking the victim's vagina with their fingers first.
11) it presumes that actual PIV penetration is the only violent, violating process at play during rape.
12) advertising this device as a scare tactic for rapists is more likely to increase the prevalence of anal/oral rape, than to reduce rape incidences themselves.
13) it presumes that anyone female assigned at birth (FAAB) will be physically able to use this contraption.
14) it presumes all women raped are FAAB
15) Cheesus, how many times do feminists/womanists have to explain this. The only way to prevent rape is for rapists to stop raping, for rapists not to become rapists in the first place.

Rape is not only a series of individual attacks, it is a prevalent, patriarchally endemic ideology. A device that reinforces the patriarchal message that potential victims (abso-fucking-lutely anyone) can prevent their own rapes, in this case by inserting teeth into their orifices, is victim blaming, nothing more, nothing less, and it sure as hell doesn't do anything to stop rape.

One small step towards actual progress would be for the money spent on inventing crappy dick shredder devices to be used instead on developing effective community/school programmes a) educating men about how women are in fact human beings and not fuck holes, b) demonstrating that misogynist masculinity is not the only type of masculinity and offering alternative models, and c) ensuring a proper system of accountability is in place whereby the whole legal system is not patriarchal and male dominated, with misogynists working at every level of the "justice" system from police officer, legal council to judge and all that's in between, so rapists actually do get convicted for their crimes more than once in a blue moon.

If nothing is done to change mentalities around rape among the general public and within the criminal justice system, a penis trapper will do nothing to prevent rapes, it just means that more rapists are going to walk free with dick scars.

Thats about all my rage can muster now...I will probably add more later. Over and out
Click to expand...

"Dick Shredder", Ahaa. I love that. Good views though.

I was kind of shocked when I read the original post, I was not aware of the existence of this. And yeah, it does sound like a good idea at first, but it really will fuck people over in the end.

Might as well just make a rapist exclusive prison, and let them all go at it with each other. But then we'd actually need to get honest convictions... Fuck, we're not that perfect in this world.
So yeah, preventative education seems to be the only real deal solution. And if we could, as a whole society, actually start instilling real morals in our youths again, that would greatly reinforce that preventative education. You know, shit like... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated. (You want to get raped? Didn't think so.) This next one would be a real doozy judging by our recent trends, but, RESPECT others. Naturally when you respect someone, you usually don't rape them. We can try out not wanting to be so promiscuous, or generally not supporting promiscuity. I think a society with lots of promiscuity would probably cultivate quite a few rapists.

Reforming rape penalties might also discourage potential offenders. This is just my opinion, but 6 years penalty in the United States seems like a slap in the face to any rape victim. I'd bet my own genitals that the victim still remembers every detail long after that offender is discharged from prison.
 
it really kills me when ya'll are like "but who will think of the MEN" even in a situation like this, even resorting to "some psycho bitch". if there's a more obvious way to express your misogyny other than coming out and saying it, i haven't come across it yet

i'm not entirely sure how any sane person would see this and snicker thinking ah yes, finally a way to mutilate an unsuspecting man's penis

if you're complaining about misandry and at the same time use the word rape in casual everyday language and practice misogyny (whether it's apparent to you or not) you need to go back and think about that again friend

We can try out not wanting to be so promiscuous, or generally not supporting promiscuity. I think a society with lots of promiscuity would probably cultivate quite a few rapists.
Click to expand...

acting like people don't have control of their own bodies encourages rape more than being accepting of promiscuity does
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top