# Chem Students Come Up With Nail Polish That Detects Date Rape Drugs



## Stelmaria (Sep 30, 2011)

koalaroo said:


> But why can't people, you know, not rape?


Do you want a serious sociological answer?

We live in culture of violence and a few people are going to push the boundaries far more.

The same society that thinks it is okay to bully others, okay to bomb the shit out of other countries, to torture prisoners, is also going to create people who think that it is okay to sexually assault others.


----------



## castigat (Aug 26, 2012)

What I want to know in these situations is why it's a sudden witch hunt for people that think this is a good idea. All of the purported victim blaming because of products made to help victims _defend themselves._

There's nothing saying we can't educate while defending, because it's asinine to say that education alone will solve the problem. "People just shouldn't rape" is fucking grand, but any sense of precluding self-defense in honor of education as the sole preventative measure is just. . .no.

People are not going to stop raping, murdering, stealing, or pillaging just because they're educated not to. This is _why_ these things are made: to serve as a failsafe. "Just in case", not "you must use this because we can't expect you to be able to handle yourself or for perpetrators to stop being dickheads". 

We do not live in a utopia. We will not live in one for a very long time, because Western society is geared toward _fighting_ change rather than encouraging it, and like fuck people are going to agree on a certain way to prevent crimes—which is exactly why there are so many options. Choices. Education is very important, but we can't expect it to be able to solve the problem outright (it won't now, at least; that isn't to say it won't help reduce crime in the future). Until these preventative measures actually kick in, it's _*good for everyone*_ to have options and abilities to defend themselves against _any_ criminal, and thinking that victims of crime should never defend themselves because they shouldn't _have_ to is just—what if people _want_ these options for their own safety? It'd be bullshit to prevent them from being able to use it. I'm not assuming that people are saying blatantly that we should tear these things down, but looking at "Well, self-defense is shit because victim blaming"-esque comments every time I see this article or ones like it gets grating. 

Why is it so bad? Why can't people use it? What if it actually helps people? What if it's used in conjunction with education? If it doesn't work, then use something else—because we can't make people not do things/they will not stop being an ass just because we tell them to, unless we live in a society like Psycho-Pass.

Saying that people should _only_ use self-defensive measures because we can't teach criminals to stop being bad/we can't expect victims to be able to defend themselves - bullshit
Saying that we should only use education to prevent crime - bullshit. Why? It cannot be prevented 100%, no matter how much people want it to. *This would appeal more if humans were not a shitty species (considering history and their psychological makeup, not misanthropy).* Unfortunately, because humans as a whole are predisposed to this bullshit, education alone isn't going to work immediately, which is why preventative measures used by both sides is the best idea. Advocation for this isn't placing responsibility on victims because "people rape, oh well, BFD" (at least, not for me), it's making sure that the problem is tackled from _*every angle available in order to optimize prevention until we can rely on only one of them.*_

TL;DR









Every time I see this article there's a comment war of "this nail polish is horseshit because people shouldn't rape" and "this nail polish is a good idea (in conjunction with education and other preventative measures) because it _helps prevent the crime_".

I am not looking out for the criminals. I am saying that some criminals are incorrigible, others don't respond to rehabilitation (no, this doesn't mean we should stop trying), and other people still may still be complete dickwits despite going through a course/several courses about Not Being An Asshole 101, which means that in order to ensure safety of people they might victimize, said people should be able to defend themselves by any means possible/available and that this isn't some institutionalized attempt at oppression (unless you've got an outstanding argument to the contrary) but a method to keep people safe. 

Until we can come to a time when education is more powerful than it isn't, we should use every other option at our disposal to help keep people safe. When crime dwindles and there is enough expectation for people to be kind to their fellow (wo)man, _then_ I would be screaming about how they should be 100% expected to not do this bullshit. They are expected not to do this bullshit now and it's heinous, but in a more peaceful society, it would be even less excusable. Until then, I will just be leering at criminals (and the justice system) and pushing for improvements _across the board_, not just on one side.


----------



## aef8234 (Feb 18, 2012)

Snowy Leopard said:


> Do you want a serious sociological answer?
> 
> We live in culture of violence and a few people are going to push the boundaries far more.
> 
> The same society that thinks it is okay to bully others, okay to bomb the shit out of other countries, to torture prisoners, is also going to create people who think that it is okay to sexually assault others.


Soooo... your source-claim? Honestly, this "society" is more neutral than chaotic neutral.


----------



## conscius (Apr 20, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> Well, I mean, my thinking is ... if someone gets roofied at a club when this becomes available, how is that going to play out in a criminal trial? A defense lawyer is going to blame the woman for not having on the correct nail polish.


Good idea, so let people get raped then, so that a hypothetical lawyer would not hypothetically blame for not wearing a nail polish that detects rape drugs, in a case which hypothetically ends up in favor of the rapist (for the said reason alone)!

Are you serious?!

Also, since when has asking people to take responsibility for themselves to prevent becoming victimized has come to mean victim-blaming?


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@OP I like this idea



koalaroo said:


> This just puts the burden back on victims, imo. I mean, it's cool. But why can't people, you know, not rape?


the same reason people can't not steal, murder, commit fraud, black mail, domestically abuse, etc. people are always going to commit crimes, that is the reality. asking "why can't they just not do it in the first place?" doesn't solve anything


----------



## Mee2 (Jan 30, 2014)

Really can't see this having much of an impact. As someone said, who the fuck stirs every drink that they get handed with their finger? And I'll add to that: who the fuck stirs every drink they get handed... when they're _drunk_. Though, I could almost approve of it just because the look on a guy's face having just been caught trying to roofie someone would be priceless. Too bad I think a lot of these women would end up being abused/raped anyway. 

What I don't understand is how people can actually get away with this to begin with. Apparently flunitrazepam can be detected up to five days after ingesting it and what's the chance someone's going to have consensual sex, roofie themselves and then falsely accuse rape? I guess no weird rape conspiracy is too bizarre these days. 

The nail polish itself isn't a bad thing but sometimes the conversations surrounding such products are. In this very thread people have dismissed the possibility of stopping men from raping women. If they just mean that it can't be done quickly or completely then they're obviously correct but to me it just sounds like they're resistant to the idea in general, and there's already far too much of that going around. Men need to be educated, sure, but we also need a better legal system that actually holds them responsible for their actions, we need a society that doesn't ask what women were wearing at the time or blame them for daring to venture out past a certain time or whatever. Wait, what am I thinking? You can't change that stuff. This nail polish is totally the way to go. :dry:


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

conscius said:


> Good idea, so let people get raped then, so that a hypothetical lawyer would not hypothetically blame for not wearing a nail polish that detects rape drugs, in a case which hypothetically ends up in favor of the rapist (for the said reason alone)!
> 
> Are you serious?!
> 
> Also, since when has asking people to take responsibility for themselves to prevent becoming victimized has come to mean victim-blaming?


Because if someone doesn't have this nail polish and is raped, this is how the culprit is going to get away with rape. It's going to happen, because the victim will be told she didn't protect herself correctly. It's the same line of thinking as women not wearing certain clothes...


----------



## Random Person (Apr 30, 2013)

This sounds more naive than anything else, really. To the best of my knoowledge, the most widely used and most effective date rape drug is good ol' alcohol. It all comes down to boundaries. If a man can get a woman to pour 700 ml of vodka down her own throat simply by playing offended everytime she refuses a drink then why in the hell does he need anything more than vodka? Not that it's necessary, mind. One only needs to get a woman drunk enough to lower her guard or simply lose focus for a moment. And that's not that hard to do, in most cases just 5 or 6 shots over a short period of time. Given that we're talking about USA specifically, this is even easier because there's no such thing as a drinking culture there and rampant binge drinking is considered to be the shizz. With all of that kept in mind, it's still reasonably easy to get a woman drugged even if she's wearing fancy polish. With color-changing glasses, it may be more difficult. Until one treats the dame with coffee served in a ceramic cup.

Measures like this are most effective for women who are already less likely to get raped, and against the least intelligent of rapists. Which means that the majority of women will still be vulnerable to the majority of rapists. Hardly a satisfactory result. Until women at large are able to maintain firm boundaries rape will be easy to commit. All the fancy measures will only serve to make the rapists a tiny bit more crafty. And boundaries are... Not an easy thing. What's worse, they're a simple thing. That is to say, there are no secret super techniques for that. Enforcing boundaries always comes down to, well, *enforcing *them. Which, in the case of date rape, means getting called a ****, cold-hearted and frigid bitch - repeatedly and often by many different people - and being content with that. And also offending and upsetting a lot of people. To a person not capable of that, all the detectors are as useful as a gun is to a person who could not bring themselves to shoot.

The time is quite nigh that we acknowledge that and stop wasting time and effort on measures that not only predictably will not work, but simply cannot work. It's, to my mind, more that 18% of American women can afford.


----------



## conscius (Apr 20, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> Because if someone doesn't have this nail polish and is raped, this is how the culprit is going to get away with rape. It's going to happen, because the victim will be told she didn't protect herself correctly. It's the same line of thinking as women not wearing certain clothes...


When was the last time you heard a judge clear a rapist of all charges in a court of law, saying the person was completely innocent, just cause the girl was wearing a real short skirt at the time she was raped? 

I think what you're referring to is more along the lines of moral and social judgement, not criminal. I think some people will have less sympathy for a girl who was wearing very revealing clothing and was hanging out late in a notorious part of town and drank excessively and ended up raped while totally drunk. In terms of social judgement, they may blame the girl for acting immaturely or not considering potential consequences of her actions, the same as they would judge a guy who goes to same part of town and gets into a fight and gets beat up. In terms of moral judgement, some may also feel she got what she deserved, for dressing in improper manner and drinking and hanging out with bad people, and being sinful and so forth.

But as far as I know, courts don't operate that way. All they look for is evidence to see who did what to whom (innocent till proven guilty). They do, however, treat everyone as free, responsible, and accountable (unless severely intellectually challenged), so in reality, the insanity defense is very rarely used successfully because even severely mentally ill people are held accountable for their actions. I mean can you imagine the following:

defendant: But your honor, she wasn't wearing her nail polish cause when I put the date rape drug in her drink, I never saw her test it, so I thought that means I'm allowed to rape her.

judge: Oh why didn't you say so earlier, case closed, you're cleared of all charges!


----------



## conscius (Apr 20, 2010)

Random Person said:


> Measures like this are most effective for women who are already less likely to get raped, and against the least intelligent of rapists.


What are you basing that on? This is a solution to a specific problem, and if adopted, I think it can be of much help to many women in that situation. And why do you call alcohol a date rape drug? It isn't. Many things used to excess can have serious negative effects, and in fact if you do think alcohol is a date rape drug, then there will be serious consequences to people who sell it, purchase it, share it, advertise for it, etc. 

People who rape others do not fit one specific profile. Sometimes they plan it before, sometimes happens right at the moment, sometimes it's a stranger, sometimes it's a family member. This solution is created specifically for people who frequent bars and are at greater risk of being exposed to date rape drugs. I think this nail polish is an ingenious solution. It need not solve all problems or be useful for all people in all situations, to be seen as helpful.


----------



## Random Person (Apr 30, 2013)

conscius said:


> What are you basing that on?


My entire post was meant to provide the basis for the claim you quoted. But, if you insist that I reiterate... It will only be useful to women who will not neglect to use it on every drink, and also after every time they take their eyes off their drink. To a woman who checks the first 4 drinks and not a single one after that because she's too drunk to remember it, the polish is useless because the potential rapist will notice that and put the drug into the 5th or 6th drink. To a woman who can be distracted from her drink for more than 10 seconds and does not double-check the drink, it's useless because over 10 seconds is, in most instances, enough to drug the drink. But, a woman who either remembers to check every drink, no matter how much she's had already, or who only has a few drinks, and also checks a drink every time she leaves it unsupervised for a considerable period of time is, in all likelyhood, already too vigilant to be drugged easily. Thus, although highly vigilant women will benefit somewhat, there will be a vast gap between them and those who are not as vigilant. The latter category may benefit so little that the polish will fail to produce a noticeable result.

As per the second part of my assertion regarding the folly of the rapists, it's even more simple. If a rapist cannot put drugs into an alcoholic bewerage then it stands to reason for them to put the drug into something a woman will most likely not check. Indeed, very few women will put their finger into a cup of hot tea or coffee. Furthermore, the entire situation can then be presented as not being a date at all. Just meeting at a coffee shop for brunch. Since it's allegedly not a date and the circumstances are vastly different from a usual date, it can be reasoned that very few women will even remember to put on the polish, to say nothing of making use of it. There's nothing complicated about this scheme at all. Uncomplicated schemes do not require one to possess outstanding intelligence to conceive of them. Given that this scheme can also be effective, we can deduce that it does not require a rapist to possess outstanding intelligence in order to rape effectively even if women do use the polish.



> And why do you call alcohol a date rape drug? It isn't. Many things used to excess can have serious negative effects, and in fact if you do think alcohol is a date rape drug, then there will be serious consequences to people who sell it, purchase it, share it, advertise for it, etc.


I call alcohol a date rape drug because it's consistently and effectively used by the rapists to achieve the same end as the substances that are conventionally labelled as date rape drugs. In fact, I'd not be surprised to learn that alcohol has been used to pull off more successful rapes than most conventional rape drugs together taken. That it's easily available and readily consumed makes it all the more effective. The current distinction of drugs into legal and illegal is largely arbitrary, more benign and harmless ones often being placed alongside heroin. Because the distinction is not based strictly on the potential threat of the drugs and also because alcohol is something people are plainly too greatly used to to give up, it is not at all surprising that alcohol is not and will not be made illegal for the sole reason that it can be used to rape someone.



> People who rape others do not fit one specific profile. Sometimes they plan it before, sometimes happens right at the moment, sometimes it's a stranger, sometimes it's a family member.


Strictly speaking, this is true. But only in the sense that there are at least some rapists who differ from others in some significant way. The rapists who are responcible for the vast majority of rape are, however, very often very similar to one another. This is because certain strategies of rape consistently prove themselves to be effective. Among them are aquaintance rape and use of intoxicants. They're effective because they're very different from what most people think of when they hear the word 'rape', victims included. If it's hard for the victim to admit to themselves that they were raped and even harder to make others believe it then the rapist can be reasonably certain that they'll go unpunished. And since such strategy is consistently effective, the profiles of most successful rapists will be very much alike.



> This solution is created specifically for people who frequent bars and are at greater risk of being exposed to date rape drugs. I think this nail polish is an ingenious solution. It need not solve all problems or be useful for all people in all situations, to be seen as helpful.


What follows from my previous paragraph is that people who frequent bars are, in fact, not at the greatest risk of being exposed to date rape drugs. Nor are they at a significantly greater risk than those who do't go to bars at all. If the rapist is most likely to be an aquaintance then the place of rape need not be a bar or any similar place. Besides, a bar just happens to be a place where people drink. Often a lot. Sometimes enough to black out or at least have their ability to evaluate and control what's happening to them greatly impaired. A person who drinks themselves into a state nearing oblivion need not be drugged further in order to be raped. So a bar is, in fact, a setting where date rape drugs are least necessary or, at the very least, where they are significantly less necessary than in most other settings.


----------



## stiletto (Oct 26, 2013)

Interesting concept, poor execution. I would NEVER just stick my own nail in my drink to "test it". First of all, I shouldn't have to. Second of all, when am I going to have the desire/time to put on "special nail polish" when I go out on a weekly basis? Am I to wear it ALL the time? Also, I don't know where my hands have been, especially at a club - opening cab doors, pressing elevator buttons etc. I'm not about to put my finger in my drink. The creators assume this happens when a woman walks away from her drink like a moron to go to the washroom? What if he does it right there while her back is turned? What if they offer her a drink, is she going to just say "Hey thanks" stick her finger in it, and then explain WHY she's doing that as people stare at her like she's weird and paranoid?

:dry:


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> This just puts the burden back on victims, imo. I mean, it's cool. But why can't people, you know, not rape?


Twisted as it may seem, there may be some leftover genetic propensity in males towards rape. It creates another possibility of passing on genetic diversity in places and times where human survival is/was far less assured than it is today. I don't claim to like it, but it makes a certain amount of sense in a primitive, genetic survival sort of way.


----------



## conscius (Apr 20, 2010)

stiletto said:


> Interesting concept, poor execution. I would NEVER just stick my own nail in my drink to "test it". First of all, *I shouldn't have to*.


What do you mean?



Random Person said:


> My entire post was meant to provide the basis for the claim you quoted.


Wrote a long reply to reciprocate the thought you put into yours, but unfortunately that and another reply disappeared when I was refreshing another tab I had open. I can't type it out again, but let me just ask a question. What do you think of outlawing alcohol. You say alcohol is the most powerful date rape drug, and though I disagree in some ways, we can't deny that alcohol has been implicated in thousands of rapes and that if people didn't drink alcohol, it could decrease incidents of rape. I'm not saying we should, I'm just asking your opinion, given what you've said about alcohol so far...


----------



## aendern (Dec 28, 2013)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> and b) we live in a society where rapists rarely see the inside of a courtroom much less a prison so they know they pretty much do anything and get away with it.


This is really misguided. The majority of rapists never see the inside of a courtroom _because victims (WOMEN) don't report the rapes_.

Not because the justice system is in favor of men. That is actually very far from true, as the system demonstrably favors women.


----------



## Random Person (Apr 30, 2013)

conscius said:


> What do you think of outlawing alcohol. You say alcohol is the most powerful date rape drug, and though I disagree in some ways, we can't deny that alcohol has been implicated in thousands of rapes and that if people didn't drink alcohol, it could decrease incidents of rape. I'm not saying we should, I'm just asking your opinion, given what you've said about alcohol so far...


Other than what I've said in the last post you mean? I think that we should learn something from the war on drugs as well as the previous attempts to make alcohol illegal. Which, by the way, have failed miserably. The evidence available at this point shows with overwhelming power that any further attempt to ban alcohol will fail so dramatically and so surely that it's not even worth trying again. A measure that will almost certainly not achieve it's intended goal yet will cost a hell lot of money and cause as much trouble is not a good measure to take. The way I see it, it'll only drive the drinking - and the drinkers - underground. And drinking in an illegal, shady underground bar cannot be good as far as preventing rape is concerned.

The issue, to the best of my understanding, is that alcohol is seen first and foremost as an intoxicant. That is to say, many people believe that the very point of drinking is to get drunk. Such indulgence in binge drinking is the surest sign that there is no drinking culture to be spoken of. In France, children are given watered down wine from a very early age. From this, they learn that alcoholic bewerages can be enjoyed without getting intoxicated. And because of that, it's much more uncommon for an adult French person to get drunk than it is for a Russian or an American. To say nothing of getting drunk unintentionally. Alcohol, therefore, loses most of it's power as a date rape drug in places where people don't see it as a way to get wasted and dominates the scene in countries where such drinking culture is lacking.

Other than that, I suspect that you misunderstand what I mean when describing the power of alcohol as a rape drug. I'm not referring to it's intoxicating properties - they're relatively benign. It takes *a lot* of alcohol to become unable to control what's happening to you. Rather, the power of alcohol (if, indeed, it's even right to claim alcohol to have this power) lies in the fact that a person can be made to consume unreasonably large quantities of it seemingly of their own will, with no effort at all being needed to conseal it. A person susceptible to social pressure, guilt tripping and other tricks like that can very easily obliterate themselves completely and in short time. The rapist will not even need to try very hard, especially if they're drinking themselves.

Like I said, it's not so much the power of alcohol - or even the power of social pressure - as it's the weakness of the victim's boundaries. Drink as much as you like, then stop. Do *not *resume drinking simply because someone wants you to. Still don't resume drinking if that person gets bitchy, pretends to be offended and/or calls you names. Do not resume drinking because the person will reject you if you don't. It's as simple - and as difficult - as that.


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Metasentient said:


> Assault is kind of abusive, too.


"Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."

That is inhumane, no matter who its done against. A good way forward is actually trying to change the legal system so rape cases are taken more seriously and that rapists get a much higher conviction rate.


----------



## Metalize (Dec 18, 2014)

Sporadic Aura said:


> "Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."
> 
> That is inhumane, no matter who its done against. A good way forward is actually trying to change the legal system so rape cases are taken more seriously and that rapists get a much higher conviction rate.


Well, I'm not sure that particular analogy would really apply towards rapists, as not every single person is one. Fortunately, they are still a minority in the population.

As for changing the legal system - many people are arguing that we already have way too many laws in place that can be abused. That's true. Yet the problem still persists for some reason, and I'm not sure that should be ignored in favor of abusers either.

Brendan Gibbons sexual assault: Why do colleges fail to investigate athletes accused of rape?

NCAA Finally Does Something About Athlete Sex Assault Cases

Statistics - NCAVA - the last stat: 

A college rapist will have raped seven times before being caught. 

Whether you believe that number or not, it's a pretty well-established fact by now that colleges are notoriously bad at following up on sexual assault cases - they need their prized athletes for obvious reasons, and most schools won't lose that cash-cow in exchange for the pursuit of justice. The point I'm hoping to bring with those articles, though, isn't so much that athletes have a higher chance of sexually abusing someone - but that even in the modern day, rapists get acquitted relatively frequently. So while you're saying we should change the legal system - I'm asking how and presenting the problems we have right now, as well as making a suggestion that would likely deter more would-be abusers in the future.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

emberfly said:


> This is really misguided. The majority of rapists never see the inside of a courtroom _because victims (WOMEN) don't report the rapes_.
> 
> Not because the justice system is in favor of men. That is actually very far from true, as the system demonstrably favors women.


Then should explore why women don't report [1], many hold concerns over the ability of the police to deal with it properly as not every area has a resources/unit dedicated to the sensitivity of such a crime, how society and the media responds is often dismal and I would say many states are woefully inadequate in their policies and definitions in which it fails to acknowledge many victims of assault.
Like some states defining it as rape only if one was forced after they physically resisted, which doesn't account for those who are coerced or freeze up in fear.

As for the system demonstrably favors women needs to clarified as to how as I think there's some disagreement to that being a reality depending on how you choose to clarify that statement. 

Also if one does want a comprehensive view of the feminist perspectives towards rape there's this.
Feminist Perspectives on Rape (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)


----------



## Sporadic Aura (Sep 13, 2009)

Metasentient said:


> Well, I'm not sure that particular analogy would really apply towards rapists, as not every single person is one. Fortunately, they are still a minority in the population.
> 
> As for changing the legal system - many people are arguing that we already have way too many laws in place that can be abused. That's true. Yet the problem still persists for some reason, and I'm not sure that should be ignored in favor of abusers either.
> 
> ...


The point of the analogy is that responding to abuse with further abuse just leads to more problems. Which is something I agree with. Remove rapists from society, but I could never get behind sterilizing them.

As for fixing the situations on college campuses, there was a massive discussion on PerC awhile ago about the new 'yes means yes' law for California colleges. I'm not sure if you heard of this? It basically put the emphasis on making sure both parties have clear consent 'yes means yes', instead of just an absence of resistance 'no means no'. What it also did, which to me was more important, was that colleges had to follow mandatory guidelines on how they treat rape cases, and the colleges would be reviewed and if they didn't meet standards their state funded scholarships would go away.

Personally, although I understand some of the merit of 'yes means yes', I believe it creates some issues as well. But I thought the idea of having a set guideline on how they had to treat rape cases, and if they don't follow that their state funding can be taken away, was a good idea. And possibly something that could be implemented more often.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

koalaroo said:


> I don't think it will legitimately cut down on rapes in a meaningful way; furthermore, it's likely to increase the victim blame for women who do not take this precaution ("Well, Joanne, you should've been wearing anti-rape nail polish."). Stop blaming women for men's misbehavior when it comes to sexual assault and rape. Stop making women responsible for men's poor behavior in even attempting to rape.


On the flip side of that, you're basically saying that women shouldn't be empowered to prevent themselves from becoming a victim and ultimately taking the victim mentality that they should be helpless at the mercy of men who probably won't change their actions. There are a segment of men out there that are terrible human beings that will rape if they can. It's the same thing for pretty much everything else. If you didn't lock your door and someone came in and stole your stuff, wouldn't the police make a comment that, "Well maybe you should have locked your door to prevent this from happening?"


----------



## Death Persuades (Feb 17, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> I'm not ridiculing it. I'm saying it opens a whole new can of worms that doesn't actually solve the problem. Realistically you're saying, "Women protect yourself so he can rape the other women" instead of addressing the behavioral issues at hand.


I don't think that's what it's saying... It's saying "Protect yourself, because sometimes people just do bad things."

That is in no way encouraging other women to be raped. Sure, we should be teaching people to not rape, but people are still capable of it and if someone wants to do it, he/she could more easily do it if people aren't taking proper precautions. Everybody knows rape is bad, but rapists exist. Do you suggest we just teach men rape is bad, and not teach women to take precautions? Then that leaves the entire situation in the hand of the men who don't care that rape is bad. Because, face it, some men JUST DON'T CARE. That's when precautions like this one come in handy.

EDIT: It may no significantly reduce rape rates, but that might just be because of people putting it down as a precaution, saying we should instead teach men to not rape and dis-encourage women from taking precautions. Honestly, it's kind of ridiculous to suggest people shouldn't take precautions just because someone else shouldn't do something. Don't give that kind of power to others. Take proper precautions.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Diligent Procrastinator said:


> I don't think that's what it's saying... It's saying "Protect yourself, because sometimes people just do bad things."
> 
> That is in no way encouraging other women to be raped. Sure, we should be teaching people to not rape, but people are still capable of it and if someone wants to do it, he/she could more easily do it if people aren't taking proper precautions. Everybody knows rape is bad, but rapists exist. Do you suggest we just teach men rape is bad, and not teach women to take precautions? Then that leaves the entire situation in the hand of the men who don't care that rape is bad. Because, face it, some men JUST DON'T CARE. That's when precautions like this one come in handy.


It's a shitty precaution, to be fair, because it promotes the myth that the majority of rapes are committed by strangers. Something like 75% of rapes are done by people the survivor knows; when you get to a college campus, something like up to 90% of rapes are committed by someone the survivor knows.


----------



## Death Persuades (Feb 17, 2012)

koalaroo said:


> It's a shitty precaution, to be fair, because it promotes the myth that the majority of rapes are committed by strangers. Something like 75% of rapes are done by people the survivor knows; when you get to a college campus, something like up to 90% of rapes are committed by someone the survivor knows.


A shitty precaution is better than none.


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

Diligent Procrastinator said:


> A shitty precaution is better than none.


Maybe, but it still gives a false sense of security.


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

koalaroo said:


> Maybe, but it still gives a false sense of security.


Or does it make someone think twice before they slip a date rape drug into a drink? If they know women have this tool at their disposal and can more easily detect that a date rape drug has been put into their drinks, they'll start catching more people in the act. With that, other people will think twice about doing this knowing that they may be caught in their attempt. It's the same thing for conceal and carry. You don't know who is packing so you'd probably think twice before trying to mug them versus if you knew it was illegal for everyone to conceal and carry.

Regardless, if it prevents even 1 rape, I'd consider it a success.


----------



## Mee2 (Jan 30, 2014)

PowerShell said:


> On the flip side of that, you're basically saying that women shouldn't be empowered to prevent themselves from becoming a victim and ultimately taking the victim mentality that they should be helpless at the mercy of men who probably won't change their actions. There are a segment of men out there that are terrible human beings that will rape if they can. It's the same thing for pretty much everything else. If you didn't lock your door and someone came in and stole your stuff, wouldn't the police make a comment that, "Well maybe you should have locked your door to prevent this from happening?"


How is it empowering for women to take precautions that men don't have to take? For the moment that might be all women can do but focusing on these shallow preventative measures really distracts from the fact that this is fundamentally an unfair system. Unless you think it's totally fine that only women have to worry about these things?


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

Mee2 said:


> How is it empowering for women to take precautions that men don't have to take? For the moment that might be all women can do but focusing on these shallow preventative measures really distracts from the fact that this is fundamentally an unfair system. Unless you think it's totally fine that only women have to worry about these things?


You know what? The system can be unfair in terms of the men that rape women. There's no doubt, statistically speaking, that men rape more often than women do. With that being said, you aren't going to change anything by telling men to not rape. The decent ones already don't rape and the assholes still do. What you can do is engineer technology that starts to even out the playing field.

Empowering women to be able to counteract something and minimize the risks of a bad thing happening is the only way to solve this problem. I'm sorry but to just say men will stop raping isn't going to happen. Let's be practical and come up with practical solutions that help mitigate the issues versus having a pie in the sky dream that this will just stop happening and effectively do nothing but sit there and fantasize about someday in that perfect world that is never going to be.

We tell other members of society to take certain precautions. What about seniors and phone scams? How about little kids and "stranger danger?" How about gays and the risk for HIV infection? The thing is, as a society, we already look at high risk groups for a bad outcome and then find ways to avoid that outcome. This is no different.

You know I'd love to have a world where there are no rapes. A world without car accidents or scams. A world where everyone could be honest and show each other respect. A world where physical safety is not threatened no matter where you go and you can leave you house and car unlocked and nothing gets stolen. Wouldn't that world be great? I can fantasize about it all day but fantasizing does absolutely nothing to get me closer to that goal. I can however wear a seatbelt and drive a car with a high safety rating. I can check the ratings and reviews of sellers before I conduct business with them. I can avoid high crime areas, especially at night, to reduce the risk of getting mugged or obtain a permit and carry a concealed weapon to deal with the threats at hand. I can lock my doors at home and in the car and also put my valuables out of site in the car so it doesn't attract attention to would-be thieves. 

Regardless, it is your responsibility to do everything you can to mitigate the risks that are a part of everyday life. Some of these risks are greater for certain demographics than other demographics. You just need to utilize any tools and technology and stay ahead of the risks that are greatest to you. Simply expecting the world to change is naive. Changing yourself is entirely possible and highly recommended to be successful in life.


----------



## Mee2 (Jan 30, 2014)

PowerShell said:


> You know what? The system can be unfair in terms of the men that rape women. There's no doubt, statistically speaking, that men rape more often than women do. With that being said, you aren't going to change anything by telling men to not rape. The decent ones already don't rape and the assholes still do. What you can do is engineer technology that starts to even out the playing field.
> 
> Empowering women to be able to counteract something and minimize the risks of a bad thing happening is the only way to solve this problem. I'm sorry but to just say men will stop raping isn't going to happen. Let's be practical and come up with practical solutions that help mitigate the issues versus having a pie in the sky dream that this will just stop happening and effectively do nothing but sit there and fantasize about someday in that perfect world that is never going to be.


Why do you think men are so inherently flawed that they can't stop raping women? Or, if it's easier to answer, why do you think women don't have the same propensity towards rape? And why are you so sure that there are no cultural factors here? You know that the incidence of rape varies in different parts of the world and this would imply that there are cultural factors, so why would you suddenly insist that cultural factors are irrelevant? 



PowerShell said:


> We tell other members of society to take certain precautions. What about seniors and phone scams? How about little kids and "stranger danger?" How about gays and the risk for HIV infection? The thing is, as a society, we already look at high risk groups for a bad outcome and then find ways to avoid that outcome. This is no different.
> 
> You know I'd love to have a world where there are no rapes. A world without car accidents or scams. A world where everyone could be honest and show each other respect. A world where physical safety is not threatened no matter where you go and you can leave you house and car unlocked and nothing gets stolen. Wouldn't that world be great? I can fantasize about it all day but fantasizing does absolutely nothing to get me closer to that goal. I can however wear a seatbelt and drive a car with a high safety rating. I can check the ratings and reviews of sellers before I conduct business with them. I can avoid high crime areas, especially at night, to reduce the risk of getting mugged or obtain a permit and carry a concealed weapon to deal with the threats at hand. I can lock my doors at home and in the car and also put my valuables out of site in the car so it doesn't attract attention to would-be thieves.
> 
> Regardless, it is your responsibility to do everything you can to mitigate the risks that are a part of everyday life. Some of these risks are greater for certain demographics than other demographics. You just need to utilize any tools and technology and stay ahead of the risks that are greatest to you. Simply expecting the world to change is naive. Changing yourself is entirely possible and highly recommended to be successful in life.


No, we don't just tell people to take precautions. We also make certain actions illegal and try to hold perpetrators accountable, we try to minimise poverty, bring everyone up to a certain standard of education. We make safe cars but we also expect safe roads. Surely you're aware of these things?


----------



## PowerShell (Feb 3, 2013)

Mee2 said:


> Why do you think men are so inherently flawed that they can't stop raping women? Or, if it's easier to answer, why do you think women don't have the same propensity towards rape? And why are you so sure that there are no cultural factors here? You know that the incidence of rape varies in different parts of the world and this would imply that there are cultural factors, so why would you suddenly insist that cultural factors are irrelevant?


Changing culture takes time and even with a culture change, there's still going to be bad apples. We need to do what we can to prevent harm from those bad apples. Why sit around and do nothing when there's tools out there that can be used if you think of this pragmatically?



> No, we don't just tell people to take precautions. We also make certain actions illegal and try to hold perpetrators accountable, we try to minimise poverty, bring everyone up to a certain standard of education. We make safe cars but we also expect safe roads. Surely you're aware of these things?


Rape is illegal. It still happens. So is drunk driving, speeding, distracted driving, etc. Accidents still happen. That's why we have seatbelts and safe cars. Everyone is educated via driver's ed and required to pass a test but there's still accidents. Would you ignore wearing a seatbelt because "people should just learn to drive better" or would you wear in it case something happens? Are you not going to practice defensive driving techniques or are you going to be vigilant and do what you can to prevent accidents?

See what you guys don't get is, I agree rape is bad and I wish it wouldn't happen. The thing is, I'm pragmatic and instead of wishing for something to change while effectively really doing nothing to make it change, I'm praising practical solutions out there that can help ultimately get us closer to the goal of having no rapes. Wish all you want, but wishing and then complaining about things gets nothing accomplished. Engineering solutions that help mitigate risks is what will accomplish the ultimate goal.


----------



## Mee2 (Jan 30, 2014)

PowerShell said:


> Changing culture takes time and even with a culture change, there's still going to be bad apples. We need to do what we can to prevent harm from those bad apples. Why sit around and do nothing when there's tools out there that can be used if you think of this pragmatically?
> 
> Rape is illegal. It still happens. So is drunk driving, speeding, distracted driving, etc. Accidents still happen. That's why we have seatbelts and safe cars. Everyone is educated via driver's ed and required to pass a test but there's still accidents. Would you ignore wearing a seatbelt because "people should just learn to drive better" or would you wear in it case something happens? Are you not going to practice defensive driving techniques or are you going to be vigilant and do what you can to prevent accidents?
> 
> See what you guys don't get is, I agree rape is bad and I wish it wouldn't happen. The thing is, I'm pragmatic and instead of wishing for something to change while effectively really doing nothing to make it change, I'm praising practical solutions out there that can help ultimately get us closer to the goal of having no rapes. Wish all you want, but wishing and then complaining about things gets nothing accomplished. Engineering solutions that help mitigate risks is what will accomplish the ultimate goal.


If we're talking about this nail polish then I think you're kidding yourself if you think this is actually going to help women to any notable extent, so I'll assume you're talking about preventative measures collectively, and the problem with them is that expecting women to do these things results in an extremely oppressive society. There would be a marked reduction in the number of situations where women could safely get drunk, women would treat every man she knows with suspicion and rarely spend any time alone with him, they would almost exclusively wear clothing that served to hide the fact that they're a woman, and I guess now they'd all be wearing this nail polish every time they were drinking in the vicinity of men. Do such precautions really deserve to be called "practical"? That's not the kind of society that I want to live in, especially when I think there are other alternatives. You're right to say that society doesn't change quickly but you'd be wrong if you think it's going to happen naturally and you'd also be wrong if you think we're already doing everything we can do to help posh society in that direction. 

I'm not saying that we can create a society where rape never happens but it sounds like you're saying that because this is impossible, we shouldn't try at all. What's wrong with increased efforts to hold rapists accountable? What's wrong with creating a society that shames sexual predators instead of giving them a hi-five and blaming their victims? Sure, preventative measures might still have their place in such a society but at least such burdens won't be so unfairly distributed.


----------



## Mr.Venture (Dec 25, 2011)

You know, I'm just curious 'bout something. The article said that they could make a lot of products out of this technology, including glasses that change color. Personally, I thought it would be interesting if the local bars got on board with this and didn't tell anyone - just sorta let the word spread as shit happens. ('Course, the bar would have to get involved if a glass did change color, they just wouldn't publicizing this stuff in advance.)

Dunno, sounds like a nice mix of seatbelts and dishes best served cold to me.


----------

