# The Premise of Anti-Rape Undewear



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

i don't think people need to be educated that "rape is bad", but to be educated that they cannot hide behind a defense that is so flimsy. 

we all know it's terrible; the ones who enter into this kind of behavior give into some dark psychological cluster-fuck of a problem and then use rationalizations to hide their own shame--but, _we all know better_.

once "proof" has be gathered, and it's beyond 100% doubt that the person in question is in fact in a rapist (if this is even possible), they should be executed. i think that _this_ can be a very good deterrent for anyone who believes that they can bypass the consequences of their actions, and might--just might--cause them to reconsider what options they have at their disposal. 

i'm actually kind of glad this thread came up. i have a friend that got black-out drunk once and i had to spend the entire night chasing off weirdos (especially bad because she doesn't even look legal despite the fact that she's in her late 20's). i actually had people tell me that if someone wants sex and i'm standing in the way, i'm an "outdated asshole" who's putting a guard on a women's vagina as if i had the right to do so... lol, nice try. some guy tried to sneak her out of the bar to his vehicle, so i and my ex followed and the guy and i nearly got into a fight over this (which, i'm sure, would have left me covered in my own blood--he was ~ 6'6 and athletic... i'm not, lol). 

i was furious with her for a while. regardless of the culture we live in, it's never a good idea to reach a point at which you are no longer aware or in control of your own actions; there's a plethora of terrible things to get into that don't involve some pathetic, coward of a guy.


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

Donovan said:


> i'm actually kind of glad this thread came up. i have a friend that got black-out drunk once and i had to spend the entire night chasing off weirdos (especially bad because she doesn't even look legal despite the fact that she's in her late 20's). i actually had people tell me that if someone wants sex and i'm standing in the way, i'm an "outdated asshole" who's putting a guard on a women's vagina as if i had the right to do so... lol, nice try. some guy tried to sneak her out of the bar to his vehicle, so i and my ex followed and the guy and i nearly got into a fight over this (which, i'm sure, would have left me covered in my own blood--he was ~ 6'6 and athletic... i'm not, lol).
> 
> i was furious with her for a while. regardless of the culture we live in, it's never a good idea to reach a point at which you are no longer aware or in control of your own actions; there's a plethora of terrible things to get into that don't involve some pathetic, coward of a guy.


All of that would be the guy's fault for feeling entitled to touch up and violate a woman who has not given consent. It is NOT the woman's fault or anyone elses fault for being tipsy or drunk for being raped. You have basically just blamed the victim and this is how rapists get away with it time after time. Think about what you've just said. Those men thought they had the RIGHT to take this human being back to their place, violate her when she was not well and you just experienced that entitlement first hand and was called 'outdated' for protecting a potential rape victim.


That's called rape culture.

Edit: Your post was really depressing, really. The fact someone _physically_ tried to coerce a woman out to their car...and you saying she shouldnt've got drunk like that to be taken advantage of. It's too common and victim blaming. It's sad.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> All of that would be the guy's fault for feeling entitled to touch up and violate a woman who has not given consent. It is NOT the woman's fault or anyone elses fault for being tipsy or drunk for being raped. You have basically just blamed the victim and this is how rapists get away with it time after time. Think about what you've just said. Those men thought they had the RIGHT to take this human being back to their place, violate her when she was not well and you just experienced that entitlement first hand and was called 'outdated' for protecting a potential rape victim.
> 
> 
> That's called rape culture.
> ...


completely misinterpreted my post. going to work, i'll clarify later. :happy:


----------



## Dalien (Jul 21, 2010)

A lock around the waist and legs? Scissors, knife, etc. could/would cut the rest of the fabric... enough said!


----------



## Pertinent.Irrelevance (Nov 2, 2013)

I don't get it.. wouldn't this just make it -more- fun for the rapist?


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

Dalien said:


> A lock around the waist and legs? Scissors, knife, etc. could/would cut the rest of the fabric... enough said!


Nothing can make it impossible, but making it more difficult means it is less likely to happen, one way or the other. The ad also claims that the fabric is resistance to scissors (not sure if that claims holds up).


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

@knittigan The fact that you're citing the 1 in 4 statistic (which is a lie) and making allegations of sexism after the preceding few posts indicates that you're not even following this discussion. If you're not going to take the time to read my argument and respond respectfully, I'll return the favour. I don't appreciate the blatant sexist attitude (you're a man therefore you're wrong), nor the accusations that I would in any way benefit from hiding a serious problem like this.



> Your statistics are delusional


And this very succinctly sums up the feminist line of thought. Damn the facts and the statistics; either believe our dogma or go to hell. It's impossible to have a rational discussion with people who are so emotionally invested in an idea as to disregard reality.



isingthebodyelectric said:


> All of that would be the guy's fault for feeling entitled to touch up and violate a woman who has not given consent. It is NOT the woman's fault or anyone elses fault for being tipsy or drunk for being raped. You have basically just blamed the victim and this is how rapists get away with it time after time. Think about what you've just said. Those men thought they had the RIGHT to take this human being back to their place, violate her when she was not well and you just experienced that entitlement first hand and was called 'outdated' for protecting a potential rape victim.
> 
> 
> That's called rape culture.
> ...


This is a very strange mindset that I don't understand at all. Why is everything always so black and white with feminists? Obviously no one has the right engage sexually with a person who's too hammered to walk; no one is disputing that, and no one is shifting blame away from the predators in this scenario, who would undoubtedly deserve the harshest of punishment if they had gone through with it. That said, we are responsible for our own safety and well-being; it's no one else's responsibility to keep us safe. It was very irresponsible of her to put herself in that situation to begin with: She knew that being around a group of complete strangers who may or may not be predators posed a serious risk, and she took that risk anyways.

While the predators in society deserve no leeway and no pardoning, that doesn't change the fact that people need to be responsible for themselves. That's why we lock our doors at night.


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

Pertinent.Irrelevance said:


> I don't get it.. wouldn't this just make it -more- fun for the rapist?


Like, if the rapist is into DIY projects?


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

SuburbanLurker said:


> @_knittigan_ The fact that you're citing the 1 in 4 statistic (which is a lie) and making allegations of sexism after the preceding few posts indicates that you're not even following this discussion. If you're not going to take the time to read my argument and respond respectfully, I'll return the favour. I don't appreciate the blatant sexist attitude (you're a man therefore you're wrong), nor the accusations that I would in any way benefit from hiding a serious problem like this.
> 
> 
> And this very succinctly sums up the feminist line of thought. Damn the facts and the statistics; either believe our dogma or go to hell. It's impossible to have a rational discussion with people who are so emotionally invested in an idea as to disregard reality.


You're offended by people saying sexist things and then come out with the predictable 'Typical feminists!' line? Right.

Those statistics aren't made up. I'd suggest you actually read up on them before you make anymore posts. You're sounding extremely ignorant right now.

Edit: Tell me how that statistic is a lie when it's been cited by very trustworthy sources, time and time again?



> Nothing can make it impossible, but making it more difficult means it is less likely to happen..


Doubtful.


----------



## Pertinent.Irrelevance (Nov 2, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> Like, if the rapist is into DIY projects?


Let's say someone likes breaking into safes, not just for the money but mostly for the pleasure they get from the act of doing so. They'd get a lot more pleasure from cracking a safe that was a lot more complicated, no?


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> All of that would be the guy's fault for feeling entitled to touch up and violate a woman who has not given consent. It is NOT the woman's fault or anyone elses fault for being tipsy or drunk for being raped. You have basically just blamed the victim and this is how rapists get away with it time after time. Think about what you've just said. Those men thought they had the RIGHT to take this human being back to their place, violate her when she was not well and you just experienced that entitlement first hand and was called 'outdated' for protecting a potential rape victim.
> 
> 
> That's called rape culture.
> ...


If she had been raped, then the dude would have been guilty of rape, and the victim would be guilty of being a blithering idiot. She put not only herself at risk but the lives of those who care for her. Anywhere there are criminals, it is the responsibility of potential victims to act safely. I should not be leaving my car keys in the ignition when I park in an inner city slum. Whenever this analogy is brought up, it is deliberately misinterpreted, like I am saying car theft is the same as rape. I am not. I am saying that people who are not damned idiots have a responsibility to act safely.


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> If she had been raped, then the dude would have been guilty of rape, and the victim would be guilty of being a blithering idiot. She put not only herself at risk but the lives of those who care for her. Anywhere there are criminals, it is the responsibility of potential victims to act safely. I should not be leaving my car keys in the ignition when I park in an inner city slum. Whenever this analogy is brought up, it is deliberately misinterpreted, like I am saying car theft is the same as rape. I am not. I am saying that people who are not damned idiots have a responsibility to act safely.


The victim would've been that, a victim. That's like saying people who have been murdered were idiots for being murdered or those who were robbed were being idiots. There's no excuse for it and victim blaming is truly disgusting.

It worries me living in this world with people with opinions like that. Wow.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Donovan said:


> once "proof" has be gathered, and it's beyond 100% doubt that the person in question is in fact in a rapist (if this is even possible), they should be executed. i think that _this_ can be a very good deterrent for anyone who believes that they can bypass the consequences of their actions, and might--just might--cause them to reconsider what options they have at their disposal.


Execute?! I don't agree with the death penalty. I wouldn't put a serial killer to death. As a kid, I wouldn't have given the police any information if I thought he might get the death penalty. You think victims would want another human beings death on their shoulders? 

Nice that you looked out for you friend. But maybe not with the killing outside of self-defense.


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

Pertinent.Irrelevance said:


> Let's say someone likes breaking into safes, not just for the money but mostly for the pleasure they get from the act of doing so. They'd get a lot more pleasure from cracking a safe that was a lot more complicated, no?


Sure, but I believe rapists do it for the sex, not for the rape. There is a popular perspective that rapists do it because of power or whatever, but I think that's nonsense. I think rapists tend to go for the easier targets.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> If she had been raped, then the dude would have been guilty of rape, and the victim would be guilty of being a blithering idiot. She put not only herself at risk but the lives of those who care for her. Anywhere there are criminals, it is the responsibility of potential victims to act safely. I should not be leaving my car keys in the ignition when I park in an inner city slum. Whenever this analogy is brought up, it is deliberately misinterpreted, like I am saying car theft is the same as rape. I am not. I am saying that people who are not damned idiots have a responsibility to act safely.


If someone leaves their front door unlocked and their house is robbed, that doesn't make them a blithering idiot. It means they made a mistake. If someone leaves the keys in the ignition of their car and it's stolen, that doesn't make them a blithering idiot. I means they made a mistake.


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> The victim would've been that, a victim. That's like saying people who have been murdered were idiots for being murdered or those who were robbed were being idiots. There's no excuse for it and victim blaming is truly disgusting.
> 
> It worries me living in this world with people with opinions like that. Wow.


I suggest you get used to it, because it is the perspective that actually makes sense.


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

monemi said:


> If someone leaves their front door unlocked and their house is robbed, that doesn't make them a blithering idiot. It means they made a mistake. If someone leaves the keys in the ignition of their car and it's stolen, that doesn't make them a blithering idiot. I means they made a mistake.


OK, I can grant you that. A blithering idiot is someone who does such things many times in a series, not just once.


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

skycloud86 said:


> How about we teach people not to rape people, or is that too hard?


That is interesting to me that you bring that up because it reminds me how WWI rape was at its lowest for the first time in war history supposedly due to the fact that the common soldier was better educated than had been previously.

Better education + respect for women = less likely to become a rapist.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> You're offended by people saying sexist things and then come out with the predictable 'Typical feminists!' line? Right.


Being against feminism has nothing to do with sexism. Feminism is an ideology/dogma, not a gender.



> Those statistics aren't made up. I'd suggest you actually read up on them before you make anymore posts. You're sounding extremely ignorant right now.
> 
> Edit: Tell me how that statistic is a lie when it's been cited by very trustworthy sources, time and time again?
> 
> ...


I already cited an article that discusses those made up statistics in great length, and quoted excerpts from it.



Scruzz said:


> That is interesting to me that you bring that up because it reminds me how WWI rape was at its lowest for the first time in war history supposedly due to the fact that the common soldier was better educated than had been previously.
> 
> Better education + respect for women = less likely to become a rapist.


Exactly. Education is the _only_ way to reduce the prevalence of rape. Any other methods that pose to do this, such as strongly exaggerating/making up statistics, scaring people from leaving their homes and trusting others, and making them wear "protective gear" is completely counter-productive, and serves a political agenda; not a human agenda.


----------



## Pertinent.Irrelevance (Nov 2, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> Sure, but I believe rapists do it for the sex, not for the rape. There is a popular perspective that rapists do it because of power or whatever, but I think that's nonsense. I think rapists tend to go for the easier targets.


Meh.. to each his own. I'm the kind of person that values the chase more than the sex, so I guess that's why I can't see rapists doing it mostly for the sex.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

mimesis said:


> If you can't see the difference between 'see also' and 'equals to', I think we are dealing with a false dilemma.


Your insinuations were abundantly clear, and now you're being a coward by failing to own up to it.


----------



## Arya (Oct 17, 2012)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> That's a bit different since they would be putting themselves and other people in danger. A woman getting drunk or tipsy or walking around in the dark is not automatically dangerous. It's the other people who are dangerous. Running with scissors wrong side up is dangerous as they are a weapon. Are you saying women who are in a less than stellar state are fair game for anything to happen for them?
> 
> What happened to human decency and helping those in need and those who aren't able to look after themselves? Would my first instinct be to rape a drunk man who came to my bedroom or house door? No, of course not. Or take something that isn't mine? No, because I was taught not to touch things that weren't mine.


What happened to common sense? Getting drunk like that is stupid in the first place whether the woman gets raped or not. I cannot understand why anyone would choose to put themselves into such a vulnerable position.


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> It may be misleading to think it is all about sex, anyway, because rape happens predominantly between people who know each other. A rapist doesn't want to have sex with anyone so much as sex _with a particular person he knows_, which I take to be the typical pattern of sexual attraction.


It may very well be sexual attraction, but if we are to say this is a serial killer and not just a rapist; for instance, we could say not only was it sexual attraction that led the serial killer to choose his victim, but also, that this was someone he wanted to dominate, demean, and utterly destroy (sorry for all the Ds) due to a sickness that cannot empathise with the victum. Of course, if we switch it around a little and look at who is most vulnerable (are not just women), children are more at risk for sexual abuse. How do they guard against sexual aggression? The mere inescapable fact about children's innocence and lack of physical strength makes them a target to the depravity of a preditor. It isn't ONLY sexual.

Just because someone leaves their key in the car or leaves their door unlocked doesn't make it the victum's fault that their vehicle was stolen or that their house was robbed -and not to make excuse for people who live in inner city slums either- the people who commit the crime is the criminal and it is shame they don't have the respect to leave what isn't theirs alone. Having said that, I don't go running around naked in the city centre. Regardless of how vulnerable a person is, there is no excuse for abuse, crime or violence. Full stop!


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

SuburbanLurker said:


> Your insinuations were abundantly clear, and now you're being a coward by failing to own up to it.


Haha. Hey I didn't call you anything, you are calling me all kinds of things. I don't need to because you just made a fool of yourself. And I am not going to respond to your silly arguments, that are irrelevant, and namecalling. If that's your opinion, I'm fine with that. 

Just take a closer look at your own post and compare it with 'cognitive distortion' and I'm sure you'll find a few. 

Cognitive distortion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Arya said:


> What happened to common sense? Getting drunk like that is stupid in the first place whether the woman gets raped or not. I cannot understand why anyone would choose to put themselves into such a vulnerable position.


People should be able to get wasted and not worry about their safety. I've been fucked up thousands of times and nobody has taken advantage of me.


----------



## Arya (Oct 17, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> People should be able to get wasted and not worry about their safety. I've been fucked up thousands of times and nobody has taken advantage of me.


The fact of the matter is getting wasted causes you to do stupid things you wouldn't normally do because your brain and physical body are not under your control like they normally are. It's just dumb. There is simply no way to know what you or some other drunk person might do beforehand.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

Arya said:


> *The fact of the matter is getting wasted causes you to do stupid things you wouldn't normally do because your brain and physical body are not under your control like they normally are. * It's just dumb. There is simply no way to know what you or some other drunk person might do beforehand.


That is most of the fun. 

I'm not gonna be a rapist or a murderer when I'm drunk. Alcohol shouldn't be an excuse for bad behavior.


----------



## Arya (Oct 17, 2012)

FearAndTrembling said:


> That is most of the fun.
> 
> I'm not gonna be a rapist or a murderer when I'm drunk. Alcohol shouldn't be an excuse for bad behavior.


Yeah, but it can cause it. Every time I go to work it seems like someone is hungover and did something dumb like crash their bike into the middle of a busy road, or tried to hook up with someone else's husband, or got violent, or said nasty things to their friends, or tore off all their clothes the night before. It's just a recipe for disaster.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

Scruzz said:


> It may very well be sexual attraction, but if we are to say this is a serial killer and not just a rapist; for instance, we could say not only was it sexual attraction that led the serial killer to choose his victim, but also, that this was someone he wanted to dominate, demean, and utterly destroy (sorry for all the Ds) due to a sickness that cannot empathise with the victum.


Yeah, obviously we would need to think about serial killers a little differently, because I don't think a serial killer is like a typical rapist. Rapists are relatively common, but serial killers are diminishingly rare. They would each be committing significantly different acts and following significantly different motivations, in my opinion.


Scruzz said:


> Of course, if we switch it around a little and look at who is most vulnerable (are not just women), children are more at risk for sexual abuse. How do they guard against sexual aggression? The mere inescapable fact about children's innocence and lack of physical strength makes them a target to the depravity of a preditor. It isn't ONLY sexual.


I would treat pedophiles as a class of sexual offenders different from rapists. There are actually public online communities of pedophiles (they call it "boy love" or "girl love"). They don't explicitly think of themselves as being powerful or dominating in their relationships or aspiring relationships. On the contrary, they actually think of it as mutually fulfilling and consensual.


Scruzz said:


> Just because someone leaves their key in the car or leaves their door unlocked doesn't make it the victum's fault that their vehicle was stolen or that their house was robbed -and not to make excuse for people who live in inner city slums either- the people who commit the crime is the criminal and it is shame they don't have the respect to leave what isn't theirs alone. Having said that, I don't go running around naked in the city centre. Regardless of how vulnerable a person is, there is no excuse for abuse, crime or violence. Full stop!


That brings to mind another important point. I would not blame any rape victim for getting raped. Such blame belongs exclusively on the rapist. However, I may blame a rape victim for an act or acts of negligence or carelessness that allowed the crime. The distinction is essential, as there are two different acts that need to be discouraged. Blame on a rapist would be for the purpose of punishing the rapist to prevent acts of rape by himself or others. Blame on a rape victim who acts negligently would be for the purpose of discouraging such acts of negligence among others. I think it is a difficult to claim that there is no culpability of any sort on someone who habitually leaves the car keys in the ignition parked in an inner-city slum. There is culpability that is different from the culpability of the theft.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

FearAndTrembling said:


> People should be able to get wasted and not worry about their safety. I've been fucked up thousands of times and nobody has taken advantage of me.


The world doesn't change for the better on shoulds and wants, imo self defense is important for everyone. This is reality, it is what it is, stuff can happen.

Learn Krav Maga and crack the assaulter's nuts. Don't get so drunk you pass out, watch out for drugs..>.> there is also pepper spray and tasers, keep fit and ready to kick ass. Common sense and be careful, keep friends around if you can, avoid going home alone at night if you can.

...there are so many things one can do other then wearing anti rape undies, if all else fails a good kick to the nut-sack will trigger paralyzing pain and vomiting. 

Expectations, shouts, oughts and wants, relying on some third party to keep one safe (the government ought to do something) is not realistic imo. "You can't walk into the jungle and expect the tiger to be nice and not kill you..." It shouldn't happen, but it does. Rapists are out there, they are sick people yes, it is what it is sadly.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

monemi said:


> I think if I'd thought he might actually get the death penalty, as a kid I would have covered for him. I've got my scars but I haven't hated someone enough to wish them dead. Maybe for a split second, but not enough to actually do something that I thought would get them killed. That's something that would hang over my head. Also, if a rapist is going to face the death penalty, what's the incentive to let their victims live? Dead victims don't talk.
> 
> Are you sure your friend drank that much? Were all of her drinks safe? That is a lot of alcohol to lose your memory/blackout.



yeah, that's a good point about "letting the victims live"... there would be a lot of "hate" (or just negative feelings in general) on my side, although it also comes down to these people having a malignant impact on society, and no place within it (although, killing them off could have its own "malignant" implications)... i won't try to defend the "execute them"-line, because i know it's problematic and to be honest, i don't know all the feelings/reasons for why i have that stance to begin with. i just don't like the idea of a person being taken advantage of period, especially in ways that are so personal and potentially damaging (i imagine it'd be a very hard thing to come back from). 

i don't how much she drank. it was the second location we went to... i could tell that she was out of sorts though. i went up to the two of them because she seemed too quiet and still and he was rubbing on her knee (just to say "hi" and to feel out the situation). he was immediately, and subtly, aggressive (controlling of the physical space, telling me to leave them alone when i was asking her if she was ok--she wasn't very responsive, she just kind of stared at me, which is odd considering the atmosphere and her earlier behavior). so, i left them alone because i didn't want to be "over protective"/obtrusive, but i had a bad feeling so when i saw him leading her out i and my ex followed--he then became even more aggressive and she was still just sort... "blah", unresponsive... 

but alcohol is a funny thing; it affects people differently and even the same person differently based on their current diet/lifestyle, how much sleep they had (the enzyme that metabolizes it for you could just be "short supply" that day for a variety of reasons). plus, she's tiny to begin with, so...


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> That's a bit different since they would be putting themselves and other people in danger. A woman getting drunk or tipsy or walking around in the dark is not automatically dangerous. It's the other people who are dangerous. Running with scissors wrong side up is dangerous as they are a weapon. Are you saying women who are in a less than stellar state are fair game for anything to happen for them?
> 
> What happened to human decency and helping those in need and those who aren't able to look after themselves? Would my first instinct be to rape a drunk man who came to my bedroom or house door? No, of course not. Or take something that isn't mine? No, because I was taught not to touch things that weren't mine.


yeah, i'm pretty sure we're on the same page here actually... and are still somehow arguing... :happy:


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

@mimesis Here's a new psychology term for you to learn about: Projection.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

Donovan said:


> i just don't like the idea of a person being taken advantage of period, especially in ways that are so personal and potentially damaging (i imagine it'd be a very hard thing to come back from).



The women I've known that have had the hardest recoveries, seem to be the ones that were in relationships with the rapist. They were threatened with violence and complied. They seem to beat themselves up over it . There's no bruises or signs of assault. The lines are blurred. I got more support than I knew what to do with. Those women get nothing or worse, have their mistakes pointed out to them. Listening to their stories, I think those instances where they didn't have a clear enemy to fight (because they empathize with an attacker they know) are more psychologically damaging. But that's just my opinion. 



> i don't how much she drank. it was the second location we went to... i could tell that she was out of sorts though. i went up to the two of them because she seemed too quiet and still and he was rubbing on her knee (just to say "hi" and to feel out the situation). he was immediately, and subtly, aggressive (controlling of the physical space, telling me to leave them alone when i was asking her if she was ok--she wasn't very responsive, she just kind of stared at me, which is odd considering the atmosphere and her earlier behavior). so, i left them alone because i didn't want to be "over protective"/obtrusive, but i had a bad feeling so when i saw him leading her out i and my ex followed--he then became even more aggressive and she was still just sort... "blah", unresponsive...
> 
> but alcohol is a funny thing; it affects people differently and even the same person differently based on their current diet/lifestyle, how much sleep they had (the enzyme that metabolizes it for you could just be "short supply" that day for a variety of reasons). plus, she's tiny to begin with, so...



My Grandparents own a pub in London and my parents traveled a lot for work. Some locations weren't kid friendly, so I stayed with my Grandparents above the pub. I'd say I know my alcohol. But responsible drinking was emphasized. 

It's hard looking at someone and guessing their tolerance sometimes. I've served alcohol and would have cut people off earlier if I'd been a better guess of their tolerance. Bit burly men don't always have good alcohol tolerance.


----------



## Death Persuades (Feb 17, 2012)

While I in no way want to seem like I am blaming the victim, I still must say that there are fucked up people out there and regardless of whether the internet pesudo-feminists agree or not, doing certain things will make these people more likely to focus on you. A rapist is more likely to go for a drunk girl that can't even stand up, than he is to go for a sober woman simply dancing at the party. Obviously, this doesn't mean that a woman who never drinks will never get raped, but it's just less likely due to the extra effort it'd require for the rapist to immobilize her. To state that women should just do whatever the fuck they want and it's 100% not their fault if something happens to them is simply wishful thinking. Just as walking around late at night in a bad neighborhood puts you at higher risk of being mugged, getting super drunk/wearing clothes that will attract the attention of certain men will make you more likely to become a target.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

SuburbanLurker said:


> @_mimesis_ Here's a new psychology term for you to learn about: Projection.


It really knocked you off your socks didn't it?


----------



## Emerald Legend (Jul 13, 2010)

KINGoftheAMAZONS said:


> Blaming/shaming rape victims (specifically when the victim's abuser is male) stems from patriarchal assumptions about male sexuality, in which the natural state of a man is seen as one where he will do anything he can in order to obtain sex. Regardless of whether that means taking advantage of, or raping someone, a man will do whatever he must to secure his own sexual pleasure according to the traditional understandings of "manhood". Because men are "naturally" obsessed with sex, the responsibility of chastity, sexual purity, and not getting raped by a man, is therefore put onto the shoulders of the woman.
> 
> That is why when women are being chastised for having sex outside of marriage, they do not have the privilege of being able to blame their "crime" on the man seducing them; because, as a man, he was naturally inclined towards sexual impurity from the beginning, whereas the woman being the more pure creature, is naturally inclined towards keeping her virtue. And so by allowing the man to _defile_ her, she has gone against her "inherent nature" by not maintaining her purity. And surely any woman who does such things must seriously be a debased and reprobate (aka. unnatural) woman that is worthy of the blame?
> 
> ...


 I think women need to abandon the idea that 'all men are potential rapist'- mindset too, if they don't want to be labeled a slut for their sexual habits. I think it's only fair, no? It seems to me like when people talk about the victims- they only talk about how one half is doing. 

As for the issue of intoxication- one is responsible for what happens to them, or what they do after consciously deciding on being intoxicated..whether be male, female, smurfs or hobbits. This goes for getting behind a car dunk, rape when drunk, or giving consent to sex when drunk...they are responsible.

Also, let us not pretend the link you posted to BBC article is not an isolated incident. Usually rape charges are pretty straight forward and linear.


----------



## Eudaimonia (Sep 24, 2013)

monemi said:


> The women I've known that have had the hardest recoveries, seem to be the ones that were in relationships with the rapist. They were threatened with violence and complied. They seem to beat themselves up over it . There's no bruises or signs of assault. The lines are blurred. I got more support than I knew what to do with. Those women get nothing or worse, have their mistakes pointed out to them. Listening to their stories, I think those instances where they didn't have a clear enemy to fight (because they empathize with an attacker they know) are more psychologically damaging. But that's just my opinion.


There is something to what you are saying because it wasn't just the physical act as much as it was the aftermath abuse; the labelling and trying to control my environment (contacting friends and family). Not only threatening me personally, but other people I knew. It became very strange and twisted in a psychological way.


----------



## SuburbanLurker (Sep 26, 2010)

mimesis said:


> It really knocked you off your socks didn't it?


What?


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

FreeBeer said:


> ...there are so many things one can do other then wearing anti rape undies, if all else fails a good kick to the nut-sack will trigger paralyzing pain and vomiting.


Like the anti rape condom, much like the vagina dentata











 TMI?


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> That's a bit different since they would be putting themselves and other people in danger. A woman getting drunk or tipsy or walking around in the dark is not automatically dangerous. It's the other people who are dangerous. Running with scissors wrong side up is dangerous as they are a weapon. Are you saying women who are in a less than stellar state are fair game for anything to happen for them?
> 
> What happened to human decency and helping those in need and those who aren't able to look after themselves? Would my first instinct be to rape a drunk man who came to my bedroom or house door? No, of course not. Or take something that isn't mine? No, because I was taught not to touch things that weren't mine.


I completely agree with your philosophy but I think you are misinterpreting what @Donovan said. The unfortunate reality is that HE could have been killed and he risked his life to save her but she was not ill, a child or suffering from some condition she couldn't help. No, doing something stupid never makes that person responsible for the actions of another but I think it is dangerous for ANYONE male or female; to get wasted in an uncontrolled and potentionally unsafe environment. I once knew this guy, a subway musician who had a dangerous reaction to mixing vodka and orange juice with potent anti-anxiety medication. He couldn't walk without falling over. I insisted on walking him back to my apartment and sleeping it off on my couch. I was terrified that he was a serious threat to HIMSELF in that condition and I didn't want to read about something horrible happening to him, when I could have prevented it.

I also agree with @monemi; I am also against the death penalty. On Facebook I was asked to sign a petition demanding the death penalty for rapists in India. I couldn't sign it for that reason; although I did sign a comparable one that didn't include that. I originally made a post stating my views on capital punishment but I subsequently deleted it; since I didn't want to be insensitive to Indian women, by forcing my privileged Western viewpoints on a situation where I could not completely understand the full context. The death penalty has not shown to be an effective deterrent in any violent crimes because the perpetrator always believes that (s)he can get away with it. I think better education programs demystifying rape - particularly in police stations and courtrooms would be a good first step.

For anyone who doesn't believe that a "blame the victim" mentality doesn't really exist in the west; think again! I was once walking towards a crowded swimming pool, on a during rush hour, on a weekday where many people were around to meet with some friends. I had just been to the eye doctor who had put a few drops in my eyes, that made my vision slightly blurry. On my way to the pool, a strange man went up to me and molested me. I screamed at him and he ran away. When I later reiterated what had happened to me to forward thinking, liberal and in all other ways - feminist viewing men; I was blamed for forgetting to bring my sunglasses. So, I should have expected to be assaulted in a public place in a very safe environment, in the middle of the freaking day? What if I had been actually been blind? Would they have blamed me in that case as well?


----------



## KINGoftheAMAZONS (Jun 21, 2011)

Emerald Legend said:


> I think women need to abandon the idea that 'all men are potential rapist'


The idea that all men are potential rapists is not an idea created by women (or feminism for that matter). It's an idea that was created from the traditional notions of gender and manhood that were born out of patriarchal ideology. Society as a whole should abandon the idea that all men are potential rapists, not just women. 



> I think women need to abandon the idea that 'all men are potential rapist'- mindset too, if they don't want to be labeled a slut for their sexual habits. I think it's only fair, no?


So in order for women to earn the privilege of being able to openly express their sexuality without being labeled as sluts, they must first agree to the terms of "abandoning the idea that all men are potential rapists"? Something about this statement is rubbing me the wrong way. I think it's the fact that you're trying to imply that women can't have the right to *not* be slut-shamed unless they do something for men first. Either way, society should abandon the idea that women should be punished for expressing their sexuality, as well as the idea that all men are potential rapists. Why? Because it's the logical thing to do. Period.



> As for the issue of intoxication- one is responsible for what happens to them, or what they do after consciously deciding on being intoxicated..whether be male, female, smurfs or hobbits. This goes for getting behind a car dunk, rape when drunk, or giving consent to sex when drunk...they are responsible.


This is bullshit. One is never responsible for getting raped. It doesn't matter if 12 drunk people were passed out in a public square with their legs wide open. No one has a right to sexually violate any of them. It is not the victim's responsibility to not get raped. It is the violator's responsibility to keep their sex organs to themselves. 

And please don't compare apples and oranges, and pretend that your fallacies make sense. Consciously getting behind the wheel of a car drunk, and giving consent for sex during intoxication, is NOT the same as someone forcing themselves on you WITHOUT your consent. Unless you're going to tell me that being drunk automatically gives a person the right to ignore the legal requirement of obtaining consent from a potential sex partner?



> Also, let us not pretend the link you posted to BBC article is not an isolated incident. Usually rape charges are pretty straight forward and linear.


Proving rape charges is neither straight forward, nor linear. The victim shaming/blaming that was present in the BBC article is something that is common place within society, and consequently, the courtroom. You've proven that this attitude is alive and well with your ridiculous rationalizations that takes the responsibility away from the perpetrator, and places it onto the shoulders of the person who was forced into having sexual contact. *Forced* means that they could have been raped with, or without personally being intoxicated.


----------



## OldManRivers (Mar 22, 2012)

I did not read all of the posts. Two points, however:
1) look in the patent gazette, published every month by the patent department. In every issue I have looked at there are several - sometines maybe 20 - patents for an anti-rape device. The more interesting are (_ahem_) tampon-like devises equipped with barps, razer blade-like knives, and the most godawful one was a miniature cannon detonated by, uh, being pushed backward and designed to blow the offending organ to hell and gone. It did not mention recoil. . .nor powder burns. This is no joke.

Now guys, consider - You see a fine-looking woman staggering down the street, three sheets to the wind yourself, and you are sure that was a beckoning call to join her in the gutter. Besides, she is too drunk to remember. But just as you are about to hit pay dirt, your pride and joy is mangled, blown away, harpooned - so you say, Gee honey, if you had told me that you were not in the mood. . .Hell, no! You stomp the poor gal in the face, kick her in the shins, and take out your knife for a pro quid quo. So much for defensive tampons. 

2) When bees smell smoke, they think the world is on fire and gorge thewmselfs with honey.Get theirs while the getting is good. So during war, famine, natural disasters, drunken carousing, bee-brained men figure all hell has already broken out, might as well get all the honey. . .

I do not believe it is sexual, but is aggression rationalized by the circumstances - insanity? No justification at all.


----------



## Emerald Legend (Jul 13, 2010)

KINGoftheAMAZONS said:


> The idea that all men are potential rapists is not an idea created by women (or feminism for that matter). It's an idea that was created from the traditional notions of gender and manhood that were born out of patriarchal ideology. Society as a whole should abandon the idea that all men are potential rapists, not just women.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




...

edit: well, I think I might eat my words: 

*"if intoxication causes a person to lose control of himself/herself, what happens to him/her is his/her responsibility. Now, a person could get raped when s/he is drunk..and that's still rape and I didn't deny that."*

So if a person gets raped while intoxicated is it his/her fault as s/he doesn't have control over him/herself?

No. 
But that would mean what I said about being intoxicated and being responsible for his/her fate is wrong. 
But what if an intoxicated person drives a car and kills a family? Is s/he responsible? I want to say yes, it's that person's fault. 








I don't know what to think anymore.


----------



## KINGoftheAMAZONS (Jun 21, 2011)

This will be my last post as far as our debate goes. Your posts are contradicting themselves.



Emerald Legend said:


> _*Both attitudes need to go..why keep the relevant half and ignore the other. *_


Did you even read my post? I'm pretty sure I already said that society should disregard both the idea that woman should be slut-shamed AND the idea that all men are potential rapists.



> *I never said one is responsible for getting raped. I simply stated if intoxication causes a person to lose control of himself/herself, what happens to him/her is his/her responsibility. Now, a person could get raped when s/he is drunk..and that's still rape and I didn't deny that.*


I'm not sure if you're blatantly lying here, or simply unaware of the ways in which you are contradicting yourself?

1. If a person loses control of themselves due to intoxication, and therefore as a consequence, are responsible for *anything* that happens to them _while_ they are in this state of inebriation, then "logically" that same person is responsible for getting raped while intoxicated. There's no way to "not" hold the intoxicated person responsible for being the victim of abuse, since according to you, they are responsible for ANYTHING that happened to them while they were drunk or high. 

2. Even if you amended your previous statement to say that intoxicated people are responsible for everything that happens to them, except for getting raped, it still renders your claim as completely irrelevant to our debate, since you would be admitting that being intoxicated doesn't actually make a person responsible for getting raped. Which means that alcohol and drugs have no relevance as far as determining if a person being forced to commit sexual acts against their will, should be defined as rape, or not.



> *So you're telling me a judge will blame the woman 100% of the time for provoking sexual desire in men and blame her for getting raped.*


Where did I even imply that a judge would blame a woman 100% of the time for being the victim of rape? I'm curious though, would the judge _have_ to blame a female victim 100% of the time in order to validate the notion that slut-shaming/blaming is a common tactic used in both society, and the courtroom? Either way, I never said anything about judges blaming victims 100% of the time, and therefore it's irrelevant to me.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

mimesis said:


> Like the anti rape condom, much like the vagina dentata
> 
> 
> 
> ...


:shocked: ....uhm to shove a tube up there seems unconfortable to me...how odd.


----------



## Ligerman30 (Oct 23, 2013)

The #1 way to prevent rape is to carry a gun.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

Anti-Rape Underwear: Lingerie Can Shock Sexual Offenders, Send Emergency Alert Signals Through GPS

[url=http://designtaxi.com/news/356887/World-s-First-Anti-Rape-Lingerie-That-Emits-3-800kV-Shockwaves-Alerts-Police/]World?s First Anti-Rape Lingerie That Emits 3,800kV Shockwaves, Alerts Police - DesignTAXI.com[/URL]





















http://personalitycafe.com/current-events/142373-world-s-first-anti-rape-lingerie-emits-3-800kv-shockwaves-alerts-police.html


----------



## He's a Superhero! (May 1, 2013)

This idea would be better than no protection at all, and even though the woman could still get raped, it would make it more difficult - and as mentioned in the clip, a more difficult victim may deter the rapist. Even if it doesn't deter them, it would certainly slow them down, which means more time for someone else to save them, and hopefully this would stop unwanted pregnancies.


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

I've basically given up on this thread but some of the viewpoints are disgustingly scary. Typically by men are the victim blamers. Not a coincidence. How about human beings stop having daughters and phase out the female gene so there won't be any temptation to rape. Certainly wouldnt want daughters in a society with viewpoints like those. All I can say is wow to humanity. What a fail.

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

isingthebodyelectric said:


> I've basically given up on this thread but some of the viewpoints are disgustingly scary. Typically by men are the victim blamers. Not a coincidence. How about human beings stop having daughters and phase out the female gene so there won't be any temptation to rape. Certainly wouldnt want daughters in a society with viewpoints like those. All I can say is wow to humanity. What a fail.
> 
> Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk


I sometimes find myself on the opposing side of the vast majority of members of the human species. Most of the time, I continue thinking I am right and the vast majority is wrong. One way or the other, it is always a prompt to inwardly examine and critically test my belief. Debate is the way I do that.


----------



## William I am (May 20, 2011)

I'm tired, so I haven't read the whole thread, just the first page. Obviously, this is a hot button topic.

Con:
I don't like that it:
May take advantage of fear of rape to sell its products
May give rape apologists another way to blame the victim
Puts more burden of responsibility on women. Men cause rape, not women (practically always).
Promotes a culture of fear... maybe?

Pros:
Ok, maybe it actually works. Great, sort of. If the rapist has a weapon, maybe they're going to threaten your life and just make her take it off herself. Rape is about control, not about sex. 
It makes people feel safer in situations like date rape or club scenes and hopefully it works (and you can't threaten an unconscious person into removing them herself).
I don't know. Maybe this could be a good thing, but is it just band-aids on bulletholes?



The Proof said:


> just get a gun


Gun owners are much more likely (I want to say 3x as likely, but I have to find a source) to be victims of gun violence. And to shoot bystanders. And so on. An "Asp" collapsible baton is a much better option. Nonlethal and intimidating as hell when it goes "SCHLUNK" and now the target has a 3-foot titanium rod to beat somebody with. I worked with Law Enforcement officers one summer and one of them got a belligerent drunk guy who told him he was going to "monkeyfuck you into the ground" to give up just by getting the rod out.



ApostateAbe said:


> Not all men are potential rapists. However, I think it is fair to assume that all men are _possible_ rapists, from any perspective of limited knowledge, be the possibility large or small. It seems obviously unwise to guide women or ridicule safety measures of women according to how men _should_ behave. All of us live in the world that actually exists, not the world of _shoulds_. Yeah, let's stop men from trying to rape. Until then, maybe we should keep vulnerable people safe from rapists.
> 
> I am with you that a rapist is far more likely to be someone the victim knows and trusts. So obviously not all situations have equal risk. When a woman is living in the same apartment as a man who sexually harasses her, that is a risky situation. To call it a "risky situation" is not a disgusting aspect of rape culture. That is a disgusting aspect of the real world.
> 
> ...


I was informed that this went on the market in India. It's another sort of "it's something" thing. I'm sure it's not comfortable to wear, it doesn't look too hard to remove, and it's invasive plus putting more perceived responsibility on women. I support people having access to this if they want it. Fuck rapists, they deserve long barbs all up in their dicks. 




Ideally, this whole discussion shouldn't happen because rape should not exist. Ideally, these are a terrible idea, but practically? Pragmatically? They might be good for something.

It's sort of like I tell other survivors of abuse (I am one)- it's not your fault, but it is your problem and nobody can deal with it for you but you.

It's really not my place to decide whether or not this kind of thing is good.

(On a tangent, rape is a big reason we need sex education in schools, not how to not get pregnant/STI's education. People need to be educated on consent, especially men.)


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

To the people who are saying that women and people need to stop saying all men are potential rapists (not true, they all can potentially hurt you just like I could potentially hurt any stranger I pass)... If women feel the need to constantly protect themselves using these devices and not trusting the 'shady' looking (?) men, then you have just said that any man will potentially be a danger to them.

So, look at men like they can potentially hurt you or trust all men and be raped anyway? Women are damned in they do, damned in they don't and it doesn't make any difference if that person is determined to rape her, anyway. It's irrelevant as most women who are raped are raped by an aquaintaince or someone who they're friends with. We basically can't trust anyone. So, men a_re _*potentially *dangerous. People are potentially dangerous to people.

That's not to say they are _automatic_ rapists. It's to say they may *potentially *hurt you. 



One thing that did happen to me one time at school, I was standing with my friends talking and this insane guy randomly came up behind me and strangled me with some kind of string or something 'til I felt myself losing my breath and my vision going white. Was I in the wrong for being at school or trusting people around me that they won't strangle me? That wasn't my fault and it wouldn't have been my fault if he decided to sexually assault me either. It wasn't my fault because I didn't anticipate I was going to be attacked that day and I was standing with my friends, without a care in the world. I didn't report that guy because I knew nothing would be done. Sounds familiar?

I can keep saying to people stop blaming victims til I'm blue in the face but some people just want to believe everyone is innocent and not capable of these things. People need to realize the scale of the problem. It's not just women or young girls who are tipsy getting taken advantage of. It's everywhere, in different forms and saying that they have been irresponsible is brushing that problem under the carpet. 

Are you going to say that that stat of only 7% of rapists are ever convicted and/or jailed is a wrong statistic? Because it's entirely believable, in this victim blaming, rape celebrating culture, that that is true.

It's men's attitude of entitlement that they can take advantage of any girl, drunk or sober, that's the problem. In order for men to look at women like 'potential victims' or drunk girls as 'easy meat', they have to look at girls as objects to acquire and pieces of meat in the first place. That's not our fault and that's nothing we can change. So, we're powerless and that's why it's easy to rape in this society and get away with it.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

@isingthebodyelectric, I would agree with everything you said; if you changed "men" to "SOME men" as in "some very sick and disturbed men" - even better. While the assholes get the most attention; the vast majority of me don't think that way at all and it won't help make the world any safer for women; to tar them all with the same brush. I know you said "potential" as opposed to "actual" but I've had more men who genuinely wanted to _help_ me rather than _hurt_ me. I'm not being a Pollyanna by saying this. I'm not naïve and I'm extremely vigilant about who I can and cannot trust. With that said, I'm extremely sorry that you went through that and its disgusting that society isn't taking this more seriously than it is. I had this roommate who was being sexually harassed and intimidated by some douche. We called the cops and they responded to her request for help, by saying things like: "what do you expect, you're so pretty" and "do you think it's your birthday or something?" and no, I swear I'm not making this up; I _wish_ I was 'though.

_Most_ men are not and never were the enemy; it's the sexist culture that would view women (to paraphrase one poster) as "honey" for the taking. It's very important not to conflate them. It's _equally_ dangerous for men to view women that way as it is for women to lump words like "entitlement" and "male privilege" onto innocent men. Lambast the perpretators and their supporters all you like but it's critical to avoid falling into the trap of viewing anatomy as destiny. Women don't hold the cornerstone on morality; decent, ethical people - of BOTH genders do that.


----------



## Animus Tigridis (Apr 5, 2013)

The premise of the underwear and the condom both is based on an ignorance of how rapists operate, and the choices a victim perceives.

The most common type of rapist doesn't tear clothes off someone. He tells his victim to take them off herself. He likes it like that. He wants to believe that she's consenting. Resistance is a great way to fend him off, he'll always fold under pressure, but who is going to take that chance when a man with a knife tells them to take off their clothes? Even if they know the statistics, that 8 out of 10 rapists are really just blowfish with delusions, the arithmatic then isn't "If I resist there is an 80 percent chance I will not get raped", but "If I don't comply there is a 20 percent chance I will die."

A surprisingly large number of people will risk death in that situation. They're not actually risking death, because the dude is a blowfish without any bite, but not knowing this they still resist. I read the study that inspired the product, and it said that 25 percent, around about (I read it yesterday, I'm not sure of the exact number anymore), resist. The conclusion they made was that this number is low. The conclusion I make is that 25 percent of women deserve to have an epic poem written about them. One for each, individually. The courage and badassitude it takes to pull this off is no less than soldiers walking straight ahead into machine gun fire. The gun might be shooting blanks, but _they don't know that_. 25 percent is an incredible number. God damn 


The actual date rapist type of rapist is another beast entirely. You don't want to resist this 12 percent block of rapists. They're raping out of a sense of entitlement. They think they are taking something that belongs to them, that they have a right to that woman's body because they're all that and then some. Resistance, to them, is infuriating, and they will get violent. They'll knock out teeth, break bones, and when faced with a pair of underwear they can't remove it's going to get ugly. The kind of ugly where you better hope that you have amazing health insurance. As an added bonus, they'll also be back, because they wants what is theirs.

What I can appreciate about the AR Wear and the Vagina Dentata thingy is that they could give some women a sense of confidence. For this it doesn't matter if it's actually helpful, or not, for the purpose of giving confidence. Confidence by itself is a good deterrent for rapists as it factors heavily into victim selection, so there is some good that I can see being possible there.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

He's a Superhero! said:


> This idea would be better than no protection at all, and even though the woman could still get raped, it would make it more difficult - and as mentioned in the clip, a more difficult victim may deter the rapist. Even if it doesn't deter them, it would certainly slow them down, which means more time for someone else to save them, and hopefully this would stop unwanted pregnancies.


I don't really see the usefulness of this at all. Most potential rapists kidnap and forcibly take their victims to an isolated second location and since they have already invested all of their "efforts" on a particular women; who's to say that they might become even angrier and even more violent as a result? A device that she would have in a more accessible area of her clothing would make way more sense and as far as that ludicrous condom goes: when have rapists ever been concerned with catching STDs or preventing possible pregnancies? Unless, there would either be some legal benefit or a possible mitigating circumstance criminally; I don't see this happening.


----------



## Felidire (Jan 12, 2013)

It's kind of sad that we have to invent shit like this.... So impractical. It reminds me of the "Ultimate Belt" from the simpsons, it just shouts _"Help! Help! Help!"_ while you get the shit punched out of you.

Actually, they wouldn't be too bad in the event that you were drugged at a party - but if I were a woman I'd wear them more as a "Hahaha, I'm unconscious but fuck you!" slap in the face. Problem is, the assailant might get a little too ambitious with sharp/pointed objects, increasing the risk of harm. (Also, they didn't try a cigarette lighter on the strap in the video?)



FallingSlowly said:


> No, because sexual assault is not equal to being raped, and even rape doesn't just happen via two orifices.


Thankfully we've got teeth in the third one~



FallingSlowly said:


> On top of that I thought: Better don't be desperate for a pee wearing these things, and don't forget your combination.


Hahaha!

AAAAANnngg! 1-8-6 1-3-8-6-3 NNNGggg!!! 1-1-2-1-1-3-8-6-1-FML-6-8-6-1-6!

(I think some kind of guillotine underwear would be far more effective).



monemi said:


> Let's be fair. If women are going to be expected to wear these chastity belts, men should be too.


Ohhh, shit, that's awesome! They should force convicted rapist men to wear these permanently


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

He's a Superhero! said:


> This idea would be better than no protection at all, and even though the woman could still get raped, it would make it more difficult - and as mentioned in the clip, a more difficult victim may deter the rapist. Even if it doesn't deter them, it would certainly slow them down, which means more time for someone else to save them, and hopefully this would stop unwanted pregnancies.


exactly. plus, if she (or even he) were carrying a weapon--even something as simple as a knife--this would be the time to pull it out, drive it into his leg, twist, and run like hell while the guy has his attention divided.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

knittigan said:


> Women should not have to restrict the way that they move though the world because societies insist on tolerating sexual violence and violence against women more generally. Sexual violence and other forms of violence are not inevitable features of human social organisation and if you believe that they are (as you do when you believe that women should have to live their lives under the threat of being raped by a stranger hiding in the bushes _at all times_), that is exactly what you are saying you believe, and as a consequence of that, you are also saying that you believe that all men are potential rapists. .


No one should have to do a damn thing. But this isn't heaven, this is Earth. We all have to make sacrifices for the system. Yes, it would be great to solve sexual violence, but it's probably a good idea to avoid it too.

Shouldn't have to live under a threat? Who the hell should? What does that say about homeless people, poor people, people in prison, people in other countries, people that are gay or any minority, people of other colors of skin or religions- people with deformities or obesity- people that are too old or too young.

There are many levels of oppression and many levels of threats.

Let's work towards overcoming them both by changing others, and by changing ourselves.

Don't wear stupid ass underwear that honestly clings tight to the thighs and is a turn on.

Learn martial arts. Learn to kill. Carry a damn weapon.

"Shouldn't have to?"

So?

Guys shouldn't have to deal with so much testosterone from thousands of years of evolution and having to be aggressors either. This should be a world where we know we will never war and never have to use aggression.
This should be a world where sex isn't so damn taboo and people don't come up with weird fetishes.
This should be a world where people are taught to have control rather than be impulsive.

This should be a world where we are taught to meditate and respect others, not "CHASE A FUCKING AMERICAN DREAM THEN GO DESTROY OURSELVES AT MOTHERFUCKING MCDONALDS WHICH PRETTY MUCH IS THE CAUSE FOR SEXUAL VIOLENCE"

I'm fucking pissed.

Society is just as bad as it is good.

"Shouldn't have to?"

Well thats a damn understatement of the century.

But you can't fix the world by complaining about other people having power.

Empower yourself. I'm a martial arts instructor and I could teach 3 out of 4 people to be able to take out a blackbelt in under just 6 months.

But no one wants to train.

So "shouldn't have to?"

You mean, we shouldn't have to not be lazy, since we have the excuses of us being "better people than others?"

What if our life wasn't spent reactively, and instead proactively.

What if instead of just walking around buying milk, we were instead helping every person we ran into at the same time.

What if we weren't just selfish people. What if we were leaders.

Get the power and use it for good.

Don't be passive and just complain about rapists.

CHANGE society, CHANGE rapists, CHANGE yourself.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

William I am said:


> Gun owners are much more likely (I want to say 3x as likely, but I have to find a source) to be victims of gun violence. And to shoot bystanders. And so on. An "Asp" collapsible baton is a much better option. Nonlethal and intimidating as hell when it goes "SCHLUNK" and now the target has a 3-foot titanium rod to beat somebody with. I worked with Law Enforcement officers one summer and one of them got a belligerent drunk guy who told him he was going to "monkeyfuck you into the ground" to give up just by getting the rod out.


When I go for a run, I don't have space to keep a collapsible baton. I have an inconspicuous blade (carried illegally) that I've taken lessons with. I wouldn't trust that intimidation would work. I've never pulled a blade on someone. If I reached that point, I wouldn't be letting them know I was planning to stab them. I usually give people one warning in life. If they've crossed the line far enough that I've decided I need a weapon, the idea is to efficiently do maximum damage and get the hell out of there. 



Animus Tigridis said:


> They'll knock out teeth, break bones, and when faced with a pair of underwear they can't remove it's going to get ugly. The kind of ugly where you better hope that you have amazing health insurance. As an added bonus, they'll also be back, because they wants what is theirs.


I'm not sure that seeking conviction after the fact is worth the embarrassment but fighting back is worth it to me. Not to say if someone doesn't fight back they've doing something wrong. I just think complying is harder to cope with afterwards. No one can even tell my front tooth was chipped and the stitches in my lower lip is hidden in the curl of my lip. (Teeth went through lower lip.) It's just hairdressers that find the little bald spot from the stitches in my head. And bruises and bones heal without visible scars. I didn't need any plastic surgery to put things back. Not fighting might be smarter, but the scars make it more real for me. I don't even know why it's important, but I see the scars and they're reassuring. I know scars on women are ugly and they're only minor and it sounds really dumb but I earned them. Even if they weren't hidden, I don't think I'd regret them.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

@monemi

scars aren't ugly on anyone. they're just... "physical conduits of experience", that people carry, . 

and when it comes to the knife situation, don't hesitate (although, if it's illegal to carry one to begin with in canada, i could see some bullshit similar to a would-be-robber getting the shit kicked out of him and then suing for excessive force arising...). if someone puts anyone in a position like that, they've already played all their cards and made their intentions perfectly clear, and no one owes them a damn thing (other than a quick death i guess, :tongue:--no playing with your food monemi!).


----------



## Animus Tigridis (Apr 5, 2013)

@monemi

Where I come from we have a saying. Scars are the marks heroes, loosely translated. It acknowledges a pride that can come from surviving tragedy, or trauma, and the strength that is born from that. Quirks we might have, or wounds we might carry with us, physical or not, scars in any sense, they can serve to remind us of where we were, and where we are now. That we didn't throw in the towel and can hold our head up high. That is how scars mark a hero. How is that not beautiful on a woman


----------



## William I am (May 20, 2011)

@monemi - Good on you for taking training for the blade. I think it's a good option. I don't know how big it is or if it's a fixed or collapsible blade, but you're not going to kill anyone with the baton unless you repeatedly hit them in the head. As for size, it's cylindrical and measures about 1" around and 5" long, which is not much bigger than my clip knife. Cheers to never needing to use either in the future.


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

> Learn martial arts. Learn to kill. Carry a damn weapon.
> 
> "Shouldn't have to?"
> 
> ...


Boohoo? Are these meant to be excuses why men rape?


Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk


----------



## OldManRivers (Mar 22, 2012)

TreasureTower said:


> I don't really see the usefulness of this at all. Most potential rapists kidnap and forcibly take their victims to an isolated second location and since they have already invested all of their "efforts" on a particular women; who's to say that they might become even angrier and even more violent as a result? A device that she would have in a more accessible area of her clothing would make way more sense and as far as that ludicrous condom goes: when have rapists ever been concerned with catching STDs or preventing possible pregnancies? Unless, there would either be some legal benefit or a possible mitigating circumstance criminally; I don't see this happening.


A rapist will allow his intended victim to mutilate his penis and walk away? I think the failing of all of these - I figure probably 250 a year are patented in the US alone -is that they do not incapicate the agressor to allow the victim to get awar. Mace is not a good idea. Taser, OK, but clumsy to use, might be used against the victim. Firearms require training and psychological will to use them. 

As a therapist, I did not have young women who were victimized by a male on my case load. That is standard procedure. But in treatment team when intake assessments were presented, most of the young girls, as young as 9, had lost thier virginity by rape - family member, date, neighbor -

I have no answer except viligence. And that will not prevent all incidences. Perhaps defining rape as a serious threat to life, and excuse deadly force against the perpetrator.


----------



## He's a Superhero! (May 1, 2013)

Donovan said:


> exactly. plus, if she (or even he) were carrying a weapon--even something as simple as a knife--this would be the time to pull it out, drive it into his leg, twist, and run like hell while the guy has his attention divided.


In many countries it's illegal to carry a weapon, and even if you do that is no guarantee of safety, as it can be used against you.


----------



## Briguy (Nov 20, 2011)

The anti-rape condom ought to suffice.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

Up and Away said:


> Don't wear stupid ass underwear that honestly clings tight to the thighs and* is a turn on*.


Are you serious? Wow! just wow! I can't believe that men _still_ exist who actually will blame women for what they're _wearing_. So, to take your "logic" one step further: If I wander the streets, extremely inebriated by myself, in a bad neighbourhood, at 3:00am., in January, wearing a parka; then I'm 100% safe, right?
What's your explanation then on 80 year old grandmothers getting raped? Cuz we all know the irresistible allure of canes and walkers. Oh and if she's really quick at the draw; she can always clock her assailant with a bottle of prune juice. I would be ROLFing unontrollably if this issue weren't so serious. There have been some majorally mind numbing WTF responses in this thread so far but yours definitely takes the cake.


----------



## Children Of The Bad Revolution (Oct 8, 2013)

TreasureTower said:


> Are you serious? Wow! just wow! I can't believe that men _still_ exist who actually will blame women for what they're _wearing_. So, to take your "logic" one step further: If I wander the streets, extremely inebriated by myself, in a bad neighbourhood, at 3:00am., in January, wearing a parka; then I'm 100% safe, right?
> What's your explanation then on 80 year old grandmothers getting raped? Cuz we all know the irresistible allure of canes and walkers. Oh and if she's really quick at the draw; she can always clock her assailant with a bottle of prune juice. I would be ROLFing unontrollably if this issue weren't so serious. There have been some majorally mind numbing WTF responses in this thread so far but yours definitely takes the cake.


Seriously.


Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

TreasureTower said:


> Are you serious? Wow! just wow! I can't believe that men _still_ exist who actually will blame women for what they're _wearing_. So, to take your "logic" one step further: If I wander the streets, extremely inebriated by myself, in a bad neighbourhood, at 3:00am., in January, wearing a parka; then I'm 100% safe, right?
> What's your explanation then on 80 year old grandmothers getting raped? Cuz we all know the irresistible allure of canes and walkers. Oh and if she's really quick at the draw; she can always clock her assailant with a bottle of prune juice. I would be ROLFing unontrollably if this issue weren't so serious. There have been some majorally mind numbing WTF responses in this thread so far but yours definitely takes the cake.


I think the key to understanding our perspective is to think of it much like you would think of other sorts of crimes. If you don't want to get robbed, then you don't have hundred dollar bills sticking out of your shirt pocket late at night in the slums. You are not to blame for the robbery if someone robs you, but you would still be an idiot for endangering yourself and anyone who would want to protect you. 

80-year-old women are at far less risk of getting raped. There is a myth that old women are at equal risk as young females, but it is just a myth contradicted by all the relevant statistics (i.e.). I think the myth is driven by the other common ideological perspective that rape is about power, not about sex. No, it is about sex.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

@ApostateAbe, no it's not; it's about *vulnerability* - perceived or actual; anything else is a _myth_. 80 year old women have been raped in their beds while sleeping. _All_ women -regardless of age, attractiveness, weight, etc., are vulnerable and no one is more vulnerable than children, the physically/mentally disabled or senior citizens.

Woman in her 70s reports rape in Central Park



> *Woman in her 70s reports rape in Central Park*
> 
> World | Associated Press | Updated: September 13, 2012 23:21 IST
> 
> ...


If you're going to dispute this by citing her photographing him; she was still SEXUALLY assaulted by her assailant.


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

TreasureTower said:


> @ApostateAbe, no it's not; it's about *vulnerability* - perceived or actual; anything else is a _myth_. 80 year old women have been raped in their beds while sleeping. _All_ women -regardless of age, attractiveness, weight, etc., are vulnerable and no one is more vulnerable than children, the physically/mentally disabled or senior citizens.
> 
> Woman in her 70s reports rape in Central Park


Everyone is vulnerable, but, when some people are ten times more vulnerable than others, it matters a lot, and you really should incorporate those differences in magnitude in your thinking. Isolated anecdotes are almost completely irrelevant.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> I think the key to understanding our perspective is to think of it much like you would think of other sorts of crimes. If you don't want to get robbed, then you don't have hundred dollar bills sticking out of your shirt pocket late at night in the slums. You are not to blame for the robbery if someone robs you, but you would still be an idiot for endangering yourself and anyone who would want to protect you.
> 
> 80-year-old women are at far less risk of getting raped. There is a myth that old women are at equal risk as young females, but it is just a myth contradicted by all the relevant statistics (i.e.). I think the myth is driven by the other common ideological perspective that rape is about power, not about sex. No, it is about sex.


Why would anyone walk around with a large denomination bill sticking out of their clothes? That's a shitty comparison. It's nothing like the same thing.


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

monemi said:


> Why would anyone walk around with a large denomination bill sticking out of their clothes? That's a shitty comparison. It's nothing like the same thing.


It is a hyperbolic analogy but it serves the point.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> It is a hyperbolic analogy but it serves the point.


How does it serve the point?


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

monemi said:


> How does it serve the point?


It may help people see the point that there can be justified advice to keep one's self safe from crimes including robbery and rape (though I am not optimistic that the point will get across). 

The analogy came to mind because I actually did have large denominations sticking out of my coat pockets walking around the town late at night. I was dressed as a pimp on Halloween night. It is a town of 2% unemployment, so I wasn't worried.


----------



## Cetanu (Jan 20, 2012)

skycloud86 said:


> How about we teach people not to rape people, or is that too hard?


While we're at it, let's teach people not to murder, genocide, steal, cheat, fraud, swear, speed in their cars, break rules, be offensive, spend more than they earn etc.

Lemme know how that goes with criminals that don't give a fuck.


----------



## Chesire Tower (Jan 19, 2013)

monemi said:


> Why would anyone walk around with a large denomination bill sticking out of their clothes? That's a shitty comparison. It's nothing like the same thing.


He is far more interested, in maintaining a head in the sand worldview than seeing reality. If he was, he would not criticise MY thinking and recognise that there are many more examples of senior citizens being raped - some in their homes while sleeping but my failure to list every single example I have heard about on the news - is considered an "anecdote". Go figure.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

ApostateAbe said:


> It may help people see the point that there can be justified advice to keep one's self safe from crimes including robbery and rape (though I am not optimistic that the point will get across).
> 
> The analogy came to mind because I actually did have large denominations sticking out of my coat pockets walking around the town late at night. I was dressed as a pimp on Halloween night. It is a town of 2% unemployment, so I wasn't worried.


When someone is mugged, I've never heard people give advice about how not to get mugged. I've only heard people respond with empathy. 



TreasureTower said:


> He is far more interested, in maintaining a head in the sand worldview than seeing reality. If he was, he would not criticise MY thinking and recognise that there are many more examples of senior citizens being raped - some in their homes while sleeping but my failure to list every single example I have heard about on the news - is considered an "anecdote". Go figure.


Unfortunately, it is anecdotal evidence. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you. I think you'd have to check into the statistics he provided for methodology to see if they're worth paying attention to. Plus, with any statistics, correlation doesn't prove causation.


----------



## ApostateAbe (Aug 8, 2013)

TreasureTower said:


> He is far more interested, in maintaining a head in the sand worldview than seeing reality. If he was, he would not criticise MY thinking and recognise that there are many more examples of senior citizens being raped - some in their homes while sleeping but my failure to list every single example I have heard about on the news - is considered an "anecdote". Go figure.


I provided this link before, but it was easy to miss. It provides the statistics about which demographics are more likely to be the victims of sexual assault.

Who are the Victims? | RAINN | Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network

It is a key point of reasoning that patterns are more important than anecdotes if we want to make sense of human society. Part of making sense of the world is through news stories, but that carries a special problem: you may come out of it thinking that men biting dogs are more common than dogs biting men.


----------

