wired.com: "Rapex(tm) -- 'a medieval device for a medieval deed'

[eudaemonia]

Rape-Stopper's Razor-Sharp Bite

 

[silverwhisper]

i have three fears about this device that make me anxious about it.

1. if it only angers the rapist, the victim will wind up dead and quite probably very painfully.

2. rapists are usually serial rapists, i understand. if so, they will simply begin by using something else (such as a branch) to get the device, remove it ungently, then continue.

3. what if the woman forgets?

 

[M's girl]

2. rapists are usually serial rapists, i understand. if so, they will simply begin by using something else (such as a branch) to get the device, remove it ungently, then continue.

Not much serial anymore after that I suppose.

I like the idea. I guess you have to be a woman (and raped at one time) to really really like this idea

 

[silverwhisper]

mg, i've known women (and men) who've been raped.

i like what this is trying to do, but you don't think my concerns are at all justified?

ed

 

[M's girl]

mg, i've known women (and men) who've been raped.

i like what this is trying to do, but you don't think my concerns are at all justified?

ed

Yes... I guess you have a point. But I guess "you" (women) want a man to bleed at least too.... that's why this does sound like a good idea. I dunno....

 

[pimpslap]

Why not just carry a firearm and know how to use is?

Two to the chest and one to the head is a VERY effective rape deterrent.

 

[silverwhisper]

pimpslap: except that not everyone's down with carry & conceal...plus, shock can lead to people not responding in a way consistent w/ making greatest use of that approach.

ed

 

[M's girl]

Why not just carry a firearm and know how to use is?

Two to the chest and one to the head is a VERY effective rape deterrent.

Well.... for one.... we can't carry weapons here in Europe.

Two: at what point can you start shooting the bastard? Plus "their" defense would always be (if they can still talk, that is) that they never wanted to hurt you (in) any way. Yeah right.

Two B] (by the way) If the bastard is dead their family will nail you because 'their' son could never have done such a thing because he was such a sweetheart....

Third: like SW said, you don't have to do anything yourself because the bastard will hurt himself; something that only happens if he rapes you. Not much debate there.


Of course... there is the other side where vengeous women will use the device on a (poor?) ex or something to settle the (a) score, luring him into a last-fuck-for-old-times-sake (which is usually a bad idea anyway) and claiming it was rape plus hurting/damaging the eh.... man.

 

[eudaemonia]

i have three fears about this device that make me anxious about it.

3. what if the woman forgets?

Of your fears, I think this is the most unfounded. What's curious is that I've heard more than one person (all men, presumably) mention this. This mystifies me.

Let me pose two thought experiments in hopes of teasing out the reasoning above.

Suppose you chose to walk around all day with an anally- or vaginally-inserted pleasure-producing device. Do you honest think you'd forget it was there? I mean, the point is to be constantly "reminded" of its presence, right? And honestly, how many people walk around all day, every day, carrying these types of foreign objects inside themselves? At some point, you become selective about the occasions to, erm, carry concealed.

Suppose you chose to walk around all day with an anally- or vaginally-inserted rape-prevention device. You must have good cause to fear attack to take such a drastic measure. I'd venture that one's awareness is negatively heightened to the point of preventing other, more productive thoughts. But even then, does "set it and forget it" strike you as the likely mindset under the circumstances?

As for your other fears, while I must grant your feelings I have difficulty understanding them. If one's not a rapist, there's nothing to worry about. If you've personal concern for the welfare of women in general, wouldn't lessening their anxiety be of primary consideration rather than yours?

###

I don't know what the firearms laws are in South Africa, pimpslap, where the invention is now on sale. But even if their culture is liberal on weapons, which concealed item do you think most women would feel easier about handling: A 14-cent condom-type protection device or a $$$ handgun?

 

[silverwhisper]

eudaemonia: do you seriously think this device will stop a determined rapist? and esp in south africa where it appears to be a pandemic, i am very concerned.

you appear not to be understanding me so let me re-state this: i think that this device will make things worse, not better.

the device will not cause sufficient pain to render the rapist completely unable to function or kill him, which means that the rapist continues to be a threat to the woman. rapex will therefore merely anger him and lead to even greater pain and possibly the victim's death. and if word of these devices spreads, rapists will simply use a branch or something else to check for it, then remove it.

you are ascribing to my comments a bad faith character that is utterly unwarranted, eudaemonia.

ed

 

[M's girl]

I agree with SW in that it won't stop the attack or the rapist probably. After all rape is more about anger and violence most of the time than it is about sex. But still.... if the woman who wears such a device feels like she is protected by it then that helps in itself already. She will feel safer and will act more confident. And that in itself will scare some men off.

And device or not.... some rapists aren't scared off by anything, so, yes, in some cases if the rapist is set on getting his kicks and doesn't mind the destructiveness of the whole 'deal' he probably won't be scared off by this. And yes, it can add to his anger. But let's face it: guys like thát you can't beat anyway, so my reasoning is you might as well do whatever you can to harm them back.

Just my 2 cents...

 

[PertPerth]

I'm not sure if it has biased my opinion, but I have been sexually assulted.

I can't help but feel that this new device will cause sexual offenders and rapists to rape women with things other than their own penis (such as a bottle)....and probably piss him off....not a good thing to do to someone who is planning on hurting you. Rape is about power. He will try to take it (being power over his victim) one way or another.

 

[silverwhisper]

mg, that's a good point re: self-confidence itself being useful. i hadn't considered that. and the part about at least making him pay for it a little, i can certainly understand.

ed

 

[eudaemonia]

I can't help but feel that this new device will cause sexual offenders and rapists to rape women with things other than their own penis (such as a bottle)....and probably piss him off....not a good thing to do to someone who is planning on hurting you.

If rape is all about aggression over another, and it's possible that an attempt to thwart an attacker could escalate the violence, then then victim has the same two functional options before the escalation as after: Allow the attack or defend against it.

Why then does the line of scrimmage in these discussions seem to end up back on what the victim should not/must not/cannot do? This is what mystifies me, a morality that seems horribly misfocused.

Is this the argument against the sale or use of Rapex(tm): Product R should not be sold or used b/c Attacker X might first try with his cock before moving on with something "worse"?

If not, then why shouldn't Rapex be allowed for sale or used to thwart assault?

 

[midwestyankee]

Reading this thread has led me to a corollary question: can't many of the same arguments be used for and against the carrying of handguns?

I don't mean to hijack the thread because I think that this is a useful and valuable discussion of more than just the product at hand, but the parallel just hit me and I'd be interested in the reactions of better minds.

 

[eudaemonia]

You're fine, yank, because that's exactly the parallel I intended to bring up.

 

[midwestyankee]

You're fine, yank, because that's exactly the parallel I intended to bring up.

This is more than a little scary, e. I think you need to be very afraid when you start to think like I do. It could easily jeopardize your career to say nothing of your reputation as a rationalist.

 

[silverwhisper]

eudaemonia, i don't have a problem w/ rapex being available. i just think it causes more problems than it solves.

 

[M's girl]

Reading this thread has led me to a corollary question: can't many of the same arguments be used for and against the carrying of handguns?

Not really. With a gun YOU still have to pull the trigger and shoot so you have to make the decision in a very awkward and scary situation.

With this device, however, you will still try to defend yourself as much as you would without I assume, but if the rapist manages to penetrate you after that he will inflict the wounds on himself and the only one to blame will be him. Because he has no business whatsoever to be there in the first place!

 

[eudaemonia]

eudaemonia, i don't have a problem w/ rapex being available. i just think it causes more problems than it solves.

Okay. I assumed you were offering up something beyond mere conjecture. My bad.

 

[PertPerth]

Eudaemonia, I don't have any issues with it being for sale either.
I also mentioned in my first post that rape isn't about the rape, it's about power. I never said anything about what the victim, should or shouldn't do - EVERY situation is SO different. Hind sight may be 20/20, but things are rather blury upfront. I feel that "common sense" can reduce risk of rape. No one is safe 100% of the time, not even in their own homes.

I agree with Silverwhisper, I think it's going to cause the offenders to want revenge (to which I hope I'm not on the receiving end).

I simply don't beleive in "an eye for an eye" and will never use the device myself.

 

[silverwhisper]

eudaemonia: i offered up nothing less than you did. i would thank you to stop applying the worst possible spin to what i have to say. our previous interactions were not marked by your constant bad-faith reading of me. i will therefore choose to assume you're merely not in a good mood.

ed