View previous topic | View next topic

Anti-rape condom invented

Page 1 of 3
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

Linda
65174.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:02 am Reply with quote

Who's ever read any of Julian May's books? In the one series there is a race of people called the Furfulag (or something like that) and the woman have teeth in their nether regions.
Well now now ladies you too can have something like that:

Quote:
Ehlers <the inventor> said the “rapex” hooks onto the rapist’s skin, allowing the victim time to escape and helping to identify perpetrators.

“He will obviously be too pre-occupied at this stage,” Ehlers told reporters in Kleinmond, a small village about 60 miles east of Cape Town. “I promise you he is going to be too sore. He will go straight to hospital.”

The device, made of latex and held firm by shafts of sharp barbs, can only be removed from the man through surgery which will alert hospital staff, and ultimately, the police, she said.

Full news story here.

She then goes on to say "It also reduces the chances of a woman falling pregnant.."
Yes funny that. I can't see to many men ejaculating with spikes in their willy.

Rapex Homepage

Linda

edited: to correct a typo

 
Natalie
65177.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:10 am Reply with quote

But do rapists use a condom? I've thankfully never been raped, and it is a serious subject, but surely they wouldn't be too bothered?

 
Linda
65178.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:15 am Reply with quote

Perhaps I should have said Femidom.
Its not the rapist that wears it, a woman wears it incase she gets raped.
Says a lot for a place if the probabilty of being raped is so high that you wear something just incase.

Linda

 
Celebaelin
65182.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:24 am Reply with quote

A bad idea I think, for three reasons:

Firstly it's open to abuse, women are obviously not beyond offering sex as a revenge tactic.

Secondly it's probably (?) illegal in that it is designed specifically to cause injury. An urban legend tells of a guy who placed razor blades on the back of his car radio (remember them) as 'experimental cooling fins' and was prosecuted when a thief injured himself trying to rip it out.

Thirdly it could lead to an escalation in violent rapes. What if the first act of any rape automatically became violation with a dildo? Or perhaps something sharper?

 
suze
65184.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:27 am Reply with quote

Hmm. Devices of this general kind have been patented before - IIRC the Book of Lists mentioned them back in the early 80s. While us girls have probably realised the flaws, some of the guys might need a bit of help, so here goes ...

1. It's not going to be excessively comfortable to wear; I accept that (sorry male readership) it's not unlike a tampon, but then many women find these uncomfortable and use alternatives.

2. Their website suggests that if used properly it won't attack the lady parts. I think that caveat might constitute too big of a risk to take. I dunno about you, but I'm not sure that I want anything with spikes in it "down there".

3. It's been invented in South Africa, where it seems to be legal. I guess it would be legal in the USA as well, but I rather suspect it wouldn't be in Britain.

And on the pregnancy claim. You are of course right that your average man would, on balance, prefer not to have spikes thrust into his penis. But I rather think that some men with deviant sexual interests (which might be considered to include rapists) would get off on it, and that the very fact of this thing embedding itself might cause them to ejaculate. (I once knew a couple who were into some unspeakable things involving needles, and that appeared to be their way of thinking.) Not, therefore, a strong selling point.

 
Linda
65185.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:32 am Reply with quote

Its not illegal where it was invented. Well not yet. At the moment rape is considered a Schedule 1 offence. In other words you are allowed to use lethal force to protect yourself or others from it.

As to the other points, well yes those are valid points.

With regards to point three, lots of rape cases in South Africa result in the victim being murdered anyway. I guess its a gamble.

When you consider the horrendous number of rape that occur in South Africa, and the complete lack of support from the government for women who are victims of rape you can see how it came into being.

Linda

 
Celebaelin
65186.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:41 am Reply with quote

Linda wrote:
Its not illegal where it was invented. Well not yet. At the moment rape is considered a Schedule 1 offence. In other words you are allowed to use lethal force to protect yourself or others from it.

How certain are you of this fact? Isn't there a 'reasonable force' condition? If it could be demonstrated that I had knowingly (and successfully) used a lethal blow to defend myself against an unarmed opponent I would expect to be prosecuted and in all probability convicted.

 
Natalie
65188.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:49 am Reply with quote

It's like when there was a farmer who shot trespassers on his land (I think), and he was convicted, or at least arrested.

I think it's good that there is a thinking into protection against rape, but as has been pointed out before, I certainly would not like anything spikey in said place.

Also, as I think suze pointed out, some men and indeed women, "get off" on some very strange things. It may become, for some men, a variation of self harming. By this, I mean that the pain may allow them to feel pleasure and enjoyment.

Who knows what goes on in the minds of these people.

 
Linda
65214.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:25 am Reply with quote

I'm very sure of that fact. Unless its changed very recently, they are rewriting some of the laws...I don't think buggery is still a schedule 1 offence any more.
I can't exactly remember how it was put to me, but if your attacker is bigger and stronger than the victim, but doesn't have a weapon, it can be argued that their strenght/size was sort of thier weapon. Sorry I'm not phrasing that right, but hopefully you get the gist.
And in this case is not as extreme as shooting the rapist, it still leaves him with a fully fuctioning penis, and no permanent damage. Just causes him extreme pain for a while. I think in these cases its up to the prosecutor whether they want to press charges, though the rapist who get injured could probably file charges of assult against the woman, but they'd be investigated by the police and the state's prosecutor.

I am pretty sure it would be illegal HERE in the UK, but the SOUTH AFRICAN legal system is completely different and works in a completely different way. You have far more rights to protect yourself and your property in South Africa than you do here. For example if someone gets bitten by your dog while in your property with out your consent, you are covered if you have a proper wall and signs up in different languages warning people that the dog may bite.

I do however stand to be corrected as they are rewriting the laws. But with womans rights being given such a high priority in SA at the moment I doubt they'll take away too many of the ways you can claim self defense.

Linda[/b]

 
Celebaelin
65218.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:36 am Reply with quote

I suspect the point is that if you are capable of killing your opponent then you are probably capable of defending yourself effectively without doing so. You may not feel much like it but that's another matter. Of course if you were to kill an assailant he's not going to be around to see the outcome - whatever that may be.

 
djgordy
65221.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:42 am Reply with quote

The myth of the 'vagina dentata' is quite an old one. Not surprisingly Freud had something to say on the subject.

http://www.goddesscafe.com/yoni/dentata.html

The 'anti-rape condom' seems just like a chastity belt.

 
Celebaelin
65224.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 10:56 am Reply with quote

As did Jung

Quote:
The mother that is behind the real mother may be the great mother, the tragic mother, the terrible mother, the devouring mother, the cruel mother, the tyrannical mother, the wise old woman or others. Jung often used the metaphor of the cauldron as the container for the interaction of opposites and the interaction of real and symbolic people. A positive transference is a desirable state in which analysis flourishes but it is not a steady state and fluctuates. Whenever two people are in a close relationship transference is there;

http://www.geocities.com/mindstuff/jung3.html

Quote:
As the ego gains strength the paradoxical archetypal representations will indicate a fear of the return to the primordial state (manifest, for instance, as a fear of the Terrible Mother who gives life by devouring). And in later stages the return to the non-bifurcated state will once gain be sanctioned by the particular paradox corresponding to that state-- the transformation image of fertility-in-death.

http://www.mentalstates.net/add_g.html

And the rebirth from the devouring mother representative of the process of individuation in many images: Christ emerging from the cave, Jonah from the whale, Hercules (amongst others) from Hades, Gandalf's re-appearance after his death in Moria etc. All symbolic of separation from the (devouring) mother.

 
Linda
65246.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:40 am Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:

And the rebirth from the devouring mother representative of the process of individuation in many images: Christ emerging from the cave, Jonah from the whale, Hercules (amongst others) from Hades, Gandalf's re-appearance after his death in Moria etc. All symbolic of separation from the (devouring) mother.


And of course not to mention the Judge in Pink Floyd's The Wall.

Linda

 
Linda
65247.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 11:43 am Reply with quote

Celebaelin wrote:
I suspect the point is that if you are capable of killing your opponent then you are probably capable of defending yourself effectively without doing so. You may not feel much like it but that's another matter. Of course if you were to kill an assailant he's not going to be around to see the outcome - whatever that may be.


Well yes, but you can be weaker than you're opponent, and capable of killing them. You could be equipped with a knife or a gun. Both of which are legal there...though with the gun of course you need to be properlly licenced and trained in its use.

Linda

 
davethecat
65264.  Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:49 pm Reply with quote

Do you mean to say that I've been celibate for all these years and now you're telling me they don't have teeth?

 

Page 1 of 3
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group