Rape-aXe: Anti-rape Condom

Off Topic
61

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
This will never make it to the US. It’s a barbaric device.[/quote]
You sound threatened; it’s much less barbaric than the crime. And since when has the U.S. been too ticklish for rough justice? We’re largely founded on it, and predominantly a pro gun, pro incarceration and pro death-penalty society – and I don’t say any of those things critically.

I don’t see the device not making its way to the U.S. if there’s demand for it with political will backing it up. The only thing I can see opposing it would be a coalition of men threatened by what the device might mean to them personally.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
And any man who is willing to rape someone is also willing to beat the tar out the woman that puts that on him.[/quote]
That’s just the kind of threatening attitude rapists rely on. It’s also of only limited truth. Most men who attack women let the victim’s fear do the work, and have little recourse against someone who has tools with which to respond, be they verbal or physical. Most men willing to rape a woman retreat when there’s difficulty or struggle because they depend on intimidation and are weak facing strength or assertiveness – which is why they’re rapists. And most are going to get the hell out of there once their prick’s been barb wired.

But I do appreciate second and third order thinking, and anyone – man or woman – who intends to defend themselves in certain situations needs to have contingency plans for the likely ways a scenario might play out.

And yes, there’s a certain small percentage of men who attack women (people, really) who are truly violent and can’t be backed off short of incapacitating or killing them. Take that to its logical conclusion. If you happen across one in the wrong scenario, a beating is the last thing to worry about, and the use or non-use of this device won’t factor much in what you’re dealing with.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
And what happens when a woman finds out that her husband is cheating on him and decides to wear one “to get even” [/quote]
Good call. Because there aren’t any other objects in the world that might be used for purposes other than their original intent to inflict uncalled for harm. I suppose you’re against screwdrivers, Drano and pineapples, too?

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
And what about a woman who has a grudge against a man for whatever reason and decides this is the way to get him charged for rape and ruin his life.[/quote]
First, see above point. Second, like this doesn’t happen without the device? Like a lot of things, it’s terrible and shouldn’t occur but nonetheless sometimes does; that’s why we have a legal system.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Please. Develop a civilized society and retarded contraptions dont need to be invented. [/quote]
We’ve come a long way but not far enough and wouldn’t it be pretty to think it can be achieved. But while we’re trying to make the world what we’d like it to be, let’s not forget the realities of dealing with the world as it is.

62

[quote]C-Bear wrote:
Most men who attack women let the victim’s fear do the work, and have little recourse against someone who has tools with which to respond, be they verbal or physical. Most men willing to rape a woman retreat when there’s difficulty or struggle because they depend on intimidation and are weak facing strength or assertiveness – which is why they’re rapists. [/quote]

Well said. Truth.

63

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
I specifically said the rest of the CIVILIZED world. I dont consider any of those practices civilized even though they may happen in countries more civilized than South Africa, including the US. Perhaps I should have specifically said “civilized populations”.

I already said I’m not an anthropologist. I took two anthro classes in undergrad. I dont have an answer for that. But it sounds like youre implying that razor blades in a vagina is leading people down the path of civilization. That’s just not true. This is equivalent to Hannibal’s “eye for an eye” code.

What’s going to happen when a mother gets raped with one of these. But instead of just being raped (again, excuse the downplaying of the act) she is now killed by the rapist. Her children are now motherless instead of the still horrible alternative. There is so much that can go wrong with this “solution” Im amazed people think this will lead to any progress whatsoever. [/quote]

I don’t know that anyone said it would lead to civilizing South Africa.

Some of what I posted as crimes against women happen here in the U.S by the way.

Women are already raped and killed. Are you advocating women lay back and take it, is that what you would do?

I don’t know what the answer is, but I can certainly understand the outrage at a society like South Africa and the culture of abuse for women.
[/quote]

Are you reading my posts? Its not late at night where you are, what’s your excuse or are you just seeing what you want to see. PLease read my most recent post one more time. I said it sounds like you are IMPLYING that this will have positive effects on society (call that what you want, I’ll call it civilization).

Second. I clearly acknowledged that those practices happen in the US. I

Of course Im not advocating women accept rape as the norm. Are you serious with that question. It almost sounds like you are trolling at this point. My whole argument has been that this device will cause more harm than good over the long term. This device is reinforcing barbaric behavior. My opinion is that time and resoruces should be invested in finding ways to change the culture, not find a sophisticated way to put “barbs” in a rapist’s penis during the act.

Please dont make anymore nonsensical posts. I dont feel like insulting anyone personally to make my point so if you are going to ignore my actual words simply dont reply.
[/quote]

I have read your post fully. I don’t agree that my posts are nonsensical, you just don’t agree with my opinion or I am not making my point clear.

You said this would probably make the situation worse and the enraged rapist might then kill the woman. I said this happens anyways. It read to me that a woman shouldn’t be doing anything to anger her rapist. That was my point.

Another point I made is that there is no motivation for the country to change. The entire continent is in shambles. Look at Darfur.

So much aid already goes to South Africa both governmental and private. If it reads as if I know what the answer is, I hadn’t meant to imply that. I’m not trolling. But quite a few of the posts are coming across as if the woman shouldn’t make her rapist angry.

There is no need for personal insults.
[/quote]

So you think it’s not a (really) bad idea to make a rapist angry?

Women are raped and killed to begin with (your point). So a possible solution is to implement a device that will possibly increase the rage and certainly not stop killing because it will also harm the man? I cant imagine a more backwards approach to modernizing a culture. This is boggling my mind.

Youre saying that since they dont want to change that people shouldnt attempt to help? Let them continue to be a cesspool of human life? These are human beings with fucntioning brains and reasoning skills. Providing women with rape traps will certainly not give the society incentive to change. [/quote]

If you read my posts I never said I thought it was a good idea.

I said I can understand the motivation behind the condom.
[/quote]

OK fair enough, that’s why I asked.

I think the intention of stopping rape is noble. This particular solution is terrible though.

[quote]
Do you see where your saying “don’t make the rapist angry” can come across a bit as “just take it and don’t do anything because you might make him angry”? [/quote]

I dont actually. Because I read things for what they are and try not to put my own emotion into interpreting text.

Handing out damn tazers would be infinitely more productive than this retarded condom. And no, that’s not my proposed solution.

This is nothing personal, btw, I dont think it came across that way, just sayin though. I’ll still give a thumbs up to your pic in whichever tvixen thread whenever I browse that section :wink:

64

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
I specifically said the rest of the CIVILIZED world. I dont consider any of those practices civilized even though they may happen in countries more civilized than South Africa, including the US. Perhaps I should have specifically said “civilized populations”.

I already said I’m not an anthropologist. I took two anthro classes in undergrad. I dont have an answer for that. But it sounds like youre implying that razor blades in a vagina is leading people down the path of civilization. That’s just not true. This is equivalent to Hannibal’s “eye for an eye” code.

What’s going to happen when a mother gets raped with one of these. But instead of just being raped (again, excuse the downplaying of the act) she is now killed by the rapist. Her children are now motherless instead of the still horrible alternative. There is so much that can go wrong with this “solution” Im amazed people think this will lead to any progress whatsoever. [/quote]

I don’t know that anyone said it would lead to civilizing South Africa.

Some of what I posted as crimes against women happen here in the U.S by the way.

Women are already raped and killed. Are you advocating women lay back and take it, is that what you would do?

I don’t know what the answer is, but I can certainly understand the outrage at a society like South Africa and the culture of abuse for women.
[/quote]

Are you reading my posts? Its not late at night where you are, what’s your excuse or are you just seeing what you want to see. PLease read my most recent post one more time. I said it sounds like you are IMPLYING that this will have positive effects on society (call that what you want, I’ll call it civilization).

Second. I clearly acknowledged that those practices happen in the US. I

Of course Im not advocating women accept rape as the norm. Are you serious with that question. It almost sounds like you are trolling at this point. My whole argument has been that this device will cause more harm than good over the long term. This device is reinforcing barbaric behavior. My opinion is that time and resoruces should be invested in finding ways to change the culture, not find a sophisticated way to put “barbs” in a rapist’s penis during the act.

Please dont make anymore nonsensical posts. I dont feel like insulting anyone personally to make my point so if you are going to ignore my actual words simply dont reply.
[/quote]

I have read your post fully. I don’t agree that my posts are nonsensical, you just don’t agree with my opinion or I am not making my point clear.

You said this would probably make the situation worse and the enraged rapist might then kill the woman. I said this happens anyways. It read to me that a woman shouldn’t be doing anything to anger her rapist. That was my point.

Another point I made is that there is no motivation for the country to change. The entire continent is in shambles. Look at Darfur.

So much aid already goes to South Africa both governmental and private. If it reads as if I know what the answer is, I hadn’t meant to imply that. I’m not trolling. But quite a few of the posts are coming across as if the woman shouldn’t make her rapist angry.

There is no need for personal insults.
[/quote]

So you think it’s not a (really) bad idea to make a rapist angry?

Women are raped and killed to begin with (your point). So a possible solution is to implement a device that will possibly increase the rage and certainly not stop killing because it will also harm the man? I cant imagine a more backwards approach to modernizing a culture. This is boggling my mind.

Youre saying that since they dont want to change that people shouldnt attempt to help? Let them continue to be a cesspool of human life? These are human beings with fucntioning brains and reasoning skills. Providing women with rape traps will certainly not give the society incentive to change. [/quote]

If you read my posts I never said I thought it was a good idea.

I said I can understand the motivation behind the condom.
[/quote]

OK fair enough, that’s why I asked.

I think the intention of stopping rape is noble. This particular solution is terrible though.

[quote]
Do you see where your saying “don’t make the rapist angry” can come across a bit as “just take it and don’t do anything because you might make him angry”? [/quote]

I dont actually. Because I read things for what they are and try not to put my own emotion into interpreting text.

Handing out damn tazers would be infinitely more productive than this retarded condom. And no, that’s not my proposed solution.

This is nothing personal, btw, I dont think it came across that way, just sayin though. I’ll still give a thumbs up to your pic in whichever tvixen thread whenever I browse that section ;)[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification and the patience BONEZ. I’ve mentioned to you before I like your posts. I think I probably am coming across very confrontational and that is not conducive to a good discussion.

I am pretty sure I have beaten this to death as every rapist should be. =)

and gracias

65

The device in itself is the wrong way to go about things. However, the IDEA behind the device is great. It probably sounds really good on paper, and in “lab settings” but has no carry-over to real life scenarios.

I’m so glad I don’t have a vagina.

66

[quote]C-Bear wrote:

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
This will never make it to the US. It’s a barbaric device.[/quote]
You sound threatened; it’s much less barbaric than the crime. And since when has the U.S. been too ticklish for rough justice? We’re largely founded on it, and predominantly a pro gun, pro incarceration and pro death-penalty society – and I don’t say any of those things critically.

I don’t see the device not making its way to the U.S. if there’s demand for it with political will backing it up. The only thing I can see opposing it would be a coalition of men threatened by what the device might mean to them personally.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
And any man who is willing to rape someone is also willing to beat the tar out the woman that puts that on him.[/quote]
That’s just the kind of threatening attitude rapists rely on. It’s also of only limited truth. Most men who attack women let the victim’s fear do the work, and have little recourse against someone who has tools with which to respond, be they verbal or physical. Most men willing to rape a woman retreat when there’s difficulty or struggle because they depend on intimidation and are weak facing strength or assertiveness – which is why they’re rapists. And most are going to get the hell out of there once their prick’s been barb wired.

But I do appreciate second and third order thinking, and anyone – man or woman – who intends to defend themselves in certain situations needs to have contingency plans for the likely ways a scenario might play out.

And yes, there’s a certain small percentage of men who attack women (people, really) who are truly violent and can’t be backed off short of incapacitating or killing them. Take that to its logical conclusion. If you happen across one in the wrong scenario, a beating is the last thing to worry about, and the use or non-use of this device won’t factor much in what you’re dealing with.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
And what happens when a woman finds out that her husband is cheating on him and decides to wear one “to get even” [/quote]
Good call. Because there aren’t any other objects in the world that might be used for purposes other than their original intent to inflict uncalled for harm. I suppose you’re against screwdrivers, Drano and pineapples, too?

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
And what about a woman who has a grudge against a man for whatever reason and decides this is the way to get him charged for rape and ruin his life.[/quote]
First, see above point. Second, like this doesn’t happen without the device? Like a lot of things, it’s terrible and shouldn’t occur but nonetheless sometimes does; that’s why we have a legal system.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Please. Develop a civilized society and retarded contraptions dont need to be invented. [/quote]
We’ve come a long way but not far enough and wouldn’t it be pretty to think it can be achieved. But while we’re trying to make the world what we’d like it to be, let’s not forget the realities of dealing with the world as it is.[/quote]

Threatened? Yes. Is that wrong? I really dont agree with the “eye for an eye” mentality when it pertains to an already lawless society. That is a step backwards IMO.

Your comment about men stopping its arrival to the US because they wont be able to rape people anymore is comical and simply irrational. You’d be hard pressed to make a more “militant feminist” statement. It’s implying that people who disagree with the use of this device are all wannabe rapists or actual rapists. Please. That comment is sad.

My cheating husband scenario is obviously a hypothetical “what if” type thing. Its very possible but obviously not the biggest issue in question. Nitpicking is annoying.

So because women already cry false rape that makes it ok to hand out a device to make that even easier. Lunacy.

Plain and simple your arguments suck. Youre arguing for the sake of it and I dont honestly believe that YOU believe that just because something happens that its ok for it to enabled in another way. If you do, I feel bad for the people around you.

67

Africa can still be proud of being the shithole of the earth, with absolutely no moving forward!

Unrelated, but just read the atrocities section for more display of African know-how : Revolutionary United Front - Wikipedia

And also, this is T-Nation, I expected the usual “stick it in her pooper” comments. Maybe this subject is too serious to post such comments, but I can’t help but think it would be safer (anyway, it’s Africa, no one cares about AIDS there, it’s SOOOO 1980!)

68

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:

[quote]C-Bear wrote:
Most men who attack women let the victim’s fear do the work, and have little recourse against someone who has tools with which to respond, be they verbal or physical. Most men willing to rape a woman retreat when there’s difficulty or struggle because they depend on intimidation and are weak facing strength or assertiveness – which is why they’re rapists. [/quote]

Well said. Truth.
[/quote]

sigh I wish I never opened this thread.

I just wanted to comment on the above. I disagree with this. We have seen a lot of rape victims in the hospital that have been brutally beaten or cut up with knives (mutilation style, not for killing). If the attackers have difficulty, a lot of the attackers we have encountered become more aggressive and violent.

As far as the device topic goes, I don’t think I’m going to touch that thing with a 30 foot pole.

69

[quote]GSD wrote:

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:

[quote]C-Bear wrote:
Most men who attack women let the victim’s fear do the work, and have little recourse against someone who has tools with which to respond, be they verbal or physical. Most men willing to rape a woman retreat when there’s difficulty or struggle because they depend on intimidation and are weak facing strength or assertiveness – which is why they’re rapists. [/quote]

Well said. Truth.
[/quote]

sigh I wish I never opened this thread.

I just wanted to comment on the above. I disagree with this. We have seen a lot of rape victims in the hospital that have been brutally beaten or cut up with knives (mutilation style, not for killing). If the attackers have difficulty, a lot of the attackers we have encountered become more aggressive and violent.

As far as the device topic goes, I don’t think I’m going to touch that thing with a 30 foot pole.[/quote]

Better then touching it with your own pole, no?

Too soon?

70

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Threatened? Yes. Is that wrong? I really dont agree with the “eye for an eye” mentality when it pertains to an already lawless society. That is a step backwards IMO.[/quote]
It isn’t a lawless society – why the hyperbole? It’s a lawful one where laws are sometimes broken for which there are further laws attempting to address the problem. That’s how the civilization you’re championing works.

Some places are more civilized than others. I’m guessing you’re from one of better places, in which case it’s rather easy to be testy about the ugliness sometimes necessary to preserve your right to live, if live you wish to. What you call a step backwards I call an occasional and unfortunate practical reality.

But your logic on this point is caught in false dilemma: that you can’t increase civilization without making some concessions to the reality of those who won’t be civilized. The two things aren’t mutually exclusive, as many modern societies show.

And your use of “eye for an eye” – which is a system of punishment – here is misplaced; the device ideally acts as both deterrent and identifier; “punishment” can be argued to occur in the form of physical damage, but that’s not the device’s purpose.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Your comment about men stopping its arrival to the US because they wont be able to rape people anymore is comical and simply irrational. You’d be hard pressed to make a more “militant feminist” statement. It’s implying that people who disagree with the use of this device are all wannabe rapists or actual rapists. Please. That comment is sad.[/quote]
You’re right, my comment was comical and irrational – deliberately so. The point was to say that there was really no practical reason to object to this device unless you’re a rapist. Humor to make an assertion – admittedly flip, but with reason. Too subtle, apparently

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
My cheating husband scenario is obviously a hypothetical “what if” type thing. Its very possible but obviously not the biggest issue in question. Nitpicking is annoying.[/quote]
If your point was a nit and I was picking it, why did you bother making it in the first place? You’ve essentially just said you waste time on arguments that are insignificant. I showed you the courtesy of taking your assertions seriously and offering a fair counter. Sorry you can’t appreciate that.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
So because women already cry false rape that makes it ok to hand out a device to make that even easier. Lunacy.[/quote]
You either miss the point or deliberately twist it. Nothing makes it okay to make false claims against anyone. Simply, this device hasn’t any more potential for gross abuse than a thousand other tools or objects available. Suitcase nukes can’t be purchased on the open market because the potential for abuse is huge; letter openers, however, are easily obtained because although they can inflict damage it’s of a less likely and much more manageable kind. On that spectrum, this device is much closer to the letter opener.

And it’s already incredibly easy to make a false rape claim, this device does not substantially increase that ease, or make it any more difficult to disprove, compared to the potential benefits individuals can get from it.

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Plain and simple your arguments suck. Youre arguing for the sake of it and I dont honestly believe that YOU believe that just because something happens that its ok for it to enabled in another way. If you do, I feel bad for the people around you. [/quote]
You’re not being clear here – poorly worded. What are you saying I believe happens that because it does should be enabled in another way? Simple barbarism? If so, I don’t think it’s barbaric to respond to the threat of extreme physical danger or death with comparable or greater counterforce. That’s a personal choice, and if you think all violent behavior is created equal, then there’s probably nothing to debate.

What pervades your argument throughout this thread, however, is the strong scent of encouraged fear and intimidation for potential victims, who you imply should submit themselves to brutality without resistance lest they suffer greater brutality. That’s a legitimate position to take and I wouldn’t fault an individual for choosing it. I just happen to disagree. I would argue that submission to brutality is the best way to encourage greater brutality, and that the advancement of the “civilization” you’re so fond of is based in no small part on the will to collectively resist brutality, and enforce a system that seeks to limit it.

I never argue for the sake of it. It’s cheap of you to cast aspersions rather than follow a more decent code of behavior in the point-counterpoint discussion of a complex and volatile issue. Critique my points, address any flaws, offer alternatives – all that’s fine. But it’s ironic that you fall back on lazy and vindictive rhetoric when challenged, when you talk as emotionally as you do about making the world more civilized; you haven’t done that here.

I like what you wish the world to be, and wish it were so myself. And it’s that world that we should all be working to make. If you have the courage of your convictions followed to their logical conclusions and really could choose extreme personal damage or self-destruction over responding in kind when personally or societally threatened, color me post impressed. That’s saint-level stuff.

But, really, there just aren’t that many saints out there.

71

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Most rapes involve a beating, it isn’t as if she doesn’t wear one she won’t be beat.

This doctor is in South Africa it is the Rape Capital of the world.

Rape is barbaric, as evidenced so are the circumstances for most women in South Africa. In another article it goes on to say that women are already inserting sponges that have razor blades embedded to slash at a rapists penis.

[/quote]

And yet now you’ve created a more violent beating. I realize that rape is “not pleasant” (read: harrowing), but I can’t help but feel getting beaten to death might be slightly worse.[/quote]

So you agree with the Bobby Knight thing of lay back and enjoy it if you are going to be raped?

I wonder if you will not fight back if you are ever in the situation where you might be raped, you know, so you won’t get beat worse or possibly beaten to death.

I know I fought back. I know I got hurt, I know I was sexually assaulted, but I wasn’t raped.

[/quote]

How does any of what I said imply that? You are reaching.

Fact: Men who rape tend to be extremely violent sociopaths.

Fact: Men in pain tend to lash out at the source of their pain.

Let’s add 1 and 1 now, mmkay?

72

[quote]GSD wrote:
I just wanted to comment on the above. I disagree with this. We have seen a lot of rape victims in the hospital that have been brutally beaten or cut up with knives (mutilation style, not for killing). If the attackers have difficulty, a lot of the attackers we have encountered become more aggressive and violent…[/quote]

Some are going to – that’s a potential reality. Some can be talked or shouted into retreat and some fought off. Some are going to maim or kill no matter what you do, resist or submit; others might get away with something terrible based on your fear where otherwise it could have been prevented.

Each individual should make a personal decision on what matters most to them based on possible outcomes, and try to prepare a response based on that. Wish it were as easy as it sounds.

I very much appreciate the perspective you offer but it should be kept in context. Where you stand depends on where you sit, and in your case, you work in a hospital. By definition, you’re not going to encounter the individuals who were able to protect themselves, fend off an attack or not get hurt.

So while your evidence is legitimate and should be incorporated into an overall picture, it’s also limited and not representative.

73

[quote]WormwoodTheory wrote:
Seems to me like this thing is a necessary evil.

Having hooked barbs in my dick would make me think twice about raping someone else.[/quote]

Let’s try a simple thought experiment.

Rapist is in blinding pain and the source of said pain is in front of him. This particular rapist, like most if not all, is a violent individual.

Let’s imagine what the end result here will be.

74

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Are you advocating women lay back and take it, is that what you would do?[/quote]

Where the hell are you reading this in peoples posts?

75

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Are you advocating women lay back and take it, is that what you would do?[/quote]

Where the hell are you reading this in peoples posts?[/quote]

Didn’t you say that inflicting pain on the rapist might make him angrier? Hitting him or knocking his head with a bottle might make him angrier, scratching him, might making him angrier, kicking and biting him might make him angrier.

So if a woman shouldn’t use this condom because the pain inflicted might make him angrier do you also advocate a woman not lash out and fight back against her rapist because it might make him angrier?

What would be your suggested level of resistance?

It isn’t a stretch.

And I’ve already covered all this in other posts.

76

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]WormwoodTheory wrote:
Seems to me like this thing is a necessary evil.

Having hooked barbs in my dick would make me think twice about raping someone else.[/quote]

Let’s try a simple thought experiment.

Rapist is in blinding pain and the source of said pain is in front of him. This particular rapist, like most if not all, is a violent individual.

Let’s imagine what the end result here will be.[/quote]

Let’s try another scenario, woman in a parking lot being attacked by two men, she hits one in the head with a bottle causing him to cry out and attract attention. She gets beaten, but the blow and the resultant cry of pain brings about the end of the attack. Was it worth inflicting the pain?

77

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:
Are you advocating women lay back and take it, is that what you would do?[/quote]

Where the hell are you reading this in peoples posts?[/quote]
The implication of your previous posts has been “if you agitate the rapist, you’ll make things worse for yourself, so don’t.” Since you haven’t provided alternative suggestions, it reads like you recommend submission.

Easily clarified by your elaborating.

78

[quote]Makavali wrote:
Let’s try a simple thought experiment.

Rapist is in blinding pain and the source of said pain is in front of him. This particular rapist, like most if not all, is a violent individual.

Let’s imagine what the end result here will be.[/quote]
Critical thinking allows for a lot of ways that might go, especially since details are absent. Why do you assume just one (negative) outcome?

79

[quote]C-Bear wrote:

[quote]GSD wrote:
I just wanted to comment on the above. I disagree with this. We have seen a lot of rape victims in the hospital that have been brutally beaten or cut up with knives (mutilation style, not for killing). If the attackers have difficulty, a lot of the attackers we have encountered become more aggressive and violent…[/quote]

Some are going to – that’s a potential reality. Some can be talked or shouted into retreat and some fought off. Some are going to maim or kill no matter what you do, resist or submit; others might get away with something terrible based on your fear where otherwise it could have been prevented.

Each individual should make a personal decision on what matters most to them based on possible outcomes, and try to prepare a response based on that. Wish it were as easy as it sounds.

I very much appreciate the perspective you offer but it should be kept in context. Where you stand depends on where you sit, and in your case, you work in a hospital. By definition, you’re not going to encounter the individuals who were able to protect themselves, fend off an attack or not get hurt.

So while your evidence is legitimate and should be incorporated into an overall picture, it’s also limited and not representative.[/quote]

I don’t work in a hospital. I am a police officer. So I see a much larger pool of victims (those that report sexual assaults). The only situations I have heard of where the attacker stopped because of resistance was where the victim was perceived as a “weaker” victim or someone that the attacker believed should have been easily overpowered, such as children. Usually the attacker knew the victim, so the victim already had a fear for the attacker. Then when they encounter resistance it may surprise the attacker and cause them to hesitate or stop.

I realize I don’t encounter all causes of sexual assault because they are not all reported, but I see a lot of them. One that comes to mind is a handicapped male that used his crutch to beat a woman into submission before sexually assaulting her. So I still disagree that resistance will effectively deter a random attacker. That said, I’m not saying that a victim should just accept what is happening, but resistance may escalate the aggression of the attacker.

And for the women that I have encountered that were able to protect themselves, they were able to run to safety.

And if you want to speak of context and legitimate representation, I wouldn’t mind hearing where your source of information comes from. Mine is from reading police reports, speaking directly to victims, interviewing suspects and preparing court documents to prosecute said suspects.