Rape-X Anti-Rape Female-Condom

[xestrox]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-rape_female_condom

Above is a link providing information on it. but ill explain a vague explanation of what it is, it is a device that a women inserts into herself at anytime (probably before going to a party or something similar) and if someone inserts their penis into her while she is wearing the device, it preforms practically a penectomy, being it will remove part or all of the penis seeing as the device has a spring action blade inside of it, in many cases this could discourage men from raping women in fear that the women may have one of these inserted, though at the same time this may be used for getting revenge of as a malicious tool, there are pros and cons of this, a women may forget it is in if she is at a party and is drunk or under the influence of drugs, or rapist would also grow weary to this and surprisingly check if the women has it in first.


please post if you agree with the release of the product rape-x or not.

 

[DropKick Murphys]

I see no valid reason a manufacturer couldn't release that.

 

[xestrox]

I see no valid reason a manufacturer couldn't release that.

what i meant by it was do you agree with the product being released or not as stated in the poll, not if you think a manufacturer could or could not release it.

 

[The Fat Controller]

No problem with it, I just hope it actually will reduce rape rates, rather than primarily maiming innocent people.

 

[~XS]

I dont think that this should be allowed. What if some chick decided that she wants to slice peoples dicks open. She just starts whoring herself and hurting people.

 

[Shredderbeam]

I dont think that this should be allowed. What if some chick decided that she wants to slice peoples dicks open. She just starts whoring herself and hurting people.

You would ban a person from inserting objects into their own body? Who owns their body - you, or them?

 

[Nathan III]

You would ban a person from inserting objects into their own body? Who owns their body - you, or them?

A man owns his own penis then, right? A woman has no right to remove it.

This shouldn't be released. Think about it, a woman puts it on before a party in fear of getting raped, but when she gets to the party she gets absolutely hammered, along with a man, they decide to go to the bedroom and he ends up in the hospital without a penis. It's way too dangerous, and as you said, could also be used maliciously, as a form of revenge.

 

[MatthewGor123]

The device actually doesn't cause penectomy, it just hurts like a FUCKING BITCH and can only be removed surgically (unless you want to remove it yourself, and basically forcing you to cut your dick off). I really don't see a way for this to work well - there would be too many law-suits from innocent men that had drunk sex with a bitch with a Rape-aXe and then had to pay for surgery and having damage done to their dicks...

It's a great idea, but I think it needs to be further developed until a plausible solution that would ONLY harm the guilty, but not really affect the innocent. I don't see what right a woman has to put an object onto a man without his consent - there should be a VERY severe punishment placed on the woman if she causes injury to a man in a case of consentual sex.

But meh, I don't really give a shit. At least now I'll know to check and see if the bitch is a crazy serial-dick-chopper

 

[Shredderbeam]

A man owns his own penis then, right? A woman has no right to remove it.

She does if he's sticking it inside her without her permission.

Even if she didn't, you would punish the women who did such a thing rather than ban them from owning a device.

This shouldn't be released. Think about it, a woman puts it on before a party in fear of getting raped, but when she gets to the party she gets absolutely hammered, along with a man, they decide to go to the bedroom and he ends up in the hospital without a penis. It's way too dangerous, and as you said, could also be used maliciously, as a form of revenge.

I'm sure the man can do a quick check to see if she has one in.

 

[xestrox]

The device actually doesn't cause penectomy, it just hurts like a FUCKING BITCH and can only be removed surgically (unless you want to remove it yourself, and basically forcing you to cut your dick off). I really don't see a way for this to work well - there would be too many law-suits from innocent men that had drunk sex with a bitch with a Rape-aXe and then had to pay for surgery and having damage done to their dicks...

It's a great idea, but I think it needs to be further developed until a plausible solution that would ONLY harm the guilty, but not really affect the innocent. I don't see what right a woman has to put an object onto a man without his consent - there should be a VERY severe punishment placed on the woman if she causes injury to a man in a case of consentual sex.

But meh, I don't really give a shit. At least now I'll know to check and see if the bitch is a crazy serial-dick-chopper

i think you should read up more about this before commenting, some of the models of the Rape-X device even actually have somewhat like an arrow head with a 4 blade head that cuts the part of the penis into 4 pieces, and some contain darts that will tranqualize the man, making it able to be used for the women to rob people with.

You would ban a person from inserting objects into their own body? Who owns their body - you, or them?

Yes, when it comes to the point where it may indanger an innocent man and may be usedf as a malicious tool than yes it does need control upon the device being released.

She does if he's sticking it inside her without her permission.

yes it's designed for preventing rape, but you have to consider the ratio of people that would use it in the wrong way. does that mean i should be able to wear a helmet to school that contains extremely sharp seraded blades on each side, which would prevent people from wanting to fight me, but as i was saying consider the negative risks, i could be the antagonist in a fight, and than use it to harm someone else, not by using it as what it was designed for.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Yes, when it comes to the point where it may indanger an innocent man and may be usedf as a malicious tool than yes it does need control upon the device being released.

No, it does not. That is an assault upon the woman's right to her own body.

yes it's designed for preventing rape, but you have to consider the ratio of people that would use it in the wrong way. does that mean i should be able to wear a helmet to school that contains extremely sharp seraded blades on each side, which would prevent people from wanting to fight me, but as i was saying consider the negative risks, i could be the antagonist in a fight, and than use it to harm someone else, not by using it as what it was designed for.

Punish those who use it in the wrong way rather than banning the thing entirely.

I don't see a problem with you wearing a helmet with blades to school - unless the owner of the property forbids it.

 

[xestrox]

No, it does not. That is an assault upon the woman's right to her own body.

yes, it does when it can be used to maliciously harm an innocent man aswell, so by allowing this product to be used, you are resolving a percentage of 1 problem, but than at the same time opening a door full of many other problems.

 

[xestrox]

No, it does not. That is an assault upon the woman's right to her own body.



Punish those who use it in the wrong way rather than banning the thing entirely.

I don't see a problem with you wearing a helmet with blades to school - unless the owner of the property forbids it.

so your saying by eliminating one problem which can be punished it is ok to eliminate it with a solution that opens a box full of many other malicious possibillities that may be formed, causing there more problems for people to commit and be punished for, i really think it would be considered less of a crime for a women to be raped, than for a man to have his penis cut into 4 pieces. but i'd like to hear if you yourself would think that a person needs more or less punishment for rape or cutting a mans penis into 4 pieces.

 

[Nathan III]

Woman's body, she can insert whatever she wants into it.

You all believe you have the right to own guns in America, so if she wants that up her v-jay then she can do so by all means.

She can do whatever she wants to her own body, but this is removing part of someone else. She has no right to do that.

 

[xestrox]

If they're to make a breach of her rights by forcefully engaging with her sexually, they - by doing this - consent to the forfeiting of their own rights

as i said it can be used in malicious activity going against its sole purpose. so consider that.

 

[Nathan III]

If they're to make a breach of her rights by forcefully engaging with her sexually, they - by doing this - consent to the forfeiting of their own rights

But as I said before. What if they both get drunk, go to the bedroom... She gave consent but is too hammered to remember?

 

[MegaMatt]

You would ban a person from inserting objects into their own body? Who owns their body - you, or them?

Its sort of like the issue with drugs.
But I don't see why the thought of female condoms would be questioned, seems like a great idea to me.

 

[Shredderbeam]

so your saying by eliminating one problem which can be punished it is ok to eliminate it with a solution that opens a box full of many other malicious possibillities that may be formed, causing there more problems for people to commit and be punished for, i really think it would be considered less of a crime for a women to be raped, than for a man to have his penis cut into 4 pieces. but i'd like to hear if you yourself would think that a person needs more or less punishment for rape or cutting a mans penis into 4 pieces.

By banning this product you ban a person from owning part of their own body - a clear violation of the self-ownership principle. I have a right to my own body in its entirety, and you have a right to yours - it's as simple as that.

I wonder how, under your system, such a law would be enforced? Scanning women at regular checkpoints? Acquitting rapists because the victim used a self-protection device?

She can do whatever she wants to her own body, but this is removing part of someone else. She has no right to do that.

Correct - she has no right to remove part of another's body unless they are assaulting her own. The release of this product, however, slots into the "do whatever she wants to her own body" category, so I take it you agree with its release?

Its sort of like the issue with drugs.
But I don't see why the thought of female condoms would be questioned, seems like a great idea to me.

The issue with drugs is equally ridiculous.

 

[Nathan III]

By banning this product you ban a person from owning part of their own body - a clear violation of the self-ownership principle. I have a right to my own body in its entirety, and you have a right to yours - it's as simple as that.

I wonder how, under your system, such a law would be enforced? Scanning women at regular checkpoints? Acquitting rapists because the victim used a self-protection device?



Correct - she has no right to remove part of another's body unless they are assaulting her own. The release of this product, however, slots into the "do whatever she wants to her own body" category, so I take it you agree with its release?



The issue with drugs is equally ridiculous.

No I disagree with its release. I agree with a woman being able to do whatever she wants to her own body, but as I've said multiple times, accidents could happen with thing. She puts it in before she goes to a party, she meets a lad at a party, they both get hammered, they head for the bedroom, she forgets about it...
Also - isn't this abit brutal? If a man attempts to rape a woman, it does its job, he gets VERY angry and kills the woman.
Also it would lead to more brutal rapes. Rapists would hear about this then and always check before they do their business.

 

[xestrox]

By banning this product you ban a person from owning part of their own body - a clear violation of the self-ownership principle. I have a right to my own body in its entirety, and you have a right to yours - it's as simple as that.

I wonder how, under your system, such a law would be enforced? Scanning women at regular checkpoints? Acquitting rapists because the victim used a self-protection device?

QUOTE]


actually by banning this product, you would be banning something that can be used as a preventive measure of protecting yourself yet it could be used as a malicious tool, and if this product doesn't release, or stops being released there would be no need for "check-points" to make sure a women doesn't have it in.