Anti-Rape underwear

[Thaluikhain]

I agree on everything you said
Except this part

Well...yes...but you seem to have gone and put responbilities on victims there. If they don't want it known, they shouldn't be blamed for that.

I personally am convinced that if you can prevent something, you should at least try.
If not, then when next victim will be hurt, at least partially you will be responsible too.

I certainly understand your point, but as it stands, condemning victims for not reporting rapes is one of the things regularly done to attack victims.

Certainly, in theory it'd be better if every victim reported it, but we can't expect that until the societal problems facing people who report them are removed first. Having said that, I have huge respect for people who are open about being sexually abused, but they will receive a lot of flak about it.

 

[blackrave]

I certainly understand your point, but as it stands, condemning victims for not reporting rapes is one of the things regularly done to attack victims.

Um... What?
If victim is reporting he/she is condemned for not reporting?
O_O
Apparently I can't brain anymore, so please explain.

 

[Thaluikhain]

I certainly understand your point, but as it stands, condemning victims for not reporting rapes is one of the things regularly done to attack victims.

Um... What?
If victim is reporting he/she is condemned for not reporting?
O_O
Apparently I can't brain anymore, so please explain.

I meant that victims are often condemned for not coming forwards, or for giving up on accusations. If a victim retracts an accusation because it's too difficult, it's taken as evidence that they were lying about the crime. Likewise, if they don't make the accusation right away.

 

[CloudAtlas]

To do something against rape should not be the responsibility of the victim.

Yeah! Just like preventing theft should not be the responsibility of the victim! Locking your door is just sending mixed messages and it makes people believe theft is the victim's fault...

That's obviously sarcasm and I understand theft and rape are different things, but what you are saying is silly. Doing something to lower your chances of being a victim of a crime is a great idea. No matter how much flowery rhetoric and good will and "education" you put into the public, there are still bad areas and there are still bad people. Why is it so wrong to wise up to this and try to do things to prevent yourself becoming a victim?

What you're saying is of course not wrong. But we mustn't forget the context either, where the blame is often shifted to the victim all too easily instead of the attacker. That's why I think stuff like that is sending mixed messages.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

No. They won't be liable. They'd only be liable if they made a specific claim about their product, and I can't see one.

That's not strictly true. It varies from place to place but a general rule of thumb is that if a layperson who sees the pitch comes away with a belief about the product (in this case, that these garments will prevent rape), then there exists potential for lawsuit should it fail to work. In order to combat this, they'd have to include an explicit statement that qualifies just what they expect the garment to do - that is, they'd have to say something to the effect of "This product will not prevent rape".

 

[Lightknight]

No. They won't be liable. They'd only be liable if they made a specific claim about their product, and I can't see one.

That's not strictly true. It varies from place to place but a general rule of thumb is that if a layperson who sees the pitch comes away with a belief about the product (in this case, that these garments will prevent rape), then there exists potential for lawsuit should it fail to work. In order to combat this, they'd have to include an explicit statement that qualifies just what they expect the garment to do - that is, they'd have to say something to the effect of "This product will not prevent rape".

Their claim appears to be that its intention is to be resistent. They are no more liable for it happening than flame "resistent" material is responsible if someone manages to get it to catch on fire. Resistent =/= proof. Resistent is a legal term than has actual legally explainable ramifications. If a product says resistent and is not any more resistent than comparable product (I imagine this to be slightly more resistent to being pulled off than regular clothing) or if a product is actually less resistent then we have a liability issue. We have seen cases where flame resistent material burns even easier than other materials in its class and so the company was sued out of business.

I strongly doubt this material would work even a little bit though. Anymore than really tight underwear would. Maybe it'd protect people from really weak assailants. It's fun to watch the video show people lightly tugging at the sides but this just seems incredibly unlikely.

If it did work, however, then I would completely contest the notion that this somehow sends the wrong messages. I wear a cup in some sports because I don't want to get hit in the balls. But if I don't wear a cup, it isn't my fault if someone hits me there. It's the person who is hitting me who is at fault. Taking precautions and the ability to take precautions does not impact the fact that another person broke the law and is assaulting you. What a terrible falacy. Taking self defense and not accepting drinks from strangers in a bar without seeing them being made and wearing resistent material if such is ever made are just taking precautions. The mindset that the existence of precautions means people who don't take them are less of a victim is just as ridiculous as the mindset that skimpy clothing somehow makes a woman more "deserving". It only sends the wrong message if you're the kind of person who would think that.

The fault is and will always be on the side of the person who decides to take advantage of the situation and break the law. You could walk around naked in a bar drunk and it still wouldn't be your fault if someone raped you.

 

[Lionsfan]

"She says she wants"

Now I don't mean to sound ignorant, but this one really confused me. If a girl says she wants to have sex with a guy and they have sex how is that rape (assuming she is of legal age and sound mind)? I mean isn't that the very definition of consent? Or do you mean she says she want to and then changes her mine, which is a completely different situation in which case the man would be raping her.

Lieju basically already said it.

If the girl says at one point she wants to have sex, then she's obligated to, no matter what.

Like I said, I wish I had saved it, cause I was just going off of memory when I posted.

 

[Azure23]

So yeah, we already have some products like this and honestly I say more power to them. And last time I checked we didn't live in a civilized world, we live in a world where 1 in 4 women's first sexual experience involves some form of coercion, forceful or otherwise.

Citation needed. Completely unbelievable.

Of course, I was remiss in not including it in the first place. The infamous 1 in 4 statistic comes from a 2009 survey of South Africa conducted by Amnesty international. They also found that a quarter of South African men had admitted to rape at least once, with roughly half of that number admitting to multiple rapes. I should have absolutely been more specific with regards to that statistic. Apologies for not including a proper citation but the survey overview is pretty easy to find. Also RAINN has released statistics based on it's own surveys specifically regarding American women and that number is 1 in 6 women, and refers to women who have been victims of attempted or completed rape. For men it's 1 in 33, which is still rather shocking I'm sure you'll agree.

These statistics are unbelievable because they pertain to an unbelievably cruel act, one I've experienced firsthand. Generally I've found that people who haven't been victimized in this way tend not to think about rape in any realistic terms, which is fine, they shouldn't have to, it's not something that you should go around thinking about. Anyway I hope this post was informative, and yeah, there are a lot of bullshit statistics floating around regarding rape, the fuckheads over at the MRA rallies spread misinformation about the severity and frequency of rape as a societal issue. Basically I'm saying good job asking for sources.

 

[Do4600]

In fact, if you read very carefully, you'll realize that the product is actually being marketed primarily as a means of controlling feelings of anxiety about rape. This is necessary, because in most of the situations a person is actually likely to be raped they probably won't have thought to put their protective underwear on.

And actually according to statistics roughly 66% of women who are raped are done so by people they know quite well; 46% by a person the woman is in love with, 22% by a person they "know well".

Also, 50-63% of rape is committed against people under the age of 18

Also most rapists are under the age of 30.

So typically or I suppose I should say statistically, rape is a crime perpetrated by a man under the age of 30 against a girl under the age of 18 whom the girl is in love with. The further from those circumstances a person is, the less likely they are to be raped.

We have this fiction in western society of random people, crazed serial "somethings" coming out of nowhere to do use harm in some way, but that's rarely the case, most violence in general is committed by people who are well known to the victim. This goes for murder, assault and rape, violence is most often a product of emotional and empathetic failure in interpersonal relationships.

Magic underwear just distracts from that cause, if you want a society free of violence and rape you need a society that is educated emotionally and that is where we consistently fail as a society, in that emotional education.

 

[Thaluikhain]

We have this fiction in western society of random people, crazed serial "somethings" coming out of nowhere to do use harm in some way, but that's rarely the case, most violence in general is committed by people who are well known to the victim. This goes for murder, assault and rape, violence is most often a product of emotional and empathetic failure in interpersonal relationships.

Magic underwear just distracts from that cause, if you want a society free of violence and rape you need a society that is educated emotionally and that is where we consistently fail as a society, in that emotional education.

Exactly...to add to that, I'd also point out that it's a very dangerous fiction. Because everyone "knows" that rape is something that happens when a stranger grabs a woman (who is somehow at fault anyway) in an alley, if it doesn't happen like that, it's somehow not really rape.

 

[Crazy Zaul]

Seems pretty good but a pain in the ass when you need a piss.

 

[The Material Sheep]

snip

One: There are women without vaginas. Transwomen and intersex women may have penises or other genitalia that aren't vaginas. They're just as female as anyone else however, so no, having a vagina is not the only thing that counts when determining gender. It should also be noted that it is not the only thing that determines whether someone can be raped.

Two: Do you have the stats on how much of a 'negligible effect' these things have? They haven't been released widely yet, so we don't know if they are or aren't effective. I agree that it would seem exploitative if they were in fact just doing this as a cash grab, but shouldn't they at least get a chance to prove they do or don't work before we start writing it off? Also, similar products have been show to be successful in the past, but couldn't continue production due to money problems.

Three: It is true that there are some people who, for whatever reason, really cannot see that their actions hurt others, but I don't think EVERY SINGLE RAPIST falls under that. If that were the case, I would be hella worried for the state of the world because there are a lot of rapists. Many become rapists simply because they aren't told that certain things are wrong. For example, sleeping with a drunk person at a party is rape, but some people don't know that. They think that rape is only something that happens in a dark alleyway with a stranger. If we could educate people, and make them realize that a lot of what they think is alright ISN'T, then rape would go down. Of course that's not going to happen any time soon so long as people still think of rape as a "sad fact of nature" and not a society wide attitude problem.

1. Physically being a woman was the criteria in your original post as to who was in fact in the know on how prevalent rape was. Not people with facts and those who've done unbiased research into the subject, but those who are physically women and in fact have a vagina. Your at odds with yourself in your own post. I was pointing out the absurdity of that being the criteria for being knowledgeable on rape, not the vagueness of gender identity.

2. I don't have stats, and if it turned out that this was a huge deterrent and wasn't just capitalizing on rampant fear mongering, I'd be the first to correct myself. It's a matter of being skeptical of anyone who comes out to solve a new crisis with the most recent form of snake oil. Your better off immediately questioning something's legitimacy in this kind of situation then giving the benefit of the doubt.

3. This is deliberate naivety. Most serial rapists are sociopaths, who both know and do not care that they are hurting others. Rape is not usually a one time thing people do and are immediately ashamed of. People at least in the west are told every week that rape is wrong. Those who practice violence against women are some of our culture's most evil villains. There is a trope called rape is a special kind of evil. Culturally these do not exist in a place where rape is in any way common place or accepted. The fact that sexual predators exist is a sad FACT of nature, and you cannot remove evil people from the world entirely. People who force and coerce sex are -predators- who know what they are doing, and often feign ignorance to evade repercussions.

-Two drunk people bumping uglies at a party is not rape.
-A man drugging a woman deliberately and having sex with her at a party is.

One is the act of two people getting drunk and making bad decisions while drunk.
The other is the act of a single person making a concerted effort to abuse another. A planned move that didn't happen spontaneously and no amount of hard to remove clothing would deter someone with that kind of investment.

Sociopaths and predatory people exist within our society and no amount of education will deter them from their actions. The only thing that really can be done is bringing people to justice for crimes and doing your best to prevent crimes.

 

[Vivi22]

Sounds like it could do more harm than good. I might be wrong on this, but I imagine the last thing a rape victim would want is to piss off or frustrate her attacker, which seems to be the point to this. Hell, they even use the word "frustrate" as one of the goals. It may also influence bringing knives into the general vicinity of her genitalia to remove the garment, which again I assume is a less than wanted outcome.

Yeah, I don't see this working at all. In fact, I imagine this already violent crime would became even more dangerous if this is employed.

They did state in the write up that studies have shown resisting rape can prevent a rape from being completed, and without increased risk of physical injury to the victim. And credit to them, they at least posted a link to their source for anyone interested in checking it out. Now I don't really have the interest to check out the quality of the source, but it does make some sense to me. Most rapists and just potential murderers looking to have sex before they kill someone. Some rapes do turn deadly, but most rapists aren't looking for a fight, they're looking for an easy victim. Anything you do to delay them or to fight back is going to make it more likely that they decide you're not worth the trouble, or increase the odds of them being caught in the act, and result in them taking off. Maybe they do decide to beat you up a bit more than they would have if you didn't resist, but most aren't going to kill someone for resisting. If it's not worth the effort they'll give up and get the hell out of there.

So it's just underwear that's hard to take off?


I mean, they can still be taken off right?


Also, don't most rapes occur between someone the girl knows? Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the % of stranger rape was quite low than where we think it is.

Edit: Just finished the video. So if a girl is drunk, how easy is it going to be to switch the clock hands to "unlock" them. What if she has to use the bathroom really bad?

There are 132 combinations so it's going to take someone a while to simply get it through guessing more often than not. And it looked from the video like it was pretty easy to set the correct position and release the lock. From there you're just pulling them down so I can't imagine bathroom trips will be much of an issue.

To do something against rape should not be the responsibility of the victim. Good intentions with these products, I guess, but sending a mixed message.

I don't think it's sending a mixed message at all. Of course it's awful that we live in a world where rape occurs, but it does. And if a person doesn't want to become a victim they should educate themselves on the topic, and take preventative measures. No, they shouldn't have to do it at all, but unless we can find a way to start identifying rapists before they rape then what people should have to do isn't overly relevant.

 

[Thaluikhain]

3. This is deliberate naivety. Most serial rapists are sociopaths, who both know and do not care that they are hurting others. Rape is not usually a one time thing people do and are immediately ashamed of. People at least in the west are told every week that rape is wrong. Those who practice violence against women are some of our culture's most evil villains. There is a trope called rape is a special kind of evil. Culturally these do not exist in a place where rape is in any way common place or accepted. The fact that sexual predators exist is a sad FACT of nature, and you cannot remove evil people from the world entirely. People who force and coerce sex are -predators- who know what they are doing, and often feign ignorance to evade repercussions.

That's not true. It's well known that surveys using the word "rape" and surveys using descriptions of rape get very different responses. Many people, not just rapists, don't understand what it is.

In the US, marital rape only became a crime in all states in 1993 (began in the 70s). Before that, it wasn't rape for a man to force himself on his wife. That attitude has yet to completely disappear.

Hell, just in the news recently, a GOP congressional candidate has come out and said that he didn't think marital rape was a thing:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/15/dick-black-rape_n_4602683.html

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ar-wear-confidence-protection-that-can-be-worn

What does the peanut gallery think? Good idea or bad? What happens if they don't work due to manufacture error? Is the manufacturer legally liable? Would you wear these yourself?

1) Good idea. Of the anti-rape devices I've seen, I think this one is probably the best one.

2) ...? Manufacture error? You mean the item fails and the woman gets raped anyway? The point of the product is to delay the attacker, not be 100% impenetrable. They said so right in the video. So no, of course they wouldn't be liable.

3) Eh... no, probably not. Maybe if I'd had it when I was younger and living in some less pleasant areas. I've had friends who were super rape-paranoid, and it always seemed a bit silly to be that worried about a fairly unlikely event. Now, I also wouldn't jog at night or go to a club alone - sometimes the best way to avoid a dangerous situation is to avoid it - but if I had to for some reason, again, I might consider it. Like I said, it's actually a pretty good looking product.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

3. This is deliberate naivety. Most serial rapists are sociopaths, who both know and do not care that they are hurting others.
People who force and coerce sex are -predators- who know what they are doing, and often feign ignorance to evade repercussions.
Sociopaths and predatory people exist within our society and no amount of education will deter them from their actions. The only thing that really can be done is bringing people to justice for crimes and doing your best to prevent crimes.

I don't really want to get involved in this argument, but I feel the need to point one thing out.

Most rapes are not committed by serial rapists or sociopaths (just like most murders aren't committed by serial killers or sociopaths). There aren't that many sociopaths/serial criminals out there - they're actually pretty rare.

Most rapes are committed by regular people in moments of extreme emotion, extreme bad judgement, and/or extreme intoxication.

Education does actually matter quite a bit. A lot of young men are "taught" that they are entitled to sex for various reasons. When they don't get what they have been taught they deserve, they get upset and try to force it. They aren't sociopaths or sexual predators - they're just people who feel like they're being cheated out of a reward they earned. Education about sexual rights and similar can help with that by preventing the attitude that leads to the sudden disappointment - ie, if they never expect to be rewarded with sex, they won't be upset if/when it doesn't happen.

And if that seems absurd to you - well, then, you've already been educated on that point. As inconceivable as it might be to you and I, there are many people who still believe things like that.

Okay, that's really all I wanted to say. You two may continue arguing about whatever you were arguing about.

 

[Batou667]

It's not the worst anti-rape device I've ever heard proposed (that would be the spiky tampon... ouch) but it does seem like a bit of a depressing and restrictive piece of kit.

Scenario 1:
"Thanks for the lovely evening... say, I know this is still early on, but what the hell. Come back to my place?"
"Sure!"
* * *
"OK, just let me slip out of these..."
"Wow, odd underwear. Are you Amish? Why do they have a lock on them?"
"Oh, don't worry, those are my Anti Rape knickers"
"You thought... I was going to rape you?"
"It was just a precaution. I don't need them now. But enough of that, let's get your clothes off too..."
"Because you thought I might rape you, but now you're pretty sure I won't rape you?"
"Come on, don't let this kill the moment, it's just a simple piece of protection"
"Nah, I'm out of here. I'll try not to rape anybody on the way home, but no promises eh, because you never know with us men! Good night" *slam*

Scenario 2:
"Victim is 22, female, appears to have been a pedestrian involved in the car crash. Heavy bleeding from the lower abdomen. Suspected femoral artery injury. Removing clothes to ascertain... wait, she's wearing some kind of chastity belt. No, we can't remove it, there are 512 possible combinations! OK, let's cut them off. What? The scissors don't work because the underwear is reinforced? Fuck, start guessing the combinations. Hurry up, she's bleeding out!"

Also, I'm usually a supporter of women taking ownership of their own personal safety. I think "tell the rapists not to rape!" is an overly idealistic position to take, and as long as we're dealing with the real world, people of both sexes should be taking commonsense precautions about their personal safety. But kevlar underwear? If a woman feels like she could get raped on a daily basis, my advice would be move to a better part of town. If I had to wear a bulletproof vest every day because my chances of getting shot were statistically high enough to warrant it, my first priority would be to get the hell out of there, not stock up on a range of discreet and fashionable ballistic vests.

 

[rbstewart7263]

Honestly, I don't get it. I mean, yay stronger clothes and all, but I don't see how this is supposed to work. It mentions a 'unique locking mechanism' that'll supposedly provide an obstacle to rapists. Huzzah if it works as advertised, but I don't understand how exactly they'd make something like that for a pair of briefs, at least not to any extent that provides more than a short distraction. Stranger still, they also claim that EMTs wouldn't be hindered by them if they needed to remove them, citing non-cut-resistant segments...what exactly is preventing a prospective rapist from cutting these same areas? Maybe I missed something[footnote]Granted, I read the page rather than watched the video, so it might have been adequately explained in there[/footnote], but I'm more confused by the concept and apparent design than anything else.

perhaps the emts are educated on the matter where as your average street or party raper isnt? I mean nothing is perfect but if it takes a man too long to take em off that could be enough time for her to wake up? if you know someone in a bad situation that they cant get out of.(abusive parents where you cant simply get the cops involved for whatever reason) you could give these too a friend so that the dumb ass cant rape the girl.

 

[rbstewart7263]

It's not the worst anti-rape device I've ever heard proposed (that would be the spiky tampon... ouch) but it does seem like a bit of a depressing and restrictive piece of kit.

Scenario 1:
"Thanks for the lovely evening... say, I know this is still early on, but what the hell. Come back to my place?"
"Sure!"
* * *
"OK, just let me slip out of these..."
"Wow, odd underwear. Are you Amish? Why do they have a lock on them?"
"Oh, don't worry, those are my Anti Rape knickers"
"You thought... I was going to rape you?"
"It was just a precaution. I don't need them now. But enough of that, let's get your clothes off too..."
"Because you thought I might rape you, but now you're pretty sure I won't rape you?"
"Come on, don't let this kill the moment, it's just a simple piece of protection"
"Nah, I'm out of here. I'll try not to rape anybody on the way home, but no promises eh, because you never know with us men! Good night" *slam*

Scenario 2:
"Victim is 22, female, appears to have been a pedestrian involved in the car crash. Heavy bleeding from the lower abdomen. Suspected femoral artery injury. Removing clothes to ascertain... wait, she's wearing some kind of chastity belt. No, we can't remove it, there are 512 possible combinations! OK, let's cut them off. What? The scissors don't work because the underwear is reinforced? Fuck, start guessing the combinations. Hurry up, she's bleeding out!"

Also, I'm usually a supporter of women taking ownership of their own personal safety. I think "tell the rapists not to rape!" is an overly idealistic position to take, and as long as we're dealing with the real world, people of both sexes should be taking commonsense precautions about their personal safety. But kevlar underwear? If a woman feels like she could get raped on a daily basis, my advice would be move to a better part of town. If I had to wear a bulletproof vest every day because my chances of getting shot were statistically high enough to warrant it, my first priority would be to get the hell out of there, not stock up on a range of discreet and fashionable ballistic vests.

well you know if im a knight and I hold my shield to block an oncoming blow should I blame the shield when another guy comes in and stabs me in the side? I dont see how those two things invalidate the underwear in question. I think like a concealed handgun or a specialized rifle it cant do everything but it does what it is needed/designed to do.

assuming they make it right and it sells and all that.

 

[The Material Sheep]

Most rapes are committed by regular people in moments of extreme emotion, extreme bad judgement, and/or extreme intoxication.
.

Your points are all completely irrelevant at that point then. Murder, and physical abuse all have those same three excuses. No amount of teaching people not to physically brutalize or kill has decreased the amount of murders. The assumption you have to be on to think that educating not to rape will be more effective then it already is, is that most people think that not having a woman's consent to have sex, which is false. Most people know and are told that. Those three excuses up top are people who are so emotionally out of wack they aren't thinking rationally, so stupid they can't understand the nature of consent or comprehend consequences, and someone who is too intoxicated. You can't educate that, rationality was impaired or not functioning correctly ANYWAY. If your rationally coming to rape, your either ignorant of the bar that makes things nice and legal or your a serial rapist/predator. In a world of no means no, and modern feminism being heavily ingrained in our education system, and has been for twenty years I very well doubt that the majority of those who rape while rational are those who just didn't know any better.