Dec 02 2011

Spinster aunt forgets what year it is, starts yammering about RapeAxe again

Jayzus in a jetpack. So much has happened since last we spoke that I’m just going to ignore it all and proceed straight to the latest installment of the Anti-Rape Device Chronicles.

You know the Anti-Rape Device Chronicles, right? A long and sordid history attends the battle for dudely control over the problematic human vagina. The timeline so far:

Middle Ages: Chastity belts are implemented by jealous brutes to enforce feminine purity against other jealous brutes. Or are they?

1996: British historians debunk as myth the notion that medieval chastity belts ever existed as anything other than 19th century “curiosities for the prurient or jokes for the tasteless.”

Cheesy BDSM-wear, only 500 bucks on eBay.

This dude writes a scholarly analysis of the mythology. The chastity belt naturally finds its niche as a corny prop in the BDSM community, where it is anything but an anti-rape device.

2000: The “killer tampon” is invented by South African septuagenarian Jaap Haumann. Quoth he, “I designed a hard cylindrical plastic core which contains the spring blade, which slices when pressed against. […] When the rapist attacks the woman and penetration takes place, the point of his penis will touch the section containing the blade and it (the penis), or at least a part of it, is sliced off.” Haumann notes that South Africa is the rape capital of the world.

2005: A now-defunct website announces “FemDefense,” a spike-equipped vaginal insert reminiscent of, but slightly less disfiguring than, Haumann’s dick mutilator. The imaginary FemDefense and its faux marketing campaign turns out to be a conceptual art project by Swedish artist Leif Lindell; the “product” is never manufactured but makes the rounds on the feminist blogosphere, prompting a profusion of whataboutthemen whingeing. Photo here.

2005 again: Sonnet Ehlers, a South African activist, invents RapeX (later changed to RapeAxe). This is a hollow vaginal insert with lined with barbs. “When the attacker attempts vaginal penetration,” says Ehlers, “the barbs attach themselves to the penis, causing great discomfort. The device must be surgically removed, which will result in the positive identification of the attacker and subsequent arrest.”

2006: Production of Rapex “delayed” by squeamish dick preservationists.

2010: The newly renamed RapeAxe is in the news again when Ehlers announces plans to hand out 30,000 of them for free at South Africa’s World Cup.

Today: Blamer Sandi emails me (thanks, Sandi!) with a link to the 2010 Gizmodo story; I fail to notice the date and commence writing this post as though it were breaking news, quite forgetting that we discussed the subject last year in the comments of this post.

Well, untimely though it be, you get this post anyway, because it’s the one I wrote.

So. Consider a minor shift of focus in the wonderful world of rape culture. First there is this imaginary chastity belt, which leaves nothing to the imagination in terms of the 19th century woman’s moral status: a whole mythos erupts around the idea of medieval dudes asserting ownership of their women by literally locking up the only thing about them that matters. You can still rape, though, you just need a key.

Scroll down to the 21st century. Haumann, Lindell, and Ehlers’ devices are more victim-oriented. They don’t prevent rape, but they do suggest instantaneous unpleasant consequences for rapists. Therefore they are controversial.

But why should that be? Are we, as a society, pro-rapist?

Heck yeah we are.

Historically, society tolerates rape because it is more or less consistent with the Global Accords Governing Fair Use of Women, but the idea that rape might conceivably involve violence against rapists is just too shocking. Judging by the many comment threads discussing RapeAxe, a significant contingent of Internetians believe that women possess neither sufficient personal bodily sovereignty nor sufficient personal integrity to be trusted with such a device.

Concern trolls pretend to worry that dick-blood might harm the rape victim (more than a rape, apparently), or that the device might make the rapist madder than he already is, or that it’s sending the wrong message and promoting the dreaded “victim mentality” to tell women to be prepared for rape at any moment. The squeamish dick preservationists object that dick mutilation is “just wrong,” that RapeAxe is “vindictive,” and of course that women are evil and will surely be unable to resist using it to injure innocent men who prong in ignorance.

The objectionable violence is interpreted as originating, not with the rapist, but with the vengeful woman who has deployed the barbaric peen-shredding RapeAxe.

Pah. The thing that would prevent any and all peen-shredding is the thing that nobody can fathom: keeping it their pants.

I’ve commented before that this RapeAxe thing is a pretty compelling little gizmo. It can’t prevent rape, but at least it theoretically improves the chances of a conviction. And of course the agony it inflicts on the rapist is conceptually satisfying and poetically justical. And it dovetails so neatly with my wacko consent scheme. Theoretically, anyone equipped with one of these little dealios abides, unlike you or me, in a persistent state of having said “no.” Only removal of the RapeAxe can switch on consent. No ambiguity. Simple as that.

But alas, after considering it lo these many years, I can’t say I have high hopes for its efficacy. Enterprising rapists could easily game the system. For example, it would be the work of an instant for a dude with a gun to force his victim to remove it. In the end, whatever measures a woman takes to keep assholes from assaulting her, some chumpass perv will figure out how to circumvent them. Women can’t prevent rape.

Like the feminist email forward says: preventing rape is easy: just don’t rape anybody, stupid.


Skip to comment form

  1. Barefoot Doctoral

    I hadn’t heard about the RapeAxe until I read your post. (I’ve been living in a dungeon), but it reminds me of a story from my pre-dungeon days. A friend of mine, when discretely groped by a man on a crowded bus, a very common occurrence in the country where she lives, would just as discretely stick an open safety pin in his penis. After a couple years of this, she eventually gave up on carrying safety pins around with her.

    We can’t take it into our own hand like this. The problem of violence against women is just too damned big is but one of the reasons.

  2. Boner Killer

    This just after a dude recently infiltrated a “stop porn culture” group online, claiming that taking away dude’s porn and access to women via prostitution would “have consequences.” Apparently men cannot control themselves and we, all women, should have to alter our lives to accommodate their “inner rapist.” Unbelievable.

  3. Kea

    Thanks for the light relief. Yes, seriously. I spend all my time at GeniusDudes Inc, and I’m sick to death of them feeling sorry for themselves because they had to wait 30 privileged fucking years to gain recognition, or something.

  4. allhellsloose

    That link to ‘RapeX’, like wtf? The woman’s uterus is where exactly? She has no bladder. Ugh!

    Have to agree though, it is a compelling gizmo.

  5. yttik

    A common theme is the idea that women must never be allowed to defend themselves. All of the anti-rape devices are passive devices, not based on a woman’s judgment, but only activated by a man’s decision, in this case a rapist’s. She has to be an innocent bystander, waiting helplessly for her device to activate, and it can only activate because some man made the choice.

    Rather then having to walk around with an uncomfortable contraption inserted in you, it would be much simpler to just carry a gun, a taser, pepper spray. But of course, weapons, much like birth control and abortion rights, must never be left in the hands of women, because we might (mis)use them. These devices are simply elaborate inventions designed to take the choice, the judgment call, out of the hands of women.

  6. Cycles

    What about a separate unlocking device for the RapeAxe, meant to be left at home. An electro/magnetic wand you wave across your vagina and out pops the RapeAxe. Without the unlocking device, RapeAxe cannot be removed. Hospitals, police stations, pharmacies, and other public venues are stocked with an unlocking device too, in case of emergency, handed over with a phone that has 911 on speed dial.

    Of course, rapists could get their hands on an unlocking device somehow, but there’d be fewer of ’em and it would take more effort.

    Godbag patriarchs who may be tempted to install one in their purity-ball daughters against their will can eat a bag of dicks, because daughter can flounce down to one of the public venues that stocks the unlocking devices, and screw to her heart’s content.

  7. Judi

    So does this device exist, or not? I’ve been wondering about this since I read about it last year. I’m eagerly anticipating reading the first news story reporting its use, but nothing so far. Can anyone enlighten?

  8. bitch with opinions

    All I get from this “controversy” is:

    Criminal men in consequential pain because they made a conscious decision to rape = UNACCEPTABLE!
    Victimized women in pain = who gives a flying fuck?

    When someone takes hostages during a bank robbery and the police shoot him to death, everyone says “well, he took his chances.” If you decide to rape someone, which is a goddamned high-level crime, you run the risk of getting something sharp in your penis. I see no difference.

    (Cue the misogynists wailing about the evil pissed off strawgirlfriends who will use the device for revenge against their devoted boyfriends. As though those girlfriends couldn’t just do the job with a Swiss army knife right now)

  9. caterwaul

    “RapeX could be used against innocent non-rapist men” is always the one I hear when this subject comes up. Nobody seems to raise this issue against the manufacture of the innumerable violent implements used almost entirely by men to threaten, maim and kill women.

  10. Saurs

    [T}his RapeAxe thing is a pretty compelling little gizmo. It can’t prevent rape, but at least it theoretically improves the chances of a conviction.

    Yeah, but a conviction of whom?

    If these contraptions were out and about and free and legal to possess and use without a license (probably limited to the rightful owners of the vagina — dudes and dads), I couldn’t imagine a woman would get away with (passively) using one on a wang. She’d be arrested and tried for mayhem and sexual torture, the prosecution on behalf of the dude’s shredded junk would definitely claim that the woman tricked the dude into trying to rape her and would succeed in convincing a jury and the public at large that the lady was a Bronson-style vigilante (not the cool white supremacist kind, but the Solanas kind) for trying to protect her “property.”

    ‘Cos that’s what this pro-rape gobbledygook (rape is inevitable, so let’s capitalize on that!*) reduces us to: owners of a highly valuable commodity with an extensive blackmarket.

    The wily rapist contingent would only respond by targeting the non-safeguarded vaginas, thereby exploiting further the class- and race-based inequality between women. And I know some folk disapprove of the notion, but yes, in reality the device would be used against any woman who dare wield it, to chop up or off her fingers, nipples, nose, etc. Actually, I should think the bulk of the market for these things would be dudes, anyway, because no group of people fixate on portable torture devices quite like dudes. Plus, you could bring one with you on your rape spree to plant at the scene so that you could later claim some kind of pre-emptive defensive rape on the part of your johnson. The ensuing controversy would result in further rollbacks for women’s basic civil rights, probably starting with a mandatory nighttime curfew and a daily pat-down prior to leaving the house to make sure you’re not packing any of those dentata terrorist devices.

    *Speaking of re-inventing the nauseating and stomach-churning into the cuddly and consumer-friendly, I am simply gobsmacked these things aren’t hot pink.

  11. Saurs

    From the Rape-Axe FAQs:

    There is no recorded rape of a women carrying a walking stick or umbrella – these are definitely deterrents!

    And yet they’re not hawking walking sticks or umbrellas. Also, you guys? I am sort of doubting that assertion re The Impenetrable Forcefield of No-Rape phallic-y implements provide for the ladies in public. SORT OF.

  12. Saurs

    Sorry, that bit o’ wisdom above was from the “The Cold Hard Facts” section. As distinct from FAQs. They are different.

  13. Saurs

    Okay, one more, this time from FAQs:

    1. Will the offender become more violent when he realises that he has been tagged?

    No, he is ‘tagged’ and cannot remove Rape-aXe. If he kills or further harms his victim he will be in double trouble.

    Ruh-roh! Better dump the body and destroy every last shred of evidence, then. This stuff is even creepier than Law & Order: Sexy Rape Victims edition.

  14. c2t2

    It wouldn’t work.

    As others have said, the rapist would just make his victim take it out. If it couldn’t be taken out, then what happens when he rapes her? Would they just be stuck together until they got surgical intervention? Yeah, that’s not going to further traumatize anyone at all.

    But all that is beside the point. Rape has little to do with sex and everything to do with hate and harm. If men couldn’t safely rape women PIV, they would simply rape their victims orally, anally, or with inanimate objects.

  15. speedbudget

    . . .or that it’s sending the wrong message and promoting the dreaded “victim mentality” to tell women to be prepared for rape at any moment.

    Oh, I laughed and I laughed so hard at this little nugget.

    What woman hasn’t spent their WHOLE LIFE being prepared for rape at any moment? Isn’t that the point of those ridiculous e-mails forwards telling how to get to your car in a darkened parking lot, why you shouldn’t carry too many bags to your car at the mall, what happened this one time when this one lady was at the beach?

    I was going to link a Snopes article debunking one of these dumb rape e-mails, but of course they couldn’t hold it together. The last two paragraphs are pure victim blaming. Of course we get the admonition to “not be there” when the rape happens, so WTF we you doing walking home at 3:00 a.m.? And then there is the always helpful “be aware of your surroundings.” Because more hypervigilance is exactly what we need!

    P.S. My first thought on reading about these things was “Oh, great. Now I’ve not only been raped, but possibly exposed to HIV or Hepatitis. Thanks!” I mean, I just don’t see how it’s any BETTER for a woman to have been attacked AND exposed to possibly infected bodily fluids. Now you have to add the stress of testing for deadly diseases to the stress of being raped. Sounds like a punishment to me. Why do these items have to be so bloody? Why isn’t there a device that clamps down and exerts uncomfortable pressure instead of all these devices drawing blood?

  16. speedbudget

    Hm. My /blockquote didn’t seem to work. I know I put it in!

  17. kate

    This is so sweet! But of course just because a guy has a “peen shedding device” all kinds of embedded doesn’t mean the Jury would believe it was rape! You already said – vindictive ladies be slicing unsuspected partners. And any way so it was a touch nonconsensual, hasn’t the poor dude suffered enough?!

  18. Sandi Worthen

    Apologies for not noticing the date on the article, either.

  19. josquin

    Is anyone else bothered by the idea of wearing a knife in their vagina? I couldn’t care less about the rapist, I just wouldn’t want the thing to misfire somehow. I would not feel safer walking around with what is essentially a cocked pistol inside of me. I don’t care what safety settings are built in.
    This whole thing is just preposterous. Sadly, as Jill says, the only way to stop rape is simply (sic) to stop raping people.
    I’d rather talk about why Siri is sexist.

  20. josquin

    Any more news on the donk front?

  21. Keri

    From FAQ also:
    What a medieval device. Do you, hate men?

    “No, I do not hate men and I do not even hate rapists. These men are sick, they lack self-esteem and use rape as a means of asserting power – rapists need help. What I do hate, is the fact that there are men out there who do not seek help against their compulsion towards sexual violence. ”

    When is “Hug a Rapist- They’re Hurting too” Day? I forgot to put it on my calendar.

  22. Comrade PhysioProf

    These could be viewed legally as somewhat analogous to spring-guns.


  23. lizor

    The courts will most likely see a rapist with one of the shredders embedded in his peen as a victim and the rape victim will be cast as the sadistic rapist.

  24. AlienNumber

    Rape has little to do with sex and everything to do with hate and harm.

    Yeah, right! Next thing you know you’ll have a line about how rape isn’t even a gendered crime and “but women rape too.” Rape has quite a bit to do with sex, but do we really have to go through the motions to prove this? On the radical feminist blog?

    I’m with yttik on preferring carrying guns and tasers over this RapeAxe device, but can’t say I’m not a fan. If only because its sheer invention allows us to identify the rape apologists and the dick preservationists (brilliant new term, Jill!). It also sends a message, as weak as it is, that there’s a strong defense force against the war on women. It might deter some rapists somewhere. It might help some women open their eyes to the reality of how much men hate women.

  25. awhirlinlondon

    This – and the responses – are so terribly not ok. Am so angry. And sick.


  26. Twisty

    “It might help some women open their eyes to the reality of how much men hate women.”

    Then again it might not. Nothing has so far.

  27. EmilyBites

    Saurs is right – women using RapeAxe would be prosecuted for premeditated assault. It’s not the violence committed against a woman that’s a problem; what upsets people is a woman fighting back. If she just submits quietly, no violence is perceived to have taken place; if she deliberately damages the attacker, she’s done something unnatural and the indignation is palpable.

  28. Twisty

    “It’s not the violence committed against a woman that’s a problem; what upsets people is a woman fighting back. If she just submits quietly, no violence is perceived to have taken place; if she deliberately damages the attacker, she’s done something unnatural and the indignation is palpable.”

    So true. So true.

  29. yttik

    Alien, power and control, rape and hate, ARE sex, at least in the way the popular culture defines sex.

    I get tired of the “rape is not about sex” argument, too. Rape is sex. Power and control is sex. The word for sex is also the greatest insult you can dump on somebody. That speaks volumes about what men think sex really is.

  30. Owly

    I suppose they’d be useful at parties, but that might be the (disappointed) college student in me talking. Side note: I used to call myself Captain Cockblock and monitor the parties at my student co-op. I’m proud to say that I prevented more than a few “hook ups.”

  31. Owly

    More than RapeAxe would, anyway.

  32. Yellowmarigold

    Thanks so much for the info about the chastity belt. On more than one occasion, I’ve discussed female genital cutting with others and said what a horrific cultural practice it is, only to be called racist and reminded that Europeans had something similar: the chastity belt. Now I’m pleased to know that such a thing never existed.

  33. Fictional Queen

    So,if men are allowed to be misogynist…then they won’t be misogynist? They’ve got all their rape and porn now and there are consequences for us.

  34. Fictional Queen

    “We’ll rape you if you don’t let us rape you!”

  35. Val

    Same ol’, same ol’, awhirlinlondon – it’s all just a matter of degrees. Have you watched CSI recently? My redoubtable reward for going to the gym is watching trash TV, but the other day when a rerun of CSI was replaying in endless voyeuristic detail the demise of 2 women – it made me sick in less than 15 min.

  36. Jezebella

    That cheesy bit of B D S M wear looks unsanitary.

    Val, a few years back I started turning off any show the minute a Hot Dead Chick appeared on the screen. CSI is the worst: it rarely takes more than 60 seconds to get to the Hot Dead Chick. Even if her first appearance is as a corpse, you just know there are going to be flashback scenes of her demise. I don’t think I’ve watched a full episode of any of the CSI franchises since then. Haven’t watched much Law & Order, either, come to think of it.

  37. Linden

    “These could be viewed legally as somewhat analogous to spring-guns.”

    Don’t think so. The spring-gun cases have to do with what level of force is permitted to protect property when there’s no one home and no one’s life is in danger. With rape, the woman is always home and her life is always in danger. Rapists who decide to rape take their chances.

  38. crickets

    “we’ll rape you if you don’t let us rape you!” so damn true Fictional Queen. That’s the state of things really – comply or not, the attitude of the people who want to own us by fucking us doesn’t change one bit.

  39. Frumious B.

    “a significant contingent of Internetians believe that women possess neither sufficient personal bodily sovereignty nor sufficient personal integrity to be trusted with such a device.”

    I know you knew this already. Internetians and and non-internetians alike believe that women possess neither personal bodily sovereignty nor personal integrity.

  40. rubysecret

    Then of course comes the inevitable, “well, she wasn’t wearing a prong shredder in her vag, so she obviously wanted it.”

  41. MezzoPiana

    “Then of course comes the inevitable, “well, she wasn’t wearing a prong shredder in her vag, so she obviously wanted it.” ”

    Oh SOOOOOO not a suitable topic for mirth, but dammit I lolled. You are so horribly right, rubysecret.

  42. Kaia

    “We’ll rape you if you don’t let us rape you!”
    Fictional queen I have lost count of how many MRA’s have threatened this if women dont remember their places and shut up.
    Ive been thinking hard lately but the only thing I can come up with is to put men on one side of the earth and women on the other, until they’re ready to talk some sanity.
    But I don’t think we’d ever get a peace conference and I dont think they’d thrive as a nation either thankfully.
    I’d like to live out the rest of my days with a bunch a rad fems though :D so its not so bad who’s with me with dividing the earth?

  43. A Ginva

    Kaia, I’d say the best thing is to chuck them out of the earth, let them find their own planet to destroy and allow some to come back only if they’ve grown up and come to their senses. Even then I’m not even sure we could trust them, but well.

    I’m glad to see this critiques of Rapeaxe, I read about it for the first time yesterday, and couldn’t really formulate what I thought about it. The first thing that came to my mind was that it wouldn’t feel great to have this thing my vagina. it’s really intrusive (as if we didn’t have enough things prodded into our vaginas! From penises to objects, speculums, etc) plus it probably increases hypervigilance, since you have a constant reminder of your rapeability inside you.

    Saurs, your point that it would be turned against women who could be prosecuted for premeditated attack is really important. Women who fight back their default condition under patriarchy and prevent or harm men / their prerogative to rape women are severely repressed. I hadn’t thought about it before, it’s good to have this argument in my pocket.

  44. Fictional Queen

    Why would we let any men back on the planet? They can get their own planet and nicely die out a few centuries later. We won’t lose anything. Except patriarchy.

  45. ethan

    i have two words to describe my cynicism for the day that a device like this gains widespread public acceptance without a corresponding shift in men’s sexual entitlement: denim day

    “she took her barbs out…must’ve been consensual after all.”

    “she doesn’t even wear one. what a s***.”

    i mean, patriarchy can turn ANYTHING into a tool of rape and victim blaming. skirts? easy. beer? you betcha. we’ve got TIGHT JEANS on lockdown like a chastity belt. anti-rape vaginal inserts? we’re workin’ on it!

    so my question is: to what extent does widespread public acceptance of something like this actually represent (in part?) a shift in men’s sexual entitlement?

    and what about the women for whom this isn’t a possible form of protection, for WHATEVER reasons?

    and and also, it reeks of “stranger danger” bullshit. how often is a device like this even relevant, considering how often rapes are the result of the offender violating and exploiting the unguarded trust and vulnerability of someone they know?

    this is a problem i have w/victim blaming in general. we should NEVER punish trust and vulnerability. we should ALWAYS punish people who exploit and abuse others’ trust and vulnerability, because that’s what’s destroying us and our social fabric.

    “well, serves you right for trusting him…” “you know better than to let your guard down.” fuck. that. noise.

  46. GraceMargaretMulligan

    “we should NEVER punish trust and vulnerability. we should ALWAYS punish people who exploit and abuse others’ trust and vulnerability, because that’s what’s destroying us and our social fabric.”

    Damn straight. I’m sick of women being blamed and punished for doing something so completely outrageous as thinking men are decent human beings. I don’t know any survivor who wasn’t assaulted by someone they knew and trusted. But put your guard up and you’re a ‘man-hater.’

  47. Wandering Uterus

    Not exactly on topic, but it does have to do with rape. Rape victims need access to emergency contraception. The sooner, the better.

    Kathleen Sibelius, P. collaborator and secretary for the US Dept. of Health and Human services, just decided to prevent young women (under 17) from obtaining emergency contraception sans prescription. The FDA had given the go-ahead for over the counter use and declared EC safe for all women of childbearing age.

    Sibelius decided to unilaterally overrule the FDA, and keep the status quo. Apparently she believes young women of childbearing age aren’t mentally ready to use EC properly:

    Making life slightly less hellish for young rape victims isn’t allowed under the P.

    Now excuse me while I go attend to my blown lobe.

  48. Jezebella

    Ethan, it is my understanding that the incidence of rape in South Africa is much more skewed to strangers than acquaintances. Let us not forget that, in some places, boogeymen really do jump out of the shrubbery at you, even though it’s far less common here in the US.

  49. speedbudget

    Wandering Uterus, yes. This is another example of the Fierce! Advocate! we have sitting in the White House fiercely advocating for. . .forced birth and loss autonomy.

    I swear, he is just a Reagan Republican who gets away with claiming he’s Democrat because the political and social discourse in this country has shifted so fucking far to the right that fascism is starting to look moderately reasonable.

  50. pheeno

    I’d like to see it available over the counter, but only to women. I can totally see some d00d buying it so he can add it to a girl’s drink along with the rufie, that way he can rape her with no future consequences.

  51. gingerest

    I reaaaally like the way this totally sidesteps all the other ways women can be assaulted, sexually and otherwise. “Hey, ladeez! You know no one has ever been forced to perform oral sex, right, because a lady – the only people who can be raped are ladies, you know, s**ts and le*bos are asking for it, and men who get raped are totally sekrit ‘mos – a lady has teeth. Here is something to protect your precious tunnel of love. No wouldbe rapist who uses force to put his peen in you could possibly force you to take this peeniwacker out, or force you to do anything else sexshul.”

  52. Saurs

    Yeah, pheeno, except dudes already have condoms and (dunderheaded uninformed fuckwads that the bulk of them are) rapists probably don’t understand the mechanism behind Plan B, nor why pre- v post-coital ingestion of it may result in different rates of efficacy.

    Does it sound anti-science (giving in to the numbskull anti-abortion set, I mean) to want to refer to hormonal forms of contraception in public as what they actually are, methods by which women get to control (maybe delay) their ovulation? I find myself doing this frequently when discussing the topic with strangers (whose political beliefs are largely unknown to me). I’m not pleased that by doing so, I’m slightly sanitizing a topic deeply offensive and scandalous to a lot of misogynists, but allowing the opposition to dictate the terms by which we discuss reproductive freedom, including reference to things which aren’t, in fact, birth control by that very phrase, steers discussion away from the real issue: are women allowed to control their bodily functions? If yes, unashamedly so, then we’re probably grown up enough to differentiate between contraceptives and birth control, and especially to acknowledge that contraceptives ought to be, even amongst the most rabid anti-abortion people, a non-starter in terms of controversy, no different than taking a laxative or summat.

  53. pheeno

    “rapists probably don’t understand the mechanism behind Plan B, nor why pre- v post-coital ingestion of it may result in different rates of efficacy.”

    No, they’re just going to think ” will stop pregnancy”. And, it wouldn’t shock me if they overdosed their victims on it too.

    Condoms require an effort to put on. Slipping pills into a drink is easy.

  54. Saurs

    Yeah, except we naturally experience “overdoses” of hormones all the time, and are none the worse for it. But I do agree dudes find ladypills icky and confusing, and would be quite willing to use them against us.

  55. Natassia

    The only problem I see with “fanged vaginas” (other than trying to walk normally) is that a sadistic psycho b*tch can do a helluva lot of damage to unsuspecting men who think they are just getting lucky on the first date.

    However, as with all things, one must weigh the benefits against the costs. If 30,000 fanged vaginas are walking around Johannesburg, rapists (who are usually just looking for opportunity) may find that sexual gratification of the Neanderthal variety is bumped to the bottom of their priority list. And the likelihood of sadistic psycho b*tches looking to destroy hapless men’s happy parts is probably pretty slim.

    Of course, the higher IQ rapists will simply use an object to test the woman’s vagina before dipping in himself. But I doubt the typical South African rapist even has an average IQ.

  56. Twisty

    “a sadistic psycho b*tch can do a helluva lot of damage to unsuspecting men”

    The number of ‘sadistic psycho bitches’ who would wake up one fine morning and say, “A bleeding, shredded dick in my vadge — that’ll teach Chad a lesson!” is zero.

  57. AlienNumber

    Except, Twisty, that’s NOT what Natassia thinks (I use the term “thinks” very loosely).

  58. Fictional Queen

    Sadistic psycho men do a helluva lot of damage to unsuspecting women.

  59. Kali

    I wish some women with a background in genetics and biochemistry would come up with an anti-viagra. Viagra responds to a certain biochemical state that comes with arousal. Anti-viagra could respond to the biochemical state that comes with rapish arousal. The result would be extreme and debilitating pain. I’m thinking festering boils on the wang. The question is how to administer it? Men will not take it voluntarily, of course. How about a highly contagious retro-virus?

  60. Cootie Twoshoes

    I used to call myself Captain Cockblock and monitor the parties at my student co-op.

    Owly, this is so great! It makes a little shiny place in my heart.

Comments have been disabled.