Anti-Rape underwear

[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.

 

[The Material Sheep]

snip

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

I'd honestly like to see those surveys. See who administered them, the questions asked and such. There is a very long history of surveys on this subject being incredibly biased just in the way or manner they asked questions. Also, an old southern senator is not a proper gauge for the education and beliefs of the younger generation of America, the ones you can still legitimately plan to educate. Sure the attitude hasn't entirely disappeared because the people who use to practice it haven't died yet, and haven't decided to continue educating themselves. This isn't a question of martial rape though. If your wearing this underwear around your spouse to protect you from your spouse, something has CLEARLY gone quite wrong long before that point.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Your points are all completely irrelevant at that point then. Murder, and physical abuse all have those same three excuses.

Yes, that was my point. And I pretty sure I either said that directly or implied it heavily in my previous post.

No amount of teaching people not to physically brutalize or kill has decreased the amount of murders.

Um, actually it has. We as a society value life more now than we did 100 years ago (to say nothing of a few hundred years before that!) and the percent of people killing one another has gone down.

Furthermore, in locations where people are taught - not necessarily directly, but by the society around them - that life is cheap, painful, or worthless, murder is more frequent.

And anyway, I never said anything about teaching people "not to rape" - as that's a very silly thing to teach. The Education we keep talking about is teaching a woman's right to say no. The people who need education are those who don't think a woman can or should have that right.

The idea was to prevent the emotional situation from occurring in the first place, not to overcome anger in the moment.

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.

Except that the education system is often directly undermined by society. Case in point, another example: people are told that being smart is good and that grades matter. However, society also teaches them that nerds are uncool, that studying is lame, and than athletes without college educations are super important people. In that example, kids are getting two very different messages.

In our society, kids are told that "no means no" - but many are also taught by society that a woman who won't put out is a prude, that jocks always get laid, and that alcohol makes girls "give it up". Society says that women have to "out out" after the third date.

Thus, when a woman attempts to exercise her right to say no, sometimes all that weight of social obligation that has been taught to us outside of school comes crashing down and causes the emotional situation.

The education that we're talking about is a change to these social attitudes - or at least a clearer education about these assumptions and why they are wrong.

And again, just because YOUR school or upbringing told you that no meant no, not everyone's did. There are a lot of places in the USA - to say nothing of the rest of the world - where that message is NOT conveyed to people. You are assuming that everyone has had the same education - both in school and outside it - that you have. That is a faulty assumption.

Edit:

Oh, one final thing. I went back to read your original post that started this argument and... I actually mostly agree with you. I think there is a lot of fear-mongering over rape. The media in recent decades has capitalized on an unfortunate situation to get ratings/hits by playing up fears about rape.

Hence why I don't think I'd actually ever own or wear a pair of these things. I think they're a good idea because they exist mostly to let the wearer not worry about a situation that probably won't happen, but that's harmless enough. They even say that they're designed to reduce fear since the actual likelihood of a rape attempt is low.

There were a few times when I was back in undergrad college that I wish I'd had a pair of these things so I wouldn't have been irrationally afraid. Looking back, I feel kinda silly about that, but they really would have helped get over my fears.

Thus, I do think this product is valuable. Silly, but valuable.

Oh, and I also agree with Nora Shepard about one specific point - they would be good for wearing to college parties. The TYPE of rape that occurs at a college party (with drunk men and unconscious women) would greatly benefit from super difficult to remove panties. Drunk guys are not known for manual dexterity.

 

[The Material Sheep]

Oh, one final thing. I went back to read your original post that started this argument and... I actually mostly agree with you. I think there is a lot of fear-mongering over rape. The media in recent decades has capitalized on an unfortunate situation to get ratings/hits by playing up fears about rape.

See I was going to do a bunch of specific quotes but then I realized that we agreed on most everything.

Only real point of disagreement is I don't think society really seriously believes all these things about a girl needs to put out or entitlement to sex is farcical at best. Every time I see that portrayed in popular culture it's usually to paint the person who believes it as a dumb ass jock who only thinks with his dick. I also feel the life being cheap idea is problematic because most humans have a hard time killing/harming other humans. Most will kill/harm/take if the need is high enough which is more likely to happen in a situation where there is abysmal poverty. The reduction in crime in general is more due to increased wealth then an increase in education, though to the two tend to be intertwined so I can see arguments for the other.

I do agree that my education is anecdotal at best though. I've had a mixture of private and public schooling, so my views on how people educate is a bit suspect. Still I find it hard that it was -that- much different, that I attended the small minority of schools that actually taught a decent sex ed.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

One worrying implication of this is that it puts more of an impetus on the victim to "not get raped."

The clothing choices of rape victims already can come up in court against them (something being too short, too revealing...) so I can see someone going for "were you wearing your anti-rape underwear, no? Just regular underwear? Well, what did you think would happen?"

That's very crudely phrased but you get my point.

I wonder what this will be like 50 years in the future.

"remember women, if you don't wear your power armor when you go outside you're practically begging for it"

 

[The Material Sheep]

One worrying implication of this is that it puts more of an impetus on the victim to "not get raped."

The clothing choices of rape victims already can come up in court against them (something being too short, too revealing...) so I can see someone going for "were you wearing your anti-rape underwear, no? Just regular underwear? Well, what did you think would happen?"

That's very crudely phrased but you get my point.

I wonder what this will be like 50 years in the future.

"remember women, if you don't wear your power armor when you go outside you're practically begging for it"

Like I'm seriously curious how recently a court legitimately used that as evidence. Honestly this gets thrown around a lot and I'm just curious how recently this was a thing.

 

[Tradjus]

Sounds like they'll be either uncomfortable or ineffective, but if they make people feel safer, there's no issue in my mind. Rape is typically unpremeditated so just frustrating someone who's decided to do it might be enough to get them to give up.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

I can't really see these having much practical use aside from giving paranoid women a false sense of security. To my understanding a majority of rapes aren't some guy tackling a woman, dragging her into an alley then holding her down and violating her, which is really the only scenario I could see this preventing.

To be honest, I'd think if you got raped while wearing something like this, it would possibly help the rapists case if he managed to get them off without physically damaging them. And if your definition of rape extends to consensual sex under the influence, it would hurt the woman's case in that scenario too. It's a lot easier to claim sex is consensual if the woman is wearing combination lock underwear.

 

[symphonymarie]

As someone living in LA who has idly entertained the thought of buying Men in Tights style underwear so I could live in Echo Park, I see this as mostly a sad by product of a violent society. Yes, we have made huge strides as a whole in regards to equality, etc, but as previously noted rape notoriously is borne of familiarity. I don't think this concept would help with that, nor do I see it as terribly productive in regards to any other kind of assault. I'm assuming people like me are the target client, and while I appreciate the sentiment, I don't think a product like this will work.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Like I'm seriously curious how recently a court legitimately used that as evidence. Honestly this gets thrown around a lot and I'm just curious how recently this was a thing.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/rape-of-woman-in-skinny-jeans-not-possible-20100430-tzai.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy/2447225/Italy-overturns-ruling-that-women-wearing-tight-jeans-cannot-be-raped.html

Fairly recently, a least in part.

However, those are just explicit examples, not where they were quietly a factor.

 

[scw55]

Mixed feelings.

It's nice that someone's taking an initiative to reduce rape rate (of people who wear these undies) in a not really provocative way.

But I feel like it might unintentionally make some women even more paranoid about rape.

I'm not a woman, so feel free to ignore my opinion.

I guess if you are a woman and don't want to be raped, you can attach a mouse trap around your groin.

 

[Steve Waltz]

I think it's a nice idea. The only thing is that I worry about the marketing campaign for this product. I mean, this product will not sell unless women are scared of being raped, so unless this company has good intentions they might put some unnecessary fears in the minds of women so their product sells. However, rape is still an issue in the USA and this project has my support (for the time being).

I'm actually kind of surprised and disgusted at the guys that are shrugging this off as if it's some kind of new electric toothbrush or backscratcher; that behavior reminds me of the feminists that claim to care about but completely ignore mens' issues. Yea, you guys don't have to worry about it so you can easily shrug it off, but rape is a serious issue for women that seems blown out of proportion, and might be, but it's still an issue and you shouldn't toss it aside like a used tissue when it's still happening as often as it does. I know some women that have confided in me about being raped, and while this product would not have helped either of them, it still would be a good thing to have because it might help some other poor woman.

I don't want to sound like some self-righteous jerk like Steve Harvey or Jeremy Kyle that talks down to men for not being chivalrous, but seriously guys; just because an issue doesn't affect you doesn't mean it doesn't exist and doesn't need to be addressed. Blown out of proportion maybe, but all the more reason to address it so the media can move on to the next thing.