Female Condom Unveiled For World Cup

[Locutus of Bored]

Honestly. Do you really think that I meant that grandparents everywhere surf trek boards under such topics to get offended?

Yes, I was deadly serious, and not jokingly poking fun at your silly repeated use of the grandparent's example. That's why I used technical terms like "teh internets."

Oh, and thank you for making me feel welcome within the thread, too. I appreciate that.

No, thank you for coming into the thread, launching it into two pointless tangents, dictating what everyone was not allowed to discuss, and calling TSQ "tasteless" for simply pointing out the facts of rape in a clearly marked topic on the subject. But if you want to pretend that people just made you feel unwelcome out of the blue and that your comments had no part in it, go right ahead.

 

[ThankQ]

Oh fuck me with a spoon.

Does rape happen? Sure it does.


Does totally random rape happen? RARELY.

GLENN BECK is not god. Women should not fear rape more than I fear murder. Get over your hot-assed self. For real.

Seriously people, dose FOXNEWS control how you live you life?

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Oh fuck me with a spoon.

Does rape happen? Sure it does.

Does totally random rape happen? RARELY.

GLENN BECK is not god. Women should not fear rape more than I fear murder. Get over your hot-assed self. For real.

Seriously people, dose FOXNEWS control how you live you life?

You said that already. It's no less stupid the second time around. Perhaps the third time is the charm?

 

[Amaris]

Oh fuck me with a spoon.

Does rape happen? Sure it does.


Does totally random rape happen? RARELY.

GLENN BECK is not god. Women should not fear rape more than I fear murder. Get over your hot-assed self. For real.

Seriously people, dose FOXNEWS control how you live you life?

The women of South Africa disagree.
Also, as an answer to my question earlier, I did find that gang rape is very common in South Africa, as a form of "male bonding".
If THAT doesn't make you sick, I don't know what does.

 

[Luther Sloan]

No one has told you to leave. You, however, have expressed your desire for everyone to bend to your will merely because you say so, and that is simply not acceptable in a community forum where you hold no such authority. The offer to leave is voluntary and conditional on the idea that you wouldn't want to stay here, around what you would find objectionable.

SOV:

No. I know what you meant.
Your suggestion was pretty clear in your previous post.

Also, whether this type of talk is acceptable on this forum or not doesn't change the fact that it is still wrong. No one should publicly talk about kids being raped in any type of detail. Talking about it as a concern in trying to stop it is one thing. Explaining the details of the actual act is quite another.

That is your opinion. You are welcome to it. It does not change anything previously stated.

It is sad to say that is just my opinion.
Well, believe what you will then.

 

[Amaris]

SOV:

No. I know what you meant.
Your suggestion was pretty clear in your previous post.

That you were free to leave if you felt you could not be around this kind of language given the nature of the thread? I certainly did. Whatever else you read into it is of your own volition, not mine. I did not tell you to leave, neither did I imply it. I merely reminded you that you are not a hostage here.

It is sad to say that is just my opinion.
Well, believe what you will then.

That is your choice to feel that way.
Now, let's get on to more important things than dislike of language and feelings of being unwelcome.

 

[Hermiod]

I never suggested to ignore this topic. All I am saying that it is wrong to talk about the actual act of it in gory tasteless detail using words that your grandparents would be ashamed of hearing you use.

Nothing tsq said was gory or tasteless.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Yes, I was deadly serious, and not jokingly poking fun at your silly repeated use of the grandparent's example. That's why I used technical terms like "teh internets."

LOB:

If only your statement would ring true if you printed this forum out and read it yourself at a nursing home or middle school somewhere.

And yes. I keep using the same tactic, because apparently your not getting it. People of all ages COULD read this forum.

No, thank you for coming into the thread, launching it into two pointless tangents, dictating what everyone was not allowed to discuss, and calling TSQ "tasteless" for simply pointing out the facts of rape in a clearly marked topic on the subject. But if you want to pretend that people just made you feel unwelcome out of the blue and that your comments had no part in it, go right ahead.

Your welcome. And they are not pointless topics. And it is relevant to the thread's topic apparently enough for someone to bring it up in the first place (i.e. children rape being discussed in distasteful detail). Also, whatever the discussion: a poster should never say... well if you don't like it then... Well, here's the door. There is a point of disagreeing with people and there is a point of just being rude and unkind.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Okay. Let's drop the subject, folks. It appears we are not going to agree. I'm just a bit conservative in the way these things are discussed. Let's move on. Please.

 

[RoJoHen]

Yes, I was deadly serious, and not jokingly poking fun at your silly repeated use of the grandparent's example. That's why I used technical terms like "teh internets."

LOB:

If only your statement would ring true if you printed this forum out and read it yourself at a nursing home or middle school somewhere.

1) I guarantee old people have heard all these words before

2) I took sexual education and learned about rape in school when I was 9 years old. I'd much rather have middle schoolers informed about the topic of rape than to have them shielded from dirty language.

It's not our job to protect someone else's children from a questionable topic. Their parents should be monitoring what they're reading on the internet.

Also, if my grandparents were sitting at the dinner table and the topic of rape came up, I guarantee they would be perfectly comfortable with the language that has been used in this thread. They have dirtier mouths than I do!

 

[O'Dib]

My primary concern about potential abuse of such a device is social, not immediately physical. Because the device would be primarily associated with rape, a male assaulted with one might be assumed a rapist until and unless proven innocent. As a weapon of perception - not of mutilation - it could be quite powerful.

WTF kind of scenario are you imagining in which a naked man with an erect penis would plausibly allow a woman to place his member in a toothed tube thing?

 

[thestrangequark]

Luther, I have been nothing but civil with you, even after you insultingly and incorrectly called me "tasteless," and I will continue to be civil with you because I am just a classy gal. I am also not the type of woman to beat around the bush, and there are a few things you've said that really need addressing.

1. As Cicero kindly posted, the definition of rape is thus:

Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, anal or oral penetration by the offender (s). This category also includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims, and both heterosexual and homosexual rape.

Nothing I said was any more vulgar than what is given in that definition. Or, again, any more vulgar than can be read in the BBC news article I cited. You are clearly being oversensitive.
(Cicero, I do intend to respond to your post as well, but I am tired and can only handle one tonight!)

2. You specifically brought up the public nature of this forum and took issue with my posts on the grounds that, A) these things should not be spoken of in public, and B) children could very well be reading this thread. My responses are, A) These topics must be discussed in public fora else people will not learn of them, not then be shocked and offended, and not try to improve the situation. And B) Yes, children might be reading this, but did you know that a quarter of boys interviewed in a study of 1,500 South African schoolchildren thought that "Jackrolling," a slang term for gang rape, was "fun," and that more than half thought that when a girl says no to sex she really means yes?

3. (And this is the one I really want you to pay attention to.) I hope you realize (though I doubt you do), what a luxury it is for you to feel so offended by the mere mention of such things. What a luxury it is to not realize that, for some of us, child rape is the discussion we have with our mothers and grandmothers, out of necessity. What a luxury it is to think that a child of twelve or eight, who might stumble upon this thread, doesn't already know about everything mentioned, in all its gut-wrenching detail. It is a luxury that many of us cannot afford.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I just want to pop in and say that I made my "American Pie" joke after reading the OP and not the other five or so pages.

Also I think the idea of censoring the horrific things that go on in backward parts of the world (and to a lesser extent here) because it offends some the more enlightened (who are free to stop reading if they choose) is stupid. Pretending something doesn't happen or suger coating it to the nth degree isn't gonna help anyone, ever. Consider yourself lucky you weren't born an attractive South African girl. Consider yourself lucky that the topic of gang rape is a disgusting concept you'd rather not think about rather than something you have to live with. It's threads like this that put all our whiny, pampered lives into perspective.

 

[iguana_tonante]

i know the streets are not as safe as it used to be and alot of women stick to together in groups.

Bullshit. The streets have always been unsafe (or safe, depending from your point of view). In general, violent street crime is decreasing in the western world.

i also know alot of women who are young go to night clubs and they flirt to the exstent when a man sees this and they go for it dont they.

Great. Blame the victims. Good work.

You need to stop doing so many paragraph breaks. It makes your posts difficult to read because they flow oddly.

My posts are alright and everyone else seems to understand what l am writing about except for you mate

No, that's simply because most people just don't read them.

All I am saying is that there are other ways besides this.

I just can't get my head around what you mean by "natural". As I have already said, most opposition to this device come from the age-old fear of vagina dentata.

i do think that Mr Sloan would understand about a woman being raped and what that person had or is going through

hey Mr Slaon does understand about women being raped mate

Since he's a man and (I suppose, correct me if I'm wrong) he has never been raped, I somehow doubt that.

You are only trying to make a mockery out of this thread

Now, this cannot stand. tsq is the one that is offering thoughtful and fact-based assessments of the situation, as well as personal experiences. You two are just parroting vague platitudes about it being "unnatural" or "God will help". Geez, the nerve of some people.

What he meant about being vulgar was being nasty in the way you were explaning yourself.Evebn by your post you are posting it in anger.

Utterly vacuous and insensitive posts tend to raise anger.

And to say, "Maybe if they just believed in God they'd feel better"?

Uh, no. That's not it at all. God can change things if people start to turn to Him for help.

Keep the proselytizing in check, ok?

Whatever you guys want to believe. Go right ahead and believe it. Just know that you wouldn't use such words at the dinner table with your grand parents present. Some things just shouldn't be said (in such detail) in front of others.

Again, seems you have more problems with words decribing the act than with with the act itself. I would check your priorities, man.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I just want to pop in and say that I made my "American Pie" joke after reading the OP and not the other five or so pages.

Also I think the idea of censoring the horrific things that go on in backward parts of the world (and to a lesser extent here) because it offends some the more enlightened (who are free to stop reading if they choose) is stupid. Pretending something doesn't happen or suger coating it to the nth degree isn't gonna help anyone, ever. Consider yourself lucky you weren't born an attractive South African girl. Consider yourself lucky that the topic of gang rape is a disgusting concept you'd rather not think about rather than something you have to live with. It's threads like this that put all our whiny, pampered lives into perspective.

Indeed. I mean, it must be nice to be able to crawl under a rock and say, "La la la no such thing as baby rape! I can't hear you!" Given the statistics tsq has shared in this thread, I can't even begin to imagine what it's like to be a woman in South Africa, living with that kind of fear all day, every day, to the point that I would consider putting a defensive device on my genitals to thwart a would-be rapist.

I'd like to know who some of the people in this thread think they are, that they can pass judgment and tell others what they're allowed to talk about, or how women in another country should or shouldn't be allowed to protect themselves.

This device was clearly borne out of desperate circumstances. If it helps keep women from being victimized, by all means, I am all for it.

I hate how squeamish some people get when topics like this are brought up, too. If you don't like it, don't read the thread. And definitely don't post your displeasure at the topic being discussed--nobody cares, GTFO. Some of us are actually interested in gaining perspective on things outside our own experience, and trying to understand the plight of people who live in terrible circumstances.

 

[Scout101]

any chance we can maybe agree that rape is bad, and talk about the actual device? Trying to shock each other or out-compassion the other guy, but any posts about the actual topic of the thread are getting passed by...

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ See, that's the thing. We're not allowed to talk about how bad this device might be, without being somehow labelled as pro-rape. The propaganda of the day demands that anything against rapists is good, no matter how barbaric it actually is.

 

[Scout101]

Kinda a tough argument, MLB. I mean, something against rapists does sorta imply that the person on the receiving end IS committing a violent crime at the time, so not much of a leap to claim self-defense at that point, and anything up to and including killing the attacker would probably be justified as 'reasonable and acceptable reaction in self-defense' under those circumstances.

I understand what people are saying about more vindictive uses of this device in more developed countries, but not really part of this conversation. Wonder if it could be used as 'evidence' of a rape under those circumstances, though, instead of a 'he said, she said' situation? Probably just proof that sex occured, rather than forcible, but muddies those waters.

As for the device, in the situation it is being promoted for? Still don't see it as much of a useful piece. Perhaps a very brief scare tactic, but once word gets out, too easy to defeat. If the woman can remove it easily, why can't an attacker? And since you have to assume a high level of violence already exists in the situation, how much more do you think the attacker would escalate it if he found this device during an attack? I would imagine that it would escalate things further, but that's my opinion.

It definitely might get a few people, for a short time, which is obviously good, but i can't see it helping long-term unless it's more permanent. Word gets out, and you just remove it. If it had to be removed by a doctor (from the woman), i could see greater usefulness, but then it severely restricts her options for voluntary sex. Also means it's not as useful for married (or sexually active) women, and I'd be there's no really difference in rape statistics there between single women and married women in the same age brackets...

 

[Pingfah]

^ See, that's the thing. We're not allowed to talk about how bad this device might be, without being somehow labelled as pro-rape. The propaganda of the day demands that anything against rapists is good, no matter how barbaric it actually is.

There's nothing at all barbaric about it, it doesn't cause any damage, so how can it be barbaric?

Possibly likely to cause more problems for the victim than it solves, but barbaric? Hardly.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

it doesn't cause any damage

Really? Has it been tested?

God help the poor sod who volunteers to have one of those clamped onto his junk.

Okay, even if you accept that it doesn't cause permanent damage: What if it did? Would anyone care? What if there was a device that simply chopped the rapist's dick off?