Two new types of 'Anti-rape' personal product.

[ruby sparks]

Two fairly new types of product aimed at reducing the problems around rape, sexual assault and lack of consent:

'Anti-rape pants', in two versions, one with a combination lock (and an alarm)...


and one with a PIN-activated release (and again an alarm, I believe)....


And 'consent apps', to be used by couples just before sex to confirm consent (and in the case below, std status):


There are of course pros and cons. I just thought it might make for an interesting discussion.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Wait, so if it's legally binding and then she changes her mind afterwards and tells you to stop, how much do you get from her when you sue for breach of contract?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The first one is hilarious. The second one isn't a bad idea but has obvious issues that will stop it from catching on.

 

[ruby sparks]

Wait, so if it's legally binding and then she changes her mind afterwards and tells you to stop, how much do you get from her when you sue for breach of contract?

As far as I know, some of the 'contracts' are very basic, nothing more than 'I/we consent at this time'. Which allows for changes of mind (as it should, imo).

Perhaps there are contracts which allow for compensation, or maybe even compromise solutions to resolve disputes, such as a man being entitled to get his hands under a woman's bra, at least (what we used to call at school 'getting upstairs inside').

- - - Updated - - -

One big potential flaw of course is coercion, particularly threats of violence.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Wait, so if it's legally binding and then she changes her mind afterwards and tells you to stop, how much do you get from her when you sue for breach of contract?

As far as I know, some of the 'contracts' are very basic, nothing more than 'I/we consent at this time'. Which allows for changes of mind (as it should, imo).

Well, that's kind of pointless then. If the entire rationale of the contract is to show that the sex was consensual but people can change their mind afterward signing the contract, then the contract doesn't have any kind of legal standing because either party can still claim rape despite the existence of the contract.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The point is that it gets the couple to stop for a moment and the guy to be sure she is consenting before proceeding.

Guys can still rape. Nothing stopping him from using her phone. Women can still falsely accuse of rape, as you note, since minds can change at any time.

 

[dismal]

When I saw the headline I thought it was going to be this:

"Consent condom" requires four hands to open, making powerful statement about consent

With consent at the forefront of modern conversations about sex, one company is highlighting its importance in a unique way. Argentinian company Tulipán has created a "consent condom" that requires four hands to be opened, intending to raise awareness about consent in the bedroom.


"If they don't say yes, it means no," the tagline on a video demonstration says. "Consent is the most important thing in sex."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/consen...open-making-powerful-statement-about-consent/

Let's just hope the rapist insists on using a condom. And doesn't think to bring their own condom. And doesn't have a pair of scissors or something.

Then this ought to be effective.

 

[thebeave]

This first one will never fly. It violates the sacred mantra that the only acceptable way to prevent rape is to teach men not to rape. So,

As far as the second one, it seems like too much work just for intercourse. I think by the time I got to page 4 of the contract, my head would be spinning and I'd just close that browser window and bring up Pornhub instead, rub one out in the bathroom and say goodnight to the young lady in bed next to me. I'm hoping she'd still make breakfast for me in the morning, but I'm not counting on it.

 

[ruby sparks]

Wait, so if it's legally binding and then she changes her mind afterwards and tells you to stop, how much do you get from her when you sue for breach of contract?

As far as I know, some of the 'contracts' are very basic, nothing more than 'I/we consent at this time'. Which allows for changes of mind (as it should, imo).

Well, that's kind of pointless then. If the entire rationale of the contract is to show that the sex was consensual but people can change their mind afterward signing the contract, then the contract doesn't have any kind of legal standing because either party can still claim rape despite the existence of the contract.

Well maybe 'contract' is the wrong word. At least such things could help establish if there was consent. Yes, they are all imperfect. But one thing they all do is highlight the issue. We now apparently live in a society where such products are offered. In one case, a modern version of the chastity belt is making a potential comeback, in a different way, under different dynamics. That may in fact be the most interesting aspect, not the efficacy of the products themselves. So in some ways, if asking for consent for stuff is rising up the social agenda, that might be a good thing.

I can't speak for anyone else here, but when it came to romantic/sexual interactions with prospective (new) partners for me, it was customary to pre-ask for almost everything (Would you like a drink? Shall we go for a walk? Would you like to dance? Would you like to have dinner? Would you like to come back to my place? etc) and I'm fairly sure that 'would you like to chat?' is pretty common on dating apps nowadays, but oddly, the pre-asks didn't extend to sex, generally-speaking. That often proceeded (if it did) along the lines of trying get into a (usually private) situation where something could occur (if it was going to) and then to mind read, or read body language, or making certain advances and trying to gauge if they were welcome or reciprocated. It was 'as if' explicitly asking 'would you like to have sex?' was (a) inappropriate or (b) a potential mood-spoiler (and possibly even non-manly in an odd way, as if, if you had to ask, you weren't particularly competent at romance). It was similar for first kisses. If you were attracted to someone and would have liked to kiss them, there was generally that tricky 'how and when to go for it' process. Looking back, I can't think of a good reason why 'would you like to kiss?' or even 'would you like to have sex?' wasn't asked more often. But then, things were a bit more conservative and repressed in my day, where I was living.

And now I'm trying to remember a romantic or sexual scene in a movie, between two protagonists who are doing it for the first time (kissing or having sex) where such things were asked beforehand.........

 

[James Brown]

And now I'm trying to remember a romantic or sexual scene in a movie, between two protagonists who are doing it for the first time (kissing or having sex) where such things were asked beforehand.........

In a Stephen King novel I've read, two (adult) protagonists began kissing each other for the first time. After he came up for air, he looked her in the eyes and said...

"Want to?"

She smiled and nodded.

 

[ruby sparks]

And now I'm trying to remember a romantic or sexual scene in a movie, between two protagonists who are doing it for the first time (kissing or having sex) where such things were asked beforehand.........

In a Stephen King novel I've read, two (adult) protagonists began kissing each other for the first time. After he came up for air, he looked her in the eyes and said...

"Want to?"

She smiled and nodded.

Thanks. So then I did some googling....

Some examples relating to initial consent in films:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=14&v=DfqevsQu3LI[/YOUTUBE]

and (from 30 seconds onwards).......

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TL7eXSlHEpQ[/YOUTUBE]

and look here, he's at it again...

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S56RCr8h1qo[/YOUTUBE]

and finally:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=9&v=1pUXH1Bye88[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But I thought if a woman refused to consent via legally binding contract, that means yes.

 

[Politesse]

Some people find contracts sexy in and of themselves... tis a thing with some bdsm partners.

 

[Toni]

Two fairly new types of product aimed at reducing the problems around rape, sexual assault and lack of consent:

'Anti-rape pants', in two versions, one with a combination lock (and an alarm)...
View attachment 20933

and one with a PIN-activated release (and again an alarm, I believe)....
View attachment 20934

And 'consent apps', to be used by couples just before sex to confirm consent (and in the case below, std status):
View attachment 20935

There are of course pros and cons. I just thought it might make for an interesting discussion.

Those pants should be designed for men, not women.

 

[ruby sparks]

 

[ruby sparks]

More options:


Prototype anti-sexual assault bra. Can deliver 3800 KV electric shock.





Anita Ingmarsdotter, a Swedish woman, has patented an anti-rape device called FemDefence. The basic idea is that the woman carries the protective device in her vagina. It contains a sharp pin which has a penetrating effect on the perpetrator's penis in the event of a rape. The construction is such that the pin still cannot injure the bearer.






A condom called Rape-Axe, an anti-rape condom to be worn by women, comes with jagged teeth that will dig into your attacker's sensitive area when they try to force themselves on a victim. Invented by Dr. Sonette Ehlers, the contraption isn't meant to simply wound. Instead, it tears deep into the skin and affixes itself, requiring medical attention in order to be removed. Yes, rapists will now have to visit a doctor and expose themselves as such, lest they risk permanently damaging their members trying to pry it out themselves.

 

[ruby sparks]

Two students at India's National Institute of Fashion Technology, Nishant Priya and Shahzad Ahmadat, designed an "anti-molestation jacket" that discharges 110 volts of electricity when it detects unwanted advances. The coat, available in both denim and acrylic, uses the concept of a stun gun and is activated by a button which will momentarily stun and knock out an aggressor. The main idea of the jacket is to catch the offender off-guard and incapacitate him.




An early prototypical anti-rape female tampon was invented in late 2000 by 72-year-old Jaap Haumann, a South African man, for the purpose of preventing rape. The “killer tampon” sported a guillotine blade attached to a hollow cylinder which, if sprung, decapitates any intruding penile head. Haumann estimated that 1 million women would arm their crotches with his contraption, but he was ridiculed in the media and sales never materialized.

 

[ruby sparks]

Some people find contracts sexy in and of themselves... tis a thing with some bdsm partners.

I see. Friends of yours? Say no more. Wink wink.

 

[ruby sparks]

Those pants should be designed for men, not women.

Which would of course reduce not just rapes, but cases of paternity fraud too.

 

[Bronzeage]

Wait, so if it's legally binding and then she changes her mind afterwards and tells you to stop, how much do you get from her when you sue for breach of contract?

It has to be spelled out in the contract, but most people go for a clause which requires her to hook you up with her friend who would have had sex with you, but she saw you first.