SubJeff on 19/4/2008 at 09:17
See now I wanted to say that but thought I might sound snarky. And I probably would have :p
Anyways - Although thinking like a criminal Aja is quite right. And I think discovery of the device will create a "Oh biatch, you thought you were going to mess me up? NOW you're going to SEEEEE!" attitude with corresponding increase in the viciousness of the attack.
heretic on 19/4/2008 at 09:27
Quote Posted by D'Juhn Keep
By "a while back" do you perhaps mean "5 hours ago in Muzman's post in this thread" ?
I responded to the initial post...are we really expected to bother with everything in between?
;)
SubJeff on 19/4/2008 at 09:30
Ha ha. Yeah, I reckon.
Edit: oh you were joking. Ok
The Phenomenon on 19/4/2008 at 09:56
Quote Posted by fett
I found this new (
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/2140,features,rapex-the-internal-anti-rape-device) anti-rape device rather interesting. For years I've loudly advocated castration as a reasonable punishment for rapists and pedophiles, so I kind of like the idea of this thing (though it pains me to read about it).
More than anything, I'm interested in what the ttlg ladies think about it. Would you wear one if you lived in a high rape-crime area?
Vengeful? HELL YES IT SHOULD BE! Hey Charlene? You're campaign SUCKS ASS since 1.5 million woman are still being raped in South Africa every year (last time I checked) - not counting child rape. Maybe it's time to be more pro-active?
Since it was South African anti-rape activist that actually designed the damn thing, what's your point?
And you are clearly so ignorant about what South Africa is like, where you are just as likely to get raped again by the police officers that you call after the fucker left.
Anti-rape activists aren't doing enough? How the FUCK is the crime statistics iin South Africa their fault? Rape isn't the only problem we have here, we also have leading murder statistics. I guess those anti-murder activists should do a better job too huh?
It took the government all of 5 minutes to ban that over here.
heretic on 19/4/2008 at 10:15
Quote Posted by The Phenomenon
It took the government all of 5 minutes to ban that over here.
Dude, I only read initial posts...try to keep up.
Ok, seriously. The fact that it was banned is redundant, the point is that things must be very drastic for such an idea to even begin to be viable, much like the spikycunt 3000. The shock factor alone makes this a valid topic IMO.
Maybe you shouldn't be taking all of this so personally?
SubJeff on 19/4/2008 at 10:35
Quote Posted by The Phenomenon
what's your point?
His point is that you should start again, read the article, pay attention to the actors and their roles, re-read his post, think about it, and THEN come back.
You've clearly misconstrued things buddy.
SD on 19/4/2008 at 11:07
Incessant rape, murder and carjackings; propping up the vile Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe; AIDS pandemic through the country... the natives are doing such a great job of running South Africa.
nickie on 19/4/2008 at 11:09
Quote Posted by fett
More than anything, I'm interested in what the ttlg ladies think about it. Would you wear one if you lived in a high rape-crime area?
No. Rape is about power and violence, not sex. And no for the reasons already stated by Tocky, Aja and Subjective Effect.
fett on 19/4/2008 at 14:30
Aja, Tocky, SE, nickie - it seems like you're saying it would be a bad idea to wear one because it might make the rapist more angry, or make rapists start checking before they take the plunge. Which to me sounds like, "Oh, let's not anger the rapist. He might rape me worse than he would have without it, or maybe kill me. It's better to just take what's coming without a fight and not risk making it worse..."
Am I wrong?
Phenom - I never claimed to understand what was going on there - how could I? I spent 12 hours there once and realize there's no way to comprehend what's going on in that amount of time or from reading news stories. However, I find it hard to believe that the rape epidemic is 'the least of your problems' when it's at the root of millions of unwanted pregnancies, STD's, and resulting economic burdens on both individuals and the government.
It just seems bizarre to me that an anti-rape advocate would be against these. She seems like the kind of idealistic twat who stands around insisting that the police and the rapists change their ways while women are getting raped an average of every 10 seconds. Guess what? That's never gonna happen, so it seems like taking such a drastic step would at least make a rapist think twice. No one believes it's going to stop the problem completely, but it sends a message that women aren't going to continue to stand by defenseless and let this happen to them.
SubJeff on 19/4/2008 at 14:54
Kind of fett. Whilst I'm not advocating a "I'll take what's coming to me" stance I'm saying that there is a difference between fighting and telling some to get the f off and using something that may cause serious injury to the guys genitals - because I really think that the the relative amount of fury generated would be very, very different.
Of course I could be wrong. Perhaps it won't make any difference.
