Rapex

[Der_Trihs]

@Sunrazor

And well-said it was. Rape notwithstanding, passionate penetration sans digital titillation should earn a rowdy fellow a prick pricking, eh?

Fishhooks in the fingers isn’t that much of an improvement.

[Mangetout]

@Cervaise

No, no, no. Rapex goes in the vagina.

Rapex apply directly to the vagina
Rapex apply directly to the vagina
Rapex apply directly to the vagina
Rapex apply directly to the vagina

I’m absolutely certain this is a hoax; as I recall, the idea has been done as concept art, and redone by a media student with all the trappings of a product in development.

[catsix]

Sunrazor said:
And well-said it was. Rape notwithstanding, passionate penetration sans digital titillation should earn a rowdy fellow a prick pricking, eh?

Because physical harm is an appropriate response to bad foreplay?

[Jumbo_Jet]

Well, men should exercise care in choosing their sexual partners.

But your idea that a woman might be married to man for 20 years and suddently decide to use this on her husband, with no warning or hint of dissatisfaction is… bizarre.

As other posters have commented, I don’t think it is possible to be careful enough. Google “woman hired hitman to kill husband”.

He would have to prove that she deceived him with intent to cause harm.

A woman’s word alone is enough to convict a man of rape. Physical evidence is NOT required. Imagine a prosecutor faced with a woman claiming rape and a man claiming assault by Rapex. You have her word and a Rapex attached to the man as evidence. If she has no physical injuries she can always say she was afraid to put up a fight. It would be political suicide for the prosecutor to go after the woman. Perhaps the man wouldn’t be charged if he were really lucky. He could only get legal recourse for her assault if he had a videotape of the encounter, if she discussed her plans beforehand, or if she admitted to it. Eyewitness corroboration of his story wouldn’t likely help, as the prosecutor would go after them as accomplices.

Keep in mind, too, other medical personnel will be seeing the patient and involved in his care as well. Violation of ethics on that scale would result in those same medical people acting as witnesses in a criminal trial. Not only is the possibility of such “medical justice” remote, the possibility of getting away with it is even more unlikely. Too many witnesses.

I am not convinced of this. The man has serious injury to his penis, and a device which requires surgery to remove hooked into it. The necessary treatment strategy is a matter of the OPINION of the doctor. Certainly a doctor couldn’t get away with amputating a criminal’s penis because of a stubbed toe, but this is a totally different story. I used to trust doctors, until I heard some horror stories from my friends. And a nurse I once dated told me the hippocratic oath is pretty much bullshit.

The danger to innocent men could be entirely alleviated by the judicious employment of a little foreplay.

But how far in can such a device be placed? I guess you could limit your search if you know the length of the woman’s vaginal canal and the length of the Rapex. But not knowing the first, I wouldn’t be confident I’d checked far enough unless I got my hand in past my wrist. And this has to be a part of the foreplay every time? She’s going to eventually ask why, and be seriously offended by the truth. And a woman who wants to assault by Rapex can always insist he skip the gynecological exam just this once.

I mean, there must be a safe way to do that, or how would the woman ever get it out of her?

The Rapex comes with a removal device. The need for a removal device furthers my suspicion that it would be hard to check for.

I would imagine that any woman crazy enough to use this device for anything other than self-defense would find some way to cause harm one way or another.

Certainly, dishonesty and psychosis exist, but if you’re in a relationship with someone of that sort Rapex may be the least of your problems.

But unlike other weapons, the Rapex virtually guarantees the woman will face no legal repercussions for an illegal and serious violent assault on a man.

[Broomstick]

@Jumbo Jet

As other posters have commented, I don’t think it is possible to be careful enough. Google “woman hired hitman to kill husband”.

I highly doubt that was the first indication of problems in the marriage!

Dude, you have issues.

A woman’s word alone is enough to convict a man of rape. Physical evidence is NOT required.

Actually, yes it is. I’m not saying the justice never miscarries, but he said/she said doesn’t carry that much weight in a courtroom, even today.

I am not convinced of this. The man has serious injury to his penis, and a device which requires surgery to remove hooked into it. The necessary treatment strategy is a matter of the OPINION of the doctor. Certainly a doctor couldn’t get away with amputating a criminal’s penis because of a stubbed toe, but this is a totally different story. I used to trust doctors, until I heard some horror stories from my friends. And a nurse I once dated told me the hippocratic oath is pretty much bullshit.

A doctor who amputates a man’s penis for any reason is likely to find him (or her) self hauled before a review board. I’m sorry you are so paranoid, but there ARE checks and balances in the medical field.

She’s going to eventually ask why, and be seriously offended by the truth. And a woman who wants to assault by Rapex can always insist he skip the gynecological exam just this once.

And he can refuse to put his penis into her vagina at that point, can’t he?

Like I said, you have MAJOR trust issues.