Soiling Oneself As Defense Against Rape

[jordan179]

Apparently, an organization called Rape Aggression Defense (R.A.D.) urged women who were in danger of being raped to defend themselves by, in part, soiling themselves (vomiting, urinating or defecating in their clothing).  Various leftist groups,including at least one college, and some feminists, have signed on to this idea as a useful tactic

Comments

[beesandbrews]

Your link doesn't work, so I had to Google through and look this up to see what you were talking about. RAD is a 20 some year old program taught by schools and law enforcement agencies. When I was in school it was called 'Lady Beware'. It's a combination of risk mitigation and personal safety techniques to prevent rape and other types of physical assault (primarily, but not necessarily by strangers.)

Puking on someone would definitely put them off. So would kicking them in the 'nads, but the opportunity might not be available. As long as you get away and to a place of safety, it's all good.

[jordan179]

Puking on someone would definitely put them off.

Possibly off rape, but that gets to my second point -- that if one was confronting someone attempting violent rape in the first place, they would then proceed to severely beat one to "punish" one for puking on them -- and one would now be debilitated by the physical effort of vomiting. And it's not that easy to aim projectile vomiting -- humans didn't evolve to use that as a defense. Point being that this would hardly be a reasonable substitute for more conventional means of active self-defense.

[beesandbrews]

The whole point is to do something shocking - biting, kicking, eye gouging, employing bodily functions, whatever, it doesn't matter as long as you get away from an attacker. Your argument that someone shouldn't vomit because it might make a violent attacker more violent is the same as saying you shouldn't try and fight them off. (Most people can't vomit on command, and no one was suggesting that women be trained to do so. But if it's an option, use it

[jordan179]

The whole point is to do something shocking - biting, kicking, eye gouging, employing bodily functions, whatever, it doesn't matter as long as you get away from an attacker.

One of these things is not like the other ...

... Biting, kicking and eye-gouging confront the attacker with a threat of injury, possibly causing him to rethink the wisdom of attacking a victim who is showing herself capable of resisting to a degree that could cause him serious injury. Indeed, such tactics may harm him directly to a degree that his intent becomes irrelevant -- if the intended victim manages to blind him, for instance, he is now almost helpless in this fight (and happily, any future fight, if she does the job right). In contrast, vomiting shows the attacker that his victim is weaker than he expected, confirming the wisdom of attacking her.

Your argument that someone shouldn't vomit because it might make a violent attacker more violent is the same as saying you shouldn't try and fight them off.

Vomiting, peeing and pooping in a fight all show

[xiphias]

The biggest cause of rape is guys who are genuinely unaware that what they are doing is rape.

Rape where the rapists are aware they are raping someone is simply a violent crime, and should be defended against the same way as you would defend yourself against any other violent crime, which is an entirely other conversation, but which I'm sure we all have opinions about. If soiling yourself is a reasonable defense against battery or murder, then it's a reasonable defense against that form of rape.

But the majority of rapes are from guys who are genuinely unaware that having sex with someone who is passed out, or who DID go on a date with you and wants to make out but not have sex, or who wants to have sex with you, but not sex with you and your four buddies, is rape.

The most useful form of rape education is teaching guys that That Is Not Cool, not teaching women to puke on themselves.

[robby]

What would happen if the present laws were enforced, and a violent rapist actually spent 20 years in prison? Prison is too expensive, you say, and we must release them on parole after just a few years!

I'll bet prisons could be built in remote areas, as work camps, and could be self supporting. I'll also bet that the crime rate would plummet when criminals realize that the penal system is suddenly for real.

[jordan179]

I completely agree -- if we enforced existing, classical-liberal laws against the use of force and fraud, imposing severe sentences and not paroling at every opportunity, the problem of violent crime would solve itself.

[xiphias]

Of course, that involves changing our laws to be a lot less punitive in general, in order to leave enough resources for the few that actually NEED more punitive responses. My back-of-the-envelope calculation -- average cost per prisoner (jails, prisons, state, federal, watever) of something like $30K per year, somewhere around 2.5 million people incarcerated on any particular day -- comes out to somewhere in the neighborhood of $75 billion per year.

Direct costs, not counting how much tax revenue we're not getting from them not working, people's families probably using more welfare when they're lacking a wage-earner, and stuff like that. I can't even guess how you'd go around calculating that sort of thing.

But I'm pretty sure that we don't really need three-quarters of a percent of the people in the country behind bars. When we've got a higher incarceration rate than Cuba, we're probably doing something wrong.

[chocolate_frapp]

I'm a feminist and that's the dumbest fucking thing I've heard in a long time.

[kharmii]

Ever see this:

http://www.therebel.media/_blue_haired_babysitter_buying_power

At the end, the guy talks about how 4Chan tricked feminists into pissing themselves 'for solidarity' then posting pictures of their pissed pants on social media.

Didn't think people were encouraging it in good faith.

[graywolf44]

Totally off topic, but I'm back.