I spent forever pouring my heart and soul into a post for Vagina Dentata today, but just as I went to post it, the thread got locked. This upset me a lot, especially because my post was addressing the very reason that the thread got locked--the topic had devolved into a flame war about the punishment of crimes such as rape. I feel that, in your eagerness to argue your points, you guys missed the more salient point of the thread: the prevention of rape and other forms of violence against women.

That's prevention, guys, not punishment. Ensuring that those who commit rape are brought to justice is an important part of the prevention process, but there are many other components that I'm not sure that all of you are aware of. One of those components is education, but the sad fact is that most rape education is directed at women. Focusing rape education at women tends to frame rape as a "women's problem," and therefore moves much of the responsibility of rape prevention onto women. This kind of emphasis is dangerous, because there are so many measures that men and boys can take to prevent the women and girls in their lives from being victimized, and I don't think that many men and boys learn very much about them.

Guys, you should educate yourselves: start by checking out this webpage and looking into groups like Men For Change (http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/CommunitySupport/Men4Change/) and Men Can Stop Rape (http://mencanstoprape.org). It would also be nice if you stopped fighting with each other and focused instead on things you can do to end violence against women....Pretty please?

I have had no trouble convincing men of what I would and would not tolerate.

Well, the governmentment argues that the two (prevention and punishment) are linked. I'm not digging it back up, but from 1960 rape was down 16% while incarceration was up 20%. This is a debatable point, however.

And I respectfully counter that, even though the nature of justice is important, it is only tangentially related to the original thread. I can say the same thing for this thread.

Point taken. Thank you!

Self defense is a preerquisite for preventing rape. If a woman knows how to steal your peach she has a better chance of fending off an unarmed rapist. Armed ones could still present a problem, but that's inherent in the "armed vs. unarmed" problem of martial arts. (Please do not take this as an invitation to discuss martial arts. That's what bullshido.net is for).

A better justice ssytem would also help. While laws do not always prevent crime, they do prevent some crimes. Better conviction rates of rapists would make some people think twice about raping someone. It wouldn't help with everyone, but one rape stopped is enough of a reason to try. (And again, let's not get into the problems that do or do not exist in the judicial system).

To keep this thread Shadowrun related, a cyber implant that automatically and painlessly takes a DNA sample of anyone entering either of the typical rape orifices could also help to deter criminals. Add to that cyberware an injection needle that slaps the guy with a drug to remove the erection and you remove part of the rape process. Have the drug knock him out completely and you've removed the majority of the rape process. the only problems with those are that they don't stop the rape from starting, they only stop it from finishing.

well of course there's no 'solution' to rape, short of removing the sexual urges of all of humanity.

Of course, if you condemn with the wrong language, you can raise a generation of boys who (like me) despise their own gender and think all men are evil rapists who'd go on a rape-crusade if they could get away with it.

And what the hell has this thread to do with Shadowrun? A run idea, perhaps? The basis of a whole campaign?

Somebody had got to come up with a reason for the Admins not to move this to the wrong forums, so here I am.

I think they should just shoot rapists.

"To keep this thread Shadowrun related, a cyber implant that automatically and painlessly takes a DNA sample of anyone entering either of the typical rape orifices could also help to deter criminals. Add to that cyberware an injection needle that slaps the guy with a drug to remove the erection and you remove part of the rape process. Have the drug knock him out completely and you've removed the majority of the rape process. the only problems with those are that they don't stop the rape from starting, they only stop it from finishing."

Now that's a good idea. The DNA could be used to convict the perp, then they can shoot him! Have the drug knock him out for easy Lone Star pick up.
I'm all for people being armed, especially women.

Actually, sexual violence in lesbian relationships in a dirty little secret that neither conservatives nor liberals like to talk about. The former don't like to talk about it because they are homophobic. The latter don't like to talk about it because *gaps* it suggests that women aren't just victims.

Of course, rape of lesbians by their lover's isn't the only form of female perpetrated sexual violence. There is rape of heterosexual women by homosexual woman and rape of heterosexual women by other heterosexual women (contrary to popular belief, same sex rape doesn't mean that the victim must be homosexual nor does it mean so for the perpetrator). There is rape of daughters by mothers and sisters by sisters.

There is also rape of men by women, despite popular belief that this is impossible. Erection is an involuntary function that can be stimulated rather easily. Erection doesn't equal consent for a man any more than lubrication equals consent for a woman. If someone suggested that a woman really wanted it because she was aroused or because she had an orgasm then that person would be thrown in the metaphorical woodchipper (or should be, at the very least). Yet, if a man has an erection or orgasms he is considered to have consented? That is an awful double standard and, thankfully, some more enlightened jurisdictions do recognize it is fallacious. Hopefully, this sentiment can spread throughout the world.
It is possible for a rape victim to become aroused and even have orgasms despite being unwilling. It isn't even that uncommon. It adds to the shame felt by the victim and public misconceptions about rape don't help matters.


About the fact that you are more likely to be raped by an acquaintance, friend, relative, or lover (in ascending order of probability) than by a stranger does seem dismal but it isn't at all. It is just the nature of human interactions.

Violence, including rape, is another form of human interaction. It is a rare and undesirable form of human interaction but no one will deny that it is a form of human interaction. It is reasonable to assume that you engage in human interaction most often with the humans whom you interact with most often in the same way that it is reasonable to assume that a=a. Now, if you interact with a person frequently it is reasonable to assume that some rare or unusual interactions will take place. By the same token, it is reasonable to assume that if you roll a die often enough you'll get some rare or unusual results.

Of course, the explanation for the statistics applies only to that, the statistics. It doesn't apply to individual cases. Statistics cant be applied to individual cases. As I said before, people make statistics, not the other way around. The risk of violence is not a dice roll. These things do not happen in a vacuum. Often, there are many factors that suggest a relationship is about to go bad. Often, there are many factors that cause a relationship to go bad. You are more likely to be killed by your spouse than anyone else, according to statistics. Does this mean you should never get married? Of course not. It means that if your spouse attack you then you should call the police, put the batterer's ass in prison, file for divorce, and get a restraining order. These things do not happen in a vacuum.

Cain's statement that you're daughter is more likely to be raped by you than by a stranger is true statistically but it may not be true personally. In individual cases, the latter is what matters and the former is irrelevant. What matters is how you actually treat your daughter and how you actually feel about her. If you are abusive then the abuse will almost certainly escalate without intervention. If you aren't then there probably won't be a problem. All those who commit domestic violence have a family but not all those who have a family are guilty of domestic violence.

I greatly disagree with the assertion that individuals are socially conditioned to not harm loved ones. Due to the strong emotions involved social conditioning fails much more easily with loved ones than it does with strangers. But, at the same time, emotional and economic dependence can result in very stupid decisions ones everyone has calmed down. In many incidents of domestic violence both participants fight boldly and with potentially deadly force only to return to the status quo once both have calmed down. It is one of the reasons police should respond immediately to domestic violence calls and take the perpetrator(s) into custody immediately, so the victim(s) doesn't have time to think things through and change the story.


I don't like the perception of rape as a men victimizing women issue at all. I don't like the perception of feminism that we live in a men vs. women world. It is the very acceptance and institutionalization of rigid gender groups that reinforces gender inequality.

I could write a thesis about the fact that the terms "male" and "female" do not provide any meaningful information about an individual. And most would dismiss m as a new-age hippie quack by making that statement but there is logic ot my madness. There are many sex related biological traits. These traits are interdependent to a degree but there are not mutually inclusive. Some are even mutable through drugs and surgery. The statement "I am male" makes clear that I identify myself as male. However, it provides no reliable information about my biology or my personality. The prevailing attitude is that there are two genders and some freaks that don't fit into either. The fact that there are individuals that fully fit into the existing classification systems suggests that the classification system is wrong and should be changed to enfranchise the minority. That change may do good for the majority, too. Instead of two exclusive gender categories there should be several inclusive gender categories that people can mix and match as they see fit, including sexual orientation.

I could go on and on but I won't. My point is that as long as we see the male/female dichotomy as an us/them dichotomy there will be issues. It would be better for everyone if we just got rid of it and saw each other as human beings first and last.


The discussion of the nature of justice really was tangential to the original thread.
The hooked female condom is, to be honest, quite silly. It is probably more useful in consensual femdom BDSM than it is in actually preventing rape. But, it may help. There is no way of knowing without actual field trials. Certainly, there are situations where it would help and situations where it wouldn't, as with anything else. It was only related to shadowrun due to Snow Crash and the presence of actual vagina dentata in certain magical or supernatural beings in certain myths and literature. The latter provides some interesting campaign flavor. The debate was fun and I actually think that were were clarifying our positions and moving toward a place where we could all agree. However, I do regret responding to the discussion rather than attempting to move it back the the heart of the topic, which was about how genital mutilation can be fun. I'd much rather it turned towards providing stats for semi-mythological toothed-vagina women and penis-slicing cyberware than where it actually headed.

Increase standards of living and education
Lower unemployment and economic stagnation
Increase punishment (both conviction rates and punishment lengths)
Media attention with accurate reporting and no sensationalism
Enforce treatment plans and diagnose mental conditions early

Add inhibitors to alcohol and drugs
Use simsense psychotropic technology on everyone

On the contrary, psychotropic simsense can encourage wild spending. Really, with enough psychotropic simsense, there's nothing physically possible you can't do.

~J

i'd say the second is as much of a pipe dream as removing human sexuality (or desire for dominance) altogether. non-sensationalist media? how would they sell papers? more, maybe: not everybody has a strong desire for sex or power; everybody* wants something to gossip about.

*not really everybody

Psychotropic simsense.

Seeing a pattern?

~J

Again, you're totally forgetting about ignoring women.

That and you're indulging in the fallacy of total self-control, but that's a whole different issue more suited for a psych board (and to forestall the response, no, I don't think we should just ignore something if someone didn't have control over it. The fact that they didn't have control in and of itself is important and would need to be addressed.).

~J

If you're going to chip away at my faith in humanity, at least have the decency to do it more slowly.

~J

oh, my.

*looks up from the shadows of a central park, and hides the dart gun in a knapsack.* What? Who? Where? No-nothing of the sort. You can't prove a thing! Your check's in the mail...

Accidental rape is a real problem that needs to be avoided. I have a close friend who had a relationship—up to that point a very pleasant one—destroyed because during consensual sex she had an asthma attack and her partner missed the "stop now" signals. Though I'm only casually acquainted with said partner, I understand the guilt caused him no end of problems for quite some time thereafter.

~J

Sounds like someone has a "pet topic of the month/semester/insert appropriate time period here".

Rape = bad. Anyone with a brain gets it. For those without said equipment, posting to a SR forum about it isn't going to get it through to them, methinks.

Attack it for being off-topic all you like, that's one charge that Hell's attorney himself (herself?) couldn't keep from sticking. Objecting to the topic, however, does not make trying to simplify a very complex issue down to a simple (correct but badly incomplete) statement acceptable.

~J

Pish. "Acceptable" to whom?

Me, of course. Is there any higher standard?

~J

Hmmm...

Ummm...

*scratch, scratch*...

emo?

Sometimes, I don't even know why Kage tries.

I have the same feeling, but I suspect we mean different things when we voice it.