[Freddy_1]

http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/vi...5mssR0wg3e

Haha this is awesome!..Props to the first RVF member to get a ONS with a girl wearing a pair of these and then NOT to be accused of rape post bang!!

[Collide]

This seems unfair to women. How are they going to falsely accuse rape when wearing these?

[Walderschmidt]

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure - something feminists will never understand.

Wald

[kbell]

Would bang model. Might have to use her mouth instead though that thing looks complicated to remove. Surprised there isn't a fingerprint reader and retinal scanner built in.

[speakeasy]

If anyone needs this product it's women in S. Africa. Now that's a place where rape culture(and HIV) truly is out of control. I wonder if this company will be donating these panties to impoverished townships?

Someone commented:

Quote:

Niggas gonna be wear this shit in prison

[R Smoov]

"Hoodrat bitches don't even wear panties, stinky pussy will keep a nigga away!!"

"So y'all make an anti rape underwear then give the rapist the secret on how to open it....Now niggas are going to ask for the combination SMH...."

[Jaydublin]

Me: WTF is this shit?
Her: My anti rape panties, let me take them off.
Me: Get the fuck out you crazy bitch.

[Kingsley Davis]

Matthew Piazza • an hour ago −
There's going to be bitches like precious wearing these things, do they make them in xxxl? Acting like someone will touch there nasty ass.
•Reply•Share ›

Kingkonglongshlong • an hour ago −
The rapist is willin to go to jail to fuck this ho, u don't think he can get thru a muthafuckin underwear?
2 •Reply•Share ›

Still Here • an hour ago
Fuck around and get drunk and forget the combination and shit on ya self..........
5 •Reply•Share ›

jsdancer • 42 minutes ago
When a nigga got those snoopy eyes aint no garment going to get in the way of him snatching up on that womb
1 •Reply•Share ›

lamont e. • 35 minutes ago
im laughing , bitches think this gone stop me.
3 1 •Reply•Share ›

[Sourcecode]

As said above..these should be in places where rape is a real thing.


Girls that wear these probably aren't getting laid anyway./
I cant image the look on the guys face when he brings a girl back and she has to explain that she wore rape underwear

[mental]

What stops the supposed "rapist", who managed to SOMEHOW drug her while she was with friends, who somehow didn't notice she was unconscious, then somehow took her through a tightly packed crowd of white knights, bouncers and other women, to just beat her until she gives him the combination or to use a blowtorch or similar tool?

[Roosh]

This actually is a benefit for us, because if you had sex with her, it implies complete consent.

[worldwidetraveler]

I think there will be a time when women panties will have a built in alcohol breathalyzer. Over the limit, panties lock. Under, they fall off for sweet, sweet loving.

[Tuthmosis]

(11-04-2013 12:32 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

This actually is a benefit for us, because if you had sex with her, it implies complete consent.

Not necessarily. She could claim that you "coerced" or "intimidated" her into taking them off. Or, she could claim she was drunk and took them off, but wouldn't have done so if she hadn't been drinking. Finally, she could plead ignorance and say she didn't lock them properly, since that shit seems complicated even to my-ass.

[Aliblahba]

The anti rape underwear comes in feminist size too:



   

[soup]

I hope some girl gets diarrhea in that and can't get it off in time.

Saturday night attention whoring mission: FAILED

[elpresidente]

I won't have sex with a girl that is wearing one of these. Ever!!

If a girl is so worried about getting rape while on a date with me then she really is not the type of girl I am looking for.

[Enigma]

This is simply more attention whoring and a continued unwillingness to show responsibility for their actions.

A logical human being would assume that pepper spray or a taser in the purse would do everything and much more than these underwear would do.

You know, you could actually fight off your attacker and flee to safety rather than being at the mercy of some raving maniac trying to cut off your panties with a dull pair of scissors in the back of his windowless rape van. It would also protect you from being robbed, beaten, or murdered, things that men and other less delusional people worry about at night.

The sole purpose of this invention is to allow women to get blackout drunk and stumble around the hood barefoot at 4 am before passing out the first place they fall down. If their underwear are still on in the morning, they don't even have to give a second thought to the events of the night before.

Oh yeah, sure, the drugging...really fits with the theme of the video considering this has been proven to be little more than an urban myth perpetuated by women who need to blame someone for how outrageously drunk they got.

[Sargon of Akkad]

(11-03-2013 10:37 PM)Freddy_1 Wrote:  

http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/vi...5mssR0wg3e

...rrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigght.



And I suppose that'll stop a rapist from forcing you get give him a blowjob...or just threatening to stab you should you not take the damn panties off yourself...or just beating the living shit out of you.

Ceterum censeo Osakam esse delendam!

[Doctore]

Being dumb bitches, they probably never know how to change the default passcode anyway. "1234, bing! off it comes. Let's rayyyype!"

[soup]

(11-04-2013 11:01 PM)Sargon of Akkad Wrote:  

(11-03-2013 10:37 PM)Freddy_1 Wrote:  

http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/vi...5mssR0wg3e

...rrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigght.



And I suppose that'll stop a rapist from forcing you get give him a blowjob...or just threatening to stab you should you not take the damn panties off yourself...or just beating the living shit out of you.

Ceterum censeo Osakam esse delendam!

This is interesting.

I think a lot of guys would argue that blow jobs are not rape.

They would also argue that if the girl takes her panties off and presents her pussy to you, this is not rape.

The idea is physical struggle against the sex is proof of rape. In this thinking, if a girl sucks your dick, there was no struggle (she could have bit your dick off, or fought against it).

But what happens when someone has a gun to their head.

Sure, nobody has to do anything they don't want to do.

But, what would you do if someone had a gun pointed towards your head and they told you to suck their dick?

Would you fight against it? If someone put a gun at your head and told you to suck their dick or they were going to kill you, would you do it? Would you say that you didn't against your will? That you were forced?

I bet everyone on this board would do it if they had threat of immanent death at their right or left temple.

If that doesn't classify as rape, what does? This isn't a rhetorical question. There's a lot of seemingly grey areas.

[lskdfjldsf]

In 100 years time these things will be looked at the same way as this:



That is, pointless, mindless contraptions with the sole purpose of making women feel safe when they aren't in danger in the first place. On the History Channel (assuming we have one, with the newest generation being taught more about Molly Pitcher than Bunker Hill or Valley Forge) people will sit back and laugh at how incredibly fucking stupid women are in the US. Watch the video again and pay close attention to the bar scene, these people are relentless in painting everything with a swinging dick as a pervert and rapist just waiting for a girl to drink a spiked margarita.

The funny thing is that feminists claim women are too small and weak to defend themselves against attackers, yet at the same time are protesting for women to be integrated into US Army Infantry units.

[Sargon of Akkad]

(11-05-2013 02:18 AM)soup Wrote:  

This is interesting.

I think a lot of guys would argue that blow jobs are not rape.

Yes, I'm sure a court of law is going to take that as a defense. "He had a knife to her throat and his penis in her mouth against her will...but oh, he left her vagina or anus alone...there was no sexual assault here."

I'm no lawyer, but as far as I'm aware, rape is understood to mean any form of sexual penetration without consent. Period.

Quote:

They would also argue that if the girl takes her panties off and presents her pussy to you, this is not rape.

The idea is physical struggle against the sex is proof of rape. In this thinking, if a girl sucks your dick, there was no struggle (she could have bit your dick off, or fought against it).

But what happens when someone has a gun to their head.

Sure, nobody has to do anything they don't want to do.

But, what would you do if someone had a gun pointed towards your head and they told you to suck their dick?

Would you fight against it? If someone put a gun at your head and told you to suck their dick or they were going to kill you, would you do it? Would you say that you didn't against your will? That you were forced?

I bet everyone on this board would do it if they had threat of immanent death at their right or left temple.

If that doesn't classify as rape, what does? This isn't a rhetorical question. There's a lot of seemingly grey areas.

They would also argue that if the guy pulls out his wallet and presents his money to you, this is not an armed robbery.

The idea is physical struggle against giving another person your valuables and wallet is proof of theft/robbery. In this thinking, if a guy hands you his wallet, there was no struggle (he could have fought against it).

But what happens when someone has a gun to their head?

Sure, nobody has to do anything they don't want to do.

But, what would you do if someone had a gun pointed towards your head and they told you to give him all of your cash?

Would you fight against it? If someone put a gun at your head and told you to give him your wallet or they were going to kill you, would you do it? Would you say that you did it against your will? That you were forced?

I bet everyone on this board would do it if they had threat of immanent death at their right or left temple.

If that doesn't classify as armed robbery, what does? This isn't a rhetorical question. There's a lot of seemingly grey areas.

...

Again, rape under most legal definitions is sexual assault (sometimes limited only to penetration -- of any orifice) without (informed) consent. It does not matter whether a struggle took place or whether physical force was involved.

Absence of valid consent is the defining factor in a rape, not the presence/absence of physical force. If the person was drugged, underage, unconscious or so drunk they could not function enough to give or withhold consent, no court is going to let you off simply because "he/she didn't put up a fight".

Ceterum censeo Osakam esse delendam.

[Katatonic]

Well. Since we all know that regret = rape, these devices will never be truly "rape-proof" until they can be unlocked remotely(like OnStar) by a certified feminist who has properly vetted the womans potential mate via telephone interview and thorough social media analysis. With this system, a misogynist "getting the bang", would be as likely as finding leftovers after a Jezebel company potluck.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Soup, no one has ever said that a person forced to give a blowjob because he/she is threatened with a gun, knife, extortion or something is not being raped. That quite clearly falls under the common sense definition and should definitely result in a conviction if proved. It's already covered.

Of course, compared to a case with physical violence and actual trails, such a case might end up being unprovable (since it's just the accuser's word vs. the accused's word and there's no way to prove the the accused really held a gun or uttered a threat at that moment). And while that will certainly let some rapists get off free, I think it should be kept that way. I am horrified at the efforts of feminists to destroy due process by making the accuser's word the only thing that matters.

[soup]

(11-05-2013 03:24 AM)Sargon of Akkad Wrote:  

(11-05-2013 02:18 AM)soup Wrote:  

This is interesting.

I think a lot of guys would argue that blow jobs are not rape.

Yes, I'm sure a court of law is going to take that as a defense. "He had a knife to her throat and his penis in her mouth against her will...but oh, he left her vagina or anus alone...there was no sexual assault here."

I'm no lawyer, but as far as I'm aware, rape is understood to mean any form of sexual penetration without consent. Period.

Quote:

They would also argue that if the girl takes her panties off and presents her pussy to you, this is not rape.

The idea is physical struggle against the sex is proof of rape. In this thinking, if a girl sucks your dick, there was no struggle (she could have bit your dick off, or fought against it).

But what happens when someone has a gun to their head.

Sure, nobody has to do anything they don't want to do.

But, what would you do if someone had a gun pointed towards your head and they told you to suck their dick?

Would you fight against it? If someone put a gun at your head and told you to suck their dick or they were going to kill you, would you do it? Would you say that you didn't against your will? That you were forced?

I bet everyone on this board would do it if they had threat of immanent death at their right or left temple.

If that doesn't classify as rape, what does? This isn't a rhetorical question. There's a lot of seemingly grey areas.

They would also argue that if the guy pulls out his wallet and presents his money to you, this is not an armed robbery.

The idea is physical struggle against giving another person your valuables and wallet is proof of theft/robbery. In this thinking, if a guy hands you his wallet, there was no struggle (he could have fought against it).

But what happens when someone has a gun to their head?

Sure, nobody has to do anything they don't want to do.

But, what would you do if someone had a gun pointed towards your head and they told you to give him all of your cash?

Would you fight against it? If someone put a gun at your head and told you to give him your wallet or they were going to kill you, would you do it? Would you say that you did it against your will? That you were forced?

I bet everyone on this board would do it if they had threat of immanent death at their right or left temple.

If that doesn't classify as armed robbery, what does? This isn't a rhetorical question. There's a lot of seemingly grey areas.

...

Again, rape under most legal definitions is sexual assault (sometimes limited only to penetration -- of any orifice) without (informed) consent. It does not matter whether a struggle took place or whether physical force was involved.

Absence of valid consent is the defining factor in a rape, not the presence/absence of physical force. If the person was drugged, underage, unconscious or so drunk they could not function enough to give or withhold consent, no court is going to let you off simply because "he/she didn't put up a fight".

Ceterum censeo Osakam esse delendam.

What about if you are out drinking with a a girl, a friend of a friend, you guys get really drunk and bang (she does consent, and gives you a blow job as well). She leaves your house with some people, everything seems cool.

The next day you get a call from your friend. The girl can't remember whether or not you had sex.

At the time she consented. Now she doesn't even remember doing it.