A device that barbs onto rapists penises is causing outcry.
Gee! 'Ya think?!
Not that I have any sympathy for rapists, you understand, but I believe something like my Smith & Wesson Airweight in .32 magnum would be a better option all 'round.
And not only because it doesn't require the lady in question having to undergo vaginal penetration at all if she hasn't previously or simply doesn't wish too. My understanding is that most rapes arise from abuse of an established personal relationship with the victim. It seems unlikely to me that very many females would have such an elevated degree of suspicion towards those she has established trust with to have this device in place should such a betrayal occur. Instances of "stranger rape" often seem to involve several men attacking one woman. Not to put too fine a point on things, but this Rapex device is only going to work on one of them. It seems unlikely that the rest of the rapists will have much sympathy for him or their victim until they've finished with her themselves. As well, and not to be too indelicate, there is a third option available to the rapist(s) that this product doesn't seem well adapted for.
Since I don't hold out much hope that sanity will spontaneously break out regarding firearms and personal defense, I believe for this device to actually have an effect beyond the one-on-one encounter, some type of adornment that implies the presence of the Rapex would heighten it's effectiveness. A simple bracelet, or ring perhaps, that is publicly associated with the anti-rape device, and readily visible to casual visual inspection, would be an inexpensive mechanism for reducing the instance of initiation of sexual attacks.
Nothing in this world is 100% effective all of the time, and instances of this product's mis-application will likely become it's own tragi-comic sub-genre, but even 50% effectiveness would equate to almost 900,000 fewer rapes every year in S. Africa alone. That's got to be worth something all on it's own, don'tcha think?
Update: Tamara K, traditionalist that she is, prefers her .45 but otherwise seems in agreement.
Further Update (11/15): Connie du Toit points out a malaprop on my part. Given my history with gyneacologic calistenics, I'm sort of relieved to have made such an error - points up my lack of familiarity with the whole topic, what?