Welcome! Sign in to access your account. New user?
SAFE MODE: ON HOME DIRECTORY SEARCH RANDOM POLL MAKE A POLL

Punishment For Rape

How should it be chopped off?

Posted by D. Bone on 2008-05-08 08:00:52

The Pol Pot regime in Cambodia had methods for both male and female genital punishment for unauthorized sexual contact. Both punishments totally destroyed the genitals of the offenders fairly slowly and very painfully.

In the case of men and boys 15 and older, they were tied spread-eagled naked between two posts set 8 ft apart. First his pubic area was shaved, then naked women were used to arouse the males, then a ball spreader made of steel and wire was tightened around the $%!@ root and testicles of the male. A sac made of a metal screen with a steel ring attached was then tightened around his testicles and a heavy clamp was tightened on the head of his $%!@. Then cords were tied to the various attachment points and a heavy weight was attached to the other end after the cords went over a couple of pulleys on a post 8 ft. behind the victim. Then 3 electrodes were tied to the various attachment points and the 240 volt/60 amp DC current was turned on. It usually took several minutes or more to completely roast the offender's genitals. His genitals became softer and softer over the course of the punishment as steam and smoke began to rise in the air. Victims screamed at the top of their lungs the entire time and many lost control of their bowels. Occasionally a victim passed-out and had to be revived with smelling salts. Finally the attached weight ripped his well-cooked genitals off of the male victim from behind him. Genital destruction by electrocution as practised in Pol Pot's regime was an absolutely horrid torture which completely destroyed the male offender's genitals after immense suffering. Some males didn't survive the torture, and others were executed following their electro-castration.

Another variation used the same basic set-up but didn't employ electricity. Instead the genitals were tied with heavy rope, cable, or chain, which was then passed over a couple of pulleys on the post behind the condemned male. To the other end of the rope a large drum was suspended. The drum was then slowly filled with water from a hose. A 55-gallon drum can hold over 850 lbs of water, but it never took that much weight to rip the offender's genitals completely out of his body from behind. The offender's genitals were stretched to the tearing point over as long as a 10 to 15 minute period as the drum filled and became heavier. Another variation was tying the rope to the back of a jeep. The driver then stomped on the gas and ripped the offender's genitals right out of his body. This castration method was over much more quickly and was certainly less painful than other methods.

In many cases the castrated prisoner was then cauterized with the end of a burning stick to stop the blood loss.

In the case of females, they were suspended naked in a crouch position between two posts by their knees and wrists. This left their crotch hanging at the lowest point. Their legs were well spread apart, and their exposed genitalia was hung about 18 inches off of the ground. Then a shovelful of hot coals from an adjacent campfire was dumped on the ground directly under the victim. If the torturer wanted to make the punishment more severe they added some twigs or sticks to the hot coals. Over the course of the next couple of hours the woman's genitalia was literally destroyed by cooking her sensitive parts over an open fire. Many women who suffered this punishment later had to have surgery to remove the dead cooked flesh of their genitalia, anus, and buttocks. Some women didn't survive the torture. In some other cases women were caned with a punishment cane on their breasts or between their legs on their genitalia. The canes were soaked in brine to make them pliable, and were up to an inch thick and 3 ft. long and were wielded by soldiers, with as many as a hundred strokes being applied. The unfortunate victim's breasts were often split and torn, as was her labia. Often victims lost their nipples and occasionally even their clitoris in the caning.

The source of the above genital torture is from a Reader's Digest condensed book from the late 1970s.

In Bosnia at one torture camp, some men there lost their genitals to a heavy hammer. The prisoner was bound and gagged, then tied with his genitals stretched across a chopping block by ropes tied around his testicles and $%!@. Another prisoner was brought in and given the choice of beating the other prisoner's genitals to a pulp with the hammer or was told that they would suffer the same fate if they wouldn't do it. Often after the other prisoner had thoroughly smashed the victim's genitals, the unfortunate 2nd prisoner was tied up just like his victim had been, and another prisoner was then brought in and given the same choice. Sometimes this went on all day long.

Would beating an offender's genitals to a pulp with a heavy hammer or some more sanitary method, or any of the Pol Pot regime's castration punishment methods be an appropriate punishment for rape, sexual assault, or sexual assault of a child?

There you go: A few more genital punishments to consider in your search for the perfect genital punishment to fit the crime. And the wonderful thing about all of these techniques is that they have all been used somewhere in the world before.

How about tying a guy's genitals with rope and pulling on the rope from the opposite side of a 20-ton punch press with a table clearance thickness of 0.01"? The guy knows that he is going to get it, then you push the button and clang, his genitals disintegrate in a shower of blood and guts. Another quick and easy method would be to close his $%!@ in the jaws of a large lathe, then jog the chuck. The victim should have the choice of a quick end to the offender's manhood or a long and drawn-out very painful affair, as the offenders $%!@ is slowly twisted off in 15 second 1/8th of a turn increments.

Just thought that you would like to know of the methods that the Khmer Rouge punished women with. See if you can fantasize about that.

Posted by TheG on 2008-10-14 02:45:24

Don't get me wrong, I fully understand how heinous a crime rape is, having someone in my building raped not very long ago. I do advocate extreme punishment for rapists. But before any punishment should be carried out, I think we should try to help people. I believe that many rapists probably have many problems, and I also believe that we should get them the help they need, not torture them. I believe castration is far too extreme a punishment. One man makes one mistake (yes a rather large mistake I know) and you're going to ruin his life for it? I know that being raped can lead to a traumatized life for the rest of your years, but physically it is over with after not very long, while the man is tortured everyday not only by the lack of manhood, but also by the daily reminder of looking down there and seeing nothing. How about this, how about a woman kicking a man in the crotch? Arguably one of the most painful things someone can go through ( I don't know how this isn't a more serious offence); the punishment for this? Removing the woman's arms and legs so she can never do this again. Seems a bit extreme doesn't it? (This method should be void provided it is in self-defence, of course).

Posted by Becky Miller on 2008-10-14 10:53:32

So you acknowledge that rape is a heinous crime, but physically it is over with very quickly. This assumes that there is nothing else done to the woman/girl. And what about in the cases of men raping girls who are very young, even infants? Do you honestly believe that wouldn't damage them physically, possibly even fatally?

What if the man does not rape only once, but several times, as is usually the case with rapists, especially pedophiles. How many such "mistakes" is a man allowed to commit before you feel he deserves to be punished? Have you made such a "mistake"? Have you thought about making such a "mistake"? If not, how can you dismiss the act of rape as a "mistake"?

I've no doubt being kicked in the groin is very painful for a man, and that's why it should only be done in cases of self-defence. But it is VERY arguably one of the "most painful things someone can go through". And besides, to use your own argument, isn't the physical pain over with rather quickly, just as you say rape is?

You can diminish, even dismiss the severity of rape all you want. But unless you've suffered it's terrible nightmare, you have NO idea whatsoever about what it's like!

Some of us come here to vent our anger. Not against men, but against rapists. Some come here to express their feelings through fantasy. Does it bother you that there are women who have fantasies that don't involve being fluffy, warm and subservient to men? I love men! I hate rapists! And if you can't tolerate the discussion that takes place here, why don't you go somewhere else where people share YOUR views on rape, and how women should feel about it?

Posted by TheG on 2008-10-14 14:34:15

You're absolutely right, I have no idea what rape is like, and I don't want to know. But I don't think it should stop me from voicing my opinion. I guess I missed the memo that said that this place was for women only, sorry. Obviously repeat offenders would be spending the rest of their life in prison to prevent them from commiting such crimes again. But taking such severe action as castration, well, I guess I believe in the whole "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" kind of thinking.

As for the pain of being kicked in the groin being over with relatively quickly, yes, this is true, which is why the punishment sounds so absured.

Posted by katie12345678 on 2009-06-16 21:46:58

personally i think some1 dat does dat sud be shot den hung by there feet beat like sticks and den gutted dats just my personal opinon