Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Panty-Sniffing Gets 21st Century

Posted by Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon at 4:23 AM on April 24, 2008.


Semen detectors don't detect much but they do degrade human relationships.
champagnesatinpantiesproduct

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Amanda Marcotte in your
mailbox!

 

Holy mother of Disco Ball, is this just wrong. It's a semen detection kit that is marketed for catching cheating spouses and teenagers who have unruly amounts of autonomy. Naturally, they are trying to suggest that it's for catching both men and women, but of course, we know that's just some ass-covering and defies all common sense that tells us that since men shoot the semen away from their bodies, clean-up to the point of avoiding detection would be simple enough. Also, as blogger Slut Machine notes, this would be really good at catching male masturbators (i.e., all men), if not cheaters. I'm sure some woman out there will try it, and much sorrow will be had as she discovers that her husband is a man and thus has trace amounts of semen in his underwear all the time, but on the whole, I see this being marketed towards men who are looking for novel ways to control wives and daughters now that the law is less cooperative than it used to be.

My main concern here is that the abstinence-only nuts are going to find out about this. (Probably shouldn't blog about it, since many of them read this blog to get their daily titillation thinking about women who have sex without apologizing for it.) You think the metal detectors at school doors are ridiculous? Or think about all the annual dust-ups with over-zealous, perverted school officials start doing underwear checks on high school students. This could make the situation a thousand times worse, with school officials getting the brilliant idea of having panty drills, like fire drills except everyone has to submit to panty-testing to make sure that they're not having Teh Sex. Sure, various civil liberties organizations would sue them into the ground, but don't think the idea isn't attractive. Though I suppose it would encourage young women to use condoms.

Anyway, it's a rip-off. If you want to find out that there's biological material in people's underwear, you can just assume that there is. And if you're skeptical, I recommend the black light as a cost effective alternative to satisfy your doubts.

Digg!

Amanda Marcotte co-writes the popular blog Pandagon. She is the author of It's a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments.


Does Time Magazine Believe Women's Bodies Should be Owned by Men?
Time helps push retrograde patriarchal agenda with article about "purity balls."
July 22, 2008.
Catholic League President Believes Atheists Should Have No Rights
Of course religious freedom is an absolute, as long as your religious beliefs accord with his own.
July 14, 2008.
Parsing the Drunken Jezebel Trainwreck
Gawker bloggers Tracie Egan and Moe Tkacik slur rape jokes on TV, feminists cringe.
July 9, 2008.
Patriotism Without Nationalism
Our country: Love it always, respect it when it deserves it.
July 7, 2008.
Canadian Abortion Rights Pioneer Awarded Nation's Highest Civilian Honor
Dr. Henry Morgentaler receives the Order of Canada.
July 2, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Truly a stupid post
Posted by: abqavgjoe on Apr 24, 2008 6:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lay off the high-grade

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is a sexist post
Posted by: felipe on Apr 24, 2008 8:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"this would be really good at catching male masturbators (i.e., all men)"

women don't masturbate?

Amanda, your sexist attitude is showing...

from Websters -sexist
1 pertaining to, involving or fostering sexism
2 a person with sexist attitudes

sexism
1 attitudes or behavior based on stereotypes of sexual roles. 2. discrimination or prejudice based on a persons sex

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This is a sexist post Posted by: nathanhj1970
» RE: This is a sexist post Posted by: felipe
» Thank you Q30 and JimmyV Posted by: felipe
New technology, same hypocracy
Posted by: ohb0b on Apr 24, 2008 9:43 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of my favorite biblical stories is in the Gospel of John, chapter 8, when the Pharisees bring a woman who was caught "in the very act" of committing adultery to Jesus and ask his opinion whether or not she should be stoned, according to Old Testament law.

She must have been committing adultery by herself, since they didn't bring in the man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I got dibs
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Apr 24, 2008 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on the franchise for this kit in all the Southern states!!!!!!!!!!
I should be able to retire off of Texas and Mississippi alone. :D

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just ask George Bush, Rudy Giuliani or Dick Cheney
Posted by: JimmyVaughan on Apr 24, 2008 12:19 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Their underwear should yield urine, stool and sperm samples.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» not necessarily their own, either Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
Call me silly
Posted by: rickiey on Apr 24, 2008 1:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But I don't find anything inherently sexist in a tool designed to catch cheaters.

And the "think of how many divorces this will create" is moronic. The device won't create divorces, the cheating will.

Yes, it would be nice to have a device that would do the same for cheating men as well. Hopefully they are in development on that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Control
Posted by: Urgelt on May 7, 2008 10:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree.

It's kind of nice to be able to say I agree with a feminist. I seem to do that a lot with Amanda's posts.

There's no question that a tool like this will be used to control women and female children even more than they're controlled now - if we let it happen. Patriarchs will love it.

Expect the wingnuts to insist that DNA samples be on file with the FBI for every citizen - the ultimate in national ID. Then these test kits will really come into their own. Just a little more morality legislation, and we're all set. Semen in her panties? Call the police and find out whose - then throw them both in jail. Hey, God says adultery is against His laws, and we're a Nation Under God. Says so right in the Pledge.

We'll need more prisons, but thankfully, Bush, Halliburton and Blackwater are nearly ready to open the doors of some sparkling new prison camps. Go ahead, ask what they need hundreds of thousands of new prison berths for. Hint: it's not for terrorists. If all the terrorists in the world were put in them, they would have 90% capacity left over.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]