I've never heard of this before, it was developed in South Africa by someone called Sonette Ehlers who was told by a rape victim that she wished she'd 'had teeth down there'.
It's a tube applicator inserted like a tampon which has teeth/barbs to latch on to the penis, not only causing pain, but as it would have to be medically removed the man would be identified.
My first thoughts veered towards vengeance and just deserts, the man could think again if he believed he could get away with such despicable and base behaviour.
But thinking about it further, is it just provoking an already dangerous man, who on finding himself stuck in such a device, could kill the woman when he wouldn't have done otherwise?
It can't actually prevent the rape taking place anyway, and the man could just anally rape the woman instead.
And more than that, it places the responsibility for not being raped squarely on the woman, it's men who should be stopped from thinking they have the right to do this.
Critics have described it as a medieval punishment, but part of me agrees with Ehlers reply to that criticism that it's 'a medieval device for a medieval deed', if you're in a place where rape is prevalent why shouldn't women have an option to defend herself in the same way as choosing not to walk in isolated places or carrying a weapon?
If the criminals who carry out such offences knew such a device is widespread, even if the deterrent of the device was small (when legal convictions are also small), would the control it gave women be of value?
I know it's not black and white, but who is anyone to say how another woman chooses to deal with such an emotive issue?