It's stupid in the way that if we assume men/people in general need fucking Rubik's belts to help them not to rape other people, there's something fundamentally, horribly, fucking astonishingly wrong, both with us assuming so and the people we assume would need the belt.
It's not like raping people is a reflex. All it takes not to rape someone is being a decent person. You don't need a belt for that, same as you don't need a special device to stop you from murdering your teacher when they give you too much homeworks. We, humans, have a fancy thing called self control and, additionally, a sense of conscience and morals etc. We should focus on preserving those not making belts that make it a bit harder to ger your pants off. If you need a belt to stop you from raping, you're a fucking bad person in the first place.

not tolerating violence is not the same as knocking someone out even if they hit you.
i mean, you're saying being violent in response means you're intolerant towards violence as a concept? you realise your logic is so backwards it has spiralled right back up its own arse?

why divorce? they've literarly just prooven they're perfect for each other.

according to this, girls turn into the 'master race' if they go to slytherin.
this post is not getting my seal of approval.

or people could practice some self restraint and not have sex in a public restroom?

okay so, after having read the article, who will help me find my will to continue living?

if that's all they say, sure but if they tell you not to talk to them at that moment, what are you supposed to do, force them to talk to you? make their whatever progress from 'not good' to 'worse'?
i know that women, in general, tend to say stuff they want to hear negated, like the ol' 'oh i'm fat' line but when someone's not feeling well it's not time for pulling shit like that. if you're not feeling like talking, say so. if you want to talk about your problems, simply /say so/.
complicated, right?