"Origami" condom prototype

Above is a demo of a prototype "Origami Condom" that is meant to be much easier to, er, deploy. It's silicone (non-disposable?) with a fluid lining that, according to New Scientist, is "supposed to mimic the vaginal environment, simulating sex without a condom for a man. Ridges on its surface are meant to enhance the experience, making it double as a sex toy." "New Origami condom adds pleasure to safe sex"


    1.  Yup… and that guy is appalling at putting on condoms.  I’d have lost interest by the point I’d finally got it on. :D

      1. I’d have lost interest by the point I’d finally got it on

        I’m pretty sure that I’d have lost interest when I discovered that my partner’s dick was gelatinous and jiggly.

          1. The jiggle, the wiggle, the ooh-la-la,
            Someone to spank you and sheep that go ‘baa’?

          2. It’s all here. You have babes, boys, beasts, thinner, fatter, hunks, chunks, monks, twins dipped in batter.

  1. When to be out in the wild to be tested?

    Oh, btw, considering my bewilderment because of SFW toilets in space: was *THIS* SFW?

  2. This is very interesting. If we’re talking about birth control methods, we’re obviously very concerned about rates of failure. The predominant cause of failure in the traditional condom design is so-called “blunt puncture” and the firms that make condoms have spent a lot of time trying to reduce or prevent it. It will be interesting to see how this new design compares to the old in terms of blunt puncture, and also in terms of other failure modes. I for one would be pretty worried about the folds increasing the likelihood of tearing.

    1. The weird part of that Durex study summary is that they don’t mention that Durex’s conclusion was that the “blunt puncture” wasn’t the predominant CAUSE, it was a SYMPTOM of the predominant cause: improper lubrication.

      Off topic: Why does Disqus always insert a space at the beginning of replies?

      1. Because it’s evil. If you’re not careful, the space will get into your tags (like masked links) and render them non-functional. They claim to be unable to fix it.

        1. because the code is alive, and it keeps inserting spaces to tell the world how much pain it is in having to nest comments to oblivion.

      2.  Speaking of improper lubrication, that demo rolled condom is suffering from it Very badly. Considering most condoms come with some lubrication, plus often a few sachets of lube, they’re being quite disingenuous, making me quite unlikely to trust them overall

  3. Obviously designed by a man.  Those “ribbed for her pleasure” things are actually quite painful for many women.  They may as well be made of sandpaper, especially when the sex gets especially vigorous.

    1.  ymmv. my ex partner of 5 years quite liked ribbed and studded condoms sometimes, perhaps overall lubrication is a factor here?

  4. I can’t watch the video on this computer but now that I think about it, I can’t believe someone didn’t come up with a viable reusable silicone condom sooner! My silicone Diva Cup does a fantastic job during my period, and the amount of tampons and pads that I’m not using is staggering. A silicone condom would be basically the same idea but in reverse – keep a particular liquid on one side of the cervix. I like it!

    1. Except for the part where the silicone condom can’t be sterilized properly to not transmit STI’s between partners. Boiling or a rubbing alcohol bath does not render a silicone object sterile, despite what some people claim. I would also be scared of pregnancy from a condom that had been washed off. It’s not like live sperm are visible to the naked eye.

      A Diva Cup is also about 1000x as thick as a silicone condom would be, and is subjected to much less friction.

      Silicone as a condom material = maybe good. Reusable condom with goofy folds = probably not so good. 

      Plus Mr. Hand in the video definitely strokes the origami condom demo penis differently ! The only good baggy condom is the female condom. Not a functional or safe solution to the penis fit/comfort problem.

      1. True, it’s not a production ready idea by any means! But perhaps still useful for monogamous couples who aren’t worried about transmitting STIs. Not to mention sperm are surprisingly crap at surviving outside in the real world. Letting the thing dry for an hour would kill them all. So, I guess, buy two?

  5. The condom on the right is obviously much looser than the traditional one, which completely kills their “easier to put on” argument. I’m sure a Magnum XXXXXL is also really easy to put on.

    Also, the new design seems to have a lot of edges and seams, which is likely to be painful for both partners, and also creates points of weakness, compared to the smooth regular condom.

  6. It’s about time.  There’s quite an experiential overlap between origami and condom use.  One requires intense focus, inhuman patience, skilled hands, and is done very badly by amateurs.  The other is origami.

  7. yeah, i don’t think the origami condom is going to work so well… lubricating the inside of the “traditional” condom before rolling it on provides the same slip benefit that the origami touts. the loose slip-and-slide action of the origami will probably increase the chances of blunt puncture failure. and then there’s the heat transfer issue… a snug fitting roll condom probably has better heat transference between partners, versus the origami. lastly, the origami probably wont work for anything other than vaginal sex.

Comments are closed.