Stealthing Is Actually Rape | A Message For Men Who Secretly Damage Condoms Or Remove Condoms During Sex

Yes, Stealthing Is Actually Rape

A disgusting sex practice has come to my attention in the past few days – and I’m not talking about whatever you can find in so-called weird porn. No, I mean properly disgusting. The practice known as stealthing. I’m so angry I can barely type.

A study into stealthing was undertaken & recently published by Alexandra Brodsky for the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law. You can read the insights in this Huffington Post piece and download the full paper (last revised 23 April 2017 at the time of writing) here.

What The Fuck Is Stealthing?

Stealthing is the practice of secretly damaging condoms before sex with a partner, or secretly removing it during sex.

It doesn’t seem to matter to stealthing fans what sort of sex it may be – ie. this isn’t something solely done by straight men or gay men. They just want to take advantage of their god-given right to spread their seed, as the superior gender. Obviously.

*spits*

Why Do People Do It?

Because they’re dicks? If you want a calmer, more rational and psychology-based answer, give me a moment.

Ok, I’ve taken my Kalms. Well I guess people who engage in sexual stealthing feel that they have the right to do so. I genuinely doubt that ‘better sensation during sex’ is the reason, because why the need for secrecy? Keeping something secret from someone else, especially when it directly involves and affects them, is a way of having power over that person.

And make no mistake, that’s entirely what stealthing is all about. That need for indiscriminate power and control over someone else… you know, the same reasons rapists rape.

So If The Sex Partner Doesn’t Know…

Yep, it’s rape. I don’t care about any arguments saying that the person wants to have sex with you anyway, so why does it matter all that much. The fact of the matter is that if that person would NOT have had sex with you bareback (ie. without a condom, which is the same as wearing a damaged condom), and the only reason they ARE having sex with you is because they believe they’re protected – then it’s non-consensual sex.

The person deciding to have sex with you wasn’t in possession of all the facts, because you’ve withheld them. It’s lying by omission. Non-consensual sex = rape.

But You Love All That Rape Stuff, Right?

xxOk I’m just going to go ahead and assume that if you are genuinely considering the notion that stealthing is in any way ok, you’re a bit naïve (to put it politely). Therefore you might think that because I’ve written about my love of rapeplay, that I should also be ok with stealthing.

No.

Rapeplay is entirely different. It’s a kink which is founded on trust between the people involved, and absolute respect. It’s consensual non-consent – note the mandatory element of consensual.

Stealthing isn’t CNC (consensual non-consent), it’s simply non-consensual. Yes I’ll say it again: stealthing is rape.

I Kinda Like The Idea Of Stealthing…

Then you can get the fuck away from me. Seriously. If you believe stealthing is a fun sexual proposition, then we are seriously at odds in our views of what living as a moral, respectful member of a caring society should be.

Even this shitty penis sticker thing is better than just going in bareback (or as good as), and that’s not saying much considering it looks about as safe as a pre-needled condom (in my opinion).

At least unsafe sex between two people in such a way would be with both partner’s knowledge. And not because you’ve conned someone into having unsafe sex with you out of a pathetic need to fuel a bruised male ego or to compensate for a lack of control in other areas of your pitiful life. Silliness is simply silly – whereas stealthing is non-consensual, and most definitely rape.

 

Unsponsored and unaffiliated post

9 COMMENTS

  1. If a man deliberately does this it’s rape. No arguments!
    How would you describe the situation where a woman deliberately damages a condom so as to be able to become pregnant and then pursue the guy for maintenance for the child he never consented to fathering?

  2. Just when you think misogynists can’t get any lower… I’m speechless that anyone in their right mind thinks ‘stealthing’ is acceptable. The term says it all- basically you are stealing something- in this case the partners informed consent, and the very thing they wouldn’t have given you without a condom- safety!

  3. It is rape legally as well, apparently. This is the law on this vile meme, copied from Stack Exchange (which allows copying, it’s open source):

    “In English law, it’s rape. See Crown Prosecution Service guidance to sexual consent, which explains it very well: cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual_offences/consent (sections “conclusive presumptions” and more so “conditional consent”). Asssange’s case pivoted on this point and the web link quotes the President of the Queens Bench, a high level judge indeed.”

    “It would apply equally to both genders because the offence (crime) isnt defined by gender or body parts. It’s defined purely as deceit as to the nature of the sexual act – its intended nature, intentions upon participating in it, or conditions which one party knew untruthful. A possible situation that a condom would be worn, but in fact wasn’t, was enough to get a valid extradition case in R. v Assange.”

    “The crown document makes it clear that sex is legally nonconsensual even if consent is given, if consent is given under false assumptions. That includes if partner is claiming to use birth control when he or she is not (possibly what you mean by ‘stealthing’), or if partner pretends to be male when she is in fact female or pretends to be female when he is in fact male; all three of these examples are explicitly given in the text.”

    “Footnote 59 page 224 of Canadian Supreme Court case R v Hutchinson 2014 – wilful deception about contraception which had been a condition for sex: scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/13511/index.do “On appeal, the majority upheld the conviction on the basis that condom protection was an “essential feature” of the sexual activity, and therefore the complainant did not consent to the ‘sexual activity in question’ … Held: The appeal should be dismissed.“ So both UK and Canada at least.”

Please share your thoughts!