Is Stealthing Rape?

The question is why would you want to "stealth" someone. Let us reason this out. Stealthing can result in: HIV = DEAD Syphilis = long treatment or brain damage Gonorrhea = long treatment sometimes not successful, pain, sterility Chlamydia = PID for partner HPV = no cure, dick warts Herpes = no cure, pain, expensive meds Pregnancy = kid = child support = no money

Gee ! 7 reasons to not Stealth almost all of which are life ending. I do not think I will plan to stealth anyone any thing in the future.

While this guy is really a douche bag and making it "illegal" is dumb because it will do nothing more than create another law to be ignored by the ones callous enough to to that heinous act to a woman. He is just as much a dip shit and the CA legislature that has made it no legal to knowing infect someone with HIV.

Sorry should be; 'to do that heinous' & 'it is now legal to infect' Darned phone voice text editor

I'm not sure if it constitutes rape. That being said - I think the ability to clog the courts with cases related to stealthing would be a real possibility. Unless each partner signs a consent document prior (stating the details of the sexual encounter) - then it could be very difficult to prove.

Notice that they are trying to make this a federal law. As of now rape is only being prosecuted under state laws.

If stealthing is to be a serious crime, how about oopsing?

" (v) to engage in sexual intercourse with the intent, unbeknownst to the partner, of causing a pregnancy. This word is used specifically in instances where one partner believes that birth control is intact or being used, while the other has damaged/removed birth control without the knowledge or consent of the first partner, for an ulterior motive such as forcing the partner into a shotgun wedding situation as a means of securing the partner as a mate, or producing a child that the partner does not yet/ever want. This may include but is not limited to intentionally missing the Pill, removing diaphragms, or poking holes in a condom. Although more commonly done by women, men have also engaged in oopsing. Oopsing involves an obscene abuse and betrayal of the partner's trust, not to mention the objectification of the partner into someone whose plans to remain childless, for whatever reason, no longer matter. Oopsing is thusly one of the most disgusting acts imaginable, and ought to be a prosecutable offence.

'How could you oops your lover? Shame on you for stooping to such betrayal!' "

urbandictionary.com

SJG

1. Chaos Magick | Daily Practice | Divine Masculine ☽✪☾ youtube.com

Hermetic Hour youtube.com

Only you would ask this question and ask if it’s okay.

Go home SJG you’re drunk

sjguy asks a valid question. as i have had the possible situation happen twice...(she fell asleep/ passed out)... i suppose it could be called more than was originally agreed to.

Yes it is. SJG, if You come within 10 feet of my wife, I will knock your block off so hard that people will think you were scalped, too!

Amen, praise Jesus.

For myself I have talked about entering girls while they are asleep. They love it.

But I only do that when we were just fucking before we feel asleep. And the coverage status is always the same as how we had done it before. So it is just more of the same.

But getting the condom off when the girl thinks it is on? That is certainly deception and betrayal of trust. But is it rape? And can that realistically be prosecuted as such, and under federal law?

SJG

Renior upload.wikimedia.org

How can stealthing be a crime if you don't also make oopsing a crime?

SJG

Great. The Sleepytime Rapist is expanding his horizons into new forms of sexual assault.

Why is this even a question? Of course it is.

"For myself I have talked about entering girls while they are asleep. They love it."

YOU ARE A SICK FUCK. PLEASE SEEK PROFESSIONAL HELP.

@SJG: What would your mother think of what you've become?

We call this a clue, more laws defining Rape to protect the females

Males need the Legal option to accept OR not accept the child as a responsibility.

Why do Males NOT have the Pill??

Poor SJG's mother! I can't believe that she allows her son to do these horrible things to the girls he brings home!

Most guys come here looking for validation of their stupid decisions.

SJG is the only one who comes here for validation of sexual assault.

SJG is now at the point where he can rationalize away any psycho behavior. Violence, rape, you name it!

Fucking a sleeping woman and/or stealth fucking her is a chump's game, not to mention CREEPY AS FUCK. It's so epically pathetic and creepy to even have a discussion topic on this. I'm done here.

SJG is gonna be fucked when he goes to prison. Literally.

The more I learn about SJG's sexual activities - the more disturbing it seems to be. The description by SirLDAlot is harsh (and true) and it sounds uber creepy!

LIGHTNINGKAY has got my point, the law is on the female side in forcing paternal responsibility in all cases.

If a girl resists sex, or resists when she knows that the condom has been removed, then to continue is of course rape.

But if she does not know the condom has been removed and so she does not ever resist or object in anyway, and if she never issued any standing order against bare backing?

And then of course if she sees that their is no condom being used, but she does not resist or object, and in fact cooperates fully, then that has to be considered consensual.

I don't fuck women in their sleep. They wake up. I only do this when we were fucking before we fell asleep. Enter for another round, and then let her wakeup, which she right away will. There is no unilateral sex occurring, just entering without asking first. They love it. Many will say things before they fall asleep inviting it. And I will usually give a little hint at some earlier time.

SJG

portal address, please save this address: sites.google.com

King Crimson, live in Japan youtube.com

@Cashman1234 LMAO no matter how you break it down the desire to even stick your dick in a sleeping woman is still creepy as fuck.

"There is no unilateral sex occurring, just entering without asking first. "

^ creepy quote of the day

@SJG: You are easily the worst psycho in the history of TUSCL. Now rationalizing violence and rape. Does your mother now what you turned into?

It's just a way of showing her that you are laying claim to her.

They always love it. Just some say, "Wait Wait Wait, I need to go to the bathroom first." But then when they come back they really deliver.

They want to be objects of desire. They don't want to be able to sleep with a man and remain undisturbed.

SJG

Lol^^^! Good point. "There is no unilateral sex occurring, just entering without asking first!"

Which one of us will feel the most guilt when we know we should have alerted authorities to arrest SJG after he has cloroformed a girl and chopped her body parts up and put them in a suitcase, found in a dumpster. I will alert the San Jose police department and place a call into the police chief as soon as I head out west on tour with my wife and 5 kids. Sheesh!

^^^^^^^^ That is if Gaffigan doesn't fall into a tar pit first.

SJG

Rape / sexual assault is any sexual act carried out against a person's will or without that person's consent.

If a woman is asleep and there's explicit sexual contact or penetration, then that's rape because the woman cannot give consent while she's asleep. The act is prosecutable as rape if the woman decides upon waking that she has been assaulted. Bottom line is that the inability to give consent before a sex act begins = rape.

Also, it's creepy as fuck.

Stealthing is more nuanced, but still shitty. If a guy secretly removes his condom during sex, then there's a solid legal (and moral) argument that the woman is no longer having the protected sex to which she consented. The fact that the guy removes his condom secretly means that he is, via deception, engaging in unwanted sexual contact (and he knows it). That is rape. The fact that it's a form of rape that's harder to prove does not change the fact that the act itself is still rape. If I kill a guy and get away with it, that doesn't make me any less of a murderer.

Also, if you're the type of person who thinks that either "stealthing" or sexual contact with not-conscious women is okay or desirable, then you're just a horrible, creepy, and toxic bag of shit. Even if it were somehow legal, it's still morally reprehensible.

I mean, this really isn't a forum where I look for a lot of moral or ethical high-water marks, but we should be able to agree that sex should be fully informed and have consent for both parties.

Also, SJG, if this hasn't been mentioned before ... you're creepy as fuck.

@Dougster "SJG: You are easily the worst psycho in the history of TUSCL. Now rationalizing violence and rape. Does your mother now what you turned into?"

she gave up when as a child he was diagnosed as an incurable autistic window-licker

I had to look up stealthing online. Condoms can come off by accident. That should not be a crime. I'm not sure how you take it off during sex on purpose without the girl noticing.

Sounds like SJG has already converted to the dark side. I've had Darth Vader in my dreams threatening to kill me if I didn't reveal the location of the secret rebel base. Darth Vader reminds me of SJG. Next we will hear about Darth Vader wanting to kill people of a certain religious faith that he considers against his dark side or rising empire Once you cross over to the dark side, doing minor things like fucking sleeping women seems like nothing.

They've tried to make something like that for the UC campuses, a requirement of positive show of consent. But I don't think its constitutional. Maybe as a school dorm rule, but not the penal code.

The law has never been that tough, requiring that or it is rape.

If you want to know more about how gray and dice it gets: amazon.com Some very provocative scenarios laid out there.

If a girl and I have just fucked and then we fall asleep, I like will have said something, if she didn't herself, to let her know that more is coming. So unless she protests then are at the time it happens, that is consent.

And, " I'm not sure how you take it off during sex on purpose without the girl noticing. "

The way you do it without her noticing is that she does not want to notice. She just wants you to do it.

Remember, when it comes to sex, women are completely crazy. Men on the other hand are always completely rational.

And, "Once you cross over to the dark side, doing minor things like fucking sleeping women seems like nothing."

Yes indeed!

ROTFLMFAO, and laughing so hard my face is turning red.

:)

SJG

^^^ completely bonkers now

i know a number of you guys think sjguy is bonkers. he sometimes tends to the 'outside the envelope' sometimes. butt this subject is valid. i know. i've been at this particular crossroad myself.

@justme62 forget about the blathering idiot. I'm curious about your situation and will give you the benefit of the doubt on it and won't assume any similarities.

Can you explain your crossroads in a little more detail? You said earlier it happened twice. You said something about her passing out and/or falling asleep. Can you clarify the following:

1. Did she explicitly agree that it was OK for you to stick your dick in her while she was passed out or asleep? Or did she agree to sex first, and then after agreeing, she passed out or fell asleep?

2. Were you paying her for the sex? Was it a part of some business arrangement or was she having sex with you for free because she wanted it for her personal pleasure?

3. Do you personally and honestly find some extra sexual arousal from the thought of sticking your dick in a sleeping or passed out woman as compared to if she were awake?

asleep/passed out happened while we were having our fun. and during the paid half hour in both cases. paid sex in both cases. and in both cases i was fuckin them. i guess both of them felt comfortable. one was in tj and the other LA. and it seemed odd to me. butt... honestly... what do i know...

@justme62 thanks for the context.

First off, the fact that you were having your fun before she went out is a little different than the blathering idiot's situation. It sounds to me you would rather that she were awake both times and your intent was to have awake and fully conscious sex by both parties (but LOL you never really answered 3) above). This to me is "normal" behavior.

Also to be clear, if you still kept fucking her while she was out, then IMHO I gotta say that that is a little creepy. I try not to judge when it is sex between two consensual adults, but really I don't think it out of bounds to see a little creepiness from wanting to stick your dick in a woman that doesn't know it at the start. It's hard for me to take someone's sincerity that they ONLY like it when the woman wants it. I know this is an assumption on my part, but to me a guy that wants to put his dick unbeknownst into a woman doesn't really care (deep down) whether or not she consented to it. It probably helps his conscience to believe in the consent, but again this is secondary which is why, again IMHO, there is a creep factor going on. (And LOL why I asked question 3) above).

Also that it was paid sex is a huge factor! We really don't know how she personally feels about it and to me being paid more likely means she would be OK with you having sex any way you wanted given that it was within the paid time window.

Also the money factor affects you too! I can see how you would expect her to provide you FS and stay fully awake within your paid time frame. It's not fair to you that she fell asleep or passed out on the job.

So anyway, although I understand your perspective and thank you for sharing, but if your deep down answer to 3) above is 'yes', well then you might still be creepy.

If a woman passed out while I was having sex with her, then the sex would stop.

If a girl passed out during sex, I would stop. But why would that happen? Too drunk? In that case I would not even start.

As far as entering a girl when she is snuggled up asleep spooning with me, I would never do it unless I was sure she wanted it. And the coverage level is the same as it was when we were fucking before going to sleep. The idea is not to fuck her while she is asleep. The idea is to achieve entry without waking her. Then just wait a moment and she will awaken. Then either she will say, "Wait wait wait, let me go to the bathroom first". Or she'll just start counter grinding right away. Either way, they love it and it shows the next morning.

The criminal law has never been so strict as to require positive signs of consent. But I am also taking the pre-sleep fucking and the spooning as tentative signs of consent.

If I have to roll the girl on to her back, and she goes along with that, getting woken up, seeing what is in store, I take that as a positive sign of consent. Never had one refuse, because I only do it when sure she wants it.

I would never engage in stealthing, surreptitiously removing a condom which she believes is there.

To fuck her bareback, I let her see what is coming. Having a discussion about it is only if she objects. Most of the time they do not. More often than not just going from DATY, to BBBJ, to BBFS.

Now at the Univ. Calif, they have tried to make a campus dorm rule that there has to be positive signs of consent. I say that the first time they try to penalize a student for violating that, when the DA has not charged them with rape, that U Calif is going to get its ass sued off.

One of the problems with all of this is that colleges don't want to admit that lots of sex goes on in their dorms anyway.

And also you have inexperienced young people, and so wired get crossed.

Here talks about a girl who gets frog marched into the woods, and then fucked for her first time. Pretty much falls in love with the guy. Another is saying "No no no", as her inexperienced partner is holding her down and trying to get his cock into her. As she is objecting she keeps moving her hips to try and help her partner achieve entry. Finally she is royally pissed and spreads bad propaganda about him, BECAUSE HE FAILED TO DO WHAT SHE WANTED HIM TO DO.

amazon.com

Also, women engage in oopsing all the time. There is actually an idiot on this board who believes that his wife got pregnant despite being on the pill.

But oopsing is not unlawful, a subject for a lawsuit, or something which nullifies paternal responsibility.

SJG

Tobias Churton youtube.com

"The idea is to achieve entry without waking her. Then just wait a moment and she will awaken."

^ The idea is to justify creepy behavior by any means possible.

@SJG is a complete mental fuck up.

Don’t burglars attempt to achieve entry without waking the person? It seems that something is wrong with this idea of consent.

It’s technically not consent - as it’s more of entry by surprise?

No. It's a matter of consent. If she's asleep, then she's incapable of consent.

Consent can be already given, at least provisionally.

I would not engage in "Stealthing". But if it happens, and merely by deception, I still don't think you can really prosecute it as rape.

SJG

That it's more difficult to prove does not make it less criminal if the removal of the condom is a function of deception.

I would not do any stealthing, it is deceptive and dishonest.

But is it really rape? Maybe there could be some other law passed, but not rape.

Is having sex with a prostitute and then refusing to pay as agreed rape?

Is lying about your marital status and then having consensual sex, rape?

SJG

SJG = RAPIST

"But is it really rape?"

As far as I'm concerned, yes. If a woman consents to sex with condom use, and then the man removes the condom, then that negates consent. That's rape by deception.

Certainly if she says that it has to be with a condom, and he then removes it, that is a serious matter. Not sure if it really rates as rape though, or if it ever could be enforced that way, no matter what the law says.

And you understand that most sex never involves explicit verbal consent, the woman just goes along with it all and sees what is coming and lets it happen and enjoys it.

If the woman allowed sex to happen that way, with a condom, and then the man later removes the condom, and she sees this happening, but does not object, I don't see how that could be in any manner deemed non-consensual.

If the woman allows condomed sex to occur, and then the man removed the condom and the woman is not aware of it, then that is a deception. I would never do that. But I still don't think you can make that rape.

Supposed the man used a punctured condom, so it looked good as the woman say it, but he knew it was not good?

Women do oopsing ALL THE TIME, it has to account for like at least 20% of all conceptions.

Remember this idea is coming from Ro Khanna, and he is in California, and it is prompted by some high profile cases in the UC dormitories, and UC has tried to impose this positive show of consent rule.

I think this is the problem, that people are looking at this with a positive show of consent logic. The law about rape has NEVER been that tough.

And I don't believe that UC will be able to up hold its rule.

SJG

Uh-Oh!

Man Who Raped Sleeping Woman in Bushwick Apt. Turns Himself In, NYPD Says dnainfo.com

Also, these two cops are in deep shit. Claiming that the sex was consensual, under that situation, is not likely to work. democracynow.org

I cannot stand this woman: washingtontimes.com

Who Profits from the Opioid Crisis? Meet the Secretive Sackler Family Making Billions from OxyContin democracynow.org

esquire.com

SJG

forbes.com

SJG

Celebrity Super Cars loanpride.com

Floyd Mayweather – Koenigsegg CCXR Trevita, Estimated $4.8 Million

en.wikipedia.org

koenigsegg.com

Chris Brown – Lamborghini Aventador, Estimated $450K

Nicki Minaj – Lamborghini Aventador, Estimated $400K

roadandtrack.com

A local person I've seen driving around in this. I recognize it from the tail lights roadandtrack.com

McLaren 570S Coupe cars.mclaren.com

en.wikipedia.org