Question about 'stealthing'

[bbckresearch]

Hey guys,

As you may already be aware, I'm doing a research on the forums of the website with the kind permission from RT.

I'm currently finishing up data analysis and will soon be writing up. I'm hoping that you could shed some light on one of the issues I'm struggling with.

One of the things that comes up often in the discussions is the idea of stealthing, but I'm quite confused as to what constitutes this. For instance, I found that one of the ways in which stealthing is enacted is to lie about one's status. In the case of men who are negative and lie about their status being positive in order to get pozzed, can this be considered stealthing? I'm aware that this is only one of the ways 'stealthing' can be defined and I'm in no way trying to box it in a single definition. Rather, I was just hoping to get a clearer idea.

Currently, my understanding of stealthing can be one or more of the following: (1) failure to disclose one's status or, (2) lying about one's serostatus; (3) agreeing to use condoms, but disregard this agreement; (4) agreeing to pull out, but disregard this agreement. These can be fantasies or put into practise to fulfil a fantasy.

I'm very much interested in the notion of stealthing because one of the things I'm planning to write about are the norms being created around barebacking from the forums. Specifically, I'm focusing on notions of consent, responsibility, choice and ethics with regards to barebacking and these topics always come up when discussing stealthing.

Thanks very much!!

[Guest JizzDumpWI]

Keep in mind the stories you read here are just that... stories... fantasy...

[wood]

Keep in mind the stories you read here are just that... stories... fantasy...

Undoubtedly many are. However, lately I have been questioning how much of the "fantasy" may actually be real.

I am not saying that most guys lie, but I do think that in the heat of the moment it is entirely possible that some guys may not tell the truth. Also I cant help but think that there may be a very small subset of guys who get off on actually infecting other men.

[bbckresearch]

Keep in mind the stories you read here are just that... stories... fantasy...

Cool, thanks for that.

When I was first in contact with RT, he reminded me about this (and also from the responses from other guys) and every time I read the forums/data, this is always considered

[bbckresearch]

Undoubtedly many are. However, lately I have been questioning how much of the "fantasy" may actually be real.

I am not saying that most guys lie, but I do think that in the heat of the moment it is entirely possible that some guys may not tell the truth. Also I cant help but think that there may be a very small subset of guys who get off on actually infecting other men.

I'm also interested in this because it seems that there is a grey area between fantasy/reality in the forums. No doubt that many forms (or, it may be absurd to claim, but most) of sexual activities are fueled by some form of fantasy. I will be writing about the many forms of barebacking (that, while it is understood as condomless sex, it has many forms) and one of these is fantasy. Fantasy, indeed, is very powerful in these forums. But some guys I found also talk about turning fantasy into reality, a step-by-step process, or a process of evolution or progression. That is, some talk about starting with a fantasy, then perhaps having that first unintentional bareback experience (due to heat of the moment, drugs, absence of condoms, etc. etc.), then having had that first hot bareback experience, wanting to have more, etc. etc. etc. Or some may just completely stop for fear of seroconversion.

[NYCBearpig]

(1) failure to disclose one's status or, (2) lying about one's serostatus; (3) agreeing to use condoms, but disregard this agreement; (4) agreeing to pull out, but disregard this agreement.

I wouldn't consider your #1 stealthing. If the partner wants to know the status of the other and he lies then we're on to your #2. I wouldn't consider #2 stealthing because the bottom is making a conscious choice to believe what their partner is saying. And, for what it's worth, it's very possible that the HIV test done last week showed neg, but if tested today even without additional sexual contact he could be poz.

I don't understand #3. If you mean that they start out using condoms but end up not, it would only be stealthing if the bottom wasn't aware that the top ditched the condom. I believe this is real, but perhaps not of the frequency we hear.

I also believe #4 is real but I also believe that in most cases the bottom knows what's going on and in the heat of the moment doesn't object. If the bottom really wanted the top off him that can easily be done using pain if necessary, unless the bottom is restrained, and that's an entirely different topic.

There's also the "compromised" condom, where the bottom believes the condom is functioning but the top damaged it intentionally. Again, I think this can be real but probably less frequent than ditching the condom midway through the fuck.

Anyway...my 2c

[bearbandit]

Currently, my understanding of stealthing can be one or more of the following: (1) failure to disclose one's status or, (2) lying about one's serostatus; (3) agreeing to use condoms, but disregard this agreement; (4) agreeing to pull out, but disregard this agreement. These can be fantasies or put into practise to fulfil a fantasy.

On a personal level I find your usage of the word "failure" in (1) to be judgmental and offensive. It's putting the poz guys into a corner where we MUST disclose: why can't HIV-unknown guys say "I'm not sure where I am - can we use condoms?"

The rest I have no problem with, I just resent the idea that all of us poz guys are out infect all our partners, even though I will admit that a minority of us are. In the UK it used to be referred to as "revenge sex".

[bbckresearch]

Currently, my understanding of stealthing can be one or more of the following: (1) failure to disclose one's status or, (2) lying about one's serostatus; (3) agreeing to use condoms, but disregard this agreement; (4) agreeing to pull out, but disregard this agreement. These can be fantasies or put into practise to fulfil a fantasy.

On a personal level I find your usage of the word "failure" in (1) to be judgmental and offensive. It's putting the poz guys into a corner where we MUST disclose: why can't HIV-unknown guys say "I'm not sure where I am - can we use condoms?"

The rest I have no problem with, I just resent the idea that all of us poz guys are out infect all our partners, even though I will admit that a minority of us are. In the UK it used to be referred to as "revenge sex".

Thanks so much for the response. I didn't mean to be offensive, and will rectify this. The reason why I'm trying to ask the question is not to put poz guys that way (i.e. 'out to infect people'). But rather, I'd like to discuss how some HIV-negative men are also 'out to get infected', if you will. That is, we cannot really point fingers on who's to blame for seroconversions because, if you will, everyone gets something out of it.

[bearbandit]

Damn! I meant for that to be private... I'm sorry for any embarrassment that my mistake might have given. I understand your motivations in looking at chasing/gifting: look for the thread "Pozdaddy" in chasing fiction, which represents my trying to understand the phenomenon. I'm no closer to understanding, but have felt the vicarious thrill of chasing/gifting via my characters. The story is unfinished and is only a first draft - it ran away with me

[fuckboy20]

Ya missed one. Doctoring a condom. Some guys doctor condoms by either sabotaging them so when fucking it will break or poking a hole in them. And yeah, there is lots of fantasy talk on here but I actually know someone in Atlanta who really does stealth bottoms. He encourages others to do it to by poking holes in condoms or making new condoms less then safe when it comes down to fucking. I know there are others too.

The other is just plain fucking a guy bareback without asking. That should be obvious although that might shift into another grey area. Or not so grey.

I don't really consider to be #4 stealthing. I took someone who was poz when I was younger just because I was a "little" curious. When he was inside me I panicked and asked him to pull out. He did. If he didn't and fucked me would that have been stealthing? He told me his status. It would have been my fault for taking cock raw for one and for being stupid to let him fuck me raw. I was very lucky he pulled out. I think the whole notion of "Oh, just fuck me raw but don't cum in me". Needs to be thrown out. It's archaic and just plain stupid. If a guy's in you most of them will fuck and breed.

I was warned when I was younger to not take a guy when on all fours because they might not always use a condom or to check behind with my hands. Well I was with a guy when I was 21 or 22 i think (fuck my memory) and we used condoms. But he was having trouble. But then suddenly he was in me. And he told me he was barefucking me and asked if he should stop. I said no, and he said he already bred me anyways. Technically that would have been stealthing. And here I am today...

Just know that just because you read lots of stuff on here about poz, chem, stealthing, and infecting doesn't mean all guys are into it. Just like any fantasy. Most of it is fantasy. But also don't think it doesn't actually happen in the world. It does. If you don't mind me asking I'd like to read the research once you're done too. It sounds interesting.

[Poz1956]

One of the items you must add into the discussion is viral load. Is there a realistic possibility of transmission? The Poz guy with an undetectable viral load has very little chance of passing on the virus, in all those situations. It's not zero risk, but minuscule compared to a "Clean" guy, who isn't quite a clean a he thought.

Now a guy who isn't on treatment, and who knows he has a high viral load, is a different kettle of fish. There IS a realistic possibility of him transmitting HIV.

Just as we see "condom fatigue" leading to bareback, I think we are also seeing "disclosure fatigue, for Poz men. Since revealing status is usually followed by anger, judgment,and nasty assertions as to the Pozzie's moral character. (and no sex of course). Both parties share equal responsibility to discuss HIV status.

What about a pure anonymous encounter? Don'tAsk -- Don't Tell is the norm? is that stealthing?

Most people use Stealthing to imply a deliberate intention to infect someone with HIV.

It is much more difficult for viral transmission from the bottom to the top (even with a high viral load it's 1 in 909). Since the transmission risk is low, is that Stealthing?

Is failing to withdraw a stealth.? If the top was planning seed straight from the beginning, that might be. Promised to, and meant it, but got carried away in the moment - well an awful lot of babies came into the world like that.

Sabotaged condom is a definite stealth

There is also a broader possible meaning too. A Neg may use Stealth with all the nasty ways, but the goal is to deposit his DNA not HIV

[wood]

One of the items you must add into the discussion is viral load. Is there a realistic possibility of transmission? The Poz guy with an undetectable viral load has very little chance of passing on the virus, in all those situations. It's not zero risk, but minuscule compared to a "Clean" guy, who isn't quite a clean a he thought.

Now a guy who isn't on treatment, and who knows he has a high viral load, is a different kettle of fish. There IS a realistic possibility of him transmitting HIV.

I think this is the biggest issue, although in reality even if both parties are neg stealthing can still occur.

I think the severity of stealthing has levels, some of which IMO are criminal, some of which are just kind of rude.

The highest risk of transmission and the most lies come first, and would eventually go down to stuff like undetectable bottom not disclosing status, in a status not discussed situation, or even less.

IMO for undetectable guys on meds because the transmission risk has been shown to be so low now, it really does fall into a much different and lower category than the highest risk stealthing acts. I would actually argue that guys who consistently fuck raw, and never get tested should be put in a higher "category" than undetectable guys.

Its pretty simple, the most risk to the other person, and the more reprehensible the act the worse the case of stealthing is. So the guy who is poz, knows it, has never been treated, has a high VL, and other STI's, but lies to purposely try to infect a neg guy who is trying to be safe, Thats awful, and criminal IMO. But the neg guy on PrEP who has consensual raw sex with another guy but doesnt pull out when he asks, not so bad IMO.

Both are stealthing but in vastly different ways.

[wood]

What about a pure anonymous encounter? Don'tAsk -- Don't Tell is the norm? is that stealthing?

Most people use Stealthing to imply a deliberate intention to infect someone with HIV.

I would define stealthing as the deliberate act of trying to go against the other partners wishes in order to attempt transfer of bodily fluids.

I would argue that a bottom who purposely sabotages condoms, and then purposely fuck in a manner where it is difficult for the top to move is stealthing. its not traditional, but I could see it happening.

I don't really agree with don't ask don't tell, but I also don't see it as stealthing. IMO for stealthing to occur you have to directly go against the other parties wishes. if the other party says nothing, I wouldn't classify that as stealthing. As its been discussed in other threads I do this a person who is HIV, especially those not on meds should disclose, but thats another matter not for this thread.

[bearbandit]

Ya missed one. Doctoring a condom. Some guys doctor condoms by either sabotaging them so when fucking it will break or poking a hole in them.

Not a new practise: it's how I was conceived: mom wanted a baby and made damn sure she got one...

[fuckboy20]

Not a new practise: it's how I was conceived: mom wanted a baby and made damn sure she got one...

Holy shit. Wow. I never thought of a woman intentionally sabotaging a condom so she can have a baby. Guess it's possible. I still remember an episode of a comedy I like where a couple sabotages condoms and fills the spermicide with marshmallow puff. That was hilarious, but fucked up too. Maybe the stealthing actually comes from the straights and breeders. I meant in the OP's bullet points that's an important one not to forget. There are others too which some have pointed out but he started it in bullet points so I was trying to further that.

Negs and bottoms can stealth too. I didn't think it was possible at first but I read about it. I even did think of stealthing a top once. I was neg (tested neg) but the top was hot and had a big dick. It was unplanned but I had him use boy butter on me. Once inside though I quickly changed my mind and told him to pull out. I said I can't do it with a condom and he's hot and everything but condoms aren't for me. Wrong of me to even consider doing and attempting. But at that time I think I cared more about loads then cock in my ass. I technically did beg a top to fuck me raw at a bath house once. Again, cumslut back then. He fucked me raw. I was tested neg back then but he didn't really seem to want to do it. Would that be stealthing? Didn't force him or make it against his will, but shattered his resolve. Before this thread I never knew there was so much to stealthing.