Is stealthing morally okay?

[killer52lt]

If they take my cock in then unprotected. Then they are responsible for when they catch from me. They almost never even ask my status let alone to use a condom these days. 

[bareback-flipflop]

I think there’s a huge difference between not uncovering the status or lying about it. Although I think we are responsible for each other, we are responsible for ourselves as well. So the bottom must consider the possibility of an infection if let a top fuck unsafe breed him. Few things are sillier than asking for the top’s status after penetration. 
However lying about it or pretending to wear condoms or destroying condoms are seriously immoral. 
Moreover, in many countries it’s a crime to infect someone against his willingness. 

[norefusal]

let's not get twisted. 

taking precautions to keep oneself healthy is smart.

intentionally risking another persons health secretly/non-consentually  is morally wrong. end of. 

saying anyone who gets bred is taking the risk of being pozzed on himself is = to saying anyone in a sexy outfit deserves to be raped. 

sorry. stealthing is kinky exactly because the stealther knows it's morally wrong and is getting off on doing something bad. and this is an opinion hill im willing to die on. 

[PozToxVersPig]

1 hour ago, norefusal said:

let's not get twisted. 

taking precautions to keep oneself healthy is smart.

intentionally risking another persons health secretly/non-consentually  is morally wrong. end of. 

saying anyone who gets bred is taking the risk of being pozzed on himself is = to saying anyone in a sexy outfit deserves to be raped. 

sorry. stealthing is kinky exactly because the stealther knows it's morally wrong and is getting off on doing something bad. and this is an opinion hill im willing to die on. 

To be clear @norefusal - I don’t stealth and refuse any type scenario.  And perhaps among others, I’m giving my most current and relevant information.  But it is not my job to elucidate an entire medical chart or its implications to another person every time I fuck.

i do my best to convey my status and frequently say things like “you know I’m poz, right?” - 

Also, I don’t think we can play both sides of the fence here… Either HIV is a chronic disease that we have learned to treat via medication OR we are giving people a death sentence by possibly giving them HIV where we know the transmission rates are low.

I don’t think it can be both.

Lastly, I am very upset by what you said equating me having HIV and having unprotected sex with somebody when I’ve been forthright is equivalent to somebody being raped. You’ve seen my words for sure on the matter of rape writ large.

equating somebody having unprotected sex with somebody choosing an outfit is just damn right foolish and you should really reconsider those words.

[Pozguyinchi]

I only tell when someone asks. I used to make a point of it but most guys are ok with it now. This is 2026 so if you are not educated on what and how you can get it, there is a problem with you. Most guys know me as a Poz bottom anyway. When you are getting a train pulled on you I don’t think anyone cares about status. lol. 

[allrise]

These days all the tops who bareback me just fuck without asking about my status or if I prefer condoms, I don’t think I am lying or stealthing. If asked I will tell them.

I don’t ask about their status or anything else because I choose not to ask. I don’t consider them trying to stealth me either.

[PozBearWI]

I don't think me always saying "you know I'm poz right?" makes any good sense.  Especially being poz and on meds.  TasP was proof enough that we do not pose the risk in the raw sex time, at least regarding HIV.  Before I started meds; yes that made some sense to tell them they're taking a risk.  But I question anymore whether we really have an obligation to say that.  If we care enough about it we should bring it up.  If we don't care; it isn't like infection is likely.  When we kiss, do we make sure we say "you know it is flu season right?".  

I understand why back in the 80's that made sense to put an onus on the poz guys to inform.  There wasn't a good "poz and on meds" going on back then.  But HIV manifests in society now in massively different ways than then.  And certainly the onus should no longer be on the poz guy.  

[BlindRawFucker1]

If asked, and if poz detectable, you should be honest.

 

If not asked, and if at a bathhouse and darkroom, there should be no obligation to volunteer.

 

If I were poz, and in a 1-on-1 situation, I’d most likely tell my partner.

[PozToxVersPig]

35 minutes ago, PozBearWI said:

I don't think me always saying "you know I'm poz right?" makes any good sense.  Especially being poz and on meds.  TasP was proof enough that we do not pose the risk in the raw sex time, at least regarding HIV.  Before I started meds; yes that made some sense to tell them they're taking a risk.  But I question anymore whether we really have an obligation to say that.  If we care enough about it we should bring it up.  If we don't care; it isn't like infection is likely.  When we kiss, do we make sure we say "you know it is flu season right?".  

I understand why back in the 80's that made sense to put an onus on the poz guys to inform.  There wasn't a good "poz and on meds" going on back then.  But HIV manifests in society now in massively different ways than then.  And certainly the onus should no longer be on the poz guy.  

@PozBearWI the fact of the matter is that nearly 2/3rds of the states in the US have HIV criminalization laws.  You've seen and read PLENTY of MY posts from me about the ridiculous low rate of transmission, but the fact of the matter is - if I don't disclose it, I'm still liable under current law in a lot of places.  If not criminally, civil charges can also be made.

These laws are UNFAIR, and should be overturned, but they are the law.  

What these laws criminalize:

• HIV-specific charges: Elevating charges for sex crimes or other offenses if the person knows they have HIV. 
• Non-disclosure: Failing to tell a sexual or needle-sharing partner about HIV status, even if transmission risk is zero due to treatment.
• Exposure: Actions with no realistic risk of transmission, like spitting or biting, especially in correctional settings

So the reality is - YES, under the law, we ARE required to disclose this in most states.  And I sure as shit don't want to have to hire criminal and civil defense attorneys and get involved in a protracted court case...we can fight this, disagree with this - but I for one don't want to spend a decade of my life and a huge amount of money being the poster boy for HIV Criminalization reform.

Also, your comparison between the flu and HIV is inaccurate.  HIV is a retrovirus which integrates with mRNA and attacks the very core of our immune system.  The flu does not - it isn't near the level of sophistication of HIV and the way it fully integrates via mRNA into its host...it is helpful to make appropriate comparisons here because they are fundamentally different.

[PozToxVersPig]

I just re-read my earlier post, and I want to clarify because they seem as though they are at odds with each other:

1. I think I make best available efforts to inform any sexual partner of my status - via public profile updates, as well as clarifying their understanding of my status.
2. To the extent I hook up with someone randomly, anonymously, whatever, I'm not compelled to stop things in their tracks to ensure that someone engaging in anonymous sex is aware of any potential risk they might be facing, nor do I expect someone to tell me if they don't know their status (HIV or STI).

When and if asked in the latter situation, I will always obligate myself to honest.

[hntnhole]

21 hours ago, PozToxVersPig said:

I feel comfortable with my anchor being honestly

and that is completely honorable, P.T.V.P.  

It's not asking too much to be completely honest with our (potential) fuckmates; whether in-the-flesh or here on BZ (to a lesser extent, obviously).  There's everything right about being honest, and nothing wrong with it; particularly in sexual contexts.   If some potential trick doesn't care for some facet of me, that's fine.  There are plenty of other holes in the fuckjoint, so each guy can find what he most needs. 

I too am completely comfortable with being honest about sexual proclivities at the fuckjoints.  

[hntnhole]

"Is stealthing morally okay?"

^ the title of this thread (it's almost a whole blanket of threads by now) could easily be expanded to a wider question: 

 

"Is dishonesty morally okay?"  

While there may be situations where lying can save an innocent life - in wartime, for instance - the basic question would be as directly above.  I doubt any person likes to be lied to, and thus that person (i,e. every person) that doesn't care for being lied to should, obviously, refrain from lying to others.  There are ways to parry unwelcome, obsequious probing questions, some more blunt than others.  In either case, dishonesty is not the proper way to parry the offense.  

A reply with something like "talk some other time" (the more polite version) or "it's really none of your business" (a more blunt response) is always better than returning a lie with another lie.  At least the respondent doesn't stoop to the liar's level.  

[hntnhole]

23 hours ago, bikerarmpits said:

What if it's Neg Bottom -- Poz Top? What if the bottom stealths the top somehow (yes, there are ways) to get bred by the top, and doesn't let the neg bottom know his status?

As mentioned:  I don't think it's ever a decent thing to lie.  

Whether it's a this or that, that or this, or a mix of both ... lying is simply not ok.  Whatever the contrivance; it's just not ok to lie about stuff. 

Guys and parry, guys can change the subject, guys can do any number of things to avoid telling the truth.  Any astute hearer of the previous will be able to understand quickly that the guy is simply not going to be honest, and either move on or accept the situation. 

Some may say that the guy in question should not be expected to answer certain questions, and that's a different discussion.  The question in this topic though, is clear and unmistakable.  And, my answer is no.  If/when asked, any decent guy should tell the truth.  

[HornDog]

For decades my profiles have always disclosed that I’m poz undetectable and I haven’t have a hard time finding a willing hole. Oddly, in the last 6 months I’ve noticed that more guys whose profiles say they are on PrEP and fuck bb, have been wary of me. On two occasions I was asked to explain what poz undetectable meant. After I explaining it, they passed. Anyone else running into that lately?

[PozToxVersPig]

23 minutes ago, HornDog said:

For decades my profiles have always disclosed that I’m poz undetectable and I haven’t have a hard time finding a willing hole. Oddly, in the last 6 months I’ve noticed that more guys whose profiles say they are on PrEP and fuck bb, have been wary of me. On two occasions I was asked to explain what poz undetectable meant. After I explaining it, they passed. Anyone else running into that lately?

I think what your experience is the massive knowledge gap that exists for what U=U means, what the implications are, etc.  It's unfortunately because it puts some of us in educator roles in situations we'd rather not have to be educators in.  There was a little cheat sheet I saw recently for "how to explain to someone who is neg...." - I'll try to find it and send your way