Is stealthing morally okay?

[JamesTheBBJedi]

20 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

“All you guys equivocating about how stealthing is sometimes wrong but sometimes okay - it’s always done without the consent of the person being stealthed, or it isn’t - by definition - stealthing. And since it’s done without consent, it’s sexual assault.”

..,ridiculous victim-blaming shit, because nobody forces a stealther to stealth - that choice is 100% his own.

Stealth means theft - the theft of another person’s right to refuse, and the possible theft of his health. It’s wrong 100% of the time, in every circumstance.

 I would even go so far as to say that in my  view a superior Top would never think of stealthing - he would consider it beneath him, something only done by lesser men.

Thank you for framing it that way!  I could not agree more...I hope I did not infer that the victim (the most accurate descriptor in this case) is somehow at fault, etc. Completely 100% not my intended message. I absolutely place ZERO blame on the victim, and my words were poorly chosen and my message conveyed incorrectly. My view of my own individual health and Neg HIV status and the responsibility to maintain this falls onto me, and I have taken the steps to do all I can to ensure I can continue the status quo so to speak - and if I choose to place myself in a situation where that can be a problem then that is the only part of it that rests upon my shoulders and mine alone. Simply put, I feel comfortable with those I am intimate with and Truvada helps me bolster my defense and confidence in my continued Neg status and would never intentionally put that at risk by entering into a situation where a person with ill intent would have the opportunity to stealth me. 
Bit you are completely correct - that it is theft, of their choice and their health, and should be considered sexual assault in ALL 50 states!

[Pozlover1]

I would not even poz a willing chaser, much less stealth anyone. I would not steal a car if the keys were in it. But in the real world, at this point in time, take your car keys and consider darkrooms, slings and such to be full of HIV+ cum. 
I do not think  guys above the age of consent, that are not legally insane or retarded, that get in a sling there are “innocent victims”. 
Similarly I do not consider people who take hard drugs “innocent victims of the opioid crisis” or people who rob and steal from individuals “innocent victims of society”.           To start shifting blame to others is to create a sick society. 
  I realize that a person  who robs banks, steals HIV drugs or frees animals from a lab might be making a political statement that has some merit, but they have to take the consequences if they get caught. 

[hornycumslut91]

21 hours ago, hungry_hole said:

You cannot paint all stealthing situations with the same brush and some stealthers don't qualify as sociopaths.

In my opinion, which I've expressed here before, anonymous stealthing at a bathhouse or in a darkroom is totally OK. These places are high-risk places and a bottom has to be very naive to believe the HIV status from some random horny guy who wants to breed him in one of these places. It's just common sense. First, why would anybody believe that a bottom who offers his hole to anonymous cocks at a bathhouse is HIV negative. Second, part of the fun of these places being able to live fantasies and for some fucking and breeding a negative hole is a huge turn-on.  Third, in the topic of fantasies, some HIV+ bottoms play the game of being HIV-neg, just another fetish. I have a sign that I use that says "HIV- HOLE" and sometimes hang it on the sling at the bathhouse. A few weeks ago a guy came into my room, he fucked me and bred my hole. He said "You'll have to change your sign" and left.

In any other circumstances I would agree that stealthing is not OK, even when meeting through Grindr or other Apps. Don't paint all stealthings with the same brush.

 

First of all, the very fact a guy says he's using a condom and then takes it off to stealth a guy is not cool. Secondly, having sex in a bathhouse or orgy or you being gangbanged carries an increased risk of you catching something, something any of us who considers ourselves cum dumps would realise, but not guys who are having sex with men for the first time and exploring their sexuality. I was one of those guys who was having fun when I got stealthed in an orgy where guys were to use condoms. I know, big fucking mistake to think every guy would agree to do that. But the guy that fucked me without one did so without my permission, and therefore he's a sociopath. And you also validated my point about stealthing. It's not the bugchasers I worry about. It's those young men who were misled into having sex with someone who ends up changing their life dramatically. And for the record, I don't think stealthing in a bathhouse or darkroom is ok. But it's far more likely to happen.

[hornycumslut91]

16 hours ago, ErosWired said:

The word stealth derives from Old English steal + th meaning “theft”. More broadly, it denotes slyness or deception. In any context, it expresses the idea of taking some action without the consent of the one acted upon.

All you guys equivocating about how stealthing is sometimes wrong but sometimes okay - it’s always done without the consent of the person being stealthed, or it isn’t - by definition - stealthing. And since it’s done without consent, it’s sexual assault. You can’t paint it any other color. You don’t get to say a victim was ‘asking for it’ by putting himself in a situation where he might get pozzed, or entering a darkroom, or for taking anon loads, or for being naïve, or any of that other ridiculous victim-blaming shit, because nobody forces a stealther to stealth - that choice is 100% his own.

Stealth means theft - the theft of another person’s right to refuse, and the possible theft of his health. It’s wrong 100% of the time, in every circumstance.

 I would even go so far as to say that in my  view a superior Top would never think of stealthing - he would consider it beneath him, something only done by lesser men. It smacks of the behavior of intimidated males in a pack who have been denied reproductive rights by an Alpha male, surreptitiously slipping in to inseminate a bitch on the sly; even if successful, it still imparts no honor to the one who does it.

Thank you!!! That is exactly how I feel about it, especially since I felt violated when I found out I was stealthed and ended up being pozzed as a result. 

[Brain&Brawn]

On 10/22/2019 at 11:51 PM, JamesTheBBJedi said:

...it is theft, of their choice and their health, and should be considered sexual assault in ALL 50 states!

Knowingly infecting someone is already a crime in all 50 states. 

[wildcumdumpinla]

On 4/28/2017 at 12:47 AM, Guest Dickmagnet said:

Well someone has to disagree & it looks like i'm the one for this. I have been stealth fucked several times as well as instigating being stealth fucked by providing a spiked condom to the top that fucks me. Firstly it's totally hot & getting a surprise load in your cunt is just super hot. I don't really understand the dilemma after all you are on breeding zone. So if you don't want bareback sex why are you here ? Maybe i'm wrong but i think all guys secretly want the load in there ass. I don't consider it as rape. Rape in my book is something totally different this is someone speaking from experience from being actually raped themselves.

the problem is that your underdeveloped brain can not sepearte bareback sex and HIV transmission. Yes we all love bareback sex and if HIV was not a consequence of stealthing then i would agree with you. i can love having a cummy hole and at the same not wish to be infected with HIV.. the fact that you dont consider it rape makes me seriously concerned with anyone who comes in contact with you. your are clearly immoral and have zero empathy or humannity.. 

[JamesTheBBJedi]

14 hours ago, Brain&Brawn said:

Knowingly infecting someone is already a crime in all 50 states. 

Oh - that is good to know.  I guess my misunderstanding was the “extent” of severity of the crime (felony, prison, etc) as California recently changed it in 2017, and went into effect in 2018.

Under current California law, it is felony offense punishable by 3 to 8 years in prison. The new law, which was signed by Brown on Oct. 6 and takes effect January 1, changes this to a misdemeanor, carrying a 6-month prison term — the same punishment as knowingly exposing someone to other communicable diseases.

[Brain&Brawn]

27 minutes ago, JamesTheBBJedi said:

Oh - that is good to know.  I guess my misunderstanding was the “extent” of severity of the crime (felony, prison, etc) as California recently changed it in 2017, and went into effect in 2018.

Under current California law, it is felony offense punishable by 3 to 8 years in prison. The new law, which was signed by Brown on Oct. 6 and takes effect January 1, changes this to a misdemeanor, carrying a 6-month prison term — the same punishment as knowingly exposing someone to other communicable diseases.

The penalty does vary considerably. 

[tallslenderguy]

On 10/22/2019 at 8:16 PM, ErosWired said:

The word stealth derives from Old English steal + th meaning “theft”. More broadly, it denotes slyness or deception. In any context, it expresses the idea of taking some action without the consent of the one acted upon.

All you guys equivocating about how stealthing is sometimes wrong but sometimes okay - it’s always done without the consent of the person being stealthed, or it isn’t - by definition - stealthing. And since it’s done without consent, it’s sexual assault. You can’t paint it any other color. You don’t get to say a victim was ‘asking for it’ by putting himself in a situation where he might get pozzed, or entering a darkroom, or for taking anon loads, or for being naïve, or any of that other ridiculous victim-blaming shit, because nobody forces a stealther to stealth - that choice is 100% his own.

Stealth means theft - the theft of another person’s right to refuse, and the possible theft of his health. It’s wrong 100% of the time, in every circumstance.

 I would even go so far as to say that in my  view a superior Top would never think of stealthing - he would consider it beneath him, something only done by lesser men. It smacks of the behavior of intimidated males in a pack who have been denied reproductive rights by an Alpha male, surreptitiously slipping in to inseminate a bitch on the sly; even if successful, it still imparts no honor to the one who does it.

When we first started discussing this topic, i saw "stealthing" as a Top unloading in a bottom without their knowledge.  i saw the intent was to breed, not infect.  To me, the word didn't always mean "theft," but the more i think about it, it may?  What is always 'taken' is the other persons knowledge?  i think of the stealth aircraft that doesn't always drop bombs, but the intent is to occupy a space without being seen, so in a way, that takes a persons sense of seeing (and thus, knowing) from them? 

i agree with the conclusion: "...the theft of another person's right to refuse, and the possible theft of his health [is] wrong 100% of the time, in every circumstance."  

With acceptance of that conclusion, i had to examine and clarify some of my own disposition (which i would guess is similar to others).  There is something in my emotional nature that wants a Top to 'use' me without asking my permission.  i've had long held fantasies of a Top who i sleep with and any time He needs to cum or piss, He just slides inside of me, even if i'm asleep.  But the truth is, that would always involve my permission, thus knowledge, so it's not theft... though it seems to have an element of 'stealth' to me.  It's the element of stealth that pushes some button inside of me.  i have another totally impractical fantasy about waking up to find a man has His hand inside of me.  Of course, it would probably be impossible for Him to get there without waking me, but the idea of it is an ongoing fantasy.  But when i consider those fantasies, they all really involve consent, just not consent at the time it happens.  When i look at it, all my fantasies involve prior knowledge and consent, it's not rape (which the thought of has no emotional appeal to me)

That all seems pretty clear cut. A gray area for me is when i do anonymous sex at ABS or sex club, etc.. i always hope that a Top won't just stop with breeding me, but will also piss inside of me. For me, that loses something if He has to ask ahead of time.  Not everyone wants piss in their ass, so it's not as though permission is implied. Even though it's not rationally "gray," for me it is emotionally.  There is an irrational assumption on my part that the Top is caring and has no malicious intent.  So it's a fantasy on my part to think that i'll get what i want/need in an anonymous hook up that involves no real discussion.

It's like a sort of roulette, hoping i will win, i expose myself to loss as well, but i expect that there will be no cheaters at the casino.  

Rambling.  

[ErosWired]

20 minutes ago, tallslenderguy said:

A gray area for me is when i do anonymous sex at ABS or sex club, etc.. i always hope that a Top won't just stop with breeding me, but will also piss inside of me. For me, that loses something if He has to ask ahead of time.  Not everyone wants piss in their ass, so it's not as though permission is implied.

Last year a very hot young Top who was doing me the honor of fucking me for the second time with a nice thick 9” cock paused and then pulled out and informed me, “There. I just pissed in your ass.”

 I didn’t say anything, just excused myself immediately to the bathroom and expelled it into the toilet.

 I don’t do piss, inside or out, ever. Hard limit.

If he had asked me, or even just told me what he planned to do, I would have had the opportunity to explain my limit. He did neither, so in effect he stole away my right to enforce my limits.

He’s a nice guy, so I didn’t hold it against him, but if we ever fuck again, we’re going to have a come-to-Jesus meeting beforehand...

[tallslenderguy]

20 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

Last year a very hot young Top who was doing me the honor of fucking me for the second time with a nice thick 9” cock paused and then pulled out and informed me, “There. I just pissed in your ass.”

 I didn’t say anything, just excused myself immediately to the bathroom and expelled it into the toilet.

 I don’t do piss, inside or out, ever. Hard limit.

If he had asked me, or even just told me what he planned to do, I would have had the opportunity to explain my limit. He did neither, so in effect he stole away my right to enforce my limits.

He’s a nice guy, so I didn’t hold it against him, but if we ever fuck again, we’re going to have a come-to-Jesus meeting beforehand...

i would have had exactly the opposite response, i would have loved Him for it, but that is wholly irrational and i know it.  i know that my desire is not universal, so neither can a Top assume it's okeedokee. It's an emotional response on my part because i associate a Mans piss as an inseminating part of Him, but that's individual and He has no way of knowing that without prior exchange.  

Part of me wants to feel that it's okay if it's not harmful, but i know that is not true because one Mans pleasure is another mans poison.  i suspect that for me it's a desire to be known in some magical way that doesn't require communication... i.e., the Top 'knows' what i need without asking.  i see this emotional response on both sides (Top and bottom), where a Top will sometimes say: "you know you want it."   i think there is something in many of us that wants there to be that kind of perception, understanding, but it's magical thinking.

 i think the type of experimentation where the Top presumes to 'know' what the bottom needs is more reasonable in relationship vs anonymous encounters, where there is agreement ahead of time that such experimentation is wanted on both sides?

[hornycumslut91]

26 minutes ago, tallslenderguy said:

i would have had exactly the opposite response, i would have loved Him for it, but that is wholly irrational and i know it.  i know that my desire is not universal, so neither can a Top assume it's okeedokee. It's an emotional response on my part because i associate a Mans piss as an inseminating part of Him, but that's individual and He has no way of knowing that without prior exchange.  

Part of me wants to feel that it's okay if it's not harmful, but i know that is not true because one Mans pleasure is another mans poison.  i suspect that for me it's a desire to be known in some magical way that doesn't require communication... i.e., the Top 'knows' what i need without asking.  i see this emotional response on both sides (Top and bottom), where a Top will sometimes say: "you know you want it."   i think there is something in many of us that wants there to be that kind of perception, understanding, but it's magical thinking.

 i think the type of experimentation where the Top presumes to 'know' what the bottom needs is more reasonable in relationship vs anonymous encounters, where there is agreement ahead of time that such experimentation is wanted on both sides?

That's the slippery slope when people decide stealthing is ok, especially if they don't see it as harmful because they want to nut in some boypussy/cunt/hole/ass. I think a simpler way for a top to see if the guy he's fucking wants to go raw is to just ask. You might never know, some bottoms want to feel a cock in them raw after feeling it wrapped. I thing it has to be reinforced that consent is sexy and consent to having sex raw is a part of sexual activity. 

[tallslenderguy]

6 minutes ago, hornycumslut91 said:

That's the slippery slope when people decide stealthing is ok, especially if they don't see it as harmful because they want to nut in some boypussy/cunt/hole/ass. I think a simpler way for a top to see if the guy he's fucking wants to go raw is to just ask. You might never know, some bottoms want to feel a cock in them raw after feeling it wrapped. I thing it has to be reinforced that consent is sexy and consent to having sex raw is a part of sexual activity. 

For me, reality should always involve consent and the free exercise of volition of all parties concerned.  i realize my "gray" areas do not provide permission to go against that standard.  i don't think any one can or should decide what is or is not "harmful" for another person who has all their faculties about them.  

To me, "consent" is the submissive part of D/s.   i don't think it's really D/s if something is just taken, it's just D without the s.

[hungry_hole]

1 hour ago, tallslenderguy said:

For me, reality should always involve consent and the free exercise of volition of all parties concerned.

I agree. That's why HIV- guys who want to avoid HIV infection should wear condoms and avoid high-risk situations such as Cumunion and bathhouses. These guys should meet with guys before sex and discuss latest test results. That should reduce the chances of being stealthed. It's very simple.

[ErosWired]

3 hours ago, hungry_hole said:

I agree. That's why HIV- guys who want to avoid HIV infection should wear condoms and avoid high-risk situations such as Cumunion and bathhouses. These guys should meet with guys before sex and discuss latest test results. That should reduce the chances of being stealthed. It's very simple.

Good advice - except that what it means is that anyone negative who wants to stay that way should stay condomed up, never have spontaneous sex, and never go to any place where men have public sex because stealthing is an expected thing.

But it shouldn’t be, and it doesn’t have to be. It persists because there are men - and your earlier post in this thread places you among them - that accept, legitimize, and justify stealthing as a practice, even if only under certain circumstances. Stealthing will continue its insidious presence among us until we as a community adopt a united stance that it is unacceptable and spurn those who commit it. Only then will it cease.

Would you swim in a public pool if it were known that some individuals were known to jump in and then intentionally open up vials of E. coli into the water? Of course not - those persons would be expelled and banned from the pool (and likely arrested). You wouldn’t just say, “Well, sometimes these guys show up, so if you don’t want to get sick, just don’t come to the public pool.”

The advice above, while sound, places all the burden of mitigating the problem of stealthing on the potential victims, and makes no effort to address the problem at its malicious root.