Is stealthing morally okay?

[find91]

3 minutes ago, tallslenderguy said:

my understanding of "stealthing" is that it (simply?) means removing a condom without the partners knowledge/consent? (i googled it to confirm lol). i think that meaning has been extended my many as an intent from poz tops to poz their bottom.  i'd call that "stealth pozzing" vs just stealthing?  i've applied the same logic to pissing, and have been what i call "stealth pissed" by some tops who didn't ask, just did it. 

i originally agreed with find91, but this made me reconsider.  In part, i still agree that avoiding anonymous cock probably affords a measure of protection. To me, grindr and hookup still constitute "anonymous," but that's just my interpretation.  i've had long term FB's that i still think of as anonymous because our only relationship is hookup sex. The truth is, there are guys who get pozzed by long term partners in so called 'monogamous' relationships.  The notion of "protection" is a matter of degree, never really an absolute. Even condom sex is more accurately "safer sex," not absolutely "safe sex."  In 2019, the safest sex (by evidence) is with someone on meds, either PreP or HIV suppressed if poz.  Things have changed. 

You're right stealthing does not necessarily does not necessarily have to go with pozzing. But I still stand by the fact that it's rape. Consent is key in in itimate relations. Yes in Dom/Sub dynamic the dom makes the rules but still a sub trust that the Dom will not violate his hard limits. If a Dom because abusive and starts abusing his sub (mentally or physically) then that Dom / Sub contract become void and null. 

[pervfantasy24]

Do fetishes or desires exist that have illegal and immoral implications unless carried out under circumstances that ensure that legality/morality is preserved during the sexual act? I believe they do, take for example people who feel the need to have sex with animals or minors. Wanting to have non-consensual raw intercourse with someone who expects safe sex is just another version of desire. Do these desires go away after condemning or criminalizing the practices related to them? Maybe not. If you have them, you can repress them and stick to what's legally and morally right. Or not. Your choice, until you get caught, then you're fucked..

Or you might poke around at it until you find some acceptable version, some watered down role play maybe. After all, once you convince yourself that that's what fulfills your desire (and people have been shown to be capable of doing this), you might no longer need the excessive details which would result in breaking laws or moral precepts.

On 4/28/2017 at 10:28 AM, Sem said:

The real question though is whether Breeding Zone is the most appropriate place to contemplate about society's or one's own moral standards. 

That's an interesting question. Some people might not have any other place to talk about these issues. But if you don't, it might be worthwhile finding one. Because not all users on this website are barebackers. A percentage of profiles lurking around here have very different interests regarding whatever we might have to say about this topic. This is a public place in many senses, and an interesting one to many kinds of people.

[tallslenderguy]

7 minutes ago, find91 said:

 I disagree with you're notion of stealthers "looking for, a relationship where they can act without having to ask permission" From what I've seen and heard. It's simply about control, power and degradation. If you truly wanted a relationship you will be upfront about your status. Why hide that you're positive? Yes it may scare prospective subs away but it will be a test to weed out the true and deserving. You only hide because you know it give you an advantage over another. It's no different than why people tag buildings or why animals you use urine to mark their territory, it's  a stealthers way of putting a mark on a person. Marking and knowing that they have defiled a person. That form of power is very intoxicating especially when the bottom does not know. They have fundamentally turned them into a fool.

Damn, i enjoy your posts, the thought and consideration you put into them and how well you articulate.

i have a disposition, maybe a flaw?, where i almost refuse to see anyone as unredeemable. It's hard for me to think of anyone as purely evil (not saying you are inferring "purely evil," i am... and that is admittedly emotional, not necessarily rational on my part).  So, it's probably my way of offering that type of stealther an out to say they are "looking for a relationship...."  Not activly "looking," eh? lol.  

i tend to see most "evil" as inadvertent and a result of immaturity vs malicious intent.  i know, i could be wrong though. It's just hard for me to imagine a person who is willingly malicious without them having some sort of wound themselves?  i see the "advantage over another" that is achieved in such acts as illusionary.  On the other hand, there are guys like me who want to be "marked" by another guy, but it is very different in that my offer of myself is a gift given, like a canvas for a creative top to 'mark', paint on. For me, that can speak of a deep (mutual) bond, not abuse. It's an expression of yin/yang.  

In that vein, to me, the guy who "stealths" (in the way we are speaking), lacks the insight and skill of maturity to get what he really needs, which is the 'yin' to his 'yang,' so he just ignorantly tries to create a facsimile rather than going about it the 'right' way. 

 

[pervfantasy24]

21 minutes ago, tallslenderguy said:

It's just hard for me to imagine a person who is willingly malicious without them having some sort of wound themselves?.

This is quite often the case with eg. sadistic sex offenders, is it not?

[find91]

 

38 minutes ago, tallslenderguy said:

Damn, i enjoy your posts, the thought and consideration you put into them and how well you articulate.

i have a disposition, maybe a flaw?, where i almost refuse to see anyone as unredeemable. It's hard for me to think of anyone as purely evil (not saying you are inferring "purely evil," i am... and that is admittedly emotional, not necessarily rational on my part).  So, it's probably my way of offering that type of stealther an out to say they are "looking for a relationship...."  Not activly "looking," eh? lol.  

i tend to see most "evil" as inadvertent and a result of immaturity vs malicious intent.  i know, i could be wrong though. It's just hard for me to imagine a person who is willingly malicious without them having some sort of wound themselves?  i see the "advantage over another" that is achieved in such acts as illusionary.  On the other hand, there are guys like me who want to be "marked" by another guy, but it is very different in that my offer of myself is a gift given, like a canvas for a creative top to 'mark', paint on. For me, that can speak of a deep (mutual) bond, not abuse. It's an expression of yin/yang.  

In that vein, to me, the guy who "stealths" (in the way we are speaking), lacks the insight and skill of maturity to get what he really needs, which is the 'yin' to his 'yang,' so he just ignorantly tries to create a facsimile rather than going about it the 'right' way. 

 

We are all shaped by our experiences. I totally understand why you would not want to think people are evil. But you and I know that in BDSM there are some very dangerous people that masquerade as Dom but in fact are actual sexual sadist. They get of on hurting and causing pain. This is very different then those into S&M that get off on pushing the boundaries of pain and pleasure and the endorphin release from pain. This individuals are "sadistic sex offenders" like pervfantasy24 said.

[HardOneLA]

1 hour ago, pervfantasy24 said:

Do fetishes or desires exist that have illegal and immoral implications unless carried out under circumstances that ensure that legality/morality is preserved during the sexual act? I believe they do, take for example people who feel the need to have sex with animals or minors. Wanting to have non-consensual raw intercourse with someone who expects safe sex is just another version of desire. Do these desires go away after condemning or criminalizing the practices related to them? Maybe not. If you have them, you can repress them and stick to what's legally and morally right. Or not. Your choice, until you get caught, then you're fucked..

Or you might poke around at it until you find some acceptable version, some watered down role play maybe. After all, once you convince yourself that that's what fulfills your desire (and people have been shown to be capable of doing this), you might no longer need the excessive details which would result in breaking laws or moral precepts.

That's an interesting question. Some people might not have any other place to talk about these issues. But if you don't, it might be worthwhile finding one. Because not all users on this website are barebackers. A percentage of profiles lurking around here have very different interests regarding whatever we might have to say about this topic. This is a public place in many senses, and an interesting one to many kinds of people.

Totally agree with you on this one, perv.  I have learned more in the past year from numerous and various sex websites than in my entire lifetime.  And not all of the sites are necessarily about "interests" of mine.  But still, I learned something I didn't know.

[tallslenderguy]

1 hour ago, pervfantasy24 said:

This is quite often the case with eg. sadistic sex offenders, is it not?

 

1 hour ago, find91 said:

 

We are all shaped by our experiences. I totally understand why you would not want to think people are evil. But you and I know that in BDSM there are some very dangerous people that masquerade as Dom but in fact are actual sexual sadist. They get of on hurting and causing pain. This is very different then those into S&M that get off on pushing the boundaries of pain and pleasure and the endorphin release from pain. This individuals are "sadistic sex offenders" like pervfantasy24 said.

It seems that way to me. People like Jeffrey Dahmer come to mind.  i want to think that even people like him could be helped if we had the understanding and means to reach them, that they're just beyond our grasp?  But yeah, they do exist, no doubt.  i can barely wrap my brain around  S/m, let alone my emotions.  i was bullied a lot as a kid, pretty obviously had 'sub' in my nature even as a kid. my response was to learn martial arts, second degree black belt. i came close to back kicking a guy through a wall once when he got rough with me in a way where i felt threatened, bet he would have been surprised lol.

i often steer clear of using terms like D/s in profiles because they are so often coupled with S/m in peoples minds.  For me they are distinct and i never purposely try to establish anything with someone identifying with ,or wanting, S/m. 

Ultimately, it seems to me that a person who feels they have to sneak or steal must feel powerless or inadequate to get what they need legitimately?  

 

[Pozlover1]

Of course it’s wrong to do that. Even anonymous sex is supposed to be an act of love. 

I don’t see how to make it illegal without radically increasing Government’s involvement in our sex lives.

but Karma’s a bitch and it’s as certain as gravity. 

[find91]

34 minutes ago, tallslenderguy said:

 

It seems that way to me. People like Jeffrey Dahmer come to mind.  i want to think that even people like him could be helped if we had the understanding and means to reach them, that they're just beyond our grasp?  But yeah, they do exist, no doubt.  i can barely wrap my brain around  S/m, let alone my emotions.  i was bullied a lot as a kid, pretty obviously had 'sub' in my nature even as a kid. my response was to learn martial arts, second degree black belt. i came close to back kicking a guy through a wall once when he got rough with me in a way where i felt threatened, bet he would have been surprised lol.

i often steer clear of using terms like D/s in profiles because they are so often coupled with S/m in peoples minds.  For me they are distinct and i never purposely try to establish anything with someone identifying with ,or wanting, S/m. 

Ultimately, it seems to me that a person who feels they have to sneak or steal must feel powerless or inadequate to get what they need legitimately?  

 

You are right D/s is very different from S&M I have dabbled in both . Both can be fun but they need a really good connection because trust it needed because you can do a great deal of harm. The thing they have in comment is the power exchange and that deep connection. As a Dom their is great power in wanting to protect and offer your sub release. While with proper S&M it the transcendence of the physical body, through pain and pleasure. Again respect is key to both.. I totally agree with your last line.

[pervfantasy24]

57 minutes ago, tallslenderguy said:

Ultimately, it seems to me that a person who feels they have to sneak or steal must feel powerless or inadequate to get what they need legitimately? 

I can't answer that for you, but it seems pointless to try and put yourself in someone's shoes who is so radically different from you (you seem like a very kind soul), say, Dahmer, for example, and then to contrive a causal explanation for their behavior based on that 'empathic positioning'. Or to speculate about what a sadistic sex offender's 'real needs' might be. It also seems unlikely that we could have 'healed' Dahmer if only we had understood things from his point of view, as you seemed to be hinting at. If i remember correctly, he was diagnosed with psychopathy - not a curable condition. Maybe you don't like to see the darker places that exist in the world.

But I think two more points about stealthing are worth pointing out: On the one hand, it is a fringe behavior within what might be called 'mainstream' barebacking subculture that has the risky potential, because of its extreme nature, to lead to the entire barebacking community to being stigmatized and pathologized. If you like to see an example of this maybe check out the work of the arguably homophobic (though unintentionally) health researcher Michele Crossley, whose work reads like bareback is a nasty cancer to be eliminated ('healed') from an otherwise healthy body of gay males. For her, much like you seem to believe, the men engaging in these behaviors do so because they are compelled to by pathological narratives in gay culture (and not because of any psychological or biological causes), a very popular view in the social sciences. I disagree with it ; biological (genetic) and personality factors are just as important in sexuality as cultural ones.

On the other hand tho, people who engage in this fringe behavior might come to places as this one for inspiration, confirmation or whatever. Some might have stealthing fantasies and wonder if it's normal. The discussion above seems to suggest that extreme sadistic fantasies are exclusive to psychopaths or serial killers. This is an exaggeration. According to many psychiatrists, normal people have violent unconscious fantasies and as long as they don't occur in obsessive or psychotic ways they don't mean you're sick if you have them. Hurting someone in your fantasy is not quite the same as doing it in real life. Declaring otherwise can have nasty effects. Poz gay men are stigmatized within the gay community and poz barebackers are stigmatized even within the poz gay community. Now, poz gay men who are stealthers are stigmatized even within the barebacking 'mainstream'. The effect of putting anything that has to do with stealthing into the Jeffrey Dahmer category should be obvious to the reader by now. Someone with stealth fantasies could flip several ways in such a scenario, such as reject, hide, deny those fantasies, or accept the stigmatized / spoiled identity offered to him. Both seem to have bad consequences.

 

[HardOneLA]

55 minutes ago, pervfantasy24 said:

I can't answer that for you, but it seems pointless to try and put yourself in someone's shoes who is so radically different from you (you seem like a very kind soul), say, Dahmer, for example, and then to contrive a causal explanation for their behavior based on that 'empathic positioning'. Or to speculate about what a sadistic sex offender's 'real needs' might be. It also seems unlikely that we could have 'healed' Dahmer if only we had understood things from his point of view, as you seemed to be hinting at. If i remember correctly, he was diagnosed with psychopathy - not a curable condition. Maybe you don't like to see the darker places that exist in the world.

But I think two more points about stealthing are worth pointing out: On the one hand, it is a fringe behavior within what might be called 'mainstream' barebacking subculture that has the risky potential, because of its extreme nature, to lead to the entire barebacking community to being stigmatized and pathologized. If you like to see an example of this maybe check out the work of the arguably homophobic (though unintentionally) health researcher Michele Crossley, whose work reads like bareback is a nasty cancer to be eliminated ('healed') from an otherwise healthy body of gay males. For her, much like you seem to believe, the men engaging in these behaviors do so because they are compelled to by pathological narratives in gay culture (and not because of any psychological or biological causes), a very popular view in the social sciences. I disagree with it ; biological (genetic) and personality factors are just as important in sexuality as cultural ones.

On the other hand tho, people who engage in this fringe behavior might come to places as this one for inspiration, confirmation or whatever. Some might have stealthing fantasies and wonder if it's normal. The discussion above seems to suggest that extreme sadistic fantasies are exclusive to psychopaths or serial killers. This is an exaggeration. According to many psychiatrists, normal people have violent unconscious fantasies and as long as they don't occur in obsessive or psychotic ways they don't mean you're sick if you have them. Hurting someone in your fantasy is not quite the same as doing it in real life. Declaring otherwise can have nasty effects. Poz gay men are stigmatized within the gay community and poz barebackers are stigmatized even within the poz gay community. Now, poz gay men who are stealthers are stigmatized even within the barebacking 'mainstream'. The effect of putting anything that has to do with stealthing into the Jeffrey Dahmer category should be obvious to the reader by now. Someone with stealth fantasies could flip several ways in such a scenario, such as reject, hide, deny those fantasies, or accept the stigmatized / spoiled identity offered to him. Both seem to have bad consequences.

 

Right with ya again, perv.  Another book that I read recently is "Unlimited Intimacy - Reflections On The Subculture Of Barebacking" by Tim Dean.  It was recommended to me by probably the most beautiful, magnificent, sensual, sexual Top and fuck/breeder that exists on this planet.  And somehow that night he chose to cum to me.  Or, more correctly, he messaged me on BBRT: "Present your ass to me."  The rest was nirvana, hog heaven, magical.  Anyway, I should have yellow highlighted the book, like in school.  There were so many parts, sentences, passages that were "me" and I found it extremely interesting.  Matter of fact, I may read it again.  Thanks

[pervfantasy24]

6 hours ago, HardOneLA said:

Right with ya again, perv.  Another book that I read recently is "Unlimited Intimacy - Reflections On The Subculture Of Barebacking" by Tim Dean.  It was recommended to me by probably the most beautiful, magnificent, sensual, sexual Top and fuck/breeder that exists on this planet.  And somehow that night he chose to cum to me.  Or, more correctly, he messaged me on BBRT: "Present your ass to me."  The rest was nirvana, hog heaven, magical.  Anyway, I should have yellow highlighted the book, like in school.  There were so many parts, sentences, passages that were "me" and I found it extremely interesting.  Matter of fact, I may read it again.  Thanks

Apparently I "cannot add any more reactions today", but I agree with youon Dean's book. And good that you have some nice memories with it, HardOne;) BTW Tim Dean doesn't condone stealthing but he's not afraid to confront it without prejudice or value judgments, and doesn't remain on a superficial level. His explanations about barebacking make much more sense to me than other authors I have read, even if they center on cultural processes and less on individual differences. I would definitely recommend the book to anyone interested in bareback, much more than the standard stuff people read about it at universities, such as Crossley, Halperin or Race with their distant and superficial approach.

[orionboy1]

Topic aside, I woke up too early and cant get back to sleep. Just downloaded Tim Deans book, looking forward to this read. ?

[pervfantasy24]

2 hours ago, orionboy1 said:

Topic aside, I woke up too early and cant get back to sleep. Just downloaded Tim Deans book, looking forward to this read. ?

Have fun Maybe I should correct myself though, sorry if being pedantic. In this book Dean can be said to confront the fantasies behind 'condom resistance' (not his words) more generally (of which stealthing is a part, see eg. this article about 'condom resistance' for a clear illustration of stealthing / non-consensual breeding among heterosexual young men with their female partners: Davis et al. 2014, ' A Qualitative Examination of Men’s Condom Use Attitudes and Resistance:‘‘It’s Just Part of the Game’’ ', Arch Sex Behav (2014) 43:631–643, DOI: 10.1007/s10508-013-0150-9). Dean does this on a very general level (as mentioned before, cultural or rather (post-)subcultural), not getting into all the specific uses connected to desires for breeding or pozzing. It would be more correct for me to say that he confronts 'the fantasies behind forms of condom resistance such as stealthing', though he does not consider non-consensual forms specifically (in his words, "the principle of  benign sexual variation applies only to consensual sex" in the preface, and his remark + footnote on p. 113 about snuff vs. BB porn). So even though stealthing involves nuances/specifics (eg. sadistic tendencies) which fall outside the scope of his book, stealthing can be traced back to the same general mechanisms that Dean describes, especially if you consider it all a manifestation of 'condom resistance' as often done in health/social sciences..

[find91]

13 hours ago, pervfantasy24 said:

I can't answer that for you, but it seems pointless to try and put yourself in someone's shoes who is so radically different from you (you seem like a very kind soul), say, Dahmer, for example, and then to contrive a causal explanation for their behavior based on that 'empathic positioning'. Or to speculate about what a sadistic sex offender's 'real needs' might be. It also seems unlikely that we could have 'healed' Dahmer if only we had understood things from his point of view, as you seemed to be hinting at. If i remember correctly, he was diagnosed with psychopathy - not a curable condition. Maybe you don't like to see the darker places that exist in the world.

But I think two more points about stealthing are worth pointing out: On the one hand, it is a fringe behavior within what might be called 'mainstream' barebacking subculture that has the risky potential, because of its extreme nature, to lead to the entire barebacking community to being stigmatized and pathologized. If you like to see an example of this maybe check out the work of the arguably homophobic (though unintentionally) health researcher Michele Crossley, whose work reads like bareback is a nasty cancer to be eliminated ('healed') from an otherwise healthy body of gay males. For her, much like you seem to believe, the men engaging in these behaviors do so because they are compelled to by pathological narratives in gay culture (and not because of any psychological or biological causes), a very popular view in the social sciences. I disagree with it ; biological (genetic) and personality factors are just as important in sexuality as cultural ones.

On the other hand tho, people who engage in this fringe behavior might come to places as this one for inspiration, confirmation or whatever. Some might have stealthing fantasies and wonder if it's normal. The discussion above seems to suggest that extreme sadistic fantasies are exclusive to psychopaths or serial killers. This is an exaggeration. According to many psychiatrists, normal people have violent unconscious fantasies and as long as they don't occur in obsessive or psychotic ways they don't mean you're sick if you have them. Hurting someone in your fantasy is not quite the same as doing it in real life. Declaring otherwise can have nasty effects. Poz gay men are stigmatized within the gay community and poz barebackers are stigmatized even within the poz gay community. Now, poz gay men who are stealthers are stigmatized even within the barebacking 'mainstream'. The effect of putting anything that has to do with stealthing into the Jeffrey Dahmer category should be obvious to the reader by now. Someone with stealth fantasies could flip several ways in such a scenario, such as reject, hide, deny those fantasies, or accept the stigmatized / spoiled identity offered to him. Both seem to have bad consequences.

 

Very nice perspective