Stealth fucking

[Guest GermFactory]

I have seen several threads on this site with regard to what is termed “stealth fucking”. Up until my presence on this site I had never heard of this term. My first inclination was to remain silent as I typically believe that an individuals’ business is their own and not mine. After seeing yet another reply in one of these threads I feel as though I need to speak on this topic.  If this costs me friends here, I don’t give a fuck.

I read through topic threads about stealth fucking both men and women here. One of these threads speak to the question of whether on should have moral qualms about this. Really, you have to “wonder” about this? Another thread gleefully talk about infecting ‘sluts’ and ‘whores’ who cheat on their boyfriends or who ‘deserve’ being infected without their express consent.

I understand that most of these threads are really in the realm of fantasy talk and perhaps could be moved into threads that are about ‘fiction’. I am not seeking to shame anyone. My primary point is for those of us who are positive and toxic, who the fuck are we to weaponise this? Who are we to make the judgment of who “deserves’ this? How can this even considered a be a moral dilemma? Being toxic gives us an enormous power. Weaponising this power by stealth is not only patently unacceptable to me it borders on just plain creepy.

To those who are toxic I want to at least make my own thought clear- We have a huge power. With power comes responsibility. Remember that word. Responsibility.

There are people out there (within this site as well as many others) who actively SEEK and need our help. Framed either in a sexualised manner, romantic manner, kinky manner, clinical manner, whatever the construct is. All good. I am not going to sexualise this in detail insofar as my own use of this power and control. For me it’s about giving others a control of their own seroconversion while achieving my own selfish goal of fathering my genetic lineage in the absence of being able to procreate heterosexually. Something of a win win situation for both parties in this. Enough said on this as I have a series of posts here that speak to various facets of my own perspective.

I recognise that there may be others here who disagree and perhaps that’s the very reason that this forum exists. It’s all about the marketplace of ideas. I simply posit my own principles with regard to this and something of my own mantra:

With power and control comes the responsibility to wield that power wisely

 

 

 

[Guest]

How about the responsibility of the neg man or woman engaging in Barack sex when not on PrEP or just taking the word of the gifted party?

If one doesn't want to convert one should at least consider that everyone could be Poz. 

 

Ik get what you're saying, agree with it to a fair extend but it takes two (and sometimes more...) to tango.

Edited March 15, 2020 by BareLover073

[Guest PhillyBBGuy]

Great post, GermFactory!

[chargedodger]

Men are hunters by nature,and were made to fuck and inseminate.Totally understand stealthing motive but do not agree with it on unsuspecting victims.

[evilalex]

Aye. 

[Pigforpoz]

Very nice post GermFactory!!!  I enjoy all your posts here on Breeding Zone!  All your posts are very well thought out and a fresh perspective I haven't seen on BZ in a long time!!!

[Guest]

I'm an old-school "chaser" from the 90's.  There's always been those that "chase" from the very start.  Who knows the psychology behind it.  Some do it for the power you describe here and in your blog.  Some for twisted self-hatred or revenge reasons.  Some because it just turns them on.  Why did I do it?  That's a long monologue I'm not going to digress into here, but I will say that I believe it was predestined for me.

I do wish to comment about your opinion on the subject of stealth-initiated seroconversions.  First I'd like to say that we are all of us welcome to our opinions.  Every opinion has validity, if for no other reason than because another human being holds that opinion and therefore it deserves to be acknowledged and validated as having meaning.  Your opinion is valid and has meaning simply because you believe it.

We (and I mean the collective "we" as in all gay men in the United States and also in Canada) have been living with this disease in our community since the 70's.  Many, many of us have buried friends whom have died from the complications of AIDS.  I and scores of others have watched the wasting, the complications, the odd medical phenomena that only comes with lacking the ability to fight off infection naturally.  It is a brutal, ugly thing at the end.  I have buried more friends than I care to think about, especially at the end of the 90's and the early 00's, when many of those friends who had been living with it for 20ish years were starting to wear down.

I understand you seroconverted only five years ago, though with your age, I'm certain you can relate to the above paragraph at some level.  So, with that being said: First of all, welcome!!!!  Welcome to your new life, your new purpose, your new... you!  Secondly, you're still a newbie here.  So please, know your place.  Not being rude, not being an asshole.  Just telling you how it is.  You seem like a man who respects blunt honesty.  I am a man with too little time to deliver anything but blunt honesty.  At only 14 years with the virus, I'm still a noob myself.

Watching all of the pain and misery mentioned above doesn't change one very simple fact for me, a fact you expressly mention in your blog.  The fact is this: the virus, once inside, alters us.  Not just our bodies, but our minds also.  We become it's "host."  It depends on us for survival.  It must propagate.  It also desires regeneration, or recreation if you will - which results in recombinant strains (commonly known as co-infection).  Without the host, the virus will die.

I mention that to say this: the virus will replicate, no matter the cost.  It is proven that the base compulsion of each species is survival.

Some hosts are more deliberate, like you.  The virus cannot alter your base personality, it simply adds a desire to see itself live.  How each of us interprets that added desire, and the means by which we each carry that out (if we do, and most - the vast majority - do infect at least once), is going to be a direct result of our personality and our approach to life.

Stealthing is just one of the many ways in which HIV survives.  It is no more or less morally reprehensible than infecting another human after careful deliberation, education, and discussion in an attempt to facilitate a "clinical" seroconversion.  The action and subsequent consequence are the exact same - the infection of another human being.  From a strictly moral standpoint, they are equal.

One cannot stand on morals if one bends morals to fit one's self into righteousness.  This is what religion is for.  I prefer to deal with reality.  Reality is this: you are infecting another human.  The victim's willingness is irrelevant at the moral level.  You are infecting your victim with a virus that will eventually kill them.

I say eventually kill them because your strain is aggressive and apparently (based on the information presented in your blog) has a natural resistance to most medications.  Because you do not report having genetic mutations against specific medications coupled with the fact no doctor is going to put you on a medication that you have even a minor mutation to, this resistance must be based on the atypical aspect of your virus.  After all, standard A3/O2 is treatable.  Therefore your resistance must be the due to the protein structure of the RNA.

Morals, by the way, are man made ideologies with the hope of eventual Utopia.  Everyone's set is a bit different, even among those who share the same standard set.  This is because mankind is, at it's core, obsessed with survival - like any other species.  That drive to survive tells us that our specific world-view is the only correct, upright, moralistic one.

Morals are really only applicable to a situation if one removes all of one's personal feelings and thoughts about the subject and neutralizes the issue, as I've done above.  Once that is done, we are left with a true moral, which simply represents a singular or multiple principle(s).  The most obvious of the principles represented in this issue are do no harm, improve self/others, and love your fellows.

With all of that being said, because you participate in the same action as those who "stealth," you cannot speak to this topic with any validity, credibility, or moral standing.  Yes, the behavior (or the "how" and the "why") of the subsequent seroconversion(s) are different.  However, the "what" (read: action and consequence) remains the same.  Morals are almost invariably based on an action and its subsequent consequences.  Karma is the one who cares about the the behavior surrounding the action.

[Guest]

On 3/15/2020 at 12:43 PM, kevy1109 said:

Very nice post GermFactory!!!  I enjoy all your posts here on Breeding Zone!  All your posts are very well thought out and a fresh perspective I haven't seen on BZ in a long time!!!

I have to agree.  His posts are very well written, thought out, and intelligent.  A nice, refreshing change from some of the day-to-day mundane.

[hungry_hole]

NOTE: I'm only defending anonymous stealthing, when the hook-up is between a hard cock wanting some pleasure and a hungry hole. It could be a Grindr hook-up or at a bathhouse, Adult bookstore, or any other anonymous setting.

Anonymous stealthing is OK because I consider it another fetish that many guys like to enjoy, both guys looking to top or bottom. Many years ago, when it was very rare to see bareback sex I hooked-up with a guy who wanted to fuck me. He started fucking me with a condom, when something happened and I didn't realize he had taken the condom off, but his cock felt so nice in my hole. It felt different when he shot his load and when he pulled out he grabbed the condom because he didn't want me to see it, whispered in my ear "I left you a present" and left. I touched my hole and felt the cum dripping out which made me very horny. This anonymous stealthing event was such a hot fuck that I jerked-off thinking about it many times. I never wore a condom again and began taking all kinds of loads. Thank God for anonymous stealthing!

I don't see anything wrong with a BB bottom at the bathhouse getting stealth by a poz guy who lied when the bottom asked "Are you clean?".  The same bottom could have had his hole bred by a guy who doesn't know he's poz so he doesn't know he's lying. Basically the same thing.

On 3/15/2020 at 6:40 AM, GermFactory said:

We have a huge power. With power comes responsibility. Remember that word. Responsibility.

Each of us takes responsibility and if someone doesn't want to be poz avoid quick anonymous sex and instead meet a guy first and get to know him first. Boring, I know, that's reality.

[Ocelot2000]

It's a grey area in one way. I don't think anyone should lie. If asked, people should be truthful. If a person wants to remain negative, then honor that. However if I go to a bathhouse or a sex club and I take loads, and I do not ask, a poz guy fucking me and breeding me could be seen as stealthing, however is it? I didn't ask status or for a condom. So in one way, yes, absolutely, I agree with you. But there is a grey area in where steal thing starts or an action stop being stealthing. 

[ErosWired]

Intent.

That is the relevant word here. These absurd false moral equivalencies some of you are holding up hare, where the idea that someone will ‘probably’ end up infected anyway actually justifies intentional stealthing, or absolves the perpetrator after the fact, are irrational.

The enduring customs, traditions, rules, laws and taboos that regulate human societies at the base level can pretty much all be distilled down to necessary actions to ensure the survival of the species and individuals within it. While we might question whether it is “moral” or “ethical” or “good” or “right” for an infected person to stealth another, the actual underlying question is, is it consistent with the survival of the species and the individuals that comprise it for diseased individuals to intentionally make others diseased? The answer, by every possible measure, is NO.

Some argue that bottoms who leave themselves more vulnerable to infection “deserve” to be infected, are “asking” to be infected, or are In some way destined to be accidentally infected, so in each case a stealther feels that any normal constraint should not apply. But the bottom, regardless of his carelessness, naïveté, or trusting or promiscuous nature, in this scenario is an undiseased member of the population. Remember the base question? Is it consistent with the survival of the species and the individuals that comprise it for diseased individuals to intentionally make others diseased? The answer, again, is NO. No, just because he’s a cumdump doesn’t make him fair game. No, the fact that you’re in a bathhouse doesn’t give you a special privilege to hurt people so you can have your fun. NO.

Even if, in some inexplicable way, it could be logical to argue that as long as someone has become infected it doesn’t matter how they got that way (?) (!??) the matters of disease, morbidity and mortality are too grave for the society to accept the idea without challenge. The question must be asked: Could the transmission of the disease have been prevented? In the case of the stealther, who has positive knowledge of his condition, the answer is Yes.

Yet we know that by base principal the answer to whether one diseased person may knowingly infect another is NO. So if the action that caused the forbidden infection could have been prevented, why wasn’t it?

Here we come to Intent. In this situation, something has gone wrong with the social order necessary for species an individual survival. It must therefore be considered a threat and a present danger. The society must respond in such a way as to eliminate the threat. Earlier cultures might have gathered all the individuals with disease an either culled them outright or segregated them in colonies. With the advent of modern medicine, the onus of upholding the bedrock societal imperative falls upon the legal system. And so we see that in many jurisdictions, knowingly and surreptitiously infecting another person with a disease through sexual contact is considered a form of sexual assault. That is to say, stealthing is a criminal act.

But what separates an accidental infection from a willful one? What makes one an accident and the other a crime? It is the Intent of the stealther. Regardless of whether a bottom might or might not eventually end up infected, it can be absolutely said that that bottom would not get infected by that stealther except that the stealther made a positive decision to cause it. Any argument that places the responsibility on the bottom for not preventing the transmission from happening fails on causality because had the stealther had not acted on his intent, there would have been nothing for the bottom to prevent.

No, there is no defense for stealthing. No, it is not a matter of personal opinion or lifestyle. No, it is not a question of religious dogma. No, just because you person don’t see a problem with it does not make it okay for you to do it. No, the fact that somebody did it to you (sorry) does not give you any right of retaliation. No, just because you’re in a bathhouse make it suddenly acceptable when it isn’t anywhere else. Is it consistent with the survival of the species and the individuals in it for one diseased person to knowingly infect another?

NO. It’s fucking wrong, and you know it.