Stealthing is only a crime if you are a male. Still perfectly legal to lie about birth control or poke holes in condoms

Jaqen___Hghar · 2021-10-08T18:51:01+00:00

I am so grateful to have a wife I can trust and who is not psycho.

How absurd and frightening that hearsay and circumstantial "evidence" can land you in prison nowadays. You could have sex, have the woman regret it or want a settlement out of it, and your life is forever ruined. Just like that.

This new law is just the next level and makes it even easier for the system to be maliciously abused to damage the lives of innocent people. Everyone knows that condoms as a method of contraception are certainly fallible. God forbid Trojan sends you a defective product and you end up having to serve hard time on top of restitution and child support for the rest of your life.

ingridelena · 2021-10-08T19:29:55+00:00

another L for males lol

Personal_Ice2327 · 2021-10-08T17:39:37+00:00

🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️

Bane-o-foolishness · 2021-10-08T18:56:54+00:00

Between California's lifetime alimony and now "enhanced" spousal rape laws it will surprise me if anyone wants to get married there.

You'd almost have to wonder: if a man applies for a marriage license, does that act demonstrate impaired mental function? If so, is someone able to enter into a marriage while impaired? They've outlawed marriage.

PaidHack · 2021-10-09T04:04:09+00:00

It’s California after all. What did you expect? Fair treatment?

ebonyudders · 2021-10-09T07:46:56+00:00

As a lifetime Californian I can say our governor is garbage our laws are stupid , where's the enhanced punishment for lying about being raped and other false crimes?

wrightetiedee · 2021-10-08T21:41:02+00:00

This is directly from the Yale study referenced in the OP

Others have written about stealthing in the context of a broader trend of what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists describes as “active interference [by one partner] with [the other] partner’s contraceptive methods in an attempt to promote pregnancy,” known as “birth control sabotage.” Am. Coll. of Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Comm. on Health Care for Underserved Women, Reproductive and Sexual Coercion (2013), https://www.acog.org/-/media/Committee-Opinions/Committee-on-Health-Care- for-Underserved-Women/co554.pdf?dmc=1&ts=20170203T1725073970 [http://perma.cc/F4H2-8UFR]. See, e.g., Leah A. Plunkett, Contraceptive Sabotage, 28 Colum. J. Gender & L. 97 (2014); Shane M. Trawick, Comment, Birth Control Sabotage as Domestic Violence: A Legal Response, 100 Calif. L. Rev. 721 (2012). The scope of this Essay is both narrower and wider than that of these works on birth control sabotage. I consider only one form of so-called sabotage—condom removal—excluding interference with other methods of contraception such as birth control pills, IUDs, and NuvaRings, or secretive practices of poking holes in condoms.

Personal_Ice2327 · 2021-10-08T17:39:48+00:00

True indeed

wwwhistler · 2021-10-08T23:27:34+00:00

text of AB 453

1708.5. (a) A person commits a sexual battery who does any of the following: (1) Acts with the intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact with an intimate part of another, and a sexually offensive contact with that person directly or indirectly results. (2) Acts with the intent to cause a harmful or offensive contact with another by use of the person’s intimate part, and a sexually offensive contact with that person directly or indirectly results. (3) Acts to cause an imminent apprehension of the conduct described in paragraph (1) or (2), and a sexually offensive contact with that person directly or indirectly results. (4) Causes contact between a sexual organ, from which a condom has been removed, and the intimate part of another who did not verbally consent to the condom being removed. (5) Causes contact between an intimate part of the person and a sexual organ of another from which the person removed a condom without verbal consent. (b) A person who commits a sexual battery upon another is liable to that person for damages, including, but not limited to, general damages, special damages, and punitive damages. (c) The court in an action pursuant to this section may award equitable relief, including, but not limited to, an injunction, costs, and any other relief the court deems proper. (d) For the purposes of this section: (1) “Intimate part” means the sexual organ, anus, groin, or buttocks of any person, or the breast of a female. (2) “Offensive contact” means contact that offends a reasonable sense of personal dignity. (e) The rights and remedies provided in this section are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law.

this appears to be targeted towards only men. as it does not address any sabotaging of a condom, only it's secretive removal.

text of AB 1171

(1) Existing law defines rape as an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person not the spouse of the perpetrator under certain circumstances, including where the victim is incapable of giving legal consent because of a mental disorder or developmental or physical disability, where the victim is not aware of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator’s fraudulent representation that the act serves a professional purpose, and where the victim submits to the act under the belief that the perpetrator is someone known to the victim other than the perpetrator, and the perpetrator intentionally and fraudulently induces that belief. Existing law separately defines rape of a spouse as an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with the spouse of the perpetrator under similar circumstances as nonspousal rape, except that spousal rape does not include acts of sexual intercourse accomplished under the specific circumstances described above. This bill would repeal the provisions relating to spousal rape and make conforming changes, thereby making an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a spouse punishable as rape if the act otherwise meets the definition of rape, except that sexual intercourse with a person who is incapable of giving legal consent because of mental disorder or developmental or physical disability would not be rape if the 2 people are married. By changing the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes an employer to request from the Department of Justice records of all convictions or any arrest pending adjudication for specified offenses for a person who applies for a license, employment, or volunteer position, in which the person would have supervisory or disciplinary power over a minor and requires the employer to notify the parent or guardian of a child if a person with specified convictions will have supervisory or disciplinary power over that child. Existing law exempts certain convictions, including spousal rape, from that notification requirement. This bill would remove the exemption for spousal rape or any other felony conviction and would instead exempt only misdemeanor convictions from that notification.

i see no problems with this bill.

whats your take?

j0k3ricu · 2021-10-09T16:56:35+00:00

Does it also include not taking pregnancy blockers as rape?

BamPlsPenetrateMe · 2021-10-09T04:04:49+00:00

Okay and? This is a step in the right direction

AnonBubblyBowels · 2021-10-10T16:15:47+00:00

I don’t know why you act like you have to be a father if you impregnate someone.

If you don’t want to be involved and did not consent to having sex without birth control and were deliberately mislead, sign away your rights. No fathering, no child support required. And most people wouldn’t blame you given the deception involved.

Now, poking a hole in the condom… that should definitely fall under this same law, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it is eventually added. It sure as fuck should be because it’s the same concept.

Though I will note, I glanced through it and it’s worth mentioning that I also did not see it mentioned that it was a crime for a man to poke holes in the condom either.

Honestly, doesn’t matter if it’s two women using a female condom, two men using a condom, or a woman poking holes in a condom with a man or a man poking holes in a condom with a woman - all of it should be illegal if the act is non-consensual.

All that said, aside from STDs, it’s disingenuous AF to act like this is all equal footing. Getting a woman pregnant without her consent is immeasurably worse than a woman getting herself pregnant with your child without your consent.

It’s all shitty and violating and potentially life ruining either way - but pretending that the risks are completely equal here is total fucking bullshit.

Stealthing is only a crime if you are a male. Still perfectly legal to lie about birth control or poke holes in condoms

Crosspost "California bans secret condom removal during sex and enhances punishment for spousal rape" from /r/news:

Comments

Title	Stealthing is only a crime if you are a male. Still perfectly legal to lie about birth control or poke holes in condoms
Author	wrightetiedee
Upvotes	338
Comments	36
Date	October 8, 2021 4:59 PM UTC (4 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PussyPass
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PussyPass/comments/q41w5x/stealthing_is_only_a_crime_if_you_are_a_male/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PussyPass/stealthing-is-only-a-crime-if-you-are-a-male-still.1076704 https://theredarchive.com/post/1076704