I agree with feminism insofar as it relies on facts, science or data, and eschews postmodern deconstructionism. Obviously discrimination based on sex or sexual orientation is a foul sin our society should have laws against. Non-consensual sex is horrid violence, no question about it, and should be punished as such. If full blown prison gang rape is the sexual equivalent of murder, than stealthing would be the sexual equivalent of slapping someone in the face hard enough to leave a bruise.
Keep in mind that in this case condoms slipping off are already a known form of condom failure, the risk of which she has already consented to. Is it sexual violence? Certainly. Does it deserve the same attention by society at large as the other forms of sexual violence in our society? I seriously doubt it. Should stealthing be punished if someone is convicted of such a crime? Yes, to the full extent of the law, whatever that may be. Should there be a law? Sure. How severe should it be? Something like slapping someone in the face and leaving a bruise. Is it provable? How can you prove someone did something on purpose that frequently happens on accident?
Besides questioning the severity and provability of stealthing compared to other forms of sexual violence, I openly challenge the assertion that it is a "rising trend." Show me numbers. I don't doubt that it happens... with 7 billion people in the world, 3 billion of them competing for sexual partners, no doubt heinous unpredictable behavior happens every day. But the source document everyone is referring to here doesn't even assert numbers that suggest stealthing is a "growing trend". Sure it must happen, sure it should be illegal.
Let me say something here about post-modernism and feminism. When these two are combined, and words start to mean different things for different authors, when we start hearing things like "patriarchy for me may mean something different than patriarchy means for her", when we eschew the very concept of having set definitions for words, this excludes some types of rational people (who depend on established vocabulary to communicate) from your conversation. Especially males, who's shoulders and backs industry has built its tremendous weight on, who under that pressure as a community have had to become extraordinarily rational in order to survive in the face of dangerous chemicals and machinery.
In a world of profound sexual violence and competition, who benefits from a party where the men are all invited to leave? I appreciate the contributions lesbians make to our world every day, was educated and personally mentored by more than a few myself, and fully realize the vast majority of them distance themselves from these kinds of male-hating irrational arguments. But just as there are aberrant males leaving sexual damage in their wake, certainly it is at least possible that there are opportunistic lesbians that have something against their most common sexual competition, men.
Isn't it ironic how convenient stealthing is for man haters? If a condom comes off by accident, how does a man prove his innocence in their eyes? Keep in mind that compared to other birth control failures, a condom accidentally slipping off was fairly likely to happen sooner or later - BUT in 2016 it was no crime - and now it will be. It is better for a woman to have sex with a lesbian because she can't get you pregnant. Condom? He will probably just stealth you.
Tom Leykis asserted that men needed to flush their condoms down the toilet, so that opportunistic females could not pull your condoms out of the trash and impregnate themselves with men's sperm non-consensually, as to be able to take advantage of men financially. I had a really hard time taking that whole line of thought seriously. Tom is the epitome of modern misogyny, yet stealthing is the exact opposite of anything he or any of his followers would ever do...
Naivete. Can you not see the chip on her shoulder as she stares at your female curves? More importantly, do you know what an internet troll is? Supposedly men are bragging about stealthing online. Do you have any idea the lengths to which a troll will go to offend you online? Do you have any idea what lengths I, B.F.Galbraith, have gone to offend people on line, primarily for my own entertainment? Have you not partaken of this forbidden fruit even once yourself, and taken a person or community for a ride to Alice's Wonderland?
Stealthing is an appropriated term from gaming. In gaming, stealthing is sneaking up on and punking your enemies when they least expect it. Think about that: a gamer term - ironically referring to strategic deception - used to inject a new phrase into the language of sexual violence? Seriously, you don't suspect anything amiss here?
The internet knows how weak feminism is when tainted with postmodernism. They also know how ubiquitous postmodern feminism is. When you abandon facts, numbers and data, then you have no reliable standards for evidence. It is then an extreme temptation for your critics to inject myths into your network of knowledge, and see how gullible you actually will become before you abandon your silly postmodernism. So far the depths of your naivete have not been discovered.
If feminism survives, it will be without postmodernism. It will recognize objective reality and feminism's place in it. The future of feminism will have more facts, data, and science.
