Posted on 09/10/2021 7:09:18 AM PDT by karpov
California is set to outlaw unannounced condom removal. A bill that passed the California legislature earlier this week and now awaits Gov. Gavin Newsom's signature would be the first in the country to make such "stealthing" a cause for legal action.
But the measure (Assembly Bill 453) will not work through the state's criminal code. Rather, removing a condom without a sexual partner's verbal consent will become grounds for a civil lawsuit and punitive damages, with the act added to the state's civil definition of sexual battery.
Under A.B. 453, "a person commits a sexual battery who 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."
In effect, it creates an affirmative consent rule for condom removal.
Supporters of the legislation say that consenting to safe sex doesn't mean consenting to sex without a condom. Thus, furtively removing a condom before or during sexual activity amounts to rape.
Yet determining who is telling the truth in such cases will be incredibly tricky. If nothing else, this seems like a very difficult claim to prove in court. ("How the fuck is this enforceable?" comments Nancy Rommelmann on Twitter. "It's not.")
Even folks who agree with the theory behind the law note that proving an offense may be impossible.
And what if someone never puts on a condom in the first place but their partner mistakenly thinks they did—could that partner still sue? Will the law punish people who inadvertently lose a condom during sex? Won't people sued under the law simply claim this is what happened?
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Next century history books will be so embarrassing.
—
What makes you imagine that there will be books in the next century? Or even that Americans will be able to read in the first place?
I checked to see if this was Babylon Bee...
I’d bet there are more women who sabotage condoms than men who pull them off. Unless you’re speaking of homosexual men, some of whom ENJOY giving other men AIDS.
Can’t wait for the first legal case of: “It fell off by itself.”
Unless this has something to do with the Porn industry, how does one prove the central issue?
Inquiring minds want to know: does this also cover IUDs and Diaphragms??
Yes, the U.S. Congress.
Proof what California legislature thinks with brains still in limbo mode.
If there was a male birth control pill, feminists would demand it to be banned.
Whoda thunk.
Precisely "what" constitutes an "announcement"?
Go Bareback - Problem solved.
” Hi...I’m Kamala Harris, and I welcome this important bill.”
“how does one prove the central issue?”
You didn’t read the fine print in the law? Video recordings of every amours encounter are required and must be submitted to the state for record keeping without five days of said encounter.
There ARE some of us, but not NEARLY enough to effect systemic change. We try to impart some small measure of wisdom upon those charged to our care, but it’s akin to skipping a small, flat, rock into an oncoming cultural tsunami.
You have to put your pants on over it and take it off after you get home, I guess.
Should read:
"...a small, flat rock..."
That was my first thought as well.
How does this get enforced?
Do you have a passport for that thing?
If any cases go to court, they’re going to insist on video proof.
Exactly how much alcohol is involved for this to happen?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.