California Bans ‘Stealthing’ To ‘Protect Women’

California Bans ‘Stealthing’ To ‘Protect Women’

Now if you are anything like me, once you heard the news that California’s retard-in-chief Gavin Newsom has made ‘stealthing’ illegal you probably wondered what stealthing was and why you had never heard of it in the first place.

Apparently, it is a feminist cause celebre but yet I cannot find any actual confirmed cases of it occurring beyond self-reported claims that have no independent confirmation of any kind.

The BBC article by Holly Honderich and Shrai Popat – basically a feminist and her shitskin familiar – does some mental backflips in explaining what this is and why it is apparently necessary:

‘About 30 years ago, just months after starting work as a prostitute, Maxine Doogan became pregnant.

She had been with a new client at a massage parlour in Anchorage,             Alaska, when she realised he had removed his condom surreptitiously during intercourse. Shocked, she ran to the bathroom. When she returned the client was gone.

Doogan, then in her mid-twenties, went to a nearby health clinic for a round of tests for sexually transmitted infections and later gave a silent thanks for each negative result.

Six weeks later, Doogan sought an abortion. It cost her around $300 (about £220 at today's conversion rate) and after the procedure she             couldn't work for a month.

What the client did was wrong. But as far as she knew it wasn't illegal.

"There's just no recourse for something like that," she said.

Now, in one US state there is.

Last Thursday, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law a bipartisan bill that outlaws non-consensual condom removal, known as "stealthing". The new legislation adds the act to the state's civil definition of sexual battery, making California the first US state to render stealthing illegal.

The law gives victims a clear legal remedy for the assault that Doogan, who now lives in San Francisco, suffered decades ago. And advocates say it marks a sea change for other survivors who, unlike Doogan, might now have their day in court.

"We wanted to make sure that it's not only immoral, but illegal," said California Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia who introduced the bill.

Garcia has been working on some version of this legislation for years. In 2017 and again in 2018, she introduced a bill that would have made             stealthing a criminal offence, and allowed prosecutors to seek jail time for perpetrators. These bills either died on the floor or did not get a hearing.

This new version, which amends just the civil code, passed in the                   California legislation with no opposition. Survivors can sue offenders for                 damages but no criminal charges can be brought forward.

"I still think this should be in the penal code," Garcia told the BBC. "If consent was broken, isn't that the definition of rape, or sexual assault?"

Legislative analysts have said that stealthing could be considered                 misdemeanour sexual battery, even though it is not explicitly named in the criminal code. But Garcia's new law removes any ambiguity for civil claims which, experts say, will make it easier for survivors to pursue their cases.’

Honderich and Popat go on at some length in a similar vein but notice the simple fact that neither they or Garcia (who surprise surprise hangs out with jews and supports any and all jewish and Israeli causes) explain how stealthing is differentiated from say the condom accidentally breaking or it slipping off due to poor application or a similar accidental but yet innocent situation that would lead to the same result and look similar to so-called ‘stealthing’.

Nor do they consider the rather obvious abuse this law is likely to be subject to with any unwanted pregnancy being claimed as a ‘stealthing’ case with the man unable to disprove that he didn’t either use a condom and didn’t intentionally take it off during sex while the woman is just supposed to be believed because she has a vagina and has decided that she doesn’t want to have the baby, regrets having the unprotected sex and/or wants to revenge herself against the man for some reason or another.

I mean women aren’t prone to false reporting of so-called ‘rape’ or anything

Oh, and this is coming to New York and Wisconsin too

This is going to go so well: huh?