SD: Advocates looking to add ‘stealthing’ to sexual assault laws

Source: 11/27/23

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (Dakota News Now) – Community advocates and now state legislators are looking to tackle a growing issue nationwide and in South Dakota this upcoming session in Pierre. That’s the growing trend of sex stealthing.

It can already be tough for victims of sexual assault to speak up about their experience, or even report it in the first place. That’s the situation that Georgilee Flynn found herself in.

“This is something that is near and dear to me, because I was a victim of stealthing,“ Flynn said.

“Stealthing” is defined as when during intercourse, one of the partners removes the condom without the knowledge or consent of the other party.

Read the full article


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ok, full disclosure… could not actually finish reading the article. Too….

Is this really, “Assault”? The intercourse is, unless i missed something, consentual? The removing the condom isn’t however. That sounds like fraud to me, not assault. Anybody that does this sound be held accountable… Civilly and perhaps criminally… but this is not sexual assault.

However, because it involves sex, K&D will jump all over this and demand that it is assault, despite not being so. They will further demand that all who have done are lifetime threats to anyone and everyone, especially children! This will be yet another confirmation of the surreal fantasy world the K&D demand we validate in law.

If K&D were correct, that “All who have done this are Predators”… And that millions have done this and gotten away with it, some multiple times with multiple people… Shouldn’t these people be producing millions of sexual assaults a year… some for multiple decades?

Yes, K&D live in a surreal nightmare worlds filled with 10’s of millions of “Predators” all commiting 10’s of millions of sexual assaults every year. Based on the number of arrests for SO… It would seem that at least 95% of the time, “Perfect crime”.

However, that only proves to K&D that we need a lot more cops and much tougher sentences! Yes, these people get away with these crimes because nobody yells the cops they happened, but if you have a lot more cops… that magically goes away! Same thing they’ve been doing for decades… still waiting on the magic.

Seriously, in K&D Nightmare world, it would be virtually impossible to make it a whole year without getting raped by a stranger, and utterly impossible to get all the way through childhood without getting raped at least once. These people are insane, and we need to stop pandering to their crazy.

I feel for this woman she was betrayed by someone she trusted. That is sad, but this is not sexual assault… Fraud. A civil issue for sure, maybe a misdemeanor criminal issue. Felony only if it produces actual harm… Unwanted pregnancy.. STD… trauma of some kind (Debilitating fear of pregnancy/STD?)… otherwise a misdemeanor with no need to register. So, only register felons for this? Really, for this? How foes this even suggest this person is likely to do anything more than maybe this again?

And another thing….Hear me out… Starting with a gut punch.

Enjoy rasing your child all on your own… You wicked woman! This is your punishment for having sinful sex that is unsanctioned by Space Daddy! Yeah that’s what you get for telling the cops what this guy … may (or may not) have actually done… but then not getting an abortion!

Yep, some guy actually does this and you get pregnant as a result…better not tell the cops! If you do, either get an abortion or you’re raising that kid all on your own. Soon to be PFR Stealth Daddy will be too busy being in jail to help. Then later, he’ll be to busy being a PFR to help with the kid…. and maybe too restricted by law as well.

That’s what you get for defying the will of Space Daddy (AKA God)… and not getting an abortion.

You sure it was his kid? You sure this is actually how he you got pregnant? That’s not what he says. He says you were ok with no condom, just like the first time. He said because you were already pregnant with his kid, this 2nd hookup definitely no need.

Hello other woman….
You say you only got an abortion because that rich guy you seduced Stealthed you? You sure the pregnancy you just aborted was from the rich guy and not that total loser you usually sleep with?

Hmmmm, I wonder if Rich guy would be willing to… Live up to his responsibility in an .. informal kinda way? You know, without involving any 3rd parties who may… take acception to what totally for sure happened just like you said. Has to be exactly like you said… I mean it’s not like we live in a society where accusation automatically equals life destroying guilt.

Dont believe me? You go talk to Woody Allen… He’ll back me up on this!

For one – until today I didn’t know that this “stealthing” is actually a thing.

Second – Classifying that as “Assault” or “Rape” is really muddling and messing with the meaning of those words – especially when it is during intercourse between two consenting individuals. Fraud is a more apt description.

Thirdly – how do cases like this actually work out? During investigation – how are the facts of these cases are being determined after intercourse and in some cases after much time has passed? The problems that I see with this comes down to he said/she said when it comes to who is at fault.

Isn’t there a risk with all forms of contraception? Nothing is 100% guaranteed. Maybe you would want to know your partner first and both use contraceptions? I’ve had women tell me not to use a condom because they could no longer get pregnant. (I didn’t believe them). So with their very next boyfriend, shock, suddenly immaculate conception. This is often done to get the guy to stay with them and their multiple kids from different fathers. At some point people need to take responsibility for their own actions and dumb decisions.

I can see the argument where “stealthing” is a form of rape. The woman gave consent for “protected” sex only. Any other kind of sex beyond that limitation is unwanted and I think can generate some of the psychological trauma caused by a more “traditional” rape. You must understand that a woman knows full well when a man ejaculates into her, or so the women in my life have told me. She will know that she has been violated So I think it is rape pure and simple. This may be a case where the irrational, sex crime fear mongering, hypocritical fundamentalist Christian Taliban that run the legislature in Pierre just might do something right for a change if the community advocates who are asking for anti-stealthing laws get their way.

Nonsense like this is why sex robots were invented and will likely become prevalent in the next generation or so. Then watch all these same Karens whine that men don’t pay attention to them.

So if a couple are getting down and the condom breaks or slips off on its own, the dude will have to register? Pure nonsense. This world is going insane.

Just another excuse for another government law to criminalize something that shouldn’t be. Clearly there’s consensual sex happening in a “stealthing” scenario, and the risk of pregnancy is always a factor, even if a man is wearing a condom. It alludes me why a man in this day in age would purposely want to knock up a girlfriend who doesn’t want children. That’s why I think it’s mostly women who are stealthing in order to trap men into marriage….especially if they come from well to do families.

Ha! This reminds me of John Walsh’s imagined “evolving threat” against children he referred to as “bus surfing.”

And I call everything the registry entails hate stacking and nuisance lading.

Women Don’t Like How Condoms Feel Any More Than Men Do (Pysch Today Nov 2015)
We never think to ask women if they like the way condoms feel.

Can a woman feel the difference if a condom is being used during sex? (Quora)

You have to wonder what the charge and conviction rate of this particular act is and question the knowledge of the condom’s removal, i.e., the state of the actors during the act and if one cannot consent if there is a mistake of fact defense possibility (a person who has had one drink cannot consent…). According to what is published, the female certainly can vaginally feel the difference between condom and non-condom intercourse, e.g., skin on skin, lube v non-lube, ribbed v non-ribbed condoms, etc.

Therefore, if the male knowingly removes the condom and re-enters vaginally, the female will most certainly feel it according to survey results read above in the two sources provided and more than just at the point of ejaculation. i.e., skin on skin throughout. If she removes consent by objection, then it becomes rape if the act is not stopped, even without ejaculation, which is already on the books and has many people convicted of.

I guess the question I would ask the state legislator is how can a woman not know a condom has been removed when intercourse is then continued? You have to consider the actor’s condition at the time of consent initially and then throughout the act. If the act is continued without consent, then it is rape. If the act is knowingly continued where ejaculation inside happens but was not wanted, then that is the risk you take when you have unprotected sex. I am not sure you can charge a guy with a crime after removing the condom with two party consent even if the guy knows ejaculation is on the way and he pulls out beforehand (even the pull out method to avoid pregnancy does not necessarily prevent pregnancy as middle school/Jr High health class teaches that).

I feel this is a splitting hairs law in the works for political gain about an act already on the books and to make people feel better about something that happened with consequences they are responsible for but don’t want to admit it. The survey results probably got sympathy responses to move this forward. Don’t mean to sound so gruff about it, but it happens in your data source pool on some topics. Science and society prove skin on skin vaginal touching will be felt by both parties. If the female does not feel skin on skin vaginal intercourse or is not cognizant enough to know skin on skin vaginal touching is happen, then there is more to the situation. There is nothing stealth about it other than the condom being removed without two party consent and the act continuing with or without consent, which is, in the end, rape. (Probably should send this to the legislator for their consideration.)

Last edited 2 months ago by TS

Sorry, your honor the condom slipped off 🤷‍♂️

There are so many arguments against this kind of stupidity… The obvious first one is if the Condom accidentally comes off, which can happen. There is also the argument of the woman feeling the difference and still neglecting to stop it, because it “Felt good at the time”. Likewise she could consent and then the next day either feel scared of what people will think of she accidentally gets pregnant from her choice the night before, so lays blame on the man.
Or she agrees that night and then maybe next day or after a couple of times she gets ghosted and gets angry and vengeful and decides to accuse the guy of doing this.
One of the main problems is that in the bedroom it’s all he said she said, unless your a freak and like to have someone watch ECT. Are we now going to have to stop mid-screw and record a naked consent video, I am sure the women are going to love that.
This, just like most of the sex offense laws run too high of a chance to be abused and weponised again people, men in particular. Because the way almost all of the laws are constructed, most often require absolutely no evidence aside from some woman pointing a finger and giving some vague statement, to arrest and prosecute someone and effectively destroying a person’s life and reputation, even if they are never convicted. Because let’s face it, most people are complete and utter morons. They believe if someone is charged and arrested then obviously the police and courts must have some damning evidence of the person’s guilt, or else they wouldn’t be charged. They don’t understand how little it takes to get a guy thrown in jail, even when he has done nothing wrong, because in a “he said” “she said.” The woman 99.999% of the time is going to be believed over the man, unless she is some strung out crack whore and the guy happens to be a senators son or something.
This whole country has been going down hill for a long, long time. At first it was a slow and gradual decline by small degree’s. But here in the last 20 – 30 years, the decline has stomped on the accelerator and it’s only a matter of time before we crash and burn into the ground and our country implodes.

Sorry for the long rant.

This seems like it would be tremendously difficult to prove. Without some kind of admission of guilt by one of the parties I don’t think there is sufficient evidence to prove anything.

And quite honestly, in some way this could affect women with criminal charges more often than men. When I was younger and just messing around with different people all the time more than one woman tried this crap, probably trying to purposefully get impregnated. While I am sure there are men that will do this too, I believe most men are more averse to impregnating someone and are therefore actually less likely to do this. It’s just that unless someone is impregnated or someone gets a disease a man is far less likely to complain about having been ‘stealthed”. I suspect there will be a lot more men complaining about this having happened after an unintended pregnancy than anticipated by these lawmakers.

I don’t get it. Is someone complaining because the conditions of the sex has been altered?

The article video starts off about sexual assault/rape. So, two people get to the point of having sex, whatever that definition is, and continue to having sex and one of them changes the way this sex is being done by removing the barrier between the two and declaring that as sexual assault/rape?

So I query what is the legal definition of stealthing ? There’s not even a definition much less a legal definition. There are articles about it but no definition.
I got news for you all, if a man has a condom on and has his penis in you, wherever opening that happens to be, you are having sex. You consented or you are drugged beyond consent, or are forced beyond consent.

The removal of said barrier does not change that consent or non-consent.

1:10 into the video the real reason for objection is revealed… it encouraged more victims to speak up. What victims? The ones who don’t want the partners diseases? The ones who don’t want to get pregnant? The ones were didn’t get satisfied?