Lively exchange between GOP, Democratic lawmakers on H40’s gender inequity
Rep. Tom Burditt (R-Rutland Town) and Rep. Bill Notte (D-Rutland City) took opposing sides on the gender fairness of a stealth condom bill.
By Guy Page
A bill singling out sex partners for removing condoms AKA “stealthing” passed out of the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday 8-3 and now goes to the House floor.
“No person shall engage in a sexual act with another person when consent to the sexual act is made with the explicit understanding that a condom would be used and intentionally and without consent remove or tamper with the condom prior to or during the sexual act in a manner likely to render it ineffective for its common purpose,” the bill states.
Condoms, of course, are used by men. The bill doesn’t reference women’s contraception, like pills or IUDs. This omission led Rep. Tom Burditt (R-Rutland Town) in committee discussion to call H.40 “the most unequal piece of legislation that’s ever come out of this room, out of this building.”
Women deceiving men about birth control is “as much stealthing as somebody removing a condom before they have sex,” Burditt said.
With its narrow focus on condoms, and the possibility that the bill would disproportionately benefit women who are victim to stealthing, Rep. Tom Burditt, R-West Rutland, on Tuesday called H.40 before casting his “no” vote.
Rep. Bill Notte (D-Rutland) took exception: “If this bill wasn’t equal, if this bill did somehow favor women, I don’t give a rat’s a – – …..Because you want to look at the history of sexual abuse, you want to look at the history of sexual violence, you want to look at how there’s been a double standard between men and women and what happens sexually — either consensually or non-consensually — in this country, it has favored man 99.9% of the time.
When the bill is taken for second reading today or tomorrow, Rep. Mark Higley (R-Lowell) said he plans to vote no. First, because he agrees with Burditt – both men and women should be held accountable for deceiving their partner about birth control, he said.
But Higley also said the fact that this bill is getting committee and floor attention, while other crucial bills addressing serious civil rights and heath problems are not, reflects poorly on the legislative priorities.
“I would probably be voting no just for the simple fact that so far this Legislature doesn’t have time for very important bills involving conscientious objections by healthcare providers in institutions, and for adverse vaccinations,” Higley said.
Higley is the sponsor of H183, protecting health care providers rights of conscience, and H189, reporting on adverse reactions to immunizations.