GOP reps slam lack of equity in condom ‘stealthing’ ban

‘Equity has clearly taken the day off’

By Guy Page

A few Republican lawmakers fumed about gender inequality following the roll call vote approving the so-called ‘stealthing’ bill Friday. 

The bill prohibits ‘stealthing,’ AKA removing a condom without a sex partner’s knowledge or consent. The Vermont House of Representatives Friday, March 3 voted overwhelmingly 121-12 in favor of H.40, “nonconsensual removal of or tampering with a sexually protective device.”

Republicans in general agreed with the concept of the bill but some took issue with selectively focusing on male contraception. The only ‘sexually protective device’ covered by H.40 is the male-controlled condom – not birth control pills, or IUDs, or other birth control generally under the control of women. 

These Republicans entered comments into the record after the vote: 

Rep. Tom Burditt of West Rutland, who raised the same issue in the House Judiciary Committee: “I have no issue with what this bill does. I have an issue with ignoring the equality which is written in our U.S. Constitution, our Vermont Constitution, and is part of our oath of office.” 

Rep. Anne Donahue of Northfield: “I need to be responsible for my actions as much as I expect it of men. This bill wrongly suggest that only men engage in the sexual assault that occurs when consent is based on perpetration of a lie.” 

Rep. James Gregoire of Fairfield: “If we are sincere about protecting victims, then we cannot live in denial that similar acts do occur to men. No matter how that may not fit a narrative, it is all too true and devastating for male victims. If it has not happened to you, then you are lucky, by that I mean that it is wrong to discount that it has happened to men.”  

Rep. Patti McCoy of Poultney, Republican Minority Leader: “While I voted yes on this bill, I am disappointed we did not vet this bill from our “equity lens” view when drafting and ultimately passing this bill.” 

Rep. Mike Morgan of Milton: “I voted yes and I am in support of the structural foundations of the bill but I’m disappointed with the lack of equity in the bill.” 

Rep. Terri Lynn Williams of Granby: “I do support the intent in this bill but as we continue to work for equity in the people’s house, I do not find that in this bill, therefore I cannot support it.” 

One Democrat, John Arrison of Weathersfield, voted no. Two Democrats explained their support for the bill. 

Rep. Dolan of Essex Junction: It is especially meaningful for me to support this bill today with my two children with us in the Chamber. They and Vermonters deserve a decision that looks out for their safety, health, and future.”

Rep. Troy Headrick of Burlington

“Men are certainly victimized by sexual harassment and sexual assault as well. And, in some cases women perpetrate the behavior. However, Dr. Koss and countless other research studies will confirm that the vast majority of instances of sexual assault, rape, and attempted rape will identify a man as the perpetrator. This includes men who have been assaulted and raped by other men. Sexual violence harms women at overwhelmingly far greater rates than it does men. That is the only concern for equity that belongs in today’s Discussion.” 

The last word went to Republican Rep. Joe Parsons of Newbury: “I voted no today. Looking at all pieces of legislation through the lens of equity has clearly taken the day off.”

Categories: Legislation

22 replies »

  1. It’s like they never watched the women on Oprah Winfrey cheer each other on for lying about birth control to “get than man to commit.” Or heard about the NBA warning players not to leave finished condoms unattended lest they get spermjacked into huge child support payments. (Noting the language in the bill exempting tampering _after_ the sex act, effectively a loophole for exactly this.)

    Women do this to men… All. The. Time. I guarantee it’s far more frequent than “stealthing.” And it amounts to rape followed by 18-24 years of indentured servitude to the rapist.

    • What’s unbelievable to me is that men EVER even reluctantly manage to “acquiesce” to being intimate at ALL, what with the abject chicanery always involved on the part of the woman (whatever that is). Yes, with more women being accepted to & enrolling in college, in med & vet schools, etc. at greater rates than their male peers – it’s often difficult to perceive the time and effort (amidst their academic pursuits and their numbers within the workforce at close to 50%) that hordes of women still manage to take to puncture holes into condoms as they stealthfully await the very next innocent, virtuous, typically disinterested male to helplessly pass by.

      What’s even more puzzling are the ACTUAL number of rapes, perpetrated by males against females, to the tune of the 18 million women having experienced rape at some point during their lifetime as per US government stats – with 40% of these forcible assaults being committed by acquaintances of victim females. Apparently, despite knowing full well the damage being caused by women’s sexual chicanery, men still insist upon being arrested for over 80% of all violent crimes, including such forcible sexual assaults! How foolish.

      Further perplexing, according to the U.S. CDC – THIRTY percent of victims raped by a former intimate “partner” experienced some form of reproductive coercion by these men and nearly 25 percent of these men refused to use a condom during times of intimacy.

      In spite of all the prevailing sex crime statistical data compiled by the US government via the CDC and the FBI/DOJ however, clearly multitudes of chaste, virginal, and inculpable males are duped and deluded by predatory women who have sexually harassed and taken advantage of men for centuries, and Vermont KNOWS it!

      The gig is up, ladies. The true victims of rape and violent sexual assaults, discriminatory practices in the workplace, and sexual harassments are: males.

      So don’t allow decades of statistical evidentiary proof fool you any longer – male victimhood at the hands of women is widespread – just ask Hunter Biden! His illegal orgy & drug fueled promiscuous exploits very obviously forced upon him by sex workers and exotic dancers was basic entrapment. Poor, hapless Hunter. He is but one of many.

      • @Kathleen

        It’s not a contest. It’s just a dumb, hypocritical bill that doesn’t address any of the real problems that you or I have brought up. I do hope you feel better after writing all that though. ❤️

    • Thank you. I kinda do! Lol!

      But this truly is more about the recent constant attacks against women, not knowing what a woman is, proclaiming men can “transform” into a woman by simply wishing it so, loathing procreation, murdering babies, etc. etc. – all hidden behind yet another supposed “social equity” bill.
      Again, I agree with the legislature’s republicans here – stats show that actually more women are forced/pressured into pregnancy than are men forced into fatherhood (though that does occur but at a lesser degree, as per the data collected).

      So, what is this truly about? I imagine it is to further reject women’s issues, create more fader to damn babies along with the family unit & its importance – and to dismiss & demean the unique role(s) of women in society.

      These people are either truly sick or truly evil and I’m putting my money on the latter. This degree of disregard for 51% of the populace has got to be caused by some force more compelling than just being “twisted”, though they are that certainly.

      And with Vermonters struggling with heating bills, food costs, housing issues, all the seniors here with unique problems which require emergent attention, rapily rising crime, drug addiction, etc. – this nonsense, IMO, is just so insulting and vacuous it makes me infuriated.

      And I’d “heart” ya back, but I don’t know how. Lol!

      • There’s no quoted statistic on men forced into fatherhood above, and I still would assume it’s wildly more common than some Handmaid’s Tale, as the state, at any rate, definitely does not force women into motherhood. Even in the case of banning late term abortion etc., she can still literally abandon a baby at a hospital or police station and be absolved of all motherly rights & responsibilities under safe haven laws. In contrast, the state forces men into fatherhood all the time, with no ability to be absolved, and potential imprisonment for failure to pay, for any reason. Once the seed is out of the gun, men literally have no legal right to it. Once a woman is pregnant with said seed, she has ALL the legal rights. These feminist women say they want equality, but what they really want is unaccountability… for themselves only, of course. I think we probably agree on that at least. As well as your last paragraph.

    • The State doesn’t force men into fatherhood. Any male who chooses through his own volition to enter into a sexual relationship with a partner whom they may not be committed to are opening themselves up to the possibility & potential of creating new life which, morally and righteously, should never be ended thereafter – as life indeed begins at conception as per 92% of all scientists – whether they be pro-life or “pro-choice.”

      Therefore, despite your and Taylor’s (at the legislature) theory that women (again whatever they are) sit around all day poking holes in condoms attempting to lasso themselves one of these prized males you so often speak of – doesn’t jive at all with the statistics compiled by the US government’s CDC & DOJ statistics which I quoted. The reverse scenario is actually much more prevalent; no handmaiden’s tales involved.

      Nonetheless, even if what you claim were true – there remains a 100% absolutely fool-proof method of contraception that EVERY male AND female could and should begin to utilize and that is to not drop drawers at any & every opportunity unless both are committed and responsible enough financially/mentally/emotionally to accept the potential and biologically natural results of such a choice.

      The fact that the state must step in to force a parent to provide for their own flesh and blood which they brought into this world is a horribly sad & tragic commentary on the moral fabric within American men today and not likely the result of some wily female.

      Don’t want to be a father? Don’t partake in the one undisputed act well-known the world over to potentially make you a father. In other words, don’t hold up Hunter Biden as your mentor in this regard. Or in any other regard for that matter…… It’s actually pretty easy-peasy. No crack. No Heroin. No selling out your nation to Communist China. No promiscuity.

      • You’re having a hard time seeing it because you’ve been taught by 100 years of feminism that you’re a helpless victim. You’re not. You’re as equally capable of good and evil as any man, though we generally do both in different ways. I challenge you to find an episode of Oprah where the men cheer each other on for lying about vasectomies to get women pregnant in order to procure their “commitment,” and resources under threat of imprisonment. Or find an instance of a woman prosecuted for paternity fraud. It’s so common, and so unquestioned that people can’t even see it. You still haven’t actually quoted a statistic on forced fatherhood. I’d start with the number of men making state-enforced child support payments, which only go to men 15% of the time, and for 7% of that time, the woman is simply a no show in court, and probably would have gotten both custody and payments. Women, by the way, also default on those payments (“deadbeat moms,”) at a much higher rate than men do. Let’s not even get into how often the man isn’t even the actual father, whether by deceit, or by simple fact of dating or cohabiting with a single mother, and yet he is still forced to pay child support. It happens… All. The. Time. And the result is that women are entirely unaccountable to the men they choose to sleep with, and to conceive with. And it’s wrecking society.

    • Well, I fear that you don’t know me very well as the last characterization of anyone who knows me at all would be to refer to me as a “victim”. All I can personally state is that working in the (formerly) male dominated field of television production in the NYC region was certainly never a cakewalk for a female college-educated newbie trying to create a pathway to success within that industry. Workplace sex discrimination and gender harassment were once commonplace and well-tolerated despite having been violations of federal law for some time. However, as a strong, educated, capable woman – being victimized by men – actually never made me a victim. What it did do though was create a workplace environment that was exceptionally unpleasant and therefore unjust and highly inequitable.

      As far as the stats I gave, they are again easily accessible on the US Government’s CDC website – including the stats that despite the fact that there are deadbeat moms – they don’t exist anywhere close to the rate that the “dads” do, with the government citing a percentage that over one third of biological fathers are under court order to pay child support.

      But no matter, the present state of affairs of this country is dismal with so many members of both sexes having utter disregard for traditional American values and appearing to not possess any semblance of a moral compass when it comes to personal mores/behaviors. My point is that in the end it’s exceptionally easy, particularly as a male, if you don’t wish to worry about an unwanted pregnancy & all it entails is simply not engage in the very act which might result in such. True, men may not appreciate that methodology, but nonetheless it remains foolproof. And women can do the very same, save for acts of sexual assault perpetrated against them (to the tune of approximately 200,000 or so annually).

      In the meanwhile, there does still exist millions of examples sound, upstanding, responsible, decent people of BOTH genders today – many of whom CANNOT be located within the hallowed halls of the State House. This particular piece of legislation in question is just more pure unadulterated garbage intended to, as always, manipulate and divide. Introduced (I believe) by a biological male who claims to be a female, it appears as though this now “female” – who shall forever remain a male from a biological standpoint – still in fact retains much of their misogynistic mentality of her “former male” self in apparently being of the distinct opinion that today’s woman (again, whatever that is) spends much of her time tediously yet successfully compromising male birth control devices. Yeah, OK, sure Taylor.

      Don’t want to be a parent? Don’t engage in the act of procreation.

    • I never listen to NPR or to Oprah, and I recommend that you try to do the same. Isn’t NPR government-controlled radio/TV who tell their listeners that males can be females & females can be males? Aren’t they the ones who helped spawn the “insurrection” narrative? Don’t they claim that “white supremacists” (like the posters on & readers of this very site) are the greatest threats to the democracy of this nation?

      No thanks. I don’t buy any of that nonsense from either Hollyweird or Government TV. War-on-Women. And undoubtably NPR is likely thrilled to hop aboard the anti-woman bandwagon if it benefits the all-important “party” which is why the ignorant, phony “feminists” you speak of don’t make a peep any longer about genuine feminist pursuits such as stopping abortions, speaking out against the violent, often deadly atrocities against women in the Middle East & in India, protesting against domestic violence, fighting for women’s sports, etc. etc.

      Instead? The proverbial deafening silence.

  2. Do we have some legislative action here that actually is forcing those involved to acknowledge the existence and the distinction of two biological genders and admit that their safety concerns have to do only with anatomy as opposed to how one identifies? Can we assume that the sponsor, in order to address these safety concerns effectively must be able to define and distinguish between the two genders and offer her definition of a “woman”? And how would one legally distinguish between a deliberate act and a “wardrobe malfunction”? If the encounter only involved 2 persons, it’s one’s word against the other. In the case of multiple participants, I suppose there could be several witnesses to the “stealthing”. The demoprog caucus of the Vermont legislature have become a circus side show of individuals who use it for purposes of virtue signaling and to make a name for themselves by competing on who can propose the most outlandish ideas. When the sponsor uses the justification: “It’s been addressed in California. It’s time for us to do it”, we know that we are in trouble.

  3. What a psychotically authoritarian bill. Equity might have taken a day off in Vermont, but common sense has been AWOL for at least two decades! What’s next? Illegal to refuse a date from a tranny because… you know… felony transphobia?

  4. With so many problems facing Vermont, this issue seems rather absurd. Just par for the course for the progressive liberal democrats in Montpelier to waste time and money on finding another way to screw Vermonters…

    • Indeed! There is a certain irony in the ProgDems passing a “stealth condom” law when they’ve been stealth-screwing Vermonters for decades (with impunity!)

  5. Our country, our culture, is in a lot of trouble. Let us fervently work to stem the tide.

  6. Looks like another slow day at the capital and to think that we pay people to come up with this stuff. Meanwhile people are in trouble with high cost of living, fear of taxes being proposed, a pension fund we talk alot about. So many so misfocused.

  7. Women of the democrat/progressive/socialist persuasions: You are your OWN worst enemy.

  8. I have another objection: Too many separate laws. There are already penalties for criminal fraud, etc. Prosecute under existing Law.

  9. I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THIS BILL (H.40). I couldn’t care less what married, unmarried, swingers…whatever, tell each other (or do) before, during or after sex. Suddenly we’re concerned about honesty in (primarily promiscuous) sexual relations??? Last l knew our woke society couldn’t be bothered with the constraints of a marriage whereby two people were honest and faithful to one another, but now they want sexual partners (presumably casual partners) to be honest with one another. Here’s the scenario: a married individual decides to cheat on their spouse, that’s OK, BUT they have to be honest with their cheating partner about contraception!!! You people in Montpeculiar are IDIOTS!!!

  10. Even funnier is that older women are looking and paying for one-night stands with college boys. Which would you go with, as a 20 y/o guy? A college gal who will screw you over, or a 50 y/o female who pays for everything and buys you nice things? So, in light of this, maybe we should see the real problem is that proggies are so self-consumed that they cannot let go of their long-lost youth and need to molest the young b/c of their own fears of getting older, not having a family, and dying alone.