"That's not what was originally agreed to": Perceptions, outcomes, and legal contextualization of non-consensual condom removal in a Canadian sample

PLoS One. 2019 Jul 10;14(7):e0219297. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0219297. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Non-consensual condom removal (NCCR) is the removal of a condom before or during sexual intercourse without one's partner's consent. Despite considerable news and media attention devoted to the trend (as stealthing), little empirical research to date has examined people's views of the practice. The present study aimed to contribute toward generating empirical evidence to guide the discussion surrounding NCCR. We asked participants about whether or not they felt NCCR is wrong, whether there should be consequences for its perpetration, and contextualized responses within legal context. A total of 592 undergraduate students took part in an online survey inquiring about their experiences with and views of NCCR. We used descriptive statistics to determine sample prevalence and outcomes of NCCR and qualitatively analyzed responses to open-ended questions asking about perceptions of NCCR. Of participants who had engaged in penetrative sexual intercourse with a male partner using an external condom, 18.7%, 95% CI [14.4, 22.7] reported that they had NCCR perpetrated against them. The majority of these participants reported that they experienced NCCR negatively and encountered related consequences; several reported contracting an STI, experiencing an unplanned pregnancy, or both. Nearly all participants expressed that NCCR is wrong, citing reasons that included the lack of consent, possibility of unplanned or unwanted outcomes, and a betrayal of trust. In this study, we found that there was agreement that NCCR is wrong, but variability in responses regarding the circumstances under which there should be consequences for the action. These perceptions reflect the current uncertainty in law. We recommend researchers refer to the phenomenon as NCCR (rather than stealthing) and discuss related issues to encourage future research to adopt consistent and accurate labels and definitions for NCCR. We hope that our findings will guide future research and spur public and legal discussion on NCCR.

MeSH terms

  • Adolescent
  • Adult
  • Canada
  • Coitus / psychology
  • Condoms*
  • Contraception / methods*
  • Copulation / physiology
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Pregnancy
  • Sex Offenses / legislation & jurisprudence
  • Sexual Behavior / psychology*
  • Sexual Partners / psychology*
  • Sexual and Gender Minorities
  • Students
  • Surveys and Questionnaires
  • Young Adult

Grants and funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.