#No is no: project that penalizes the non-consensual withdrawal of the condom is approved by deputies

This morning was approved with 82 votes in favor, 3 against and 39 abstentions the bill that seeks to criminalize the non-consensual withdrawal of the condom during a sexual relationship, the project advances its processing and returns to the Women’s Commission for discussion in particular.
In the instance, there was a brief debate about the need for this penalty, in this context, from the Republican Party, Deputy Cristóbal Urruticoechea intervened assuring that although a woman cannot be allowed to be raped or deceived, in this project there would be according to his vision two problems, one would be the “burden of proof” and that “it can be given for both sides, there can be a lie of both man and woman and incubates the ideal of feminism, with that it already loses all meaning.”
On the other hand, Maite Orsisi (RD) explained that stealthing is a name that “we had to put to a situation that thousands of women have suffered and did not know how to name, let alone how to denounce. To remove the condom in the middle of a sexual relationship is to take away the protection against diseases and pregnancy, it is to take it out in a stealthy way, hidden, because the consensual relationship was in other terms. ”
In addition, she emphatically added that this is a problem of gender violence around consent from start to finish, which must be given in a sexual relationship so that there is neither rape nor abuse. “It’s not no, and when we say yes, it’s under certain conditions, precisely, like condom use,” he said.
On the contrary, the deputy Ximena Ossandón (RN) questioned the project mentioning that her sector is always criticized that gets into people’s bed and that if this “is not getting into bed, then what is it”. In addition, he compared the withdrawal without consent of the condom with which a woman does not take the contraceptive pill and becomes pregnant as a similar situation.
In the same vein, he questioned that this practice is framed in the terms of situations of “gender violence”, he believes that in his opinion, the project is rather “symbolic” against violence against women, but that in courts it will be “very difficult to prove whether a person withdrew the condom on purpose or not”.
Meanwhile, Erika Olivera (IND) was categorical in defending the initiative and the role that the Women’s Commission has led in gender matters when it comes to advancing in positioning this type of issues that before “this congress would not have even treated or warned”.
Regarding the project, he believes that the removal of condoms without consent is a manifesto of contempt for the sexual and reproductive rights of women, “it constitutes a violation of that trust and complicity that any person puts in an intimate relationship, precisely in a modern society where these relationships must be based on respect and affection.”
Removal can not only result in an unwanted pregnancy, but also a sexually transmitted disease, in a context where as a country we have had a proliferation of this type of disease in a sustained manner.
This bill would not be so urgent to approve, in Olivera’s opinion, “if in our country sex education were taught from an early age with content according to age and putting as a priority the prevention of diseases, affective and family responsibility, gender equity, reproductive rights and the prevention of unwanted pregnancy. If this existed, it would be a socially reprehensible practice, not something endorsed by some men,” he concludes.

Original source in Spanish