Portlandacdc
Male
Fucking is base. Animalistic. Pure, when free from the judgments and inhibitions of society and imposed upon us. Cock takes, penetrates, fills, dominates. Man fucks woman; subject, verb, object* - and the species propogates.
Fucking is not making love. Fucking is not a relationship. Relationships are built from and support the most important parts of our selves. They make us whole. People. Individuals. Human. And they take many forms. The best last a lifetime - whether romantic, familial, platonic or other. We need relationships to live and love for long, happy lives.
Yet while we as individuals in larger societies may need both, these needs often fail to resolve inherent conflict between the pleasures our bodies were built to enjoy and the frailties of that same form. On the one hand, we evolved in a ******* world with danger around every field, mountain or fjord while taking years to mature. We need tools and clothing to live, and other people to thrive.
These conflicts can be seen almost everywhere sex and morality meet, and it is in these conflicts where some of tbe dirtiest, kinkiest and most emotionally challenging sexual relationships develop. Parents and those in power - whether religious, political, academic or other- take great pains to impose their sense of sexual morality upon teenagers coming into their own, with hormones exploding and new sexual desires around every corner.
We are told who to fuck by being told who not to fuck. We are told what we should enjoy, how we should enjoy it, and what should or should not matter. We are told what we should and should not look like, and what makes someone beautiful, plain or ugly. And all of these decisions are predecided before imposition on the curious without consideration of what we actually want. To be fair, many of these historical limitations come from a desire to protect - STDs are real, men from the next valley really would torch the village and ******* whose left, and women did need more protection especially during pregnancy and after birth. But what often started from a place of love later got corrupted into domination and control masquerading as love when its real motivation was the fragile male ego.
Or at least this has been the historical pattern, especially but not exclusively as imposed upon girls and women by men of influence and power.
Sexual liberation and the empowerment of women is changing the dynamic, slowly but surely. It seems that when women have choices, they don't always choose who or what their fathers and society tried to impose. Today, more women than men attend college and grad school, more than 100 women have passed graduated Army Ranger school, and one of the US astronauts on the ISS was originally a submariner.
And so too with sexual choices.
Especially with sexual pleasure and sexual choices born of knowledge and experience.
How much of what we are taught is actually just meant to protect the status quo, the patriarchy and that most fragile of things, the male ego?
Dick size is a prime example. Men, well, we live our dicks. From the time it starts to feel good, it's a toy we want to share with everyone, and there's this apparent natural belief that because it feels so good to us that everyone wants to see it (cue dick pics, and how many men even here have only dick pics on their profiles).
And obviously, because we have the outies, bigger is always better, and we tend to put an outsized focus on size mattering more than anything else. Bigger has to be better, and look at the size of my truck and hear how loud it it is to see how big I am.
Look at what even academia and feminism (at least when I went to college) also told us - size matters not one bit. I had a sex professor/therapist tell an undergrad class exactly that, with the express implication that a woman who wanted big was not doing it for physical pleasure because she could cite a study that said it didn't matter for the female orgasm.
But size does matter, at least to some percentage of women. It isn't everything, but some percentage of women have a place that is not reached by the shallow motions of shallow seas, a place that instead needs plunged by the deepest, darkest depths of the deepest motions for her to be fully satisfied.
I suspect a deeper, linked, reason telling us size doesn't matter from the respective institutions. To break the glass ceiling and patriarchy, both honest academia and several veins of feminism (and forgive me for not knowing the schools and waves) have righteously focused on minimizing the differences between the biological sexes within the context of also addressing race and ethnic discrimination. Fewer differences mean fewer logical reasons for the subjugation of women and of minorities. ******* of my generation were the "color blind" generation from academia - just ignore your lying eyes for anecdotes are only examples, and instead pay attention to the outcome determinative studies those who know best decide to show you.
So too with some schools of feminism. If size matters, then man fucking woman - subject, verb, object - has some ability to control a woman through her sex. Fuck, if a dick can control a woman, that brings into question many of the conclusions the ones who know best for what you really need - that there are no differences except those imposed by the insecure white male patriarchy. Whatever you do, don't believe your lying pussy that came like a bitch in heat when that dominant, masculine man bent you over the tailgate of his truck and took what he wanted from you.
But he did take what he wanted from your body.
And you loved it. You loved that raw power, you loved being taken and filled and fucked and used. His dick did control you. His dick did own you, even if for that moment. And you absolutely needed to earn his seed, his approval, and you wanted him to breed you.
And after you could still do whatever the fuck you want to do with your life even if you enjoy a huge cock stretching your cunt.
As that student in that sex therapist's class who had seen that look on women's faces when I found new places, I knew that what was being pitched as science wasn't objective. It was political and meant to address rather than explain sociological differences. And even if well intentioned, politics do not orgasms make.
Which, in my mind (as a straight presenting white guy) seemed to miss much of the great promise of feminism. Shouldn't a woman be able to explore and decide for her self what her self wants? And why the hell do the opinions of anyone except those people she chooses to trust have any place in deciding anything for her? The societal pressures on women to conform and present as a monolith are real, and not just as imposed by a very real patriarchy.
So too for boys and men.
Think of GI Joe and He Man - masculinity with neither feelings except patriotism and war, masculinity without failures or bodyfat, and absolutely always in control and always more than enough for whatever task, fantasy or desire his wife or girlfriend has or needs done.
While the pressure to obey and conform to expectations is not nearly as strong for men (especially white men) as women (and especially women of color), the end result has similarities. By conforming to that predecided for us, we lose much of our complete humanity. GI Joe is not a man anymore than Barbie is a woman anymore than a Mormon housewife who could have been a rocket scientist or President was allowed to realize her full potential.
Which in many ways is why I find cuckolding so hot. I love femininity - lace and lingerie and heels and the scent of a woman aroused or at the end of the day, a mix of social and biological cues. But I have invariably dated and entered into relationships with intelligent and strong women who can admit their need to just be taken, even if only to give meaningful consent. In that need, I have yet to find that woman who also wants to be contrast her competing needs to be fucked and filled, conquered and taken, and worshiped and spoiled all at the same time.
Yet, I have heard and listen to their stories, to their experiences, to their desires. And holy hell is the fantasy of woman in full pursuing the pleasure she wants hot, even if the pleasure she wants, needs and deserves comes from a cock much larger than mine. Especially if it's much larger, especially if the man to whom it's attached is different than me. For then the preasure to conform dissipates, at least in me and often in her. Her complexity and her needs compliment my own. Her need of something I cannot ever provide allows a place where I can not fill her most feminine if needs with what I was raised to believe made me male. In that place, my role is different than I've ever allowed to exist while allowing us both the humanity of the relationship.
Her needs matter. Her most base, animalistic yet complete human needs matter. Her wants matter. Her desires matter, regardless of me or my immutable traits.
That's too hot to ignore. Even if it ends with the dick I love so caged with the key nestled in her bosom, or whatever else she has in store. It doesn't make me less of a man.
It makes me me. Human. Complex.
Fucking is not making love. Fucking is not a relationship. Relationships are built from and support the most important parts of our selves. They make us whole. People. Individuals. Human. And they take many forms. The best last a lifetime - whether romantic, familial, platonic or other. We need relationships to live and love for long, happy lives.
Yet while we as individuals in larger societies may need both, these needs often fail to resolve inherent conflict between the pleasures our bodies were built to enjoy and the frailties of that same form. On the one hand, we evolved in a ******* world with danger around every field, mountain or fjord while taking years to mature. We need tools and clothing to live, and other people to thrive.
These conflicts can be seen almost everywhere sex and morality meet, and it is in these conflicts where some of tbe dirtiest, kinkiest and most emotionally challenging sexual relationships develop. Parents and those in power - whether religious, political, academic or other- take great pains to impose their sense of sexual morality upon teenagers coming into their own, with hormones exploding and new sexual desires around every corner.
We are told who to fuck by being told who not to fuck. We are told what we should enjoy, how we should enjoy it, and what should or should not matter. We are told what we should and should not look like, and what makes someone beautiful, plain or ugly. And all of these decisions are predecided before imposition on the curious without consideration of what we actually want. To be fair, many of these historical limitations come from a desire to protect - STDs are real, men from the next valley really would torch the village and ******* whose left, and women did need more protection especially during pregnancy and after birth. But what often started from a place of love later got corrupted into domination and control masquerading as love when its real motivation was the fragile male ego.
Or at least this has been the historical pattern, especially but not exclusively as imposed upon girls and women by men of influence and power.
Sexual liberation and the empowerment of women is changing the dynamic, slowly but surely. It seems that when women have choices, they don't always choose who or what their fathers and society tried to impose. Today, more women than men attend college and grad school, more than 100 women have passed graduated Army Ranger school, and one of the US astronauts on the ISS was originally a submariner.
And so too with sexual choices.
Especially with sexual pleasure and sexual choices born of knowledge and experience.
How much of what we are taught is actually just meant to protect the status quo, the patriarchy and that most fragile of things, the male ego?
Dick size is a prime example. Men, well, we live our dicks. From the time it starts to feel good, it's a toy we want to share with everyone, and there's this apparent natural belief that because it feels so good to us that everyone wants to see it (cue dick pics, and how many men even here have only dick pics on their profiles).
And obviously, because we have the outies, bigger is always better, and we tend to put an outsized focus on size mattering more than anything else. Bigger has to be better, and look at the size of my truck and hear how loud it it is to see how big I am.
Look at what even academia and feminism (at least when I went to college) also told us - size matters not one bit. I had a sex professor/therapist tell an undergrad class exactly that, with the express implication that a woman who wanted big was not doing it for physical pleasure because she could cite a study that said it didn't matter for the female orgasm.
But size does matter, at least to some percentage of women. It isn't everything, but some percentage of women have a place that is not reached by the shallow motions of shallow seas, a place that instead needs plunged by the deepest, darkest depths of the deepest motions for her to be fully satisfied.
I suspect a deeper, linked, reason telling us size doesn't matter from the respective institutions. To break the glass ceiling and patriarchy, both honest academia and several veins of feminism (and forgive me for not knowing the schools and waves) have righteously focused on minimizing the differences between the biological sexes within the context of also addressing race and ethnic discrimination. Fewer differences mean fewer logical reasons for the subjugation of women and of minorities. ******* of my generation were the "color blind" generation from academia - just ignore your lying eyes for anecdotes are only examples, and instead pay attention to the outcome determinative studies those who know best decide to show you.
So too with some schools of feminism. If size matters, then man fucking woman - subject, verb, object - has some ability to control a woman through her sex. Fuck, if a dick can control a woman, that brings into question many of the conclusions the ones who know best for what you really need - that there are no differences except those imposed by the insecure white male patriarchy. Whatever you do, don't believe your lying pussy that came like a bitch in heat when that dominant, masculine man bent you over the tailgate of his truck and took what he wanted from you.
But he did take what he wanted from your body.
And you loved it. You loved that raw power, you loved being taken and filled and fucked and used. His dick did control you. His dick did own you, even if for that moment. And you absolutely needed to earn his seed, his approval, and you wanted him to breed you.
And after you could still do whatever the fuck you want to do with your life even if you enjoy a huge cock stretching your cunt.
As that student in that sex therapist's class who had seen that look on women's faces when I found new places, I knew that what was being pitched as science wasn't objective. It was political and meant to address rather than explain sociological differences. And even if well intentioned, politics do not orgasms make.
Which, in my mind (as a straight presenting white guy) seemed to miss much of the great promise of feminism. Shouldn't a woman be able to explore and decide for her self what her self wants? And why the hell do the opinions of anyone except those people she chooses to trust have any place in deciding anything for her? The societal pressures on women to conform and present as a monolith are real, and not just as imposed by a very real patriarchy.
So too for boys and men.
Think of GI Joe and He Man - masculinity with neither feelings except patriotism and war, masculinity without failures or bodyfat, and absolutely always in control and always more than enough for whatever task, fantasy or desire his wife or girlfriend has or needs done.
While the pressure to obey and conform to expectations is not nearly as strong for men (especially white men) as women (and especially women of color), the end result has similarities. By conforming to that predecided for us, we lose much of our complete humanity. GI Joe is not a man anymore than Barbie is a woman anymore than a Mormon housewife who could have been a rocket scientist or President was allowed to realize her full potential.
Which in many ways is why I find cuckolding so hot. I love femininity - lace and lingerie and heels and the scent of a woman aroused or at the end of the day, a mix of social and biological cues. But I have invariably dated and entered into relationships with intelligent and strong women who can admit their need to just be taken, even if only to give meaningful consent. In that need, I have yet to find that woman who also wants to be contrast her competing needs to be fucked and filled, conquered and taken, and worshiped and spoiled all at the same time.
Yet, I have heard and listen to their stories, to their experiences, to their desires. And holy hell is the fantasy of woman in full pursuing the pleasure she wants hot, even if the pleasure she wants, needs and deserves comes from a cock much larger than mine. Especially if it's much larger, especially if the man to whom it's attached is different than me. For then the preasure to conform dissipates, at least in me and often in her. Her complexity and her needs compliment my own. Her need of something I cannot ever provide allows a place where I can not fill her most feminine if needs with what I was raised to believe made me male. In that place, my role is different than I've ever allowed to exist while allowing us both the humanity of the relationship.
Her needs matter. Her most base, animalistic yet complete human needs matter. Her wants matter. Her desires matter, regardless of me or my immutable traits.
That's too hot to ignore. Even if it ends with the dick I love so caged with the key nestled in her bosom, or whatever else she has in store. It doesn't make me less of a man.
It makes me me. Human. Complex.
- Catherine A. MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State.
