Phallarchist

No, not at all. Natural body hair is essential.

On 12/29/2020 at 2:01 PM, ErosWired said:

I imagine your 5-page application is designed to weed out all but the most serious applicants, but it still sounds fraught with risk.

I'm sure no one thinks it's a legally-binding document. As you suggest, it would be a way to make sure the candidate knows the parameters of the proposal and to gauge his actual level of desire for it to happen.

On 12/31/2020 at 8:50 AM, ErosWired said:

While I can see an obvious benefit to having a spare, I’m not sure I see how the arrangement improves the issue of maintenance

I have digestion mostly in mind. A faggot has to have an empty stomach or an empty and cleansed colon to be useful. It's unrealistic to impose both conditions on a boy's body every day. It's better that that he take enema rest and heal on alternate days at least. A 2:1 ratio also goes some way to satisfy the male ego and desire for variety.

I would match one man with two boys. Faggot cunt requires a lot of maintenance time, so having two in circulation increases cunt availability for the man. If a boy had a random male urge, he could dissipate it in the other boy (with the man's permission) and return to female service.

Men have limited opportunities to ejaculate, so they tend to choose their targets carefully. You should try to find out why men find you undeserving of their seed. It might be some factor that you can improve.

20 hours ago, Cutedelicategay said:

Bottoms are akin to females in hetero world. Can't imagine a hairless top so Can't imagine a Hairy bottom. 

Actual Female Cunt™ has even more hair than the average ass.

12 hours ago, bubblebottom991 said:

What do you guys think? Should i shave or leave it?

Leave it and grow more!

I am looking for completely untouched hair growth below the neck. I prefer an extremely hairy cunt. It's just beautiful. But I am perfectly happy with less hair as long as it's natural.

32 minutes ago, subBottomKink said:

Dominance is what turns me on, in the main.

On this opposite side of the equation, I would have to agree. An abundance of aggression and other secondary sex characteristics, like muscularity and body hair, can be decisive. A short man can certainly get inside me by displaying and using male power. The difference is that a tall man can intimidate and force me effortlessly if it's in his nature, while a short one has to work harder to achieve the same effect. I greatly admire the smaller men who spare no effort to seize the advantage and prove their manhood against me. Their determination is inspiring.

Nevertheless, I retain a general preference for the human pattern of sexual dimorphism. Males should ideally be larger.

20 hours ago, ErosWired said:

On the contrary, whereas a facial may be wiped off as though it had not occurred, a bred load must necessarily be at least minimally absorbed by the body, and thus become a physical part of the fucked man. A fusion occurs; whether by absorption of the Top’s water and semen chemistry by the bowel, or if swallowed, by the digestion and full integration of the Top’s proteins. The Top, by force of his ejaculation, adds himself to the sum of the bottom. The load is never lost.

This process is vitally important, but I submit that the effect is largely in the mind. What bodily integration does occur cannot be detected, and I believe that most seed leaves the colon by the unfortunate mechanisms of that organ. The oral route is actually more effective in the sense that all seed ingested is digested.

21 hours ago, ErosWired said:

Among bottoms, at least, there is a near-universal acknowledgment that semen is a valuable substance.

I don't really interoperate with the terms "top" and "bottom". Even a normalization to the more useful concepts of male and female is somewhat unsatisfactory. There is only a man's desire and its consequences for the cunt he chooses. Semen is valuable because it is the concrete manifestation of his will to breed. The thought process of his volunteer victim is a fly-buzz distraction.

21 hours ago, ErosWired said:

[G]iven the fact that a single orgasm may end a Top’s [sic] potential for that encounter, we necessarily have to have a sense of preference.

This expectation is the crux. Female preference aside, I would agree that deep insemination must be the objective if a man has only one opportunity to breed.

However, I do not assume the promiscuous model. I always have in mind an ownership relation between man and cunt-provider, wherein the man retains nearly unlimited long-term penetrative access and is thus assured of frequent delivery of his reproductive payload to its quasi-natural destination. In this context, any number of violent or degrading practices are available to him for the satisfaction of his phallic sadism and pride. These complementary acts reinforce his power and drive his lust for the subsequent productive copulation that he knows is forthcoming.

20 hours ago, ErosWired said:

I confess I’ve never understood the appeal of facials as an expression of Dominance. To me, the gold standard of Dominance is penetration, and the ultimate expression of that is the deepest possible deposit of the Dominant’s essence into the submissive where it can then never be completely removed. 

Penetration has, at the point of release, been well achieved, and possibly into both cunts in alternation. A bred load is quickly lost to the interior. An ejaculation into the face is a frontal assault on the (hypothetical) dignity of the victim. It also allows the man to view the splendor of his seed strewn over the (presumably attractive) face he has just fucked. I would also regard pissing or spitting on a face to be dominant. Slapping even more so. Is there any doubt that these acts convey contempt?

1 hour ago, BareLover073 said:

Can I join in?

Two fairly tall guys and 1 slim and short slut-boy...  😈

Yes, impale the little bitch from both ends. Or break his tiny cunt wide open with both cocks at once.

Facial ejaculation is for domination and degradation. Oral ejaculation addresses the reproductive urge. I would never give up either, and fortunately, they're not mutually exclusive. What hits the face can be scooped into the mouth.

Yes, I crave a large difference in height. 5'4"/1.63 m and below is best. I want to be able to easily control the boy's position and feel like I'm splitting him in half and stabbing up into his guts past his navel. Small hands trying to encircle my shaft look amazing, even while I prefer a generous mouth for obvious reasons.

19 hours ago, manux32ccs said:

I cry out rape me.

It's technically impossible to fulfill as a demand or request, but it wouldn't stop me from trying.

I like the idea of decisively negating the faggot clitoris. I do not like the restraining devices. Perhaps a punishment model could work instead. He wears a tracking device and I get a notification if it records undue motion or an orgasm. I make him regret his disobedience when I get home.

If a man orders a female (faggot) to impale herself with his penis for his enjoyment, then he is exercising a form of male dominance. The only justification he thinks he needs is the birthright of his sex. He believes that the only reasonable response to his demand is compliance.

My first impulse is to agree with his stunning arrogance. The opportunity to obey and satisfy a man is a gift. The Phallus imposes rough order on a chaotic universe. It both creates life and gives it meaning. Its power and beauty overwhelm the senses and exceed the bounds of reason. Yet, I submit that its vital work can only proceed by male intention and male action. It cannot be an immovable object. It must be an unstoppable force.

A man who fails to wield his penis with active purpose is lapsing in his duty. While I might find myself reflexively complying with a command from a seemingly superior, but essentially inert man, I would ultimately feel the act idolatrous. By his deliberate inaction, he undermines the very basis of his authority and carelessly forsakes my natural devotion.

I am loath to place limits on a man's prerogative. In general, power should be wildly imbalanced to his advantage. But I do think it rightful to require from him a consistent pattern of forceful penetration.

Let it be rough! Virginity is for the breaking. You will remember it always and thus take the essential lesson of self-sacrifice into your soul. Find an excellent brute to do the job. Don't waste your precious blood and tears on an unworthy male.

I have a long-standing notion to plunder a virgin at the moment of his majority. Local laws would vary the target age, but I would need the boy to be fully grown physically as well.

Mental maturity is probably a lost cause. You could wait decades for it to arrive.

Computer crap. It's tedious.

On 10/5/2020 at 1:14 PM, ErosWired said:

Pain is a very powerful instructor, and mis-applied can have unintended effects. If an aggressive Top takes an uncertain initiate with submissive inclinations, especially one uncertain about his orientation, and inflicts agony, blunt force and bloodletting, the shock may be enough to set the young man's sexual life in an undesirable direction. At best, he may carefully avoid certain types of men and thus fail to realize his potential; at worst, the experience may present an irreconcilable conflict between his instinct to submit and serve and his instinct for self-preservation and self-defense.

The two instincts are, in fact, inescapable and irreconcilable. The initiate must be certain in his own mind and a seeker after the ever-disturbing truth of sex. He must be intellectually committed to maximal sexual freedom for the man and convinced of the necessity of his own spiritual castration. As important as the transformative nature of cunt pain is the corresponding ecstatic rage of a phallus that has absolute power. The man must hammer into his victim's body and soul the truth that has already been agreed in principle: that his deep male fulfillment is paramount and that it requires the oppression of the cunt. The sacrifice must be made to accept that his willingness to suffer is the foundation of his utility to the male. (It also creates the possibility of love.)

Even with thorough mental preparation and an ironclad dedication to male supremacy, some boys will find the sacred violation intolerable. It is, after all, a shocking abuse of his colon and a deliberate assault on his (perhaps nominal) male identity. Rebellion might be unavoidable. It makes perfect sense for such a victim to attempt to reclaim maleness and heal the sacrificial wound by turning to the natural comforts of women. I do not consider this outcome at all undesirable. The functional ease of congress with females is as true as the joys and hardships of faggotry. There is unfortunate compromise and dissatisfaction on both paths.

On 10/5/2020 at 1:14 PM, ErosWired said:

On the other hand. what if the Dominant had instead, by a series of encounters and acts gradually increasing in pain and ever greater humiliation, drawn the young man into a slower realization of his world and his place within it? What if the Dominant leveraged the young man's instinctive pleasure and inner gratification in submitting to a more aggressive man, and by a conscious, calculated effort, conflated that instinct and pleasure with growing pain and deepening degradation until his subject lost the ability to tell the difference between pain and pleasure? What if, in the end, he had so cultivated his subject that the man accepted the skewering of his own testicles without any bondage at all, and felt a thrill of exhilarated accomplishment at being so debased at the hands of a dominant male? He would have not only achieved the definitive demonstration of his power over his subject male, but forced an indelible change in the man, and would have enjoyed a series of aggressions in the process.

This hypothetical is, of course, not a hypothetical. It is my lived experience at the hands of my former Master, a Dominant Sadist. Had he attempted to needle my balls on Day One, I would have been NOPE, and I would not be what I am today.

Seduction and a deceptively slow escalation of pain are appropriate for boys of exceptionally high value who do not know themselves and need to be lured into their self-enslavement. But they might also decide that they are not given to a life of cunt service. They might commit the odious crime of coitus interruptus.

I am rather referring to those who enter the sexual arena with a deep need to be defeated and forced into abject servitude. They are few but blessed of men. Cunting takes them directly from ideology to practice.

11 hours ago, parvenu said:

do you ever feel mercy for new faggots with soft holes that have no idea what they are in for?

This idea has naïve merit, but I think it's exactly wrong. The best a faggot can expect from life is a soupçon of happiness amid abundant pain and degradation. Therefore, I believe the first cunting should be sharp, brutal and traumatic. The victim should be fully aware of how he is to be sacrificed. He must accept it as part of his fate and as a vital lesson about his place in the sexual arena.

The fag will carry the memory of that agony forever and it will remind him that suffering for a man is a privilege, even as he finds opportunities to experience pleasure in his subsequent encounters.

It's possible that some boys will have a negative reaction to such an initiation. It's a defining moment that could push them towards other paths in life. Maybe they'll discover a latent interest in women. Faggotry is difficult. If they have other options, they should use them.

11 hours ago, Spunkinmyarse said:

Occasionally, I will try to make time for myself where I can be a total cumdump whore, where serving men takes priority over everything else.  But it’s only the odd weekend here and there, or the occasional sex vacation.

Yes, for high-quality sex, the period of receptivity has to be well-defined. Only in that context is a surrender to male sexual authority meaningful and valuable.

One of the advantages of a live-in relationship is that the man can track the fag's digestion and general life schedule. His opportunities to use the cunt on demand increase greatly.

Sex is naturally violent and injurious, so I expect the average man to enjoy phallic brutality to some extent. It would be strange if he didn't.

I love to hurt bitches and break cunts. The first time a boy yelped in pain and tried to get away, a jolt of power and joy transformed me into a sexual sadist in an instant. I felt perfectly male in that moment. The first time my weapon drew blood, I was thrilled. I hadn't realized how easily a rectum bleeds. Both discoveries were accidental, but I took to painfucking right away.

On 9/26/2020 at 8:01 PM, Tightass74 said:

I realized that tops decide when us cumslut bottom sluts will be used and bred. Whether we are horny doesn't matter. If a top says he wants to breed, I say when and where and bend over and receive his precious hopefully poz load!!!

The man should decide everything where sex is concerned, but I consider spontaneous rectum sex impractical. The cunt needs to be scrupulously clean and that takes plenty of time and planning. The fag should know exactly what's required of him and when.