Phallarchist

I endorse the universal usage of the word "faggot", because it's derogatory. While I welcome society's general move toward practical tolerance or indifference, most people correctly understand exclusive homosexuality as a regrettable aberration and I want clear distinctions between preferred and marginal forms of male sexual expression to be clearly maintained in common parlance. Children should learn that male and female are naturally complementary to an extent that almost justifies the labeling of same-sex penetration as "unnatural". In fact, it's just barely natural, driven by psychology, with little real physiological compatibility involved. Exclusively homosexual behavior should be regarded as the wrong choice, except for those few of us who are actually incapable of normal male-female sexuality.

Further, I have no truck with the nonsensical politics of "queer" or the empty ugliness of most of what passes for "gay". I would much rather be known as a disgusting sexually-deviant faggot who is nevertheless allowed to go on defiling himself and others like him as long as he doesn't interfere with the sexually-normal population.

I would never knowingly kneel to a smoker and have no doubt that all of their emissions are foul. The wives of smokers are known to have higher rates of cervical cancer and I would expect the same principle to apply to the oral passage as well.

But bitter semen in general is par for the course. I savor it as a perfect concentrate of testosterone and sexualized contempt, because gratitude is the only acceptable response to a real man's seed.

On 3/28/2020 at 11:56 PM, Rubberbanned said:

Won't this loosen your bowels like when you're douching and hence, dirt might come out? Been wanting to try this but I'm apprehensive for this reason.

Yes, taking piss in your guts should come last so that you can then run to the toilet. But you should flush out beforehand anyway.

I'd think highly of it. I'd want to use her juices to moisten your cunt.

Have sex in the dark. Make sure he is lying back on the bed while you crouch between his legs to give him deep oral service. Deliberately go too deep so that you choke up some mucous onto your hand (don't gunk up his pubic hair). Spread that excellent lubricant evenly over his penis with your mouth and hand. Then, while stroking his slick shaft in one hand, quickly raise your body over it and impale yourself, taking his entire length into your cunt in one motion. Once he's buried in your guts, he won't want to pull out.

4 hours ago, ErosWired said:

It’s rare that I find a point of discord with your views, but while I take no issue with the question of prerogative, I might debate the notion that shooting out then pushing in serves the Top’s overall satisfaction in a way that could be considered “a good compromise”.

The male is instinctively programmed to seek depth of penetration for ejaculation. That is not only reproductively optimal, but also an instinctive imperative rewarded by intense physical pleasure. Although I can understand that a Top might be of a mindset in which his desire to satisfy a different kind of dominant emotion might lead him to forego the sublime pleasure of his rightful climax deep within the cunt, I think it can only be considered a compromise in the negative context that he has sacrificed the ultimate for something lesser. The physical pleasure may be great, but still finally lacking that essential quality of deep release that takes him to Nirvana. And while it might be reproductively adequate, it is not reproductively excellent.

 I tend to remember Tops who are excellent fuckers - adequate fuckers, not so much.

Yes, it’s their prerogative... but why do it?

Male instinct has many splendours. Deep seeding is only one of them. Men gauge fertility with their eyes and furthermore crave visual confirmation of every aspect of their breeding process. They want to see the cunt spread. They want to see their erections split the entrance and disappear completely inside a bitch. They want to see the cunt gape and spasm on outstrokes, and they often want to see the excellence of their seed before they cram it in towards the waiting womb.

These considerations are luxuries to be sure. If a man is likely to have just one opportunity to impregnate, then certainly it is his duty to force the maximum quantity of seed as deep as possible. For most men historically, it was the only sensible strategy. Breeding-age females were claimed by the ruling class, so the opportunity for erotic completion was often limited to opportunistic attempts at cuckolding. A fast and deep violation was a narrow path to an unlikely victory for the common man.

But when a man has secure access to a bitch, he can afford to engage the full range of his urges towards sexual dominance and reproductive mastery. The symbolic act of ownership that is spraying seed on an upturned face or swollen cunt becomes central to his complete satisfaction.

It suffices to say that men alone decide where and how to spread their seed. It is immoral for a bitch to interfere.

The man should not have to use his hand to reach orgasm. Cunt exists for that purpose. So that precludes most such targeting. But if a man wants to see the cunt smeared with his seed, it is his prerogative to pull out and aim in his naturally arrived moment of truth. I also believe it his duty to use his penis to push his load deep inside the cunt after he's done admiring the visible evidence of his prowess. It's not quite as effective for deep seeding as shooting while thrust in to the hilt, but it's a good compromise that serves his natural male pride and is reproductively complete.

I don't mind when a man tells me what he is about to do to me as a way of emphasizing his dominance , but I am  disappointed and offended if he says it to gauge my reaction or implicitly get my permission. If I have surrendered myself to him, it's because I expected him to own me sexually. There's a huge difference between his shouting "Take my piss, you stupid faggot cunt", holding my skull, and urinating into my eyes, and on the other hand saying "I want to piss in your face. Would you like that, faggot?" The first knows his power and authority as a man. The second is just a pretender to the throne.

Overall, I prefer unilateral action on his part, so it's best if he just does whatever he wants without warning and justifiably expects me to deal with it. I want a man who will exploit me first and ask questions later.

16 minutes ago, ChadAK said:

How about “my pussy’s wet”

Fags who lie

get forced dry.

"It hurts so much...[scream]...you're killing me." But heaving sobs and hot tears are wordless and the most endearing of all.

On 2/25/2019 at 9:19 AM, Pozguyinchi said:

I have had many situations where I  was made to take dick from a man I didn’t know because my dom told me I had to. Not sure if that’s rape. I have also had to give up my pussy to my man when he wanted it. Even if I didn’t want to. I don’t know if that is rape or not. I don’t think he would have changed his decision if I said no.

No, it's not rape. You're no different from a prostitute, who has sex for money rather than out of a desire for the sex itself.

On 1/19/2019 at 6:28 AM, GuyWithDoubts said:

Was it rape if a top wasn't brutal, but strict and did whatever he wanted against bottom's will?

Yes, but only if that will is expressed. If you're just biting the pillow and silently wishing that it wasn't happening, it doesn't count as rape. Though I congratulate you for suffering in silence so that the man doesn't have to hold back.

On 7/23/2019 at 6:39 AM, renovers82 said:

500mg of Valacyclovir daily greatly reduces transmission rates of Herpes. This same protocol also prevents outbreaks if you already have either Herpes virus.  The drug is cheap and easy to get: tons of telemedicine options or just about any local clinic.  The meds are generally mild in side effects too.

The infected partner can take acyclovir to prevent viral shedding, but I'm not familiar with any research showing that the uninfected partner can take it to avoid contracting HSV. But if you have a link or reference that suggests otherwise, please let me know.

13 hours ago, renovers82 said:

Herpes is easy/cheap to prevent.

How do you prevent herpes transmission? I thought the risk profile is similar to HPV (skin contact).

18 hours ago, Spunkinmyarse said:

Anyone else feel left out?

This is like being back in gym class at school, and being picked (or in my case, not picked) for the soccer team lol

You'd be on my list. Fantastic hairy muscle-cunt.

On 7/4/2017 at 8:26 AM, makingwords said:

As a bottom who loves big dick, am I just doomed to dealing with hemorrhoids for the rest of my life? Do people go through phases of flare-ups and then go back to normal?

 

Yes. The anus did not evolve for penetration. You are putting it to unnatural use and suffering the natural consequences thereby. Use lots of lubricant, follow medical advice to reduce the incidence, and learn to accept the injury as the price you pay for having men inside you.

I agree. Good pornography is a boiling brew of male dominance, degradation, and violent penetration. Heterosexuality plays better on screen, mostly because it is better. The necessary inequality is built in to male and female bodies. Payment removes the problem of consent and allows the male star and the director to maximize the exploitation and use of force. And vaginas are perfect, of course, even when they're mainly used as a source of lubricant for anal sex.

Fag porn is way too concerned with maintaining the male status of both performers. The power imbalances need to go way up and attention to the fag-female orgasm has to disappear completely. I greatly prefer the man to be much larger, older, and masculine than his fag-victim. Unfortunately, males are much more likely to be similar to each other in stature, so natural physical domination often cannot be achieved. Only degradation and violence can really satisfy. Rough rectal intercourse is painful, so it's harder to get the victim-actors to agree to the necessary abuse. But I think the complete abrogation of maleness required might be a bigger problem for the audience of confused homosexuals who like to think of themselves as men.

Yes, it matters, because male power matters, and a huge erection is the inescapable epitome of maleness. It will always be thus.

However, other secondary sex characteristics can also be deployed to achieve successful penetration:

1. Height

2. Musculature

3. Dominance

The last is most important. A short guy with 5" and an attitude of penetrative entitlement has the potential to own me. His success as a male will largely depend on his ability and willingness to use physical force against me while verbally demanding my compliance. But the fact is that his maleness has to be proven, while guys with 8" have abundant male power by default, whether they want it or not.

On 7/13/2019 at 9:02 AM, Guygonebad said:

I just put my face down in the pillow, grabbed the sheets on side of bed. He pushed slowly, inch by inch, all the way in me. The pain was intense!!! I mean searing pain, I sorted yelled out, but he kept going in and out slowly, holding his weight on top of me. He just kept going and I made my noises into the bed to muffle it. The pain hurt so bad. But he was loving it and saying all sorts of nice things as he was totally enjoying my ass. I had lots of tears streaming down my face, gulping air. But the pain versus his satisfaction was so hot. It took him a good 15 minutes before he speeded up and finally bred me...Clearly there was lube, cum and blood on the sheets and his cock.

Your self-sacrifice to his magnificent phallus was beautiful and virtuous. You understood correctly that your place was to suffer and endure in exchange for the privilege of being conquered and bred by him. Your torn cunt was a badge of honour. I salute your service to his brutal male instinct.

17 hours ago, LittleCumSewer said:

I drink piss like it was gatorade for cumdumps. that's what men want cumdumps and faggots to do so why wouldn't i.doesn't matter if you do or don't like piss. Faggot whores aren't people, we are objects that exist to be used by men. as fucktoys, flashlights, cumdumpsters and toilets. plus its a good way to show guys what a dirty whore I am

Gatorade is full of sugar. Piss is probably much healthier!

On 6/15/2019 at 2:22 AM, ALPHAboy said:

I really do not see bottoms as 'lesser' men or a breeder like me as being some kind of 'superior'. I dont mind if bttms see me, or a breeder in general, like that though, and I can understand where it comes from. Maybe being more muscles, maybe its that we carry the seed that bttms need... But for me, a top and a bttm just have a different purpose, but sharing the same goal (sperm from the top being injected in the bttms ass). Tops and bttms are like the two sides of the same coin. One can't do without the other. So how can I see a bttm as 'bitch' (in the submissive meaning of the word)?

But your account name contains "Alpha", which directly refers to an apex male who dominates everyone else. How could you not see him as a bitch?

On 6/24/2019 at 9:03 AM, BiAthlete4You said:

I am finding that when I decide to go out and take loads from men, I get into this identity that is feminine, or I see myself as a women or in her role. I also see myself as that rather attractive hard-to-get bitch. 

I am a straight-acting masculine guy, that just happens to love taking cock up my ass. I just have to get into this certain mental-space, to go out and pursue it.

Yes, not feminine, you are female. It's your sexual function with respect to your breeders, not your appearance or self-presentation.

On 6/22/2019 at 9:25 AM, ErosWired said:

@FaceLoad - Thank you very much for taking the time to give such a complete and honest answer to my question, which was indeed sincere. I find myself fascinated by the many different forms that the Top mind takes, and I have no instinctive understanding of any of them, so I ask.

My former Master was a Sadist, so your philosophy is not unfamiliar to me in principle. The difference in my case is that he very seldom fucked me (alas) but concentrated his will on shaping my mind and physical response using other means. He nonetheless assumed full, practical, physical ownership of me, to the extent that he possessed a paper deed to my body. (I still issue this deed on a limited basis to *very* select Men under special circumstances.)

I do not presume to judge either your motives or your practices. You are, of course, correct regarding the nature of injury to the anus and rectum as a result of sexual intercourse it was not designed for - my only observation being that for most of us the imperative is to mitigate rather than to exacerbate that injury. Still, you honestly explain your reasons, and I respect them as considered decisions even if I cannot advocate them.

The pleasure you take in the suffering of the submissive - your schadenfreude - may seem distasteful to some, but is the necessary accompaniment to the need for certain submissive personalities to submit and even suffer. We don’t experience catharsis without at least a semblance of cruelty. The degree to which cruelty crosses a line is less a matter of debate and more a matter of individual negotiation, unless the Top is a true psychopath.

On the one hand, I think it would be a fascinating experience to be bred by you. On the other, I very much hope that’s an encounter I never have.

Would experiencing Schadenfreude encompass situations in which I have inflicted the damage? I thought it had to be a matter of happenstance.

In principle, I see little difference from paddling a boy's behind until he can't sit down or slapping a bitch while you're fucking him/her. There's no direct justification for the pain and violence, but I enjoy it (and the victim might also).

I think this response is partly conditioned. When I was younger, I encountered a string of boys who begged me to fuck them hard, then screamed bloody murder at the first twinge of pain. As a convinced non-rapist, I withdrew immediately at their insistence. I was not being rough at that point. Perhaps my penis has a naturally cruel geometry, but I rather think these boys just failed to understand the inherent difficulties of rectal intercourse. For most receivers, it is usually going to hurt a bit for some time. It's just a built-in fact of the misused anatomy involved. I knew it to be the case because I had given my cunt to a number of superior men and understood that the pain of entry was the price I paid for the privilege of serving them, having them bodily inside me, and basking in the glory of their animal breeding power.

These recalcitrant boys weren't deliberate cockteases, but as a worshipper of men myself, I found their devotion to male dominance and pleasure lacking. Their self-regard offended my instinctive sense of the penis as the axis of the universe. They had carelessly disregarded the natural law that I embodied. They did not apologize and were not repentant. I could not forgive them and yet I could also not punish them or push them onto the path of righteousness.

These frustrations injected a bitter note into my sexual mindset. Anger became part of my male arousal patterns, and I began to be attracted to phallic rage in other men as well. I came to understand violence as a central component of maleness. It powers the hardest erections, drives the most vigorous thrusting, and propels infinitely pleasurable releases of seed that are miraculous to experience and awesome to behold. Penetration is the largest natural component of a meaningful life for a man, and it is inescapably violent. I agree with the radical feminists who say that a penis is a weapon. Only, I'm glad of the fact, while their enthusiasm for male hegemony is somewhat less in evidence.

A better man would have carefully set these thoughts aside, but as a habitual follower of my nose (and other protuberances), I began to seek out boys who claimed to be more reverent. I.e., they would shut up and take it. Mostly this quest failed, as I resembled them too much physically, whatever the dark corners of my soul. They wanted men who looked as rough as they fucked. I couldn't compete well in that arena.

Nevertheless, I did encounter a few who genuinely wanted to be taken hard. They openly encouraged my sexual hostility and one even asked to be immobilized so that he could not escape. That one bled profusely. It was both unbelievably exciting and frightening. AIDS was killing fags around me every day. The tyranny of the condom was firmly in place, so I was nominally protected, but it was still a shock to see my cock covered in his gore. I realize now that he was using my dick as a tool for his self-destruction, but the deed was done and bloodlust was instantly added to the many layers of my unreconstructed perversion.

Other willing victims bled much less or not visibly, typically a pretty drop or two in the toilet, floating in the lubricant. Those injuries were consistent with my own experience as cunt: rectal fucking occasionally leads to obvious rectal bleeding, and there's generally no problem as long as it's a small quantity, stops within a day or two, and no other symptoms arise. It's as healthy as anyone can reasonably expect an egregious assault on the colon to be. If you can't accept the terms of this compromise, then you shouldn't be offering men your digestive tract as a substitute for a vagina.

I don't think I generally fuck differently from other men. I'm just more likely to appreciate the beauty of those difficult moments when the boy's body tenses and he throws back his head in shock at his predicament. I will stop thrusting at that point to let his cunt adjust to me (unless he has explicitly invited me to sadism). But I will not pull out of him of my own accord. I believe that he has a moral obligation to satisfy me and I will not deny him the opportunity to fulfill the duty that he has willingly undertaken. He should think of coitus interruptus as the last resort. My fuck should be a sacred rite to him and interfering with my pleasure should be a sacrilege. Or he's the wrong boy.

It wasn't large, but the man was tall, slim, muscular, and hairy. Most importantly, he demanded service because he knew he had a right to use my mouth. He never warned me that he was about to come. He just held my head tightly and forced his load down my throat. I was so grateful to him and would have gladly spent the rest of my life on my knees, swallowing his seed, but he got bored and moved on to something better: pussy. I love bisexual men.

I dislike cockrings, just as I seem to dislike many things that are wildly popular with other fags. Most sexual accoutrements are silly, but cockrings distort what should be the natural perfection of the male organ. If an erect penis isn't inherently beautiful, then no amount of strangulation is going to improve it.

I briefly wore a rubber one in my youth to try to emphasize my bulge. It's not an enhancement that turned out to be necessary or useful. (I still believe in genital advertisement via appropriate clothing, e.g. sweatpants or dress pants with no underwear, tight-crotched jeans, and of course erections in public whenever feasible.)

I understand that many use cockrings to compensate for erectile dysfunction. I have some sympathy for this condition, but the failure to become hard enough to penetrate is a sign of the collapse of maleness itself. The afflicted need to fix the underlying causes (diet, exercise, psychology, etc.), or accept their fate and withdraw from the penetrative arena. Though I can somewhat accept pharmaceutical interventions, because I don't have to look at them or feel them.