Do you still cum in a bottom who asks you to pull out?

[evilalex]

Well, I’ve probably already consumed their soul by that point,  which is what I’m really after, so I’d probably just pull out and cum on his face.

[Phallarchist]

21 hours ago, Cumfilledbottomboi said:

I’m a man who “exists” (in the bedroom) to be used by top men / alpha men.

Which is to serve and be used as female. Penises become erect solely for reproductive purposes and reproduction is exclusively the coitus of male and female. Offering a man your rectum as a vagina substitute is inescapably, and gloriously, to perform a female sexual function. It's just how penises work.

Looking or behaving like a real typical girl or woman ("femininity") is an entirely separate matter. For my taste, you should never aspire to be anything but a boy. But all men who fuck need cunt and encouraging them to think of your rectum in quasi-vaginal terms properly recognizes the nature of breeding. Your rectum only works for sex with a man to the extent that it resembles a vagina and you should be proud when his penis responds to it as if it might be the real thing.

[Cumfilledbottomboi]

10 minutes ago, Phallarchist said:

Which is to serve and be used as female. Penises become erect solely for reproductive purposes and reproduction is exclusively the coitus of male and female. Offering a man your rectum as a vagina substitute is inescapably, and gloriously, to perform a female sexual function. It's just how penises work.

Looking or behaving like a real typical girl or woman ("femininity") is an entirely separate matter. For my taste, you should never aspire to be anything but a boy. But all men who fuck need cunt and encouraging them to think of your rectum in quasi-vaginal terms properly recognizes the nature of breeding. Your rectum only works for sex with a man to the extent that it resembles a vagina and you should be proud when his penis responds to it as if it might be the real thing.

So every “bottom” is presenting as “female” to you? Because that’s certainly coming from an exclusively heterosexual and/or religious POV and exactly why there are anti-gay (and increasingly anti trans) laws. 

[Phallarchist]

2 hours ago, Cumfilledbottomboi said:

So every “bottom” is presenting as “female” to you? Because that’s certainly coming from an exclusively heterosexual and/or religious POV and exactly why there are anti-gay (and increasingly anti trans) laws. 

No, they're functioning as female for the penis, factually. There is no such thing as breeding without a vagina analog.

[silentassman]

Of course. They really do want the nutt. 

[chargedodger]

never asked a man to pull out.If a man is fucking me I want him to experience all the pleasure he can.:)

[BootmanLA]

7 hours ago, Phallarchist said:

Your rectum only works for sex with a man to the extent that it resembles a vagina and you should be proud when his penis responds to it as if it might be the real thing.

If this were true, we would not have evolved a prostate so susceptible to anal stimulation. While it's true that evolution often emphasizes reproductive fitness, not everything can be explained by its link to reproduction, and it's ignorant to assume that it can be.

[ErosWired]

1 hour ago, BootmanLA said:

If this were true, we would not have evolved a prostate so susceptible to anal stimulation. While it's true that evolution often emphasizes reproductive fitness, not everything can be explained by its link to reproduction, and it's ignorant to assume that it can be.

Sorry - The premise that the fact that the prostate can be stimulated internally is evidence that the rectum was evolved for a sexual function is not a scientifically supportable conclusion. Were such an evolutionary adaptive process to have occurred, any number of other more practical and useful adaptations would be clearly evident, not the least of which the structures would be far less easily damaged by the action of penises. As it is, the anorectal region is an example of anatomy developed for a highly specialized function - the elimination of solid waste. The fact that we discovered, when we co-opted the parts by sheer default for homosexual buggery (it was the only hole in the general location), that we were stimulated inside does not mean we’re using the parts as nature intended.

@Phallarchist’s point need not be taken as a suggestion that men should or should not assume an identity as an alternate gender - indeed, he specifically states that one should not consider himself other than male. Rather, he simply points out the essential analog between rectum and vagina in a reproductive context. Some may debate the relevance of reproductive drives in the context of homosexual coupling, but I believe that all sex originates with the same set of primal imperatives regardless of orientation, and ultimately never extends terribly far from them. When a Top is approaching his climax in me, I can just about always detect that subtle shift, at the very end at least, when his brain stem takes over... and he’s reproducing.

A bottom and a Top may agree that the bottom is a man and the Top is fucking an ass, but when their biology kicks in, I believe @Phallarchist is right - the cock is looking for a womb, and that’s what the bottom provides, by any other name. It’s just biology, having nothing to do with taste, preference, or choice of role.

[parvenu]

On 4/25/2021 at 11:45 AM, Phallarchist said:

Which is to serve and be used as female. Penises become erect solely for reproductive purposes and reproduction is exclusively the coitus of male and female. Offering a man your rectum as a vagina substitute is inescapably, and gloriously, to perform a female sexual function. It's just how penises work.

Looking or behaving like a real typical girl or woman ("femininity") is an entirely separate matter. For my taste, you should never aspire to be anything but a boy. But all men who fuck need cunt and encouraging them to think of your rectum in quasi-vaginal terms properly recognizes the nature of breeding. Your rectum only works for sex with a man to the extent that it resembles a vagina and you should be proud when his penis responds to it as if it might be the real thing.

you need to write sex stories because your words are so fucking hot

[mblad99]

I never heard a bottom tell me to pull out.  

[LetsPOZBreed]

Since the prevalence of PrEP, I'm noticing this happening less and less.  

As a general rule, when I meet up with a guy and the expectation is that I'll be on top (rare, but still happens), I'm upfront about the fact that I'm going to cum inside.  Most guys who have doubts will end the convo right there.  There's no guarantee, though, and it did happen on a couple of occasions where the guy did ask me to pull out in the heat of the moment.  I honoured the request, in the interest of consent...I don't want to be "that guy", but it still makes this type of thing disappointing.

[LittleCumSewer]

I don't understand why any bottom would ask a guy to pull out. taking mens loads is what we are for. just like I would never ask a guy to wear a condom I would never dare ask a top to pull out. I beg them to cum inside me and use me for my purpose.

[LetsPOZBreed]

I understand it, though it's not a practice that I ascribe to.  It's (alleged) risk-aversion.  The potent part of bareback sex isn't the raw cock itself, it's the fluid exchange.  By a bottom asking a top to pull out, the bottom is under the idea that they have managed to cheat the process.  It's the proverbial "have his cake and eat it too."  

[Guest Goodbye]

Think people are loading/seeding Bottoms more often now than ever before.... 

[kiwiguyuk]

If a bottom asked me to pull out I would respect their decision, but it'd kill the mood for me and i'd probably just lose my drive and leave. That being said I give a hookup fair warning before we meet where I intend to cum and have yet to have anyone object or change their mind at the time.