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

[bbpoznow]

if you are fucking me BARE  you better cum deep in me as possible 

[Guest]

12 hours ago, lecheroxxl said:

held the guys down forcibly to cum deep inside them

Woof! Hold me down anytime!

[BootmanLA]

There's been a lot of back and forth here about whether ejaculating inside someone who's specifically asked you not to qualifies as "rape".

Let's get a few things straight: first, rape has a legal definition (in each state), and I suspect that in most of them, ejaculation has nothing to do with it. For instance, here's the Louisiana statutory definition of rape:

A.  Rape is the act of anal, oral, or vaginal sexual intercourse with a male or female person committed without the person's lawful consent.

B.  Emission is not necessary, and any sexual penetration,  when the rape involves vaginal or anal intercourse, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime.

C.  For purposes of this Subpart, "oral sexual intercourse" means the intentional engaging in any of the following acts with another person:

(1)  The touching of the anus or genitals of the victim by the offender using the mouth or tongue of the offender.

(2)  The touching of the anus or genitals of the offender by the victim using the mouth or tongue of the victim.

---------

So, assuming the sex itself was consented to, it's not technically "rape" (in this state) if the bottom says "Don't cum in me" and the top does anyway. In fact, I don't think there is (in Louisiana law, again) any criminal statute that would specifically address this behavior.

But that doesn't mean it's not, as I say, "rape-adjacent" or some form of sexual assault. It is. If a person gives consent to a particular sex act *under specified conditions* and those conditions are violated, that's wrong. 

And it's entirely unnecessary. We all know there are plenty of bottom men out there who are perfectly happy to be bred. Anyone who feels the need to violate someone's consent in order to cum in a bottom who clearly and specifically said "Don't" is a first-degree shit of a person.

Some of you, undoubtedly, will wear that as a badge of honor. It's not. 

[backdoorjimmy]

11 minutes ago, BootmanLA said:

There's been a lot of back and forth here about whether ejaculating inside someone who's specifically asked you not to qualifies as "rape".

Let's get a few things straight: first, rape has a legal definition (in each state), and I suspect that in most of them, ejaculation has nothing to do with it. For instance, here's the Louisiana statutory definition of rape:

A.  Rape is the act of anal, oral, or vaginal sexual intercourse with a male or female person committed without the person's lawful consent.

B.  Emission is not necessary, and any sexual penetration,  when the rape involves vaginal or anal intercourse, however slight, is sufficient to complete the crime.

C.  For purposes of this Subpart, "oral sexual intercourse" means the intentional engaging in any of the following acts with another person:

(1)  The touching of the anus or genitals of the victim by the offender using the mouth or tongue of the offender.

(2)  The touching of the anus or genitals of the offender by the victim using the mouth or tongue of the victim.

---------

So, assuming the sex itself was consented to, it's not technically "rape" (in this state) if the bottom says "Don't cum in me" and the top does anyway. In fact, I don't think there is (in Louisiana law, again) any criminal statute that would specifically address this behavior.

But that doesn't mean it's not, as I say, "rape-adjacent" or some form of sexual assault. It is. If a person gives consent to a particular sex act *under specified conditions* and those conditions are violated, that's wrong. 

And it's entirely unnecessary. We all know there are plenty of bottom men out there who are perfectly happy to be bred. Anyone who feels the need to violate someone's consent in order to cum in a bottom who clearly and specifically said "Don't" is a first-degree shit of a person.

Some of you, undoubtedly, will wear that as a badge of honor. It's not. 

Thank you for this excellent breakdown. So many people throw words like "predator" and "rape" around like it's nothing, and it minimizes actual rape and has the potential to undermine the menace of actual predators.

On the other hand, consent is something that we all have the right to give and deny at our own pleasure. For any reason, or for no reason at all. As a bottom, I love it when men cum in my ass. But if I ever decide for some unknown reason that I don't want that to happen, the partner I'm with needs to either tell me to go fuck myself or respect my boundary.

[ErosWired]

23 hours ago, backdoorjimmy said:

So many people throw words like "predator" and "rape" around like it's nothing, and it minimizes actual rape and has the potential to undermine the menace of actual predators.

On the other hand, there is an uncomfortably high proportion of respondents on this site who are apologists for the kinds of statements and behavior we see from men who clearly - whether they have met a legal criterion or not - hold the rights and welfare of other men in either indifference or contempt, and are perfectly willing to violate anyone’s sanctity if it gets them what they want. There’s a difference between a man who can’t help hurting me when he’s cunting me and a man who’s actually trying to. That difference lies in his intent, and in the way he is willing to satisfy his appetites at another’s expense. Society discourages this as antisocial behavior broadly, and as it manifests in greater degrees of egregiousness and severity of harm, it has become necessary to codify laws to draw a line to say that there’s a limit to how much of this villainy we’re willing to tolerate.

The fact that an action may not meet the legal threshold of a crime does not automatically mean it is acceptable to do. Just because a brute doesn’t use his full strength when he lashes out doesn’t make him any less a brute. While using “predator” and “rape” in a broader sense may reduce the effect of those words in relation to those truly vile predators who commit acts of unquestionable rape, a decision to not apply those words to acts that fall shy of the legal threshold would have the same effect reversed - to minimize the harm and danger in other forms of sexual brutality, violation and nonconsent, and thus give a kind of tacit approval for such behavior to continue. I’m not on board with that.

 I would elaborate further, but I’ve got to get myself ready to go get brutally violated by my local regular Top, who hasn’t had any ass for two weeks. It’s going to be a long evening.

Edited January 31, 2022 by ErosWired

[BarebackBrat]

Don’t listen to a bottoms pleas for mercy.  We are bottoms because we are the lowest of life forms. Nothing more than a hole for you to cum in. If I was to ask a top to pull out I’d hope he choke me out and then finish in me and then have his buddies do the same 

[backdoorjimmy]

31 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

On the other hand, there is an uncomfortably high proportion of respondents on this site who are apologists for the kinds of statements and behavior we see from men who clearly - whether they have met a legal criterion or not - hold the rights and welfare of other men in either indifference or contempt, and are perfectly willing to violate anyone’s sanctity if it gets them what they want. There’s a difference between a man who can’t help hurting me when he’s cunting me and a man who’s actually trying to. That difference lies in his intent, and in the way he is willing to satisfy his appetites at another’s expense. Society discourages this as antisocial behavior broadly, and as it manifests in greater degrees of egregiousness and severity of harm, it has become necessary to codify laws to draw a line to say that there’s a limit to how much of this villainy we’re willing to tolerate.

I don't disagree with that at all, and my own laziness led to me neglecting to point that out. Sometimes I cringe when I see comments like that, but I also try to keep in mind that sometimes people are posting when they're at their horniest moments and once they've been satisfied they might not feel the same way. As a submissive bottom I'm probably guilty of perpetuating that mindset to a degree, but I try to avoid it when I can.

As you say, there's a difference between a top who hurts a bottom unintentionally versus one who goes out of his way to harm his partner. There used to be a clip on Pornhub of a powertop who would fuck his partner into ecstasy, then punch him over and over again in the face before the clip ended. Some of the comments were vile and the clip itself made me panic for the bottom's safety. But I also know there are some guys out there who fetishize abuse.

 

38 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

The fact that an action may not meet the legal threshold of a crime does not automatically mean it is acceptable to do. Just because a brute doesn’t use his full strength when he lashes out doesn’t make him any less a brute. While using “predator” and “rape” in a broader sense may reduce the effect of those words in relation to those truly vile predators who commit acts of unquestionable rape, a decision to not apply those words to acts that fall shy of the legal threshold would have the same effect reversed - to minimize the harm and danger in other forms of sexual brutality, violation and nonconsent, and thus give a kind of tacit approval for such behavior to continue. I’m not on board with that.

Agreed. Abuse is abuse, and it should be called out when it happens. My biggest issue is when I see people saying, "The 10 year age gap is creepy and the older man is a groomer/predator/creeper."

I read a post on Reddit by someone who said his older (50's) neighbor groomed him when he was 19 by hooking up with him, even though the 19 year old was the one who initiated the hookup and kept going back for more. The amount of people calling the older man a predator was insane, and the entire time I was reading it I was internally screaming "There are real predators out there! An older man hooking up with a 19 year old isn't a predator, he's just some fucking guy!"

There are better examples that I'm sure I'm missing but that's what I was alluding to. And for me it's a little more personal because I'm dating a 48 year old. If someone called him a predator or said he groomed me I'd laugh in their face, but it kinda hurts knowing that there are some people who would and probably do think so.

45 minutes ago, ErosWired said:

 

 I would elaborate further, but I’ve got to get myself ready to go get brutally violated by my local regular Top, who hasn’t had any ass for two weeks. It’s going to be a long evening.

Enjoy your cockdate! I'm waiting for my old man to get off work so we can get off together. 🙂

[LetsPOZBreed]

Hopefully not creating a false equivalence here (so apologies in advance), but it's a consent thing.

Anyone (top, bottom, vers) can withdraw their consent at any time if they feel uncomfortable in the moment.  That has to be respected.  While I may be disappointed/annoyed that this consent was withdrawn right before loading the guy up, I honour that decision regardless.  It's similar to when I do any fetish play and someone says the safe word during play - in the moment, something can feel a bit "too much".

I'm not going to violate a guy's consent, just as I would expect that some guy won't violate mine.  

[barebackbro]

1 minute ago, LetsPOZBreed said:

Hopefully not creating a false equivalence here (so apologies in advance), but it's a consent thing.

Anyone (top, bottom, vers) can withdraw their consent at any time if they feel uncomfortable in the moment.  That has to be respected.  While I may be disappointed/annoyed that this consent was withdrawn right before loading the guy up, I honour that decision regardless.  It's similar to when I do any fetish play and someone says the safe word during play - in the moment, something can feel a bit "too much".

I'm not going to violate a guy's consent, just as I would expect that some guy won't violate mine.  

Thanks for this excellent post.

There has been some discussion in this thread about legal tests for rape. Much of that discussion seems to assume that if consent is given, it's irrevocable, and applies to all sex acts.  In practice, a person can withdraw consent, and might make it clear they do not consent to some particular thing.

Ignoring withdrawn or limited consent must be legally risky in most parts of the world. As you imply in your post, putting the law to one side, it's also unethical.

As I mentioned above, though, it can be tough for tops in the heat of the moment if they are suddenly asked to withdraw when they're already over the precipice.

[LetsPOZBreed]

3 minutes ago, barebackbro said:

As I mentioned above, though, it can be tough for tops in the heat of the moment if they are suddenly asked to withdraw when they're already over the precipice.

Appreciate your compliment 🙂 

Further to your point here, though, this is where we bottoms have to be extra careful.  Unethical as it may be, trying to withdraw consent in the heat of the moment is very risky.  There's always that possibility of a top not honouring this, and that's unfortunate.  This is one main reason that I try and vet out any potential tops first (i.e. not just telling them my address after two messages); if something sets of my internal alarm bells, I back out and move on.  Your consent only needs to be violated once before it sticks with you for the rest of your life.  

[hntnhole]

 

1 hour ago, ErosWired said:

So many people throw words like "predator" and "rape" around like it's nothing, and it minimizes actual rape and has the potential to undermine the menace of actual predators.

 

47 minutes ago, backdoorjimmy said:

Agreed. Abuse is abuse, and it should be called out when it happens.

Both ErosWired and backdoorjimmy raise a valid point, and thanks for raising the issue.

It seems we need to define the word predator with some specifics.  For clarity, here's one from MW:

 "an animal that lives by killing and eating other animals : an animal that preys on other animals predators like bears and wolves

and another, compliments of BBC:

"A predator is an animal that hunts, kills and eats other animals for food. Prey is a term used to describe organisms that predators kill for food. Predator/prey relationships can be illustrated in a diagram called a food chain or food web" 

Now, We are not reflective of either of those definitions.  While there may be some validity in some guys calling themselves "predators, or predatory" within the context of men having sex, the real definition of that word is being stretched to the limit.  We don't fuck, then kill each other.  Some of us do go "hunting" in the fuckjoints, and maybe some of us misuse the word.  I'll accept the blame, since I may very well have used the word in an inappropriate manner somewhere along the line.  If that's the case, it most definitely wasn't in a bloodthirsty context. That in no way conflates with the actual definition though; we're "hunting" for willing partners to fuck.  They wouldn't be there, ass up, if they weren't "on the hunt" for Cocks to Breed them.  That said, there is never, ever, ever any excuse for deliberately harming another human being (unless society determines that shall happen according to the law).  

Thus, perhaps we could describe predatory acts as aggressive, destructive, threatening, disruptive, offensive, disturbing, to name a few.  While these are not complimentary at all, at least they don't imply killing each other.  We're all about exchanging pleasure, each guy has what the other guy needs.  

[barebackbro]

4 minutes ago, LetsPOZBreed said:

Appreciate your compliment 🙂 

Further to your point here, though, this is where we bottoms have to be extra careful.  Unethical as it may be, trying to withdraw consent in the heat of the moment is very risky.  There's always that possibility of a top not honouring this, and that's unfortunate.  This is one main reason that I try and vet out any potential tops first (i.e. not just telling them my address after two messages); if something sets of my internal alarm bells, I back out and move on.  Your consent only needs to be violated once before it sticks with you for the rest of your life.  

More good advice.

I'm not asking for details, but will just say that if you've ever been violated, I'm very sorry to hear that.

A couple of times, I've had to ask a guy to stop fucking me because he's too rough, or ignores my requests, or just becomes creepy. I'm built like a brick shithouse, but even I have sometimes felt vulnerable when bottoming.

[BannedWord]

34 minutes ago, LetsPOZBreed said:

Anyone (top, bottom, vers) can withdraw their consent at any time if they feel uncomfortable in the moment.  That has to be respected.  While I may be disappointed/annoyed that this consent was withdrawn right before loading the guy up, I honour that decision regardless.  It's similar to when I do any fetish play and someone says the safe word during play - in the moment, something can feel a bit "too much".

I'm not going to violate a guy's consent, just as I would expect that some guy won't violate mine.  

I am glad someone stated the obvious here. No means no, full stop. Granted, if you're in a sling and bound such that there's a queue of guys waiting their turn behind the current it's difficult to withdraw the consent, there seems to be among some elements of the community that feel they've been given the right to abuse as only they see fit. Separate the fantasy from the reality, guys. 

1 hour ago, backdoorjimmy said:

Agreed. Abuse is abuse, and it should be called out when it happens. My biggest issue is when I see people saying, "The 10 year age gap is creepy and the older man is a groomer/predator/creeper."

I read a post on Reddit by someone who said his older (50's) neighbor groomed him when he was 19 by hooking up with him, even though the 19 year old was the one who initiated the hookup and kept going back for more. The amount of people calling the older man a predator was insane, and the entire time I was reading it I was internally screaming "There are real predators out there! An older man hooking up with a 19 year old isn't a predator, he's just some fucking guy!"

19 versus 50's? Not everyone gets off on people their own age, and there's whole contingent of guys into "daddy/son" relationships. Go see [think before following links] https://www.silverdaddies.com for fun and you'll see the amount of cross-generational dynamic. Whatever floats your boat, but they're just guys of consenting age. How much do we need to police ourselves and others for what is and isn't acceptable? If a young Twink wants me to pound him, bring it on. 😃

But agreed it's not abuse. Ignoring consent? 

1. Know what you're getting into.

2. If it goes sideways, make sure you both agree that it can stop where it's no longer what was planned.

[Qilly55]

On 1/30/2022 at 9:50 AM, Toxload said:

Once a bottom has made the decision to bareback with a poz detectable top he is exposed just as if the top came in his breeding hole, 

pre cum is just as infectious as cum and pre cum gets pumped into a hole the entire time the bottom is being bred 

it’s being worked into the bottoms blood stream the entire time he’s getting bare backed. 
so pull out or not it’s the same exposure

WELCOME TO THE BROTHER HOOD 

 

I really didn't know that. I more a,cocksucker, been fucked with condoms until recently  I had a,guy duck me bare, I asked him to pull out which he did. But I can't believe the amount of precum he had coming from his cock. He lubed me with his precum. I thought he shot his load before he fucked me.

He did pull out like I asked him to shoot his load on my cock and I jerked off for him using his big load of cum as lube.

I thought it was safer to pull out.

I'm hoping for him to come back and fuck me again.

[LetsPOZBreed]

30 minutes ago, SRQDude said:

Granted, if you're in a sling and bound such that there's a queue of guys waiting their turn behind the current it's difficult to withdraw the consent, there seems to be among some elements of the community that feel they've been given the right to abuse as only they see fit. Separate the fantasy from the reality, guys. 

Thank you for your reply and input.  This also goes back to another post of mine in this thread about being careful about placing oneself in a risky situation.  Personally, if I'm going to be in a place where I might be in a sling (or even restrained in general), I make sure I take a buddy along with me.  I need another person there to intervene on my behalf if I'm put in a position where I can't do it on my own.  Prob not the kind of thing everyone might do, but at least I have someone around who knows what my limits are.