My bf is a cuckhold when i suck other guys cocks.....
hungryman40
Sexy Member
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2009
- Posts
- 505
- Media
- 1
- Likes
- 68
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Canberra Australia
- Sexuality
- 80% Straight, 20% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Actually, the traditional, original term means "a man who has an unfaithful wife."
But in time, the meaning has been expanded to include:
1. knowledge, acceptance, and approval of his wife's unfaithfulness (and even participation with the wife in her affairs.)
2. A man who gains sexual pleasure in the knowledge that his wife has made love or is making love to other men,
3. Cuckolds are usually submissive, often have a small penis,suffer from premature ejaculation,'enjoy' sexual humiliationand are rarely able to satisfy their wives. (These are not ALWAYS present but some traits generally define a cucked husband.)
Below are a couple of sites I refer back to for my information. The first has some really interesting material, if you enjoy reading.
A Modern Cuckold Definition | Cuckold Tales
Urban Dictionary: cuckold
(I love urban dicitionary because people get to add
their take on a term. Sometimes they apply, sometimes are just for fun.) :tongue:
But if you use google (your best friend) you will find much information about this type of fetish.
As a former cuckold myself, I can tel, you that it is a man who knowingly accepts that his wife/girlfriend has sexual relations with another man/men, but is still in a full relationship with his partner. The man usually remains faithful.
For 9 months of my last relationship this was me. I forfilled all of my duties as a boyfriend and our relationship carried on the same as it had before, with the exception on one thing. My role in the bedroom was willingly given up to another, more sexually skilled, man.
It took a long time deciding that it was the right thing for us to do. But it was better than her seeing a guy behind my back, so I agreed to it.
For 9 months of my last relationship this was me. I forfilled all of my duties as a boyfriend and our relationship carried on the same as it had before, with the exception on one thing. My role in the bedroom was willingly given up to another, more sexually skilled, man.
It took a long time deciding that it was the right thing for us to do. But it was better than her seeing a guy behind my back, so I agreed to it.
Did your exclusive girlfriend ever cheat on you? Wel, that's what it is.
JudyAnn
Experimental Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2012
- Posts
- 23
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 5
- Points
- 38
- Location
- Clearwater, Florida
- Sexuality
- 100% Straight, 0% Gay
- Gender
- Female
Yeah, I think I would be EXTREMELY careful about the use of the third point. No doubt there are some men who are submissive and perhaps not well endowed but I think there are quite a few men who are simply turned on by watching their wives or girlfriends with another guy. They may or may not be in the minority but I think there are a lot of them out there.:smile:
twoton
Superior Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2011
- Posts
- 7,865
- Media
- 1
- Likes
- 8,310
- Points
- 268
- Location
- Mid Atlantic
- Sexuality
- 99% Straight, 1% Gay
- Gender
- Male
Technically, I was cuckolded when an ex g.f. had sex with other guys, although I didn't know about it for sure until one of her friends told me. The relationship ended shortly afterward.
My wife told me that one of my best buddies hit on her a number of times. What bothered me wasn't that he hit on her, but that it all happened behind my back and she didn't tell me until after he moved a thousand miles away.
My wife told me that one of my best buddies hit on her a number of times. What bothered me wasn't that he hit on her, but that it all happened behind my back and she didn't tell me until after he moved a thousand miles away.
Thank you so much for providing a historical and accurate definition of the word. I used to have a message saved in chat for when people asked the quesiton. The only think that is missing is the origin of the word from teh cuckoo which lays its eggs in other birds nests so that they don't have to raise it.
I'm thinking about the biological basis of cuckolding. Is it along the lines of 'OMG, your magnificent cock is far better than mine! You will produce stronger seed to impregnate my wife and produce alpha-children I will be happy to raise as my own, so master, please impregnate my wife with your wonderful member!'
It would explain the subservient role of the cuckold, the masterful and humiliating attitude of the bull, and the disdain felt by the wife humiliating her partner. I could not understand it until thinking in those terms, so is this the basis of it? It doesn't really support the biological need of the individual to foster HIS seed as a priority, so it's interesting from an anthropological POV to see how common this is.
It would explain the subservient role of the cuckold, the masterful and humiliating attitude of the bull, and the disdain felt by the wife humiliating her partner. I could not understand it until thinking in those terms, so is this the basis of it? It doesn't really support the biological need of the individual to foster HIS seed as a priority, so it's interesting from an anthropological POV to see how common this is.
That would assume a larger, more magnificant penis (as you put it) will produce stronger seed and children. Since the point of your post was, is there a biological or evolutionary component to cockold, then the next question is, is there any evidence that a larger penis indicates better DNA?
Women are supposed to be programmed to find the best genes for their offspring, so presumably they are following their genetic coding by finding well endowed males more sexually attractive see this.
I find it hard to understand the satisfaction of the male cuckold. To be humiliated by his female and her new partner, to be denied intercourse and the chance of inserting his seed which is a basic drive, tortured or to have another male express such dominance... I don't see where satisfaction comes in this for the cuckold and it is virtually unknown in nature. I would appreciate someone who lives this lifestyle explaining the basis of the satisfaction, and whether such a relationship can survive long term.
I find it hard to understand the satisfaction of the male cuckold. To be humiliated by his female and her new partner, to be denied intercourse and the chance of inserting his seed which is a basic drive, tortured or to have another male express such dominance... I don't see where satisfaction comes in this for the cuckold and it is virtually unknown in nature. I would appreciate someone who lives this lifestyle explaining the basis of the satisfaction, and whether such a relationship can survive long term.
Incocknito
Sexy Member
His satisfaction comes not from the act of sex but the act of his partner having had sex with someone else.
Typically the cuckold (these days) feels submissive and inferior to other men and therefore incapable of satisfying or sometimes even having sex with his partner.
The archaic meaning of cuckold was just to be cheated on and did not refer to the penis size of your wife's lover.
Typically the cuckold (these days) feels submissive and inferior to other men and therefore incapable of satisfying or sometimes even having sex with his partner.
The archaic meaning of cuckold was just to be cheated on and did not refer to the penis size of your wife's lover.
Okay, but you posited that the man liked it for that reason, but you cite the women's genetic coding. Again, there's a transference assumption there. Don't necessarily disagree with you. But, it is a perspective shift from the woman to the man atleast.
Yes, I've seen the recent study. I've wondered in the past if women's preferences evolved the larger male penis, so it is a bold and interesting theory being proposed.
If preference evolved the larger penis, I think modern technology is slowing or even reversing evolutionary trends of the past. It is still true that large penises have more sex, but for the first time in human history, that doesn't usually mean more offspring.
The same evolutionary slowdown or reversal exists in other areas. Consider what severely poor eyesight would have meant to a person's longevity 10k years ago, versus now.
IMO, technology's impact on penis size evolution (and other aspects) that you indirectly raised, is way more interesting than this cockold topic. :smile: Maybe it deserves its own thread?
Last edited:
As someone turned on by the cuckold fantasy, I've been thinking about "... why?" for a while. Why would there be men, such as myself, who think there is nothing hotter than deferring the a sexual relationship between his primary partner and another man? This is a situation most men would have a strong negative reaction to, to say the least!
After trying to understand this for many years, I've come up with a theory. I think there is an evolutionary basis for the cuckold thing being erotic to some men as a reproductive strategy.
While the evolutionary benefits for a woman to "cheat" are fairly obvious (genetic diversity in her offspring, and access to men with higher quality genes than the man who long term pairs with her), there could also be an evolutionary explanation for why some men would eroticize their wife or LTRs infidelity.
The more common reproductive strategy, of course, is for a man in a long term relationship is to prevent his woman from coupling with rival males. Therefore the woman he is with, if she chooses the reproductive strategy of "cheating" to get the better and more diverse genes than what she can get from her long time partner, she has to take a risk of her primary partner finding out. I imagine back in pre-civilized times that risk could be pretty high -- even deadly. In fact, concerns for safety -- including the danger of abandonment by her loving partner during times of pregnancy and early childhood for her young -- are really the only mitigating factors for why many more women wouldn't choose this reproductive strategy.
But with a male who is accommodating of her strategy, or better yet erotically excited by it, the risk is removed. Thus, this could be a very attractive quality in a man.
Therefore such a man would presumably have access to more women with better genes to choose from, to long-term partner with. Even though he may end up taking care of some children he didn't father, presumably he'd have some kids from his genes also.
This tendency in some men may also have another basis in natural selection. Much, probably most of the time, the secondary sex partner would be chosen based on superior physical size, penis size and strength to him (among other qualities). Many males who objected passionately to their mates sexual partnership with this type of man might have been killed off before passing along their genes, unlike their more accommodating brethren.
If you look at it that way, you can see how the this tendency in some men could be good for the "cuckold," the "wife," the "bull," any children that come from any of the coupling that occurs, and the species as a whole. Everyone gets to fuck their way up the gene pool -- even the alpha male, as he gets to fuck the woman and move on to new ones with a better possibility that his young will be cared for by a surrogate father.
After trying to understand this for many years, I've come up with a theory. I think there is an evolutionary basis for the cuckold thing being erotic to some men as a reproductive strategy.
While the evolutionary benefits for a woman to "cheat" are fairly obvious (genetic diversity in her offspring, and access to men with higher quality genes than the man who long term pairs with her), there could also be an evolutionary explanation for why some men would eroticize their wife or LTRs infidelity.
The more common reproductive strategy, of course, is for a man in a long term relationship is to prevent his woman from coupling with rival males. Therefore the woman he is with, if she chooses the reproductive strategy of "cheating" to get the better and more diverse genes than what she can get from her long time partner, she has to take a risk of her primary partner finding out. I imagine back in pre-civilized times that risk could be pretty high -- even deadly. In fact, concerns for safety -- including the danger of abandonment by her loving partner during times of pregnancy and early childhood for her young -- are really the only mitigating factors for why many more women wouldn't choose this reproductive strategy.
But with a male who is accommodating of her strategy, or better yet erotically excited by it, the risk is removed. Thus, this could be a very attractive quality in a man.
Therefore such a man would presumably have access to more women with better genes to choose from, to long-term partner with. Even though he may end up taking care of some children he didn't father, presumably he'd have some kids from his genes also.
This tendency in some men may also have another basis in natural selection. Much, probably most of the time, the secondary sex partner would be chosen based on superior physical size, penis size and strength to him (among other qualities). Many males who objected passionately to their mates sexual partnership with this type of man might have been killed off before passing along their genes, unlike their more accommodating brethren.
If you look at it that way, you can see how the this tendency in some men could be good for the "cuckold," the "wife," the "bull," any children that come from any of the coupling that occurs, and the species as a whole. Everyone gets to fuck their way up the gene pool -- even the alpha male, as he gets to fuck the woman and move on to new ones with a better possibility that his young will be cared for by a surrogate father.
Wow - impressed with your theory; you have done some thinking about this, haven't you. Actually, I think your theory makes pretty damn good sense, especially long ago, when populations would have been limited and spread out, so that rare opportunities really needed to be exploited to avoid inbreeding. Your theory speaks equally to both cockold and open marriages. IMO, these traits make the most sense evolving early, nearer to the trunk of mankind's evolutionary tree, when early humans were driven more by instinct than intellect (i.e. perhaps 1 to 3 millions ago). And of course, instincts that evolved then, would still be with us today, even if somewhat diluted or inconsistent. An early evolution of these traits would make them more primitive and instinct-based, and harder to rationalize intellectually, which fits in this case.
Interesting post, yours...
