CNN Writes Article On Cuckolding | Describe it as "Largely Positive"

Wibbs wrote: »

Reality isn't always positive, many things and people and behaviours are negative.

100% agreed. But that is not really what the text above was commenting on at all. But as I said your value judgement is just a personal opinion - it does not appear to be grounded in anything meaningful or actual. Nothing wrong with that of course - but pays to call a spade a spade. And a useful distinction here is between cuckolding itself being negative - which I see no reason to think it is especially from your good self - and specific reasons and motivations for it being negative - which many are. But many are positive and healthy too.

Wibbs wrote: »

No deep thinking required.

Yet your explanation does not cover the bit I find interesting. Which is, to take your words "Getting regular action from multiple guys" - seems to be derided in one context and lauded in another.

Sure as you say one is more difficult than the other - but I am more focused on the idea that either shagging loads of people is either the focus of derision or it is not.

Wibbs wrote: »

Fine and off they go, but that doesn't preclude me from thinking they're weirdos. We ALL make value judgements all the time.

Sure I have loads of them myself. But all the ones I am aware of holding I can explain and defend and ground in actual reasoning. That is more the distinction I am making. And as I said there is nothing wrong with a value judgement held for no other reason than emotional bias. But there is also nothing wrong with highlighting when that is all it is or appears to be or the speaker is willing to demonstrate it to be. When you start questioning here whether it is valid to call a man a man - then I can only suspect your definition of "man" is rather unusual and-or limited.

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Fascinating that this article would get under so many people's skin. given the solidarity I saw when Gillette were perceived to have had a go at men, now some of the same posters having a go at men who are Into a different type of sex.

Oh here you go. Again. You must wear drum skins out at a rapid rate with all the banging.

Here's an article highlighting awareness of a different type of sex that some men enjoy. Instead of celebrating men being encouraged to do as they want with consenting adults, men calling otheren cucks and talking them down.

Apparently according to the article a third of women fantasise about the same thing. If they're actively doing the same thing, inviting other women to hop on their bloke and getting off on the "humiliation" or whatever I'd regard them in the same way. No gender politics required.

Deleted User wrote: »

Sure but those who are coming from a negative place are pretty apparent. Especially when they start calling the people "sad sad men" or questioning whether it is even valid to call them men at all. How is that _not_ coming from a negative place?

Reality isn't always positive, many things and people and behaviours are negative. Depending on one's viewpoint of course and mine sees some guy getting his jollies from being humiliated from watching his missus getting tapped out by someone else as negative and yep sad.

What is somewhat interesting to me though is the psychology behind a mild inversion I see here. Very often in the past I have heard complaints that men sleeping around are called Studs while women who do it are called sluts. Here the reverse appears to occur. The men are derided while the women who have this going on are congratulated by those deriding the men. It is an interesting reversal probably worth exploration.

No deep thinking required. All things being equal being a "stud" is more difficult that being a "slut" so it's understandable why one is seen as more of a positive - in one sense anyway - than the other. Getting regular action from multiple guys with the permission/acquiescence of her partner is pretty difficult too as the majority of men would cry foul, so again it's understandable why it's seen as more of a positive, especially with the image of some yahoo pulling his pud in the corner watching same. The same reaction would happen if the sexes were reversed.

If you would evaluate physical violence depending on the context therefore - realising some of it is assault and some of it is consent - then why not emotional too? Consenting to be whipped with words or whipped by leather - what is the difference really when there is consent and even desire?

Fine and off they go, but that doesn't preclude me from thinking they're weirdos. We ALL make value judgements all the time.

El_Duderino 09

Fascinating that this article would get under so many people's skin. given the solidarity I saw when Gillette were perceived to have had a go at men, now some of the same posters having a go at men who are Into a different type of sex.

Here's an article highlighting awareness of a different type of sex that some men enjoy. Instead of celebrating men being encouraged to do as they want with consenting adults, men calling otheren cucks and talking them down.

Sadly typical of some of the usual posters to feign interest in men's issues. But even that feigned interest clearly doesn't spread to men who aren't like you.

Watching someone else have sex with my Mrs isn't something I'd like to do, but there are loads of things I'm not Into. As Long as everyone involved is consenting and nobody pressures me to get involved, then normal rules apply. Live and let live.

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

It's not always coming from a negative place just to highlight such matters.

Sure but those who are coming from a negative place are pretty apparent. Especially when they start calling the people "sad sad men" or questioning whether it is even valid to call them men at all. How is that _not_ coming from a negative place?

But that is their opinion entirely. There is nothing outside value judgements here that actually ground that in anything but mere opinion and bias from a pedestal one does not actually have. Which is absolutely fine - do not get me wrong - but let us call the spade a spade.

The more realistic appraisal is that there is a whole continuum of reasons why people might want to engage in this activity and _some_ of them are perfectly healthy and OK while _some_ are not. But you can say that about dominance and submission play too. Or Bondage. Or many things.

I certainly feel for people in the latter camp. There are people who genuinely really do not want to lose their partners and consent to activities like this solely because they think they will lose them if they do not. For example.

But I would reserve for them my compassion and sympathy rather than insults and questioning whatever I personally think "man" or "manhood" means and whether they deserve the label which is a level of high horsing I have no personal time for engaging in myself.

Gimme A Pound wrote: »

The vast majority of men wouldn't like the idea of their wife or girlfriend having a really good ride with another man (doesn't matter what skin colour) and it's not unreasonable to wonder why such a spectacle or idea is a turn-on for a minority.

Well firstly if the study is accurate - and I have not actually read the original that closely yet to question it - then it is not that much of a "minority" at all who like the idea. Though those that actually go through with it may be.

As for _why_ they would do it well as I wrote on another thread I think there are a multitude of reasons for it - some healthy and some worrying - for it. Quite diverse reasons too. I have some of them myself and when reading about other people with similar interests in maybe pursuing this I find their reasons entirely different to me own. So I suspect the sum total of reasons is rather large.

Briar Wrong Tribune wrote: »

It’s a very strange kink for sure. I’d be devastated if my long term partner didn’t care about me not being faithful.

I think the issue there is that "faithful" is not a fixed term from relationship to relationship. Consenting to engage in sexual activity with others outside a relationship - when all members of the relationship are in agreement - is for many _not_ being unfaithful. At all.

Being faithful in a relationship and being monogamous while in a relationship are not synonyms. One does not automatically imply or in any way require the other.

Briar Wrong Tribune wrote: »

What’s the difference though both result in stirring another mans porridge

It strongly comes down to _why_ the people engaging in it are doing it. And I think the derision associated with it is focusing on the kind of man allowing it to happen because he is too weak to voice his counter opinion - too scared to lose his partner by denying her requests - or too unable to satisfy his partner so she is compelled to seek further pleasures elsewhere.

I do not share their derision, rather I have compassion and sympathy for such people. I genuinely think they need help.

But many many engage in this taboo/fantasy for genuine and healthy reasons too - but they get splashback (pun intended) from the derision of the above. And the people questioning why their wife wants to go and do it miss that quite often it is the _man_ who initiates the idea and pursues the fantasy.

So rather than judge or evaluate "cucks" and the like as a whole - I think it healthier to evaluate the reasons any given individual is doing it.

What is somewhat interesting to me though is the psychology behind a mild inversion I see here. Very often in the past I have heard complaints that men sleeping around are called Studs while women who do it are called sluts. Here the reverse appears to occur. The men are derided while the women who have this going on are congratulated by those deriding the men. It is an interesting reversal probably worth exploration.

Briar Wrong Tribune wrote: »

Surely that’s domestic abuse? Telling a man he’s worthless and pathetic and making them feel like they’re inadequate? That’s disgusting. I would be horrified hearing a woman speak to her partner like that

It is all about consent though isn't it? There is a difference between insulting someone calling them "worthless" and doing it because they actively _want_ you to.

The same is true by analogy of, for example, S+M stuff. In most contexts you might be horrified to find a man hitting his wife. Or a wife inflicting physical pain on her husband. But some people actively want that when it comes to their sex life.

If you would evaluate physical violence depending on the context therefore - realising some of it is assault and some of it is consent - then why not emotional too? Consenting to be whipped with words or whipped by leather - what is the difference really when there is consent and even desire?

splashuum wrote: »

I came across this quite bizarre article which advocates cuckoldry. What is most surprising for me is the fact that CNN (a massive main stream media news outlet) are glorifying this. Some of the quotes from the article include

splashuum wrote: »

What is their end game here? Break up the family?

You have had a really weird response to the article I suspect - attempting to attribute all kinds of motives and positions to it. The article appears to have no "end game" here other than to report on the findings of a study. Their reasoning for reporting on it appears to be simply that the results of the study seem to run contrary to what most people might expect - hence to their mind making it interesting to their readers.

But alas like many reports on studies - the article does not appear to actually refer to the data - the methodology - or anything related to the study at all really. So it is the same pathetic level of Science Journalism that is alas the norm of our modern world.

The quotes you picked as being "from the article" are not actually from the author of the article at all though - but quotes from people and data the article is about. So they too can not be attributed to the motivations of the writer of the article. That said however -

splashuum wrote: »

"acting on cuckolding fantasies can be a largely positive experience" "Overall, our research found that for the most part, cuckolding tends to be a positive fantasy and behavior,". "It doesn't appear to be evidence of disturbance, of an unhealthy relationship"

- I am not sure what your issue is with any of these quotes. They appear to be containing no value judgement. Merely direct comments on the findings. I would be more worried about the finding themselves as the only link in the article is to a study on cuckolding specifically in "gay men" so I would not know why they are extrapolating this to an article about men and their female partners. As I said - bad science journalism.

The quotes you picked appear ok to me however especially the last one. This kind of sexual activity is not automatically evidence of issues in the relationship. It _can_ be of course - no one is saying it can't. They are just saying that we can not automatically assume that there is issues when people take this route. Quite the opposite in fact as many people taking this route can be in quite strong and healthy relationships.

So if readers were to take only one thing from the article and nothing else - I would want it to be that. Divergent sexual behaviours are almost never an automatic indication of relationship issues. Sometimes they can even be the _exact_ opposite.

splashuum wrote: »

Each to their own but in general I am almost certain this sort of behavior would be a relationship destroyer. CNN are trying to normalize the idea of watching your long term partner have sex with someone else. Bonkers.

I think they are not trying to normalise it so much as merely acknowledge it might already be more normal and common than we might suspect.

I am not sure what your certainty about it being a relationship destroyer is based on. Many people do it and are just fine. And "swinging" too. The definitions of cuckolding and swinging have changed a bit over time to the point that many people take one as the other - or use them interchangeably - but in general there is a lot more of it going on without destroying anything than you might know.

That said - anything _can_ destroy a relationship and one should not bush the boundaries without a solid foundation and good communication unless one wants to take great risks with the relationship. That is not limited to swinging or cuckolding. Any change can do this. Even relatively mundane things like anal sex, or things like BDSM, or watching porn together. Anything _can_ upset the boat and toss everyone out. I personally know of a couple that broke down after they started watching porn together.

Caution and communication is always advised.

But at the end of the day is the title of the article merely that "Cuckolding can be positive" really that controversial? Or do we have to ignore the word "can" in order to manufacture a reaction to it greater than it actually deserves?

Feisar wrote: »

Never stick yer dick in crazy.

and don't let crazy stick its dick in you, as my exes found out to their cost.

Feisar

Balanadan wrote: »

There are plenty of men out there who have no problem attracting women, but they don't throw it about for various reasons, such as not wanting to be chased by nutters or the risk of STDs.

Never stick yer dick in crazy.

mcmoustache

Temptamperu wrote: »

not all liberals are cucks, but all cucks are most definitely liberal.

Roger Stone would like a word.

Feisar

Well my weird lil' kinks don't seem so bad. Now if I could just get the barbed wire out of my arse...

seamus wrote: »

It's only abuse if it's non-consensual.

I don't get it either. Even your standard sub/dom stuff. How can you be tied up in chains and leather and be "yes, mistress, no mistress", and then an hour later you're sitting down to a cuppa and interacting as equals?

It has to affect the relationship overall and cause one partner to wield excessive power outside of the bedroom. And unless they're acutely aware of this imbalance and only use it benevolently, then it follows that a form of stockholm syndrome will set it.

I get men like bossy women, or women like men in charge but that’s totally different to verbally abusing and belittling someone. I dont know. Each to their own, but that just doesn’t sit right with me

seamus

Briar Wrong Tribune wrote: »

Surely that’s domestic abuse? Telling a man he’s worthless and pathetic and making them feel like they’re inadequate? That’s disgusting. I would be horrified hearing a woman speak to her partner like that

It's only abuse if it's non-consensual.

I don't get it either. Even your standard sub/dom stuff. How can you be tied up in chains and leather and be "yes, mistress, no mistress", and then an hour later you're sitting down to a cuppa and interacting as equals?

It has to affect the relationship overall and cause one partner to wield excessive power outside of the bedroom. And unless they're acutely aware of this imbalance and only use it benevolently, then it follows that a form of stockholm syndrome will set it.

Surely that’s domestic abuse? Telling a man he’s worthless and pathetic and making them feel like they’re inadequate? That’s disgusting. I would be horrified hearing a woman speak to her partner like that

Rootsblower

Ernest Mammoth Cashier wrote: »

When I was 19 I worked in an arcade in the US. The mother of a girl I worked with started coming in a lot and giving me sandwiches and stuff. Invited me to a pool party repeatedly. Her husband came in tow one time. She was openly trying to hook up with me. Her daughter told me the same thing. I was just confused by it. They definitely had a cuckold thing.

She was alright looking, nothing special. Smacked of desperation a bit, which totally spoiled the whole older woman thing I could otherwise have gotten into. Blond hair down to her ass. Dressed a bit young.

Mutton dressed as lamb eh, won’t yell swell or tell!!!

seamus

Briar Wrong Tribune wrote: »

What’s the difference though both result in stirring another mans porridge

Cuckolding specifically is a form of domination/humiliation fetish.

Part of the draw to it is that the other man is more of a stereotypical "man" than the husband, either in the size of his penis, his physical fitness, or just his assertiveness/dominance.

It can involve simple humiliation such as comments from the wife and the other man about how pathetic he is, right up to what can only be described as a bisexual threesome where the cuckold sucks off the other man in between watching his wife getting pounded.

There are of course grey areas. Men who would claim to be into a cuckold fetish, when in reality they are hogtied to a woman who has sex with her boyfriend and the only sniff of action he ever gets is to watch them go at it. Whether that actually constitutes "consent" or is actually form of domestic/psychological abuse, is debatable.

As humiliation goes, it can get pretty extreme. I have no idea how such insane crushing of your self-esteem is in any way exciting, but there you go.

"Hotwifing" is pretty broad, it can be simple voyeurism sharing explicit photos or videos. Or it can be having sex in the view of others, and can even involve wife-sharing/wife-swapping.

The difference between wife-sharing and cuckolding is specifically the humiliation aspect. People who wife-share aren't necessarily cuckolds; they get enjoyment out of seeing their wife going at it, but they're not actively being humiliated at the same time. In fact, afaik many cuckolds hate the fact that their partner is shagging someone else, but this is part of the excitement.

Humans are fncking weird.

Muckka

Pete_Sampras wrote: »

The majority of women do not find their husband attractive. Only a small percentage of men are sexually attractive to women, say around 10% or so for argument's sake.

A study on OK Cuppid for example found that women find around 80% of men below averagein terms of attractiveness if I recall correctly. This makes sense evolutionarily, a woman's eggs are expensive, she should avoid wasting them on suboptimal men so the attraction mechanism in her head only gives her attraction for the top men. Most men for example would have sex with an average woman as sperm is cheap, most women would not have sex with an average man as eggs are expensive

This leaves women with a dilemma, if they want a family most women need to settle down with a man who they don't find sexually attractive. There is a reason there are so many memes based on sexless marriages, because there is a lot of truth to it that people can recognise. Even when there is sex in these marriages it is usually transactional in nature rather than out of genuine desire as the wife knows that she has to at least give her husband sex occasionally, even if that means boring routine sex.

The husband infers from his married sex life that his wife just isn't really into sex, the truth is she just isn't into sex with him

Little does he realise that there is a good chance his wife had genuine desire sex with desirable men in her younger, where she begged for her partner to cum on her ass/tits/face and fukc her in the ass. He couldn't fathom that as a possibility as he never gets to see her true sexual nature as it lies dormant within her. But it is a lot more likely than many husbands realise.

These husbands are often controlled in subtle ways by their wives, the wives use their sexual agency to control them. This is why the sex is transactional, they only get it if they are a good little boy and do what their told. As a result their wives lose respect for them which makes the husbands even more unappealing sexually.

Many of these huaband's believe that their wives wouldn't have casual sex as they were made to wait for months. Little do they know that it just takes the right man in the right place and they would have casual sex.

As a rule of thumb, if a woman makes you wait for sex it usually isn't worth the wait. Before a man has a monogomous relationship he should ensure that he can regularly have casual sex with attractive women so that he knows he has value sexually to women.

That's all for now folks, feel free to subscribe to my newsletter.

Fancy playing doubles

harry Bailey esq

Church on Tuesday wrote: »

I take it you're a Utd fan then :rolleyes:

Good God no! I'm a bohs fan! I'd quicker let two fellas double team my missus than visit the 'theatre of dreams'

Briar Wrong Tribune wrote: »

What’s the difference though both result in stirring another mans porridge

One I believe comes with the mindset of "I hit the jackpot and my wife is so hot, other men want her." The other is "I'm a worthless man."

Motivations are different, with the same end result where your wife is getting omniplexed in front of you. It likely leads to a ruined relationship but I guess it can work for some couples. I know another couple where both are allowed to do their thing. 17 years together and they're a model couple.

Deleted User wrote: »

One of the lads drunkenly told me he fantasised about it. There's a difference between hotwifing and cuckholding though. The latter having more of a focus on emasculation, while the former being more like swinging.

What’s the difference though both result in stirring another mans porridge

One of the lads drunkenly told me he fantasised about it. There's a difference between hotwifing and cuckholding though. The latter having more of a focus on emasculation, while the former being more like swinging.

dxhound2005

Dakotabigone wrote: »

The amount of affairs people are having now is frightening. The biggest mistake people make is telling their friends. The one and only rule is if you are having an affair tell no one. No one can judge you then.

It's even worse than you think. You only know about the ones your friends told you about.

Muckka

I was on Bumble recently, there's a few women out there with soy boys who must be rightly sad cucks.

Cucks are usually married to Libtards, and are soft pittiful lads, with no liathriod what so ever.

Where herself gets peed off with his lack of lustre, she decides to go elsewhere.
He's no other choice but to put up or shut up.
So said guy has to endure his "in sickness and health" or terms and conditions playing out the 4 legged monster with a real man.

It's quite sad really, I'd say 55% of guy's will be ok with it, the other 45% are absolutely tormented.

I myself wouldn't sleep with another guy's partner. It's a line I couldn't cross.

There's plenty of tramp's in stable marriage's out there riding stranger's for kick's and white washing it with a libtard agenda.

Do I see anything wrong with it ? not really it's their business.

But it's very new agey and leans very left....

Keep on swinging

Dakotabigone

The amount of affairs people are having now is frightening. The biggest mistake people make is telling their friends. The one and only rule is if you are having an affair tell no one. No one can judge you then.

It’s a very strange kink for sure. I’d be devastated if my long term partner didn’t care about me not being faithful.

Gimme A Pound

Deleted User wrote: »

I disagree. Foot fetishes are f*cked up in my eyes, getting your lady to call you Daddy is f*cked up in my eyes. Getting your other half to dress as a school girl is f*cked up in my eyes.

Apparently online, these are quite common fetishes, but I have yet to meet one of my mates that owns up to these fetishes.

I say who cares, because all most of the population is doing is throwing stones in glass houses.

Live and let live.

Enquiring about things is not throwing stones in glass-houses, nor is it not live and let live. If people want to do the cuckold thing, I will live and let live. I'm not going to do anything to try and stop them, but that doesn't change that I'll be curious about it.

I'm still not sure that the vast majority of people have ****ed up fetishes. Plenty do no doubt but I'd need more convincing that it's the vast majority.

s7ryf3925pivug

When I was 19 I worked in an arcade in the US. The mother of a girl I worked with started coming in a lot and giving me sandwiches and stuff. Invited me to a pool party repeatedly. Her husband came in tow one time. She was openly trying to hook up with me. Her daughter told me the same thing. I was just confused by it. They definitely had a cuckold thing.

She was alright looking, nothing special. Smacked of desperation a bit, which totally spoiled the whole older woman thing I could otherwise have gotten into. Blond hair down to her ass. Dressed a bit young.

To be fair, whatever consenting adults are into and get up to in the privacy of their own abodes I could give two hoots for. Whatever floats your boat and all that and fair play and some folks have odd rising tides indeed. And that's fine, however attempts based on non science and cheap seat chatshow "research" to make the odder even dysfunctional minority ends of the bell curve of human sexuality somehow mainstream and average, I say show me the peer reviewed numbers or GTFO with your need for validation for your kink and/or need for attention, usually for profit and peer approval.