Monday, June 7, 2010

Bull [shit]

I am reading a few blogs where the man writes about the woman in his relationship dealing with extracurricular sex. Yes, I am talking about the man being pussy-whipped and the woman taking any sex outside the relationship as her due.


In some cases that is what the man wants regardless of what the woman wants: she must have sex outside, or else his fantasy is not fulfilled.

In other cases they already have a shitty relationship, and it is only a matter of time before it breaks without redemption. So she looks outside, he gets a hard on, then gets resentful at the end. Sometimes it works ... for a while at least. Maybe.

Then there is the pathetic fantasy where he has a small dick that would not satisfy a gnat, and she must have one of those big ones we read about, you know, some foot-long schlong attached to a piece of human meat with no brain, but that’s all right.

Yeah, we all have our fantasies. I don’t see the preoccupation with huge dicks, though. For one thing, it might be painful to the person on whom it is used. Forget anal sex, and maybe even forget vaginal sex. Oral sex might be fine as long as the male with the schlong pulls his punch. For another, well, just like having a big head, a big foot, or a big belly: it is not necessarily esthetically pleasing. But some men think that a bull with a huge cock is god’s answer to a woman’s need.

My main objection to all this is using the word bull. As if a woman were to say, “I’m going to the stockyard and hire a 3000 pound mindless animal to rip my innards so that I’ll be totally satisfied for once after dealing with this unsatisfying pipsqueak with a tiny cock.”

Damn, don’t these [assumed] women realize that a bull has a pea-size brain running a twenty-inch penis? Yes, I know, it is an analogy, but even the analogy fails when it comes to, say, tact, cleanliness, kindness, consideration, safe sex, let alone intelligent conversation. Then again, maybe these women need only to be reamed and then they are done?

Actually, I don’t believe any of this. I think that all of this is in the fertile mind of horny men who write pretending to be in a relationship of that sort, or pretending to be women.

Does anybody out there have actual information on this? Does anybody think that a bull is a good term for a sex mate in extracurricular affairs?


m said...

Yes, i do.

i'm not sure if you read my blog. Or maybe it is my blog that has, in part, inspired your judmental comments. But let me briefly explain why the term Bull works.

First of all, to each their own. Being who you are, one might think you'd live by that outlook. i've read your blog, and you're not exactly a mainstream guy, although you've certainly spent your time living in that world as some kind of law enforcement officer. But can you imagine what the boys would say if they knew what you were about behind closed doors at home with your wife? Might they also be judgemental? And might you then each their own?

On a practical leve, the term "Bull" is an analogy. But it is the not the stupid lumbering beast with a monstrous member that works for Ms. Catherine and is the notion that this man is like a Bull...the stud who services the female, satisfying them better than the other.

And believe me, Ms. Catherine must be satisfied, and being what i am, i'm not in Her league. I could go on, but i suspect you understand the intricacies of cuckolding. you just may not relate to them, and that probably says more than your judgemental post.

- m

Susan's Pet said...


Relax! I am not being judgmental, I merely object to the usage of the word bull in this context. Yes, my “boys” would have fun at my expense if they knew what I do behind closed doors although many of them do something just as kinky, I assume. It is called comradery. We tend to be merciless, but it is all in jest.

I do read your blog, and yours is just one of the several that uses this term. I have no objection to a woman wanting to use a man with a larger member. However, I feel that there should be some intelligence attached to that coveted member, and the term “bull” does not convey that. I am not trying to make rules here. If a woman wants a brainless fuck, it is up to her, and “bull” will do just fine.

m said...

Thanks, Susan's Pet. i'm more relaxed now. When i read your post last night, it struck a nerve, for a couple of reasons...

1) i've had some comments regarding whether or not my blog is real, or am i just making stuff up. my blog is 100% real. i do tend to focus more on the kinky sex side of our FLR, and that skew can lead one to believe that no real couple could possibly exist the way we do. But we're just normal people who have chosen to lead a very different lifestyle (as i'm sure you can relate). And my blog tends to be about the dirty parts. But i can guarantee it is totally legit. We're for real, and the content of my blog is true.

2) Some people have commented on cuckolding and look down on it. Don't get me wrong, as a cuck, being looked down upon is part of the lifestyle. But i bristle when people write it off as something that isn't really for the Woman, or that it may even be fabricated...that it's just a male fantasy. Having said that, it certainly has been a fantasy of mine for a long time, and it was me who introduced Ms. Catherine to it. But once She got some momentum going, She was the driving force behind it, because it works for Her. Now, She may be the rarity, but She's legitimately into it for Her reasons, not mine. It just happens to work really well for both of us.

So, because of those two points, i've been sensitive. And...i overreacted.

Your point about the term "Bull" is a good one. But i choose not to think of other man as a mindless cock who Ms. Catherine is just using. On the contrary, the way She approaches it is as though he is a special boyfriend...a man with whom She doesn't have to worry about the trappings of a relationship...She can just have a sexual affair with him. Given that She already has a relationship with me, and that i'm subservient to Her, She has the freedom to pursue the extracuricular affairs with men who offer more than i do...not just in terms of endowment, but how they relate to Her as a man. You see, i'm a cuck. In addition to having me as a slave, She can also have a lover who gives Her all of the other sexual things She can't (or won't) get from me. So, the "Bull" isn't just a body...a cock. He's a man. He's THE man.

To us, the word "Bull" takes on meaning as the big, strong, virile entity...the male presence that is the alpha. It has little to do with the actual animal, or anything animalistic about it.

But we do recognize the points you've made and we've encountered them before. Where we find the term "Bull" unsavoury is when it refers to a black man. There's a racist overtone that is unacceptable. That doesn't mean a man or a woman shouldn't be interested in having sex with a partner of a certain race or ethnic background because they're a little different...i'm not one who believes that white women shouldn't like the idea of sex with a black man because that is racist. i just don't see it that way. In fact, Ms. Catherine may soon have an opportunity to enjoy a sexual affair with a black man. But he won't be the "mandingo". He'll just be a man who happens to be black. And yes, he can be the bull, but not because he's a big, black, bull...but because the way we use the word has more to do with his role...and not his body.

Anyway, i've now rambled, as sometimes i am want to do.

Thanks for your post...your comments...and your continued blogging efforts.


- m

Susan's Pet said...


I am glad I have not done permanent damage to you with this post. On your first point, regardless of how you deprecate yourself, I think that you have more balls then most men who blog. You say it like it is, and are not afraid of repercussions.

The cuckolding part is a non-issue with me. As long as it is real and workable, enjoy it. It is a bit dangerous, but psychologically no worse or better than any other kink including mine. If I ever said anything negative about it, it was with the assumption that the blog was a man’s fantasy, and the woman, if she existed at all, was not really driving it. I am glad that you have a partner who drives it, and satisfies your fantasy in a very real way.

About the fake blogs, I really have no problem with men who write their fantasies. I do that, although not on my blog where I try to be truthful but skipping some details that would point a finger at me (see my comment about your balls above). I put my fantasies into other media, such as books and short stories. With respect to the fake blogs, I would say, get a life, male or female. There is a lot of good stuff out there that is legit.

Anyway, I have enjoyed your blog and also Ms C’s.

doll said...

Having had the experience of both huge and minuscule I feel neither is adequate and both types of men are fodder for ridicule by the less than generous spirited amongst us. I agree with you that a bull would rip apart a woman's various openings and that the best that can be done with such a penis is to ride it to stimulate the clitoris. Which paradoxically is also the solution for a pindick although not riding but smoothing like a tongue.

Interestingly the last xxxxxl I encountered was on a jockey sized man so no bull there ;-)

Susan's Pet said...

Sweet Doll,

Your being a woman puts you at an advantage when considering the experience with small versus large as opposed to my inexperience with that. You know, I am not into that sort of thing. I am modestly endowed, and my wife has not complained. But on the long run, she admits that my best sexual organ is my tongue whether it comes to words or her physical satisfaction. My preferences also lie there.

What I find interesting about this is that even if she were into extracurricular affairs, she would always return to my tongue for best satisfaction. About the other, well, size is a matter of preference. However, it's not what you have, but what you do with it.