Gentlemen: Can you explain the appeal of cuckolding?

[littlecordelera]

Again I will respectfully disagree. And I think maybe one of the elements that addresses the difference is to whom is the cuckold submissive or inferior. I am both to my wife and neither to my wife's lovers.

The stereotype of the modern cuckold fetish is that of the superior "bull" pushing the cuckold aside and claiming the wife's sex. But to me that is all part of a flawed male centric view of the world that holds men as superior. Women will swoon for a "real" man and any man who cannot please his wife to the point that she would never want another must be a "lesser" man.

In our relationship (credit to PW from whom I am borrowing many concepts) it is my wife who is sexually superior to me and her lovers. She can satisfy each of our sexual needs while no one of us can fully satisfy hers. When she brings a man to our bed it is her who dispatches me to the spare room (and no not according to his command). And she will just as easily send him on his way when she chooses. It is her rocking his world in the next room. He is not the conquering stud to a grateful unsatisfied wife - he is a man who knows he is lucky to be there and can be replaced easily.

I am basking in my wife's sexual prerogative and superiority not that of another man. Each man she takes (including me) is arguably "better" to the others in his own unique way. My pleasure is in being inferior and submissive to her.....not them. She regards me as first among equals all of whom are there at her pleasure.

So my wife fucks other guys. There are elements of submission and inferiority. I only engage with other women as she allows. I am every bit a cuckold and wittol. The only reason we don't fit your description is because our choices don't revolve around finding a superior man. They revolve around recognizing the sexual prerogative and superiority of women.

I am not capable of fulfilling all my wife's needs (as are many men whether they admit it or not). Her lovers are in the same boat which is why she hasn't chosen just one mythical stud. My capabilities relative to my wife's lovers don't enter into it.

I have had this discussion with many cuckolds whose primary focus is there wife's sexuality. They (we) thrive on the notion of a sexually liberated and voracious women. For us its more about the depth of her desire and the willingness to pursue it than whether another man can fulfill her more adequately. There are those for whom a "better" man is part of the appeal as well. But it isn't that linear or one dimensional. That is where we differ.

So a guy in an FLR with a dominant wife is a cuckold?

You should go over to the BDSM thread and tell them that. But let me warn you. It won't go over well.

 

[policywank]

Again, as I noted just above, I personally don't bring sexual inadequacy into the equation. I tend to agree with most of the online discussion that 'cuckold' does necessarily imply some sort of (perceived) inferiority or submissiveness. The bolded situations above would tend to come into that definition. I would also suggest that in some situations, the inferiority could simply be that he's not happy about it but she keeps on doing it anyway - again, that would suggest a certain degree of something like inferiority within the relationship I suspect once 'cuckold' becomes a kink, the (perceived) inferiority handily shifts into the sexual, to up the sexual ante a bit.

I'm actually being very precise with my language - hence the fact that I've not referred to sexual inferiority, nor suggested that a small penis is an indicator of anything other than have a small penis. (In fact, I didn't bring penises into the discussion at all.)

Not sure I agree. I wife cheating for revenge, money or power could involve a notion of inferiority but it is just as easy to imagine examples where it does not.

 

[policywank]

I think that while the historical definition is clearly not so relevant in the contemporary era, where we'd be unlikely to see a 'cheated upon' man as the subject of derision (but more like rage towards his wife, and maybe pity for him). However, I think the implication of inferiority has stuck to the word ... and again, pretty much every site I saw that discussed the term contained that component. In same cases, it did seem overly specific (e.g. sexual inadequacy), but the inferiority aspect is such a common theme that I don't think we can ignore it just because it's not part of the original definition ... the implication got 'stuck' to the word over time, it's just shifted a bit in terms of how its conceptualised.

Sorry, I didn't really 'submissive' in the d/s sense of the word. More just within the relationship (e.g. inclined to leave decisions to the other, etc). It was a poor word choice, given the present context. What I was thinking of does, as you've suggested, imply an asymmetrical relationship, but I definitely didn't meant in the d/s sense of the term.

I understand what you mean that the notion of inferiority has stuck to the word. My contention has been that in most of the definitions or references I have seen it is in a context where society cannot imagine it otherwise. We still live in a world where faithful monogamy is the assumed standard and the premise that a "satisfied" woman would never want another man. The premise of a woman who is not innately wired to have a sexual and loving relationship with only one man is not accepted.

So as has been said above. Imagine it is 1850. A woman is cheating on her husband. Society doesn't know about it so he is not the object of derision and/or for his own particular reasons he is not humiliated and does not feel inferior. Is he not a cuckold? I would argue he is a cuckold. If people knew they would make a series of assumptions about the circumstances, but the validity of those assumptions doesn't change whether or not he is a cuckold.

In modern times I would also argue that any time a woman cheats - meaning she committed to monogamy and violated that commitment with another man - she is cuckolding her husband the same as in the historical definition regardless of her motivation or his sentiments.

Where it gets complicated is in the more modern use of the word in which non-monogamy is known. In that context I agree with SA. Yes there is an element of inferiority or submission but not necessarily to the other man.

 

[SlutAddicted]

I realise you're responding to Cordelera, but none of my posts even mentioned the other guy (with the possible exception of the example of my friend, and I guess my own husband, because there are specific other guys involved). I'm not sure that 'inferior' has to be in relation to others ... it can just be a generalised feeling. Again, so much of what you're saying encapsulates precisely that. Re: the bolded point above - although you say the 'inferiority' is in relation to her, do you think you'd feel the same if she was only having sex with you?

I know you haven't made the case that inferior means to other men. As we have done before you and I are debating nuance with reasoned points.

 

[SlutAddicted]

So a guy in an FLR with a dominant wife is a cuckold?

You should go over to the BDSM thread and tell them that. But let me warn you. It won't go over well.

Nope that isn't what I said at all.

The defining factor is that my wife has sex with other men because I alone cannot satisfy her needs while I have no such reciprocal rights. And I regard her as sexually superior to me.

The fact that we also have an FLR is very much to my liking and makes the asymmetry in our relationship that much more emphatic but it is incidental to whether or not I am a cuckold.

Where we differ is in the reason why she needs other men to satisfy her needs. In my wife's case it is because she wants more than one man rather than because she is seeking a better man.

 

[littlecordelera]

Where we differ is in the reason why she needs other men to satisfy her needs. In my wife's case it is because she wants more than one man rather than because she is seeking a better man.

We can't differ here. I've already told you, what your wife wants or needs or thinks is irrelevant.

 

[SlutAddicted]

We can't differ here. I've already told you, what your wife wants or needs or thinks is irrelevant.

How she feels informs how I regard the situation which does seem to be the point of debate.

So to clarify, where we differ is in that I do not feel inferior to the other men and that fact alone does not mean that a I cannot be a cuckold. I feel sexually inferior to her. I am a man who accepts my wife fucking other guys because I am inadequate to fulfill her needs on my own. Meanwhile I do not seek other women. I am not simply a swinger or a party to a threesome.

There is no need to see myself as inferior to the other men as validation.

If we disagree on that point so be it.

 

[StrongMaster7]

I enjoy watching cuckolding videos because the woman is the active sexual focus and in the best videos she is directing the action one moment, overwhelmed by it the next.

The emotional politics of cuckolding in reality don't appeal to me at all. I just enjoy watching women in non-passive sexual roles.

 

[littlecordelera]

I am inadequate to fulfill her needs on my own.

I rest my case.

 

[scott6251]

Congratulations - you folks have ruined what should have been a fun thread . . .

 

[need2cumbadly]

There is no right or wrong answer, there are many motivations for Cuckold. I do think that a posters view should be respected. And it is difficult to disagree on a forum and not sometimes cause offence, however good your intentions might have been.

I have changing view on Cuckold myself, never done it, so not an expert, but have watched quite a lot. Sometimes I am just not interested in it all.....then another day I really want to watch some guy give up his wife for a guy with a much bigger cock, and video it.

What I like to try and find is a good amateur video with direction from either the cuckold or the wife, don't mind which, but a bit of commentary is always good for me in this situation.

Would I do it myself? Yes I think I would, but seeing as I am coming out of a relationship and looking for something completely different in the next one, then I am can't really say yes or no to that either.

I think its great, if you want to do it, do it. If you hate the idea, then hate it.

 

[KimGordon67]

I understand what you mean that the notion of inferiority has stuck to the word. My contention has been that in most of the definitions or references I have seen it is in a context where society cannot imagine it otherwise. We still live in a world where faithful monogamy is the assumed standard and the premise that a "satisfied" woman would never want another man. The premise of a woman who is not innately wired to have a sexual and loving relationship with only one man is not accepted.

So as has been said above. Imagine it is 1850. A woman is cheating on her husband. Society doesn't know about it so he is not the object of derision and/or for his own particular reasons he is not humiliated and does not feel inferior. Is he not a cuckold? I would argue he is a cuckold. If people knew they would make a series of assumptions about the circumstances, but the validity of those assumptions doesn't change whether or not he is a cuckold.

In modern times I would also argue that any time a woman cheats - meaning she committed to monogamy and violated that commitment with another man - she is cuckolding her husband the same as in the historical definition regardless of her motivation or his sentiments.

Where it gets complicated is in the more modern use of the word in which non-monogamy is known. In that context I agree with SA. Yes there is an element of inferiority or submission but not necessarily to the other man.

The bolded paragraph is sort of a 'if a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it' scenario. The knowledge of the event and the judgement of 'inferiority' happen simultaneously, so whether he is 'really' a cuckold if no one knows about it is a sort of irrelevant.

Understanding the reason an inherent part of the meaning of a word exists doesn't stop it having that meaning. Fundamentally, this is why I have a problem with the word - because it is judgemental about the man, but the judgement is really linked to the woman's actions. There's no reverse term, no special name (that I'm aware of) for a woman who's husband cheats - because men cheating is tacitly condoned (for a whole heap of reasons that are too boring and obvious to go into).

Your final paragraph suggests agreement with the point I've been making all along. I just didn't add the 'not necessarily to the other man' qualifier, largely because that element hadn't even occurred to me.

 

[paulw128]

Congratulations - you folks have ruined what should have been a fun thread . . .

I'm with Scott!

 

[twister947]

I'm with Scott!

Yep. I agree.

 

[sterculius]

There will always be those of us who refuse to embrace socially sanctioned sexual standards. I'm a Cocksucker. I like being a cocksucker. I love the way that being a cocksucker makes me feel, and the fact that the practice among males is proscribed only makes it all the more erotically thrilling and exciting. It pleasures me to feel denigrated and humiliated and to permit others to impersonally "use" my body as a sex object. At first, my ex wife's extramarital affairs hurt me, but after a while I began to see it from her perspective and this made it easier for me to accept. Everyone is an individual and as long as they're not hurting anyone, and are in mutual agreement, they have the right to live their lives as they see fit.

 

[gordo12]

Gentlemen: Can you explain the appeal of cuckolding?
Because some of us girls are wondering.

Thank you!

Nope! Not a clue what motivates. Especially the ones seeking humiliation.

 

[ThirdShift]

There will always be those of us who refuse to embrace socially sanctioned sexual standards. I'm a Cocksucker. I like being a cocksucker. I love the way that being a cocksucker makes me feel, and the fact that the practice among males is proscribed only makes it all the more erotically thrilling and exciting. It pleasures me to feel denigrated and humiliated and to permit others to impersonally "use" my body as a sex object. At first, my ex wife's extramarital affairs hurt me, but after a while I began to see it from her perspective and this made it easier for me to accept. Everyone is an individual and as long as they're not hurting anyone, and are in mutual agreement, they have the right to live their lives as they see fit.

You seem to contradict yourself there a little.

 

[KimGordon67]

There will always be those of us who refuse to embrace socially sanctioned sexual standards. I'm a Cocksucker. I like being a cocksucker. I love the way that being a cocksucker makes me feel, and the fact that the practice among males is proscribed only makes it all the more erotically thrilling and exciting. It pleasures me to feel denigrated and humiliated and to permit others to impersonally "use" my body as a sex object. At first, my ex wife's extramarital affairs hurt me, but after a while I began to see it from her perspective and this made it easier for me to accept. Everyone is an individual and as long as they're not hurting anyone, and are in mutual agreement, they have the right to live their lives as they see fit.

I don't think anyone in the more recent bits of this thread is making a judgement about anyone involved in the cuckold scenario, either as 'reality' or as a kink. We're just discussed what the term actually means.

 

[geronimo_appleby]

http://sites.psu.edu/siowfa15/wp-content/uploads/sites/29639/2015/09/Yawning2.jpg

 

[littlecordelera]

Congratulations - you folks have ruined what should have been a fun thread . . .

If my comments have contributed to ruining this thread, I do apologize. There seemed to be quite a few people in on the debate, and I was enjoying the well-thought arguments. In so doing, I lost sight of the overall theme. I sincerely apologize to any of you for whom my tunnel vision was bothersome.

My husband and I have lived this lifestyle for many years, and so much of the cuckold community consists of truly caring people. The last thing I want to do is to ruin the fun for any of you.

 

[Klinsing]

On the other hand, you can't be a cuckold AND be insecure. It's impossible.

There's a lot of good stuff to respond to in this thread but I wanted to take exception with this point. I think it's absolutely possible to be a cuckold and insecure, it's the whole angst syndrome that some cuckolds have that arises from insecurity about their inadequacy in various ways, their diminished self-image, and can include a sense of shame, moral conflict, and a kind of perverse pleasure in all of it. I don't get the sense that insecurity is at all part of the hot wife's partner who takes unmitigated pleasure in her having other lovers. But the cuckold's mixed sense of pleasure with shame or insecurity is how I think of there being a difference between the two.

 

[wordsNguitars]

what I have found... in years of being a third/bull for couples that play all over the hotwife/cuckold spectrum... is that it's the loss of SOME control. Hotwifing, regardless of whether you play as a hotwife/husband or hotwife/cuckold (or in between) is about the empowerment of the wife to fulfill her desires as she wants/needs, with the full support and encouragement of her partner.

The allure of playing to the cuckold spectrum then goes beyond just seeing your partner, separated from the bounds of your relationship being a sexual person. It goes into having the male willingly give up or "lose" some of his leadership and to be more led, according to his wife's needs and wants.

So the loss of "standing", as well as seeing their wife pleasured (and, depending on his interest, some form of degrading verbal/physical play to drive home his inadequacy) by others... AND knowing that she will return to her loving relationship after she's been pleased. So there's a lot going on... and a lot that can go on. Every cuckold couple is different in what drives the dynamic of their relationship. Fundamentally, though, I believe it's that angst/joy over letting go a little... seeing her spread her wings... and the knowledge that she will return that drives men to do this.

Again, though, with the caveat that everyone is different... *lol*

 

[ThirdShift]

There's a lot of good stuff to respond to in this thread but I wanted to take exception with this point. I think it's absolutely possible to be a cuckold and insecure, it's the whole angst syndrome that some cuckolds have that arises from insecurity about their inadequacy in various ways, their diminished self-image, and can include a sense of shame, moral conflict, and a kind of perverse pleasure in all of it. I don't get the sense that insecurity is at all part of the hot wife's partner who takes unmitigated pleasure in her having other lovers. But the cuckold's mixed sense of pleasure with shame or insecurity is how I think of there being a difference between the two.

Although I am not a cuckold. And don't plan to enter this lifestyle. However, it would seem in my mind as I read and admittedly have some desire for it, but know my wife will never go there. I don't see how I could be cuckold and insecure. If I was insecure, it would destroy the marriage. If I was insecure, I would
Never be able to reclaim.

 

[policywank]

The bolded paragraph is sort of a 'if a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it' scenario. The knowledge of the event and the judgement of 'inferiority' happen simultaneously, so whether he is 'really' a cuckold if no one knows about it is a sort of irrelevant.

Understanding the reason an inherent part of the meaning of a word exists doesn't stop it having that meaning. Fundamentally, this is why I have a problem with the word - because it is judgemental about the man, but the judgement is really linked to the woman's actions. There's no reverse term, no special name (that I'm aware of) for a woman who's husband cheats - because men cheating is tacitly condoned (for a whole heap of reasons that are too boring and obvious to go into).

Your final paragraph suggests agreement with the point I've been making all along. I just didn't add the 'not necessarily to the other man' qualifier, largely because that element hadn't even occurred to me.

As soon as another man's cock entered that wife in 1850 her husband became a cuckold before anybody but the wife and her lover knew of it. Before any sense of judgment or sense of inferiority existed. Just as the tree that fell in the forest made a sound though nobody was there to hear. A fact is a fact regardless of whether it is a relevant fact.

As I have a said a few times.....I didn't think we are far from agreement. The difference lay in how the husband sees himself in relation to the other man.

We may differ on the judgment point. Most do see the word as a pejorative for the reasons you state but that is a function of how society sees it. There are other words that were once thought to be inherently negative that evolved beyond that because society accepted the underlying condition. Whether we should reject or reclaim those words is a matter of opinion.

 

[policywank]

I rest my case.

So you have changed your mind then? It is not necessary that the other man be a superior lover. Or did you just intentionally lift that excerpt out of context?