Taboo. A word that has not changed in its definition since it was adopted into English in 1777. That in itself is curious to me because words that resist change in language are generally the ones used the most. So I ponder why this word, that is so often used pejoratively, has resisted change....
Well, that isn't of major importance at the moment. What is important to me is why people are so quick to pass judgment on individuals with taboo sexual practices. I personally love men's asses. The hairier the better. Give me ass or give me death should be my motto. I love sticking things in asses. My cock, fingers, hands, tongue, toys...I don't think there's anything to do with an ass I don't like. Well, except pooping, but even that isn't a completely hard limit I don't think.
This brings me to the issue at hand. (hand being the operative term) I have a new boy. It's a long distance connection at this point, but there's hope that it won't remain that way forever. This boy is really into my favorite "kink," fisting! I love getting an ass all lubed up and loosened then going in knuckles first. If I can find an accommodating ass to take both my hands, AWESOME! If I can shove my dick in there too it's even better.
So my boy and I were fooling around on Skype the other night. Dirty talk was flying back and forth about wrecking his hole. It was so hot! And then a subject came up that we had touched on when talking about fantasies. My boy started using the language of K9 with me. By the time he got to saying I was going to knot him I exploded cum all over my chest, stomach, the sheets, the pillow behind my head... It was a mess. What fueled that massive explosion was the fantasy of a taboo subject of being fucked by a dog. Sure he was talking about ME fucking him, but using the terms of a dog fucking him really fueled the image in my mind of a dog, maybe even me as a dog, fucking him.
I suddenly started to think about why we hold such taboos. Sure there's the general rule of not harming anyone or anything for pleasure, and I would uphold that in the sense of non-consensual harm. When it's two consenting parties I say go for it, but at the root of the matter I would question if no one is being harmed is it ok? Could we ask that hypothetical dog if he wasn't enjoying fucking a person? Could we ask him if he consented to the act? Does that mean it isn't consensual? I'm in no way saying I'm going to go out and adopt a dog to test these theories, but it got me thinking on a grander scheme about taboos.
Anal fisting is a taboo for many people. Hell, my very sex life is taboo for millions of conservative people. So what makes one taboo something we're willing to overlook and another taboo completely objectionable? Shouldn't we all just get to a point of saying what happens in your bedroom is your prerogative? I, for one, tend to err on the side of tolerance. If you want to get fucked by a donkey just do me the favor of not uploading it online so my friends can non-consensually assault me with the images of that. Frankly I don't want to see it; but if you want to get it, you get it! What my neighbor does for pleasure has no effect on me. I just don't want to watch.
So I encourage you, my reader, to grab a handful of tolerance when it comes to the taboos of the world. Let your neighbor get railed by that donkey, and shake my hand when we finally get to meet because honestly I ALWAYS wash the crisco off my hands after I've been elbow deep in an ass.