Cuckolding can be positive for some couples, study says - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=EnlightenDead;53085888]I feel like thats a tad revisionist, theres definitely a much longer history of people on 4chan calling others beta males, cucks, ect in an attempt to degrade their "manliness" or whatever than there is a history of the media drawing attention to cuckolding[/QUOTE] Calling people beta males absolutely has a long history, but using cuck as an insult? It honestly hasn't been around for that long. At all. At least, not in the "mainstream" 4chan/wider internet culture.

[QUOTE=phygon;53085894]Calling people beta males absolutely has a long history, but using cuck as an insult? It honestly hasn't been around for that long. At all. At least, not in the "mainstream" 4chan/wider internet culture.[/QUOTE] Thats just not true, remember when someone found a picture of moots girlfriend or whatever with another dude and the entire chan community bombarded him "cuck cuck cuck"? I absolutely despise that I'm using KYM as a source but [URL="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cuckservative?full=1"]here it says that Cuckservative dates back to 2014~[/URL] and [URL="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cuck?full=1"]here it talks about cuck being used in 2014 pretty frequently too[/URL]

[QUOTE=phygon;53085880]But they began doing that because of the sudden weird media attention to cucking.[/QUOTE] I think you're confusing the order of events here. I'm pretty sure cuck as a modern insult (obviously not the origin of the word) started on 4chan regarding Moot. Somebody on /b/ dug up social media pictures of him and his "gf", and similar time frame pictures of her with another guy, and then people started implying he was a cuck due to her considering moot a "close personal friend" and think he's beta for being "cucked". Then people started using it as a general insult to imply someone who is emasculate and weak, then that spreads to /pol/ since it's a part of 4chan, then the alt-right gets big, /pol/tards are generally right-wing and start using it to refer to liberals as a generic insult, and then since there's crossover with The_Donald and /pol/ the usage continues on both sites, and people outside the culture make the association of the term with the alt-right since these sites tend to be where proponents of the movement congregate. Basically 4chan started it, and the culture of 4chan leaks to the alt-right via /pol/, and now the alt-right "owns" the term since the people parroting it are generally influenced by /pol/. The sudden media attention started because alt-right forum goers call liberals cucks, and people are then interested in what that means and why it's being used as an insult when there isn't any cuckoldry involved, whichs leads to articles about it. In reality the context of "cuck" generally doesn't imply literal cuckoldry but is just a generic insult like 'retard' or 'faggot'. Articles come out about the term and what cuckoldry is, thinly vieled defense pieces like this crop up in an attempt to neuter the insult (totally counterintuitive) and /pol/ finds it hillarious people are getting invested in what is essentially a slur thrown at random by trying to "defend" the practice which in their eyes is beta and emasculating. Tl;dr /pol/tards call people cucks, alt-right is composed of /pol/tards, people wonder why they use it as an insult, media focuses on the term, /pol/tards laugh that people are putting effort into understanding their insults.

[QUOTE=EnlightenDead;53085904]Thats just not true, remember when someone found a picture of moots girlfriend or whatever with another dude and the entire chan community bombarded him "cuck cuck cuck"? I absolutely despise that I'm using KYM as a source but [URL="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cuckservative?full=1"]here it says that Cuckservative dates back to 2014~[/URL] and [URL="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/cuck?full=1"]here it talks about cuck being used in 2014 pretty frequently too[/URL][/QUOTE] That's extremely weird because I've used 4chan frequently for many, many years and I just didn't see "cuck" getting thrown around like it is now until /pol/ blew multiple gaskets/eyeball veins across all boards when all those "BBC is better" spammers posters + cuck porn spammers + articles seemingly began to get written. Although, it may have been that those articles were already kind of floating around, and then it got disproportionately represented once the whole cuck shit started in full force. I'm also probably out of touch with the evolution of the insult because /pol/ is kind of the worst so I attempt to avoid it where I can. If only the archives were better

SNIP: Didin't read the rest of the thread. Actually turns into legimate discussion instead of fetish bashing.

Havent checked FP for a day and hooolyyy shit this thread. Soms of you guys need to get their shit together with those attitudes.

why is it always when cuckolding is mentioned everyone needs to chime in on how DISGUSTING and PATHETIC it is, that is a lot of insecurity in one place lol

What the fuck is this thread.

[QUOTE=karimatrix;53086007]What the fuck is this thread.[/QUOTE] A lot of very insecure teenagers.

[QUOTE=DrugUnit;53086040]A lot of very insecure teenagers.[/QUOTE] are you saying that 'secure' people allow and even want their SO's to get fucked by other men? lmao

[QUOTE=LeonS;53086047]are you saying that 'secure' people allow and even want their SO's to get fucked by other men? lmao[/QUOTE] Secure people don't let other people's sexual kinks get under their skin.

And people say Polidicks is bad...

[QUOTE=LeonS;53086047]are you saying that 'secure' people allow and even want their SO's to get fucked by other men? lmao[/QUOTE] I can't tell if this is serious or not, but, yes? That's the point of the fetish in the first place. Even secure, healthy relationships between people who approve of it can partake on it. Obviously if not all parties are comfortable with it then it's not gonna happen, but yes, people who are secure enough to engage in their kinks might engage on them as long as there's communication and there's approval in general. I've got the impression that you haven't read the article and/or the full thread. I recommend you to do so since a lot of knowledge has been dropped which might be interesting to read.

[QUOTE=LeonS;53086047]are you saying that 'secure' people allow and even want their SO's to get fucked by other men? lmao[/QUOTE] Sure, why not It's a fetish Also, some people just legitimately do not prescribe the same value to sex and what it means in the context of a relationship as you do.

what have i done

[QUOTE=OmTheory;53086096]what have i done[/QUOTE] You started the cuck genocide on facepunch

No one's pushing it into anyone's face, this is just an article linked on a gaming forum discussing the general attitudes towards the fetish - the idea of "inherently disagreeing with it" is the problem here. Not being into it, sure, but that's about it... [QUOTE=LuaChobo;53086126]people from both sides[/QUOTE] lel

[QUOTE=LuaChobo;53086145]pushing this on people by taking a study out of context[/QUOTE] The closest the article gets to this is saying that if you have a cuckolding fetish then acting out on it is often beneficial for your relationship, I hardly see how this is pushing it on people.

What a hell of a thread, holy shit :v:

I don't get what the big deal is lol, You don't have to take peoples fetishes so seriously. Cuckolding is a step up from fetishes involving submission, humiliation, and dominance- and while the idea of my SO having sex with someone else makes me deeply uncomfortable and is probably the least sexy thing in the universe as far as I'm concerned, I wouldn't judge a couple who are into it because tbh how the fuck is it my business. Besides I think we all have our own sexual fetishes that others would judge us for. It's all well and good to sit around saying [i]"Lol look at these [b]cucks[/b] they are pathetic!!!"[/i] but isn't that kind of the point of the fetish? You could just as easily try and argue that foot fetishists or guys into femdom or BDSM are pathetic human worms for enjoying tamer forms of humiliation. Conversely you could argue that men who prefer dominant roles when it comes to kink are ~abusive~ because their fetish obviously says a lot about how they think about their sexual partners right? Or is that fine because it lines up with traditional ideas about masculinity? It's a couple of hundred steps further than most people would be comfortable with, but I don't see why that means it needs to be a big deal?

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53085137]I might get some flak for saying this, but.. Comments like this are great examples of toxic masculinity definitely being a thing that exists.[/QUOTE] Toxic masculinity because he doesnt want to have his SO fucked by someone else. Yeah right

[QUOTE=freaka;53086217]Toxic masculinity because he doesnt want to have his SO fucked by someone else. Yeah right[/QUOTE] No, toxic masculinity because apparently arguing for something that doesn't hurt or affect him is "pathetic".

[QUOTE=freaka;53086217]Toxic masculinity because he doesnt want to have his SO fucked by someone else. Yeah right[/QUOTE] No it's more like Toxic masculinity because he can't accept that someone else might be into it even if he's not. Cuckolding is supposed to feel emasculating or otherwise humiliating- It's definitely toxic masculinity to be so frightened of the concept of being emasculated that you would lash out at people who are into it. Imo it's not so different from people who act incredibly homophobic because they feel the need to prove to everyone that they don't also want to take it up the arse.

[QUOTE=Mifil;53086056]And people say Polidicks is bad...[/QUOTE] After separation happened it was apparent that the problem is with SH users, not users who post in political threads.

[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;53085622]I hate to sound like the standard homophobe here, but - what if someone is confused? Like, what if they actually value monogamy and don't realize how much they truly don't want to see their spouse fucked by someone else until it's too late? That would be fucking devastating, man. [/QUOTE] I'm not really sure what that has to do with homosexuality, but that's a possibility with any fetish. A couple could try BDSM, for instance, and if one of them takes it too far it can destroy the trust between the two. In fact, that's true for sexuality entirely. If one pushes the relationship farther than the other wants, it can be disastrous. There's not really much you can do to stop that kind of thing except help people find their limits in a safe way.

[QUOTE=Paramud;53086246]I'm not really sure what that has to do with homosexuality, but that's a possibility with any fetish.[/QUOTE] I was worried about seeming like I was echoing the age old "he's not homosexual he's just [I]confused[/I]" argument. I also acknowledged that the same can be applied to fetishes & sexuality in general. [QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;53085622] This can all be said for basically any fetish, or even sexual act, depending on the person. But few have the potential to tear down relationships and ruin ones own self-imposed moral fiber like cuckoldry has. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Paramud;53086246]There's not really much you can do to stop that kind of thing except help people find their limits in a safe way.[/QUOTE] Indeed. I'm more or less just confused to why this article exists, it's a near universal conclusion that can be applied to basically every fetish and sexual situation.

[QUOTE=LuaChobo;53086126]If you greatly dislike something and people are constantly pushing it in your face you will react negatively to it, the degree of which this thread has it seems to be "ewwww yuck why would you do that" but it feels like others are taking some moral high ground for not being mad that a fetish exists meanwhile also of ignoring the legitimate issues with the fetish where its fairly common to see that relationships where it's common can be incredibly one sided in support for doing it, and when attempts to disengage happen the relationship dies.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say you're wrong, of course, but that can practically be applied to any fetish that involves multiple people or where trust is important (or both). Like it has been said before, it doesn't matter what fetish it is: if the trust is broken, the relationship is broken.

I'm surprise nobody brought this up before, but Dan Savage is a pseudo-scientist pundit who believes [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/magazine/infidelity-will-keep-us-together.html]infidelity[/url] (in the completely non-consensual sense) can aid a relationship, calls people who wait to lose their virginity [url=https://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=8255]abnormal deviants[/url], and tells others in his [I]relationship advice column[/I] to leave their partners so frequently that he's invented an acronym for it (Dump the Motherfucker Already). He's been making disingenuous studies like these for years, which is probably why the article is so misleading.

[QUOTE=WillerinV1.02;53086275]Indeed. I'm more or less just confused to why this article exists, it's a near universal conclusion that can be applied to basically every fetish and sexual situation.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it's kind of a pointless article. But I guess sometimes bringing these things up again will serve as a reminder to some people.

[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;53086330]calls people who wait to lose their virginity [url=https://www.thestranger.com/seattle/SavageLove?oid=8255]abnormal deviants[/url][/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Dan Savage]You're right, YADAD--I have no proof that people who save themselves for marriage are sociopaths. I do, however, have proof that the vast majority of people are NOT virgins on their wedding nights (please see every single study of human sexuality). What this means, of course, is that it isn't normal for someone to be a virgin on his or her wedding night; people who are virgins on their wedding nights deviate from said norm.[/QUOTE] Holy shit, what a copout. I'm all for killing the negative connotations surrounding 'abnormal' and 'deviant' and using their literal meanings, but he's actually using it here to backpedal calling them [I]sociopaths[/I]. And also what the fuck at his answers to the last questions. I did notice, certain quotes in the article sounded like the authors were a bit... biased, on the topic.