Oh, my. A gal’s likely to get athlete’s ass that way.
I always wondered where P. Diddy came up with that name.
Not the stuff I usually like to comment on, but since no one else has offered the explanation…
Cecil mentions that the sensitivity could not be linked to incontinence, which leads me to believe that that assumed link was the purpose of the experiment. In other words, anal sex might cause later anal leakage.
Just what is gaping, and does it apply to what you follow up with in the rest of your post?
- Jack
About what it sounds like: holding an orifice wide open.
The article about the risks of anal sex made me recall an item I heard on the
news late last year about how gay men should get pap smears:
I suppose a mongamous, heterosexual woman who engages in anal sex would have the same risk.
ths post has been gaped by the gapist.
I feel obliged to make one observation about the article that prompted this thread:
What, are we creationists now, Cecil? The rectum wasn’t designed at all. It evolved.
My sources tell me that first-time anal sex sometimes causes anal eekage! :eek:
You should have put a bunch of carriage returns between the two quotes.
Well that takes away all the charm of fucking a girl in the ass.
I dated a Brazilian woman for almost two years in New York. We mostly used the good ol’ Catholic Birth Control because she didn’t like the Pill and I didn’t like condoms. We were genuinely monogamous and experienced, and suffered no ill effects. By “experienced” I mean that we were older and knew how to keep ourselves clean and that it’s not going to lubricate itself, mister.
That said, we also knew two crucial things: 1) porno movies are highly dubious, 2) human medical research projects are also highly dubious.
My advice is to take both lightly and use your own common sense.
Also Non-Gonococcal Urethritis (NGU, symptoms very similar to gonorrhea) can apparently be caused by fecal matter entering into the man’s urethra. At least so I was told by a doctor once.
On the issue of condom use, perhaps men are able to persuade women that they aren’t needed to prevent pregnancy when delivering in the rear, and I suspect that most straight men would rather perform sans culotte whenever they can.
Cecil seems to be mainly concerned with consequences to the ladies, and not at all with the men’s risks. Also, he doesn’t touch on the reverse, i.e. men penetrated by a lady with a strap-on. Significant gaps in his otherwise voluminous answer.
Roddy
True Blue Jack said:
Opening the hole up wide.
The other comment had to do with prolapses. A prolapse is when part of the rectum protrudes out the anus. Gaping can contribute to this result. What happens is the rectum separates from the internal wall so it can be pushed out. It can also happen because of straining, either for a bowel movement (persistent constipation) or trying to squeeze out a small quantity of liquid (i.e. semen). A small quantity of liquid is not very squeezable, so you end up pushing the rectum out.
Advice for the kiddies - anal prolapses aren’t fun. They do lead to anal leakage. And that is a serious impediment to all sorts of normal daily activities.
Cecil said:
Of course it was. Why else would God make it compatible in size and place it right next to the other entry?
Skald the Rhymer said:
If evolution is a process of adaptation over time, then the result might reasonably be considered designed by evolution. But that is perhaps confusing.
“Design” implies a consciousness behind the process, which is absent in this circumstance. If I were designing a humanoid organism, there’s tons of things I could do to prevent it from enjoying anal sex if that were my desire. As there is no designer in evolution, those things are not present, even though anal sex is not an unmixed blessing.
There’s a part of the US where macho men are fond of threatening to “put a boot in your ass.” Coincidentally, folklore says the men of that place “don’t know sh!t from Shinola.” Now, I know a little more about those guys.
This argument is a thing of beauty. A ID proponent would have to concede either that God didn’t design the rectum intelligently, since it will admit the penis, or else concede that God is not against anal sex. Plus the fact that we’d have to have a serious discussion about buttholes and buttsex during the ID discussion - how perfect.
Oh no. Like with anything else, there is such a thing as too much: http://www.tuckermax.com/archives/entries/date/tucker_tries_buttsex_hilarity_does_not_ensue.phtml
Doing my part to fight ignorance, I did exactly this. Thank god I had the volume down. The Xvideos link is the EXACT FREAKIN’ FILM I was referring to.
Google frightens me. But, on further review, it does NOT appear to be complete heel penetration, although it comes close enough for me.
How about that… I can now send that link to the sick bastard that sent it to me those many years ago.
You know the goatse guy? There are more photos than just that one. I don’t think he’d even notice a foot unless it belonged to an elephant.