Proof that God intended for straight males to be butt fucked

[RonR18]

If God didn't intend for straight males to be fucked in the ass, why in the hell did he put the male G-spot deep inside their anus? Personally, I believe he did it so they could fuck each other while their women were having periods. What do you think? (If you don't believe in a supreme being, just substitute "evolution" for "God.")

In case the poll question is confusing, I'm clarifying it as follows:

If you answer yes in the poll, it means you're agreeing that God or evolution put the male G-spot deep inside the anus because he/it intended for ALL males to be butt fucked. In other words, it's the same reason the female G-spot is located in the vagina... G-spots were put where erect penises are intended to go.

 

[RonR18]

It is there for gay men. I should say it is there for bottoms. Most tops don't know what they are missing

Butt only 10% (or less) of men are said to be gay, and probably only 60% of them are bottoms. So why would someone/something as smart as God/evolution position a female type G-spot deep inside the anus of 100% of men if only 6% of them were intended to have any practical use for it?

 

[paintact]

On one hand, for the most part, I figured this is just a joke.

But... if you think about it, the prostate is considered the male g-spot. And how do you get to it...? Hmmmmm mmmmm. Guessing not many straight guys get that experience, do they.... the OP certainly has posed an interesting question.
Perhaps it should be... who experiences greater sexual stimulation/orgasms... tops or bottoms.

 

[belamyi]

Butt only 10% (or less) of men are said to be gay, and probably only 60% of them are bottoms. So why would someone/something as smart as God/evolution position a female type G-spot deep inside the anus of 100% of men if only 6% of them were intended to have any practical use for it?

Free will. It's like the question abou why God would allow evilness to exist

 

[Telstra]

nope, g-spot is a myth. I never found it or maybe i don't have one.

 

[Nomenclature]

It's the PROSTATE. The prostate is inside your body primarily for urination and ejaculation. It isn't solely a pleasure zone. It just so happens that it CAN be stimulated to cause sexual pleasure, since it's part of the genitals. Women's g-spots can be stimulated through the anal wall, as well.


Anal sex isn't technically "natural", since it requires water-based or silicone-based latex lubricant, as the anus doesn't self-lubricate; it isn't physiologically a vagina. Oral sex isn't "natural", either. . .but the penis can be stimulated with the mouth. Technically, the only "natural" sex is penis-in-vagina.

Everything else humans do for pleasure is a Body Hax.

 

[belamyi]

It's the PROSTATE. The prostate is inside your body primarily for urination and ejaculation. It isn't solely a pleasure zone. It just so happens that it CAN be stimulated to cause sexual pleasure, since it's part of the genitals. Women's g-spots can be stimulated through the anal wall, as well.


Anal sex isn't technically "natural", since it requires water-based or silicone-based latex lubricant, as the anus doesn't self-lubricate; it isn't physiologically a vagina. Oral sex isn't "natural", either. . .but the penis can be stimulated with the mouth. Technically, the only "natural" sex is penis-in-vagina.

Everything else humans do for pleasure is a Body Hax.

Cooking is not "natural" either. Nor are homes or farming or even religion (if it were so, missionary people and conversions would not be necessary, and animals would go to church... I mean... cattle... I mean... oh well...). So what.

 

[Nomenclature]

Cooking is not "natural" either. Nor are homes or farming or even religion.

Of course. 95% of everything we know and take for granted as humans strays from what is "intended" by nature.

 

[belamyi]

Of course. 95% of everything we know and take for granted as humans strays from what is "intended" by nature.

Then what was your point?

 

[Telstra]

Cooking is not "natural" either. Nor are homes or farming or even religion (if it were so, missionary people and conversions would not be necessary, and animals would go to church... I mean... cattle... I mean... oh well...). So what.

I agree. Everyone should stop cooking immediately !!!

 

[Nomenclature]

Then what was your point?

That a lot of what we do isn't "natural", or intended to be, but that doesn't really mean it's "wrong", either. Sex is really only supposed to be procreational, but even straight people are like "Yeah, fuck that."

 

[belamyi]

That a lot of what we do isn't "natural", or intended to be, but that doesn't really mean it's "wrong", either. Sex is really only supposed to be procreational,

Unless you want to reduce humans back to their animal condition, like Christian hypocrites preach.

 

[Nomenclature]

The funny thing is, every single Christian who has ever attacked gays for being "against nature" have engaged in pre-marital sex and oral and anal sex, both of which are considered sodomy. . .and all of which are punishable BY DEATH, according to their religion.


Still holier than thou, eh?

 

[belamyi]

The funny thing is, every single Christian who has ever attacked gays for being "against nature" have engaged in pre-marital sex and oral and anal sex, both of which are considered sodomy. . .and all of which are punishable BY DEATH, according to their religion.


Still holier than thou, eh?

According to the Book of Law of a religion they don't profess themselves, and whose followers they can actually despise on ethnical grounds, and who in their turn DO despise them according to that very same Book.

 

[evanrick]

both hetero and homo sex are important for humans, that includes anal sex for straight men.

why else would we have 2 sexes? they are perfectly designed for each other in every sense.

and yes god did intend for straight males to be butt-fucked. sex is about domination, control and social bonding. that goes for straight guys as much as gay ones, often those instincts overlap. categorizing men as straight or gay is simply an attempt to make one "superior" to the other when there can be no distinction.

 

[Mstrshake]

Of course. 95% of everything we know and take for granted as humans strays from what is "intended" by nature.

not sure about this

 

[Bent-On]

If there was indeed a male g-spot, homosexuality would have been a lot more popular.

 

[WillMc88]

It's the PROSTATE. The prostate is inside your body primarily for urination and ejaculation. It isn't solely a pleasure zone. It just so happens that it CAN be stimulated to cause sexual pleasure, since it's part of the genitals. Women's g-spots can be stimulated through the anal wall, as well.


Anal sex isn't technically "natural", since it requires water-based or silicone-based latex lubricant, as the anus doesn't self-lubricate; it isn't physiologically a vagina. Oral sex isn't "natural", either. . .but the penis can be stimulated with the mouth. Technically, the only "natural" sex is penis-in-vagina.

Everything else humans do for pleasure is a Body Hax.

This depends on how you define "natural." If you define it as "something found in nature," then homosexual sex is natural, because animals do it.

I don't really buy the whole 'nature's intent' either, because it seems to be presupposing an intelligence.

The good thing is that even if homosexual sex WERE unnatural, it wouldn't matter because natural =/= good or better. That's naturalistic fallacy. So carry on with my gay brothers, carry on!

 

[mbamike]

Anal sex isn't technically "natural", since it requires water-based or silicone-based latex lubricant, as the anus doesn't self-lubricate; it isn't physiologically a vagina.

Really? I have been fucked without lube. The top had so much pre-cum, none was needed.

If God didn't intend for straight males to be fucked in the ass, why in the hell did he put the male G-spot deep inside their anus? Personally, I believe he did it so they could fuck each other while their women were having periods. What do you think? (If you don't believe in a supreme being, just substitute "evolution" for "God.")

I have thought of this too!

 

[bankside]

Nature doesn't "intend" anything. The opportunities for survival, and pleasant survival at that, accrue for those who use what they've got.

The inability to make use of a prostate and a penis at the same time is merely an evolutionary maladaptation.