for pretty 'bukkake'

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

what is it and how do you do it with whom? who wants to know?

― Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:06 (twenty-one years ago)

oh GOD i don't want to click on this one later today.

Vic, go to ask.com. See what happens.

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:14 (twenty-one years ago)

a) google
b) vigorously
c) not me
d) see c)

― Herbstmute (Wintermute), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:15 (twenty-one years ago)

OK, I'll admit, I didn't expect this to be a Vik thread. Calm down, cowboy!

― Casuistry (Chris P), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:19 (twenty-one years ago)

TS: pretty bukkake vs ugly bukkake vs plain bukkake

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:20 (twenty-one years ago)

vs Albuquerque.

― Casuistry (Chris P), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:24 (twenty-one years ago)

i know i could google and stop but it's easier to just ask my worldly and well-read internet friends!! *shrugs*

― Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:25 (twenty-one years ago)

vic, do you have Kazaa? do a search for it. You'll be...enlightened.

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Bukkake is either:

A) A tasty Japanese noodle dish; or
B) Covering someone with gobs and gobs and gobs of gooey, viscous ejaculate.

Choose whichever definition you want.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:27 (twenty-one years ago)

just as long as he wears a bib, a rain slicker and and protective goggles.

(xpost)

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:27 (twenty-one years ago)

"pretty bukkake" = "ooh, look at the colors!"

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:30 (twenty-one years ago)

Um, white and off-white?

― Casuistry (Chris P), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:31 (twenty-one years ago)

"cream"?

"egg shell"?

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:39 (twenty-one years ago)

How all the ejaculate contrasts with the purple penises and the color of her face!

― j.lu (j.lu), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:41 (twenty-one years ago)

hee hee. it's like an ep of "Queer Eye" GONE ALL WRONG!

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:44 (twenty-one years ago)

wow, okay. see i knew i would learn something today!

― Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Simply put, Bukkake is a mystery as much as it is something which can be explained.

http://bukkakestore.com/what_is_bukkake.html

― Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:47 (twenty-one years ago)

I associate the word bukkake with tubgirl, and so I think of nacho cheese, which is an entirely different hue altogether. I'm not even sure if there are bukkake pics on tubgirl but I probably wouldn't want to know.

― JuliaA (j_bdules), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:49 (twenty-one years ago)

that link is work safe fwiw, but don't click on anything else on that page. sorry

― Vic (Vic), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Bah, 'American Bukkake' indeed! They thought they could remake 'The Ring' scarier, and now they think they can make noodles slurpier?

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:52 (twenty-one years ago)

but don't click on anything else on that page.

I think I'm going to be very, very ill.

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:57 (twenty-one years ago)

Is it just me or has bukkake suddenly become an ultra-mainstream reference point? That link that Vic just posted leads to 'bukkake' t-shirts!!

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 20:59 (twenty-one years ago)

blame H0ward St3rn.

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:00 (twenty-one years ago)

How can anyone find that erotic?

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:01 (twenty-one years ago)

I'll tell you a funny story. I went to dinner in Japan at the house of a famous TV comedian, Suidobashi Hakase. He's a protege of Takeshi Kitano. It was quite a gathering, with legendary author and tattooed hardman Ishmaru Gensho also present. We tucked into sushi prepared by Hakase's bald manservant.

Hakase had just published a book in which all his friends narrated their early experiences with masturbation. Kitano and Gensho had whole chapters to themselves. In the middle of supper, my girlfriend announced that I was fond of gansha, a more modestly-scaled and intimate version of bukkake. I blushed, but Hakase and Gensho seemed delighted that I had taken the trouble to learn Japanese customs, and from that moment on I felt like they'd accepted me into their club.

Hakase later married Chie, one of the two girls with whom I was living at the time. She had first introduced herself to him with a playful photo of herself dribbling condensed milk from her mouth. Apparently this is quite a common method of flirtation -- a lover I had in Japan that same year produced, on our first date in a cafe in Nakameguro, a portfolio of photos of herself, one of which featured herself in an open white National Standard zip top, with some white substance trickling down her chin onto her breasts.

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:10 (twenty-one years ago)

in america they call this: "got milk?"

― gygax! (gygax!), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:13 (twenty-one years ago)

(but Americans are the freaks for enjoying Kill Bill)

(kidding!)

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:15 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm honestly shocked that no one has mentioned the 'm' word yet.

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Momus?

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:35 (twenty-one years ago)

Mokkake?

― Herbstmute (Wintermute), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:36 (twenty-one years ago)

Missy Elliot?

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 21:36 (twenty-one years ago)

it's your fremme neppe bukkake

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:37 (twenty-one years ago)

I knew I could count on you, Dan :D

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 21:38 (twenty-one years ago)

mayonnaise?

― mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:38 (twenty-one years ago)

I AM NOW VIOLENTLY ILL MR SINKER I HOPE YOU ARE HAPPY

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:39 (twenty-one years ago)

BTW thank you Momus for your definitions, as I was apparently confused as to the different terminologies, though that story is totally bizarro.

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 21:39 (twenty-one years ago)

oh but Kill Bill is terribly violent! fetishistic objectification of women, that's just quaint good ol' fashion fun.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Midichlorians?

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:40 (twenty-one years ago)

>:D

― mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Chief?

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:41 (twenty-one years ago)

J0hn, that ain't gonna fly at 20 til 5:00 on a Friday afternoon, save it for Monday morning.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:42 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't know enough about sexual psychology or how fetishist preferences map onto the general psyche to speculate with any authority, but from a strictly straightforward standpoint, isn't the emergence of bukkake as another cultural trading card fairly worrisome?

(xpost with John D)

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:44 (twenty-one years ago)

SEMEN FIGHT! (ew)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:46 (twenty-one years ago)

(Imaginary Momus rebuttal: "Sperm is life-giving, violence life-sapping.")

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:46 (twenty-one years ago)

sigh... Aw, come on Vic.

At least now, I can gleefully say the phrase "The Master Musicians of Bukkake" without acquiring too much ire.

― donut bitch (donut), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:46 (twenty-one years ago)

How does sperm in the face give life at all though, that's my question. No one has babies out their face.

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 21:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Is it because of the music that the Union 13 album I'm listening to sounds really good or is it the implied sexlessness, thus making me not think of this thread's contents?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Ally, it's moisturizing - it gives new life to your complexion!

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Allyzay OTM-shot

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:48 (twenty-one years ago)

What are some feminist readings of bukkake?

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:49 (twenty-one years ago)

I have a feeling they're against it.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:49 (twenty-one years ago)

No one has babies out their face.

ZEUS AND ATHENA TO THREAD!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:50 (twenty-one years ago)

This thread isn't quite as horrific now.

"50 Cent has taken more shots to the face than Jenna Jameson!"

― miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:50 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.dl.ket.org/latin1/mythology/1deities/gods/olympians/athena.htm

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:51 (twenty-one years ago)

I love how feminist issues get so heavily torn into by the men of ILX.

I am not partaking in this thread anymore because I have made a promise to myself to stop posting on sex/relationship threads and this could turn ugly.

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 21:51 (twenty-one years ago)

That it is about men humiliating and debasing women, I would think. It's a hard reading to argue about, mostly.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:51 (twenty-one years ago)

ZEUS AND ATHENA TO THREAD!

High-browness strikes again! the thread is SAVED!

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:52 (twenty-one years ago)

It doesn't have to get ugly if we don't want it to, Ally. And I'd like to hear you expand on your first point.

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:52 (twenty-one years ago)

High-browness strikes again!

Worst damned pun ever.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:53 (twenty-one years ago)

OK:

Why is it about humiliation and debasement at all times?

Why is it inconceivable that a woman might enjoy it?

I AM NOT ADVOCATING ANY OF THESE VIEWPOINTS BEFORE PEOPLE START GOING ALL PERVY ON ME, THEY ARE JUST Q'S!!

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 21:54 (twenty-one years ago)

How tame...Well, I'm not going to post what I THOUGHT it meant...

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Those were my questions, as well. Does bukkake actually fall under the "scat games" umbrella? Can sperm be classified as excrement?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:55 (twenty-one years ago)

My lover: 'How come you don't come in my face anymore? Have you lost interest in me?'

Me: 'It's not that, you know I still care! It's just... I've been reading Andrea Dworkin, and it just doesn't feel right any more!'

My lover: 'Harumph!' (rolls over, switches off light)

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:56 (twenty-one years ago)

Answers: it doesn't have to be, and it's not. From a symbolic point of view, it's pretty easy to see how bukkake could be seen as domination/degradation. But symbolism doesn't necessarily equal reality.

― NA (Nick A.), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:56 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm just thinking, and this happens a lot in threads like this, a lot of them men of ilx fall all over themselves in a race to denounce certain behaviors as exploitative/debasing but you are all ignoring the fact that I'm pretty sure Momus's girlfriend was ok with him coming in her face if she walked around telling people about it, so why is this definitely an instance of inherent sexism?

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 21:57 (twenty-one years ago)

Is the act of covering someone else in a substance that comes from the human body inherently debasing and humiliating? Would it be degrading to have someone bleed all over you?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Last question is obviously loaded; read it as "Would it be degrading to bleed all over someone?"

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:58 (twenty-one years ago)

It's not inconceivable, it just seems unlikely. To get perfectly graphic about it - Momus's own fetish, coming in someone's face, isn't necessarily about debasement: if two people (or three, or five!) get off on something together, great. But sixty guys spraying on one girl's face: one intuitively senses that there's something other than "this is how we get off!" going on there.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:58 (twenty-one years ago)

during a meeting? yes.

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 21:59 (twenty-one years ago)

also, all paraphilias are to some extent about control

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Hurrah, I got the 69th answer!

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, this is a good point, Ally. If I can be explicit for a moment (feel free to skip this, anyone...) the only time I've come in a woman's face was when she made it happen deliberately, and plainly enjoyed it. Her wanting to do it was hot, whereas I would never have wanted to do it myself.

Nonetheless, its increasing prevalence is probably not likely to be an entirely good thing.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:01 (twenty-one years ago)

Ok, John, I understand your point totally now.

I'm now imagining Dan as having the weirdest fetishes ever.

― Allyzay, Friday, 7 November 2003 22:01 (twenty-one years ago)

thank god this one is not an image thread.

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:02 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't think we're going to get very far if we focus on whether this is inherently a sexist act. I'd much rather hear about why some people find it a turn-on and why others don't.

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:02 (twenty-one years ago)

The numerical imbalance thing is an interesting wrinkle, I think. There is an assumption that the many always dominate the one but I'm not sure you can logically make that assumption (especially when you realize that if the many are women and the one is a man, many people still say that the man is the dominant figure; it seems like this all boils down to sexual politics/biases as per usual).

x-post: ... Do I even want to know?

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:03 (twenty-one years ago)

It seems well documented that a lot of people will be attracted to things because of the debasement and humiliation they will endure. Hence the term perversity, no? And just because someone has this in their psyche to 'enjoy' being humiliated, doesn't neccessarily mean it's A-OK to be someone who enjoys humiliating people.

― Kim (Kim), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, the blood thing. I had completely disconnected myself from the conversation, otherwise all you would have seen was the word "EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!" accompanied by an MPEG of me running for the hills willy-nilly.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:05 (twenty-one years ago)

OK. But imagine for a second you've got 60 women who can female-ejaculate, all coming on a guy's face. Would it be plausible that the guy in question could think it was kind of cool & not debasing/humiliating etc.? Can we extrapolate?

― Douglas (Douglas), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:05 (twenty-one years ago)

I would note that this postulated equivalent seems infinitely less prevalent on the internet, which tells us something, I think.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:07 (twenty-one years ago)

perhaps that's just due to bad planning?

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:09 (twenty-one years ago)

Kim is on-point. Sure, Douglas, it's more than possible to imagine the scenario you suggest, but there are all kinds of gender-politics stuff at play here. A quick check of internet sites concerned with facial-cum stuff will reveal a common vocabulary that's quite abusive & mean-spirited, and where there's smoke, there's fire. So while one can't say "whenever this happens, it's necessarily about degradation," one can fairly describe patterns/trends.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:09 (twenty-one years ago)

It isn't a stretch to extrapolate this stance into "These people are sick and need to be cured." I think that wanting a legion of men to spooge on you in quick succession is pretty fucking odd but I don't really see why indulging in that is by definition destructive, or how being one of the spoogers makes you a bad person.

x-post: Martin, it tells as that it's pretty damn hard to get 60 women who can ejaculate into one room! (Whereas men who can ejaculate are like a dime a dozen.)

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:10 (twenty-one years ago)

the line i think, is between eroticization of all sorts of power relationships on individual terms, and what these things in toto say about and constitute on broad terms of social relationships outside the sexual/personal act.

(i.e. power games vs. power fite!)

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:10 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, yes (although it's prob. a lot harder to find 60 women of the required type). And not to say that even if we can postulate a situation of any gender-combination where all the participants are really into it that a lot of its _viewers_ won't like it for all the wrong reasons. But that great big equals sign in This = Bad doesn't sit well with me.

xpost (and John, I think, is on point too)

― Douglas (Douglas), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:12 (twenty-one years ago)

Is mixing sexual fantasies with power games a bad thing? And, really, why on EARTH would you want to get hit in the face with buckets of cum????? HELP I HAVE RE-ENGAGED WITH THE DISCUSSION EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! *insert MPEG here*

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:12 (twenty-one years ago)

But sixty guys spraying on one girl's face: one intuitively senses that there's something other than "this is how we get off!" going on there.

Supposedly it originated as a form of punishment for unfaithful wives. The notion is that if she welcomed the semen of one man who is not her husband, she better be prepared to take the brunt of every man in the village. Obviously, this conflicts with the modern uderstanding that if a woman has said yes to one man, it does not necessarily mean she's consented to have sex with any other man.

So, since bukkake is supposedly rooted in punishment and humiliation, I can't see the female as dominant in any aspect. Unless it becomes about her powers of endurance, as in certain porn stars' record-breaking gang-bang sessions.

― j.lu (j.lu), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:13 (twenty-one years ago)

A quick check of internet sites concerned with facial-cum stuff will reveal a common vocabulary that's quite abusive & mean-spirited

But that vocabulary is used with all types of porn, not just facials.

― oops (Oops), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:14 (twenty-one years ago)

(To Douglas) I'm not sure if the role-reversal scenario is a valid one in this instance: 1) because porn is disproportionately influenced by male fantasy and 2) because a scenario wherein a large number of men outnumber a woman raises power and gender-struggle issues in a way that the inverse scenario does not.

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:15 (twenty-one years ago)

I just wanted to say in response to J.Lu's post: EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

I am so seriosuly skeeved out, I think the skin on my back is about to run to Idaho.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:15 (twenty-one years ago)

Ok if you want to use extrapolations to make the point, assume it's instead a woman who perversely enjoys being "raped" (this assumes the other person intends rape and doesn't know it's otherwise) - does it make it ok to be the rapist?

― Kim (Kim), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:16 (twenty-one years ago)

But that vocabulary is used with all types of porn, not just facials.

Not true! Certainly not to as pervasive an extent, at least.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:16 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm not sure that this big outcry of people saying this is evil, that everyone seems to be reacting against, actually exists. I do think that its manifestation and growth and fresh prevalence is something to do with it being a fresh kink for many, and something to do with sexist tendencies expressed in a just-about-tolerated way. I'm not going to condemn anyone for wanting it or enjoying it, I just think its status as the latest sexual fad is less than a good thing.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:16 (twenty-one years ago)

I'd just like to thank Dan for bringing the word "buckets" into this discussion.

― J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:17 (twenty-one years ago)

I dunno, John. Every thing I see about anal uses similar terminology. I think I do agree with you, though.

― oops (Oops), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:18 (twenty-one years ago)

I'd much rather hear about why some people find it a turn-on and why others don't.

There is no "why" in turn-on land.

― Herbstmute (Wintermute), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:19 (twenty-one years ago)

Kim, I love the "When did you stop beating your wife?" debate technique!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:19 (twenty-one years ago)

Kim, the wrinkle in this logic is that empowerment is often a direct byproduct for those who engage in 'debased' or 'humiliating' acts.

(Not to mention that 'debased' and 'humiliating' are both massive value judgements...)

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, what Martin said in the last post. If people like it, fair enough. It makes me slightly uncomfortable that it's becoming so big though, and that's not just because the coming on the face business is sooo not my thing.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:20 (twenty-one years ago)

There is no "why" in turn-on land.

This is hogwash.

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:21 (twenty-one years ago)

j.lu the only thing i can think of is that something's "origins" don't necc. explain its entirety.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:22 (twenty-one years ago)

But there is something important in Kim's point: there is a difference in finding nothing remotely wrong in a woman liking bukkake and feeling uneasy about men liking it. That's not an unreasonable position at all. For me, I don't have anything against men liking it either, unless it becomes an abusive, forced thing. It's like anything else there. I would agree that this seems so often the way it is constructed, which is why I do have some problem with it.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:22 (twenty-one years ago)

I really have no idea how bukkake is being sold because whenever I catch a whiff of it I run in the opposite direction.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:24 (twenty-one years ago)

OH MY GOD I stare at my last post in horror.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:24 (twenty-one years ago)

nothing like the smell of protein in the morning.

y'know, this thread is STILL better than another "yo ILX sucks this week WTF" thrad.

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:24 (twenty-one years ago)

it's been a mostly excellent thread, I think, against all odds!

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:25 (twenty-one years ago)

Still horrified.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:27 (twenty-one years ago)

here. hide behind these buckets.

no, don't ask what they've been used for.

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Kingfish, I'm gonna say this in a language you might understand:

http://www.american-allergy-supply.com/charcoal-prefilters/honeywell-hepa-filter.jpg

― mark p (Mark P), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:29 (twenty-one years ago)

Bukkake as fad is over, anyway, because once columnists at The Observer are writing about something, it's cold porridge.

― Momus (Momus), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:37 (twenty-one years ago)

The first thing that comes to mind when I see the word "fad" is the hula hoop. I DIDN'T NEED THE SECOND TO BE BUKKAKE THANK YOU MOMUS.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:40 (twenty-one years ago)

In Hudsucker Proxy II: "Bukkake - you know, for kids!"

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:42 (twenty-one years ago)

after the hula hoop fad died, it returned in the form of a snack in a pretty red bag!

Dan help me complete my thought

― mark s (mark s), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:42 (twenty-one years ago)

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:44 (twenty-one years ago)

USA Today: "Bukkake fad makes for sick fun and sticky females. And it's on the rise!"

― donut bitch (donut), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:48 (twenty-one years ago)

Kim, I love the "When did you stop beating your wife?" debate technique!

Dan, that's overly defensive. That's not what I'm implying at all - it's a really complicated ethical question. I'm well aware that it's not a good vs. evil, feminist vs. wife beater issue.

Kim, the wrinkle in this logic is that empowerment is often a direct byproduct for those who engage in 'debased' or 'humiliating' acts.

(Not to mention that 'debased' and 'humiliating' are both massive value judgements...)

I know it Mark, that's why it's so complicated. The point is that working under the assumption that those ideas *are* in one or both of the particpants minds, the same activity can can have more than just one ethical angle.

― Kim (Kim), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:50 (twenty-one years ago)

USA Today: "Bukkake fad makes for sick fun and sticky females. And it's on the rise!"

oh, and what a color graph it would have!

― Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:51 (twenty-one years ago)

I think we're all saying the same thing (SHOCKER). And I honestly do like the "When did you stop beating your wife?" debating technique! I use it a lot.

― Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:52 (twenty-one years ago)

Ha - "bukkake" and "cold porridge" in the same sentence isn't something I want to see!

― Trayce (trayce), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:53 (twenty-one years ago)

"ethical angle" isn't really the phrase I wanted there. I'm just thinking that it can simultaneously have many sujective repercussions that will be experienced and viewed as both positive and negative, and the existence of one experience doesn't cancel out the other.

― Kim (Kim), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:56 (twenty-one years ago)

Thanks to the porridge mention I have now just thought of Ready Brek and glowing kids. This is not good.

― Ricardo (RickyT), Friday, 7 November 2003 22:56 (twenty-one years ago)

If someone says bukkake is troubling because it's degrading doesn't mean you get to prove that it's not by saying that it's also empowering. Question to ourselves then is does one end balance the other in any way meriting tolerance or indifference, or is a protest neccessary to attempt to correct the imbalance?

But yeah, we're probably all saying the same thing.

― Kim (Kim), Friday, 7 November 2003 23:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh, and hopefully in my last post to this thread, I think the reason for the growing popularity of the stuff is actually because of the sheer SPECTACLE of the reality and the idea. We can't help but look.

― Kim (Kim), Friday, 7 November 2003 23:14 (twenty-one years ago)

Your search - mountain goats bukkake - did not match any documents.

― Momus (Momus), Saturday, 8 November 2003 01:15 (twenty-one years ago)

hahahaha! Imagine the things we could have seen...

― @d@ml (nordicskilla), Saturday, 8 November 2003 01:18 (twenty-one years ago)

i think maybe there is a confusion about PORNOGRAPHY ---> "bukkake", and actual sex ---> that real people have, of which bukkake probably = 0.0000 percent

wanting to be humiliated = OK, and wanting to humiliate = OK too, i mean anybody that has an issue with this is not clued up, but come on - 60 guys coming into a girl's face? in real life i think 59 of them at least would kind of beg off and say they had some errands to run

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Saturday, 8 November 2003 02:27 (twenty-one years ago)

Okay. So now I have returned and am glad to see this had turned into an interesting discussion, even though I never really imagined this thread getting so big. I was just being lazy when I could have looked something up on my own...it was probably still the wrong thing to do....

...but now I'm really thinking of a lot of things. I like the strains of thought here but I think they could be expanded. For one thing, is it still called "bukkake" (or "gansha" or whatever - are these Japanese terms in origin?) if a man ejaculates on another man's face/body? If a bisexual man just likes to come on faces, whether male or female, is it just a shared fetish when its kept within the same gender, but this degrading/humiliating act of perversity where sexual politics are involved when it's done with a member of the opposite sex ? Isn't all this dependent on the viewer's definition of said terms, aside from the theoretical presence of a "viewer" or third party witnessing the act in the first place?

Which leads me to think of a lot of other things, actually. Isn't this question at least somewhat dependent on finding semen a repulsive fluid? Why is semen considered a dirty or filthy substance in Western culture, or perhaps I should just ask, is it unequivocally? Because I'm starting to recall all these aspects of Indian and japanese mythologies, and the phallic-oriented cultures they were created in, which celebrate semen as this sacred, life-creating substance which is to be worshipped for its power, not winced at...

― Vic (Vic), Saturday, 8 November 2003 02:48 (twenty-one years ago)

wanting to be humiliated = OK, and wanting to humiliate = OK too, i mean anybody that has an issue with this is not clued up

Um no, not always. Is it OK for someone to be humiliated if that isn't acceptable to them and is something out of their control? Either we have radically different definition of the term "OK" or I just disagree, strongly. If that makes me not clued up, then so be it.

― Kim (Kim), Saturday, 8 November 2003 02:55 (twenty-one years ago)

but then they wouldn't want to be be humiliated, so it wouldn't be ok, am i missing someting??

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Saturday, 8 November 2003 03:00 (twenty-one years ago)

Yes.

― Kim (Kim), Saturday, 8 November 2003 03:02 (twenty-one years ago)

i mean i assume any situation like this in real life would need to be negotiated and understood by everyone - sorry if i didn't make that clear! but i am assuming that the ACTUAL percentage of people who do this = 0% of the population (though the fantasy no doubt runs into higher numbers than that)

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Saturday, 8 November 2003 03:03 (twenty-one years ago)

i DEFNIITELY don't mean any non-consensual humiliation; i mean if that's what is understood to be going on, by both/all parties, then it's fine and okay. i certainly didn't mean to imply that anything non-consensual was alright. of course you can PRETEND that something's non-consensual but that's different.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Saturday, 8 November 2003 03:26 (twenty-one years ago)

It's ok Tracer, I understand. I'm drunk too. I love you maaaaan.

― Kim (Kim), Saturday, 8 November 2003 03:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, not precisely 0% in that I have done it and seen other people do it (without joining in).

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Saturday, 8 November 2003 11:32 (twenty-one years ago)

This has turned into the jizzing at strangers out of car windows thread.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Saturday, 8 November 2003 18:23 (twenty-one years ago)

Andrew is a genius.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 8 November 2003 18:33 (twenty-one years ago)

Two questions remain:

1. What was the 'm' word?

2. When did Dan Perry stop beating his wife?

― N. (nickdastoor), Saturday, 8 November 2003 23:50 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.ebolamonkeyman.com/images/bukakke_holding.JPG

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Monday, 17 November 2003 16:40 (twenty-one years ago)

http://bitchcakes.topcities.com/garethfap/phoneconfusion.jpg

(i'm so sorry, gareth)

― Allyzay, Monday, 17 November 2003 16:58 (twenty-one years ago)

what, does he expect it to come shooting out of the receiver or something?

― Jeremy the Kingfish (Kingfish), Monday, 17 November 2003 17:17 (twenty-one years ago)

SEMEN FIGHT! (ew)
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mike.jb/images/mike_nkomo1.jpg

― Lord Custos Omicron (Lord Custos Omicron), Monday, 17 November 2003 17:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Seriously, what is wrong with you?

― Allyzay, Monday, 17 November 2003 17:57 (twenty-one years ago)

three years pass...

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51dfHCDRTEL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-dp-500-arrow,TopRight,45,-64_OU01_AA240_SH20_.jpg

― and what, Friday, 19 October 2007 22:50 (seventeen years ago)

lolz

― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Friday, 19 October 2007 22:53 (seventeen years ago)

I think that Momus post is maybe the Momusiest thing he ever posted.

― HI DERE, Friday, 19 October 2007 23:03 (seventeen years ago)

It certainly is! It is concentrated industrial strength Momus. Distilled Momus, illegal in most countries and made in a shack somewhere in Eastern Europe.

― moley, Saturday, 20 October 2007 01:06 (seventeen years ago)

y'know, this thread is STILL better than another "yo ILX sucks this week WTF" thrad.

-- Jay Dee Sah Mon (Kingfish), Friday, November 7, 2003 10:24 PM

― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Saturday, 20 October 2007 01:12 (seventeen years ago)

a controversial stance you've taken there big hoos

― J0hn D., Saturday, 20 October 2007 01:46 (seventeen years ago)

As soon as I clicked the thread, my first thought was "Countdown to Momus".

― The Reverend, Saturday, 20 October 2007 02:11 (seventeen years ago)

http://img39.picoodle.com/img/img39/6/10/19/f_earthm_eb864b0.png

― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Saturday, 20 October 2007 02:22 (seventeen years ago)

'Countdown to Momus' = Momus engaging in gansha.

― moley, Saturday, 20 October 2007 02:23 (seventeen years ago)

http://i20.tinypic.com/fyoj78.jpg

― StanM, Saturday, 20 October 2007 22:32 (seventeen years ago)

O_o

― The Reverend, Saturday, 20 October 2007 23:33 (seventeen years ago)

http://i20.tinypic.com/iggo61.jpg

― StanM, Monday, 22 October 2007 12:27 (seventeen years ago)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/37939000/jpg/_37939295_spring150.jpg

― not_goodwin, Monday, 22 October 2007 15:00 (seventeen years ago)

― StanM, Monday, 22 October 2007 15:54 (seventeen years ago)

http://www.avitable.com/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/more-smilies/Avitagrins/bukakke.gif

― gr8080, Tuesday, 23 October 2007 01:58 (seventeen years ago)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/23/41356824_d838e2068e.jpg

― Consomelia Chisbreth-Vermeer, Tuesday, 23 October 2007 03:59 (seventeen years ago)

Too far.

― nickn, Tuesday, 23 October 2007 04:02 (seventeen years ago)

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y176/edwardiii/memeshotwad.jpg

― Edward III, Tuesday, 23 October 2007 04:47 (seventeen years ago)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJBeC4TUNpo

― Consomelia Chisbreth-Vermeer, Tuesday, 23 October 2007 11:15 (seventeen years ago)

four years pass...

odd things come up if you search for "pretty hate machine" without quotes

― keeping things contextual (DJP), Friday, 3 August 2012 18:47 (thirteen years ago)

three weeks pass...

nsfw

http://www.lukeisback.com/2012/08/a-day-in-the-life-of-a-bukkake-mope/

― ○ (gr8080), Wednesday, 29 August 2012 17:49 (twelve years ago)

da capo best mucous writing

― jjjdoom (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, 29 August 2012 23:35 (twelve years ago)

I’ve also been a “mope” for hire, as a favor to Jim who personally asked me to, and for entertainment fodder for that doc still not finished by that inept, abusive piece of shit non-producer. The late Sledge also did it, as well as Brandon Iron. It’s a porno circus. Very disgusting but at times entertaining like when a mope would run up to bust a nut before Jim even started filming. That shit was Nast-T! The smell of wads under hot lamps smelled like rotten eggs. The sperm omlet cooked once was vomit inducing. Who jerks off to this kind of shit I’ll never understand. I was always stared at by a closet homo when I did it, too.

― Hungry4Ass, Wednesday, 29 August 2012 23:46 (twelve years ago)

thank you that was horrible

― i know your nuts hurt! who's laughing? (contenderizer), Thursday, 30 August 2012 03:05 (twelve years ago)

"No one who witnessed Ami Emerson eating the 71-load cum omelette was ever the same."

JFCJFCJFCJFCJFCJFC

― Kiarostami bag (milo z), Thursday, 30 August 2012 03:14 (twelve years ago)

Fuck this is gross

― (✿◠‿◠) (ENBB), Thursday, 30 August 2012 03:15 (twelve years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.