Thank you for this fascinating post and your impressive scholarship. I must applaud and comment on three parts of the essay in particular:
(1) << Their experiences are captured by the term *compersion*: the capacity to feel joy through another’s joy. >>
This is also seen in "pure" sadomasochism -- i.e., S/M in which the Top does not orgasm (although the bottom may) but truly feels joy and sexual fulfillment through the pleasure given to the masochist. Here, the Top should display "a state of endorphin- and dopamine-rich euphoria," although I am unaware of clinical studies that confirm my hypothesis. [Please share them if you know of any!]
(2) << From my perspective of erotic psychology, these dynamics are not symptoms to be corrected but rituals of transformation. >>
I agree with you completely, and I am delighted that you used the term, "rituals."
(3) Finally, I absolutely LOVE the verb, to "parold," and the gerund derived therefrom, "parolding."
What I think is unfortunate is that cuckold refers to a man who is oblivious to his wife’s infidelity or otherwise unhappy about it.
It is going through a semantic shift to mean an acquiescent or enthusiastic husband. It should be unnecessary as there is a word with that exact meaning - wittol.
Thanks for your comment Robert, I hear what you are saying in terms of wittol - however the definition of wittol is a man who knowingly tolerates his wife's infidelity, and I don't feel that is the same as the phenomenon that I have described in the article. A parold is part of the exploration of the wife, and there is no infidelity happening, it is a structured exploration that often brings them closer and is an experience that has far more positive attributes than that of toleration.
I always understood the word wittol to describe a husband enthusiastic about his wife’s infidelity. It is a word fading into history as it is given the kiss of death by being labeled archaic.
Quite possibly! The definition I found mentioned tolerating so it has probably changed over time as words do. I'm curious what did you think about the article in general?
I am not persuaded the phenomenon of acquiescent infidelity is a complex as you make it. As I understand it (and I no biologist) sperm from two males in one female are much more vigorous than otherwise. If that is true then polyamory is a natural condition and monogamy is a social construct.
It makes sense for there to be monogamy prior to effective birth control. Men in any given social condition would kill each other if not. I remember reading Edwin Gibbon's Decline and Fall. There was a parenthetic aside in which he compared Roman infidelity to that of their enemy the German tribes. He was inviting the reader to fall into the trap of assuming that decadence leads to enervation and that purity leads to vitality. He then said no that's not right. It is simply a matter of opportunity. The German tribes lived in communal settings and the Romans in houses with lots of rooms.
Moreover, it is one of the tragedy of human existence that erotic love is all too finite. The old joke is: what is the difference between love and herpes. Herpes lasts forever.
Hmm I disagree that we are all naturally polyamorous. There are animals that are monogamous and I have met humans who I believe to be truly monogamous. I believe that there is a spectrum from monogamous to polyamorous and as with all aspects of sexuality us humans all sit somewhere along that spectrum but each person is unique. I think your focus is on evolutionary aspects of cuckolding which is fascinating but my approach here is the psychological and ritual aspects which are seen in the parolding(cuckolding) lifestyle. Did you happen to listen to the podcast episode I mention at the start of the article? For that cuckold there is no interest in competition or better sperm, it's a devotional ritual.
Great piece, showcasing nuance and that not all so-called cuckholds are what they seem. For example, my wife and I invite men into the bedroom quite often (1-2 times a month), while at the same time, we have a dominant (me) submissive (her) relationship both in and out of the bedroom. There is nothing submissive about me allowing another man to have sex with her. In fact, quite the opposite. I enjoy the power and dominance of it. I select the men, I arrange it, and I like making them beg for it. I like the validation that my wife is stone-cold hot and other men not only want her, they will do just about anything to get their hands on her. Then if they want more, they need to arrange it with me. Sometimes I watch, but more often I participate. Not only is it fun for both of us, but our sex life in one-on-one has never been better.
What a fascinating piece. I read it while reflecting on poor Cedric of Thistlecock's first night back home after being raised in innocent chastity by the Blue-balled Brotherhood.
There are few scholars who understand the unique discomfort of a lad whose mother is both the toast of the village and, by all appearances, the toast rack too.
Your mention of humiliation and devotion reminded me of Lord Thistlecock, who sits at his own table like a stag in the headlights, the only man in the castle who can’t tell his horns from his antlers from his crown.
Meanwhile, Cedric's observation of his mother's service to the village leads to the epiphany that the stained glass he’s spent years meditating upon at the monestary is actually depicting the story of Oedipus.
Thank you for a thought-provoking essay. If you ever visit Thistlecock, I would recommend bringing a towel.
Yours,
Prof. (suspended) Cordelia Knaque
Dept. of Grailcock Studies | Fleshminster University
Thank you for this fascinating post and your impressive scholarship. I must applaud and comment on three parts of the essay in particular:
(1) << Their experiences are captured by the term *compersion*: the capacity to feel joy through another’s joy. >>
This is also seen in "pure" sadomasochism -- i.e., S/M in which the Top does not orgasm (although the bottom may) but truly feels joy and sexual fulfillment through the pleasure given to the masochist. Here, the Top should display "a state of endorphin- and dopamine-rich euphoria," although I am unaware of clinical studies that confirm my hypothesis. [Please share them if you know of any!]
(2) << From my perspective of erotic psychology, these dynamics are not symptoms to be corrected but rituals of transformation. >>
I agree with you completely, and I am delighted that you used the term, "rituals."
(3) Finally, I absolutely LOVE the verb, to "parold," and the gerund derived therefrom, "parolding."
*BRAVA*!
What I think is unfortunate is that cuckold refers to a man who is oblivious to his wife’s infidelity or otherwise unhappy about it.
It is going through a semantic shift to mean an acquiescent or enthusiastic husband. It should be unnecessary as there is a word with that exact meaning - wittol.
Thanks for your comment Robert, I hear what you are saying in terms of wittol - however the definition of wittol is a man who knowingly tolerates his wife's infidelity, and I don't feel that is the same as the phenomenon that I have described in the article. A parold is part of the exploration of the wife, and there is no infidelity happening, it is a structured exploration that often brings them closer and is an experience that has far more positive attributes than that of toleration.
I always understood the word wittol to describe a husband enthusiastic about his wife’s infidelity. It is a word fading into history as it is given the kiss of death by being labeled archaic.
Quite possibly! The definition I found mentioned tolerating so it has probably changed over time as words do. I'm curious what did you think about the article in general?
I am not persuaded the phenomenon of acquiescent infidelity is a complex as you make it. As I understand it (and I no biologist) sperm from two males in one female are much more vigorous than otherwise. If that is true then polyamory is a natural condition and monogamy is a social construct.
It makes sense for there to be monogamy prior to effective birth control. Men in any given social condition would kill each other if not. I remember reading Edwin Gibbon's Decline and Fall. There was a parenthetic aside in which he compared Roman infidelity to that of their enemy the German tribes. He was inviting the reader to fall into the trap of assuming that decadence leads to enervation and that purity leads to vitality. He then said no that's not right. It is simply a matter of opportunity. The German tribes lived in communal settings and the Romans in houses with lots of rooms.
Moreover, it is one of the tragedy of human existence that erotic love is all too finite. The old joke is: what is the difference between love and herpes. Herpes lasts forever.
Hmm I disagree that we are all naturally polyamorous. There are animals that are monogamous and I have met humans who I believe to be truly monogamous. I believe that there is a spectrum from monogamous to polyamorous and as with all aspects of sexuality us humans all sit somewhere along that spectrum but each person is unique. I think your focus is on evolutionary aspects of cuckolding which is fascinating but my approach here is the psychological and ritual aspects which are seen in the parolding(cuckolding) lifestyle. Did you happen to listen to the podcast episode I mention at the start of the article? For that cuckold there is no interest in competition or better sperm, it's a devotional ritual.
Great piece, showcasing nuance and that not all so-called cuckholds are what they seem. For example, my wife and I invite men into the bedroom quite often (1-2 times a month), while at the same time, we have a dominant (me) submissive (her) relationship both in and out of the bedroom. There is nothing submissive about me allowing another man to have sex with her. In fact, quite the opposite. I enjoy the power and dominance of it. I select the men, I arrange it, and I like making them beg for it. I like the validation that my wife is stone-cold hot and other men not only want her, they will do just about anything to get their hands on her. Then if they want more, they need to arrange it with me. Sometimes I watch, but more often I participate. Not only is it fun for both of us, but our sex life in one-on-one has never been better.
Dear Emma,
What a fascinating piece. I read it while reflecting on poor Cedric of Thistlecock's first night back home after being raised in innocent chastity by the Blue-balled Brotherhood.
There are few scholars who understand the unique discomfort of a lad whose mother is both the toast of the village and, by all appearances, the toast rack too.
Your mention of humiliation and devotion reminded me of Lord Thistlecock, who sits at his own table like a stag in the headlights, the only man in the castle who can’t tell his horns from his antlers from his crown.
Meanwhile, Cedric's observation of his mother's service to the village leads to the epiphany that the stained glass he’s spent years meditating upon at the monestary is actually depicting the story of Oedipus.
Thank you for a thought-provoking essay. If you ever visit Thistlecock, I would recommend bringing a towel.
Yours,
Prof. (suspended) Cordelia Knaque
Dept. of Grailcock Studies | Fleshminster University