Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Do we misuse the gluteus maximus?
Do we misuse the anus?

The hushed issue of using the anus to extract sexual pleasure continues to hold interest for many. The expected reaction to this revelation will be one of alarm followed by condemnation by those whose heads are planted in the sand. But navigate to any reputable website offering insight into the issue and the message will be the same – an estimated 30% of males AND females have engaged in anal sex at least once. And what are some of the popular Internet searches? anal, booty, fat ass,   big ass, you get the drift.

Of interest is the fact the botsy or pooch, to use a Bajan term, as a source of sexual pleasure and general interest is pursued by BOTH sexes.  Yet it is a subject that is taboo even in the most liberal of societies. Many Barbadians associate anal sex and homosexuality. However, the volume of visits and hits to porn sites and specifically of male and female clicks to anal searches challenge the notion that there is only a moderate interest. So why the hypocrisy?  Why do males and females risk pain by penetrating the sphincter which is an anatomical feature to manage the flow of ‘waste’ from the body? Are male homosexuals attracted to the same sex because of an urge to have sex in the same way as the heterosexual? Is it a case of pursuing an emotional interest and having to settle with the anus because the female was the vagina by the great designer? To be frank BU is confused by this issue.

The big question is why is anal sex and matters related to anal rising in popularity among the sexes. If only we were able to commission a Wickham poll to determine the level of interest in anal sex among the religious in Barbados. We know that there is a healthy interest if we deduce from  revelations coming out of the Catholic church. Unfortunately the truth will never be known because of the taboo!

For many the fact that interest in anal sex is high among BOTH sexes is food for thought. It shatters the belief that it is an activity practiced mainly by men (MSM). Some argue that MSM cannot be viewed through the same lens as anal sex practiced by heterosexuals. While MSM is regarded as abnormal behaviour by the traditionalist and religious, the practice by women is often dismissed as fetish behaviour. It this a fair parsing of the issue?

Pornhub is reported to be the largest website peddling pornography on the Internet and if its analysis is to be believed, anal rules!


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

135 responses to “Anal Adored by the Sexes”


  1. Poor Pacha

    I’m afraid I have to agree with Jack B Pacho buddy – you are actually a REAL- not an illusory, fake, figment of a – MORON..

    ‘The year dot’ to a lawyer means ‘from time immemorial’…….. and that means – note I’m giving you this in stages to help you grasp the point – ‘beyond legal memory’….and that means ‘before legal records’…..which is taken to mean ‘before 1189′. Follow?

    OR – if you really want to be a smart ASS (and I’ll return to that) – it has a biblical sense too as meaning simply….wait for it…’a long time’ ago…….OR……simply……’many’.

    Thus: ‘Jesus was in the wilderness 40 nights’…means ‘many nights’.

    OR: ‘20000 saints are buried on Bardsey Island’…means simply ‘many saints’.

    The ancients were not very exact about these things you see. They had a little more poetry in them than is to be found in your desiccated , as-inine scheme of things.

    Since you admit the Romans and Greeks I really don’t need to say any more I think.

    BUT – far more importantly – why is it that the subject of asses inexorably brings you out? Do you see yourself as ‘guardian of wonders’ or ‘dragon sentinel of the black hole’? Whatever it is, I’m sure your mother worries about you.


  2. Millerheanunnaki

    I really hope that Miller has develop a new found respect for the privacy and choices of others people. He obviously thinks that his brand of morality ought to govern the personal choices of others. Now, if a man finds pleasure in inserting his phallus in a woman’s anal canal, that’s between the woman, God and himself, end of discussion. We’re not here to discuss the morality associated with such conduct but to discuss the growing trend which has found its way in the bedrooms of many. Listen to me carefully brother: man is responsible for his own Sin because he is endowed with what the Holy Bible calls Free-Will and the social-scientist terms: Self-Determination, Self-Perfect, Self-Realization and Self- Actualization.


  3. BBE says: don’t stick your dick in an asshole. Better to be a Dick and present yourself every Friday as a total asshole in a national newspaper.


  4. Word on the street is Bajans love anal sex. Whatever makes you happy ! A tight pussy makes me happy….

  5. millertheanunnaki Avatar

    @ Dompey | September 17, 2014 at 7:49 PM |

    No pun intended here Mark Donkey, but you are really one deep thinking asshole.
    It is you who find pleasure in peeping into people’s private sexual acts involving anal penetration. You are the one who is making the moral pronouncements on such activities by referring to some Biblical code of behaviour that even Lot might have found totally reprehensible.

    Which do you think, Dompey, is the greater sin (Biblically speaking, of course)? Having sex with and impregnating your own sister, mother or daughter? Or having sex with your neighbour’s husband or son?


  6. Mill

    You went on the defensive this morning and challenged me to disclose my position on anal-sex. Did you wanted to hook-up later or something? I could have put on my pun pun shorts, lipstick and high-heels and met at your desired destination undercover-brother, or is it down-low brother?


  7. Mill

    Now leave me alone and go and play with yourself; the night is yet young.

  8. St George's Dragon Avatar
    St George’s Dragon

    Its interesting that there don’t appear to have been many (any?) comments to the effect that anal sex is bad.
    Contrast that with the anti-gay posts of a while ago where the main reason that homosexuality was condemned, was because of anal sex.
    So in summary, if heterosexual people want to do it, its edgy and acceptable but if gay people want to do it, its unacceptable on public health grounds.


  9. St. George’s Dragon

    Let’s challenges that assumption and inform your thinking in the process. Now, I am not defending the practice of anal intercourse, but the moral condemnatioin that is associated with this act as it related to women. Question: do you believe that anal intercourse is wrong because of the code of ethics forced fed to you by the hands of society,or is it wrong because your conscience as well as reason, free of secular and religious indoctrination of course, tells you so? Now, if you take a young child and lock him or her in a room from the influences of society and perpetually impress upon him or her that Black is White, wouldn’t he not believe this, until society convinces him or her otherwise? Morality as seem in the West, is predicated upon religious values with a slight secular influence. Now, I am not say that the Bible has it wrong with regarding anal intercourse, neither I am trying advance the fact that anal intercouse is right in the case of male and female. All I am trying to do is to challenge the conventional wisdom as it relates to what’s wrong and what’s right in modern day society.


  10. St. George’s Dragon

    I don’t want to belabor this topic to long, but doesn’t our Conscience, Reason and common-sense tells us that harming another human being is wrong? We do not need the teachings of the Hebrew Scriptures to tell us this, it is interlaced in our human nature. Now, with this thinking in mind, we’re able to determine what Hitler did to the Jewish people in Germany was wrong, or what the Europeans did the African people during the evil institution of slavery.

  11. Easy Squeeze (Make No Riot) Avatar
    Easy Squeeze (Make No Riot)

    If BU is not your thing , you can create another universe on the internet on another blog and hang out there all day


  12. Bullen Robert Ross
    We give not a f*ch about your legal ease. We already knew what you were likely to say. But your time frame could only apply to racists who see the world through your limited vision. To use 1189 as a point of reference is ignorance regardless of what your law says. On the other hand, you are so slippery that you have opted to posit a very recent epoch to avoid having to explain the absent of anthropological evidence to support your false claims. We will not seek biblical instruction from the likes of you.

    But you are wrong and continue to exhibit yourself as an intellectual lightweight. As researchers we know that everything that has happened in the evolution of mankind, no pun intended, leaves markers. In fact everything that has happening in the universe leaves markers. Where are the markers you claim establishes the universality of bulling. This is your claim, not ours. These notions about the inexactitude of the ancients is not a very convenient rock for a slippery, slimy, buller like Bullen Robert Ross to hide under. Even in this you are wrong.


  13. Poor Pacha

    Is that the best you can do?

    On heterosexual ass play – check, inter alia, the Kama Sutra,

    St George

    I think you got that right.


  14. Pachamama

    It is funny how human knowledge has reached an explanatory threshold, concerning the creation of God and the Big Bang, concerning the creation of the cosmo. We just do not have sufficient empirical evidence to support the existence of God, neither do we possess the convincing evidence to support the Theory of Evolution. We can use the world of metaphysics and historical -constructs and dialectical arguments, to paint this elusive picture of reality, but the forward thinkers as well as critical minded people just ain’t buying it. You may ask the question: is there a paradigmatic shift in one’s thinking here…..certainly not. I am just following the instructions of the 13TH century Philosopher, Medical-Doctor and Theologian, Moses Miamonides when said: ” Follow the evidence no matter the source.” And finally, we have to think about our thinking as well as challenge the thinking of the establishment, as well as ourselves PG.


  15. @ Dompey
    We share much of these ideas. However, it has been settled knowledge that evolution is reponsible for the state of all living organisms. We accept these arguments and will continue to hold fast to them until the predominants of evidence guide us otherwise. This does not deny the presence of spirituality, not religion, for that is an onerous imposition on mankind. The evidence of evolution is all around us and is undeniable. Only fools would want to continue with any alternative narrative and you certainly are not.


  16. Pachamama

    Now would you agree that everything which enters our universe has a beginning; a creator for the lack of a better explanation? Now, this question would probably appear simplistic to a rare intellect such as yours but I am going to ask it any way: Geological Evolution claims that the gases from the Big Bang are responsible for the continual expansion of our cosmo right? If this being the case, then can you tell me what force or forces gave rised to the Big Bang and the gases associated with it? Bearing in mind of course, that there were no such thing as the: Earth, the Moon, the Sun, the planets, and the galaxies in existence prior to this phenomenal explosion which set our world on it course.


  17. In the beginning GOD created the heavens & the earth, the earth was formless & empty; darkness was over the surface of the deep. & the spirit of GOD hovered over the waters. Genesis 1: verses 1&2


  18. GOD makes no mistakes. Everything man has ever made has been destroyed, & because of man’s reluctance & unbelief, destroying the world as man know it; but GOD in His great love & mercy will not allow mankind to destroy what He has made .


  19. Just asking..then who created god? Relax now i won,t want u to burst a blood vesell


  20. Jusk Asking

    Do you believe in Predistination?
    Well, what you’re seeing transpiring in our world today has been predetermined by the hands of the Almighty God, according to the Hebrew Scriptures. If man obey all of God’s precepts, what would have been Jesus purpose for returning to the earth brother? What you’re seeing is the divine order of things made possible before God spoke the world into existence. God who is all knowing, ought to have known that man through the gift of Free-Will, would have broken His Divine -Directives.

  21. millertheanunnaki Avatar

    @ ac | September 18, 2014 at 4:02 PM |
    “Just asking..then who created god?”

    Man! A figment of his imagination. Look above and you might just understand.
    Come on ac, if you can believe in god then you have to accept there are aliens and life in other worlds.

    That should rouse Zoe from hibernation!


  22. The Ancient philosophers often spoke about the Prime-Mover in the universe. The clock and its designer as well as the Moon and its designer and so forth. Do you follow their logic? Their have argued that everthing that is created in our world has a Designer and that includes our universe. As far as God’s existence is concern, this has not yet been proven through the application of empirical-evidence, but metaphysicians like Aristotle makes a convincing case through this medium.


  23. Miller, You asked who created God? And that a fair enough question, but let me ask you this one: where is the human mind located on the human body? And where does our consciousness go when it exist the human body. Two subjective entities which and empirical evidence cannot explain in practical terms.


  24. Miller, can science teach us morality? (I hope you shout no) Because the evoultion you believe in is grounded on scientism and there are just some questions that a dogmatic and scientific narrative cannot answer. Such as: is there life after death? And where does the data which is stored in the human mind goes after death? Does it dissipates into the universe? And what’s the nature of reality?


  25. but what.s so wrong with believing in a God…i dare say there is nothing wrong,,,as a matter of fact ,i submit that this omnipresence has in some way help to form the natural character or characteristics of mankind,,, even though man in his /her thirst for power has abused those characteristics relentlessly to their own determent transforming them into evil ,instead of good, i also hasten to add one should be lessen in their haste to downgrade or remove such an unmovable or unstoppable force,,a force which by all accounts has been able to stand alone and forever in the minds of all mankind whether atheist or any form of religiosity from the birth to grave,


  26. Miller, I have looked to conscience, reason and common-sense, to arrived at the conclusion that there is a Higher-Source who exercise oversight over our universe. Look at the order of the universe; look at the order of the human body; look at the natural laws of nature; look at the moon, and the sun and how one arrive under the cover of darkness; while the other light the day. I haven’t forgotton the stars!


  27. Some have argued that a life without God is life without meaning and purpose. Were we born to merely die? Or are there more to our existence than meets the eyes? Evolution certainly cannot answer this question because it seems as though evolution from its inception has focused more of its efforts on trying to disprove Creationism.


  28. Lord have mercy on us all….!!!
    Dompey is teaching BU brainiacs about BBE….
    …and ac is a senior consultant.

    …the end is near……!


  29. millertheanunnaki | September 18, 2014 at 5:00 PM |
    “Just asking..then who created god?”
    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
    Man! A figment of his imagination. Look above and you might just understand.
    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
    so miller am i supposedly to take away from your answer that there is a god,,,whether real or unreal and that this God lives in the minds of mankind,,,,which then in essence is more of a confirmation..or should it be that the creator of god be called into question ? which however would not null and void the reality of a GOD in the minds of man or should it?


  30. Evolutionism is grounded more on scientific- materialism; sense data in other words. While Religion is grounded more on the metaphysics and subjectivism, but the both them meet an explanatory threshold in terms of convincing us conclusively, regarding the origin of of universe.


  31. @ Dompey
    Evolutionism is grounded more on scientific- materialism; sense data in other words. While Religion is grounded more on the metaphysics and subjectivism, but the both them meet an explanatory threshold in terms of convincing us conclusively, regarding the origin of of universe.
    +++++++++++++++++++
    In short…
    You don’t know one shiite of what you speak……
    …right?
    LOL …..Ha Ha Ha


  32. AC, I thought I had explained myself conspicuously above. There are just some questions we’re not going to be able to answer applying the instruments of science and religion. For examlpe, it hard to convince me as to where the gases came from that set the Big Bang in motion. I guess they just appear out of no way and set the universe on its course?


  33. By the way Miller, I hope you’re aware of this fact because a few people are: The Theory Evolution comprised of three components: 1) Astronomical Evolution 2) Geological Evolution 3) Biological Evolution.


  34. Bushie, I am all ears brother shoot.


  35. but dompey .where is the argument,i have neither agree or disagree with u the premise of my argument is related to what miller terms as” a god figment’ created by man..nothing more or nothing less.


  36. Question for you Bushie: how does one validate the existence of a metaphysical God through an objectifiy reality? Now, I am using the word objectify in this context as something material, and not the common usage as using a woman for sexual gratification.


  37. @dompey

    Will your grandchildren be an entirely new kind of human being? This researcher thinks so. Mankind is undergoing an evolutionary transition as big as previous jumps from monkeys to apes, and apes to humans.
    That’s according to new research by evolutionary anthropologist, Cadell Last. His theory was recently published in the journal “current aging science”.
    Instead of the biological evolution that caused massive physical changes over millions of years, Last believes that cultural evolution is changing the human species in a matter of decades.
    “Humans are naturally interested in music, movies, mathematics, and science and all of these things. So we’re just entering a world where we can own our own cultural reproduction, and we can engage in this for an entire lifetime,” Last said. “We’re not in this world yet, but this is sort of where we’re going.”
    He says human evolution is a long transition from quote, “living fast and dying young” to “living slow and dying old.”
    “What my paper tries to show is that the whole of human evolution in some sense can be viewed as our species trying to abolish the category of adulthood,” Last said. “We want to keep the creativity of cultural reproduction into adulthood.”
    Last believes that as early as 2050, we’ll be living to 120, on average. He thinks the biological clock is becoming obsolete.
    “We’ll be having babies later in life, and fewer of them, in order to focus on their cultural development,” he explained.
    “People are going to be able to have more control over how they spend their time and energy, culturally speaking. And that will be a big change, that will be a fundamental difference between industrial society and the society we’re making.”

    http://www.aol.com/article/2014/09/18/one-anthropologist-believes-well-be-a-new-species-of-human-by-2/20964321/?icid=maing-grid7|maing14|dl17|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D531840&hpt=hp_bn16


  38. Bushie, just to inform your thinking Brother, the concept of God is subjective; just like the concept of Faith or Pain etc.


  39. @ Dompey
    Shoot what…!?
    Bushie here soaking up the eloquence of your elucidation.
    …just suspicious that you are way above your head..
    ….but that would not be new territory for you ….LOL Ha Ha


  40. Dompey
    …you best leave out Bushie….
    This could be painful 🙂

    BTW
    Subjectivity is mostly a sign of ignorance.
    Concepts are usually deemed to be subjective in the absence of a full understanding by the researcher.
    Many currently well-understood concepts were consider to have been “subjective” by scholars …for centuries.

  41. millertheanunnaki Avatar

    @ islandgal246 | September 18, 2014 at 8:44 PM |

    Nice post IG.
    Hoping the likes of Bushie and DR. The Honourable read it.


  42. Thanks AC, quite informative piece of information.

    “Many currently well understood concepts were consider to have been subjective by scholars for centuries”

    Bushie, throughout ancient, medieval, and contemporary times, we have always had Rationalists and empiricists scholars/ philosophers . So this idea that many well understood concepts were consider to have been subjective is pure crap. Who doesn’t know that Bush Tea? Your argument is neither here or there sir.


  43. Bush Tea, the word subjective used within a theological or a philosophical context, means to arrived at a conclusion based on reason but not learned experienced. For example, a rationalist philosopher would use reason as basis to prove God’s existence by pointing to the order in the universe with is subjective. The empiricist philospher on the other hand, would use sense data to invalidate the existence of God by saying for example: has anyone ever seen God with his or her human eyes.


  44. So Bush Tea, that is why I said to you earlier that, Scientism is grounded on Empiricism, and Religion/ theology is grounded on Subjectivism.


  45. @ DOMPEY
    can u explain the trinity to bush tea,,GP tried but he failed to convince,,,,,


  46. Why the two o ‘ wunna don’t leff Bushie nuh?
    …the whacker getting service…. 🙂


  47. Why wunna don’t go and lecture Miller and Islandgal bout their pornographic inclinations…… ?


  48. AC, I am sorry but the Trinitarian-Doctrine was a Bibibcal-Construct introduced by Emperor Constantine at the Council of Niceaea to dismantled the belief of Arianism which was pervasive at the time. I am quite sure the loud mouth Bush Tea should have been cognizant of this historical fact?


  49. AC, I am tired of informing the understanding of this wunna taa bee intellectual; he should read as I have done in the past to accumulated such knowledge.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading