home authors guest shorts graphical shorts
Douglass spread his girlfriend's labia and lapped up the sleep-thickened mucus. It was cooler and less salty than the vagina proper. Using plenty of saliva, he licked her tumescent clitoris along its hood, just as if it were a tiny penis. He knew she liked that. The morning light filtering through the comforter flattered her already beautiful genitals. Her hips shifted and Douglass sensed she was awake.
Against her little organ he pushed the flat of his tongue, using the tip to probe inside, testing her waters. He simultaneously teased the floor of her threshold with his finger, waiting for the sweet and brackish flavor that always signaled the beginning of her victory lap.
It came, and Douglass wrapped the little string dangling from her cubby (as if a mouse were hiding in there) around his finger and slowly pulled. When the base of the tampon emerged, he plunged it back in slowly, a bloody piston. With her barrel thus occupied, Douglass kissed her clitoris now in earnest. Sucking, wet kisses. She groaned and ground herself against his face, signaling him to increase the tempo.
Grabbing the tampon between his knuckles like the tip of a pool cue, he tripled speed and sucked the top of her labia hard into his mouth, the combination of vaginal fluid and slough tasting rich and coppery. A maroon bubble farted out around the tampon's perimeter as she orgasmed, dribbling down her raised perineum and collecting in a fast-forming drop along the lee of her anus. Douglass consumed the offending fluid before it could drip and stain the sheets. She wouldn't like that.
He replaced the tampon with a fresh one, pulled her panties back on, emerged from under the comforter and tucked her in.
"Don't you want me to take care of you," she mumbled sleepily as Douglass trebucheted his aching pole inside his slacks.
"No, baby," he said. "You go back to sleep."
"I'm the best boyfriend in the world," Douglass thought, loping to the subway. His chest swelled with pride, his testicles with blood.
Date Written: March 01, 2005Comments:
Average Vote: 4.5
03/9/2005 Phony Millions (5): This short has greatness.
03/9/2005 Will Disney: good for this guy!
03/9/2005 TheBuyer (5): He's cheating on her.
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony (5):
03/9/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs: Trebucheted? I don't get it, that's not what trebuchets do.
03/9/2005 anonymous: His boner is the arm of the trebuchet, cocked into position by the harness of his slacks, straining against them to "throw its load."
03/9/2005 Phony Millions: past participle baby
03/9/2005 Jimson S. Sorghum (5): Despite my discomfort, I have to rate it thusly. I love the the closer. It's actually...uh...cute.
03/9/2005 Litcube (5):
03/9/2005 John Slocum: sweet and brackish....rich and coppery....coastal italian red from iron-rich soils?
03/9/2005 Jon Matza (5): Well written, calculated shock type three till those last three grafs 'bucheted it into the all-star section (last graf particularly Einsteinium).
03/9/2005 Jon Matza: Disney--this wasn't the short that necessitated the disclaimer, was it?
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony: Shock?
03/9/2005 John Slocum (5): I'm not going to make the same mistake I've made on author's last 2 5-star efforts. I learn from my mistakes.
03/9/2005 John Slocum: This *is* masterful, some great flavors, great curve at end (like Matzoid commented), very creative. Very romantic.
03/9/2005 Jon Matza: Pony: ?
03/9/2005 Dick Vomit (5): Yes/Lee of her anus/ok.
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony: 5-star effort being the operative phrase, here, Slocum. While this admittedly ambitious short starts out just fine, it pretty much falls totally flat with...oh wait, I already voted. Yeah, I like this a lot. Never mind.
03/9/2005 anonymous: Lot of great chatter out there, folks, let's keep it up.
03/9/2005 John Slocum: way to ruin it, 'author.'
03/9/2005 Dylan Danko: I think i have to change my bet
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony: Author, perhaps you could better fill the space by continuing to defend "trebucheted"?
03/9/2005 Litcube: I don't get "trebucheted' either. In order for a cock to become a trebuchet, the fulcrum would have to be located at roughly the center of the cock (and this would be fucked up). As it stands, most of our cocks have fulcrums at our pubic bone, thus resembling more of a catapult. Perhaps this "trebuchet" was a slip-of-the-hand thesaurus selection from catapult.
03/9/2005 Ewan Snow: Trebucheted was totally clear to me, although I felt it was forced. "Hey guys, check out this metaphor!" I didn't find this shocking or particularly brilliant, however. It was sexy, though, sort of like a penthouse letter. Definitely not a five in my book. Author, should I vote, or let you keep your unblemished bloc of fives?
03/9/2005 anonymous: I welcome all opinions, as long as you're sharing.
03/9/2005 anonymous: I didn't use a thesaurus, litdude. Trebuchet was chosen over catapult because "to catapult" already means something completely different from what I wanted here. I used trebuchet instead because it hasn't been verbed yet, so I could make it mean what I wanted. I realized it wasn't a perfect, physically accurate metaphor, but then, what is? People use "catapulted," for example, all the time to simply mean "thrown hard" or "thrown overhand" without worrying about where the fulcrum was in the launching mechanism.
03/9/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs (3): The disgusting thing was well done. "victory lap" and "pool cue" were choice phrases; well done on those. "Trebucheted" didn't make sense to me, and even if it did, it wasn't clever enough for the way it was forced. Also, the last line was definitely underwhelming. OK, this is a good short, but it is not a 5. I am giving this a 3.5, rounded down, or a 7 on the proposed new system. It was disgusting, but that was about it.
03/9/2005 anonymous: I didn't think it was disgusting at all. You obviously hate women. I pity your mother.
03/9/2005 Klause Muppet (4):
03/9/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs: Jimson?
03/9/2005 Jimson S. Sorghum: Nope. Not disgusted. A little squirmy, but that's because there were so many uh...sensitive details. And I'm reading them at work. "Disgusting" is definitely your little hang-up Streifenb. Sorry.
03/9/2005 anonymous: You probably don't go for the cheese course after a meal, Streifen.
03/9/2005 Jimson S. Sorghum: Alright, I adimit it. I was a little bothered by certain ways of phrasing things: "the maroon bubble farted out..." (not really very sexy or pretty--particularly with that verb). "Sleep-thickened mucus" is a less than savory image, so, yeah, I guess I can see why your stomach turned here and there. I take it back, Streif. But I've always been more partial to boy parts. It gets a little messy down there for my taste.
03/9/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs: I'm sorry; the question mark after your name was not inviting your opinion on the nature of this short, but instead was intended to convey my belief that you are the author.
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony: Streifenbeuteldachs, you know you can bet on that, right?
03/9/2005 Streifenbeuteldachs: Yes, but I prefer to make wild and insubstantiated speculations with nothing more on the line than my reputation.
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony: For d'record, I didn't think the intention was to be shocking or disgusting. Explicit, maybe, but not gross.
03/9/2005 anonymous: 'xactly, pony.
03/9/2005 Ewan Snow (4): Pony, did you mean NOT shocking or disgusting?
03/9/2005 Ewan Snow: ah... "didn't". my error.
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony: I'd'a said that.
03/9/2005 Mr. Pony: No problem!
03/9/2005 anonymous: My apologies to the community for bringing the ruckus to all you motherfuckers.
03/9/2005 Jimson S. Sorghum: Hey, Streifenb, I don't need your invitation to post my opinion. It's my day. I can do whatever I want.
03/9/2005 Jon Matza: You guys are right--this is one of the tenderest descriptions of a mucousy cunnilingus session featuring piston-like tampon action & vaginal blood bubble eruption that I've ever read.
03/9/2005 John Slocum: advantage matza
03/9/2005 anonymous: Douglass sure thinks it's tender. I don't know what else you have to go on here.
03/9/2005 Jon Matza: Am I being led down a primrose path here? Maybe, but I'll keep arguing the point just in case, in spite of the aggravation you're causing me. Earlier you, author, and pony seemed to be denying that this short had any intention of being shocking. I was pointing out this was hard to swallow, given its content. Now you seem to be arguing that it's Douglass the narrator who doesn't see anything shocking in what he descibes. This is obvious, and part of what (I thought) was funny about the short. Are you saying you share Douglass' viewpoint? I don't believe you. Nor do I believe there's no calculated shock going on here. Nor do I believe you believe it. I also am puzzled about why you're arguing this point. I don't think you have a sincere argument. I am very upset. You have made me cry.
03/9/2005 anonymous: Well, I knew of course it would shock a squeamish person. I wouldn't show this to my pastor, for example. But I didn't expect anyone here to be grossed out particularly by it, maybe just amused by the precise description of something gross that they'd maybe not do themselves. Uh?
03/9/2005 Dylan Danko: I read this while munching some sweet egg, bacon and swiss on an everything bagel. I couldn't make it past sleep thickened mucus - musta been the egg - and had to come back to it when fully digested. Matza, i don't think this is shocking just disgusting and I think QC's denials are in jest. I'd like to know before I vote, however. Some splendid writing.
03/9/2005 Dylan Danko: Dude, it's kinda gross.
03/9/2005 anonymous: Let me amend that. I knew some people here would be grossed out by this, but that's not why I wrote it and not why I think it's any good.
03/9/2005 Dylan Danko (5): Damn you! I expected your answer to be disingenuous.
03/9/2005 Jimson S. Sorghum: I think the author just basically copped to it. He hoped the reader would "see it as something gross [he'd] maybe not do [himself]." He's hoping that you'll be grossed out by it a little bit, because that just points to what a good boyfriend the hero is (not the narrator, incidentally). In other words, all you guys are bad, but Douglass is good.
03/9/2005 Jimson S. Sorghum: oops. Are you sure, author?
03/9/2005 Phony Millions: If this is 'gross', that's fair enough, but this is 'gross' on a high level - it's not slapstick or stupid; it becomes gross in our minds' eye because the descriptions are so good.
03/9/2005 Jon Matza: Hey, I liked the short too. But if't'd ended after graf 4 I'd'v'e three'd it. I just dislike shorts where I sense the author's wish to arouse disgust/shock is the primary purpose of the short, even if done well--by precisely articulated, explicit description, say. Which I would've thought about this puppy had it ended after graf 4. But it turns out there's a payoff...all the blood and pus gulping stuff throws the protag's deranged pride in his tender ministrations & self-effacement into relief, i.e. makes it more umorous.
03/9/2005 Ewan Snow: Hold the phone. This needs more discussion. Matza, I disagree with you. I'll explain next Tuesday at the latest!
03/10/2005 Mr. Pony: Madtha, Madtha, MADTHA! I think sometimes when you're grossed out by something, it's because of you, and not the thing that you were grossed out by. Think of mayonnaise, brother. In the stores, they sell that as food. The product doesn't exist as a joke for your benefit.
03/10/2005 John Slocum: Oh no you didn't!
03/10/2005 Jon Matza: Cripes. Why is everyone so hell-bent on arguing with me today? Could you maybe argue with each other once in awhile? Mr. Pony, I don't think I understand what you're driving at. Seriously. You have a way of making your points through inference and metaphor that leaves me not quite knowing what they are. Can you state your position more directly? I was trying to pinpoint my reaction to the short. Are you suggesting that I'm wrong for feeling skeptical towards shorts that seem to go out of their way to be disgusting/shocking? Or that there's no such thing as disgusting/shocking? Or that in general I shouldn't assume a given author is trying to make me (or "the reader") react in a certain way, i.e., a short isn't 'a joke for my benefit'? (Isn't it, kind of, though)? Does that mean I shouldn't comment on it in the comments section? In short, what kind of rarified/nebulous hocus pocus are you attempting to subject me to now? Or are you just poking at me with two sticks (you drunkard)?
03/10/2005 The Rid: I might be sick now.
03/10/2005 Mr. Pony: Okay. I guess what I'm saying is this: It looks to me that because you find the content of this short disgusting, you are assuming that the author's intention was to gross you out. That's about as simple as I can put it. It will get more complicated now. I don't think the author's intention was to shock, and I held this belief strongly long before I confirmed it with the author last night over about fifty drinks. (I apologize for seeming to lash out at you.) Rather, I think the Author was going for a sharp-focus realism and accuracy. This was what I liked about the short.
The reason I brought mayonnaise into it was because it felt like a familiar and similar set of emotions and responses--I'll explain that. I know at least three people who don't like mayonnaise, and they don't just not like it--they loathe it, they think it was created for the sole purpose of making them want to vomit. It's as if mayonnaise is a living entity that exists only to destroy them. It's weird. I mean, some people don't like cherries, but you never see that kind of emotional response, that primal disgust. Not with food, anyway--you do see it with some dudes and their response to the menstruation of the ladies.
I am reminded by the simularity of the two, and metaphorize accordingly. I make this connection due to Slocum's suggestion that you, Matza, also dislike mayo on your hamburg. Also, the connection happened because of my aforementioned impairment last night (again, apologies). I realize that it seems that I am analyzing and generalizing you and your statements far more than is considered polite, and far less than would be considered accurate; and while I do not necessarily agree with myself, I thought it fair to walk you through, as best I can. In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I am a big fan of mayonnaise.
03/10/2005 Phony Millions: Pony, God Bless You! You're so...clear!
03/10/2005 Jon Matza: Pony: your love for satanic mayonnaise may be distorting your reactions to my lucid, carefully worded postings. As I tried to "opine" in my penultimate comment (only to have Snow quickly but unspecifically disagree with me), I wound up thinking that my initial reaction (this was merely a gross-out piece) was wrong; that there were good (i.e., comic/aesthetic) reasons for the haemo-muco-fest beyond inducing nausea in the reader (and if you read through the comments you'll see I was far from the only one to react that way). Now maybe I should have used disgust instead of shock (though I still don't quite see what difference it makes) or put "shock" in quotes--after all, my objection is to feeling manipulated, not that I'm actually horrified. Moreover, as I saw it I was confessing my own personal prejudice against "mere gross-out" shorts, not telling anyone else what to think. What you should take away from this is that I have more honor than Joan of Arc, Ponch and Schindler put together.
03/10/2005 qualcomm: Okay, let's get this over with: who chows rare rug and who doesn't?
03/10/2005 TheBuyer: The Hell's Angels actually have a patch for it, it's a sign of...I dunno, some biker thing that likely ends in shotgunning tallboys.
03/10/2005 Mr. Pony: Have I mentioned that I actually prefer mayonnaise over melted butter when eating steamed artichokes?
03/10/2005 Dylan Danko: Oh come on, Matza, the only person with more honor than Ponch is Sergent Getraer.
03/10/2005 John Slocum: I chow rare rug. Happy to share this with everyone.
03/10/2005 Jon Matza: Me, I prefer fresh pockets of runny yeast over sleep thickened mucus-mayo discharge when shotgunning rare rug.
03/10/2005 Mr. Pony: Astute readers will no doubt observe several fine examples of that weird mayonnaise/menstruation thing I discussed earlier peppering this entire thread.
03/3/2008 qualcomm: i think it was great when i used the word "trebucheted"
01/18/2012 scoop (4.5): I feel Brother Za was unfairly maligned and unnecessarily reprimanded here.
01/19/2012 qualcomm: Yeah, what the hell, this short is gross.
03/5/2012 Mr. Pony: Shut up, scoop, unless you want some too
03/29/2012 Marvin_Bernstein (2.5): I like the title but not the ending. I liked trebuche in a badly placed context. This guy is a pussy