sperm in the uterus?

Why are you so aggressive?
Gotta love the liberals screeching "You're so aggressive" in response to "I don't buy your BS" type posts. Gets me to turn them off IMMEDIATELY as anything resembling a useful input. (Hint: Everything after what I quoted got ignored as the typical whining of dipsticks with no grasp on reality - We've heard it all before - your latest variation isn't worth even hearing, let along listening to)
 
Gotta love the liberals screeching "You're so aggressive" in response to "I don't buy your BS" type posts. Gets me to turn them off IMMEDIATELY as anything resembling a useful input. (Hint: Everything after what I quoted got ignored as the typical whining of dipsticks with no grasp on reality - We've heard it all before - your latest variation isn't worth even hearing, let along listening to)
Wow, just because I don't want to have a discussion with name-calling and made up numbers I'm liberal? :D Actually what?
If you absolutely wish to know then I lean towards the right, but I don't get where or why politics fit into this discussion of anatomic possibilities.
I think your answer says more about you than it does about me.

Edit: I realise that you're probably (hopefully) just trolling and baiting people, but I respond against my better judgement.
The irony of your post still gets to me though, so thanks for making me smile.
 
Last edited:
Wow, just because I don't want to have a discussion with name-calling and made up numbers I'm liberal? :D Actually what?
If you absolutely wish to know then I lean towards the right, but I don't get where or why politics fit into this discussion of anatomic possibilities.
I think your answer says more about you than it does about me.

Edit: I realise that you're probably (hopefully) just trolling and baiting people, but I respond against my better judgement.
The irony of your post still gets to me though, so thanks for making me smile.
No, dear, I don't need to troll to get my kicks - unlike libs that love to scream about "aggressive" anytime someone refuses to swallow their crap. (And nearly as often, try to do EXACTLY what you're doing now: "Well, you won't say I'm right, so you must be a troll")

If you're going to try to argue that someone is wrong because you can find an exception, however rare, then you fit SOLIDLY in that category, and I couldn't much care how much you claim to "lean right". Your actions speak louder than your words, and what those actions are saying is that you're one of the libtards that will do whatever it takes to avoid anything like facing reality.

So you can find some idiot too stupid to care about how miserable their "LOOK HOW EXTREME I AM!" behavior is going to make the rest of their life. So what? For actual sentient, normal, realistic people, (as opposed to delusional idiots) the idea of cramming something through the cervix is about as appealing as shaving their legs with a rusty cheese grater in a shower spraying rubbing alcohol. Enough so that saying it isn't done as a generality is pretty darn accurate. Just because someone is stupid enough to try, and perhaps even succeed, that outlier doesn't mean anything when stacked up against the norm.

Fact is, I don't much care WHAT you say as a generality, the cold hard reality is that somebody - maybe even me - can find an exception to it. Does that mean what you said is wrong? Nope. Just means that arguing that you're wrong because an outlier was dug up is stupid.

Which is EXACTLY what you're trying to do: Argue that someone is wrong because you found an outlier.
 
Gotta love the liberals screeching "You're so aggressive" in response to "I don't buy your BS" type posts. Gets me to turn them off IMMEDIATELY as anything resembling a useful input. (Hint: Everything after what I quoted got ignored as the typical whining of dipsticks with no grasp on reality - We've heard it all before - your latest variation isn't worth even hearing, let along listening to)

I don't know if they're a liberal, but they're definitely a new user here so they have on clue just how many times this idiotic claim keeps being made.
I just love being lectured to by people that have been around here for less than a week and instantly jump into a long contentious issue that has probably hundreds of people claiming total BS.

Why are you so aggressive?

It's not aggression, its being fed up with new users coming in and making the same BS claims over and over and insisting that --THEY-- know better than anyone else.

Many people have had kids, which could make the cervix more susceptible to very small things, like the tippy top of the pointed k9 penis which would in turn make cumming directly into the womb a possibility (even without a complete penetration because the urethra is located there): https://www.aboutkidshealth.ca/Article?contentid=415&language=English

"Your cervix measures about the width of two fingers for a few days after childbirth. Within the next few weeks, the cervix gradually narrows and thickens. Your cervix might not become as narrow as it was before you gave birth."
Beyond that, a woman with a natural positioned uterus, an anteverted uterus like mine or a retroflexed uterus wouldn't even line up right with a canine cock for it the 'tip' to land directly in the center of her cervix. A woman with a retroverted might, but due to the force of penetration by a canine, its highly unlikely even in that case that it'd line up. However even if it could...
Have you ever touched a canine dick before? That 'tip' that you speak of us super rubbery and not at going to stay stiff enough to penetrate anything. If it comes in contact with the cervix, its just going to get bent away... it's not stiff like what people expect from a cock. It doesn't have the rigidity to penetrate anything... let alone a 99.9999999% of cervixes.

And I'd put money on the reality that any woman with a prolapsed Uterus to the degree at which you describe, wouldn't be able to tolerate the violence of a dog fucking them. They'd likely end up in the hospital if they even tried.

Now maybe you're one of the people that would get that 100% recovery after all of your pregnancies, and maybe you're not.
But with most people that undergo a radical bodily alteration (EG: a pregnancy) they will experience things changing, and some things can be permanent. Might be droopier breasts, less sensitive and/or stretched out cervixes, darker skin certain places, might not happen after first birth, or second, or third, or it could happen at any of those or they could compound.. and I don't know why I need to explain this to you.
You don't need to explain any of this too me, I'm very well experienced in female anatomy... seeing as how I have my own to look at and I've literally been fist deep inside women after both before and pregnancy. I'm aware changes can occur in the reproductive tract after a pregnancy. But you're not going to see extremes like this outside of a severe medical issue.

If we have to paint with broad strokes and generalise all people with either a exclusive yes or no answer, then as I stated in my original post on this matter "no" they will not be able to have the canine cock inside the os. Hopefully this makes you happy.
Um..... I hate to be the one to break this to you... but since you haven't figured this out yet... almost all conversation is in broad strokes and generalizations. People don't usually discuss extremely rare occurrences when they're having regular conversations. And they certainly don't discuss those things in extreme detail in general conversation. As I mentioned before... this is not a scientific research forum. It's a general conversation forum.
So yea... OBVIOUSLY we're talking in generalizations. That's what general conversation is. If you want to have a discussion about statistical outliers, that's fine... but don't come crashing into a general thread with them as you try to prove everyone wrong. This conversation... and debate as it turns into all the time... has been going on long before you arrived in it.
Hence you being the "Ackchyually..." meme.

If we're going to be literal about things then your statement about autism is incorrect. "Anyone with a basic understanding of human conversational behavior would have realised" that calling someone's ass X, Y or Z implies that it's the person as a whole they're talking about.
But I'm not here to discuss semantics.
Ah yes... the old... "I'm not here to discuss semantics..." right after you want to get into discussing semantics about something that was said.
If you're not here to discuss semantics... then don't. Otherwise you're playing the "I'm going to do this but I don't want you doing it back to me" game.

How is this the exact same reason why people say humans can interbreed with dogs?
You haven't been here long so I'll be gracious and explain even though I brushed over it before. If you read through any of the dozen threads on here about that. What you will see is the same exact argument logic that you used, they will fine some outlier and make a claim about it. Then the next person takes that and takes it one step further with another outlier. Before long you're several deviations out and all the while people have been getting the details wrong.
Examples...
People will argue that since animals of the same genus can breed (horses and mules), and before long that's been twisted into "humans and animals can breed."
People will bring up chimerism... and before long people are arguing that humans can inherit/absorb canine dna ~somehow~ which will allow them to breed with a dog.
People will bring up about some random story they found somewhere about a woman carrying a canine fetus to term and that proves we're compatible (they provide no sources).
People will bring up "well in a medical situation you can insert something into the cervix..." See: https://www.zoovilleforum.net/threa...etween-women-and-boar-pig.48355/#post-1059841

Every time it starts by someone bringing up an edge case and then people who don't understand the reality of that edge case... take that and bend that fact or twist that fact into meaning "its possible".

People here want to jerk off or rub one out to fantasy... and they're more than happy to lie about it because the idea gets them horny.


It doesn't work like that because of the different morphology in cell interfaces. There's insanely tight tolerances that has to be met at that scale, I even made a statement about that in another thread. We're now on the other hand talking about much larger mechanically mating surfaces with much more give. It's like comparing a fine jigsaw puzzle to planting a tree in the ground. Your comparisson doesn't work unless you're talking about complete fiction, and if someone believes fiction without looking into it critically, they're fooling themselves. You can only do so much for these people.
"Tolerances" have nothing to do with it, its a biochemical impossibility due to micro-cellular differences and the obvious fact that out genetic codes are not in anyway compatible and will never be able to bond together.
It's not about comparing a jigsaw puzzle to planting a tree in the ground. It's not a mechanical issue at all, why would you even bring that up?
Even if acrosome reaction would take place between a human oocyte and a canine spermatozoa... and I don't believe that it would... chromosomal mismatch will not render a single viable DNA strand capable of being replicated.
I did research into the interactions of canine male and human female gametes in another thread.


And if a new woman here is so insecure about herself that it is a real problem in her mind not being able to have the urethra of the dog's dick meet the cervical opening when having sex with him for that direct cum filling then she has other issues she need to work on.

ted-wow.gif
I cant believe you actually thought it was totally fine to say something like that... and then decided you were going to type that out... and then post it publicly.

But to try to take what you said in the most charitable light I can muster... perhaps you need to go back and re-read what I said. I was making a comment regarding women not having their personal experiences match up with the BS claim on this forum all the time. This was not a explicit claim about cervical penetration... even though that comes up all the time by people claiming its true and women then commenting that they never experienced it in response to those claims.
But I wouldn't expect a member here less than a week to have any idea the kinds of discussions that happen here and what gets said.


But then again, the possibility is there, and possible does not equal impossible.
To repeat myself... Anyone with a basic understanding of human conversational behavior would have realized no one was asking if the chances were 0.000000001% of this happening.


How come you're not claiming those girls are fake still btw? Did you actually look into them? :) Not that I want you to answer it here.
I am not going to get baited into a debate over using medical injuries/oddities/deformities as the basis of an argument about this happening to women, because I'm not the "Ackchyually..." meme.


If you still wish to continue this discussion and actually talk about it I think it would be time we took it into private messaging, but I'm kind of done though as it seems you don't want to hear something that contradicts your current understanding.
I see no reason to make this a private conversation. You put this out here in the open. In the open it can stay.


...where we bring facts and not just make up things as we go.
... irony defined.

Which is EXACTLY what you're trying to do: Argue that someone is wrong because you found an outlier.

Bingo! Exceptio probat regulam.
Needing and arguing that an outlier proves the "claim" wrong... proves that in every realistic case the "claim" is true.
 
Last edited:
um... I'm going to have to call BS. Here's Alisson_Punk...
View attachment 285616
Please tell me you are not stupid enough to believe that's her actual cervix? That's just something she inserted into her vagina that looks vaguely like a cervix. There is no way that's her actual cervix unless this woman is severely deformed. And I'm pretty sure that's not the case. First off the cervix does not have length or girth like that... it's not the length of the entire vaginal tract. Second, it's not that enormous. Thirdly... in order to get the cervix at the opening of the vagina she'd basically have to prolapse her entire vagina... which obviously isn't the case there since she's got that sleeve or whatever inside her vagina. Fourth... even if she was prolapsed... her uterus would have to descend into the inverted vaginal area, which wouldn't be possible because the uterus is held in place by other tissues and blood vessels and veins in the body. A simple understand of A&P would make any reasonable person realize what you're seeing there is either bogus or a severe medical abnormality.

All that being said, I'm sure there are women who have medical issues and have an easier time penetrating their cervix. But people seriously need to pull their head out of their own autistic asses and stop trying to argue that because a few women have a medical issue that make something possible then imply that it's possible for every woman or even all women. Outliers are just that... outliers. Take your, "I'm here to tell you that they're wrong" and stop trying to "educate" everyone as to what women can do by using extreme medical oddities as your examples.
See k9 cookies and red rockets turn me on human pussies do not or dicks.
 
A female poster here has told me in private conversation that her dog's cock completely penetrates and enters her cervix every time she is mounted.
And it's a big dog (although that's probably superfluous information).

I've scoured the internet for examples of cervical penetration, and the nearest thing I've ever come up with was a girl with the tip of her finger just inside the orifice. Do I want to be told fairy stories? No thanks!
 
unfortunately tests like this cannot legally take place... buuuuuuut...im work in CETAS (Centros de Triagem de Animais Silvestres or Wild Animal Screening Centers),sector of IBAMA. this sector subsidizes and carries out scientific research and tests involving the human/animal relationship, despite not being frowned upon by everyone, zoophilia is something addressed.
however due to approval of animal sex to receive data for study
It would be something fantastic, magical, magnificent and beautiful if we could see the mating between a dog and a woman.
 
A female poster here has told me in private conversation that her dog's cock completely penetrates and enters her cervix every time she is mounted.
And it's a big dog (although that's probably superfluous information).

I've scoured the internet for examples of cervical penetration, and the nearest thing I've ever come up with was a girl with the tip of her finger just inside the orifice. Do I want to be told fairy stories? No thanks!
What is this female poster's name?
 
أستطيع أن أشعر بوجود كلب في داخلي ، لكنني لا أتذكر أنني شعرت بالانتفاخ. الكثير من السائل المنوي يتسرب. لقد عرفت أنني قد تجمعت نائب الرئيس فوق رحمتي لأنني رأيت صوراً. ربما القليل من التسرب في.
قرأت أيضًا أنه من الممكن للحيوانات المنوية للكلب أن تخصب بويضة بشرية لأقل من ثانية قبل أن تموت. لا أعرف ما إذا كان هذا صحيحًا.
أنا رجل يبحث عن فتاة للزواج بشرط أن تكون من محبي ممارسة الجنس مع الكلاب
نحن السيدات مختلفون ، لذا فإن بعض النساء لا يدخلن الرحم والبعض قد يحصل على الكثير
نحن بحاجة إلى دراسة علمية جادة أتطوع بها
I am a man looking for a girl for marriage, provided that she is a fan of sex with dogs
 
the last time I took a knot in a missionary position.
I felt pressure on the cervix, which didn't hurt much, but I felt a slight bloating in my stomach.
and for several hours despite showering my cum leaked out of my pussy.
is it possible that my sperm is in the uterus.have had a similar experience.
the boy is a 4 year old German Shepherd.
PS sorry, English is not my mother language.
Sounds like a dream
 
I know a female who is a member here and who is active. I chat to her regularly on wickr, and about a year ago she told me that her dog's cock penetrates her cervix. It a large breed of dog.

Because of what I've read here on this subject in the past I told her she was FOS and that it was impossible. Then I stopped chatting to her.

Subsequently I saw an image on the Internet that I believe to be genuine of a woman with a large butt plug buried up to the hilt in her cervix.

I then apologised to this female and she accepted my apology. She has got nothing to gain from lying to me so, unlikely as it may seem, I do believe her.
 
Last edited:
I know a female who is a member here and who is active. I chat to her regularly on wickr, and about a year ago she told me that her dog's cock penetrates her cervix. It a large breed of dog.

Because of what I've read here on this subject in the past I told her she was FOS and that it was impossible. Then I stopped chatting to her.

Subsequently I saw an image on ther Internet that I believe to be genuine of a woman with a large butt plug buried up to the hilt in her cervix.

I then apologised to this female and she accepted my apology. She has got nothing to gain from lying to me so, unlikely as it may seem, I do believe her.
Cervix penetration << Nope that's pure bullcrap
 
So I was have having a lively pm discussion with allyfitz about the effects of dog sperm on the vagina and I was wondering if any women would be willing to test their vagina with at home women's health vagina pH test strips to test if the dog cum in the vagina affects the vaginal pH. Ideally it would be women who are getting a lot of dog cum in the vagina daily or several times a week. allyfitz was adamant dog cum wouldn't affect the vaginal pH. A human vagina has a PH of 3.5-4. Human semen is 7.2-8.0. Canine being 6.4-6.8. Given this since human semen is more basic anyway then canine semen might be ok. One problem point I see though is that human semen stays in the vagina once depositied whereas dog cum spills out, so if the delicate acid-base composition of the vagina is getting mixed with the dog cum and then spilling out each day when the dog cum spills out then it's hard to know how pH will be affected without testing it. For instance if the vagina has chemicals that buffer the vagina to be acidic and these chemicals are washed out then the vagina would be less able to maintain an acidic pH.
 
Here's a video edit I made showing what happens to the cervix during orgasm. Then imagine having a large K9 cock inside your vagina kissing your cervix. I'd be surprised if there isn't a certain quantity of cum that gets sucked in...especially considering dog cum is quite watery.
Nice video - but - I don’t see any different from start to end except a slight chance in angle, so the light reflection diminish. What could be mistaken for a pool of semen is one part of the speculum used, so there is no pool of semen on / below her cervix.
So to me this video proof nothing.
A woman gets pregnant when the mans sperm cells swim from the vagina and through her cervix inside her uterus and further on into her Fallopian tube, where the fertilisation happens.
When she is ovulating I have no doubt that the dogs sperm in the same way enters her uterus and Fallopian tubes, so with both a human and animal partner she will for several days carry’s his little swimmers inside.
 
A dog would ejaculate on average about 50ml and that would be a very large dog.
I do not think you would feel this amount of liquid as bloating at all.
Keep in mind that a significant portion of the ejaculate would have been ejaculated before complete erection.

Normal dogs produce semen that ranges from 1 to 30ml per ejaculate.
Dog semen is usually produced in three fractions. The first fraction is normally small in volume at about 5 ml and it helps to eliminate any contaminants from the urethra before the actual ejaculation. The second fraction is mainly rich in sperm and has a volume of 0.5 to 4ml. The third fraction consists of a few sperm cells and prostatic fluid and has more volume of between 3 and 80ml.

2. So is cervix penetration possible?
Nope, not at all. Your cervix can’t actually be penetrated. That’s because the opening of the cervix, known as the external os, is too narrow for a penis or dildo to enter. It’s usually no bigger than your thumb.

Plus, the os is filled with cervical mucus — playing around with that stuff is definitely not our idea of a good time.

The only time the cervical opening expands wide enough for anything to pass through is on the delivery table. In other words, if you’re not prepping for impending childbirth, nothing should be passing through your cervix.

I've heard cervix penetration is possible with a boar/pig, but i don't know if that's true or not 🤷‍♀️
 
I've heard cervix penetration is possible with a boar/pig, but i don't know if that's true or not 🤷‍♀️
That is discussed at length here and does nor appear to be possible without enduring a huge amount of pain.
 
That is discussed at length here and does nor appear to be possible without enduring a huge amount of pain.
Oh that's make sense. Thanks for the link!
 
Back
Top