Keep in mind that by jacking off too much you [young men] lose one of the fundamental advantages in starting a company: blue balls. Blue balls brought the Age of Discovery. Empires conquer foes with armies of men with blue balls. When the balls of these young men stop being blue (because they proved themselves and got relief, or otherwise, by jerking off too much) they desist from these feats. Scientists who get married don't desist from research just as excons who get married desist from crime. Just a few tidbits to keep in mind:
Castration was once used as a form of punishment for felonies. The recidivism rate was 2.2%.
Because of population growth policies and parental preference for boys, there are substantially more boys than girls in China. Historically, when Portugal had a lot of landless young noblemen in the early 1400s...well, you know how that went. I don't want to think about what these restless Chinese dudes will do to prove themselves to the opposite sex.
You are conflating two separate things--the physical need to ejaculate, and the much more powerful and complicated need to have a woman. Masturbation satisfies the former, but it has only a very weak and brief effect on the latter.
Agreed. It's the difference between winning a video game and getting a promotion / winning the high school football game / launching that product and getting an email that somebody loves your work / etc.
I know this is tongue-in-cheek, but it's also pretty true. Sexual energy is powerful and is prime fuel for creativity. Wether that energy and creativity is used for good (art) or evil (rape) is up to the individual and subject to their self control and morality.
As I get older, I am learning this over and over again about myself. I don't understand why this topic is not discussed more. It can make a huge difference in motivation for pretty much anything, at least for me. Not masturbating also makes me more confident and gung-ho in attracting females when single, and more romantic when in a relationship... I suppose that is not unexpected. But still, it surprises me how little this is talked about compared to how huge of a difference it seems to make on my state of mind.
They should do more research on news addiction. At least, porn needs a restricted environment, so we can't do this all the time. But news sites as hacker news is really a big problem for everyone.
Good call. I've found that I'm using Hacker News a lot more since the downturn - perhaps a link between uncertainty and a desire for information. I'm wondering if this could be a factor in Hacker New's recent growth spurt (no puns intended).
Myth 3 is most interesting. The problem with the claim is that it implies that masturbation is somehow "junk food" in a way that sex isn't. Most people I know would suggest the opposite: sex is preferable to masturbation, which is a poor substitute.
Furthermore, the evidence that it is bad consists of two anecdotes, one from a true addict (which is a problem), and one from a man who stopped for less than two weeks.
As far as quitting goes, the trouble is that there is no reason aside from willpower in most cases. You save (at most) half an hour or so, during which you probably wouldn't have done anything anyway. What you get in return is orneriness and frustration.
Remember: people have sex drives. They aren't bad. Fulfilling them isn't bad either. Just keep it in moderation if it starts to interfere with life.
But that implies that it's unhealthy, which it isn't.
Hell, there's research to show that common ejaculation is helpful in preventing prostate cancer.
The only problem is when you let it affect your life. And you reach a problem with extremely high levels - I wouldn't call twice a day a problem.
Masturbation fulfills a need. It allows you to moderate your sex drive. If you're with someone who only gets off once a week, so be it. If you want more, it's an easy problem to fix.
Men, in general, aren't monogamous. We are hardwired into looking, and masturbation can help to keep it at that.
If you look at the rest of the site, they're not only against porn, but seem to be discouraging orgasm in general, based on the ideas of spiritual traditions such as Taoism.
While it's true that many traditions did advise this kind of thing, that usually would have been in the context of cultivating some kind of overall spiritual path. It's not something that would just be recommended to everyone in a blanket way. It seems to me the people in their forums who talk about struggling not to masturbate at all may be doing themselves more harm than good (at least, they could apply their energy to something other than trying to subdue a basic biological function). I think a lot of people persuaded by the message of this site are just indulging some aspect of their psychology that gives them a tendency toward self-denial, while buying into the notion that it's for some higher purpose.
It's important to distinguish between a habit and an addiction. It would be a difficult adjustment for me to live for two weeks without electricity, but I wouldn't consider myself to have an electricity "addiction". To qualify as an addiction, a habit would have to have additional characteristics: for example, escalating momentum, interfering with other life activities, being used as an escape from problems that were created by the addiction in the first place, and so on.
There's a tendency to use the most extreme examples as anecdotal evidence. Some people can have a glass of wine with dinner and it's not an issue, and some people (alcoholics) may ruin their lives in a matter of days after the first drink. But that's not a particularly strong argument for saying that no one should ever drink, just because some people may become alcoholics. You just have to carefully observe your own life and figure out how to make use of your energy in an appropriate way. Anyone who has a blanket prescription for everyone is peddling dogma.
Taoist sexual tradition is fragmented and diverse. This particular site's bias/philosophy/view is one of many.
For a more moderate and well-written exploration/manual on Taoist sexual practices, I suggest Mantak Chia's "The Multi-Orgasmic Man", which teaches the practitioner to separate ejaculation from orgasm (among other things.) It also affirms that regular ejaculation is necessary and beneficial to men.
Notably, there are a variety of things that associate themselves with the label "Taoism", and it is important to understand that there is not a single authoritative canon or lineage that represents "real" Taoism. Rather, there is a complex history of various cross-pollinating traditions throughout chinese history, some of which are closely associated with people who associated themselves with the idea of the Tao.
"Not unlike" as in, it has similarities, but not exactly the same thing as.
Obviously, death from porn addiction would be a very extreme outcome, though possible, and would take a lot longer to achieve than death by jumping in a car without breaks.
Nevertheless, they are similar- if you jump in a car without breaks, you will find it difficult to stop (though not impossible). If you look at porn, you have done something that can be difficult to stop.
In conclusion, this comparison is not at all ridiculous.
Hmm. I'd say the serious injury or fatality rate from jumping in a car without brakes is probably 90%+, and the serious injury or fatality rate from looking at porn is probably around 0%.
I also don't think that looking at porn means you've done something that's difficult to stop. While I'm not discounting the existence of porn addiction, I think you'd find that rate of addiction (i.e. the number of people who have seen porn compared to the number of porn addicts) is very very very low. Overall I think most of the article is based on bad assumptions but I still don't have the time to write a thorough refutation of the article.
Given the difference in actual risk of death, and the arguable risk of addiction, I'd say the comparison is more like "drinking a bottle of Drain-O is not unlike drinking a bottle of soda". Yes, you could drown from a bottle of soda, yes people will argue that you get addicted to sugary drinks, but realistically, other than both being liquid, there's not much similar. It's rampant hyperbole at the very best.
>While I'm not discounting the existence of porn addiction, I think you'd find that rate of addiction (i.e. the number of people who have seen porn compared to the number of porn addicts) is very very very low.
But what is porn addiction, even? Is it the same thing as alcoholism, in the hard-line Alcoholics Anonymous definition of "if you think you have a problem, then you have a problem"? If you spend an hour viewing porn instead of watching a sitcom, are you an addict? If you spend an hour viewing porn instead of dealing with a family emergency, are you an addict, or just very irresponsible?
I mean, to make porn an addiction seems like an effort to reframe the debate. It takes what seems to be strictly a moral problem, and reframes it in the light of psychology. I really don't think this is a correct line of argument, for the same reasons modoc presents.
I actually lost my breaks one time while driving to work. Like, I totally lost all braking ability. I ran into the privacy fens on the other side of the parking lot, but no one was injured. I actually drove my truck home, and then to the mechanic the next day- without any breaks. The stickiest part was making a left turn going downhill with a dump truck approaching in the other lane! Crazy, yes, but I didn't die. I think 90% chance of dying too high.
Of course, you are correct- your chances of dying from getting in a care without breaks is higher than your chances of dying from looking at porn. But, your chances of being addicted to porn are about perhaps (who really knows?) similar to your chances of dying?
Also, keep in mind that there are things much worse than death.
You knowingly drove around for two days without brakes? The level of risk you put everyone else on the road and children crossing the street/etc... is amazing. You should be in jail.
Okay, to further explain, I have a standard transmission, I drove very slow, I took back roads, only a couple of miles, and I was following a coworker, who had a very large truck that I could run into without causing harm harm. (I never hit him).
And yes, it was in my younger, and probably stupider years. Though I am stupid enough I would likely do the same thing again.
Or maybe you're just so addicted to it that it feels like you wouldn't be able to function without it. Kind of like a drug addict feels like they wouldn't be able to function with out getting high regularly.
The idea of super stimuli was the most valuable, but I can't find much on it.
It's also called, "supernormal stimuli", "supernormal releaser" or just "super releaser". It's defining quality is that it invokes a "fixed action pattern", or hard-wired response. But as you increase the stimulant the response goes into overdrive, or becomes maladapative.
Not everything can be considered super stimulus. But certainly a lot can be.
Be wary of the bias for large, obvious events. If porn helps lots of people small amounts at the margin, but hurts a few in obvious ways, it may still be a good thing.
You all keep saying that. Do I really keep coding, trying to do successful things to impress women? If that was the case, wouldn't I be more into bodybuilding or something? I started getting into programming when I was like 8 years old, and I really doubt it was to impress women.
I don't know about you, but i code(and generally exist) for the purpose of improving my self as a human being. Now you could argue that the only reason i want to be BETTER is the subconscious need to procreate. I believe(oh, how i hate this word, but cant think of a better one, maybe suspect, but thats not much better) that curiosity, obsessiveness and general interest in technology are all tools in my arsenal of self improvement. It is my desire as a human and as a male to realize my self. That means to procreate in some way, be it through children, or through something that i invent or anything else that is going to stay after my death.
ps, i actually tried to impress a girl with my |\/|4D SK1llZzZ, don't do that, even if the girl knows how to program(especially if she knows, it will be easier to see that you are an asshole).
I don't think all pornography is harmful. Most people have used it, and relatively few people have long-standing problems with it. Then again, I don't fully get the appeal of it, being one who has viewed but never used it. I get more (sexually, not just aesthetically) from a painting of a beautiful woman than from a video of some man fucking her, often in some degrading way.
I have a beauty addiction. I'm addicted to beautiful imagery and experiences. Sexually, this means that I need emotions and context, and only have serious interest in sex with a romantic partner. Porn does nothing for me. But then again, my mind is very female for a man's, possibly due to a case of high-IQ androgyny (smart men tend to be effeminate; smart women, tomboyish).
The real problem is not limited to pornography but to cultural garbage-- disrespect for sexuality and humanity-- in a broader sense. Excessive and extreme pornography certainly can damage mens' ability to have fulfilling relationships, as does casual sex (porn acted out). On the other hand, Sex and the City has the same ruinous effect on women.
Castration was once used as a form of punishment for felonies. The recidivism rate was 2.2%.
Because of population growth policies and parental preference for boys, there are substantially more boys than girls in China. Historically, when Portugal had a lot of landless young noblemen in the early 1400s...well, you know how that went. I don't want to think about what these restless Chinese dudes will do to prove themselves to the opposite sex.