Quote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 11:22:58 AMBut we're not talking about your position or about whether you think it's a benefit. We're talking about me and whether I should consider these things (any more) beneficial than what I'm currently doing.
You also didn't really respond to what I asked for. Of course there's other things you can do that give similar benefits. But is there something as quick, effortless, cost-efficient and fun that does the same thing? Everything you've listed takes more money, time or effort than sex all while being much less enjoyable.
Quote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 11:47:30 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 11:06:15 AMQuote from: TBlocks on November 11, 2017, 11:01:02 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 10:27:51 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 04:33:15 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.benefits that can surely be achieved elsewhere and in higher quantitiesmasturbation = 10-30 minutes of time wasted for 3-5 seconds of pleasure; that doesn't seem very efficientand i don't need to talk about the risks associated with intercourseI know the risks about intercourse but realistically speaking relationships generally require some level of sexual activity to survive. It's pretty essential.The risks are also pretty minimal in many relationships. Don't have STDs and use some form of protection, and the risks are almost completely gone.the safest sex possible is 98.8% successful (over the course of a year of sex)if every time you had sex, there was a 1 in 100 chance for your head to explode (or something equally horrific), would you still do itThat's not how that statistic works. "For example, when used correctly the male condom is 98% effective, but that's not to say there is a 2% chance of becoming pregnant every time you use one. A 2% failure rate actually means that for every 100 woman using the contraceptive method for an entire year, two will experience an unintended pregnancy."
Quote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 11:06:15 AMQuote from: TBlocks on November 11, 2017, 11:01:02 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 10:27:51 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 04:33:15 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.benefits that can surely be achieved elsewhere and in higher quantitiesmasturbation = 10-30 minutes of time wasted for 3-5 seconds of pleasure; that doesn't seem very efficientand i don't need to talk about the risks associated with intercourseI know the risks about intercourse but realistically speaking relationships generally require some level of sexual activity to survive. It's pretty essential.The risks are also pretty minimal in many relationships. Don't have STDs and use some form of protection, and the risks are almost completely gone.the safest sex possible is 98.8% successful (over the course of a year of sex)if every time you had sex, there was a 1 in 100 chance for your head to explode (or something equally horrific), would you still do it
Quote from: TBlocks on November 11, 2017, 11:01:02 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 10:27:51 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 04:33:15 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.benefits that can surely be achieved elsewhere and in higher quantitiesmasturbation = 10-30 minutes of time wasted for 3-5 seconds of pleasure; that doesn't seem very efficientand i don't need to talk about the risks associated with intercourseI know the risks about intercourse but realistically speaking relationships generally require some level of sexual activity to survive. It's pretty essential.The risks are also pretty minimal in many relationships. Don't have STDs and use some form of protection, and the risks are almost completely gone.
Quote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 10:27:51 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 04:33:15 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.benefits that can surely be achieved elsewhere and in higher quantitiesmasturbation = 10-30 minutes of time wasted for 3-5 seconds of pleasure; that doesn't seem very efficientand i don't need to talk about the risks associated with intercourseI know the risks about intercourse but realistically speaking relationships generally require some level of sexual activity to survive. It's pretty essential.
Quote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 04:33:15 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.benefits that can surely be achieved elsewhere and in higher quantitiesmasturbation = 10-30 minutes of time wasted for 3-5 seconds of pleasure; that doesn't seem very efficientand i don't need to talk about the risks associated with intercourse
Quote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.
Quote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless things
Quote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.
Quote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.
Does that include sex or what?
Quote from: Snake on November 11, 2017, 11:57:44 AMFlee, imagine if every time you had sex there was a 1 in 100 chance the Quake would be erased from historyMore like "if a 100 people had frequent sex for a year, 1 one of them would have Quake erased for them at the end". If you'd go by people having sex twice a week, that'd be one unlucky fuck out of 10,000 - with the possibility of lowering that further by doings things like pulling out or being aware of when the woman is most fertile. I'll take those odds.
Flee, imagine if every time you had sex there was a 1 in 100 chance the Quake would be erased from history
Quote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 12:11:01 PMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 12:04:33 PMQuote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 11:47:30 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 11:06:15 AMQuote from: TBlocks on November 11, 2017, 11:01:02 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 10:27:51 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 04:33:15 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.benefits that can surely be achieved elsewhere and in higher quantitiesmasturbation = 10-30 minutes of time wasted for 3-5 seconds of pleasure; that doesn't seem very efficientand i don't need to talk about the risks associated with intercourseI know the risks about intercourse but realistically speaking relationships generally require some level of sexual activity to survive. It's pretty essential.The risks are also pretty minimal in many relationships. Don't have STDs and use some form of protection, and the risks are almost completely gone.the safest sex possible is 98.8% successful (over the course of a year of sex)if every time you had sex, there was a 1 in 100 chance for your head to explode (or something equally horrific), would you still do itThat's not how that statistic works. "For example, when used correctly the male condom is 98% effective, but that's not to say there is a 2% chance of becoming pregnant every time you use one. A 2% failure rate actually means that for every 100 woman using the contraceptive method for an entire year, two will experience an unintended pregnancy."this was specifically noted in the postnot entirely sure how you missed that when it's two lines longBecause you then went on to say "if every time you had sex, there was a 1 in 100 chance for your head to explode (or something equally horrific), would you still do it", which is a wrong interpretation of that statistic. And as I pointed out in that other comment, that'd be more like 1 in 10,000 depending on how often these people had sex.
Quote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 12:04:33 PMQuote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 11:47:30 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 11:06:15 AMQuote from: TBlocks on November 11, 2017, 11:01:02 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 10:27:51 AMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 04:33:15 AMQuote from: Verbatim on November 10, 2017, 07:09:38 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:37:25 PMQuote from: Snake on November 03, 2017, 09:22:09 PMQuote from: Flee on November 03, 2017, 09:20:43 PMDoes that include sex or what?It's up to you, but I think having sex is sort of going against the spirit of the idea.Eh, if sex is included I already failed anyways. Seems kind of pointless too.i'm sitting here cracking up at the idea that it is pointless to avoid doing pointless thingsBut there's notable health and relational benefits to it, hardly making it pointless anymore. It also seems inconsistent with your whole philosophy to be so against suffering but then reject pleasure.benefits that can surely be achieved elsewhere and in higher quantitiesmasturbation = 10-30 minutes of time wasted for 3-5 seconds of pleasure; that doesn't seem very efficientand i don't need to talk about the risks associated with intercourseI know the risks about intercourse but realistically speaking relationships generally require some level of sexual activity to survive. It's pretty essential.The risks are also pretty minimal in many relationships. Don't have STDs and use some form of protection, and the risks are almost completely gone.the safest sex possible is 98.8% successful (over the course of a year of sex)if every time you had sex, there was a 1 in 100 chance for your head to explode (or something equally horrific), would you still do itThat's not how that statistic works. "For example, when used correctly the male condom is 98% effective, but that's not to say there is a 2% chance of becoming pregnant every time you use one. A 2% failure rate actually means that for every 100 woman using the contraceptive method for an entire year, two will experience an unintended pregnancy."this was specifically noted in the postnot entirely sure how you missed that when it's two lines long
Quote from: Verbatim on November 11, 2017, 12:15:39 PMQuote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 12:14:10 PMQuote from: Snake on November 11, 2017, 11:57:44 AMFlee, imagine if every time you had sex there was a 1 in 100 chance the Quake would be erased from historyMore like "if a 100 people had frequent sex for a year, 1 one of them would have Quake erased for them at the end". If you'd go by people having sex twice a week, that'd be one unlucky fuck out of 10,000 - with the possibility of lowering that further by doings things like pulling out or being aware of when the woman is most fertile. I'll take those odds.then you're a silly personFor having a single video game erased for me? Verb, I would gladly have Quake erased with 100% certainty just to have a healthy sex life with my girlfriend.
Quote from: Flee on November 11, 2017, 12:14:10 PMQuote from: Snake on November 11, 2017, 11:57:44 AMFlee, imagine if every time you had sex there was a 1 in 100 chance the Quake would be erased from historyMore like "if a 100 people had frequent sex for a year, 1 one of them would have Quake erased for them at the end". If you'd go by people having sex twice a week, that'd be one unlucky fuck out of 10,000 - with the possibility of lowering that further by doings things like pulling out or being aware of when the woman is most fertile. I'll take those odds.then you're a silly person
Flee imagine if every time you had sex there was a 1 in 100 chance that mayonaise would cease to exist
Tfw pull out method has worked for me going on ten years.
Quote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:38:58 AMTfw pull out method has worked for me going on ten years.No one cares about your sad sexual exploits with women well beyond their expiration date.
Quote from: Snake on November 12, 2017, 01:40:08 AMQuote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:38:58 AMTfw pull out method has worked for me going on ten years.No one cares about your sad sexual exploits with women well beyond their expiration date.Confused by that second bit
Quote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:41:22 AMQuote from: Snake on November 12, 2017, 01:40:08 AMQuote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:38:58 AMTfw pull out method has worked for me going on ten years.No one cares about your sad sexual exploits with women well beyond their expiration date.Confused by that second bitOlder women who lack the youthful beauty they had before their "Best before" date, usually mid-20s.
Quote from: Snake on November 12, 2017, 01:43:47 AMQuote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:41:22 AMQuote from: Snake on November 12, 2017, 01:40:08 AMQuote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:38:58 AMTfw pull out method has worked for me going on ten years.No one cares about your sad sexual exploits with women well beyond their expiration date.Confused by that second bitOlder women who lack the youthful beauty they had before their "Best before" date, usually mid-20s.You think I was banging thirty year olds when I was 15?
Quote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:44:37 AMQuote from: Snake on November 12, 2017, 01:43:47 AMQuote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:41:22 AMQuote from: Snake on November 12, 2017, 01:40:08 AMQuote from: Poetic Carnage on November 12, 2017, 01:38:58 AMTfw pull out method has worked for me going on ten years.No one cares about your sad sexual exploits with women well beyond their expiration date.Confused by that second bitOlder women who lack the youthful beauty they had before their "Best before" date, usually mid-20s.You think I was banging thirty year olds when I was 15?No, but that's what it's amounted to in recent years. From what I can tell, anyway.
Why are you guys so fixated on what men do with their penises.
Quote from: MyNameIsCharlie on November 12, 2017, 02:03:23 AMWhy are you guys so fixated on what men do with their penises.Dick is interesting.
Who else is gunna do No Fap November with me?
