Rants and WTF are you talking about and Coronavirus!

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2476242]Yes, I agree that most men would not be as affectionate towards someone else's children as they would be towards their own. However, Mursenary originally used the world "survival", so I took that literally and formulated my response accordingly. Provided she is fed and clothed, the red-headed stepdaughter will probably survive into adulthood, (she just might grow up to become a WG). I was told once that in ancient times, in Polynesia, LBGT stayed behind to care for the tribe's children. Essentially caring for the "next generation" while warriors were away fighting became their "patriotic" duty.

My original point to Mursenary, is that even if the birth father and birth mother were monogamous, what would be the chances that both parents would be alive to see the child's tenth birthday? What are the chances that the mother would survive childbirth or be able to give birth to a second baby? What would be the chances that the child would make it to their tenth birthday? So if I were a tribal chief, I might tell my strongest warrior to drop seed in ten different women, and hope that one of those ten sperm deposits will yield a healthy warrior in 16 years time. Because for all I know, my strongest warrior could be killed in his very next battle. If a child becomes an orphan at age two, the tribe might abandon the orphan regardless of how committed the birth father or birth mother were. If a child were orphaned at age 6-7, then that child only needs to be the tribe's burden for 1-2 years before they are able to contribute back to the tribe. So in that sense, it makes sense for the tribe to pitch in and raise him / her together..[/QUOTE]In evolutionary terms, survival of progeny extends beyond one generation (F1). Second (F2) and third (F3) generation of progeny not raised in a stable environment may see less and less probability of extending that genetic passage. If the 2nd generation survives but is a broken human, the chance of passing on their genes is greatly diminished compared to one raised in a stable family unit.

EL: I think that you are wrong, of course alcohol and nicotine are just a legal drug with a lot of people addict to it and killing millions of people every year. Easy to know if you are addict to FKK or prostitutes just don't go for at least 1 year. If you can t you are addict.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2476279]Turgid, it seems like you are focusing on the physical act of sex and numeric quantities. Pessimist posted an article, the very first sentence which states that sexual addiction is "not even all about sex". As Pessimist summarized, sexual addiction is about "risky behaviors". The article seems to suggest that spending half your income on prostitutes is a risky behavior. I suppose the implication is that one would risk their financial well being spending at those levels. The article characterizes watching porn at the office a risky behavior. That is, the sexual addict knows realizes that they would be fired on the spot if caught, but continues to engage in this behavior anyway. You did mention that you continue to monger amid the pandemic. If mongering is illegal in your country or you are 60+ and living in an CV-19 epicenter, those might be considered risky behaviors.

You do mention being married. If your net worth is considerably higher than your wife's and you have no prenuptial than perhaps continued mongering might be considered a risky behavior. That said, whether it is evading law enforcement or mongering behind your wife's back, there are ways to mitigate the risks down to almost zero.

"Feminist" would be the worst insult by a significant margin. A distant second on that list might be "sheep" or "brainwashed by society" or some variation thereof. Slight tangent, but I did not realize how rampant conspiracy theorists are in France, only 18 percent of French dismiss conspiracy theorists as "crackpots". USA is at 32 percent. Germany at 53 percent. [URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2020/06/29/how-many-americans-believe-in-conspiracy-theories/[/URL]#5 e95 e1 c45 e94.[/QUOTE]There are a lot of judgements in that WebMD article, which I assumed would be disputed by members on this board. I think WebMD is a reputable source on health matters. But as the article says, they are not even sure if they would classify sex addiction as an addiction and they admit it will not be included in DSM-5. They also say it is not about sex, as they say food addiction is not about food etc. So, what is it? Is it an excessive consumption of it? Is it multiple partners? I mean, if a young fella is married and fucks his wife 2 or 3 times a day and another person abstains for 9 months a year and has sex with FKK girls which he visits for say, 90 days a year, they might have sex approx equal number of times, but very likely that the latter is branded a sex addict by society. Likewise, if a star athlete in his 20's has a debonair life and plays the field, he would be envied and called a society playboy but a late mid aged man with 3 kids and a wife and middle class income fucking a tute once a week would be called a deviant.

In the article, they note sex addiction is characterized by other characteristics such as stress, anxiety, depression, shame. So, if I am a frequent monger but do not have any of those attendant feelings, I am not an addict, but if a guy with some underlying issues suddenly discovers mongering, starts seeing WGs a few times a month, and his feelings of anxiety and depression / shame get worse over time, would he be branded / diagnosed as a sex addict?

It seems to me that they don't yet have any formal way to define sex addiction and have to point to behaviors that they think are the result of underlying addiction issue. Such as porn watching, mongering, etc.

I suspect the reason they claim mongering is an addicted behavior not necessarily because it drains half your networth. I mean, if Robert Kraft hired 10 prostitutes a day, 24/7/365, even at Evita rates, he would not dent his networth by 1%. Someone with smaller balance sheet would be bankrupt if he hired even one tute at such rates. Is the diagnosis of sexual addiction dependent on one's balance sheet?

So, I feel this is still one of those emerging fields. I kinda converge on the opening paragraphs. My view is that people with underlying psychological disorders, be it anxiety / depression / something else, may have those manifest in the form of "sex addiction", or the behaviors enunciated in the article. However, the true disorder already exists and perhaps the risky behaviors become more extreme over time due to the progression of underlying psychological disorders.

Not to disclose too much about myself, but my wife makes almost as much as I do. In my case, the risk is not just to the balance sheet, but to the shame / embarrassment / family break-up / leaking of this news to extended family beyond just wife / kids, potential divorce being emotionally and otherwise painful, and impact on work life. I think the reason the Webmd authors categorize the "risky behaviors" as addiction is because the damage is manifold and not just limited to a financial amount.

[QUOTE=ExpatLover;2476446]EL: I think that you are wrong, of course alcohol and nicotine are just a legal drug with a lot of people addict to it and killing millions of people every year. Easy to know if you are addict to FKK or prostitutes just don't go for at least 1 year. If you can t you are addict.[/QUOTE]Well I easily pass this test. I'm not an addict! Yay! LOLOLOL!

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2476290]It's like I have to constantly correct every one of this guy's false scientific claims, which seem to be copious.[/QUOTE]So I see you've been around long enough then LOL! After a while, maybe you will learn to just ignore.

[QUOTE=Turgid;2476407] What is the percentage of income one must spend on prostitutes before one is considered an addict? 25%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%? What if one is a billionaire? It is obvious that there is no hard and fast rule as to what constitutes a sex addict and it is very difficult to accurately place that label on anyone.[/QUOTE]I never said that there is a hard, fast rule. The article mentioned 50 percent, but I do not believe even the author meant that to be a hard or fast rule. The author seemed to center their discussion on risky behavior. Pessimist discusses this, stating that is not just the financial risk, but also the social risks. I have expressed similar opinions in the past when stating that many local, married men prefer discrete mongering option, so not FKK clubs but private apartments.

[QUOTE=Pessimist;2476451]I think the reason the Webmd authors categorize the "risky behaviors" as addiction is because the damage is manifold and not just limited to a financial amount.[/QUOTE]Everybody's life circumstances are different. If you have been told you only have six months to live having a bareback gangbang and sharing needles with a few homeless WGs probably isn't that risky of a behavior. For most people, it would be. Visiting a FKK once a week, for most normal guys is not risky behavior. But for some men, visiting a FKK even once, would be considered risky behavior. For example, since BLM has been in the news, let's use Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton as an example. If either were caught leaving an FKK club, they would stand to lose a lot more than their wealth. Their careers and legacies would be ruined by the judgemental "feminists and impotent males". Both being religious men, they are held to a higher standard. They would lose all their followers. Family and friends would turn their back on them. For other high profile celebrities, like musician Justin Bieber, getting caught leaving a brothel was not risk to his career.

[QUOTE=TheCane;2476475]So I see you've been around long enough then LOL! After a while, maybe you will learn to just ignore.[/QUOTE]You're right. It's a personal character flaw, LOL.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2476511]I never said that there is a hard, fast rule. The article mentioned 50 percent, but I do not believe even the author meant that to be a hard or fast rule. The author seemed to center their discussion on risky behavior. Pessimist discusses this, stating that is not just the financial risk, but also the social risks. I have expressed similar opinions in the past when stating that many local, married men prefer discrete mongering option, so not FKK clubs but private apartments.

Everybody's life circumstances are different. If you have been told you only have six months to live having a bareback gangbang and sharing needles with a few homeless WGs probably isn't that risky of a behavior. For most people, it would be. Visiting a FKK once a week, for most normal guys is not risky behavior. But for some men, visiting a FKK even once, would be considered risky behavior. For example, since BLM has been in the news, let's use Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton as an example. If either were caught leaving an FKK club, they would stand to lose a lot more than their wealth. Their careers and legacies would be ruined by the judgemental "feminists and impotent males". Both being religious men, they are held to a higher standard. They would lose all their followers. Family and friends would turn their back on them. For other high profile celebrities, like musician Justin Bieber, getting caught leaving a brothel was not risk to his career.[/QUOTE]W. R. T. Your second paragraph, I thought we were discussing risky behavior as a manifestation of underlying sex addiction, in the eyes of webmd or perhaps addiction psychiatrists (if they subscribe to the views of Webmd). I am not not saying those are my views nor did I say x or why is a risky behavior. What type of risk one is willing to take is completely up to that person. Far be it from me to even characterize some other guy's actions and behavior as risky.

But yes, risk is also specific to that individual as you say. Using hookers was not a risk to Kraft in terms of financial risk but was a massive hit reputationally. For a retired male porn actor, if he is not getting any action of late in his private life and visits hookers or fkks, there is zero reputation risk to getting caught, the risk is purely financial (or health, if he is unlucky).

Gino, who is not writing here anymore for a few months, called me a hypocrite a while ago because I am married and using hookers and he claimed he has visited FKKs with his work boss and co workers and challenged me to do the same. I don't know what type of work he does. In my case, visiting any of these clubs with anyone from my work place is a total no no. This part of my life is absolutely sealed. I would have as much chance of visiting these clubs with a boss or co worker as I would have of visiting with my spouse. But then again, I do see guys visiting FKKs with their wives (I think they are wives; didn't ask them) occasionally. So, yeah, everyone is different.

BTW, you are right about married guys and privacy in your first paragraph, at least for me. I bit $ch and complain that America is a sex prison but if magically there was a big Artemis in my home city, would I visit it? Very unlikely. So yes, I can see some married guys preferring private apartments to FKKs out of necessity, even if they wished they could be inside the FKKs.

[QUOTE=McAdonis;2476511]I never said that there is a hard, fast rule. The article mentioned 50 percent, but I do not believe even the author meant that to be a hard or fast rule. The author seemed to center their discussion on risky behavior. Pessimist discusses this, stating that is not just the financial risk, but also the social risks. I have expressed similar opinions in the past when stating that many local, married men prefer discrete mongering option, so not FKK clubs but private apartments.

Everybody's life circumstances are different. If you have been told you only have six months to live having a bareback gangbang and sharing needles with a few homeless WGs probably isn't that risky of a behavior. For most people, it would be. Visiting a FKK once a week, for most normal guys is not risky behavior. But for some men, visiting a FKK even once, would be considered risky behavior. For example, since BLM has been in the news, let's use Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton as an example. If either were caught leaving an FKK club, they would stand to lose a lot more than their wealth. Their careers and legacies would be ruined by the judgemental "feminists and impotent males". Both being religious men, they are held to a higher standard. They would lose all their followers. Family and friends would turn their back on them. For other high profile celebrities, like musician Justin Bieber, getting caught leaving a brothel was not risk to his career.[/QUOTE]Justin Bieber, a musician? I didn't hear. Herbie Hancock, Stevie Wonder, Stanley Clarke, Steve Lukather, David Paich, play music. Addiction is when you can't control even when you are falling in problems, not when you can afford to get pleasure everyday, when you don't have other passions like some real sports, working to prepare your cars, to do before because more enjoyable for you, then this is only jealousy and frustration for some who can't afford, when they would like to go as often but can't. Just what I read here and some French are the worst jealous, but when they are in club, we can see girls with them. Really no need for jealousy, I don't need to be jealous for these girls.

[QUOTE=Mursenary;2473977]I never really understood why people are worried about being "tracked. " I mean, is anyone here all that important as to worry about a third party looking into your business? The way I see it, the only people needing to worry are public figures and criminals.

I'm just a normal dude and the only effect that being tracked or monitored has on me is annoying targeted advertisements on my phone. No institution cares about my mongering habits or my movements. I'm not making frequent 6 figure transactions as to be scrutinized by tax or criminal investigation authorities. Not sure why all of the average paranoid conspiracy theorist would think that their information is all that important either.[/QUOTE]I felt compelled to add my two cents here to hopefully help you understand. Pessimist has given you a valid reason, but, to many people, that is not even the main point. I think you are missing the root of the argument here. Why would you give up or give away something that is so private to you for free EVEN IF it's something benign, insignificant, unimportant, or no concern to you? Why would you want to be used? You aren't offended that people use you? Arguments like "I'm not important to be worried about being tracked", "only criminals worry about that", "it is not like I'm hiding something", or "no one cares about what I do" are NOT the point. I heard this kind of imbecile reasoning so many times. Good grief! Why would one be dumb enough, stupid enough, and idiotic enough to give away his personal bio data for nothing. Why?

That is the central point of the private data debate that so many people don't seem to understand. Keep in mind that whatever personal info you gave may not be useful now. Who is to say it may not become useful few years down the road. Who knows! This is not about worrying about being tracked. It's more about why would one be so gullible to give away his private data without being compensated for it. Privacy has a price. It's not f**king free.

To give you a relatable example, I've visited many clubs as many of you have done. If I was asked to present my passport at the front desk, my instinctive response would be "why?" even though I probably wouldn't mind if given a valid reason. After all, I was not hiding anything or committing a crime. Right? That's what you would argue. Correct? THAT IS NOT THE F**KING POINT! In my head, I probably think something like "it's none of your business". If they insist on seeing my identification without a legitimate reason, I would show my passport (without handling it over) to tell them that if there were a police raid, I would have a passport ready. That's pretty much how far I would go. Fortunately, that never happened. No club has ever asked my passport as a condition to enter the clubs. HOWEVER, HERE IS THE POINT. As many of you may know, many clubs have a policy of free entry on your birthday. Do you know that? I will hold my passport and show them my birthday so that I can get a free entry. You see where I'm going here? I gave away my private information in exchange for free entries to the clubs. That would save me 65 Euro per club or 120+ Euro for 2 clubs / day. Hell, I even took advantage of that by visiting 3 clubs on that day. You get it now? I did not give away my personal data for nothing. I use it to my own benefit.

When people go through your passport, they see where you come from. They know your ethnicity. They figure out your age. They find out where you've been. You see. They can build a profile of you. You may not care because you said you're just a normal dude and don't worry about being used for advertisement. You are missing the f**king point here. That's the kind of stupid mentality I used to have. Some people may end up using your personal profile to benefit themselves. They are making money off your private information without compensating you. Don't you get it? Why are you so stupid to let them do that? Imagine you filed a patent for an invention. Would you be happy if people use it in their products without paying you a royalty or something? I would be pissed and sue the hell out of those thieves. Think of it that way if that helps. Your personal bio data is owned exclusively by you as if you patented it. Understood now?

You may still not agree or say that it is not a big deal, but it is a big deal to someone else. We value our personal data differently. You get it? At least you can now understand this giving-away-your-personal-data discussion from a different perspective. When you engage in a such debate with your colleagues or friends as I've done occasionally, you can now understand it from a different angle. The bottom line is that there is no free lunch dude. Your personal profile information has a price. Don't give that away easily. No way!

[QUOTE=SinglePro;2476588]I felt compelled to add my two cents here to hopefully help you understand. Pessimist has given you a valid reason, but, to many people, that is not even the main point. I think you are missing the root of the argument here. Why would you give up or give away something that is so private to you for free EVEN IF it's something benign, insignificant, unimportant, or no concern to you? Why would you want to be used? You aren't offended that people use you? Arguments like "I'm not important to be worried about being tracked", "only criminals worry about that", "it is not like I'm hiding something", or "no one cares about what I do" are NOT the point. I heard this kind of imbecile reasoning so many times. Good grief! Why would one be dumb enough, stupid enough, and idiotic enough to give away his personal bio data for nothing. Why?
[/QUOTE]LOL, thanks for the kind words. Basically, I think your gripe is one of idealism with very few tangible manifestations stemming from a point of unwarranted self importance, selfish individualism even. That idealism may make some feel important but what often happens is that they sacrifice freedom of action or impose self restricting limitations for that idealistic sense of privacy.

As far as others profiting, if someone benefits from my info and I didn't lose anything of substance or endanger my sensitive identity information to criminals, why do I care? Heck, do you have a mobile phone with any apps? Example WhatsApp? Yeah, people have already been profiting off of your info for years.

Just because someone else wins does't mean you lose. Things are not always zero sum.

Basically, I'm saying "get over yourselves."

[QUOTE=Turgid;2476404]Every girlfriend I have had would have liked me to do dirty things to her. I, however, don't like doing to girlfriends what I do to hot hookers because after the act I don't see the hookers again but I spend lots of non-sex time with the girlfriend and will be somewhat spooked by the thought that she is thinking of all the nasty things that I would have done to her. Nevertheless, I demand BBBJ from all girlfriends that I've had.[/QUOTE]You don't find many girlfriends to piss in their mouth or insert toys in their ass or give you rim job whenever you want.

I have had many normal girlfriends and 90 % of them would never accept things like that.

But we have a dirty mind right? So someone has to do the job for us!

[QUOTE=Sirioja;2473965]But very high deaths rate, 540/ million in Sweden with Stockholm as one of the worst capital in the World for deaths rate. I look forward to arrive in Dolomiti on this week, no risk in Stelvio or Mortirolo or Zoncolan, virus is not able to climb.[/QUOTE]540 deaths per million? Do you have any reference? What you say is complete nonsense, as the top spot belongs to Belgium, despite (it's massive lockdown and police state mask laws! Below are statistic and Sweden (no lockdown, no masks) is placed number 6. Ironically, Sweden is actually below (= better) Italy and Spain, where they has massive lockdowns and super strict mask wearing laws.

Some hard statistics, instead of just unverifiable fantasy numbers:

[URL]https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/[/URL]

Here is a bunch of charts, comparing Sweden (no lockdown, no masks, no police state) to Belgium (heavy lockdown and strict mask protocols);.

[URL]https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/sweden?country=SWE~BEL[/URL]

[QUOTE=Alessandro527;2476610]You don't find many girlfriends to piss in their mouth or insert toys in their ass or give you rim job whenever you want.

I have had many normal girlfriends and 90 % of them would never accept things like that.

But we have a dirty mind right? So someone has to do the job for us![/QUOTE]Blatant honest answer. Do that to your girfirend and you will get slap in the face.

[QUOTE=Alessandro527;2476610]You don't find many girlfriends to piss in their mouth or insert toys in their ass or give you rim job whenever you want.

I have had many normal girlfriends and 90 % of them would never accept things like that.

But we have a dirty mind right? So someone has to do the job for us![/QUOTE]I really don t need this, this is not sex. Even paying, even I know some guys like to receive GS or have ass licked and pay for this, but I would not even dare to ask for above. I find more interesting for sex.