Printable View
[QUOTE=PahllusMaximus;2167178]...
Many of you may not realise this, but the girls use lidocaine / xylocaine / lignocaine to numb their pussies and some use cervical pads as well. They are very much thrashed mattresses and have had hundreds or thousands of cocks in their mouths, pussies or ass. They are in the acting business.
...
[/QUOTE]Wow, I did not knowing this. How you can tell the girl used lidocaine for numb pussy? Or you cannot tell? Can you feeling the cervical pad?
[QUOTE=Takedown;2170350]Indoctrination? It's biology and social evolution. Single people die earlier and acquire more disease. That's a statistical fact.
[URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566023/[/URL][/QUOTE]The above report is about longevity in the United States specifically. First of all, we need to separate men from the pool of the subjects of this research. Second, we need to remember that most US male population with average or below average income doesn't have much choice in sex life or social life after 60. The lifestyle in monger-friendly societies is different. If a retired man could walk out of his house or apartment and take public transportation to FKK or other P4P establishments the stats of this report might collapse.
[QUOTE=Takedown;2170350]Indoctrination? It's biology and social evolution. Single people die earlier and acquire more disease. That's a statistical fact.
[URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566023/[/URL][/QUOTE]Single people who never married are much better off. Here is the quote from the report "High risk behaviors" section.
"The never married group exercise slightly more than those that were married and were less likely to be overweight. Overall, those who have never married have slightly better health habits and risk factors than married peers and never married adults have notably better health habits than those who are divorced or separated."
[QUOTE=TheCane;2170172]A lot of younger guys think like this. It's understandable, especially given all of the societal "indoctrination" that begins the day you are born. Just remember this. "Companionship" and "marriage" are not one and the same thing. You can have companionship without marriage. Even more, you can have a marriage without true companionship! Do what works for you. But remember that. And be careful! Don't let any women score a "takedown" on you, all in the name of love. Protect yourself, including both your own heart as well as any assets you might acquire in life along the way.[/QUOTE]Jazakallah Mr Cane! Wise words.
What happened is that people were trained to equate the concept "stable relationship" with marriage, something that is knotted up with the State, the Church, even the taxation system. Then the marriage deal was made more and more unfavorable, especially for guys. So by association people gave up on stable relationships, and turned more and more to what we do. Meanwhile the Third Way (polyamory) is something that people are not supposed to think about at all.
Arguably something similar is happening to the FKK system. The common pattern is:
1. Establish an Approved Way of doing something.
2. Herd people into these camps under initially favorable terms.
3. Wait for people to forget there is any other way of doing things.
4. Gradually make the Approved Way worse and worse.
5. There! The spirits of the inmates are crushed! Their own habits defeat them.
They say that if you put a frog in a pot of cold water and gradually heat it up, it won't jump out, but will just stay there until it is boiled alive. This is not true: frogs are not that dumb. Sadly many polar bears are that dumb, and will continue to visit FKKs many years after they are a shadow of what they once were.
[QUOTE=Takedown;2170350]Indoctrination? It's biology and social evolution. Single people die earlier and acquire more disease. That's a statistical fact.
[URL]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2566023/[/URL][/QUOTE]Of course widows and ex wives live much longer. Nothing new or surprising there. They thrive on the spoils of slavery.
[QUOTE=XXL;2170579]Of course widows and ex wives live much longer. Nothing new or surprising there. They thrive on the spoils of slavery.[/QUOTE]Please actually read and read carefully. It says married people live longer than people who never marry, the shortest living demographic being men who never marry.
But by all means, hang on to your assertions.
[QUOTE=MyTwoInches;2170181]If Mr. Ho types up the same thing a thousand times and Mr. Cane dutifully agrees with him, that does not make "we all agreed".[/QUOTE]And a thank you for your, shall we say, "2 inches" of input.
[QUOTE=MythoVirus;2170515]I myself, I'm sure I can never commit to a single lady, I'll probably not even last a year before cheating on my significant other. Therefore at least ATM I don't think I will choose the marrige / GF path.[/QUOTE]At least you recognize your weakness, accept it, and then compensate appropriately. I find this admirable. Most men want to have their pussy, then eat other pussies too. They want the beautiful and loving wife, the house, the kids, and all that. But then, they want to go and fuck around on the wife too. And let's not put it all on men either. As I always say, when a man goes and messes around on his wife, he's typically doing that with another woman (usually) who knows he's committed to somebody else (often the case). So, let's not make it look like the women are innocent all the time. They are not, and often instigate the affair themselves. But getting back to you "MythoVirus", congratulations and good for you for being mature enough and introspective enough to go for what works for you! Bravo!
I wish this forum had the option to just do a thumbs up for posts. So many interesting posts: to pick just two.
RN. Your summary was perfect to my way of thinking. I, as you know, have, like many, skirted the precipice. One cannot live all the time in a club.
Polyamorist. Really good summary of the way society controls wayward elements like us LOL.
[QUOTE=Jnpr30;2170339]Editing policy depends on the site. I think ISG allowing upto one hour is actually good enough. WSJ allows 5 minutes.
One obvious issue: re-editing is unfair and unethical after other members have directly replied to the original comment, or even if it is referenced tangentially.[/QUOTE]Re-editing is unethical? Unethical? I think we sometimes take ourselves a little too seriously. After all, this is a hooker board.
Please watch the South Park Season 19 episode entitled "Your Not Yelping. ".
[QUOTE=TheCane;2170480]Yes, I appropriately use the word "indoctrination" because statistics don't change the reality that man's natural biology is to desire and to seek multiple sex partners. That's the way it is, and that's the way it's been since the dawn of mankind. That's a very, very, very long time, and that's natural biology, and settling for one woman is not. Social evolution and / or any negative consequences resulting from biology haven't changed man's basic natural behavior with respect to this. "Social indoctrination" (shaping the mind to do that which does not come natural to achieve happiness) has had the major impact in my view.
People are not getting married like they used to. And when they do marry, they don't stay married as half of all marriages end in divorce (seems like "grass is greener" syndrome to me).[/QUOTE]Rejecting companionship in favor of an argument of biological evolution has one huge fallacy: those hundreds and thousands of years of evolution does not factor in that we live 2-3 times longer than primitive humans. Do 60 year old men have the same needs as a 17 year old boy? I'd hope not. When living into old age, companionship becomes a higher priority which is why I quoted the literature / research.
Be sure, I am not talking about monogamy, there just isn't any literature about companionship so I had to settle on literature regarding marriage.
I'm talking about the need for companionship while differentiating physical and emotional needs. If you want to designate modern acts that satisfy emotion needs into the term indoctrination, then you can have your point. Otherwise, I will go on to say that survival and happiness are not one and the same. Yes, hundreds of thousands of years evolution has biologically programmed us to spread many seeds into many vessels, but fulfilling that one need is not the sole source of happiness. Cumming 3 times a day with no real companionship would still lead for me to be a depressed man. So I reject your use of the term indoctrination, rather it is survival for the modern man.
[QUOTE=SmokeLight;2170568]The above report is about longevity in the United States specifically. First of all, we need to separate men from the pool of the subjects of this research. Second, we need to remember that most US male population with average or below average income doesn't have much choice in sex life or social life after 60. The lifestyle in monger-friendly societies is different. If a retired man could walk out of his house or apartment and take public transportation to FKK or other P4P establishments the stats of this report might collapse.[/QUOTE]Are you hanging your hat on a hypothesis that mongering would extend a never married man's life to that of a married man and discounting the value of true companionship? Sounds like you're suggesting that only the mere act of physical sex with attractive women is what it would take to keep men alive longer rather than companionship and connection with another human being?
[QUOTE=SmokeLight;2170572]Single people who never married are much better off. Here is the quote from the report "High risk behaviors" section.
"The never married group exercise slightly more than those that were married and were less likely to be overweight. Overall, those who have never married have slightly better health habits and risk factors than married peers and never married adults have notably better health habits than those who are divorced or separated."[/QUOTE]Yet mortality is higher in the never married group. So all of those good habits is not enough to overcome the stress and detrimental effects related to loneliness and all things that come with being alone in life. If anything, you pointing out the detrimental habits of married people only puts more emphasis on the need for companionship in old age.
[QUOTE=HungryStud101;2170686]Re-editing is unethical? Unethical? I think we sometimes take ourselves a little too seriously. After all, this is a hooker board.
[/QUOTE]If you had typed a comment, someone had replied to it, and THEN you re-edit your original comment, of course it is not the right thing to do.
If you think this is just a hooker board and we should not take things seriously, why did you lament that your original comment did not come our right?
As (probably) the Methuselah of the Forum, my continued existence is proof that being married and visiting brothels is the secret to a long life (like the 100 year olds who put down their longevity to smoking or drinking). Of course, what I say trumps all statistical evidence LOL.
Takedown. You at your young age are very wise. Companionship (as The Cane says, not synonymous with marriage) in life outside clubs gets more and more important as I get older. Or more accurately maybe what the French refer to as la tendresse. In fact, also when visiting clubs. It is good if I can have sex with six young women in one day, but infinitely better if I get on well with them: of the two options the sex is the less precious, unlike when I first visited clubs. The best workers know this and use it to earn more money.
My two pence worth
[QUOTE=Optimist;2170737]As (probably) the Methuselah of the Forum, my continued existence is proof that being married and visiting brothels is the secret to a long life (like the 100 year olds who put down their longevity to smoking or drinking). Of course, what I say trumps all statistical evidence LOL.
Takedown. You at your young age are very wise. Companionship (as The Cane says, not synonymous with marriage) in life outside clubs gets more and more important as I get older. Or more accurately maybe what the French refer to as la tendresse. In fact, also when visiting clubs. It is good if I can have sex with six young women in one day, but infinitely better if I get on well with them: of the two options the sex is the less precious, unlike when I first visited clubs. The best workers know this and use it to earn more money.
My two pence worth[/QUOTE]Secret of long life is in Okinawa Japan and it is because of food and culture there. I think marriage can make you live longer if it is working our good, but if it is not marriage will kill you slowly, but surely both physically and financially LOL So it is like a strong medicine, if it works it works, if it does not marriage is lethal weapon to your life LOL.
As for companionship or connection with people, I got plenty and it does not need to be with wife, that is for guys who are billy no mate with only blocked choices in lives. Companionship can be friends or pets even, I even think dogs can connect with human than some of wives by looking at it.
Good marriage is good, but bad ones are lethal and remember most marriage fails.
It is cult religion conducted by society, governments and religion to fool men.
They show you love, that how they fool ya LOL!
[QUOTE=Takedown;2170696]Rejecting companionship in favor of an argument of biological evolution has one huge fallacy. Do 60 year old men have the same needs as a 17 year old boy? I'd hope not. When living into old age, companionship becomes a higher priority which is why I quoted the literature / research. I'm talking about the need for companionship while differentiating physical and emotional needs. If you want to designate modern acts that satisfy emotion needs into the term indoctrination, then you can have your point. Otherwise, I will go on to say that survival and happiness are not one and the same. Yes, hundreds of thousands of years evolution has biologically programmed us to spread many seeds into many vessels, but fulfilling that one need is not the sole source of happiness. [/QUOTE]And you my friend have committed one huge fallacy if you are suggesting that I am rejecting companionship as a worthy thing. I am not. Nor did I say (or even suggest) that 60 year-old men and 17 year-old boys have the same needs. Or that survival and happiness are both the same thing. That all came from you! It's as if you are more interested in making some counterargument than really "hearing" and considering the main points I made.
I said that marriage and companionship are not the same thing, and that one can even have a marriage with no companionship. That was not said to "reject" companionship. It was just to point out something that people don't realize sometimes. I talked about having a full and varied life, the importance of which becomes more evident as one grows older, like say when you're 60 versus 17? And I absolutely did not suggest that spreading one's seed around is the sole source of happiness! That came from you. No need for you to put words in my mouth or attempt to make my points for me.
You know, it's the younger guys who think they know everything too. You see, I was one of those younger guys before, so I know this from experience! Let's have this conversation again in 20 years (if we're both still going) and see what you think then.