Vagina, exposureee

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can imagine it on 4Chan right now...
"Panty PHAIL!"
"Lulz, WIN!"
"Lolz, thats ur mom!"
"STFU"
"PWNED."

Oh the fun she will have for the rest of her life.
 
Raziaar said:
It's just like... I experience very little sexual attraction most of the time. I don't have much of a sexual appetite and as a result I can easily go months without masturbation.

I do occasionally feel the need/desire to feel sexual, but it's incredibly rare these days.

No penis malfunction or anything, I'm just not a horny bastard.
Click to expand...

use it or lose it foo !

I'm pretty sure I've masturbated 99.99% of every day since I was like 8. I think about 15 orgasms in 24 hours is my record.

I think there is probably something wrong with me.

Anyway, I don't know how you can go to sleep at night without doing it.


I can't meet a girl that can handle it so I do it before and after they come over or else I screw up the relationship.
 
VirusType2 said:
use it or lose it foo !

I'm pretty sure I've masturbated 99.99% of every day since I was like 8. I think about 15 orgasms in 24 hours is my record.

I think there is probably something wrong with me.

Anyway, I don't know how you can go to sleep at night without doing it.


I can't meet a girl that can handle it so I do it before and after they come over or else I go berserk.
Click to expand...

Only 15 orgasms in 24 hours? Pfft.

After the initial orgasm, I can achieve like 4 more in under 5 minutes.

No lie. You be jealous.
 
come on. Multiple orgasms? I've never heard of a guy being able to do that. I think 30 minutes apart is about max. Is there some trick [that isn't too descriptive and appalling]?
 
VirusType2 said:
come on. Multiple orgasms? I've never heard of a guy being able to do that. I think 30 minutes apart is about max. Is there some trick [that isn't too descriptive and appalling]?
Click to expand...

Yeah, there's a trick, at least for me.
 
Raziaar said:
It's just like... I experience very little sexual attraction most of the time. I don't have much of a sexual appetite and as a result I can easily go months without masturbation.

I do occasionally feel the need/desire to feel sexual, but it's incredibly rare these days.

No penis malfunction or anything, I'm just not a horny bastard.
Click to expand...


Sounds...liberating in a way I guess.


come on. Multiple orgasms? I've never heard of a guy being able to do that. I think 30 minutes apart is about max. Is there some trick [that isn't too descriptive and appalling]?
Click to expand...

Its possible, you just gotta put a bit more effort into it.

Anyway, sex isn't good unless you've been doing it for hours and are knackered afterwards. Exhausted, but satisfied.
 
VirusType2 said:
Completely serious, I'd be worried about prostrate cancer if I were you.
Click to expand...

Prostate Cancer runs in my family.

Why though because of my ability to go without sexual release?
 
Tantra is for the win, dawgs. I'm a master at it because I'm from the internet.
 
Prostate Cancer runs in my family.

Why though because of my ability to go without sexual release?
Click to expand...
shit you don't even know.

yeh, you got to keep the pipes clean Raz

I know how you are, but worrying won't help, just do some research on it. (Google) But usually it comes after like 40 years old (something like that), so you should be fine if you take precautions.
 
Masturbation isn't necessarily completely necessary for proper prostate upkeep. You aren't going to explode in cancerous tumors of you fail to rub one out once a day. Leave dancing-cow-man alone. D:

p.s. Cow you should get a fap in once in a while, it's healthy for the endorphins if nothing else
 
Um. I'm helping him. And once a month isn't once a day.

But I liked the exploshens of tumors.
 
Just saying the fact that he doesn't jerk off (even once a month) doesn't mean he's necessarily at much greater risk for prostate cancer. In fact, the prostate health benefits aren't really seen until older age. Fap as his libido sees fit!
 
BHC said:
Just saying the fact that he doesn't jerk off (even once a month) doesn't mean he's necessarily at much greater risk for prostate cancer. In fact, the prostate health benefits aren't really seen until older age. Fap as his libido sees fit!
Click to expand...

By the time were old medical science will have created artificial prostates anyway. :V
 
?
Well...

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=o...bation+prostate+cancer&spell=1&fp=DwUsqvqK_ig

actually there seems to be some serious contradiction. I'll have to catch up on this

according to live science:
A new study finds men who are sexually active in their 20s and 30s are more likely to develop prostate cancer — especially if they masturbate frequently.

The message, perhaps: Hold off until middle age.

The study also found that frequent sexual activity in a man's 40s appears to have little effect and even small levels of sexual activity in a man's 50s could offer protection from the disease. Most of the differences were attributed to masturbation rather than sexual intercourse.

However, some previous studies had generated much different findings. The bottom line: More study is needed to settle this one.
Click to expand...

Shit well, old studies had it the other way around. I'm ****ed, if that's the case.
 
VirusType2 said:
shit you don't even know.

yeh, you got to keep the pipes clean Raz

I know how you are, but worrying won't help, just do some research on it. (Google) But usually it comes after like 40 years old (something like that), so you should be fine if you take precautions.
Click to expand...

Note I said I can go months without. I try not to though.
 
Raziaar, you must use the force
 
A new study finds men who are sexually active in their 20s and 30s are more likely to develop prostate cancer — especially if they masturbate frequently.

The message, perhaps: Hold off until middle age.
Click to expand...

oh **** :O
 
*thinks to self: well this is getting awkward. Say something to change the subject. Something interesting, that no one can ignore.*

Umm...vagina!

*edit* That no one can ignore except Raz.
 
God, masturbation tips & tricks on a gaming forum, seriously....just....what?
 
Where do you see masturbation tips and tricks.
 
It's almost as if she wanted this controversy. She went to school on the day of yearbook pictures, without panties, with a skirt, then didn't sit with her legs crossed like half the girls in the shot.
You'd think if she didn't want her vagina out there for the world to see she would have taken some precautions before the shoot... you know what I'm saying?

Anyway, I say we give her the attention she seeks. Anyone up for vajayjay billboards plastered all over her home city?
 
nurizeko said:
I wouldn't worry, everyone and their grandma comes out with studies.

Most are pretty dumb/scientifically unsound or stating the obvious.
Click to expand...

LolOLo Grandma wrote that article lolOLL

You claim we should ignore science and listen to you instead. Why? What do you know?

It's not some voodoo, it's case studies on hundreds of people. It's statistics.


- People who have an aggressive sex drive got cancer much more often.

- People who are over 45 and masturbated at least once a week less often got dick cancer.


But don't listen to me, because I'm liable to make mistakes:

http://www.webmd.com/prostate-cancer/news/20090127/masturbation-and-prostate-cancer-risk
 
VirusType2 said:

LolOLo Grandma wrote that article lolOLL

You claim we should ignore science and listen to you instead. Why? What do you know?

It's not some voodoo, it's case studies on hundreds of people. It's statistics.


- People who have an aggressive sex drive got cancer much more often.

- People who are over 45 and masturbated at least once a week less often got dick cancer.


But don't listen to me, because I'm liable to make mistakes:

http://www.webmd.com/prostate-cancer/news/20090127/masturbation-and-prostate-cancer-risk
Click to expand...




But different studies of this question, done in different ways, have reached different conclusions. . .These are just theories, . . . More research is needed to determine the exact role of sex hormones and sexual activity in prostate-cancer risk at different stages of life.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying believe everything I say (you don't, regardless).

What I said is that every other 3 days a new study comes out with some other conclusions.

"scientists" are not infallible, and contrary to your opinion is not some all encompassing secret mystical society of truth.

For every scientist who says one thing and has data saying one thing you can find another scientist with different data or different conclusions.


I'm not saying doubt science, I'm saying don't be so ready to jump in bed with conclusions just because a study says so or you have an emotional attachment to those conclusions for whatever reasons, you haven't read the paper, you don't know the circumstances, all you know is a study was carried out and it came to a conclusion, which even ignoring the prospect of it merely finding the results they want it to find (science and scientists are not immune to political/emotional bias) could be flawed because even then they can forget an important factor or whatever.


also hundreds of people (who can lie on a survey BTW :O) in a population of millions (in my country alone) cant just automatically be assumed to be a good indicator of the population across the board. The smaller the number of individuals included in a survey the less accurate you should expect your findings to be if used as an indicator of the whole. Also it could easily be environmental factors of genetic factors within the British population that cause those results or anything. Do the same study in a part of the US or some other country and the results could be completely different, then what?. They cant all be right.

You cant just claim one study's findings are somehow a universal truth because you want them to be or your too lazy to use your own brain and let other people do it for you.
 
If someone else says the phrase "just theories" in a science discussion again I am going to be very upset.
 
nurizeko said:
What I said is that every other 3 days a new study comes out with some other conclusions.
Click to expand...
Every 3 days huh? Maybe on a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SUBJECT PERHAPS? :rolleyes:

Looks to me that there was a study in on this subject in about 2003 and another one that ended in early 2009.

6 YEARS, not 3 days.

nurizeko said:
"scientists" are not infallible, and contrary to your opinion is not some all encompassing secret mystical society of truth.
Click to expand...
Where did you get that from? That's just an insult based on nothing. So weak, nurizeko.

I never claimed scientists had power equal to what is commonly reserved for God or the Pope.

I never even claimed it was a proven fact, I suggested he better listen.

Especially, you know Raz, I sometimes think he is agoraphobic. :p

nurizeko said:
For every scientist who says one thing and has data saying one thing you can find another scientist with different data or different conclusions.
Click to expand...
OK, you ignore scientists that are trying to find the causes of cancer, or factors that contribute to it. Meanwhile, I'll be listening attentively.


nurizeko said:
You cant just claim one study's findings are somehow a universal truth because you want them to be or your too lazy to use your own brain and let other people do it for you.
Click to expand...
If doctors and scientists recommend something, I tend to lend it a good deal of credit, with generally decades of education and study in their specialized fields, I don't think I need any more reason.

Yep, sometimes they are wrong, so I didn't claim they were a universal truth, this is what pisses me off in an argument more than anything. You are making shit up.

nurizeko said:
I'm not saying doubt science, I'm saying don't be so ready to jump in bed with conclusions

[...ETC.]
Click to expand...

You can save that for anyone who doesn't understand how surveys work, I guess.

Obviously we should reserve doubt about anything scientific until it is proven, yes.

I'll quote what I've already said:

VirusType2 said:
there seems to be some serious contradiction. I'll have to catch up on this
Click to expand...
VirusType2 said:
However, some previous studies had generated much different findings. The bottom line: More study is needed to settle this one.
Click to expand...

Does that sound like I was claiming that they were infallible or that it was the absolute undeniable truth? Weak.

VirusType2 said:
Completely serious, I'd be worried about prostrate cancer if I were you.
Click to expand...
It's something to be concerned about for all men first of all, and here is why:

According to one source (fallible statistics is a given for anyone that doesn't understand how statistics work) 8 out of 10 men over age 65 get it:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=prostate+cancer+percentage&aq=1&oq=prostate+cancer+per&fp=DwUsqvqK_ig


Here is another reason to be concerned:
Raz said:
Prostate Cancer runs in my family.
Click to expand...
Even more reason for him to look into the causes of prostate cancer, right? Or do you not understand how genetics works?
Does Cancer Run In Families?

ScienceDaily (Jan. 13, 2005) - In a paper published in PloS Medicine, the premier medical journal freely available online, Laufey Amundadottir and colleagues from deCODE genetics (a company that is using genetics to develop new drug treatments) and Iceland's National-University Hospital go some way toward answering that question. They analyzed comprehensive data on the most common forms of cancer from Iceland's National Cancer Registry in the context of deCODE's nationwide genealogy database. This enabled Dr. Amundadottir and her team to establish how often cancers occurred in first through fifth degree relatives of some 32,000 cancer patients over the past 50 years.
Click to expand...

Pretty good statistics I'll say. They analyzed data from 32,000 patients over 50 years. But you can disbelieve these statistics if you want; for everyone else, read on:
For 16 of the 27 cancers studied, the results indicate that relatives of patients are at a significantly higher risk of developing cancer than are members of the population at large. For some cancers this increased risk even extended out to distant (i.e. 3rd to 5th degree) relatives. Cancers in certain sites also showed a familial association with other cancers--for example relatives of individuals with stomach, colon, rectal, or endometrial cancer were more likely to develop one of these cancers, although not necessarily in the same site as did their relative.
Click to expand...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050111171446.htm

nurizeko said:
By the time were old medical science will have created artificial prostates anyway. :V
Click to expand...
For someone who has such little faith in the scientific process, you sure are putting a lot of FAITH IN IT.

:p
 
ITT: Virus gets butthurt that Nuri doesnt believe his conclusions which be based on unconclusive science.
 
Stop arguing with Nuri, Virus. You need to get a girlfriend.
 
I didn't even care. Science is just good guessing, right?

Hey Eeijit, I'd appreciate if you didn't make attacks on my personal life, especially because you don't enough about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Raziaar
Holy Shit - Yearbook Drama
Replies
36
Views
3K
MorganFreeman911
MorganFreeman911
Dog--
Tired? GO TO JAIL.
Replies
26
Views
1K
Tyguy
Tyguy
Adrik_Senturu
Welcome to Judge Rotenberg Center where we torture the mentally handicapped!
Replies
31
Views
2K
Raziaar
Raziaar
Warped
Iranian Elections Erupt in Utter Chaos
2 3
Replies
86
Views
6K
Warped
Warped
CptStern
Christian Mom tries to ban 80 books from school library due to promoting "sinning"
2
Replies
50
Views
3K
Barnz
B
Back
Top