Smallfaces1 wrote:Porn is good. Without it we'd all be stuck in the 20's,30's,40's etc not daring to speak of sex and only having having it on our wedding nights!
You need to watch the History of Sex documentary. There was lots of sex and pornography in the 20's, 30's, and 40's, it was just more repressed, like alcohol!
I think Henry Miller said it best in REDS, "There was just as much fucking going on back then as there is today." If anything, it was a lot wilder and more free-spirited. People could screw each other and at worst worry about carpet burn or the clap. Now, to quote Joni Mitchell, sex kills. While I'm referencing artists I like so much, I'll end this post with a philosophical nugget from the great Bill Hicks.
"The day they invent a one-shot, no problem cure for AIDS....on that day there's gonna be fucking in the streets with people screaming 'It's over'!"
Copenhagen Fan wrote:It's clear that most of the women on this board have no idea what an extension is, and would be appalled if they bumped into one......
I just happen to be a VERY big fan of Nick's "Labor of Lust", and know fully well what is meant by the above quote (***ahem***)...
Not something that I can put in here without a r-17 rating, however...
"Porn is good. Without it we'd all be stuck in the 20's,30's,40's etc not daring to speak of sex and only having having it on our wedding nights!"
I know what i mean in my head! just came out wrong
"Do you remember rick astley? he had a big fat hit it was ghastly, he said i'm never gonna give you up or let you down, well i'm here to tell you that dick's a clown"
bambooneedle wrote:...but the question is, did it take years of extra hardcore porn to come to that conclusion?...
Good point Bamboozle! First it starts off with a little porn....then it escalates into the peep shows...then it ends up in the gutter! Porn is kinda like pot....once you smoke it...you eventually end up shooting heroin......
I think porn sucks too, Cope. And I resent the generalization that seems to be made in that article that we men are a bunch of hopeless wankers... how would that guy know? He is just trying to justify his lifetime of self-abuse.
Physiologically, is it not believed at the moment that men that don't masturbate are at a greater risk of testicular cancer (that is if they're not having regular sex)...build up of non-used sperm and all that, as not all of it is recycled. Plus, release of chemicals into the blood stream and ergo brain, mean that wankers are a lot calmer than non-wankers
Last edited by laughingcrow on Mon Nov 10, 2003 7:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
There's nothing wrong with the odd wank, plus studies have proven that if you don't you have more wet dreams anyway. Anyway, you don't need porn to wank, only if you have no imagination.
I have nothing against wanking...but it's just not for me any more....It does not turn me on in the least.....my poor girlfriend wishes I would take it up again...but why practice self abuse, when one can abuse others????
Re: Porn. My take on the subject is that it all takes place in an alternate dimension called, naturally, the Pornoverse.
I was under the impression most of it took place up in the Valley.[/b]
The San Fernando Valley may, in fact, offer an entryway into the pornoverse, but it is not in fact the actual pornoverse. It is just where they make porno, which is different.
Still, in the spirit of scientific inquiry, I tested BWAPs theory. I walked in on several lesbian couples, and instead of being asked to "join the fun," I was maced, pepper sprayed, and forced to wear plaid.
laughingcrow wrote:Physiologically, is it not believed at the moment that men that don't masturbate are at a greater risk of testicular cancer (that is if they're not having regular sex)...build up of non-used sperm and all that, as not all of it is recycled.
You mean 'it is believed', no? There are other ways to release sperm than wanking, by the way!
sorry guys reading that again it is confusing, yes it is believed at the mo by some, but I tend to write on the internet as I might say something. So, 'is it not believed' means 'it is', but im saying it with a question mark at the end! Do you not see what I'm saying?
I do now, but the lack of a question mark led me/us to read 'it is' for 'is it'. A rhetorical question still needs its mark. I suspect it's all the cancer-reducing self-abuse enfeebling your mind.
My goodness the turn this thread has taken... BTW Crow, I gotcha right away.
I also love the term 'wank'. I think if Americans had such a nice fun term for masturbation it might fix a lot of things over here. For that matter I think there should be an equally felxible and evocative term just for girlwanking. Perhaps there is and I'm just too stodgy to know it...?