Miser

Still waiting for the summary

In my defense, he assumed that I didn't know what I was talking about. Should one not be accountable for how one goes about their way of talking with people? I merely reciprocated his assault with mine. Every comment that he makes is filled with rage and contempt, is it not fair for me to rebut emotionally as well as intellectually? The fact is I've been reading on this subject but he has given me no grounds to respond to the topic. All he did was to assume that I've no understanding, that I'm ignorant and that I don't know what I'm talking about. These are assaults too The point I want to focus on though is that the issue of female orgasm is not so black and white as you think. Give me a point to talk about and I'll show you why it is so.

Its not an intellectual refuge as you said, but a personal grudge toward your manner of speaking. Let's drop this and go back to the discussion. I'm still waiting for your summary And for the last time, I added that my words were meant as a sweeping generalization. I don't know how people manage to miss that in its entirety.

Why don't you sum it up for me so I know you read it instead of doing a quick google search. Women don't need orgasms to reproduce successfully. I won't comment further until you do. You are quite a loser. I want you to think about how your life went wrong, get out of your house and do something worthwhile instead of being an anonymous asshole on the science forums

Evolution is not an adequate explanation for a lot of things. You can't say evolution explains a thing unless: 1) it is shown that individual or geographic variation in a trait has a genetic basis-in this case, masturbation is a behavior that could have its basis in our genotype but the choice to do it is not. Just because a behavior is conducive to reproductive success doesn't mean it is good for the individual. For example, take the disposable nature of males in recent history; sending boys off into war may prove to be productive for the population at large, but not for the individual soldiers. The behavior enhances the reproductive success of the group, but it potentially kills the individual. This doesn't mean abstinence can't be productive individually, especially in light of a technologically and socially demanding world. 2) The trait has to be shown to influence reproductive success. Without it, there is no basis for including that the trait evolved over evolutionary time by natural selection. In this case especially, we are talking about an activity that may potential strengthen one's body. To speculate: in many cases, masturbation is counterproductive to a species reproductive success as semen is being expended on personal satisfaction rather than fertilizing a female. It would be sensical to say that a male who is willing to retain his semen in his alone time would be more conducive to him passing on his gene because he'll be more driven to find a mate. Contrary to that, a male who fails to find a mate may use masturbation, during periods of solitude, to self-soothe, the adaptive advantage of masturbation in this case is a salve to mend pains. In any case, masturbation cannot be shown to affect reproductive success either way. And in neither cases does it contradict my claim that masturbation could boost one's mental and physical being-the best it could do, is to soothe a damaged ego. Though sex is undoubtedly helpful in reproduction, the man is satiated afterwards and often exhausted. And this too could be used as ammunition for my argument. One must be careful when appealing to evolution for its explanatory powers. 3) There also needs a mechanistic account explaining the links between the trait and reproductive success in the wild. Well many things humans do can't be found in the wild. Meditation doesn't exist in the wild. Neither does building sky-scrappers, driving cars, or going on the internet. Yet all these things are productive. Abstinence, along with all aforementioned activities, is a uniquely human feature. And its origin cannot, and should not be explained, through evolution. 4) The fourth type of evidence for adaptation concerns experiments. The hypothesis that variation in the trait is adaptive should be independently confirmed by experimentally manipulating the selective environment or the trait itself. Again, fundamentally, the behavior of abstinence is not a genotype but a behavior. It can be passed down through social means, if one chooses to have sex solely for reproduction, but not any other. Take the case of the female orgasm. It is dubious whether evolution gives inadequate explanations because all the claims that's made on the basis of evolution doesn't account for its existence satisfactorily. Whether it has an adaptive function is very questionable. Its even found to occur in the females of species where the length of time of intercourse is insufficient for orgasm by stimulating their genitalia for a prolonged period. There is, at this point, no adequate evolutionary explanation for female orgasms. This should warn you against making rash evolutionary accounts on human behavior. Much of this is taken from pages 4-6 in The Case of the Female Orgasm: Bias in the Science of Evolution, written by Elisabeth A. Lloyd in case you want to check her book out. And before you think she's a creationist bashing science, she is not.

Science has a lot of dirty work that's not for the faint of heart. All the better, I'm willing to make that sacrifice. I've recently broken out of my nihilistic despair and found the meaning of life and that's to contribute to society as efficiently as possible. Society, in turn, will reward you proportionally to your contribution. Its hard to say. And I hate to give you my subjective experience because it could be confounded. But I must say, in brief, abstaining from masturbation has made me much more productive in that I crave social activity and exercise because they are necessary to fill the void masturbation left. Like the OP said, I can feel my breathing becoming strained as another day is added and the only way for that to go away is to step on the treadmill. So I'm going to put my foot down and say masturbation is an unnecessary habit and gives one a reward that comes too easily; going back to its relevant biochemical pathways-dopamine, opiates-, its 'danger' primarily lies in its similarity in why the general consensus of cocaine and heroin is bad. It makes one content in doing nothing. So in this sense, because one is content, one feels less motivated to get the reward from external, more productive sources. The people that the website attracts are usually addicts of porn who watches porn and jerks off on a daily basis. There has been links between depression and social-anxiety and excessive porn use (intensity ranging from normal hardcore videos to fetishes to even transexual porn). To wean off pornography, it is proposed to go ninety days without porn so as to "rewire" (plenty of information on what this means on the website) their brains normally-a daunting task for most. So in order for this to be maximally effective, one should abstain from any cues that would even remind one of porn. Naturally, this includes masturbation, even without porn, because its likely that one would use fantasy from porn to aid this process. Also, masturbation causes what's called the chaser effect, during which one feels a strong sexual burning to masturbate again. Also, to respond to a comment that was posted a while back, I have no religious affiliations. Though I've become more conservative over the years, it is because I see myself as an open-minded liberal. Reason triumphs but one must not neglect the emotional/subjective side of life. Especially that of poetry because poetry can be a source of eternal truth that complements scientific truth to make our understanding of the world whole. Sorry for the babbling, its very cathartic you see. The better question would be "who wouldn't want to be in the compulsory masturbating group"? That's why you pay them a sum of money so they would do it. Though compliance could be an issue. My brain hurts No, there's not. These are just the patterns I've seen.

Fair thought experiment. I would argue that an experiment would be permitted by an ethics committee because similar experiments were conducted in the past-notably the Chinese experiment. An experiment of the kind proposed earlier-involving abstinence and non-abstinence group followed by a battery of cognitive tests would be the ONLY kind of experiment that would ward against confounds. Our rising IQ can be due to many concurrent environmental reasons. Members of countries with enriched environments tend to have higher IQs than those who do not. Nutrition may also be a factor in early childhood IQ development. So we would expect an increasing trend of IQ over time and this is what has been found. Also, an assumption of the phenotypic IQ, modified by abstinence, is passed on wholesale to the next generation may also be illusory. Lastly, IQ may not the only trait appropriate for measure. Recall, focus, cognition and reflex may all be possible areas of study. P.S.: I'm glad this has moved to its rightful home in "Speculation".

Great site. This is where I found my statistics http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/200903/how-common-is-masturbation-really Again, I can't claim anything that has any scientific backing. But I think each time one masturbates, one consumes an amount of energy disproportion to the time spent doing the activity. It is common to hear boys do it every single day. Whether this is addiction, or habituation is up to debate. If it is true that it drains one's energy and it occurs on a regular basis, then the effects would add up dramatically. Me, and the OP, both understand that there isn't research to back this claim up. To take a step back though, many men are reaping the rewards of pornographic abstinence which must be done coupled with masturbation. I'm curious as to whether the abstinence of masturbation has as big an effect on the increase in function that so many men saw. More on www.yourbrainonporn.com As a side note, this site is not motivated by the religious. All the claims are substantiated by citations to peer reviewed research on neuroscience.

Let's not completely deny old wives tales either. As Nietzsche once said "What if truth is a woman." Women approach truth from a whole different perspective, wholly different from that of philosophy and science. Their subjectivity sometimes stumble upon truth that can only be achieved through tediousness via men. One has to see that religion gets things right some of the time too. Embedded in the practice are many structures that needs to made sense of from a modern scientific perspective. Especially in the realm of ethics is where I find religion to be powerful. The seven deadly sins: lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy, and pride are all shown to be less than productive means of going about life through my studies in psychology. What abstinence could do to benefit a person could be many. It could be, by withholding sex and thereby deriving from a habit and achieving a goal, strengthen one's willpower as achieving small incremental goals and deriving from habits has been shown to increase willpower. I've read widely on the subject and I know that it has at least some form of effect on the human psyche and not all of it positive. Nothing ever is wholly positive. The most important aspect of abstinence to me-the nootropic effects of it-hasn't any scientific backing as of this point. But as I said before absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. I know this doesn't make too convincing a case, but I look forward to the day when I have the privilege of conducting such a research. Gee, you must be a real winner in real life. If all knowledge is to you is the combative conquest of an opponent, then you must have lots of anger toward life. I've addressed your responses as best as available knowledge has to offer. You pick and choose what I've said to respond to. Science is a mere means to making knowledge more concrete and precise. I am merely paving the way with findings outside of science. Meditation was only recently confirmed through fMRI to induce neurogenesis in the medial prefrontal cortex yet it was known for thousands of years that its conducive to well-being. I will prove my assertions in time. In the mean time, keep on jerking it, it's your life that you're wasting away. Not mine

In light of the lack of evidence, I submit to further discussion. There needs to be more research done on the topic. This could be made more complicated by the fact that abstinence is effective when one follows a particular Taoist guideline of redirecting your essence. Otherwise one becomes agitated, aggressive and thinks about sex all the time. This generalizes to coitus with a partner and the goal in that would be to refrain from ejaculation thereby reaping what they call the full body orgasm. This entails up to six hours of feeling invigorated. So bottom-line is, if you expel your seed while awake, then you are no longer abstinent. There's also, again anecdotal reports of people feeling more social when they refrain from masturbation and yes thats subject to confounds too. The only available doctrine that backs up my claims are religious and spiritual practices which doesn't hold water in the court of science. I have read here and there that its used as a means to achieve greater things but alas science is not on my side. Here's a link if you're interested in reading religious philosophy on masturbation. http://www.godrealiz...sturbation.html iNow, do you not realize that I realize the weakness of my positions but merely trying to appeal to the intuition of people. I am not here to prove anything, I rather do that in real life where I can be rewarded. I am trying to get a sound discussion on masturbation going; testing the waters, if you will, on this hunch of mine, and dare I say many others. Without hunches like these, there would be no progress in science. Does it not make you wonder why so many religions abhor masturbation? From an evolutionary perspective, is it possible that it serves an adaptive purpose? I'd like to conclude with my flawed opinion that people of science are less inclined to do research on the ills of masturbation as it would go against a culture that stigmatizes anything that has a trace of conservative ideology. Perhaps in time we will discover more about this issue The real statistic of people who masturbate is 61 percent. This activity works directly on your dopamine and opiate receptors. It is much easier than most other things in life that would give the same amount of pleasure. However, admittedly, dependency may be a stretch. In the yourbrainonporn.com community, the chaser-effect occurs after masturbation. It's basically "After you masturbate, you would crave to do it again shortly after". This exemplifies the powerful lure masturbation has on men. Read all that I wrote. I've acknowledged that already. I'm just happy that abstaining from this has brought me a great deal of control over life. Indeed, that energy has to go somewhere if the pressure valve is kept closed and it hasn't let me down so far. Do what you will, it's your body and your life.

It is thus necessary to explain the values behind such claims. If a person seeks intelligence and contribution to society through career achievement as the end goal of life, then abstinence is a worthy sacrifice. In terms of the average Joe, masturbation can serve a very useful utility indeed to prevent many social ills . My main argument revolves around its drug-like qualities; its relevance in dopamine and opiate receptors. Having it as a goto habit for anything ranging from low-self-esteem(not saying that you have it), depression, anxiety and boredom is not productive. There are better things to do that will benefit society or the self like playing an instrument or working on a project that is long overdue. And please don't try to claim that you jerk off only because your shooting off poisonous toxins so that you don't get prostate cancer. Most people I know are "dependent" on this habit as its hard for them to go a day without it. Also, it may have nootropic effects, but it isn't yet substantiated by science. Such tests would be simple, have experimental group abstain from any sexual behavior for an X number of days, then run a battery of cognitive tests to see if abstinence can improve cognition or memory or concentration or any of my claims. Sounds easy, but curiously, it hasn't been done. Not once. Absence of evidence isn't evidence of its absence. So stay tuned. To claim that I have no understanding in science is an insult. Why else would I repeat that there isn't research if I don't understand the importance of research on knowing. Do you go into science so you can feel superior to people by winning arguments? That is very unpleasant to say the least I challenge you to go 15 days without masturbation. Only then will you find out how dependent you are on this habit and how much energy you'll have for life.

This is because science is a slow process and takes time to catch up toconfirming facts of nature. Also I'd said nothing about hormones aside fromstating the research. It is sufficient grounds to confirm my claims. So what? If you want to wait for X number of years for research onthe nootropic benefits to make life-changes while there have been examplesafter examples of people seeing the benefits of abstinence, then its reallyyour loss not mine. Life is an uphill battle and we need every nuance of ourbody to work in our favor. Sacrificing long-term gains for short-term pleasureis myopic. Science isn't everything. It is slow to name one of its flawsthough it is the very foundation of all we know. But Intuition is a veryvaluable asset that guides further research. Believe what you will, these twotopics-mine and the previous one on celibacy-should be enough to convince youthat there are at the very least some benefits to abstinence. I've made no attempts at trying to pass off my claims as scientifically congruent. I am hoping to appeal to your intuition through available information in human culture thus far.

That is really really interesting. Really really really interesting. I can't add more degree words preceding interesting. It's so romantic for a sage to simply disappear from civilization into the mists of the unknown.

You suspect wrongly. I hope to get to the bottom of this as much as you do. There simply isn't that many peer reviewed papers on abstinence. Not many studies have been done on the topic. However, this doesn't mean that there isn't evidence behind my claims. Luckily, there has been another topic on this issue. So let me refer you to it, they've said all that I wanted to say and more: http://www.sciencefo...-and-longevity/ I admit that I'm too lazy to form an coherent scientific argument as most of my experience on this topic is experiential and anecdotal. I am reluctant to make any further factual claims because I've ran out. There simply AREN'T any scientific papers on the topic of abstinence to conclusively steer the conversation one way or another. As for tradition, I was referring to the Taoist philosophy of continence. Though, yes, they all die out, we as thinkers must speculate as to why they came to the conclusion that semen retention (especially applying to when someone has sex) leads to immortality. Obviously it doesn't-so far to my knowledge anyway-, but I suspect possible nootropic effects of semen retention. To the taoist, sex is said to be a dynamic stealing of essence between the man and the woman. This is interesting in light of the finding that college women who do not use condoms during sex are less depressed. What if the man successfully refrains from ejaculation? Would men who successfully do this mean less depression as a result too? Could one go further and speculate that not only would men be less depressed if they retained their semen during sex, they would experience what is called the full body orgasm which lasts for hours, leading the man to be more energized. Again, no research has confirmed this but this is a widely confirmed anecdotal finding. When objective truth is not present, it doesn't hurt to have subjective ones. However, I urge you to go 15 days without masturbation and see if you notice any difference. You may experience an accumulation of stress and negative affect but exercise and healthy recreation will make quick work of them; and it will make said activities much more enjoyable. Again, no research, much less experiment, has found masturbation to be mind enhancing a factual or generalizable claim. But assuming that our bodies work similarly, I expect you to experience similar experiences of increased concentration, energy, motivation and a feeling of being able to accomplish anything. Though I offended many (dare I say all) of you, I think to my defense, I merely wanted to convince you that this is an exciting area of future research simply because there's a lack of abundance of research. Intelligence and science approaches the divine more so than animalistic sex. It is saintly in the Christian quality, sagely in the Tao. I am personally willing to sacrifice a great deal of pleasure so that higher goals are met, because what else is there in life? Lastly, when I generalized about the lack of success in this forum, I projected onto you my discontent with people in my surroundings who think that sex is the end-all goal of life-what mind numbingly dim proposition. You see, I live in a college fraternity, and the prospect that there is anything more to life than hedonia is rejected. Also, I misjudged the life success of people on this forum as being equal to the general internet population. All the above are my failings and I apologize for any hurt feelings. But I remain in my accusations of your boorish and sarcastic remarks.

Aren't you a sour puss. I presume that the question you ask regarding the scientific standards of tradition is rhetorical. Traditional philosophy provide clues to potential fields of research in science and should not be used to prove it. Like I said, there isn't enough scientific literature for me to support the cognitive benefits. Critique the nutritive content of semen and we'll go from there Don't be such a boor. Such a statement should be taken on its sentimental value. Its, at the very least, very very common, probably all that I talked to. But quit wasting time, back to the arguments.

Finally, the conversation gets rolling... Prostate cancer is merely a side issue in this topic. Granted masturbation can reduce its incidence, so can a balanced diet and frequent exercise. If conserving semen has benefits that outweighs its reducing the risk of prostate cancer, then perhaps it is a worthy endeavor. Nietzsche and Plato had nothing to do with the effect of continence and prostate cancer. They, among others, attribute their superior intelligence to abstinence. This is succinct with the following findings taken from a 1957 paper Science discovers the physiological values of Continence: "The semen is a viscid albuminous fluid, alkaline in reaction, which is very rich in calcium and phosphorus, also in lecithin, cholesterol, albumen, nucleoproteins, iron, vitamin E, etc. In the ejaculation of the normal man, about 226 million spermatozoa are given off; these are rich in phosphorized fats (lecithin), cholesterol (the parent-source of sex hormones), nucleoproteins and iron. An ounce of semen is considered to be equal in value to sixty ounces of blood, of which it constitutes an extract of some of its most valuable constituents, as far as its vitalizing power is concerned. " The article can be found here http://davidpratt.info/bernard.htm And please don't be so presumptuous to say that I made the proverb up, perhaps I've just mistaken how common it is when I heard it. But since I've committed the offense of ad hominem first, I expect reciprocity. Also, I will admit in advance that there simply isn't too many studies on abstinence. The only one that is of any value is the Chinese study that showed a acute rise, followed by a sharp return to baseline, of testosterone in those who abstained from masturbation for 7 days. There are studies on the ill effects of masturbation on the other hand. I'll leave it like this for now, more on it when I'm not in danger of laptop batteries running out

Didn't I add that it was a sweeping overgeneralization? My point was conserving semen could lead to a greater man; one who's more motivated to accomplish more with life. It is the epitome of delayed gratification-which I, along with countless psychologists, believe to be one of the highest qualities of man. In any case, ignore the ad hominem. I've given a fair bit of evidence already. Talking to people about this issue always elicits the same response so I hope you'd forgive me for my frustration. Nobody likes to seriously consider this issue because, let's be honest, people love masturbation and our culture supports it. But if the status quo ostracizes those who engage in drug use-opiates in particular-, which gives pleasure in somewhat the same way as masturbation (only varying in degree), then why should masturbation be so accepted and even encouraged? Men are failing across the board. The male to female ratio in college is 2 to 3. Porn use is cited as one of the culprit. But I want to go a step further and argue that masturbation doesn't do one much good either. I am arguing that our values should be changed on this topic. It should be cut down if not eliminated so that one would be motivated to do more. To seek that opiate high somewhere outside the bedroom. I won't add anymore evidence because the previous ones haven't been responded to yet and more evidence could serve as grounds for unnecessary contention in light of ones already presented.

All the masturbation defenders I've seen thus far holds to dear life the prostate cancer study. Check this out: http://www.livescience.com/7658-masturbation-increase-risk-prostate-cancer.html The results aren't as conclusive as you think. And many thousand year old traditions encourage the preservation of seminal fluids as they are considered the essence of the man. I bet none of you are in graduate school and not many of you are in college for anything substantial. Anyway, sweeping generalization. But if only you had preserved your essence for better things you may have more energy to become fully realized. And its still not too late. For now, all that is available is anecdotal evidence from people who try to quit porn and incidentally masturbation. There have been countless reports of improvements that range from increase in confidence to energy. There were also Plato, Nietzsche among others who abstained from sex to preserve creativity. As a common proverb goes "The blood in my body can either goto my brain or my dick".

OP, I strongly share your desire to find objective truth on this issue. And like you, I have sifted through much of the available literature to look for answers. Truth is, there just isn't any substantial research on the effects of masturbation. This is, to my suspicion, due to the leftist nature of academia to not go against the current liberal culture of free sexual expression. Sexual release induces sedative-like effects for the individual. Its endorphin inducing mechanism could be looked at as small doses of heroin as both of these chemicals work on opiates. Though subtle in the short term, its effects could be powerful in the long. Why are heroin addicts losers? They do nothing but shoot heroin. They are satisfied with doing nothing. So logically it follows that those who masturbate are satisfied with doing less than those who don't. Masturbation rewards doing nothing. The same opiate high could be found through exercise instead of masturbation-a much healthier and rewarding habit. Sometimes to achieve greatness, the first things one must do is to abstain from deleterious behavior. When objective answers are not available, it doesn't hurt to have subjective ones. And abstinence has given me much energy but also much strain on my body. I hope that the psychosomatic issues that you are facing are relieved-it has been two years since your original posting. Please send me a message when you see this, I'd like to talk to you more about this topic. If it leads to a betterment of one's higher faculties, then the sacrifice of lower desires is all-too-appropriate. Cheers.