Why not to fap

[Subduction Zone]

Religion to the religious. Science to the scientific.
One can fight on both fronts and have either one evaluated by their peers in that community.

Yes, but that is the problem. His beliefs do not appear to be very scientific.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Yes, but that is the problem. His beliefs do not appear to be very scientific.

He invented open heart surgery!

Why can't you judge him scientifically for what he's done scientifically?

There are many scientists who worship God but don't bring it up when they write their research papers.

I don't understand you SZ.

 

[Subduction Zone]

He invented open heart surgery!

Why can't you judge him scientifically for what he's done scientifically?

There are many scientists who worship God but don't bring it up when they write their research papers.

I don't understand you SZ.

So what? Kellogg invented corn flakes. That does not make either of them valid authorities in this area. And your last sentence was quite the non sequitur.

An appeal to authority when the authority is not an expert in the field is a logical fallacy.

 

[robocop (actually)]

If you don't think he knows a lot about science, don't listen to him.

If you don't think he knows a lot about religion, don't listen to him.

 

[Galateasdream]

N.Y.

This seems to lead to some interesting ramifications.

It seems, then, that the only reason masturbation is wrong, in your opinion, is that it does more harm than good.

This means:

A) that you believe that any activity where the harm outweighs the good is wrong to do

B) that it would be just as wrong for a spouse to masturbate their partner, since it's the physical effects of masturbation not the auto context that is the issue

Is that right?

If so, can you be clear as to exactly what harms and what benefits come from masturbation, so we can see the pros/cons and why you think it more harmful than beneficial?

 

[Subduction Zone]

If you don't think he knows a lot about science, don't listen to him.

If you don't think he knows a lot about religion, don't listen to him.

You can listen to him if you want. My point was that it makes no sense. I know that I can find articles that show ejaculating at least twenty times a month is healthier than doing so only four or five times a month. I could probably find articles by sex experts that will say there is no trouble with it if not done to excess. Why would anyone listen to a biased heart surgeon on this topic?

 

[robocop (actually)]

This seems to lead to some interesting ramifications.

It seems, then, that the only reason masturbation is wrong, in your opinion, is that it does more harm than good.

This means:

A) that you believe that any activity where the harm outweighs the good is wrong to do

B) that it would be just as wrong for a spouse to masturbate their partner, since it's the physical effects of masturbation not the auto context that is the issue

Is that right?

If so, can you be clear as to exactly what harms and what benefits come from masturbation, so we can see the pros/cons and why you think it more harmful than beneficial?

Yes, more harm than good.

(A) Yes, that makes it normally wrong.

(B) A person can masturbate their partner. What doesn't work so well is that a person masturbates themself instead of their partner. I can understand disagreement... the Raelians even say masturbating yourself is OK.

 

[robocop (actually)]

You can listen to him if you want. My point was that it makes no sense. I know that I can find articles that show ejaculating at least twenty times a month is healthier than doing so only four or five times a month. I could probably find articles by sex experts that will say there is no trouble with it if not done to excess. Why would anyone listen to a biased heart surgeon on this topic?

Shadow Wolf claimed to be an expert on the subject and she said that it would only not be a problem if the person doesn't have it lead to worse behavior. Colon cancer isn't everything.

 

[robocop (actually)]

You can listen to him if you want. My point was that it makes no sense. I know that I can find articles that show ejaculating at least twenty times a month is healthier than doing so only four or five times a month. I could probably find articles by sex experts that will say there is no trouble with it if not done to excess. Why would anyone listen to a biased heart surgeon on this topic?

Be my guest. I have tried to argue for myself.

 

[Galateasdream]

A person can masturbate their partner. What doesn't work so well is that a person masturbates themself instead of their partner

How are the health effects different?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Shadow Wolf claimed to be an expert on the subject and she said that it would only not be a problem if the person doesn't have it lead to worse behavior. Colon cancer isn't everything.

Though I probably agree with Shadow Wolf I would like to see some credentials. But as I said, as long as it is not excessive there probably is no problem with it. And it is prostate cancer that it lowers the rate of. How the heck are you masturbating?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How are the health effects different?

i don't know, but it appears he might be open to my "massage parlor" happy ending suggestion.

 

[Galateasdream]

i don't know, but it appears he might be open to my "massage parlor" happy ending suggestion.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say I don't think so ...

But I'm genuinely curious how this all works.

I mean, the ramifications of disallowing anything where the harm outweighs the good is staggering enough (food must be very tricky!) but I'm curious as to how sex works and exactly what can and cannot be done under this paradigm.

I'm still unsure as to exactly what the list of harms/benefits are.

 

[robocop (actually)]

How are the health effects different?

That's a good question. I think because with your partner it's a form of sex, but that's a good question.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Though I probably agree with Shadow Wolf I would like to see some credentials. But as I said, as long as it is not excessive there probably is no problem with it. And it is prostate cancer that it lowers the rate of. How the heck are you masturbating?

You can ask Shadow Wolf. And I finally got your joke when I meant to say "prostate cancer."

 

[robocop (actually)]

i don't know, but it appears he might be open to my "massage parlor" happy ending suggestion.

In marriage, I don't see why not.

 

[robocop (actually)]

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say I don't think so ...

But I'm genuinely curious how this all works.

I mean, the ramifications of disallowing anything where the harm outweighs the good is staggering enough (food must be very tricky!) but I'm curious as to how sex works and exactly what can and cannot be done under this paradigm.

I'm still unsure as to exactly what the list of harms/benefits are.

If you follow what I've explained, you should see where I would advise against masturbating.

When a couple is married, physically exercising their love is appropriate.

 

[Galateasdream]

That's a good question. I think because with your partner it's a form of sex, but that's a good question.

If you list the benefits and harms of masturbation it should become clear whether or not masturbation with a partner is also to be disallowed.

And we can also compare many other sex acts, solo and partnered.

 

[robocop (actually)]

If you list the benefits and harms of masturbation it should become clear whether or not masturbation with a partner is also to be disallowed.

And we can also compare many other sex acts, solo and partnered.

That's OK. If it's all the same to you I wouldn't mind retiring this thread now. It had its day in the sun. Now we are discussing trivialities.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You can ask Shadow Wolf. And I finally got your joke when I meant to say "prostate cancer."

Glad to hear that you have a sense of humor.