From: Brian Phillips (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Jan 27 2002 - 16:57:27 MST
> In a message dated 1/26/2002 6:57:54 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> email@example.com writes:
> << I have done all the things you mention many times, except for using
> EP-Prime. >>
> Maybe we should try to use it sometimes! It's very progressive at the
> They were more interesting to me when I was in the range of 12-16, heh.
> I think its always good to wear clothes just a *little* bit off from
> else, to either make them uncomfortable a bit, or to admire you, or at
> notice the visual uniqueness that you convey. Wearing original clothing
> helps us to articulate our own personalities better, in effect making us
> (better?) individuals.
Individuality is a bulletproof waistcoat, a utilikilt, and a confidant
holster (for maximum concealment) accessorized with one's firearm of
choice. And comfy steeltoed boots with plenty of ankle support and
those killer specialty insoles. also a digitalangel, a good cel, and
> <<> <<This doesn't mean I think that sex is worthless or morally wrong. I
> > think sex is a great thing, for other people. >>
> > Having sex just a few times was more than enough for me,
> You mean *all total*, not per day, right???>>
> Yes, total. First it was for physical, then emotional purposes, now I
> only do it purely for novelty or intensity of the experience. Too bad no
> meets the standards.
> <<Hey, I know some girls who might be able to change your mind about
> Mmm, I doubt it. I dislike compromising my standards due to
> mating desires. If anyone could find me a gf it would probably be you
I would like to encourage everyone to get regular doses of sex. While not
a clinical psychologist I do have some background here and sex, even
sex that isn't the greatest, is good for you. Males especially.
Until we have total voluntary control of our hormonal systems (or
are post-corporeal) we must manipulate our bodies to function
at optimum levels. This means getting laid occasionally.
Males who do not have sex (and do not have close emotional
contact with someone (usually female) are probably not
functioning at the optimum level they could be if their backbrains
were reassured that the urge to procreate was occasionally being
Psychology is far from an exact science (it might be argued it
is far from even being a science, strictly speaking), but the
affective and cognitive effects of abstinence at the highest
levels of human functioning, where subtle value judgements
and high-level abstracting occur frequently, these effects are
not known to be favourable. What info we have suggests the
opposite (though this is far from proven, it merely seems reasonable!)
Obviously the historical rolemodels of monasticism may or
may not be applicable.. but I'd like to inject a word or three
of caution here.
Sex is good for you. Have healthy servings occasionally.
Even if 'love' is not involved. It helps male apes keep sane.
(who sounds like a registered dietician discussing the food groups!)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:37 MDT