Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago

I just spent about half my monthly salary on Valentines Day plans and sat through a full hour(!) of The Notebook, so my interests are obviously not with video games anymore.

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 


Holy shit, dude, are you planning marrying this girl? I wouldn't spend that much on a 10th anniversary!

And yes, gaming and girls don't have to be mutually exclusive. Kat2 and I are known to lay down some lead against each other in a game of Cube II  now and then. :-"

Porforis raises a great point with his comments on stress. I know if I am experiencing prolonged anxiety over some upcoming event in my life, my libido tends to dissipate.

I would also like to second the comments on soy. I used to be a soy fanatic -- soy cereal, soy meat, soy milk, etc. After I learned of all the downsides to soy, I cut it out of my life to the greatest extent possible, and I noticed an almost immediate improvement, not just in my libido but also in my overall health. Soy is full of estrogens, which are the last things men need to be putting in their bodies. They've shown that women who consume soy while pregnant give birth to boys with higher rates of reproductive tract defects.
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago

I'm fairly confident there's always been a certain something that's kept youths away from exploring their raging hormones for every generation. The more recent just happens to be video games. I highly doubt 50-100 years ago there wasn't something that held youths from exploring their sexual urges.

Zero2Cool wrote:


I highly doubt this. Remember, not so long ago, reproduction was considered a solemn duty of virtually everyone who didn't enter the religious life. Life was hard, often short, and children were the functional equivalent of life insurance. In the Middle Ages, for example, virginity past the onset of puberty was extremely rare. (To use one example from literature, it often makes people uncomfortable to realize that Juliet is not quite 14 when the play opens, so our modern productions tend to gloss over that disconcerting fact.)

That's one of the reasons why I find it amusing when people act like teenage sex is some modern tragedy. That's the farthest thing from the truth. Teenage sex has been the norm throughout history. Yes, it was primarily married teen sex, but that is beside the point. It's only been in very recent history -- within the past century -- that widespread abstinence during adolescence even became thinkable, much less mainstream. To think that 40 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 are virgins these days is just mind boggling.

Obviously, that doesn't mean humans were simply fucking like rabbits all the time. They had to work their asses off and probably came home dog tired, which may have often put a crimp on the lovemaking. Plus there were other circumstances that might lead to temporary periods of abstinence: abstinence after childbirth (or during periods of privation), war campaigns, long hunts, sailing, trading expeditions, exploration and pioneering, etc. But those were the exception, not the rule. The concept of young men sitting around in fantasy worlds instead of leading real-life families and bearing real-world responsibility is recent indeed.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
12 years ago

We don't give a rat's ass about the cut of your jeans. The universal truth about men is your decolletage. We don't know exactly why, and 90% of the men looking don't even know what the fuck decolletage IS, (by word, but it is quite descriptive) Your naked breasts are NOT as interesting as this, to us, and it isn't even close, for perspective, in my experience. The french pegged this one.

We like nips we just barely cannot see, and the curvature getting to 'em. Levi Strauss cannot deliver that. The sooner you women-folk realize that, the sooner we can all get back to haba da gee, lol

Originally Posted by: dfosterf 



Sorry, Foster, yer fulla shit on this one.

Legs and butts rock! And next to the black evening gown cut up to there, few things can be sexier than a gal in her jeans.




And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Zero2Cool
12 years ago

I highly doubt this. Remember, not so long ago, reproduction was considered a solemn duty of virtually everyone who didn't enter the religious life. Life was hard, often short, and children were the functional equivalent of life insurance. In the Middle Ages, for example, virginity past the onset of puberty was extremely rare. (To use one example from literature, it often makes people uncomfortable to realize that Juliet is not quite 14 when the play opens, so our modern productions tend to gloss over that disconcerting fact.)

That's one of the reasons why I find it amusing when people act like teenage sex is some modern tragedy. That's the farthest thing from the truth. Teenage sex has been the norm throughout history. Yes, it was primarily married teen sex, but that is beside the point. It's only been in very recent history -- within the past century -- that widespread abstinence during adolescence even became thinkable, much less mainstream. To think that 40 percent of Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 are virgins these days is just mind boggling.

Obviously, that doesn't mean humans were simply fucking like rabbits all the time. They had to work their asses off and probably came home dog tired, which may have often put a crimp on the lovemaking. Plus there were other circumstances that might lead to temporary periods of abstinence: abstinence after childbirth (or during periods of privation), war campaigns, long hunts, sailing, trading expeditions, exploration and pioneering, etc. But those were the exception, not the rule. The concept of young men sitting around in fantasy worlds instead of leading real-life families and bearing real-world responsibility is recent indeed.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 


How can you highly doubt it? It's common sense. Nothing about human nature is purely absolute as you are implying. Teenage sex was more accepted 100 years ago, but that does not mean nothing deterred their sexual drives as teenagers.

UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago
Maybe I am not understanding what you are saying. There have always been people who chose not to have sex, for whatever reason. My point is there wasn't the societally sanctioned and even encouraged outlets of escapism until recent history. Except for the upper classes who had more opportunities for leisure, most people had to face the realities of life pretty early.
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
12 years ago

Maybe I am not understanding what you are saying. There have always been people who chose not to have sex, for whatever reason. My point is there wasn't the societally sanctioned and even encouraged outlets of escapism until recent history. Except for the upper classes who had more opportunities for leisure, most people had to face the realities of life pretty early.

Originally Posted by: Nonstopdrivel 



There's a good chance I'm not understanding what I'm saying. Shortening up what I was saying was, video games are only today's "sex block" where as it was something else 100 years ago, something else 200 years ago... etc... The tone I perceived was that video games were ruining teenage sex lives so to speak. I think video games are simply just today's distraction of sex. That is all.
UserPostedImage
coltonja
12 years ago
I want to start this by apologizing with the nose in the air sentiment of this statement (which I will qualify that with I am currently an undergrad psych major) but I want to point something out.

This article states that 40 percent of men do not want to have sex. However, this number comes from "Relationship counsellors report a 40 per cent..." I'm not sure if that sends off alarm bells to everyone but to my minimally trained brain that screams bad external validity, or generability. Having a population of men that go to relationship counselors with problems, even if they are not to do with sex, is a horrible sample and does not translate well to the general population.

That being said, you guys probably picked that up anyway (smart crew here), it still may be true it just needs a better study.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to pack93z for the sig!!!
Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago
You raise a good point. I don't think the article ever claimed it was a double-blind study. Obviously, a study based on people in counseling is going to suffer from significant selection bias.
UserPostedImage
Nonstopdrivel
12 years ago

video games are only today's "sex block" where as it was something else 100 years ago, something else 200 years ago... etc...

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 


It's possible, but I struggle to think of what it might have been. It's not like sports played a big role in cultures of that period -- there simply wasn't enough leisure time. I think that with our modern mores, we often underestimate just how much pressure was placed on young people to have sex. Remember, a woman unmarried by the age of 16 was considered an old maid in a lot of cultures. Social and community events tended to place a lot of emphasis on bringing people together for the purposes of finding suitable mates, and parents frequently were bringing their children's attention to prospective good matches from a very young age (sometimes infancy!). You could argue that the hunt, the sweat lodges, and even politics emerged as ways for men to get time away from women (I've even read arguments that patriarchy arose as a way for women to get men out of the house!), but it's not like most of those guys were virgins. It's this phenomenon of young men hanging out with each other out of fear of rejection or outright disinterest in sex that I think is a modern development. In the old days, the less virile of men tended to be pressed into service at a pretty young age.

If someone has some information about youth movements that actively postponed sex (other than religious orders), I would love to hear about them. I think it would make for fascinating reading.

UserPostedImage
gbguy20
12 years ago
Multiquote button failed me so im going to touch on the things I can remember.

Topic of video games. If you notice your son would rather play video games than go out, your duty as a parent is to cut off his video games, he is addicted and you need to fix it before it fucks him up socially. My children aren't going to have video games, period. If you are choosing video games over sex, you have a serious issue that you need to fix, that's all there is to it. Not sure if you can tell but I am completely against children playing video games. Not because "violent video games make kids shoot up schools," but because video games have proven to be one of the most addicting activities in children and as a result social skills are lacking severely, not to mention changes in the brain and the growing amount of fat kids.

Women: A tight butt and firm legs are 100x more important than any pair of tits. I absolutely LOVE the athletic body type.

Internet affecting view on women: Absolutely true. It's pretty commonly accepted that gore on the internet and in movies has desensitized our society to that type of thing, I don't hear many people arguing that at all. It is exactly the same way when it comes to women. Standards for women are raised due to the 10's your looking at on the internet all the time. Dicks are numbed.
BAD EMAIL because the address couldn ot be found, or is unable to receive mail.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (1h) : Johnson didn't make it until 2020. Ring 2023. 🤷 Personally, he should have been in years prior to Hall.
Zero2Cool (1h) : HUMP DAY
beast (1h) : Guys that have a good shot at making the NFL Hall of Fame usually get into their teams pretty fast
beast (1h) : Yeah, but is Kampman and the others in the NFL Hall of Fame?
Zero2Cool (1h) : Johnson was Hall of Fame, 2020. Should haev been in Ring a year later, not three years.
Zero2Cool (1h) : I could be wrong there though
Zero2Cool (1h) : Guys like Kampman, Tim Harris, Al Harris, etc all over 15 years. Hall of Fame is 5 year wait
Zero2Cool (1h) : I guess I see players in Packers Hall come way later
beast (1h) : Yeah, usually teams hall of fames are a much lower bar than the NFL
Zero2Cool (1h) : is it uncommon for Hall before Ring?
Zero2Cool (2h) : S Xavier McKinney named first-team All-Pro by NFLPA
beast (3h) : I missed it, sorry, but he got into the NFL Hall of Fame years before that
Zero2Cool (3h) : Jones took his sweet ole time!
Zero2Cool (3h) : Yeah, he's in the ring of honor, just saw video and his name is up there
Zero2Cool (3h) : Didn't they have a thing in 2023 for Jimmy's ring of honor? I swear I saw it
beast (3h) : Though if they're legitimately trying to re-sign MM, then it makes sense.
beast (3h) : Jerry Jones still hasn't put Jimmy Johnson in the Ring of Honor, but he's in the NFL's Hall of Fame, Jones is petty
Mucky Tundra (15h) : Unless the Cowboys are planning an extension, seems kinda petty
beast (17h) : Cowboys denied Bears request
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : From what I'm reading, MM is under contract through the 14th of January; after that he's free game
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : McCarthy let go or not extended??
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Chicago Bears have asked the Dallas Cowboys permission to interview Mike McCarthy for head coaching vacancy
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : The winners page that is
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : I was not hoping for that. It messes up the page lol
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3.
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3.
beast (6-Jan) : Thank you, and I was really opening we were going to get 4 or more tied for the top 3
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : congrats beast on 2024 !
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : congrats porky on winning 2023 pick'em! (oops sorry)
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : Packers have $60M+ of 2025 cap space on paper TODAY.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Missed FG into a Lions TD; that'll do pig, that'll do
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : That might be it for the Vikings
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Oh so the refs do know what intentional grounding is
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : what the hell was that Goff?! Not much pressure and he just air mails it to Harrison
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : They really need to to get rid of the auto first down for illegal contact
Martha Careful (6-Jan) : watching the Vikings and Lions it's understandable why they swept the Packers. So much better product
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Even when GB got pressure he was throwing darts; vs no pressure on that last pass he just air mails an open guy
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : didn't have guys in his face ... pressure makes difference
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Where was this Darnold vs GB?
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : BALL DON'T LIE
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : how was that not a safety? Goff throws it at an offensive lineman
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Zero, I thought that was a given! ;)
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : Zero I looked through earlier and noticed the same thing. Bonkers year. I just wonder if beast put any money on games
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : I'm hoping for BLOODBATH. Pummel one another.
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : 8 people in pick'em would have won any year with their total lol
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : I'm rooting for the Lions to lose.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jan) : God help me but I'm rooting for the Vikings to...Vikings to...Christ I can't say it
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : 4 td for Rodgers
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : Chiefs got shutout
Zero2Cool (6-Jan) : Rodgers passes for 3rd TD. might be last game of an amazing career
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
7m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14h / Around The NFL / beast

7-Jan / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

7-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

7-Jan / Fantasy Sports Talk / Zero2Cool

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

6-Jan / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

6-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

5-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

3-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.