Say, fellas! He's talking about blue balls. Don't let this happen to you.
Men have a primordial urge to have sex - and many have no other recourse than to wine and dine women (or pay for prostitutes) to satisfy that basic, urgent, instinctive drive.
Women, on the other hand, get to be "wined and dined." Women seek the attention of men chiefly because it strokes their egos - not because failing to do so every couple of days places them in a state of increasing physiological discomfort (as seminal vesicles become overloaded). Women who have no choice but to pay for sex are few and far between.
Under those circumstances, it's no feat for women to "exercise discipline." It's like praising millionaires for not sleeping under bridges, while lambasting poor people for eating fried dog.
As for your throwing "and drugs" in there: I have no statistics handy about differences in the rates of drug addiction and alcohol abuse between the sexes, but the general consensus is that women are just as inclined to "over-indulge" as men.
But back to sex: For every "Chad" or "Tyrone" out there who carelessly "sleeps around," there are three or four loose women who are willing to spread their legs for them. It is "accepted wisdom" (backed up, e.g., by anthropological studies) that, throughout history, a relatively small minority of men procreate, while nearly all females "get to" reproduce. Genetic tests have demonstrated that every individual alive today has about four times as many female ancestors as male ancestors. I leave it to you to ponder the ramifications of that fact.
Regards,
Say, fellas! He's talking about blue balls. Don't let this happen to you.
You reduce men to a bunch of stupid animals, but the Bible tells us that God won't allow any temptation that we can't control. Maybe you don't believe in the Bible and that's your choice, but excusing men by painting them as a bunch of stupid animals only proves my point.
Men have been conditioned from childhood to think that their self worth is based on how many women they nail, but there are a lot of guys who don't fall into this role of having to shoot their sperm all over the place. Instead of taking a cue or just minding their own business, most men go out of their way to ridicule them or question their sexuality. Why? If some men don't want to live their lives as stupid animals who can't understand personal responsibility, then why should they have to?
And none of this excuses the money being spent on abusive pimps and human traffickers. If men think getting laid is more important than the harm caused by all of this, then maybe the feminists are right about men.
As for your throwing "and drugs" in there: I have no statistics handy about differences in the rates of drug addiction and alcohol abuse between the sexes, but the general consensus is that women are just as inclined to "over-indulge" as men.
That's likely true, but who do you think is buying much of it for them or giving it to them in return for, you know. Not to mention the human traffickers who keep their "products" drugged up.
But back to sex: For every "Chad" or "Tyrone" out there who carelessly "sleeps around," there are three or four loose women who are willing to spread their legs for them. It is "accepted wisdom" (backed up, e.g., by anthropological studies) that, throughout history, a relatively small minority of men procreate, while nearly all females "get to" reproduce. Genetic tests have demonstrated that every individual alive today has about four times as many female ancestors as male ancestors. I leave it to you to ponder the ramifications of that fact.
None of this excuses men for making abusive pimps and human traffickers rich.