I'm trying to be careful about the way I ask this as to not makes this a lewd question. I've been reading some Ayurvedic literature (for better or for worse) while reading TS Wiley and wondering, thinking about the Ayurvedic fear of regular ejaculation. Have sex or imitating sexual acts stimulates the endocrine system (in men DHT, DHA, testosterone, cortisol, luteinizing hormone, etc). Sperm is also rich in nutrients. Every time ejaculation occurs there is a loss of nutrients and an endocrine response. Over utilizing this in nature was likely not an issue do to seasonal endocrine and climate changes and the lack of super-stimulus (i.e. pornography). In a world without seasons and with super-stiumulus, people are engaging in this nutrient demanding, endocrine stimulating act with increasing regularity. What are the negative implication of this world in which a dry spell never occurs? What would be a paleo solution to the potential problems?
Addendum -- Sex on whole: healthy. But what is the J curve? When (at what frequency and to whom) do detrimental effects start to occur? Can sex exacerbate hormonal imbalances?Could too frequent of sex (or simulated sex) become a chronic stressor?
When you feel compelled to ask about it on online forums?
Yes, well, I consider modern pornography quite parallel to refined sugar, and therefore not in the paleo spirit. It's sad when people find they can't get excited over real, whole people anymore, and I wouldn't be surprised if overuse of pornography changes the brain quite concretely. Other than this super-stimulus effect, I tend to think of most of the detriment in emotional and social terms, though.
I haven't thought much about the effects of frequent ejaculation. I don't know much about it. However, I was under the impression that constant masturbation is a normal part of at least adolescence, even without any visual aid.
I am not sure this is a problem. However, here is my Paleo solution to it. I practice Karezza, coitus reservatus, however you want to call it. I don't know if the Taoists and Ayurvedists are right that frequent ejaculations are damaging. I just want to prolong the pleasure and be able to engage for as long as I like without the downtime of a refractory period.
Some women like this. Other's don't.
I'm trying not to sound like the cranky skeptic I am but this is straight-up woo. I really, really cannot imagine how sex could lead to hormonal imbalances, there's pretty much no information at all to suggest that it could. I think if you're worrying about something like that you might be becoming a teeny bit obsessive about reaching perfect health or whatever.
Men make millions of sperm every day. If frequent ejaculation really had any effect whatsoever on nutrition status, teenage boys would be dropping dead left and right of severe malnutrition.
In March of 2010, my partner and I decided (after I read a book about Slow Sex/Karezza) to try it - what did we have to lose? We figured if we didn't see a benefit, we could go right back to orgasmic sex. A simple, safe self-experiment!
We've been together more than 15 years, and have been through various sexual adventures - polyamory being one of them, but generally lots of regular sex. And now, more than a year later, we can safely say that our relationship has never been better and the sex is fantastic - off the charts fantastic. Both of us noticed the hang-over we get from orgasm, and the disconnect and lowering of compassion and camaraderie between us post orgasm. He gets more irritable the next day, I get more so in about 10 days, so for me, it's a long cycle.
We just ignore the woo part, and let our own sense of deep love and contentment be our guide. I'm never going back to fertilization driven sex. (See Sex at Dawn for one man's take on Paleo sex.)
All I can say is that I wish I had learned about Karezza AND Paleo/Primal 20 years ago!
Hormonally, there are no lasting negative effects of sex/ejaculation. In fact, abstaining from sex for 12 weeks has been shown to cause a dramatic drop in testosterone. The belief that sex saps a fighter's legs, or an athlete's energy has been proven to be a myth.
There are also studies that show that viewing pornography raises testosterone levels. Additionally, it has been said that in the 1980's Bulgarian weightlifters sexually stimulated themselves (without ejaculating) prior to a big lift, to maximize testosterone. (Bulgarians are Elite power lifters).
The Olympic Village is notorious for going through an unbelievable number of condoms.
As for frequent ejaculation, studies have shown that it's healthy for the prostate when you are under 40, and not so healthy for the prostate if you're over 40. I'm not sure how thorough the studies were on that one though.
I agree that multiple ejaculations in a day are energy sappers. I haven't seen anything measurable, or any studies relating to this. Maybe the Taoists are onto something.
I buy the woo hook line and sinker and +1 for Thomas being a big boy and having command over his sex...here's my take, science out of the equation, this is about your potency man! Your ability to contain your chi/energy/essence and not flail it around everywhere. I bet Thomas feels a big fat difference, not just in bed, but walkin around in the world. As a woman, woo centric though I am, I am awesomely turned on by a man that can...let's just say...handle a woman. a real live wild primal wo-man...
I have heard tell of men that approached this practice and their experience is that they just didn't know what they were missing. Absolutely does matter, damn the studies, n=1...Miles Davis and Ali (I think Ali is in the club, totally not going to Google it) didn't play before they had to play.
my two cents.
I've been doing a bit of reading on this and have found some interesting [articles].1 The excessive masturbation theory makes a lot of sense, and depending on the validity of the findings of the experiment regarding testosterone levels, it makes even more sense. From an evolutionary perspective, we have never had so much sexual stimulation available to us before. And to get sexually stimulated, we had to put in effort to be the alpha male. In modern times, you don't have to be the alpha male, you can be the zeta male and still get 'pussy' so to speak. So on a biological level, your body is effectively satisfied without the need for any effort.
All across the globe, in different religions and cultures, male abstinence has been considered a way of preserving the very "maleness" of a man, and that if he was to "spill his seed" too often, disaster would result. Ladies, we had the "wandering wombs" that were brought back by sexual stimulation (by a physician, just wondering, how weird would it be being, erm, stimulated by your doctor? Now you'll have that image for the rest of the day). Ayurvedic's are absolutely not alone in fearing the "draining" of men.
Honestly? If you can be tipped into nutritional depletion by ejaculation, you probably have bigger problems going on. And bad move nature, if you give someone a libido that spurs them to pursue a quantity of sex preferable for them, and then it turns out it is draining men of all that is male. And wouldn't the male libido tank when males are sick then? Because most studies show that men will continue to pursue the same amount of sex regardless of their health (the "knock first" policy of isolation rooms in the hospital could attest to this).
Fasting and testosterone? 4 Answers