Sexual Reproduction & consequences of non/over use
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 5:02 am
So Thrillers Topic doesnt get over run with this we should make a new thread for it methinks.
Thriller perhaps you could split out the posts in your thread maybe into this one?
Ok now thats over with onto the subject.
The argument has been made (by Sandman) that over using your reproductive organs leads to future fertility issues.
A counter agrument has been provided (by Myself & Hitchkok) that in fact not using your reproductive organs has a worse effect on your fertility.
Discuss folks
The following was one of my responses to Sandman, regarding the topic highlighting the issue
EDIT: In respone to the 'its not an argument' thats just semantics & you know it Hitchkok, what woud you like it called exactly? Its an opposing statement, otherwise known as an argument, in the same way that 'X + Y' has two arguments. Sweet jesus, thats all you had to say?? Why did you even bother to post just to say that?
Thriller perhaps you could split out the posts in your thread maybe into this one?
Ok now thats over with onto the subject.
The argument has been made (by Sandman) that over using your reproductive organs leads to future fertility issues.
A counter agrument has been provided (by Myself & Hitchkok) that in fact not using your reproductive organs has a worse effect on your fertility.
Discuss folks
The following was one of my responses to Sandman, regarding the topic highlighting the issue
Production of sperm decreases over time if the reproductive organs are not used, over a long enough period of time it can reduce it to such an extent that impregnation is impossible though your sperm not having enough mobility.
Where as having sex encourages production, as said before even daily sex wont lead to any damage assuming you are fully sexually mature & have a diet that is healthy.
Did you even pay attention in biology class? or was it against your beliefs so you just ignored it? Did you even take sex ed classes? How can you not know these things??
EDIT: In respone to the 'its not an argument' thats just semantics & you know it Hitchkok, what woud you like it called exactly? Its an opposing statement, otherwise known as an argument, in the same way that 'X + Y' has two arguments. Sweet jesus, thats all you had to say?? Why did you even bother to post just to say that?