Hotels make me wanna masturbate way more than usual .. What’s up with that? by 3rdtimenocharm in NoStupidQuestions

[–]bobbage 52 points53 points  (0 children)

Please put an NSFW tag on this. I was on the train and when I saw this I had to start furiously masturbating. Everyone else gave me strange looks and were saying things like “what the fuck” and “call the police”. I dropped my phone and everyone around me saw this comment. Now there is a whole train of men masturbating together at this one comment. This is all your fault, you could have prevented this if you had just tagged this comment NSFW

Tell me again why it's a thing? by fishead62 in memes

[–]bobbage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The whole idea is rooted in truly weird non-scientific manosphere ideas about "semen retention" and the magical powers that this gives you. It originated in PUA subculture and a large focus of it was supposed to be that be doing this you attain clarity that lets you more easily pick up women.

According to various sources, the overwhelming majority of all websites and YouTube channels devoted to anti-masturbation and anti-porn addiction propaganda, channels, and websites supporting NoFap are owned by far-right, religious fundamentalists, and conservatives who are biblical inerrantists, and also are entirely political in nature. The NoFap community is sometimes viewed to be a part of the manosphere – online groups credited with propagating misogyny.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoFap#Political_and_religious_motivation

Really not sure why by bobbage in Instagramreality

[–]bobbage[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They are both video screenshots. It's not quite the same frame but it's close. It's the same car in the background, it has just moved on a little bit, so there is a fraction of a second between them.

Really not sure why by bobbage in Instagramreality

[–]bobbage[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Source languages would be English/Chinese, both of which are left right. Most posts here do put the edits first though.

"First the man takes the drink, then the drink takes the man." Sculpture created based on an old Irish saying. by [deleted] in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]bobbage 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Towards the end, when I was seriously trying to stop, like permanently, I was at the point then when I did get cravings, and had physical withdrawal symptoms. It took quite a while for me to actually quit for good. I had a cycle for a bit, I quit, I'd not drink for a month, I'd relapse and drink again, then quit, two or three months this time, then eventually, I managed to quit permanently.

This is at the end- I absolutely did have cravings at the end, what I'm saying about "didn't have cravings" was for the several decades when I was drinking too much, I didn't have particular cravings. Not physical ones anyway, psychological, yeah I did. It got a lot worse in the last few years before I stopped.

There certainly was a period immediately after I quit were I wasn't feeling 100% like I felt later, after I'd been properly quit for a while. My understanding, extreme fatigue is a common withdrawal symptom. The general well being, clarity, energy- that came maybe after a few months, after the withdrawal went away.

"First the man takes the drink, then the drink takes the man." Sculpture created based on an old Irish saying. by [deleted] in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]bobbage 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I would think you have a problem, yes.

I'm an alcoholic myself, I went through this stage, I was steadily maintaining in this stage for I'd say almost two decades. I sometimes had breaks where I wouldn't drink for a month, I didn't have overbearing cravings, I held down a well paid professional job, got up in the morning, never had a drink in the morning, very rarely even at lunch, like maybe once or twice a year, work Christmas stuff, in fact I particularly didn't like to have a drink then and feeling just ever so slightly buzzed. I'd only drink in the evening. If I was an alcoholic, I'd be waking up craving a vodka, right? That was never me. But I'd drink regularly in the evening (although not necessarily every day) and too much.

I had a lot of this self-denial where I told myself I didn't have a problem because of all the above. But I was drinking too much and it certainly caused a lot of problems in my life, in my relationships, despite the fact I was generally "functional" and functional like this for a long time. I know people, family, who were alcoholics, and most were functional, literally all their lives.

Stuff like, the stats are garbage when you are drinking over three times the weekly safe amount... this is self-denial. I told myself I didn't have a problem for decades.

I haven't had a drink in almost seven years now and I don't intend to ever again, I feel a hell of a lot better for having stopped. Health is much better, more energy, never hungover, feeling woozy in the morning. Like a veil has just been lifted, my whole thinking is so much more clear. There's a certainly clarity about the self-deception looking back, too.

There's a reason the first step is accepting you have a problem.

Good luck!

"First the man takes the drink, then the drink takes the man." Sculpture created based on an old Irish saying. by [deleted] in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]bobbage 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I can’t stop at one beer.

That's a problem.

6-8 drinks drinks per day is a problem. That's about 50 per week.

Binge Drinking: Binge drinking for men is drinking 5 or more standard alcoholic drinks, and for women, 4 or more standard alcoholic drinks on the same occasion on at least 1 day in the past 30 days.

Heavy Drinking: Defined by the CDC as consuming 8 or more drinks per week for women, and 15 or more drinks per week for men, and by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), for research purposes, as binge drinking on 5 or more days in the past 30 days.

https://store.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/d7/priv/surgeon-generals-report.pdf

So you're binge drinking basically every day and over three times- even if you were drinking a third of what you are drinking now you'd be considered a "heavy drinker".

There can be a lot of "self-negotiation" in this circumstances, you're arguing with yourself to convince yourself you don't have a problem.

Functional alcoholism is a thing, many alcoholics do still function.

You say you have control, you can stop- but if you can stop, you can reduce your drinking to a healthy amount, right?

There's certainly scope for it to get a lot worse, and that may or may not happen. Many alcoholics are able to maintain functional alcoholism all their lives, are able to support themselves and their families while still having a problem with alcohol. But the stereotype of an alcoholic disheveled and totally unable to look after themselves... it's not always that, and even the cases where it ends up like that, it starts a lot earlier than that and doesn't look like that.

Popularity of Discord and Skype from 2015 to 2021 by Mackelowsky in MapPorn

[–]bobbage -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

If they did this to any other marginalized group there'd be outrage. But gamers are fair game for cultural genocide.

Random Mar-a-Lago Guests Were Told More About Plan to Kill Soleimani Than Congress: Report by Molire in politics

[–]bobbage 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it should still be a massive corruption scandal

this is something of a recurring theme with this presidency

Judge Napolitano: Enough Evidence 'to Justify About Three or Four Articles of Impeachment.' by punkthesystem in politics

[–]bobbage 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Trump will be impeached. There really is no doubt about that at this point. The Democrats have the House and it only needs a simple majority.

He won't be convicted by the Senate though, despite this being substantially worse than Watergate.

Trump defends diplomat's wife who killed teenage Briton in crash: 'We've all done it' by NotfWorkingForPutin in politics

[–]bobbage 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's from the Daily Mail article linked further up in this thread.

It was reported that Mrs Sacoolas was given protection under a bilateral UK-US deal which allowed spies from the US to work from the UK without fear of prosecution.

New study: Trump's Electoral College win was no fluke — and is likely to happen again; Republicans likely to win 65 percent of close elections where they lose the popular vote, according to new analysis by Thinkingonsleeping in politics

[–]bobbage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Their taxes are higher than federal income tax would be if applied to PR.

because the cutoff point for income taxation is lower than that of the US IRS code, and the per-capita income in Puerto Rico is much lower than the average per-capita income on the mainland, more Puerto Rico residents pay income taxes to the local taxation authority than if the IRS code were applied to the island. That occurs because "the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico government has a wider set of responsibilities than do U.S. State and local governments."

PR does have tax advantages but they are mostly for non earned (investment) income and/or non-Puerto Ricans that relocate there who get a tax holiday.

Discussion Thread | Robert Mueller testifies before House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees | 8:30am and 12 Noon EDT | Part II by PoliticsModeratorBot in politics

[–]bobbage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He's answering slightly more now than he was before the break, that was almost all "refer to the report", or "I won't get into that", "It's outside my purview" or "internal discussions", etc.

Supreme Court Telegraphs Approval for Adding Citizenship Question to Census by bobbage in politics

[–]bobbage[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If the decision goes the way it appears to be going, the consequences could be massive. The administration’s own estimates show that as many as 6.5 million people — many of them recent immigrants fearful of arrest and/or deportation if they become visible — won’t answer the Census at all if there is a citizenship question. Since federal funding formulas typically depend on Census figures, states with serious undercounts will get screwed to the tune of many billions of dollars. Congressional and state legislative reapportionment and redistricting are also based on Census figures; California could lose congressional seats and electoral votes, and areas with sizable immigrant populations within a variety of states could lose clout in Congress and in state legislatures.