₦airaland Forum

I think that over e-jaculation and frequent o-rgasm is a health concern and that modern Western doctors may have a cultural bias in not taking this seriously, this has long been theorized by ancient Taoist philosophers. I think that frequent o-rgasms can lower serum testosterone and raise prolactin to unhealthy levels and over e-jaculation depletes the body of resources in the same way that giving blood would (women typically don't e-jaculate so this wouldn't apply but high levels of prolactin would, assuming that prolactin levels rise after female o-rgasm). M-astrubating/having s-ex without o-rgasm, while still e-jaculating/o-rgasming maybe once a week, might be a good idea, this way you get the benefits of sex (increased oxytocin, dopamine etc.) without the drawbacks of high prolactin or loss of zinc, selenium, copper, . Not ejecting at all, besides leading to 'blue balls', would be a problem since the prostate needs to be flushed of carcinogens, toxins and dead s-prem.

What do you think? Have you noticed a change in your health when you go long periods of time without o-rgasm/e-jaculation?

Obowunmi,

I don't understand the comparison since people have a limited control over how thin they are and thinness is not a racial characteristic. It isn't 'anti-Black' to simply not wear your hair naturally, I see nothing wrong with that, what is 'anti-Black' is actively ostracizing Black men and women who wear their hair naturally and pressuring them not to do so because of your own negative attitudes about your own natural hair texture. I mean it's one thing to just date White women but to go on about the stereotypical shortcomings of Black women (ie. Black women are loud, rude, controlling blah blah blah) as a justification for your dating White women is something else. That might have been a bad analogy, the point is that if there's nothing wrong with being Black, then there's nothing wrong with Black men and women who naturally have tightly curled hair not relaxing their hair or going out of their way to keep it super short, since men and women from other groups aren't expected to alter or hide their natural hair texture Black people shouldn't be held to a different standard, even though there's nothing wrong with straightening or keeping it low cut either.

Good, now he should go one step further and advocate giving homosexuals all of the same legal rights (ie. marriage) that heterosexuals have. I don't think that marriage as a legal institution is justified to begin with but for as long as it exists, it shouldn't be in favor of one group alone.

I'm not in the mood to reply to all of the comments but I appreciate them.

Its funny you mention the issue of conformity in your post and then you go ahead to compare us white men who dont cut their hair so low. Should we keep our hair the way they do?

If Black men want to, they should. If they don't want to, they shouldn't. If they want to wear dreadlocks, jherri curls, pink wigs etc., they should be free to. I'm against inhibiting freedom of expression and individuality in general but discouraging Blacks from wearing their hair 'naturally' has a distinct racial aspect to it and it amazes me that people cannot see this.

We have different hair texture and a black man cannot keep his hair the way a white man does cos our hair texture is not the same.

No, he can, he'd just be discouraged from doing so.

IMO wear your hair the way you like. Long, short, curly, whatever. Me i like a clean shaven guy, low cut, chiseled hair line and a well trimmed goatee. That is a fresh look. I really cannot stand it when i see a guy with lots of hair on his head and facial hair. It just makes them look unkempt.

This is my opinion o, wetin be your own opinion?

I agree with you (people should be allowed to wear their hair however they like, dress however they like, listen to whatever music they like etc. and I won't think any less of them because of it) but for those who claim that only low cut straight hair is 'neat' 'smart', 'presentable' etc., what does it say about you that you think your natural hair texture is gross, messy etc? I'm not necessarily even talking about 'afros', mind you, but any hair that's long enough for you to see it's natural texture. I don't think that a preference for short hair because it's low maintenance or more sexually appealing is necessarily self-hating or a sign of an inferiority complex but don't you see the irony in claiming that you're proud, or at least not ashamed, of being African and Black but finding the natural hair texture of most Black people to be unattractive? I mean you really and honestly don't think that how you feel about your natural features says anything about your self-esteem? A woman can say that she finds body hair to be unappealing despite the fact that almost all women naturally have body hair (and I'd also agree that women shouldn't be pressured into shaving their natural body hair) but when you say that tightly curled hair is necessarily unkempt, messy etc., you're singling out Black people since tightly curled hair is a 'Black' feature, you're flat out admitting that, in at least one respect, Black people are less attractive than non-Black people are. Like someone else said, Black people don't just straighten their hair or wear it super-short, they pressure other Black people into doing so and then turn around and act indignant when some psychologist claims that Black women are 'objectively' less attractive or some radio show host starts talking about 'nappy headed hos', yet they also think that Black people with natural, long hair are less attractive than White people with natural, long hair, clearly this is a double standard. Do you know how many White people I've heard claim that 'nappy' hair in Black women is disgusting and gross and Black people actually agree with them yet are outraged when non-Blacks say it.

I can understand the argument of short hair being low maintenance but to say that any length of tightly curled hair, even if it's well combed, cannot be 'neat', 'smart', 'presentable' etc., I can't see that as non-racial, it's fundamentally no different than saying that light skin is more appealing or acceptable than dark skin is. You're saying that a feature that distinguishes most Black people from other groups is unappealing.

For the record, I like the way that afros and dreadlocks look on women. I don't just mean 'curly' or frizzy-ish afros either, but tightly curled hair like this : http://gorgeousblackwomen.files./2008/01/nbushe_wright.jpg?w=197

Why Is This?

Why are Black men expected to go out of their way keep their hair super short (to the point where it doesn't curl)? I've never understood why 90 something percent of Black men wear their hair at the exact same length like clones. White men with shaved heads are in the minority, when Black men wear their at the same length as the typical White guy, it's "long" and it's an "afro" (not counting those Blacks with straight or wavy hair). I could ask why Black women are expected to straighten their hair as well but that's a song that's played all the time. So, why is this, and why are Blacks so obsessed with policing other Blacks into maintaining conformity? It's expected of Whites and other non-Blacks to find tightly curled hair to be unattractive, and most do, but why do Blacks, and even if they do, which is their right and preference, why do they care whether or not other Black people wear their hair 'naturally'? These same people then go on about how 'proud' to be Black they are even though they dislike the natural hair texture of most Black people.

I don't think Bantu languages are spoken in Nigeria, although Bantoid languages are.

[QUOTE]What about white Europeans?[/QUOTE]

I was raised in Canada so my experience with Europeans is limited. If you mean would I date one, no. Not that there aren't any beautiful European/White women with nice personalities but I feel I have more in common with my own people (Black Africans).

White people generally (in my anecdotal experience) have some of the nastiest personalities on the planet. I'd honestly rather stab myself in the heart with a pencil than date, marry, or have sex with a White North American.

Since a child is a product of both parents, they can claim membership to both groups.

I'm Zambian (I was raised in Canada). My father is Bemba. My mother's family is Bemba-speaking, since Bemba is a lingua francae in parts of Zambia, but her father was Lambya (I think her father's father's father's father's mother, the daughter of my namesake, was Tambo, I don't know, and I'm assuming her paternal grandmother was also Lambya but I don't know that either). My maternal grandmother was of mixed Lungu (her mother) and English (her father) descent.

The Bemba people are believed to have descended from mid-17th century Luba settlers who migrated from what is now the southern Democratic Republic of Congo into what are now the Northern and Luapula provinces of Zambia (there may also be some Bemba speakers in south-west Tanzania) but one online source claims that only a group of Luba warriors migrated into what is now Zambia and conquered the already existing Bemba (or Bemba speaking) people. That sounds more practical but I've only read of this from one source, all the others claim that the Bemba people descend from Luba immigrants and did not exist before the 17th century. I can't find much information about the Lambya, Lungu or Tambo people online, they all speak Bantu languages. The pro-Bantu speaking people are thought to have originated in what is now south east Nigeria/northern Cameroon around 4000 years ago before they gradually spread out into southern, central Africa and east Africa.