YAGT: pr0n and relationships

[NaOH]

Originally posted by: trmiv

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger


If I was in some bizarre life or death situation and had to leave my kids with one of two random strangers and I asked them "OK, have either of you ever masturbated?" and Guy 1 says, "Uh, well.. yeah. It's a pretty normal thing to do." and Guy 2 says "Never! Masturbation is a sin and leads to immoral thoughts and immoral acts! I would never dare risk the chance of becoming a pervert or pedophile by defiling my body in such a way! Urges must be controlled and purity must be maintained!"

I'd turn to Guy 1 and with my dying breath, say "Keep that weirdo away from my kids!"

:thumbsup: I'm literally LOLing at that.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: One for M4H last post too ...I love ATOT

 

[NaOH]

Originally posted by: Compudork

Originally posted by: Bryophyte

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
I don't know that I worry about committing rape, but I definitely worry about adultery. I was addicted to pornography as a child and would be hooked again in a second if I let myself. And yes, I feel that for me it is very important to have and maintain that control.

How is it that one would be "addicted to pornography" yet only masturbated once in your life?

One word: Denial.

Judging the presentation of his arguments it seems he is is projecting his own insecurities/impulsive thoughts on others. Heck, I have no issue if the guy never masturbated, but the correlations he makes between self gratification and complete loss of sexual control to impulses are freightening. I've rubbed it out 5 times since I started typing this post, yet have no desire to cheat on my girl or force myself on someone.

Keep your uncontrollable urges away from me

 

[Kadarin]

After reading through part of this thread, I can only come to the conclusion that engineereeyore is a real piece of work. I hope he's never in the position to influence children into believing the same fvcked up sh!t.

 

[Ricochet]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger


If I was in some bizarre life or death situation and had to leave my kids with one of two random strangers and I asked them "OK, have either of you ever masturbated?" and Guy 1 says, "Uh, well.. yeah. It's a pretty normal thing to do." and Guy 2 says "Never! Masturbation is a sin and leads to immoral thoughts and immoral acts! I would never dare risk the chance of becoming a pervert or pedophile by defiling my body in such a way! Urges must be controlled and purity must be maintained!"

I'd turn to Guy 1 and with my dying breath, say "Keep that weirdo away from my kids!"

:thumbsup: Agreed. I'm of the mindset that repression sometimes lead to abnormal obsession and result in undesirable behavior like child molestation. A perfect example are Catholic priests. Mind you, I have no proof. It's conjecture at the moment.

 

[randomlinh]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
After reading through part of this thread, I can only come to the conclusion that engineereeyore is a real piece of work. I hope he's never in the position to influence children into believing the same fvcked up sh!t.

don't worry, there are plenty of whack jobs out there the push worse.

 

[Q]

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Maybe they don't like a sticky keyboard?

Gross but, I have to lol

 

[heathertre]

I don't have a problem with my SO watching it unless he tries to hide that he's watching it. I know he's doing it so why try to hide it? But all in all, I don't have a problem with it.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: OOBradm
engineereeyore,
I understand your argument thus far.

I have one question for you, however. Are you worried about becoming a child molester or a rapist? If so, then I can understand your desire to control your sexual urges.
I know that i have enough self control that I can indulge in masturbation and not have to worry about losing control as far as committing rape.

I don't know that I worry about committing rape, but I definitely worry about adultery. I was addicted to pornography as a child and would be hooked again in a second if I let myself. And yes, I feel that for me it is very important to have and maintain that control.

I think you worry about losing control of yourself, and that's why you don't masturbate. Let me ask you another question. Do you drink alcohol? Or have you ever used any recreational drugs?

You are correct. I do worry about losing control. As for alcohol, I have used it before but no longer do. As for drugs, no, never used.

I drink occasionally and it would be a lie to say that I haven't used other drugs. But I know that I don't have a problem with any of them, and I also believe i have the self control to stop when it becomes a problem. Maybe learn to trust your own self control more, and then masturbating wouldn't be such an issue for you.

That's very possible, and please don't take this wrong, but I've known many people who 'had control' over it. I'm not trying to insinuate that you don't, but I'd rather not take the chance. Again, personal preference.

Honestly, engineereeyore, it sounds like you are the one who has issues controlling himself. It almost seems like you are so scared of some things and your ability to control them that you run away from them completely and try to form illogical arguments against them to justify your position.

I can respect your Mormon beliefs and your choice to not masturbate, but please don't try to make such a ridiculous argument against it. I think deep down you realize that your argument is built like a house of cards and that's why you defend it so vehemently, against common logic and reason.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Apparently not. You don't even seem to know the difference between the Endowment and Inititories (sorry, no idea on the spelling there). Just for the record though, there's no "ball blessing" there either, though I assume that's what you were trying to say.

I went through long before that date and it didn't happen then either. But you are correct. You are mistaken.

I wouldn't confirm it whether I was 'allowed' to or not. Being as you're not a member, I see no reason or point to discuss it with you.

Actually, it would appear you are unfamiliar with Mormon rituals.

The "Initiatory" is a phase of the Endowment ceremony. During the Initiatory phase, participants are to strip down and are given Mormon garments (super duper special Mormon underwear for those who don't know) and also wear a veil of clothing that only has a front and back. They are then anointed with oil on their head and said to be "symbolically washed" or "bathed." Before the recent change, only the shield was worn and a church member of the same sex would anoint the participants mouth, chest, stomach, and groin area, hence, "ball blessing."

Again, since you are in this cult you are under strict instructions not to divulge information about this ceremony to non-members and to only speak of it openly in the Celestial Room at the temple with others who have been Endowed. If your Endowment Ceremony was before 1990, then you also took the "penalties" oath in which you simulated slitting your throat and cutting open your bowels should you ever reveal the secrets of the church to a non-member.

In either case, you are not allowed to speak of the ceremony, but I am happy to share. People should at least know that the person who decries masturbation is a sin also must wear special underwear with symbols over his nipples, navel, and, until 1979, an open crotch or not be allowed to the highest level of Paradise where, as someone already mentioned, you can call your wife's secret name and you shall be granted your own planet to seed with children and you will reign over it as a god.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Originally posted by: child of wonder

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Apparently not. You don't even seem to know the difference between the Endowment and Inititories (sorry, no idea on the spelling there). Just for the record though, there's no "ball blessing" there either, though I assume that's what you were trying to say.

I went through long before that date and it didn't happen then either. But you are correct. You are mistaken.

I wouldn't confirm it whether I was 'allowed' to or not. Being as you're not a member, I see no reason or point to discuss it with you.

Actually, it would appear you are unfamiliar with Mormon rituals.

The "Initiatory" is a phase of the Endowment ceremony. During the Initiatory phase, participants are to strip down and are given Mormon garments (super duper special Mormon underwear for those who don't know) and also wear a veil of clothing that only has a front and back. They are then anointed with oil on their head and said to be "symbolically washed" or "bathed." Before the recent change, only the shield was worn and a church member of the same sex would anoint the participants mouth, chest, stomach, and groin area, hence, "ball blessing."

Again, since you are in this cult you are under strict instructions not to divulge information about this ceremony to non-members and to only speak of it openly in the Celestial Room at the temple with others who have been Endowed. If your Endowment Ceremony was before 1990, then you also took the "penalties" oath in which you simulated slitting your throat and cutting open your bowls should you ever reveal the secrets of the church to a non-member.

In either case, you are not allowed to speak of the ceremony, but I am happy to share. People should at least know that the person who decries masturbation is a sin also must wear special underwear with symbols over his nipples, navel, and, until 1979, an open crotch or not be allowed to the highest level of Paradise where, as someone already mentioned, you can call your wife's secret name and you shall be granted your own planet to seed with children and you will reign over it as a god.

You know, I never knew about the whole seeding a planet with your own children thing, but it completely makes sense now. This was the major theme in one of Orson Scott Card's novels and I wondered where he got the idea from. Now I know.

 

[tm37]

I guess it depends how often.

I think it is natural and I just checked with the wife and she is OK with it.

I also think it is important to keep things in perspective. I know I am not marred to Jesse Jane and that my wife will usually not let me defile her in ways seen on the TV. She understands I am not evan Stone. I also understand that sex between us is about us. If we choose to add a little spark with a video or two that is not a problem. Neither of us need the video but hey after 11 years together sometimes the occasional diversion is nice.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: KingofCamelot
90% of serial killers eat cookies.
70% lacked control over their cookie urges.

People who eat cookies have a higher chance of becoming serial killers.

You'd better stop eating cookies.

If you can show the direct correlations as to how cookies cause such emotions, I'll stop today.

I would like to assume you're being facetious here; otherwise--you've entirely missed teh point.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: sixone

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: sixone
At a comedy club, you're seeing a live show, having a few drinks and some laughs with other people. How you could be a Raptor pilot IRL would be a little more difficult. In other words, you're getting more than you would in front of your TV set.

Porn is a second-rate experience, compared to the real thing.

:thumbsup:

Well, no sh1t.

Watching a movie on TV is a second-rate experience compared to watching it on an Imax screen.

Listening to a music CD is a second-rate experience compared to being at a live concert.

Eating Hamburger Helper on your couch is a second-rate experience to eating a nice meal at a fine restaurant.

So are you saying nobody should every do any of those things, since they are obviously depriving themselves of the "real" experience? I'm failing to see anything resembling a point in your quips.

No, I never said that.

And your examples are completely unreasonable. Who do you know that has the budget to support seeing an Imax daily, or following your favorite band from venue to venue, or eating out every day? Those things are luxuries for almost all of us.

hell, I know tons of people who do that. and they don't really have the budget to do it; it's just 100% of what they spend their non-rent/bills income on. I did it a bit in college, and people do this for many reasons, because it is their "happy thing." It is in reality, an extremely realistic example. just because it may not be familiar to your reality....

also, plenty of friends in the city eat out every day, and they ain't raking in the cash. Why? because they can't cook or just don't have time.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: child of wonder
You don't need to tell me what happens during the Endowment ceremony. I already know.

Apparently not. You don't even seem to know the difference between the Endowment and Inititories (sorry, no idea on the spelling there). Just for the record though, there's no "ball blessing" there either, though I assume that's what you were trying to say.

However, it appears I was mistaken about the "ball" blessings no longer occur. "Touching" during the Endowment Ceremony was removed in late 2004/early 2005. My information is out of date.

I went through long before that date and it didn't happen then either. But you are correct. You are mistaken.

Naturally, you're not allowed to confirm this (especially if you were endowed pre-1990 under fear of "penalty").

I wouldn't confirm it whether I was 'allowed' to or not. Being as you're not a member, I see no reason or point to discuss it with you.

I thought the point was to bring people into the flock, not scare them away through exclusion and secret practices. The "box" I was referring to is the "Holy of Holies," I thinkk, where you are lead with the grand-deacon whose it, donning the holy underwear, and perfrom some sort of "ritual."

It is also my understanding that the majority leave the faith 1) during their mission (as they are finally allowed to venture out of the fog), and 2) when a minister has been promoted?ordained? to the highest level, where they are exposed to the foundations of the religion. This is when the pyramid scheme becomes obvious (which is what mormonism is), and many just can't accept that their lives and faith have been built on a charlatan's lie.

I've always wondered why the mormon church held Smith's tablets to be the tenet of the faith for so long, even after the translation revealed them to be cockamamey BS; and recently (last few decades?) finally accepted their erronious origin, and now interpret their significance as "inspiring" Smith to found mormonism. Odd, considering that it was the very words on these tablets that contained the words of Christ, and the instructions for founding the church. I believe the text involves the burial rights for a cat, or something.

Well, these are the questions that I've always had.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Compudork

Originally posted by: Bryophyte

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
I don't know that I worry about committing rape, but I definitely worry about adultery. I was addicted to pornography as a child and would be hooked again in a second if I let myself. And yes, I feel that for me it is very important to have and maintain that control.

How is it that one would be "addicted to pornography" yet only masturbated once in your life?

One word: Denial.

Judging the presentation of his arguments it seems he is is projecting his own insecurities/impulsive thoughts on others. Heck, I have no issue if the guy never masturbated, but the correlations he makes between self gratification and complete loss of sexual control to impulses are freightening. I've rubbed it out 5 times since I started typing this post, yet have no desire to cheat on my girl or force myself on someone.

TMI. bleach your work area, please.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: child of wonder

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Apparently not. You don't even seem to know the difference between the Endowment and Inititories (sorry, no idea on the spelling there). Just for the record though, there's no "ball blessing" there either, though I assume that's what you were trying to say.

I went through long before that date and it didn't happen then either. But you are correct. You are mistaken.

I wouldn't confirm it whether I was 'allowed' to or not. Being as you're not a member, I see no reason or point to discuss it with you.

Actually, it would appear you are unfamiliar with Mormon rituals.

The "Initiatory" is a phase of the Endowment ceremony. During the Initiatory phase, participants are to strip down and are given Mormon garments (super duper special Mormon underwear for those who don't know) and also wear a veil of clothing that only has a front and back. They are then anointed with oil on their head and said to be "symbolically washed" or "bathed." Before the recent change, only the shield was worn and a church member of the same sex would anoint the participants mouth, chest, stomach, and groin area, hence, "ball blessing."

Again, since you are in this cult you are under strict instructions not to divulge information about this ceremony to non-members and to only speak of it openly in the Celestial Room at the temple with others who have been Endowed. If your Endowment Ceremony was before 1990, then you also took the "penalties" oath in which you simulated slitting your throat and cutting open your bowels should you ever reveal the secrets of the church to a non-member.

In either case, you are not allowed to speak of the ceremony, but I am happy to share. People should at least know that the person who decries masturbation is a sin also must wear special underwear with symbols over his nipples, navel, and, until 1979, an open crotch or not be allowed to the highest level of Paradise where, as someone already mentioned, you can call your wife's secret name and you shall be granted your own planet to seed with children and you will reign over it as a god.

That's what I was talking about! (Holy underwear, god of planet) been awhile since I looked into it, but I remember it now

Wow, that J Smith had one hell of an imagination. No wonder he was banned from every city his wacko feet set foot in

 

[Lash444]

So I was watching sex talk for the first time in a long time, (its the truth, honestly!) and the woman that hosts the show made the comment that masturbation has been proven to be more gratifying than sex. (I don't remember if she said just for men, but I think she did?)

I wish I had the exact quote, but it was something to this effect. I know I am not providing a scientifically based double blind study here, but I am just bringing up the point. What if masturbation is more gratifying. #1, pr0n can be dynamic. #2, pr0n doesnt have expectations. #3, pr0n doesnt tell you no.

Sorry ladies, but lets face the music here... Its not just men who can be lousy in bed. Point fingers all you want that men have too high of expectations for sex, but sex is a drug. Maybe you are just the over-the-counter variety?

 

[scootermaster]

Typically, most of ATOT fails to see any sort of big picture.

The reality is, this issue is actually TWO questions:

1). Why does my g/f freak out when I watch porn?

and

2). Is it okay to watch porn in a relationship?

The answer to 2 is simple: Yes. If you want to watch porn, you shouldn't be in a relationship with anyone that would tell you any differently. It's as simple as that. There's nothing "wrong" with you (or her, for that matter). You should be able to, in an adult (ATOT? HA!!!) manner, tell your partner why you like it and what it does for you, and if you can't agree on that, perhaps you're not all that compatible. (This is assuming you have an okay -- I don't want to say "normal" -- sex life, and things like that. If you're jerking off to avoid/instead of sex, then all bets are off. But that's not the porn's problem, that's YOUR problem).

The answer to 1 is a little more complicated, but it does have to do with insecurity in some cases. If that doesn't make sense to you, just imagine your girlfriend was doing nothing but watching porn with guys with huuuuuuge wangs. Non-stop. That's all she watched. And just masturbated to it. Over and over.

So hopefully that makes a little sense now. I'm not saying that it's "okay" for women to be insecure about that, or that it's a good thing, but that's just the way most [younger/conservative/whatever] women are.

Some scary things have come out of this thread though...people talking about watching porn and it driving a wedge between people because the guy looks at his girl and thinks "why doesn't she do X Y or Z". Well, um, why not? If you're in a committed relationship, your partner should have a vested interest in your sexuality, and keeping you happy.

At any rate, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with porn (no, it doesn't degrade women, for the most part, and no, it doesn't make you a pervert if you like it...just ask any porn star or any psychologist), and there's nothing wrong with watching it in a relationship. The reality is, it's OKAY if you've got kinks your partner isn't into and you use porn to tickle that side of your sexuality. It might be hard to deal with [for her], but trust me boys, she's got similar things going on in her head too. You just don't want to know about it, and she probably doesn't use porn to tickle it.

Yup yup

 

[Roguestar]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
You're trying to parallel masturbators with child molestors and rapists. I don't think there's a rolleyes.gif big enough in the world for that one.

Yes I would. Very easily.

x 1000000000

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Straw man or not, it's a valid point.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm...


Basically I want to know if we're going to be locking up the masturbators with the child molestors and rapists.

'Cause we're going to need a bigger prison.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

That's what I was talking about! (Holy underwear, god of planet) been awhile since I looked into it, but I remember it now

Wow, that J Smith had one hell of an imagination. No wonder he was banned from every city his wacko feet set foot in

Actually, the original golden plates were given back to the angel that protected them. We have no way of verifying what Joseph Smith "interpreted" on those plates.

However, I believe the incident you were referring to was the "Kinderhook Plates." This is an actual, historically accurate, total refutation of Mormonism.

A few farmers claimed to have found more golden plates in 1843 and told the local Mormon church about it, who then contacted Smith. He came to examine the plates and "translated" them saying they "contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth."

However, years later, one of the men who "discovered" the plates, came clean that they were a hoax. He and two other men had made them from copper and copied symbols they had seen on Chinese Tea bags using beesmax and acid to make the engravings. He even signed an affidavit to this effect.

Tests have been conducted on the only plate known to have survived and verified they are nothing more than a hoax.

The church's official stance is that the plates were indeed a hoax, but Joseph Smith never translated them nor showed any genuine interest in them. History tells us differently, however.

http://mormonwiki.org/Kinderhook_plates
http://www.irr.org/mit/kinderhook-plates.html

Joseph Smith was a scam artist, pure and simple. He is no different than the likes of David Koresh or L. Ron Hubbard.

One undeniable fact that supports that statement is that 10% tithing of a member's gross income is to be given to the church or entry to the highest level of Paradise, the Celestial Kingdom, is not assured.

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: child of wonder

Originally posted by: zinfamous

That's what I was talking about! (Holy underwear, god of planet) been awhile since I looked into it, but I remember it now

Wow, that J Smith had one hell of an imagination. No wonder he was banned from every city his wacko feet set foot in

Actually, the original golden plates were given back to the angel that protected them. We have no way of verifying what Joseph Smith "interpreted" on those plates.

However, I believe the incident you were referring to was the "Kinderhook Plates." This is an actual, historically accurate, total refutation of Mormonism.

A few farmers claimed to have found more golden plates in 1843 and told the local Mormon church about it, who then contacted Smith. He came to examine the plates and "translated" them saying they "contain the history of the person with whom they were found and he was a descendant of Ham through the loins of Pharaoh king of Egypt, and that he received his kingdom from the ruler of heaven and earth."

However, years later, one of the men who "discovered" the plates, came clean that they were a hoax. He and two other men had made them from copper and copied symbols they had seen on Chinese Tea bags using beesmax and acid to make the engravings. He even signed an affidavit to this effect.

Tests have been conducted on the only plate known to have survived and verified they are nothing more than a hoax.

The church's official stance is that the plates were indeed a hoax, but Joseph Smith never translated them nor showed any genuine interest in them. History tells us differently, however.

http://mormonwiki.org/Kinderhook_plates
http://www.irr.org/mit/kinderhook-plates.html

Joseph Smith was a scam artist, pure and simple. He is no different than the likes of David Koresh or L. Ron Hubbard.

One undeniable fact that supports that statement is that 10% tithing of a member's gross income is to be given to the church or entry to the highest level of Paradise, the Celestial Kingdom, is not assured.

/boggle

If the religion was found out to be a hoax, why do people still believe in it?

 

[child of wonder]

The Mormon church is worth at least $50 billion. Do you think they'd let something as trivial as the truth get in their way?

Most Mormons have never even heard of the Kinderhook plates and the church certainly isn't going to tell them.

Mormonism is also popular for the same reason Scientology is: because members are part of a "secret" organization that promises to reveal the mysteries and answers of the universe to them. They also get powerful sounding titles like "Elder," "Brother," "Bishop," or "Melchizedek Priesthood."

People want to feel important and they want to be part of something important. Mormonism offers that.

 

[Gdepp519]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: moshquerade
you think masturbating is a sin or something?

I don't agree with it. I find it rather sad that someone can't control their bodily urges.

As for it being a sin, I think it is. However, my opinion of masturbation came about long before my religious ideals, so I see that being irrelevant.

maybe if you did what is actually a natural thing you wouldn't have gotten epididymitis....

My sex live at that time is my business only, but I will say that there was no need for masturbation at the time I contracted epididymitis.

Looks like we've got us a member of the Opal Ring Crusade here. :laugh:

You are aware that masturbation was built into human genetics, right? It lowers stress, improves the immune system, can reduce headaches, and even helps reduce the risk of prostate cancer in men. It's a miracle drug in the palm of your hand.

But hey, whatever works for you. Enjoy the saltpeter.

- M4H

engineereeyore did you have sex before you were married?? do you consider that a sin??

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: child of wonder
The Mormon church is worth at least $50 billion. Do you think they'd let something as trivial as the truth get in their way?

Most Mormons have never even heard of the Kinderhook plates and the church certainly isn't going to tell them.

Mormonism is also popular for the same reason Scientology is: because members are part of a "secret" organization that promises to reveal the mysteries and answers of the universe to them. They also get powerful sounding titles like "Elder," "Brother," "Bishop," or "Melchizedek Priesthood."

People want to feel important and they want to be part of something important. Mormonism offers that.

ya, I looked that up to last night. It was the Kinderhook plates, not the original tablets that the angel Moroni refused Smith from seeing for 4 years, then allowed him to see, then retrieved for eternity. All of this, some decade or so before he revealed his vision, correct?

After the Kinderhook paltes were foudn by the farmers and taken to Smith, it seems that the Angel Moroni once again decended, and told him the location of the Hummin and Thurminn, [sic] (which are mysterious translating devices described in the bible), so that he could translate them.

Good Stuff :thumbsup:

Also, the book of Mormon is nothing more than a poor adaptation of the KJV. The adaptor was not a fan of the english language either (or just unaware of how to use it properly), it seems

For a divinely inspired text, I wonder why Joseph Smith felt that he needed to retain the copyright for it? (The original attributing him as the author and sole copyright holder)

....now, that's one hell of a departure for this thread topic, eh?

 

[GTaudiophile]

Originally posted by: Lash444
So I was watching sex talk for the first time in a long time, (its the truth, honestly!) and the woman that hosts the show made the comment that masturbation has been proven to be more gratifying than sex. (I don't remember if she said just for men, but I think she did?)

I wish I had the exact quote, but it was something to this effect. I know I am not providing a scientifically based double blind study here, but I am just bringing up the point. What if masturbation is more gratifying. #1, pr0n can be dynamic. #2, pr0n doesnt have expectations. #3, pr0n doesnt tell you no.

Sorry ladies, but lets face the music here... Its not just men who can be lousy in bed. Point fingers all you want that men have too high of expectations for sex, but sex is a drug. Maybe you are just the over-the-counter variety?

If you want to talk pure numbers, fewer women reach orgasm through vaginal intercourse than through masturbation. But the real question is, do most women in a relationship hold the "orgasm" as the holy grail? The answer to that is no. While men often have their eye on "satisfying" her sexually and reaching that end goal, I have the feeling that many women would be happy with simple cuddling, kisses, affection, and the words "I Love You" said frequently.

But if you are talking purely in terms of being able to reliably achieve a satisfying orgasm, I would say that most women do prefer masturbation over intercourse but receiving oral sex above all.