Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Today's Marital Debate...


Darth Biscuit

Recommended Posts

OK, my wife and I were having a discussion last week... then she had a girls night out Friday and discussed it with her friends and came back and told me what they all said.

I'm gonna conduct a poll on here and see what you all say.

Question:

On AVERAGE, how many times PER WEEK do you consider appropriate for a married couple to have sex.

This is not how much you are currently getting, but your ideal.

Please post the number, your sex and age and if you are married or not in your response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not married so I have no idea....

when I AM married, I would like it to be at least 2-3 times per week....basing that off of what Klong said aboot guys when they get older and they can't handle as much or need breaks...

but I honestly have no idea.

Are we talking sex and just sex? Or various other things that could possibly lead to sex?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not married so I have no idea....

when I AM married, I would like it to be at least 2-3 times per week....basing that off of what Klong said aboot guys when they get older and they can't handle as much or need breaks...

but I honestly have no idea.

Are we talking sex and just sex? Or various other things that could possibly lead to sex?

Well, I don't want to be any more specific than "sex"... I guess that can mean whatever you want it to mean. I don't want to skew the results.

I think KK may have meant that a little differently than what you're thinking... I think he meant that when guys are young, they can go 2-3 times in one session and as they age, that slows a bit...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • agreed. reich and fox were kind of similar in that i think their comfort zone with QBs were established vets.  any rookie QB would have been outside that. i do think that he might have been more comfortable with stroud than young, but i also still think that we would have been stuck in a bad place. there was more than went wrong than with the QB. nothing worked and QB issues were one of many symptoms of the problem that we found ourselves in with reich. the whole thing was too much for him. not only did he get a QB outside of his comfort zone, he got unfamiliar assistants that came from unfamiliar schemes. he had no prior relationship with most coaches he had added to his staff.  again, that staff was tepper's idea...get the dream staff with a billion years of experience and those who don't have a poo ton of experience were coaches that were considered up and comers for HC jobs.  reich is a mild-mannered passive likeable kind of guy. he wasn't the big dominant personality that would be needed to handle that staff.
    • I can't blame anyone in sports media for not believing we've made a big enough jump talent wise to compete. I mean let's be realistic. In the eyes of many of us here we were improved on paper under Scott Fitterer each offseason the last few years. Just because we're once again buying in doesn't mean the rest of the sports world will also. Then you go back to preseason last year and the downplaying of how horrific we looked not just offensively but as a whole. If we look competent in preseason  I will begin to feel some level of confidence about the direction of the team and so will those in the sports world. Until then nothing we've done matters.
    • Yeah we don't have a beast mode, and Bryce doesn't threaten with the play action/scramble deep shots. That's the majority of the reason that formula worked in Seattle during that stretch. I hope Brooks is a good back, but he's definitely not a beast mode type. 
×
×
  • Create New...