Which is better, sex or chocolate? (no spam)

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 4:38 pm

About a week ago, my wife was laughing at my moans as I consumed a wonderful piece of chocolate cake in a Hungarian restaurant. The subject of sex naturally came up, and I thought a comparison might furnish a decent discussion, here, provided we don't go lapse into the usual flirtatious cliches.

Because when you think about it, few things provide anything remotely approaching the visceral thrill of sex. In fact, chocolate may be the only legal one. And it's even considered a drug, in some circles, albeit one with potential arterial drawbacks.

So what do you think, and how would you rate the two, alongside one another?

garazdawi · Post by **garazdawi** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 4:44 pm

I don't really have a choice in this matter as I don't like the taste of chocolate at all. So for me it's an easy vote for sex. Now real vanilla icecream.. there is something that would give sex a run for it's money in my world..

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 5:04 pm

lol! Well, considering that I don't have much of a sweet tooth, though I do occasionally enjoy a bar of dark, Belgian chocolate.. there was not too much of a decision for me.
I mean honestly.. if the chemistry is wonderful between somebody and their partner.. how could *anything* possibly be better than sex?
And even if chocolate does produce a level of euphoria and well being, it doesn't hold you afterwards, it doesn't give you the sense of having connected with somebody special

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 5:31 pm

Sex, no contest.

Now if you throw out tea as another option....

On topic though, I feel I'm one of the strange people who gets nothing (sexual) from chocolate.

Could I be so evil that it has the side effects of negating chocolate too? Maybe I lack the gene?

captainbrumble · Post by **captainbrumble** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 6:49 pm

i vote for sex.

because sex will get you through times of no chocolate better than chocolate will get you through times of no sex.

or something like that.

the best of both worlds would be to eat chocolate will having sex.

though that could get a bit messy.

bring napkins.

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 7:37 pm

Well... there is such a thing as chocolate body paint...

And it really isn't very messy at all

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 7:39 pm

Sex is definitely better--but I have to tell you, after going for several weeks without finding a really satisfying piece of chocolate, it certainly provided a minor thrill and made the night that much better.

Sean The Owner · Post by **Sean The Owner** » Thu Sep 30, 2004 9:53 pm

i agreee with captainbrumble that when theres no chocolate sex is a good replacement but when theres no sex choclate just doesnt fill in right...so..sex is the answer(just cause im 15 doesn mean i havent had sex either!!!)

Locke Da'averan · Post by **Locke Da'averan** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 8:49 am

well, sex.

chocolate is good, but i think only women get smth out of it, atleast i don't, nothing remotely close to even compare with sex.

Moonbiter · Post by **Moonbiter** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 9:16 am

Chocolate only makes me feel nauseous. Then again, some sex does that as well...

KidD01 · Post by **KidD01** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 9:52 am

[QUOTE=Weasel]Sex, no contest.

Now if you throw out tea as another option....

<SNIP>[/QUOTE]

I agree on that, Weazlo

Earlgrey anyone ?

frogus23 · Post by **frogus23** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 9:58 am

Tea gives sex a contest.... sex beats chocolate....

but maybe I just haven't found the right chocolate for me

dragon wench · Post by **dragon wench** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 10:03 am

Hmmm...
so far, 17 votes for sex, 2 votes for chocolate..

I note that those people who voted for chocolate have remained conspicuously absent in terms of commentary

Sytze · Post by **Sytze** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 10:47 am

Since I haven't had the one, and don't like the other. I'm afraid I can't vote on this poll.
You do the math which is which.

dark_raven · Post by **dark_raven** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 1:45 pm

well, i'll chose the only one that has a familear feeling to it...

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 2:49 pm

[QUOTE=Weasel]On topic though, I feel I'm one of the strange people who gets nothing (sexual) from chocolate.

Could I be so evil that it has the side effects of negating chocolate too? Maybe I lack the gene?[/QUOTE]

Then I must be evil too, because I get no specific pleasure at all out of eating choclate, nor any other food. I only get something sexual out of sex, actually.

Interestingly though, there has been studies of chocolate addiction and craving, that demonstrate that there is probably both pharmacological and a social factors involved. A majority of chocolate addics, get their cravings satisfied by placebo if the placebo looks and tastes like chocolate even though it does not contain any of the known psychoactive substances in chocolate. This suggests that their addiction might be related to social factors such as chocolate being "reward"-food since it is viewed as unhealthy and "naughty". Craving after something usually increases if there is an air of "taboo" around it.

Then on the other hand you have a smaller group of people who seem addicted to the actual substances, although it may differ between individuals which substances. There are several potentially psychoactive substances in cocoa, some have an acute effect like caffein and some have a more long term effect like tryptophane, but it is unclear whether the phenylethylamine and cannabinoids are present in high enough dose to have any pharmacodynamic effect even though I've seen it mentioned in popular media.

[QUOTE=frogus23]Tea gives sex a contest.... [/QUOTE]

But you are an Englishman!

Try dark chocolate with about 70% cocoa content. Not milk chocolate. If you don't get a kick out of that, then you probably like me and Weasel - simply not susceptible to chocolate addiction.

[QUOTE=Moonbiter]Chocolate only makes me feel nauseous. Then again, some sex does that as well...

[/QUOTE]

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:48 pm

[QUOTE=dragon wench]
I note that those people who voted for chocolate have remained conspicuously absent in terms of commentary

[/QUOTE]

They must have a big supply of chocolate...or Willy Wonky has kidnapped them.

[QUOTE=frogus23]Tea gives sex a contest.... sex beats chocolate....
[/QUOTE]

Ah Kid and you are the true light in this pit of Heathens.

[QUOTE=C Elegans]Then I must be evil too, because I get no specific pleasure at all out of eating choclate, nor any other food. I only get something sexual out of sex, actually.

[/QUOTE]

Evil is the wave of the future.

My only failing would be tea addiction and I have a feeling it would lose...thought I wouldn't bet. I might do an experiment during "my next encounter" and see how the wife would react to me having to pause to get some tea.

Surviving this I will report my findings.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 3:52 pm

[QUOTE=Weasel]I might do an experiment during "my next encounter" and see how the wife would react to me having to pause to get some tea.

Surviving this I will report my findings.

[/QUOTE]

Goodbye Weasel, it has been good knowing you

Gwalchmai · Post by **Gwalchmai** » Fri Oct 01, 2004 4:07 pm

I would like to vote one way now, then change my vote in a couple of days.

giles337 · Post by **giles337** » Sat Oct 02, 2004 1:43 pm

[QUOTE=Sytze]Since I haven't had the one, and don't like the other. I'm afraid I can't vote on this poll.
You do the math which is which.

[/QUOTE]

Youve never had chocolate???!?!?