Abstinence from sex

Abstinence from sex... and especially masturbation. What do you think? Should it be done? Is there anything to be achieved by abstaining?

For many years there has been going on a campaign on Reddit called #NoFap, which is about males abstaining from masturbation. Some claim it has some straight out, measurable physical positive effects like increased testosterone levels. Though over the years I haven't found a study that could conclude anything like that with certainty.

Also it's a big trend among males who do martial arts. Every male that I know that does martial arts, have heard about it. Especially boxers and those who do Eastern practices of martial arts like Judo or Aikido. There was an article on National Geographic that claimed that Muhammad Ali used to abstain from sex 6 weeks before a fight. Also, I have read about it from multiple sources from the East, most notably Hagakure, where it is said plenty of times that Yamamoto Tsunetomo himself abstained sex for seven years.

Now there are many great artists who have said that these libidinal energies can be sublimated in order to achieve something great. On the other hand there are some (not saying they are that great) artists who said the opposite is true, such as Oscar Wilde, who clearly got motivated, energized, excited and creative by having sex, not abstaining.

I actually think that this sublimation thing holds true. I suppose Michelangelo didn't achieve what he did by having an orgy every night and taking part of all the animalistic practices that moderns dedicate their life to. Having hedonistic sex is something that people today put into hours per day (by affecting how they look, finding multiple potential partners, seducing them etc...) Since we have a limited time, these hours are perhaps out of something more noble.

But as for being successful today, in the modern nihilistic world, is there any reason why you should abstain from sex or masturbation and by doing so, sublimating the libidinal energies? Since being a genius... well not even a genius, but generally being dedicated and particularly good at something is not an obvious advantage today. 

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
This article concludes that the main reason for abstaining is mental:

expertboxing.com wrote:

Having sex decreases your competitive motivation.
There are theories of success, that believe having too much sex makes it hard for any guy to be successful at anything (let alone boxing). Males are driven to have sex; that is their #1 motivation to succeed at anything. The theories further explain that that if males had no desire to have sex (attract females), males would not have become amazing musicians, artists, businessman, athletes, etc, etc. Therefore, by having sex, you lose the desire to have sex, and therefore lose your inner desire succeed…because you already “succeeded” (and achieved the male’s #1 goal).

But I'm not sure if this is convincing. Is there any other species that would abstain from sex to gain something? In the wild, isn't it so that the alpha males indeed mate a lot, and there is absolutely nothing to be gained from abstaining?

If a human male has very low testosterone and is sickly, then he probably doesn't mate a lot if at all. Many drugs like Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors lower the sex drive.
So how would acting more like depressed brain-dead males be any good?

Can women subconsciously detect from a male that if he has sex a lot or not?
Pussy loves the smell of a pussy on a cock, right? 
So, would abstaining from sex give any advantage here? Or is it actually the opposite?
Why wouldn't a woman go for a male who has sex a lot, since there his worth has been certified?
Isn't it the case today that women want proof of a male's virility and they only detect this virility directly (in modern times)? So, having a lot of sex now probably means having a lot of sex in the future as well. 
Actually, if women can subconsciously detect a male that has a lot of sex, could you deceive a woman into thinking you're an alpha who gets laid a lot by masturbating a lot?

Masturbation is necessary.
First, as a way of discovering your own sexuality, your own body, and then as a way of alleviating accumulating libidinal energies.
Like all physical needs and all mental desires it can be abused , or it can become an obsession.

The two main - in my opinion - Delphic Maxims are γνῶθι σεαυτόν Know thyself, and, μηδέν άγαν, nothing in excess.

Diogenes the cynic masturbated in the agora and reportedly said when confronted "if only I could alleviate my hunger by rubbing my belly"...

In the Americanised modern world where everything has become a commodity, a product on the open market places, focusing us to become cynics, masturbation can become a means of mas mind control and corruption, through pornography.
Pornography, like all Hollywood movies, warp reality and affect impressionable minds - especially young ones.
This is also part of the degeneracy machine.

Quote :

But I'm not sure if this is convincing. Is there any other species that would abstain from sex to gain something? In the wild, isn't it so that the alpha males indeed mate a lot, and there is absolutely nothing to be gained from abstaining?

Abstinence does not include masturbation, and is rarely voluntary, unless there's some external power imposing it as evidence of loyalty to tis dogma.

[quote="Illiterate"Can women subconsciously detect from a male that if he has sex a lot or not?[/quote]Yes.

[quote="Illiterate"Pussy loves the smell of a pussy on a cock, right?[/quote] Like with everything, degrees.
Some women have more sensitive intuitions, others re more thick; some may be able to detect the triggers, the source of their feelings, most cannot.
The obvious is a male's confidence, or actually seeing him with females who are prettier than a female, triggering her interest.
Females are competitive with females, for social status.

I've actually seen this in practice.

Illiterate wrote:

So, would abstaining from sex give any advantage here? Or is it actually the opposite?

Abstaining from sex in these days is interpreted as an excuse for not being able to get sex, especially by women who are the gatekeepers of popular values and ambitions.
A "loser" is someone who is either not attractive enough or lacks the mental/physical potentials to compensate with money. In a system of hyoper-productivity, measured by money, being lazy or lacking ambition is a sin, an unforgivable vice - reason enough to be filtered out of the gene pool, making abstinence unintentional.
Hypergamy is the method.

Illiterate wrote:

Why wouldn't a woman go for a male who has sex a lot, since there his worth has been certified?

Difference between female and male promiscuity being a woman's impregnation.
male promiscuity indicates desirability - raising a male's value in a female's subconscious - making his seduction a jewel in her crown, representing her own social status/desirability.
"Certification" by popular consent. For females quantity is quality - adjusted for IQ.

Illiterate wrote:

Isn't it the case today that women want proof of a male's virility and they only detect this virility directly (in modern times)? So, having a lot of sex now probably means having a lot of sex in the future as well.

That's the hedonistic, genetic, angle....but the pragmatic angle has to do with a male's status - not only his physical desirability, sanctioned by a majority - but his social status - product of wealth, representing resources.
It produces confidence in males - swagger, cynicism. Aloofness.
We see it imitated by some of the clever males who like to put on an air of being unfazed, indifferent, uninterested in the mundane, the common.... calm and collected.
In most cases it is like a female's girdle or pushup bra, or lipstick...a signaling of superiority.
On-line, in philosophy forums, where, supposedly, higher IQ females are found, you find such types congregating, putting on these shows - signalling their confidence through aloofness, dispassionate boredom at a challenger etc.

It goes back to free-will and choice.
Quantity and quality of options makes an individual "free" to choose from various options accessible to him/her - this indicates power, and power is seductive to those who lack it.
Relative to the powerful those with les power find him/her irresistible.

In the sexual market females have the upper-hand. A average female can receive attention form even a slightly above average male; females can easily get laid, if they are willing to make compromises.
This is not so for males. The degree of compromises they are forced to make is determined by their options, indicating their power.
This is perceived by females as his 'neediness' - ergo obsessiveness is a sign of weakness for both sexes.

Need is a sign of weakness;' desire is a sign of power, because of the reasons I gave in my definition of need/desire.
Desire can easily be expunged, but having another want to do it for you signals your value.
Female desire represents a willingness to take on the risks and costs for having a male's offspring - a profound statement of approval; a desire to become a male's mean, to absorb and assimilate a male's essence.
For a female this state is like intoxication - a need to suck every ounce of essence form a male - merge with him.
A male always retains a distance - even emasculated, effete males who can become absorbed by otherness still maintain a level of distinction.

Here is the ideal of god as a merger of humanity into a singularity - hive-mind; individuals become absorbed by this external identity - depending on the strength and development of their own.
Feeble personality's compensate by seeking power through association - females do this as well, their identity entirely caught up in group dynamics - subjectivisation of the world - whereas the masculine sexual role necessitates certain amount of distancing, of objectification of other.

As I've said a female's sexual interests come from two sources - making her more "complex" and fickle: genetic markets - her body triggered by male symmetry/proportionality, charm, humous; memetic, her mind inspired by a male's power signals, his social status, access to resources. Depending on her age, her IQ, her sex drive, her fertility cycle she will be dominated more by one, or the other.

Illiterate wrote:

Actually, if women can subconsciously detect a male that has a lot of sex, could you deceive a woman into thinking you're an alpha who gets laid a lot by masturbating a lot?

No, self-gratification does not increase your self-esteem nor your confidence - if anything it decreases it.

Illiterate wrote:

Abstinence from sex... and especially masturbation. What do you think? Should it be done? Is there anything to be achieved by abstaining?

Celibacy, like solitude, runs counter to natural human drives and behavior; the main ones being tribalism and procreation. So when we are dealing with this subject and who applies to it, we have to remember that its a very small percentile of humans disposed to it. The one who voluntarily chooses to be celibate for a particular reason to enhance themselves in some way, is different from the one who falls into celibacy, as it were, involuntarily, for some reason.

You mentioned men of genius. Usually, they redirect their sexual energies to intellectual or spiritual pursuits. The sex drive is channeled to a higher function. They are also productive and active in this area. Activity keep energies focused toward objectives and uses, which can diminish the libido significantly, as well as other carnal drives. Action, productivity, movement, creative drives, harness sexual and aggressive energies and direct them to higher objectives. When these energies are directed to other goals, then becoming celibate is merely an incidental trifle, an effect to the cause. If one feels that consciously, deliberately, pursuing this method of attaining power or success, then they are still preoccupied with it, because they make it the cause or reason for their pursuit of higher goals. The one who is naturally inclined toward a higher goal outside their impulses, is the one who is naturally superior. Most others have to work at it, make it their cause.