By Christopher Cudworth
National Geographic wants you to know that having sex before competition might affect your performance. The linked article says it might be good for you, or it might be bad for you. Frankly we’re a little surprised here at WeRunandRide that this article did not appear in Time Magazine or Newsweek. Those two publications are famous for articles about controversial topics that teach you nothing at all about what the cover story or headline says it is really about.
For example, back in 1966 Time did a cover story titled Is God Dead? The article leads off with this tantalizing bit of scandalous questioning (by 960s standards): “Is God dead? It is a question that tantalizes both believers, who perhaps secretly fear that he is, and atheists, who possibly suspect that the answer is no.”
That’s a great start to an article if you want to confuse the ever-living crap out of people. But that’s the spirit of inquiry at most big publications. Magazines like Time or Newsweek or even National Geographic can’t actually afford to take sides and come to a conclusion about anything lest they be really informative on something an lose reader interest. That’s because these days most people don’t want to read anything that might actually change their opinion on a subject. They’ve worked too hard to build their fortress of partisanship and rock-hard convictions. God Forbid something should come along and knock down their house of cards.
That’s why more and more magazines focus on saying little while publishing articles such as this dandy cover headline from the July 2014 Runners World, which reads: “Run Strong. Stay Cool. Train Smarter. Hydrate Like a Pro. Get the Best Gear.”
Notice where that headline leads. Most of these articles are really designed to lead you to the interests of the advertisers, who pay for the magazine to be published and distributed to your doorstep or your Internet portal. See, there’s really not too much to be written about running or riding or swimming that wasn’t first published back in 1972. That’s when we all ran in zero elevation shoes, pushed on a light pole to stretch our achilles and stayed to the right side of the road so that no one would hit us on our bikes or during a run. It’s simple.
But these magazines have a great stake in having you come back month after month in hopes of finding that secret training formula that will turn you into a world class runner, rider or swimmer. But if they give you actual answers there would be nothing left to publish, and no reason to come back for more. That’s how magazines have operated since the dawn of time. Even the Bible has the same philosophy. Just give them enough to be dangerous, and then invite them back to church each week to tell them another cryptic way to find God, be happy and keep your soul intact.
But that reticence to actually teach rather than titillate might ultimately explain why so many print magazines are suffering these days. Instead of actually having the guts to tackle an issue in full, they walk a line that basically frustrates readers into thinking they’re not actually bright enough to get the real point and meaning of the article. That makes everyone feel smarter for trying even when they’re no wiser for having read 900 or so words on a particular topic
Why else would National Geographic be writing about sports and sex? Isn’t the job of National Geographic to wander around the world taking pictures of Afghani women with spooky eyes so that we can all stare at her and marvel at the commonality of the human condition?
Yes, that’s exactly what National Geographic is supposed to do. Except National Geographic The Magazine wasn’t titillating enough all on its own to survive. Those photos of naked African women with their breasts hanging out were great for young males dying for titillation in the 1960s, but too much competition came along. As a result, most magazines have moved online where people can interact with the content and give wise opinions like, “I would agree with this article in principle but I don’t agree with it in principal. And I blame the Democrats for that.”
Actually the article in National Geographic about sex and sports appeared on their website back in 2006. That was two years before Barack Obama was elected, so we can’t be sure if Obama is really at fault for an increase in athletes having sex the night before competition or not. We do know that plenty of people are complaining Obama is taking too much vacation and playing too much golf, and Clinton played golf and had sex in the White House, so there must a connection of some sort. That’s how Fox News looks at these things.
Truth about golf and sex
In truth most men only wish that things like vacation and golf would lead to sex. In fact the only thing that really leads to more sex is a huge pay bonus that enables the household to buy an entirely new kitchen. That will definitely get you laid.
Golfing? Not so much? Going golfing generally gets you higher credit card bills because if you’re the man of the house and go golfing for five hours you are going to have to deal with the fact that your neglected wife will want some retail therapy, preferable at a cute little dress shop where everything is overpriced and the women attendants flit around your darling wife telling her things like, “That looks great on you.” And she will agree.
Advice about cute dresses
Which brings up an important point. If your wife comes home from a cute little dress shop and you get home to find her admiringly transfixed with a pile of new dresses on the bed the very best strategy to get yourself laid is to tell her, “Those look beautiful. But they’d look even better on you. Why don’t you try one on and we’ll go out to dinner at the cute little place by the river where they serve wine in purple paper cups.”
Even National Geographic can tell you that’s some smart thinking, right there. It’s one of the tarsnakes of sexual pursuit that the harder you focus on the subject, the farther you drift from the goal. The way to a person’s heart is always through their interests and feeling good about themselves. It’s not the zippers that count.
A few words about athletes and sex
But the reason National Geographic even got talking about athletics and sex is because athletes tend to run around fucking like little monkeys if they get the chance. Being in shape and being around other people who are in shape is just about the biggest aphrodisiac in the world. Lord knows the Olympic Village is typically one giant humpfest from the Opening torch to the Closing ceremonies. That sound you hear coming from the Olympic dorms is not the screech of some powerlifter working on their form. That is an Olympic-sized orgasm shared by two athletes wired for sexual success.
Athletes are known to be pretty decent lovers. They are at peace or even thrive in their bodies. They are healthy enough to have sex, unless they’re on steroids, in which case their wooden nuts have been known to catch fire and explode into testicular flames or simply fall out like to numb little marbles with no other purpose than to roll under the cabinet and gather dust balls. Pun intended. So stay away from steroids.
Hyper little distance monkeys
Distance runners tend to be really hyper lovers. They’ve got all this stored up energy and no fat to hold them back. Making love to a male distance runner is, I have been told, like fucking a gibbon. All arms and legs and opposable thumbs. The only thing missing is the prehensile tail, and there are rumors some male runners grow those now and then out of sheer hormonal fury stored up from miles of training.
Then there are the cyclists whose super hot girlfriends in short little skirts stand around near the finish line looking like they’ve just wandered off the streets of Monaco. Go to any cycling competition, even the women’s races, and it seems like these short skirt girls are there. Some of them actually ride, but more of them perhaps spend more time riding the cyclists themselves. That would be certainly be an interesting for National Geographic to research and write about. Because it perhaps would provide real information about whether athletes do better or worse in competition after having sex.
From personal and associated experience it has been my observation that a bit of good sex of any sort is a very relaxing way to spend time the night before a competition. Many of my teammates over the years have even showed up at the team bus looking rosy and happy the morning of a meet. There is simply nothing more life-affirming than morning sex. One teammate literally ran from the bedroom in his spikes to line up and run a 4:18 mile and win the race. So don’t tell me sex is bad for athletes.
The love given and received in the act of lovemaking is the most natural exchange of good feelings known to humankind and beyond. I’ve watched squirrels humping in trees. One has not lived until you’ve seen two squirrels smile with their big orange teeth and those cute little ears.
That would make a nice photo for National Geographic too.
One giant gene pool
It’s also becoming evident that the gene pool of the triathlon community will someday merge into one giant organism. That’s because triathletes are typically a little incestuous within their own sport. Scientists have studied the potential effects of this and determined that by the year 2056, all triathletes will have interbred, merging into one tri-umphant race of beings thanks to the power of recombinant DNA and a few too many energy bars. All those hyper-rich foods will someday make sex between triathletes unnecessary. They’ll simply be able to rub websites and transfer sperm and eggs like frogs in some Amazon forest. Both women and men will be able to give birth, and all children will be bornwater in a burst of Gatorade and Shot Blocks. The umbilical cord will be fixed to the drawstring of the wetsuit and able to be pulled free like a parachute cord. Welcome to sex and procreation between triathletes in the future. These abilities may re-define the notion of the core family and traditional marriage, but evidences points to the fact that process is already under way.
Sex and sex and sex and sex and look at meeeeee….(Mick Jagger)
So let’s get down to the matter of conflict and purpose about sex and sports. Many coaches will tell you that having sex is bad for you leading up to competition. According to National Geographic, it’s never been proven one way or the other, except by the athletes themselves, who go humping their merry way to PRs and such without ever telling the coach.
We know the truth, don’t we? Sex helps rid you of anxiety, the killer of all motivation and determination. It can also make you feel loved, the most powerful force in the universe. Athletes know that sex doesn’t hurt your aggression the way coaches would like to make you think. Nor does it distract you from focus on the event if you accomplish the deed within reason.
So we say go out and do it. Even Nike told you so. Just Do It. Hit It. Make IT Happen. You’ll run, ride or swim faster. But even if you’re not faster, you’ll still be a happier person, which is why we do all this shit in the first place.
Just be advised that bad loving isn’t so good for performance. For all the good things that good sex can do for your performance, remember that good sex means having respect for the other person. And if you don’t have time for that when you’re in the Olympic Village, at least consider the importance of mutual lust and trust. These things are not just important for the whole sex thing to work, they help your head as well. Bad loving leads to bad performances. So you might as well make it good, very good.