Also, digitalrant, is the kind of "truth" you are talking about the kind that is derived from putting purported ancient writings and magic rocks into a top-hat? Because I put some magic rocks into a top-hat with some ancient Hebrew the other day (on the advice of the ghost of an ancient Native American) and it told me I should marry females, including 14 year old girls. I don't think I'm going to do that.
digitalrant, you may absolutely suggest I take care of the issue I am struggling with (whatever that is). However, I am awfully busy these days. My schedule is practically inundated with commitments to watch porn and masturbate.
In the interim, my I suggest you take a moment to watch this educational video?
lovemyfamily, the Hilton & Watts paper you summarize in your blog has been extensively criticized as a rather selective, even biased, reading of the studies they cite as evidence. See my link to Reid et al.
Certainly it is possible that scientific research will reveal empirical evidence for pornography addiction. As this point, such evidence is either inconclusive or non-existent.
If conclusive evidence indicated pornography had addictive potential, it would not indicate that pornography is "NOT" healthy and "IS" harmful in the way you suggest. It would, as I say, reveal a potential to be harmful. Many (if not most) people use substances that are objectively associated with addiction, such as alcohol, without experiencing any negative side-effects whatsoever. Indeed, the manifestation of alcoholism - the pathological, addictive abuse of alcohol - is likely the product of a number of factors, including genetic propensities and various aspects of the environment an individual experiences throughout ontogeny.
Your broad, moralistic claims are not substantiated by any available evidence. They are the product of your rather credulous position that religious dogma has practical advice about how to live a good, healthy life. I'll tell you a secret: there are many ways to live a healthily and ethically. People were doing it long before the advent of Abrahamic monotheism and will be doing so long after its cultural influence has waned.
At midnight, it will be revealed that digitalrant is the ghost of Jim Morrison accompanied by a "weird naked Indian". At least, that is the only explanation I can come up with for why someone would write something so vague and obtuse that it is rendered practically meaningless.
Roland, it's interesting that you believe I am being stand-offish. That is a subjective reading you bring to the conversation - it is in no way implicit in anything I have written thus far.
Regarding that study, I would submit that no single scientific study is perfect - that is why scientific discovery is the emergent product of a community of researchers. It is, however, a product of valid methodology - psychologists use the single sample t test all the time to statistically test whether or not a study group differs from a proposed null. Additionally, there is a rule of thumb that the minimum sample size for this type of study should be 30. I believe 52 is more than 30, so that is satisfied. If you look on the web you can find criticisms of that study made by professionals in the field of psychology that actually make valid points. In any event, the study can be taken as one data point in opposition to the "sexual addiction hypothesis". I only asked if you'd be willing to forward an opposing data point.
You seem to have grossly misunderstood my proposed litmus test. The point about addiction was not organ failure or death per se, but persisting in a maladaptive behavior in spite of the negative consequences. It also highlights the fact that addiction is a condition of physiological dependency - if you stop the addictive habit, you experience physiological withdrawal.
I do find it fascinating that you would present "plenty of stories of men" as evidence suggesting porn can become addicting. Is anecdotal evidence foundational to a good argument according to whatever school of thought you adhere to?
My argument comes off as internally consistent. It is also consistent with the opinion of the psychological community, who - as I understand it - are in a rather good position to define what does and does not count as addiction. As Frank pointed out, the DSM-V does not accept the notion that the type of addiction argued for in this video exists.
Well RolandDangerfield, you should offer your evidence supporting the notion that one can be addicted to pornography. I am sure you have loads of empirical evidence supporting your opinion. I await enlightenment.
I'll proffer a simple litmus test: looking at porn is becoming physiologically deleterious for a person, to the point that organs are actually damaged by the behavior. That person is told that if they continue to look at porn, it will kill them. Knowing this, they look at more porn.
That is what happens when someone experiences addiction to drugs or alcohol - should porn addiction have some lower standard?
The negative consequences of looking at porn are entirely contingent upon one's personal beliefs and those of that person's significant other. There is no objective sense in which porn is harmful. Real addiction causes people to lose their jobs, rob gas stations, and knowingly - if gradually - kill themselves.
There is no such thing as an addiction to pornography or sex. Sexual behavior, including masturbation, is perfectly normal. Looking at pornography is a cultural avenue for achieving a biological end - that is, sexual arousal and release. The notion that one can become addicted to sex or pornography is pure nonsense. If you would argue otherwise, ask an alcoholic or heroin addict who has experienced the physiological symptoms of withdrawal. Looking at porn and masturbating are activities with no intrinsic merit whatsoever. If they get in the way of other aspects of an individual's life, the issue is one of self-control, not one of dependence.
I humbly suggest that, 9 times out 10, when masturbation becomes problematic, it is due to a conflict between the details of religious dogma and the reality of being a bipedal primate - sexual urges and all. Allowing ancient mythology to dictate behavior is often problematic.
© 2017 Boise Weekly
Website powered by Foundation