# A member asked me about her husbands porn addiction....



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

I do not believe in porn addiction, or for that matter, sex addiction....I think too many Dr. Phill, and Opra types use them to make bucks off of a gulliible public....

Her husband had been neglecting her, and viewing porn and masterbating.....

I have always enjoyed porn, from the ladies undies section of the Sears and Roebuck catalog when I was 7, to playboy to hustler to the online porn available today....I had just never formulated an opinion on it, vs sex with a partner.......I had never been asked for an opinion......

After thinking about it I came up with what is the most honest expression on this debate that I can make.....

*Sex with a loving partner is an almost spiritual expression love affection and intimacy.........

Masterbating with porn is entertainment with an orgasm attached...*

That may be the most honest definitionn of the sex vs porn debate ever made....


----------



## LoriC (Feb 18, 2013)

Very well said!


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

LoriC said:


> Very well said!


Thank you, I don't know where I came up with it, but it just seemed so right had to share...

She asked me why her husband avoided sex with her, and I told her.

"*Some men are just so lazy they would rather masterbate than make love to their wives". *

I believe that to be true and people would rather call it addiction than what it really is...


----------



## sparkyjim (Sep 22, 2012)

I understand that you don't believe in it - that's fine for you. But I know that it is real and there is a lot of science behind it. 

It's funny what the brain can become addicted to.

Your analogy is very good - I think you have a good handle on your sexuality. There are many who do not and they use porn to escape relationships, responsibility, pressure, disappointment, reality. And they escalate their use and they are constantly looking for a "new" fix - something unique.

It is all very much like drug use because there are indeed drugs involved. The brain supplies the dopamine that these people are addicted to. It is a drug and it is real. Cocaine mimics dopamine, which is why it is so addictive.

There is help and there is information out there. yourbrainonporn.com has a lot of good information for anyone who thinks they might need it.


----------



## sparkyjim (Sep 22, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> "*Some men are just so lazy they would rather masterbate than make love to their wives". *



You would not believe how much WORK some addicts will go through just to get their fix of porn.

I agree to a point that laziness can undermine a relationship, but I don't really think it applies here to porn use...


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

It makes me sad when people who have no experience with porn addiction unilaterally declare that it doesn't exist. I am sure if you had any idea of the SCOPE of some of these people's habits you might change your tone.


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

It is hard to respect your opinion on porn vs. sex when you make such a close minded statement on sex addiction. It hardly seems that you have researched sex addiction or talked to those who have been diagnosed with it. Do you also believe that being straight or gay is a choice?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Well, the folks who wrote the current DSM specifically left sexual addiction out. Which is not to say that sexual 'addiction' doesn't exist, just that it's covered under other compulsive disorders. It's not an addiction in the classic sense. 

So while it's true no one can technically be diagnosed with sexual addiction, and any therapist who does so is making stuff up since that's not a recognized disorder, there are plenty of sexual compulsives.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

sparkyjim said:


> You would not believe how much WORK some addicts will go through just to get their fix of porn.
> 
> I agree to a point that laziness can undermine a relationship, but I don't really think it applies here to porn use...


Perhaps the laziness, is a poor choice of terms, perhaps disfunctional ...Not being willing or able to invest emotionally in someone on a sexual level...

That makes even more sense...It is *easier* for an *emotionally disfunctional* person to fulfill sexual needs with porn, than to engage another person for their sexual needs.... Because having sex with another person requires some *emotional interaction...*

I will go out on a limb and say it is probably easier for an emotionally disfunctional person to have sex with an escort or prostitute than with someone the are in a relationship with.....

Is there anyone out there with experience with a "PORN ADDICT" that can confirm or deny?

I need to know
the woodchuck


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Kermitty said:


> It is hard to respect your opinion on porn vs. sex when you make such a close minded statement on sex addiction. It hardly seems that you have researched sex addiction or talked to those who have been diagnosed with it. Do you also believe that being straight or gay is a choice?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



I have revised my statement to "Porn addicts are *emotionally **disfunctional* to the point that it is easier for them to masterbate to porn than have sex with someone with whom they have an emotional attachment".

Stright or gay is a toally different issue....I am willing to bet there are G/L people that are "addicted" to porn also....

There is a biological need for sex. It is a basic drive in almost all people....

It is easier for me to believe that a person who prefers porn to sex with a partner does so because he or she finds it difficult to deal with the* emotions *required for sex with a partner, than that that individual is truly addicted to porn...Addiction is just a convenient catch all label....

The end result is the same...The "*porn addict*" replaces sex with a partner with porn....Or the *"emotionally disfunctional" *person replaces sex with a partner with porn.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Cletus said:


> Well, the folks who wrote the current DSM specifically left sexual addiction out. Which is not to say that sexual 'addiction' doesn't exist, just that it's covered under other compulsive disorders. It's not an addiction in the classic sense.
> 
> So while it's true no one can technically be diagnosed with sexual addiction, and any therapist who does so is making stuff up since that's not a recognized disorder, there are plenty of sexual compulsives.


And compulsive hand washers, and germophobes, and door lockers, and all types of ritualistic compulsive behavior....But they are not hand washing...etc... addicts.......

I think people called porn addicts are called that because they let their porn use interfere with a "Normal" sexual relationship....

It is easier for a wife in a sexless marriage to say my husband is a porn addict than to say "My husband is unable to have sex with me because he is not comfortable with forming an emotional connection with me"....That would sound like SHE was not LOVABLE...or DESIREABLE... That is not the case, but it would be easy to feel that way....


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Kermitty said:


> It is hard to respect your opinion on porn vs. sex when you make such a close minded statement on sex addiction. It hardly seems that you have researched sex addiction or talked to those who have been diagnosed with it. Do you also believe that being straight or gay is a choice?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


The DSM does not recognise sexual addiction...Opra and Dr OZ may, but why should I......


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> And compulsive hand washers, and germophobes, and door lockers, and all types of ritualistic compulsive behavior....But they are not hand washing...etc... addicts.......


Don't you think that compulsive hand washers are 'addicted' to hand washing in the same way that the term 'sex addict' is used in casual conversation? 



Woodchuck said:


> I think people called porn addicts are called that because they let their porn use interfere with a "Normal" sexual relationship....


And this is a complete misuse of the meaning of addiction. If they're masturbating twice a week to porn in lieu of a real relationship, that doesn't much sound like addiction to me (I think we agree here). They simply prefer pornography to a spouse, for an endless variety of reasons, some even legitimate.



Woodchuck said:


> It is easier for a wife in a sexless marriage to say my husband is a porn addict than to say "My husband is unable to have sex with me because he is not comfortable with forming an emotional connection with me"....That would sound like SHE was not LOVABLE...or DESIREABLE... That is not the case, but it would be easy to feel that way....


I agree. That's why I cringe every time I open one of those "my husband is a porn addict" threads because it will inevitably devolve into solving the wrong problem. Taking away the porn, even after the husband gets clean and sober, is hardly a guarantee that he'll miraculously gain interest in his wife.

In lots of cases, certainly not all, porn use is the symptom, not the disease.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

AnnieAsh said:


> It makes me sad when people who have no experience with porn addiction unilaterally declare that it doesn't exist. I am sure if you had any idea of the SCOPE of some of these people's habits you might change your tone.


Anne

Please believe me when I say I have no intention of offending you. I made some statements about porn and sexuality, and presented a theory...That is how all scientific investigations begin....

Here is a post you made about your husband.....

Oh yeah we have sex on his days off. That's it. He is viewing it at least 2 times more than we are having sex. He SAYS it is because of his schedule (coming home at 5 or 6am, leaving just after the girls get out of school) and not that he prefers it to me, but I think he DOES. I've tried not smothering him or begging for sex.

Your husband has no problem having sex with you when the opportunity is present, but you would rather brand him an addict, than think that his porn use is just "entertainment with an orgasm"....Would you find it reprehensable if he masterbated *without* porn?

When a sex partner is not available, and a person, male or female feels the urge to have sex, they will masterbate...

I don't think many people will dispute that...But if that person masterbates using porn as an adjunct they are given the label of porn addict...

If you look at it in that context I think you will admit it dosen't make sense..

I know that many women feel threatened by their SO viewing porn, but using the males sexual attraction to visual stimulus
as a criteria to label them as a porn addict is not accurate, and I think most will agree unfair..... 

My OP was intended to provide an explanation of people who preferred porn to sex with a partner, not someone who prefers sex with a partner, but uses porn when a partner is not available....It seems your husband is fully capable of emotional attachment to you, and thus my OP does not apply to your situation...


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Cletus

I think we both GET IT...but I don't think masterbation is a symptom of anything, it just exists...I would be willing to bet that 90 plus percent of people in a sexual relationship with a partner also masterbate...It is just a fact...

I think some people would be more willing to label that person an addict than admit they masterbate....

Also there are probably more people having regular sex with their partner who masterbate with or without porn a few times a week, than those who materbate and do not have sex with their partner....


----------



## pplwatching (Jun 15, 2012)

There are a couple of interesting articles floating around on how porn stimulates and rewires the brain over time. There's a web site "dedicated" to the subject, although I have seen similar claims elsewhere. I don't know how much is psychobabble versus hard studies, but in my personal experience I can connect some dots and have cut way back.

Start here for an overview of concepts & science | Your Brain On Porn


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Woodchuck, there are some physiological side effects from masturbating for 3 hours straight. The penis is VERY desensitized, so much so that he can hardly feel oral sex. During intercourse, in order for him to orgasm, only forceful slamming strokes will work. Sometimes the penis is not as hard. Woman on top does not work with a man who uses a vice like grip when he masturbates. His compulsive porn use has adversely affected the variety of sex I can have. 

When I leave the house in the morning, it is not uncommon for him to get up and watch from noon and watch until 330 or so. Does that strike you as "entertainment with an orgasm?" 

I wish dearly he felt confident enough to post what he has told me. He has gone great lengths in the past to get his fix, even watching in public parking lot. He has admitted to never been able to stop completely, that it has NOTHING to do with me. Darn right it has nothing to do with me; I encourage him to wake me when he gets home or at least use the many videos of me he has. 

Because you have NO experience and have never seen what a porn addict will do to get their fix, you declare that it isn't real. It very much is. This is not watching twice a week because your wife isn't available or you find her unattractive. This is watching for hours on end, locking your children out of the computer room, sitting in a car on your phone, sneaking out while your spouse is asleep, staying home from family outings to get your fix. 

I am not insecure, wondering if I am good in bed or hot. I know I am. I could find a willing partner in no time at all. I do not blame porn. I don't even blame my husband. He has a compulsion issue with it. 

Do you think I slapped the label on my husband because he watches twice a week for 30 minutes each time? No. He watches daily, even if I have sex with him. An hour minimum each session, more if I am gone.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

pplwatching said:


> There are a couple of interesting articles floating around on how porn stimulates and rewires the brain over time. There's a web site "dedicated" to the subject, although I have seen similar claims elsewhere. I don't know how much is psychobabble versus hard studies, but in my personal experience I can connect some dots and have cut way back.
> 
> Start here for an overview of concepts & science | Your Brain On Porn


I will guarentee if these same studies were done on someone studying any acedemic subject in they were intensely interested, you would find the same type of brain chemistry taking place, and the same changes in the hardwiring of the brain....Learning causes changes......You will even see those changes in people falling in love...


I am convinced the entire porn issue is fueled by women feeling insecure when their SO watches porn......
Most women will admit to these insecurities, and still they would rather label their SO a *porn addict *than admit there are issues in the *relatonship* or in their *own mind*...It is just human nature...

From my personal standpoint, the more porn viewed, the less entertaining it is, to the point where I no longer bother....

So woodchucks defense of porn is based on his concern about individual choice, than his personal use of porn....


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

Are you also one that believes a "cheater doesn't love you or know what love is ." It's another thread that carries the same kind of narrow minded thinking. People are capable of becoming addicted to anything, be it drugs, sex, porn, or eating toilet paper.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## sinnister (Dec 5, 2010)

I think like everything else at this point in time people seek to explain away poor behaviour with some sort of mental malady. So like ADD, Bi-polar disorder etc. you have sex addiction being vastly over diagnosed. 

A PhD does not = infallible. Over diagnosis mental conditions is becoming rampant in western society.

But I know these maladies do exist, just in much smaller numbers than most are willing to admit.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

AnnieAsh

I can assure you someone who watches porn is not masterbating the whole time. No one would masterbate for 3 1/2 continuously.

Much like having a sex session lasting that long dosn't imply PIV for that length of time. I am the last to condone depriving a mate of sex, and substituting masterbation.... 

I will state categorically that it is wrong for anyone to masterbate to the exclusion of a wiling partner.... But it is equally wrong to deny a partner access to any form of sexual stimulus when they are not present.....Just because the other partner feels somehow threatened by it....I began this thread with a my totally honest perspective of porn vs sex...And I think it is a very relevent statement...
All I ask is that responders are as honest with themselves...


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> AnnieAsh
> 
> I can assure you someone who watches porn is not masterbating the whole time. No one would masterbate for 3 1/2 continuously.
> 
> ...


Google Chrome tracks your internet history minute by minute. And I have asked him. Yes we are talking about hours of straight masturbation. One hand clicking, the other...well...you know. Kind of scary. 

But again, I am not threatened by porn. I like sex. Always have always will, ever since that very first orgasm the time I lost my virginity. I have a high drive. I'm pretty darn cute if I say so myself.  

But how can you state that something doesn't exist if you have no experience with it? Would you like to speak to someone who has an acknowledged problem?


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Kermitty said:


> Are you also one that believes a "cheater doesn't love you or know what love is ." It's another thread that carries the same kind of narrow minded thinking. People are capable of becoming addicted to anything, be it drugs, sex, porn, or eating toilet paper.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Maybe splitting hairs, but I would disagree.

An addiction to drugs or alcohol is a true addiction to that substance...the substance itself introduces a different chemical balance into the body, and the body becomes accustomed to and dependent upon the presence of that new chemical balance.

"Addiction" to sex, porn, eating toilet paper, etc would more accurately be described as compulsive behavior. While there is a chemical "high" that the user gets, it is one wholly generated by their body. While the activity of choice is how they "trigger" that reaction, they can retrain themselves to trigger that reaction through other means.

And, yes, I say this as the husband of a self-diagnosed "sex and love addict." In our reading on the subject, all of the books that were recommended to her by her support group describe the cycle of the "addiction" as chasing after the self-induced "high" that comes from the activity. Her psychiatrist, in actuality, called both her self-diagnosis and sex addiction (direct quote here) as, "Hooey." He did, however, say that if she was getting benefit from viewing her behaviors as such and attempting to change them through the steps of her support program, that that was a perfectly valid approach.

And, be it porn/masturbation, games, gambling or any other activity, it can be easy for some to go from the activity being an enjoyable pastime to a habit to a compulsion. And, while a compulsion can manifest similarly to a true addiction, with the behaviors being quite similar, calling it an addiction would be inaccurate.


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

Grayson. I understand what you are saying and I suppose it just depends on what word you use to describe it. Depending in what you read on the Internet, you get different answers. I agree that calling it sex or porn addiction isn't necessarily a good representation of what it truly is. 
I read this recently, "Addiction is a persistent, compulsive dependence on a behavior or substance. The term has been partially replaced by the word dependence for substance abuse. Addiction has been extended, however, to include mood-altering behaviors or activities." addiction - definition of addiction in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

I still don't think OP should be so quick to dismiss it wether one calls it a compulsion or an addiction.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## LouAnn Poovy (Mar 21, 2013)

Woodchuck said:


> I do not believe in porn addiction, or for that matter, sex addiction....I think too many Dr. Phill, and Opra types use them to make bucks off of a gulliible public....
> 
> Her husband had been neglecting her, and viewing porn and masterbating.....
> 
> ...


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

LouAnn Poovy said:


> Woodchuck said:
> 
> 
> > I do not believe in porn addiction, or for that matter, sex addiction....I think too many Dr. Phill, and Opra types use them to make bucks off of a gulliible public....
> ...


----------



## Jamison (Feb 10, 2011)

I believe their are such things as addictions, of all kinds. If people do not believe it, its their right, just as its someones right to believe there is. Period.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Jamison said:


> I believe their are such things as addictions, of all kinds. If people do not believe it, its their right, just as its someones right to believe there is. Period.


You can believe the world is flat, and the thought police won' come knocking on your door.

I align my views with the standards set out by the psychiatric community, as they are the folks best in the know on how to properly label, diagnose, and treat addictions and compulsions.


----------



## Jamison (Feb 10, 2011)

I believe what I want, just as you do, nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Jamison said:


> I believe what I want, just as you do, nothing more, nothing less.


Believe that if you like. As much as possible, I try to not let that be the final word on anything. Sorry, hard core, engineering, empiricist type here. Show me the numbers.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

Jamison said:


> I believe what I want, just as you do, nothing more, nothing less.





sparkyjim said:


> I understand that you don't believe in it - that's fine for you. But I know that it is real and there is a lot of science behind it.


Of course you can believe what you want, but you can't make everybody else accept your definitions.

Porn addiction is not recognised in the DSM manual. It is an issue of impulse control, not addiction. Just as eating too much is an issue of impulse control, not 'food addiction'. 

Labelling it as an addiction takes responsibility away from the person with the behavioural issues and focusses on the porn rather than the underlying cause of the behavourial problems. 

The terms 'porn addiction' and 'sex addiction' are part of the trend of medicalising all behavioural issues, which makes money for 'therapists', drug companies and unscrupulous churches:

*From the Daily Telegraph: A month’s treatment at some residential centres can cost more than $37,000 (£23,600). In California, a church called New Life Ministries charges $1,400 (£900) for its three-day “Every Man’s Battle” workshops (for men who believe pornography and lust have taken over their lives) and runs a website that sells books, compact discs and DVDs for men, women and adolescents who have “failed in their battle for sexual purity”.

There is even a kit for soldiers, shipped in a camouflage box, designed to help men resist sexual urges while deployed in the military. In 2009, this organisation made nearly $8 million (£5 million) from selling its self-help material and running its seminars and workshops. *

Masturbation in moderation is healthy and, for men at least, necessary to maintain good sexual health and to avoid prostate cancer. If the OP's friend is coming at this from the perspective of porn/masturbation = betrayal, then she needs to deal with her insecurity issues first, before tackling her partner's problems.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

So the DSM III (put out in 1980) had a listing of Sexual Disorders NOS (not otherwise specified). This disorder was pulled in the version IV and V because of the lack of research to maintain the disorder listing. 

However in subsequent years there has been research in what is being termed as Hypersexual disorder, of which many would say porn addiction would fall into if you look at what is listed under the descriptors. This disorder listing did not make it into the V version (due to be release in May), however there is a push at the May APA meeting to consider making some revision version to include the hypersexual disorder. 

Anyone interested go to 
http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Sex and GID Lit Reviews/Paraphilias/KAFKAHD.pdf

So one cannot make a clear statement that it does not exist, even though is is not clearly defined yet.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Jamison said:


> I believe their are such things as addictions, of all kinds. If people do not believe it, its their right, just as its someones right to believe there is. Period.


If we're being objective, though, any true addiction that is part of "sex addiction" or "porn addiction" is an addiction to the biological chemical ****tail released by the body. The act of sex itself is not addictive. The media and genres of porn are not, themselves, addictive. The "addict" uses them as a tool to stimulate the chemical release that they crave. The same "rush" or "high" that one person might get from watching (and, presumably, masturbating to) porn is the same chemical reaction that another may get from gambling, or driving fast or buying shoes. It's simply the behavior that they have trained themselves to use to release that chemical reaction, and they can retrain themselves to get the same "high" using different stimuli.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Kaboom (Feb 6, 2013)

Woodchuck said:


> I have revised my statement to "Porn addicts are *emotionally **disfunctional* to the point that it is easier for them to masterbate to porn than have sex with someone with whom they have an emotional attachment".
> 
> Stright or gay is a toally different issue....I am willing to bet there are G/L people that are "addicted" to porn also....
> 
> ...


Sometimes it's not even the emotions that are difficult to deal with, but the partner as a whole can be difficult to deal with.. Why would someone prefer a partner who makes them feel bad about sex, or like they are a problem because they want sex too often, or more than 2 positions, or want oral, or whatever. Other difficulties can be that you might be expected to perform in a way that does not satisfy your needs and is one-sided. All of these things from a man's point of view can end up being a hassle, and porn often is easier, more physically exciting, and much less laced with guilt and shame.

I'd argue on woodchuck's side on this issue, only because many partners don't realize that when someone prefers porn to you, then maybe you are the one who makes things overly difficult. Not YOU, but kind of 'you people'. I dunno.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

drerio said:


> So the DSM III (put out in 1980) had a listing of Sexual Disorders NOS (not otherwise specified). This disorder was pulled in the version IV and V because of the lack of research to maintain the disorder listing.
> 
> However in subsequent years there has been research in what is being termed as Hypersexual disorder, of which many would say porn addiction would fall into if you look at what is listed under the descriptors. This disorder listing did not make it into the V version (due to be release in May), however there is a push at the May APA meeting to consider making some revision version to include the hypersexual disorder.
> 
> ...


Right. The new DSM includes a diagnosis called behavioral addictions, which (to date) only includes gambling, but will no doubt be expanded as research supports the inclusion of new categories. 

The argument now seems to hinge on getting past the older definition of addiction requiring an exogenous substance to a newer definition that includes anything that alters critical brain functions like the dopamine system. It seems to me then that the line between compulsion and addiction will become awfully fuzzy, which perhaps it should. 

There will always be a critical difference between treating alcoholism and sexual compulsion/addiction, however. It's a simple matter to tell someone to avoid alcohol for the rest of their life.


----------



## LouAnn Poovy (Mar 21, 2013)

Woodchuck said:


> I will guarentee if these same studies were done on someone studying any acedemic subject in they were intensely interested, you would find the same type of brain chemistry taking place, and the same changes in the hardwiring of the brain....Learning causes changes......You will even see those changes in people falling in love...
> 
> 
> *I am convinced the entire porn issue is fueled by women feeling insecure when their SO watches porn......*
> ...


*ARe you serious?*


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Cletus said:


> Right. The new DSM includes a diagnosis called behavioral addictions, which (to date) only includes gambling, but will no doubt be expanded as research supports the inclusion of new categories.
> 
> The argument now seems to hinge on getting past the older definition of addiction requiring an exogenous substance to a newer definition that includes anything that alters critical brain functions like the dopamine system. It seems to me then that the line between compulsion and addiction will become awfully fuzzy, which perhaps it should.
> 
> There will always be a critical difference between treating alcoholism and sexual compulsion/addiction, however. It's a simple matter to tell someone to avoid alcohol for the rest of their life.


I know what it includes... read the hypersexual disorder article. This would gets its own designation. There is a history to this thought. I have colleagues in this area and they are attending May's meeting to reveal version V. I am very aware. And, as a developmental biologist who specializes in neurulation, I am well aware of brain chemistry and also understand the complication involved in making simplifications out of very complicated actions. 

The problem is not about what neurotransmitter gets released, much of the reluctance has more to do with making a drive function (sex, eating, etc) into a disorder. Thus the classification of hypersexual disorder makes a better case for the argument. One of my colleagues has suggested that it is very likely to make it into a revision copy. This disorder has a lot of backing at the moment.


----------



## LouAnn Poovy (Mar 21, 2013)

Woodchuck said:


> AnnieAsh
> 
> *I can assure you someone who watches porn is not masterbating the whole time. No one would masterbate for 3 1/2 continuously.*
> 
> ...


*Oh WoodChuck - just because your experience doesn't include this, by no means consider it not possible*


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> However in subsequent years there has been research in what is being termed as Hypersexual disorder, of which *many **would* say porn addiction *would* fall into if you look at what is listed under the descriptors.


 Lot's of hypotheticals in there.


drerio said:


> This disorder listing did not make it into the V version (due to be release in May), however there is a push at the May APA meeting to consider making some revision version to include the hypersexual disorder.


Of course there are many who want it included, it is a cash cow and allows both parties to save face by blaming an addiction rather than the failure of their relationship, which is what they should be focussed on.



drerio said:


> So one cannot make a clear statement that it does not exist, even though is is not clearly defined yet.


Conversely you cannot say it does exist.


----------



## LouAnn Poovy (Mar 21, 2013)

johnnycomelately said:


> Lot's of hypotheticals in there. *Of course there are many who want it included, it is a cash cow and allows both parties to save face* by blaming an addiction rather than the failure of their relationship, which is what they should be focussed on.
> 
> Conversely you cannot say it does exist.


*Yeah, it's face saving to say my husband and I divorced due to his porn addiction. You call that face saving?*


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

LouAnn Poovy said:


> *Yeah, it's face saving to say my husband and I divorced due to his porn addiction. You call that face saving?*


So you divorced your husband purely because he watched too much porn?


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> Lot's of hypotheticals in there. Of course there are many who want it included, it is a cash cow and allows both parties to save face by blaming an addiction rather than the failure of their relationship, which is what they should be focussed on.
> 
> Conversely you cannot say it does exist.


Listen, I understand the reluctance, to classify this as an addiction. I am not even suggesting it is, however even the APA recognizes that a yet undefined disorder exist. They just are unable to agree upon it. 

to agree upon a definitive diagnosis requires a great deal of statistical data that is significant enough to warrant it. And, not enough research has been done in this area (perusing through the many peer-review Psychology journals reveals that fact). 

However in this case, enough members recognize that possible disorder exist. Using a normative Gaussian curve they suggest most individuals full under normal sexual function and that there those who are hypersexual. The problem is that this requires coming up with clear testable parameters that would give enough statistical data to make a good classification. This could take years, that does not mean it is still cannot be recognized under the typical NOS category. 

Science is full of hypotheticals until the process is well tested to provide a level of confidence to make it a substantiated theory. 

But, I for one am not going to be an arm chair psychologist and make a off-handed suggestion that such a disorder does not exist. "Stones did not disappear when the Stone Age ended".


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> But, I for one am not going to be an arm chair psychologist and make a off-handed suggestion that such a disorder does not exist.


Neither am I.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> However in this case, enough members recognize that possible disorder exist. Using a normative Gaussian curve they suggest most individuals full under normal sexual function and that there those who are hypersexual.


Hypersexuality is a symptom that can be caused by various illnesses and syndromes. It isn't an addiction.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> Hypersexuality is a symptom that can be caused by various illnesses and syndromes. It isn't an addiction.


It is called Hypersexual Disorder, different from hypersexuality.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> It is called Hypersexual Disorder, different from hypersexuality.


_"A proposal to include a diagnosis called hypersexual disorder, simply describing the symptom without implying any specific theory, is under consideration for inclusion in the appendix of the DSM, but not in the main list of official diagnoses."_


----------



## ozymandias (Sep 22, 2009)

It pleases me to see some of the more thoughtful commentary on addiction vs compulsion. It seems like we have diluted the meaning of the word addiction so far beyond its real clinical meaning that it's almost useless. Sometimes I wish everyone who thinks you can be addicted to World of Warcraft could spend some with folks coming off of ling term benzo or opiate habits.

I think some of it is just about removing agency from the people you care about. It's easier to believe they do things to hurt us not entirely of their own volition.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> _"A proposal to include a diagnosis called hypersexual disorder, simply describing the symptom without implying any specific theory, is under consideration for inclusion in the appendix of the DSM, but not in the main list of official diagnoses."_


I read the article... I understand it. And, if you understand how this works, these are initial steps. As I stated, until more statistical data is provided, it will remain as a hypersexual disorder. This is part of the reluctance. By putting it into the appendix, it also drive research funding. I also know how that part works as well.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> it will remain as a hypersexual disorder.


Hypersexual disorder has not been accepted, so it can't 'remain'.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> Hypersexual disorder has not been accepted, so it can't 'remain'.


you are cherry picking my quotes. Read the whole statement I made. It will remain even if it show up in the appendix. It give a green light to APA members to accept it as a probable diagnosis. 

If is was eliminated all together it would no longer be recognized. Case in point, dyslexia. That diagnosis was completely removed, does not show up in the main body of disorders or in the appendix.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> you are cherry picking my quotes. Read the whole statement I made. It will remain even if it show up in the appendix. It give a green light to APA members to accept it as a probable diagnosis.
> 
> If is was eliminated all together it would no longer be recognized. Case in point, dyslexia. That diagnosis was completely removed, does not show up in the main body of disorders or in the appendix.


The fact is that 'hypersexual disorder' and 'sex addiction' are not accepted by the DSM as of now. So, your use of the word 'remain' is misleading. 

It might be included in the future, but it equally might not, despite the lobbying of those who would make even more money if it were to be declared a syndrome or an addiction.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> The fact is that 'hypersexual disorder' and 'sex addiction' are not accepted by the DSM as of now. So, your use of the word 'remain' is misleading.
> 
> It might be included in the future, but it equally might not, despite the lobbying of those who would make even more money if it were to be declared a syndrome or an addiction.


I can accept your objection to the work 'remain', fair enough. However, if accepted and as I stated earlier (from what I have heard it is very likely to be accepted... so I was premature in my wording) it will remain for the duration of the upcoming edition. 

I would not deny that such could be exploited for monetary gain. But that aside, if the data shows it to be an actual disorder that can be clearly defined then it cannot scoffed because it a cash cow for some industry. 

I will wait and see and certainly not give callousness to what appears to cause harm to marriages.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> I will wait and see and certainly not give callousness to what appears to cause harm to marriages.


This is exactly why I don't think the terms are useful. The husband was using so much porn, in all probability, because he had no desire to sleep with his wife but still had sexual urges. That is the issue. The porn use is the symptom. 

Focusing on the symptom harms the chances of repairing what has gone wrong with the relationship.

I am not 'giving callousness' I genuinely believe that medicalising this type of behaviour is counter-productive.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> This is exactly why I don't think the terms are useful. The husband was using so much porn, in all probability, because he had no desire to sleep with his wife but still had sexual urges. That is the issue. The porn use is the symptom.
> 
> Focusing on the symptom harms the chances of repairing what has gone wrong with the relationship.
> 
> I am not 'giving callousness' I genuinely believe that medicalising this type of behaviour is counter-productive.


Well, I don't agree with your assumption, but that is Ok. While this is not my field of expertise (I deal with cognitive syndromes that have genetic/proteomic markers) I am not ready to look at loosely fit cause and effect in all cases. 

I am sure there are cases that porn use is strictly for entertainment purposes (suggested by the OP). As there is porn use as a replacement for a problem in ones marriage as much. As there may be a disorder associated with it. Obviously the latter is always going to be harder to prove because medical disorder requires some definitive diagnostic measurement. And, even if we don't have those well defined parameters as of yet, does not mean it does not exist. 

I would say that there is value in putting a medical diagnosis if there is a way to provide remediation.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

I am glad to see some people are able to address this issue in an unemotional manner....

I will stand by my original statement, and would like to add that there is a move to clasify any form of addiction as a primary disorder....The motive behind this is to get government entities such as medicare and medicaid to pay for treatment. 
It is an end run around current definitions to allow these money seeking individuals access to public coffers.....So now there is a profit motive to porn/sex addiction being legitimized....

There are commercial enterprises online who for a fee will help rid people of their porn addiction....These people will reap a windfall when porn becomes an addiction.....

The newer theories ascribe to the "your brain on porn? model, saying porn changes the brain through neuroplasticity.....

YOU CAN SUBSTITUTE PORN, INTERNET USE, VIDEO GAMES,CHOCOLATE,TAM, OR NOSE PICKING FOR SAXOPHONE AND THE MODEL STILL FITS.....

Scarlet Kinsey · Colchester Institute

Learning saxophone affects the brain's reward circuitry, such that memories of previous experiences with jazz, blues, and other music trigger cravings and more musical behaviors. Brain circuitry that governs impulse control and judgment is also altered in the brains of saxophone players, resulting in the nonsensical pursuit of "rewards," such as jazz and other music.

This is a brilliant and all too true debunking of the neuroplasticity "your brain on porn" theory of addiction....

I have seen too many examples on TAM of women threatening divorce over occasional use of porn to discount *insecurity of the female partner as being the PRIMARY cause of porn being labeled as addictive...*

*Women are as hard wired to object to porn, as men are to look at it...*

*Porn must be an addiction because my husband would rather look at it than have sex with me....is the clasic porn haters model...*


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> I am sure there are cases that porn use is strictly for entertainment purposes (suggested by the OP). As there is porn use as a replacement for a problem in ones marriage as much. As there may be a disorder associated with it.


You forgot to say that some porn use is for healthy masturbation.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> You forgot to say that some porn use is for healthy masturbation.



I am sure you will find many porn haters to be dead set against masterbation also.....Of course most of them don't have to worry about prostate cancer either....


good luck
the woodchuck


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

So...every person who prefers not to have porn (porn NOT masturbation) within their marriage is insecure?:scratchhead:

I'm literally laughing aloud. No one who knows me would ever say I am insecure.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> I am sure you will find many porn haters to be dead set against masterbation also.....Of course most of them don't have to worry about prostate cancer either....
> 
> 
> good luck
> the woodchuck


Well, then, I'll be sure to tell my husband that he needs to start maturbating... and not just that he needs to start masturbating, but that he needs to watch porn while doing it... because if he doesn't, he's going to get prostate cancer.


----------



## BurningMan (Mar 22, 2013)

Show me a person that will bypass a willing attractive partner to instead watch porn and I'll agree that person is addicted. Other than that, porn is an easy outlet for sexual tension no matter how often it is used.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

BurningMan said:


> Show me a person that will bypass a willing attractive partner to instead watch porn and I'll agree that person is addicted. Other than that, porn is an easy outlet for sexual tension no matter how often it is used.


You have brought the op full circle...

A PERSON WITH A WILLING PARTNER WHO CHOOSES PORN OVER THAT PARTNER IS EITHER TOO LAZY OR EMOTIONALLY DETACHED FROM THAT PARTNER TO ENGAGE IN INTERCOURSE...

Not too dificult to understand unless you are a rabid anti porn activist....Ot unwilling to admit your husband is not interested in you....Or both.


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> A PERSON WITH A WILLING PARTNER WHO CHOOSES PORN OVER THAT PARTNER IS EITHER TOO LAZY OR EMOTIONALLY DETACHED FROM THAT PARTNER TO ENGAGE IN INTERCOURSE...
> .


...or has deep seeded emotional/psychological issues that he is using porn as an outlet for. He can be neither lazy or emotionally detached in this case.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Kermitty said:


> ...or has deep seeded emotional/psychological issues that he is using porn as an outlet for. He can be neither lazy or emotionally detached in this case.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



I think you will agree anyone so screwed up as to use porn as their sole sexual outlet is one sick puppy and is not likely to be married....OP was about a married person chosing porn over wife......


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> I think you will agree anyone so screwed up as to use porn as their sole sexual outlet is one sick puppy and* is not likely to be married*....OP was about a married person chosing porn over wife......


And yet, that's exactly what happens sometimes. Some use that trash in place of the warm, willing, and WANTING body, waiting for them, their spouses.


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Yes sometimes. Also lots of times men or woman will use it in a sexless marriage. When the husband/ wife discovers it its shatters the marriage.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Maricha75 said:


> And yet, that's exactly what happens sometimes. Some use that trash in place of the warm, willing, and WANTING body, waiting for them, their spouses.


But one post was about someone too damged to be able to relate to any sexual outlet except porn...I think you will agree, such an individual is *not likely to be married*...

The OP referred to someone who preferred porn to sex with a partner, and I stated that person was either *too lazy or too emotionally detached from their partner to have sex with that partner...*. 

I could add the possibility that the partner has becomen too disagreeable in looks or attitude to interest their partner.....Perhaps she has let herself go, or is unwilling to engage in anything except boring positions or sex acts, or has become shrewish....That would certainly put off most men, and *the wife would rather blame porn than her own shortcomings...*
In one case the porn user has probably never had sex, or tried it and didn't choose to continue...A deeply disturbed person....In the second case the person is married or in a relationship, and chooses to use porn and masterbate either as a substitute for sex with a partner, or as a suplemental sexual outlet when the partner is not available or not willing.......

If a man needs sex 7 days a week, and the partner is only available or willing 2 days a week, the partner is being narrow minded, jealous, and selfish to deny the man another outlet for sex....


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

That suck puppy is married sometimes and has to seek therapy for his emotional/psychological issue which is often referred to as an addiction.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> You have brought the op full circle...
> 
> A PERSON WITH A WILLING PARTNER WHO CHOOSES PORN OVER THAT PARTNER IS EITHER TOO LAZY OR EMOTIONALLY DETACHED FROM THAT PARTNER TO ENGAGE IN INTERCOURSE...


Your opinion, correct? Or do you have some experiential evidence to substantiate your binary theory. It is perfectly fine when people want to make bold statements, but they should be qualified with evidence or given as their opinion.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Kermitty said:


> That suck puppy is married sometimes and has to seek therapy for his emotional/psychological issue which is often referred to as an addiction.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Who would marry a person so screwed up they could only engage in masterbating to porn....


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> Who would marry a person so screwed up they could only engage in masterbating to porn....


Who says they didn't hide it at the beginning and it came out later on? Or that the porn/masturbation got worse over time...and NOT due to a spouse letting herself/himself go, not nagging, nothing that could be construed as bad? Not everything is that easy.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

drerio said:


> Your opinion, correct? Or do you have some experiential evidence to substantiate your binary theory. It is perfectly fine when people want to make bold statements, but they should be qualified with evidence or given as their opinion.


Are you saying the only reason a person would neglect a spouce over porn is *that person is a hopeless addict to the evils of pornography* That opinion is so short sighted as to be totally devoid of reason or logic.....:rofl:


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> Are you saying the only reason a person would neglect a spouce over porn is *that person is a hopeless addict to the evils of pornography* That opinion is so short sighted as to be totally devoid of reason or logic.....:rofl:


Stop putting words into his mouth. He never said the ONLY reason a person would neglect a spouse is because they are addicted to it. YOU, however, have more than once stated your OPINION that porn addiction is not real...unless I misread your posts...


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Maricha75 said:


> Who says they didn't hide it at the beginning and it came out later on? Or that the porn/masturbation got worse over time...and NOT due to a spouse letting herself/himself go, not nagging, nothing that could be construed as bad? Not everything is that easy.


To a died in the wool anti porn activist, the only excuse is PORN...No amount of reason or logic will alter their convictions....

Stamping their foot and yelling no no no no Is all the argument they feel necessary....

Their attitude is "Don't confuse me with facts, I've already made up my mind"...:rofl:


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> To a died in the wool anti porn activist, the only excuse is PORN...No amount of reason or logic will alter their convictions....
> 
> Stamping their foot and yelling no no no no Is all the argument they feel necessary....
> 
> Their attitude is "Don't confuse me with facts, I've already made up my mind"...:rofl:


And for those who are admantly FOR porn, the same argument applies... no way is porn the reason for the problem. Gotta be a problem with the spouse.


So round and round we go.


----------



## Ignis (Feb 16, 2013)

I suggest you to visit some good forums where people discuss and struggle with their porn addiction. You will realize that this is serious, very serious issue, same as drugs,alcohol, gambling...in some cases even more.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Ignis said:


> I suggest you to visit some good forums where people discuss and struggle with their porn addiction. You will realize that this is serious, very serious issue, same as drugs,alcohol, gambling...in some cases even more.


Most of the sites where people are fighting porn addiction deal with simple minded folks who *know* it is wrong to "touch themselves" and are trying to stop. These sites are usually affiliated with some religon, and are dead set against the devil porn....Or they are *charging* porn addicts for treatment...

I have always been against close minded prudish individuals who are too insecure with themselves to form their own opinions, and rely on dogma to do their thinking for them....

I find opposition to porn to be almost exclusively based on religous grounds, Or women who are so insecure with their own sex appeal or spouses interest to tolerate any form of porn.....I find it close minded, prudish, counter productive and autocratic...

I am sure there are also out of shape men who would find Michelangelo's statue of David to be pornographic if their wife had a pinup of it in her boudoir....

I have little patience with prudery insecurity and religous intolerance...


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> Are you saying the only reason a person would neglect a spouce over porn is *that person is a hopeless addict to the evils of pornography* That opinion is so short sighted as to be totally devoid of reason or logic.....:rofl:


Like Maricha said... I did not make a counter argument. I figure when someone makes an all upper case comment, they are coming to a conclusive statement. I simply wanted to know if this was your opinion or it was based on evidence. If it is the latter than a short bibliography at the least would be helpful. 

I never made the claim of porn addiction. Not sure any of the experts in the field have made that as a definitive diagnosis. There is some level of understanding that some people may have what is loosely defined as hypersexual disorder. Is that the same as porn addiction? I don't know. I really don't and without more clear evidence not sure most experts would agree with you or against you. 

My opinion is that there may be lots of reasons for over use of porn by a husband. You have suggested two, I merely think there may be more. Is there a neurological pathology associated with the over use? I simply don't know, but the experts don't count it out either. More research, more significant data is needed. 

What I do know is the over use of porn by one partner can affect the relationship in a marriage. And if so, it is probably best not to ignore it. That is where MC can be beneficial.


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

I agree with what the above poster said. 
Woodchuck, if you believe that most sites are like that, and not all, then what of the other sites where people are talking about their addiction. Why don't you check those out instead.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Drerio

"What I do know is the over use of porn by one partner can affect the relationship in a marriage. And if so, it is probably best not to ignore it. That is where MC can be beneficial." 

I can agree with your statement....

However:
The mere fact that the wife objects to any level of porn use can affect a marriage....To the point that a MC might be needed

In that case what would the MC treat? The husbands occasional looking at porn, or the narrow minded opinion of the wife?

For the sake of arguement (can you tell I relish a good arguement?)

In a hypotheticl case of a wife calling her husband a porn addict, 
The wife says "My husband has 3 hour porn sessions and masterbates when I am not at home". 

What is this person realy objecting to?

Would it be acceptable for the husband to look at porn for 5 minutes and masterbate? 

Or for the husband to not look a porn and masterbate?

Or for the husband to look at porn for 3 hours and not masterbate?..

Or for the husband to fantasize about his wife and masterbate?

Or for the husband to stop any and all sexual activity except that directed toward the wife?

In this case, It is not a porn issue, it is an insecurity issue. The wife fears being compared to other women, and thus attempts to ban all porn from the husbands life.....Or she thinks her husband is wasting orgasms/sexual energy that belong to her...In either case, the wife wants to CONTROL an aspect of the husbands life...

If I had an office job, and could not stop looking at online porn during work hours, and was fired (Obviously not a government employee).

I would freely admit that I had a PROBLEM with over use of porn...

If I used porn to the extent that I was habitually late for work ..ditto

If I used porn to the extent that I wanted to stop and could not....ditto

If I looked at porn to the exclusion of having sex with my partner, or I was single and looked at porn to the exclusion of forming a sexual relationship....double ditto...

But when the issue with porn in my life is that my SO is jealous, thinks it is bad, thinks it will send me to the domain of hades, demeans women, Or any one of a dozen arguements the anti porn crowd uses, I say it is an issue of control vs personal choice...

PS....I don't look at porn myself...I type threads on TAM....help me, I am an addict...:rofl:


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> Drerio
> 
> "What I do know is the over use of porn by one partner can affect the relationship in a marriage. And if so, it is probably best not to ignore it. That is where MC can be beneficial."
> 
> ...


How about put in the full story, which has already been posted? This actually happes with one poster, as she has already stated. Her husband watches and masturbates for hours each day, except maybe one or two days a week. He admitted this to his wife. And rather than having sex with her, when she WANTS to have sex, he chooses to masturbate those days. Not so "hypothetical" then, huh?

For the record, neither my husband nor I watch porn. It has no place in our marriage. If a couple is cool with it, that's their choice. If one lies about it, then I have a big problem with people telling the offended partner that they need to just get over it because everyone does it. And yes, I have seen that sentiment posted before. If the one who watches it really thinks it's so great, so "ok" to use, then why hide it? If not ashamed of it, what's the point in hiding it? :scratchhead:


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Maricha75 said:


> How about put in the full story, which has already been posted? This actually happes with one poster, as she has already stated. Her husband watches and masturbates for hours each day, except maybe one or two days a week. He admitted this to his wife. And rather than having sex with her, when she WANTS to have sex, he chooses to masturbate those days. Not so "hypothetical" then, huh?
> 
> For the record, neither my husband nor I watch porn. It has no place in our marriage. If a couple is cool with it, that's their choice. If one lies about it, then I have a big problem with people telling the offended partner that they need to just get over it because everyone does it. And yes, I have seen that sentiment posted before. If the one who watches it really thinks it's so great, so "ok" to use, then why hide it? If not ashamed of it, what's the point in hiding it? :scratchhead:


I believe in that thread, she objected to the porn, while the husband said scheduling problems prevented more than sex on weekends....I don't want to invade their privacy with conjecture, but it seems her oblection to porn was the main issue.....In my post I asked what a hypothetical partner would be happy with....

*Would it be acceptable for the husband to look at porn for 5 minutes and masterbate? 

Or for the husband to not look a porn and masterbate?

Or for the husband to look at porn for 3 hours and not masterbate?..

Or for the husband to fantasize about his wife and masterbate?*Or for the husband to stop any and all sexual activity except that *directed toward the wife?*

I would tend to belive only the last alternative would be acceptable....

Now answer my question...What is an acceptable level?

I am not a porn crusader, I rarely look at porn myself.....Probably not an hour in the last 3 months......

I just have issues with knee jerk anti porn reactions. To me it is a matter of personal choice.....When it causes trouble in a relationship it is almost always a power struggle/control issue.

To answer your question "If not ashamed of it, what's the point in hiding it"? To avoid the wifes knee jerk anti-porn reaction....

I answered your question, now answer mine...What level would be acceptable?


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> I believe in that thread, she objected to the porn, while the husband said scheduling problems prevented more than sex on weekends....I don't want to invade their privacy with conjecture, but it seems her oblection to porn was the main issue.....In my post I asked what a hypothetical partner would be happy with....
> 
> *Would it be acceptable for the husband to look at porn for 5 minutes and masterbate?
> 
> ...


IMO, no porn, period. And if he's going to masturbate, use memories of acts with his wife. But that's MY opinion. And, like everyone else, it's based on my personal values... no porn acceptable in my marriage at all.

Regarding the "wife's knee jerk anti-porn reaction"... if the man knew of her anti-porn stance from the start, why get involved with someone who has a completely opposite view? Again, if not ashamed of it, then there's no need to hide it from someone you are dating. And if they are completely against it, there is no point in continuing the relationship, knowing that if you want to continue, you will have to hide it. If a man gets involved with a woman who shares his opinions regarding porn, guess what? No need to hide it... no need to worry about a "knee jerk reaction"! Imagine that!


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> *I do not believe in porn addiction, or for that matter, sex addiction*....I think too many Dr. Phill, and Opra types use them to make bucks off of a gulliible public....
> 
> Her husband had been neglecting her, and viewing porn and masterbating.....
> 
> ...





Woodchuck said:


> I believe in that thread, she objected to the porn, while the husband said scheduling problems prevented more than sex on weekends....I don't want to invade their privacy with conjecture, but it seems her oblection to porn was the main issue.....In my post I asked what a hypothetical partner would be happy with....
> 
> Would it be acceptable for the husband to look at porn for 5 minutes and masterbate?
> 
> ...


You said in your initial post that you don't believe in porn addiction or sexual addiction... would you assume that to be a knee jerk response? Especially since the experts have not completely agreed one way or another.

I simply am not sure how to answer your other arguments. I am not a a professional counselor and I would prefer not to answer hypothetical situations since I don't have the whole story. If I were a a counselor, I would need to hear both sides of the story.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Woodchuck

If you want to keep the objective argument of porn addiction going I am fine with that... I however will not engage any hypothetical argument about another member. I find it hurtful to do so. If that particular member wants to engage in the argument that is a different story. But, to discuss another member's issues is something I will not do.


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> Most of the sites where people are fighting porn addiction deal with simple minded folks who *know* it is wrong to "touch themselves" and are trying to stop. These sites are usually affiliated with some religon, and are dead set against the devil porn....Or they are *charging* porn addicts for treatment...
> 
> I have always been against close minded prudish individuals who are too insecure with themselves to form their own opinions, and rely on dogma to do their thinking for them....
> 
> ...


There are plenty of non prudes and non religious people who object to porn for a myriad of reasons.calling people names because they do not agree with your world view is quite rude.

Personally I find porn to be extremely offensive and harmful, if there were a lot of women focusing on the statue of David rather then their husbands and masturbating to it and fantasising about it, and turning their husbands down for sex in favour of it then I'm sure many many men would object too. It wouldn't make them prudes it would mean they had a healthy concern for their relationship and valued it enough to realise that this causes disconnect. 

I just can't fathom how if you object to porn you must be closed minded and prudish, it's a way of shaming people to be accepting of something that widely brings a lot of pain to many women, and also some men.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> There are plenty of non prudes and non religious people who object to porn for a myriad of reasons.calling people names because they do not agree with your world view is quite rude.
> 
> Personally I find porn to be extremely offensive and harmful, if there were a lot of women focusing on the statue of David rather then their husbands and masturbating to it and fantasising about it, and turning their husbands down for sex in favour of it then I'm sure many many men would object too. It wouldn't make them prudes it would mean they had a healthy concern for their relationship and valued it enough to realise that this causes disconnect.
> 
> I just can't fathom how if you object to porn you must be closed minded and prudish, it's a way of shaming people to be accepting of something that widely brings a lot of pain to many women, and also some men.


Neglect brings pain, not porn. Porn is not some evil, sentient thing intent on destroying your marriage. Most men who watch porn don't neglect their wives. Most men who neglect their wives would probably do so without porn. 

If a women were using a sex toy instead of sleeping with her husband would it be rational for him to blame the sex toy? Of course it would be easier than admitting that the fault lies with the relationship, and insecure men would probably reassure themselves by blaming that evil sex toy, but it is still not rational and it won't bring them any closer to resolving their problems.

You are hurting people's chances of resolving their issues with this superstitious view of the power of porn to destroy relationships. Porn isn't having a relationship, two human beings are. If one chooses to neglect the other there is usually a good reason for that, and it is not a bunch of pixels on a screen.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

drerio said:


> Woodchuck
> 
> If you want to keep the objective argument of porn addiction going I am fine with that... I however will not engage any hypothetical argument about another member. I find it hurtful to do so. If that particular member wants to engage in the argument that is a different story. But, to discuss another member's issues is something I will not do.


my statement was " don't want to invade their privacy with conjecture". 

However there was a specific thread posted elsewhere, and I did comment on that thread...That is the reason for posting threads on TAM.

Any hypothesis was just that and not directed toward any individual thread....


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> Neglect brings pain, not porn. Porn is not some evil, sentient thing intent on destroying your marriage. Most men who watch porn don't neglect their wives. Most men who neglect their wives would probably do so without porn.
> 
> If a women were using a sex toy instead of sleeping with her husband would it be rational for him to blame the sex toy? Of course it would be easier than admitting that the fault lies with the relationship, and insecure men would probably reassure themselves by blaming that evil sex toy, but it is still not rational and it won't bring them any closer to resolving their problems.
> 
> You are hurting people's chances of resolving their issues with this superstitious view of the power of porn to destroy relationships. Porn isn't having a relationship, two human beings are. If one chooses to neglect the other there is usually a good reason for that, and it is not a bunch of pixels on a screen.


I agree that people choosing to watch porn is the problem. Same as people choosing anything else over their relationship.

It's still OK to not like porn, for so many reasons I think porn is not good for people their brains or sexuality. 

I don't like the drug ICE either, now yes people choose to use it but I think making it is wrong, condoning it is wrong and using it is wrong. The same goes for many things. 

I have good boundaries about many thing and so does my partner. He doesn't like open marriages for various reasons, I could say plenty of people have open marriages and its not destroying their lives, if others neglect their husbands in favour of other men its not the open marriage that's a problem it's the choice made by other women to do so. Or I could recognise his concerns are valid, open marriages cause a myriad of problems, participation in it causes a myriad of problems. Not wanting to be in one does not make him a jealous prude. It makes him a man with good clear boundaries.

I often find a clear correlation in the language of those who wish to silence those who don't agree with porn and cheaters who wish to silence their spouses. The justifications seem to be the same and I often see- "how dare you try and control me" it's not about controlling any one else its getting them to see that you have boundaries, and there are reasons for them. 

I also see it as the objectification and degradation of women at its worst. It makes me feel sick. To me it's a human rights issue. And I don't want to be with a man who is OK with disrespecting women that way.


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Drerio, thank you very much.


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Woodchuck, I'm sure you won't respond or read my post here. That seems to be your general behavior. All I can tell you about my situation is this:

1. I do not hate porn. That's like hating alcohol because my mother is a recovering alcoholic. Alcohol is what it is. 

2. My husband has acknowledged that he finds it difficult to go more than a day without watching porn. He says that sex doesn't not fulfill the need to watch porn but does satisfy his need for sex. He has "2 drives." His words. 

3. I'm no nag, as most people who have followed my threads know. I'm terrified of being thought of as too pushy and have a little too far in the other direction. He does what he wants, when he wants. 

4. My husband knew before we married that I preferred not to be with men who watch pornography on a regular basis. They can not keep up with me sexually and I find myself displeased and unsatisfied. He lied to me. I was upfront with him. That was why I dumped the boyfriend I had before him. 

5. There is no power struggle in my relationship. J has the power. I don't seek to control anything. I seek to connect with my husband on a deep and spiritual level. 

6. Please do not ever call me insecure, rabid, prudish, frigid, or a crusader. 

7. If you want to know what I would find acceptable, ADDRESS ME DIRECTLY. Discussing my situation while trying to make it appear like a hypothetical situation you pulled out of your err...HEAD, was off-putting and ridiculous. 

Deuces.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> I also see it as the objectification and degradation of women at its worst. It makes me feel sick. To me it's a human rights issue. And I don't want to be with a man who is OK with disrespecting women that way.


So, this is the real issue.

How is having sex with a consenting partner objectifying and degrading them?

I would never watch porn that degrades anyone.


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

Jamison said:


> I believe their are such things as addictions, of all kinds. If people do not believe it, its their right, just as its someones right to believe there is. Period.



:smthumbup:
Me too, and glad I don't feel the need to explain it either.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

Maricha75 said:


> IMO, no porn, period. And if he's going to masturbate, use memories of acts with his wife. But that's MY opinion. And, like everyone else, it's based on my personal values... no porn acceptable in my marriage at all.
> 
> Regarding the "wife's knee jerk anti-porn reaction"... if the man knew of her anti-porn stance from the start, why get involved with someone who has a completely opposite view? Again, if not ashamed of it, then there's no need to hide it from someone you are dating. And if they are completely against it, there is no point in continuing the relationship, knowing that if you want to continue, you will have to hide it. If a man gets involved with a woman who shares his opinions regarding porn, guess what? No need to hide it... no need to worry about a "knee jerk reaction"! Imagine that!


So why did you waste so much bandwidth debating when you, Anne, and little deer could have said none, nada, zip, zero, in your first posts......Any porn use is too much....end of debate...

Any porn use = addiction...The girls have spoken

A little honesty could have saved a lot of typing...


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

*LittleDeer* said:


> There are plenty of non prudes and non religious people who object to porn for a myriad of reasons.calling people names because they do not agree with your world view is quite rude.
> 
> Personally I find porn to be extremely offensive and harmful, if there were a lot of women focusing on the statue of David rather then their husbands and masturbating to it and fantasising about it, and turning their husbands down for sex in favour of it then I'm sure many many men would object too. It wouldn't make them prudes it would mean they had a healthy concern for their relationship and valued it enough to realise that this causes disconnect.
> 
> I just can't fathom how if you object to porn you must be closed minded and prudish, it's a way of shaming people to be accepting of something that widely brings a lot of pain to many women, and also some men.


How much porn viewing would be acceptable to you?


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

I have used these terms in refrence to people who object to the use of porn..They are not prejorative 

*prude noun 
a person who is excessively proper or modest in speech, conduct, dress, etc. *

*close-minded - not ready to receive to new ideas
narrow-minded, narrow - lacking tolerance or flexibility*

*crusader
A vigorous concerted movement for a cause or against an abuse.*

While they call their loved ones and others

*addict
To involve oneself in something habitually, to the exclusion of almost anything else.
Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Dysfunction in these circuits leads to characteristic biological, psychological, social and spiritual manifestations. This is reflected in an individual pathologically pursuing reward and/or relief by substance use and other behaviors.*

*I am not willing to say someone who looks at porn has a diseased mind.....*


----------



## trey69 (Dec 29, 2010)

People who love porn will always find a way to justify why they feel the way they do...and people who do not like porn will always find a way to justify why it is they feel the way the do...of course Im sure its like that with all things of the world that someone either loves, or not.


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> So why did you waste so much bandwidth debating when you, Anne, and little deer could have said none, nada, zip, zero, in your first posts......Any porn use is too much....end of debate...
> 
> Any porn use = addiction...The girls have spoken
> 
> A little honesty could have saved a lot of typing...


I don't see where any one has said "any porn use = addiction"
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> It's still OK to not like porn, for so many reasons I think porn is not good for people their brains or sexuality.
> 
> I don't like the drug ICE either, now yes people choose to use it but I think making it is wrong, condoning it is wrong and using it is wrong. The same goes for many things.


There is no reliable evidence that porn is bad for you. Comparing it to a dangerous drug proves that you misunderstand the nature of porn.



*LittleDeer* said:


> I often find a clear correlation in the language of those who wish to silence those who don't agree with porn and cheaters who wish to silence their spouses. The justifications seem to be the same and I often see- "how dare you try and control me" it's not about controlling any one else its getting them to see that you have boundaries, and there are reasons for them.


I don't wish to silence anyone, but when you malign millions of people by comparing them to drug addicts and suggesting that they enjoy the degradation of women, I think it is reasonable that we defend ourselves. I have boundaries too. Are you suggesting that 7 out of 10 men in the Western world 'don't have boundaries'?



*LittleDeer* said:


> I also see it as the objectification and degradation of women at its worst. It makes me feel sick. To me it's a human rights issue. And I don't want to be with a man who is OK with disrespecting women that way.


You still haven't explained how consensual sex equates to the degradation and objectification of women. That is because it is a meaningless mantra trotted out again and again with no justification. 

I believe in human rights too, including the right to make legal pornography. Who are you to insist that these women are degrading themselves?


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> I have used these terms in refrence to people who object to the use of porn..They are not prejorative
> 
> *prude noun
> a person who is excessively proper or modest in speech, conduct, dress, etc. *
> ...


Not sure where you got your definition for addict, but if we are going to discuss this I think it may be helpful to agree upon a source. Granted the American Society of Addiction Medicine present some controversial issues, but we are at least talking about AMA licensed physicians. And, it has a sector dedicated to research. 

http://www.asam.org/for-the-public/definition-of-addiction. 

This particular definition could potentially identify some individuals. But, that would require an astute clinician to make that determination. So I agree on you last statement that someone who looks at porn does not 'necessarily' have a diseased mind. However if the disease mind looks at porn then this could be problematic. There is plenty of evidence to suggest addictions are genetic and thus it is the diseased mind that precludes the viewing and not the porn that causes the disease.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> There is no reliable evidence that porn is bad for you. Comparing it to a dangerous drug proves that you misunderstand the nature of porn.
> 
> 
> I don't wish to silence anyone, but when you malign millions of people by comparing them to drug addicts and suggesting that they enjoy the degradation of women, I think it is reasonable that we defend ourselves. I have boundaries too. Are you suggesting that 7 out of 10 men in the Western world 'don't have boundaries'?


I think by your same logic gambling also poses no immediate danger to the individual like alcohol or drug addiction. So can gambling become an addiction for some people? The experts say it can in some people. 

<snip - not important to the argument>



johnnycomelately said:


> I believe in human rights too, including the right to make legal pornography. Who are you to insist that these women are degrading themselves?


I too believe in human rights and freedom speech, but this is not a well regulated industry. So it is hard to make clear statements related to the porn industry and whether or not it violates any of the participants human rights.


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Poor Jenna Jamison. She degraded herself into a house hold name and millions of dollars.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

richie33 said:


> Poor Jenna Jamison. She degraded herself into a house hold name and millions of dollars.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Sorry? Who? :scratchhead:
That name isn't familiar in my household... guess I could google it, but would probably be a waste of my time.


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Sorry you don't know someone who's book has been on NY Times best sellers list. Countless mainstream TV shows and movies.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

Jenna Jamison had a hard life and was sexually assaulted and used a lot of drugs. I wouldn't trade my life for hers for all the money in the world. 

Adults who choose to enter the industry, I have no opinion about them. I'm rather ambivalent about porn itself. What other people do in their sex lives isn't relevant to my struggle. Go fap all you want. What difference does it make to me? Since my husband has commanded that all of my emotional and sexual needs be only met by him, I have the right to request the same thing. His porn habit is the only one who concerns me. Again, porn, not masturbation. 

But to shame people for not liking porn...that seems rabid and close-minded to me. Almost like a Shaming Crusade.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

Woodchuck said:


> *So why did you waste so much bandwidth debating when you, Anne, and little deer could have said none, nada, zip, zero, in your first posts.*.....Any porn use is too much....end of debate...


If you actually read what I wrote previously, you would see that I DID say NONE. But that would require more than just skimming over the posts, picking out the little tidbit you wanted and discarding the rest...



Maricha75 said:


> For the record, neither my husband nor I watch porn. *It has no place in our marriage. If a couple is cool with it, that's their choice.* If one lies about it, then I have a big problem with people telling the offended partner that they need to just get over it because everyone does it. And yes, I have seen that sentiment posted before. If the one who watches it really thinks it's so great, so "ok" to use, then why hide it? If not ashamed of it, what's the point in hiding it? :scratchhead:





Woodchuck said:


> I have used these terms in refrence to people who object to the use of porn..They are not prejorative
> 
> *prude noun
> a person who is excessively proper or modest in speech, conduct, dress, etc. *
> ...



Woodchuck, if you actually read the posts some of us make, you would knwo that SOME of us, myself included, have repeatedly stated that porn has no place in OUR relationships. And if another couple is cool with it, that's their choice. But to call someone a prude or closed minded because they choose not to have it in their own relationships, and have partners who happen to AGREE with them, completely? Hardly. I don't care if you view it. I don't care if anyone views it... but if it causes issues in the relationship, then yes, I believe it should go...especially if the partner's views are known beforehand and the other partner chooses to watch it and hide it anyway...in other words, chooses to lie to his (or even her) partner.



Woodchuck said:


> Any porn use = addiction...The girls have spoken
> 
> A little honesty could have saved a lot of typing...


I never once said ANY porn use = addiction. Once a gain, you like to put words into others' mouths. Not surprised, really.

You say "the girls have spoken"...funny, my husband and my dad would both agree with what I have said...except for one thing. They'd say "no porn is acceptable, period." And that's not JUST in our marriages, but any at all. But, of course, it must be just us women speaking, right? I mean, no man could possibly really believe that porn is bad. 

Honesty could have saved a lot of typing? Well, a little reading could have prevented the need to type anything. I've made my position on the subject known in many porn threads. Even the "pro-porn" people have acknowledged my views aren't prudish nor closed minded. And I'm certainly not a crusader. But I AM anti-porn... just not "militant" about it. How much more honest can I be? I've stated the exact same thing in multiple threads.


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Like whatever you want. Hate whatever you want. 
Couples should have a open and healthy conversation about it. Husband or Wife likes porn and the significant other hates it....what's the compromise??? Not sure there is a easy answer to it. It cant be as easy as one forbids the other from looking at it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

richie33 said:


> Sorry you don't know someone who's book has been on NY Times best sellers list. Countless mainstream TV shows and movies.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Ohhhh... that's the problem.... I don't keep track of NY Times best sellers list. I don't care if "everyone is doing it" or "everyone likes it", etc. Case in point: 50 Shades books. I've heard of them, never read them. No desire to. Guess I'm odd.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

richie33 said:


> Like whatever you want. Hate whatever you want.
> Couples should have a open and healthy conversation about it. Husband or Wife likes porn and the significant other hates it....what's the compromise??? Not sure there is a easy answer to it. It cant be as easy as one forbids the other from looking at it.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


To start with, don't lie about it. As Annie pointed out about her husband... He knew from the start that she didn't like it. He lied to her. And now, she's expected to just "suck it up" because he's been doing it all along, etc?

I agree, there's no easy compromise if neither is willing to budge. But I can honestly say that if my husband at any point showed interest in porn, I'd probably consent to allowing him to take pics/videos of me/us as a compromise. And the only stipulatiuon would be "for his eyes only".


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Maricha75 its good that you and your husband are solid in your convictions about porn.
It works for you. Not every relationship or marriage is like that. 
Obviously this topic is a very hot button issue on this forum.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Annie is right to be pissed if he told her he didn't watch it.
I don't know her story....is it possible he was being honest in the beginning that he didn't like it.
That over the course of the relationship he developed a liking for it. That he was scared and ashamed to tell her
he broke his promise to her. This may not be the case, sorry Annie if i am reaching, if it is the case is it a deal breaker?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> I think by your same logic gambling also poses no immediate danger to the individual like alcohol or drug addiction. So can gambling become an addiction for some people? The experts say it can in some people.


There is no current diagnosis of porn addiction accepted by the DSM. I will side with the experts in this case.



drerio said:


> I too believe in human rights and freedom speech, but this is not a well regulated industry. So it is hard to make clear statements related to the porn industry and whether or not it violates any of the participants human rights.


There is exploitation in many industries. I live in the area which produces most of Europe's fresh produce and exploitation of the North African labour force is endemic. Does that mean that everyone who eats a tomato in Europe is guilty of degrading and 'objectifying' North Africans? 

That argument doesn't hold water for a moment. If there is concern about weak regulation the answer is to improve regulation, not to slander people involved in a perfectly legal industry.


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

richie33 said:


> Annie is right to be pissed if he told her he didn't watch it.
> I don't know her story....is it possible he was being honest in the beginning that he didn't like it.
> That over the course of the relationship he developed a liking for it. That he was scared and ashamed to tell her
> he broke his promise to her. This may not be the case, sorry Annie if i am reaching, if it is the case is it a deal breaker?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Without going into a huge amount of history, my husband and I were friends while I dated this other guy. When we broke up, my husband picked me up and took me out. I drank and cried and spilled my guts. My ex had tastes I couldn't stomach and though I loved him, I had to break up with him. And it wasn't stuff like threesomes or bjs but violent anal stuff. 

He was dishonest from jump, lied to me because he knew how I felt. To him, it must have been justified because we do make a great team and cute babies. 

Is it a deal breaker? Maybe. If porn is more important to him than I am...then I suppose we might not make it. I don't find him as attractive anymore. It makes me sad. I am a very passionate high drive woman. I want to see him as sexy and virile. Not pitiful. 

Richie, thank you for trying to help me.


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Annie has he tried to stop? How do you know he is viewing it?
The reason I ask is I have similar story as you but I don't want to hijack the thread.


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

richie33 said:


> Poor Jenna Jamison. She degraded herself into a house hold name and millions of dollars.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I have read her book, and I can post quotes later that she wrote about severe abuse in the industry. She said she has never met a woman in the industry that was not a sexual abuse victim, that everyone has drug and alcohol abuse problems. 

She is also one of the few who has made a lot of money, most of the women get about $5000 per film, whereas the produces etc get millions. The majority of women do not get rich from it. Many don't stick around for long.


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

But at the sametime she ran her own production company. So she had made millions off the same women. Is she now the victim or victimizer?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> So, this is the real issue.
> 
> How is having sex with a consenting partner objectifying and degrading them?
> 
> I would never watch porn that degrades anyone.


Well you must not much porn then, the thing is studies have shown that porn is becoming more and more violent towards women every year, particularly the most watched porn. If you aren't watching it then who is.? 
I have also read a lot on how there has been such a shift in our thinking that porn gets more and more hard core and we then believe its a norm. 

I have also provided studies here before that show that watching porn leads to thinking in men and women where we have less empathy for women and are more likely to excuse rape and sexual assault etc that's very alarming to me. 

Also the incidence of rape is very high, the incidence of drug abuse and alcohol abuse is high, and quite a lot of sex trafficking victims end up in the sex industry and in porn, so no I don't see it as consensual. 

There are so many instances where barely legal girls without much opportunity are pressured into doing porn by boyfriends or poverty and circumstance, I don't see that as fully consenting I see that as lecherous behaviour, and taking advantage of someone whilst they are already down.


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

richie33 said:


> But at the sametime she ran her own production company. So she had made millions off the same women. Is she now the victim or victimizer?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Both and she said she would never advise young women to go into porn, that industry is dirty unsafe and terrible to women.


----------



## richie33 (Jul 20, 2012)

Yet she is still involved in it one way or another.


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

richie33 said:


> Annie has he tried to stop? How do you know he is viewing it?
> The reason I ask is I have similar story as you but I don't want to hijack the thread.


He has tried. He says it is very hard. He is embarrassed about that for a few reasons. He doesn't want me to see him as weak. He doesn't like not feeling in control. 

I know he is viewing it because of his computer and phone history. And he is pretty upfront (I hope) when I ask him directly. 

If you don't feel like sharing your story on the thread, you can send me a PM. I'm weighing options and deciding what I can and cannot live with.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> There is no current diagnosis of porn addiction accepted by the DSM. I will side with the experts in this case.


I would prefer not to re-litigate this argument again. We went over this yesterday, go back and read. Remember that in the May meeting of the APA, hypersexual disorder will likely make it into the appendix of the DSMV. It will provide clinicians with probable diagnosis and provide impetus for further research by the experts. Since the so called experts you side with are at odds for lack of enough experiential data. 



johnnycomelately said:


> There is exploitation in many industries. I live in the area which produces most of Europe's fresh produce and exploitation of the North African labour force is endemic. Does that mean that everyone who eats a tomato in Europe is guilty of degrading and 'objectifying' North Africans?
> 
> That argument doesn't hold water for a moment. If there is concern about weak regulation the answer is to improve regulation, not to slander people involved in a perfectly legal industry.


So you are suggesting that if there is the possible use of sex-trafficking used in porn, that we should just not do anything about it? BTW, I am assuming NWU School of Law should retract their article for slander.

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/backissues/v101/n4/1014_1337.Weitzer.pdf

I don't disagree that other industries are not involved with exploitation. But, I prefer to keep the discussion narrowly focused.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Johnnycomelately,

I am sure you have all the answers and that as far as you are concerned that the notion of porn addiction is absurd. And, maybe someday you can be vindicated by the data. But for now, I really am not solidly convince one way or another. I on the other hand, I am willing to sit on my hands and wait to see what the experts come up with through experiential data. 

So to continue to to nitpick each word or argument is not likely to sway me at the moment. So you can continue to post, but I may or may not respond depending upon whether the argument presents any fresh revelation. 

In the meantime, I hear the frustration from TAM member's like AnnieAsh and others as to how it does tear away at their marriage. Whether or not it is an addiction is meaningless. What is meaningful is that it is affecting some marriages (maybe not all, but some). I am concerned about those marriages. And, that is the real purpose of TAM.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

drerio said:


> Johnnycomelately,
> 
> I am sure you have all the answers and that as far as you are concerned that the notion of porn addiction is absurd. And, maybe someday you can be vindicated by the data. But for now, I really am not solidly convince one way or another. I on the other hand, I am willing to sit on my hands and wait to see what the experts come up with through experiential data.
> 
> ...


A very thoughtful post. From the OP I was primarily disturbed that people were in my opinion being called addicts for behavioral issues that affected their relationships. I am afraid in many cases, any use of porn that annoys or upsets the relationship partner, is called an addiction.

At one time the criteria for addiction that I used as my gold standard was if the "habbit" interfered with an individual carying out his everyday life ...Holding a job, or maintaining a relationship, and not being unable to quit the habbit.
Over simplified perhaps, but hard to refute......

I have seen people loose their jobs over porn, alcohol, heroin, amphetemines, and gambling....

I watched an older couple with a good income reduced to borrowing from their children for daily living expences from playing the slots on riverboat casino's....Loosing probably $2,000,000.00 in the process...

I watched a close relative who was a degenerate gambler become a drug kingpin to support his habit, spend a 3 year and then a 17 year sentence in a federal lockup, and go back to gambling when he got out...

This week, a close friends ex husband hanged himself after being caught stealing from his grandparents to buy methamptetamine...
He had ruined his life with a 10 year habit.

I have seen a nephiew survive being shot in the head by his "crack dealer"..

I do not take the term addict lightly. 

I also suspect the currently popular neuroplasticity theory about addiction is a ploy by mental health professionals to get government healthcare to pay for addiction therapy....

Changing addiction from a behavorial problem to an organic disease opens up public funds to snake oil pedlers.... I call this poppycoc k...And a get rich scheme by people spouting psychobabble while trying to pick my pocket..

The brain changes they claim as proof of being hooked can be duplicated by someone getting seriously involved playing a musical instrument, learning to play chess at a high level, or in my case mastering computer solid modeling, I have 
literallay work from the minute I sat down at my computer till I shut it down 8 1/2 hours later without taking my eyes off the screen. I would love to see some brain scans of myself navigating through the virtual cyber world while wrapped up in a difficult design project....

From what I have seen of true addiction. it would take one heck of a lot of dirty pictures to earn the label addict......That and 
the fact that I hate censorship of any kind is what brings us to the nineth page of this thread......

good luck
the woodchuck


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> Well you must not much porn then, the thing is studies have shown that porn is becoming more and more violent towards women every year, particularly the most watched porn. If you aren't watching it then who is.?
> I have also read a lot on how there has been such a shift in our thinking that porn gets more and more hard core and we then believe its a norm.
> 
> I have also provided studies here before that show that watching porn leads to thinking in men and women where we have less empathy for women and are more likely to excuse rape and sexual assault etc that's very alarming to me.


From Scientific American _“Rates of rapes and sexual assault in the U.S. are at their lowest levels since the 1960s,” says Christopher J. Ferguson, a professor of psychology and criminal justice at Texas A&M International University. The same goes for other countries: as access to pornography grew in once restrictive Japan, China and Denmark in the past 40 years, rape statistics plummeted. Within the U.S., the states with the least Internet access between 1980 and 2000 —and therefore the least access to Internet pornography—experienced a 53 percent increase in rape incidence, whereas the states with the most access experienced a 27 percent drop in the number of reported rapes, according to a paper published in 2006 by Anthony D’Amato, a law professor at Northwestern University._

You are claiming cause but there is no effect. Therefore there is no validity to your claim of cause.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> Johnnycomelately,
> 
> I am sure you have all the answers and that as far as you are concerned that the notion of porn addiction is absurd. And, maybe someday you can be vindicated by the data. But for now, I really am not solidly convince one way or another. I on the other hand, I am willing to sit on my hands and wait to see what the experts come up with through experiential data.
> 
> ...


I am concerned too. That is why I comment. I am concerned when people propogate fallacious arguments about porn and porn users. I am concerned that men who use porn (i.e. 70% of us) are villified as addicts, potential rapists and abusers of women. I am concerned that women are focusing on porn when they should be focusing on their marriage.

Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I am not concerned.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-sunny-side-of-smut&page=2


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> Also the incidence of rape is very high, the incidence of drug abuse and alcohol abuse is high, and quite a lot of sex trafficking victims end up in the sex industry and in porn, so no I don't see it as consensual.
> 
> There are so many instances where barely legal girls without much opportunity are pressured into doing porn by boyfriends or poverty and circumstance, I don't see that as fully consenting I see that as lecherous behaviour, and taking advantage of someone whilst they are already down.


The adult film industry in California employs 1500 performers. It is covered by all the same regulations that any other industry would have to comply with. All of the performers have recourse to the same laws that you do. 

To suggest that so many are raped or otherwise abused and that this has somehow escaped the notice of law enforcement agencies is not very realistic. No doubt there is some abuse, but that simply makes the case for greater regulation and better enforcement of current regulations.

Do you have any statistical studies to back up your claim that so many performers are coerced, raped and trafficked?


----------



## trey69 (Dec 29, 2010)

There is tons of info out there about the porn industry and what really goes on behind the camera. But for those who are great lovers of porn, those who feel porn is like air and they have to have it to breathe, to live, it doesn't matter who posts about the effects, or what really goes on, because those people who love porn will never really believe it anyway. They got to have it, need it, its the best thing since peanut butter. 

The pink cross foundation is just one of them. Stories of porn actresses/actors who are getting out of business and will tell you what goes on etc, but its ok those porn lovers will not believe it, and swear they are lies, I doubt most of them are lies though. These are people who see they made a mistake getting in the business and want out. Just like anyone else who felt they made a bad or wrong choice, they have the right to turn their lives around as well.


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

trey69 said:


> There is tons of info out there about the porn industry and what really goes on behind the camera. But for those who are great lovers of porn, those who feel porn is like air and they have to have it to breathe, to live, it doesn't matter who posts about the effects, or what really goes on, because those people who love porn will never really believe it anyway. They got to have it, need it, its the best thing since peanut butter.
> 
> The pink cross foundation is just one of them. Stories of porn actresses/actors who are getting out of business and will tell you what goes on etc, but its ok those porn lovers will not believe it, and swear they are lies, I doubt most of them are lies though. These are people who see they made a mistake getting in the business and want out. Just like anyone else who felt they made a bad or wrong choice, they have the right to turn their lives around as well.


And Judy Garland was addicted to uppers and downers as a star in the mainstream movie industry in the 1930's, and people make wrong career choices every day, ask my coke dealer BIL....Not a cogent reply to this thread.....I know you hate porn, but unless or until you have known true addicts you will not understand the difference...

the woodchuck


----------



## trey69 (Dec 29, 2010)

Woodchuck said:


> And Judy Garland was addicted to uppers and downers as a star in the mainstream movie industry in the 1930's, and people make wrong career choices every day, ask my coke dealer BIL....Not a cogent reply to this thread.....I know you hate porn, but unless or until you have known true addicts you will not understand the difference...
> 
> the woodchuck


I never said I hated it, but thanks for assumption. I'm saying there is a flip side to ALL things in the world. Yes, porn, drugs, food, etc the list goes on. And that yes, some people will never ever believe the other side to a thing they love. 

BTW my ex wife was a hard core drug addict and have posts about it...so yeah I know a little about addicts/addictions. I lived with it. then moved on beyond it.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

trey69 said:


> There is tons of info out there about the porn industry and what really goes on behind the camera. But for those who are great lovers of porn, those who feel porn is like air and they have to have it to breathe, to live, it doesn't matter who posts about the effects, or what really goes on, because those people who love porn will never really believe it anyway. They got to have it, need it, its the best thing since peanut butter.
> 
> The pink cross foundation is just one of them. Stories of porn actresses/actors who are getting out of business and will tell you what goes on etc, but its ok those porn lovers will not believe it, and swear they are lies, I doubt most of them are lies though. These are people who see they made a mistake getting in the business and want out. Just like anyone else who felt they made a bad or wrong choice, they have the right to turn their lives around as well.


No-one is denying that abuse occurs in the porn industry, or denying anyone the right to turn their life around. Tighter regulation is needed to prevent abuse, as far as is possible, in every industry in the world. What is required to improve the porn industry is mature debate and not blanket slander of all in the industry and all who use porn. 

Calling people who view legal porn potential rapists and suggesting that they get off on the degradation and objectification of women is false and counter-productive. As is saying that all women involved in the industry degrade themselves. This attitude will just drive porn underground, or to countries where there is little or no regulation. 

We will always have porn, why not try and make it as abuse free as possible?


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

johnnycomelately said:


> We will always have porn, why not try and make it as abuse free as possible?


Wonder whats the best way to make it as abuse free as possible? :scratchhead:


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

CallaLily said:


> Wonder whats the best way to make it as abuse free as possible? :scratchhead:


Bring it out of the shadows and regulate it. Educate perfomers and consumers about their rights and obligations. Inspect production facilities.

Insulting and defaming performers and consumers is hardly going to foster an atmosphere of openness and accountability, is it?


----------



## Kermitty (Dec 27, 2012)

CallaLily said:


> Wonder whats the best way to make it as abuse free as possible? :scratchhead:


I hope you don't mean get rid of it completely. 
That's like saying people abuse their bodies with junk food and we now have an obesity problem so lets get rid of all junk food.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

johnnycomelately said:


> Bring it out of the shadows and regulate it. Educate perfomers and consumers about their rights and obligations. Inspect production facilities.
> 
> Insulting and defaming performers and consumers is hardly going to foster an atmosphere of openness and accountability, is it?


Which is what a lot of sites and organizations out there are doing...educating and inspecting etc..there are many people getting out of the industry after being educated not only about their rights but what goes on behind closed doors when cameras are not rolling...and yes many stay...


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

Kermitty said:


> I hope you don't mean get rid of it completely.
> That's like saying people abuse their bodies with junk food and we now have an obesity problem so lets get rid of all junk food.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I doubt it will be gotten rid of completely, after all, people are looking to make a buck..not just the people in porn but the main ones, the people behind it.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

drerio said:


> I think by your same logic gambling also poses no immediate danger to the individual like alcohol or drug addiction. So can gambling become an addiction for some people? The experts say it can in some people.


Porn and gambling (among other activities) in and of themselves are not addictive. Neither porn nor gambling introduce additional foreign substances into the body, and thus, cannot themselves become a true addiction. They can, however, be used as the activity of choice that triggers the pleasure centers of the brain, releasing a "high" that the person can replicate by repeating the activity that brought them pleasure.

I think the term "addiction" in such scenarios is misapplied...a convenient shorthand that does a disservice to many in the overly broad application of a term being used because the behaviors involved are similar to the behaviors exhibited by a true addict.

Example: In the early 90's, I played the collectible card game called Magic: The Gathering. Being unattached at the time, I spent quite a bit of time and money on cards. It was something of an obsessive/compulsive behavior, trying to track down cards missing from a set, or that perfect card to make one of my decks that much more difficult to beat. In time, I moved on to a different CCG, and behaved much the same. Then, that game was discontinued, no other on the market caught my fancy, so I was forced to go "cold turkey." But, the truth of the matter is...neither game, itsel, was addictive. Rather, I enjoyed playing the game, and enjoyed the rush I got not just from playing, but from the thrill of chasing down cards I didn't have, the excitement of opening packs hoping to get cards that were new or useful to me. If we apply the overly broad term, one might say I was addicted to M:TG. But, I wasn't...I was repeating a behavior that gave me a "good feeling." I might have been addicted to that rush, but not to the game.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> I have read her book, and I can post quotes later that she wrote about severe abuse in the industry. She said she has never met a woman in the industry that was not a sexual abuse victim, that everyone has drug and alcohol abuse problems.


While I can appreciate Jenna and her accomplishments, such statements by her that you reference here seem to come and go. She's wildly inconsistent in her portrayal of the industry, and it all seems to be based on the audience for those statements.



> She is also one of the few who has made a lot of money, most of the women get about $5000 per film, whereas the produces etc get millions. The majority of women do not get rich from it. Many don't stick around for long.


You've just describe circumstances for the vast majority of working actors and actresses in mainstream TV movies. So, by your logic, the day player hired as a background extra to walk through the school halls on Glee is being objectified and degraded.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> Both and she said she would never advise young women to go into porn, that industry is dirty unsafe and terrible to women.


Which, going back to my earlier point regarding her statements on the industry, runs counter to statements made in the HBO documentary series Pornocopia: Going Down in the Valley.

With such wildly varying statements made at any given time, I have to call the reliability of using Jenna's statements into question.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Grayson said:


> Porn and gambling (among other activities) in and of themselves are not addictive. Neither porn nor gambling introduce additional foreign substances into the body, and thus, cannot themselves become a true addiction. They can, however, be used as the activity of choice that triggers the pleasure centers of the brain, releasing a "high" that the person can replicate by repeating the activity that brought them pleasure.
> 
> I think the term "addiction" in such scenarios is misapplied...a convenient shorthand that does a disservice to many in the overly broad application of a term being used because the behaviors involved are similar to the behaviors exhibited by a true addict.
> 
> ...


http://youthgambling.mcgill.ca/en/PDF/Publications/2007/Brazil2.pdf

semantics.... gambling like hypersexual behavior can be considered a disorder. If you read the APA literature, some of the similar treatment is used for those who are considered addicts. Ultimately they have to have the antecedent removed from their life. That is not a suggest complete demonization of any industry, porn or gambling, but for some in may present a serious problem. I think we need to appreciate also how this 'behavior' may negatively affect some marriages (not all).


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

drerio said:


> http://youthgambling.mcgill.ca/en/PDF/Publications/2007/Brazil2.pdf


To which I repeat: gambling itself is not addictive. While the desired mental/chemical effect may be, and gambling may be the only trigger the user has found to reach the appropriate "high," neither cards, nor dice, nor slot machines, etc themselves are capable of causing an addiction. The act of gambling itself cannot cause an addiction. Alcohol, drugs...these can be introduced into anyone's body and, given the opportunity, create a biological dependence on that foreign substance. While the body may develop a dependence on the "high" triggered through gambling, that is a learned response from repeated practice.

I've agreed that the behaviors associated with addiction and "addiction" are often quite similar, but from where I stand, while one can compulsively engage in actions that feed into an addiction, but it's the altering substance not the action that triggers it that is addictive.

Edit: you've expanded your answer, so I'll do the same. Please point out where I've even hinted that similar treatment strategies can't be effective. In fact, what you'll find is that I said that, while my own wife's psychiatrist has called sex/love addiction "Hooey," he also said that, if she sees a positive result from treating her behaviors as such, he sees no harm in her adopting that diagnosis. 

Aspirin treats body pains...that doesn't mean it can't also be used in a heart disease treatment regimine. Likewise, because addiction treatment practices can be used to treat compulsive behavior issues, that doesn't make those behaviors addictions, themselves.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Grayson said:


> To which I repeat: gambling itself is not addictive. While the desired mental/chemical effect may be, and gambling may be the only trigger the user has found to reach the appropriate "high," neither cards, nor dice, nor slot machines, etc themselves are capable of causing an addiction. The act of gambling itself cannot cause an addiction. Alcohol, drugs...these can be introduced into anyone's body and, given the opportunity, create a biological dependence on that foreign substance. While the body may develop a dependence on the "high" triggered through gambling, that is a learned response from repeated practice.
> 
> I've agreed that the behaviors associated with addiction and "addiction" are often quite similar, but from where I stand, while one can compulsively engage in actions that feed into an addiction, but it's the altering substance not the action that triggers it that is addictive.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I am confused... "the act of gambling itself cannot cause addition.... the body may develop dependence on the 'high' triggered through gambling"

Can you explain this I am confused and find this contradictory? 

I grant you that there is no psychiatric diagnosis for gambling addiction as there is none for porn addiction (I made that point earlier)... however gambling falls under the ICD (Impulsive Control Disorder) as they are trying to classify such things as porn 'addiction' as hypersexual disorder. If you read the article that I posted you will see some interesting points made by experts in the field. 

Also if you read through much of the APA literature, while they differentiate the difference between addiction and disorder they also make the call of semantics getting in the way of essential similar treatments.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

drerio said:


> I am confused... "the act of gambling itself cannot cause addition.... the body may develop dependence on the 'high' triggered through gambling"
> 
> Can you explain this I am confused and find this contradictory?


I already did, but, sure....

A behavior (in this example, gambling) stimulates the pleasure centers of the brain, causing the chemical "high." The behavior is repeated to obtain that same "high." However, the behavior is learned and is not, itself, the object of addiction. Gambling, itself, is not addictive, but becomes ritual for the user.

Or, using my earlier example, I was not addicted to M:TG, although my behavior could be called similar to that of a drug addict. I'm sure that, over the years, I've even referred to having been "addicted" to the game, knowingly misapplying the term. In fact, just recently, some co-workers who play were trying to interest me in playing again. They've said how they economically build decks, budget themselves to $x per year, etc. Recalling the literally thousands of cards I have in storage (all of which are fairly useless for modern play, given the 15+ years of rules revisions and new cards), I said to one, "You don't understand...you're asking a recovering alcoholic to have 'just one drink!'" Even then, though, I understood that I was misapplying the concept for effect.

Please note that I'm not saying that such activities are incapable of harming relationships. I'm simply saying that, from my POV, behavioral "addictions" aren't truly addictions.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Grayson said:


> I already did, but, sure....
> 
> A behavior (in this example, gambling) stimulates the pleasure *centers of the brain, causing the chemical "high."* The behavior is repeated to obtain that same "high." However, the behavior is learned and is not, itself, the object of addiction. Gambling, itself, is not addictive, but becomes ritual for the user.


You appear to be an expert able to differentiate, so could you be more specific, what brain centers, what chemical, and how do you differentiate the 'high' from say the neuromodulator substance found in crack cocaine and that released when rolling the dice in anticipation of a win? I am not saying there is not, but if you could explain that to me to make it a clear differentiated term, I might accept your argument. 



Grayson said:


> Or, using my earlier example, I was not addicted to M:TG, *although my behavior could be called similar to that of a drug addict*. I'm sure that, over the years, I've even referred to having been "addicted" to the game, knowingly misapplying the term. In fact, just recently, some co-workers who play were trying to interest me in playing again. They've said how they economically build decks, budget themselves to $x per year, etc. Recalling the literally thousands of cards I have in storage (all of which are fairly useless for modern play, given the 15+ years of rules revisions and new cards), I said to one, "You don't understand...*you're asking a recovering alcoholic to have 'just one drink!'" Even then, though, I understood that I was misapplying the concept for effect.*


Again sounds semantic... And, alcoholism, the treatment would be to remove the antecedents and the substance itself from the person. The same as for any obsession, disorder or addiction. So I say again, you are wordsmithing. 



Grayson said:


> Please note that I'm not saying that such activities are incapable of harming relationships. I'm simply saying that, from my POV, behavioral "addictions" aren't truly addictions.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


And, this is exactly my point... everyone wants to get technical with terminology when in fact, it really does not matter. If a H is using porn excessively to the point that it affects the marriage, what difference does it make at that point on terminology that is not well defined even by experts.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> And, this is exactly my point... everyone wants to get technical with terminology when in fact, it really does not matter. If a H is using porn excessively to the point that it affects the marriage, what difference does it make at that point on terminology that is not well defined even by experts.


The difference comes in the emphasis. If you say your husband is 'addicted to porn' and neglects me, the emphasis is on the porn, rather than the neglect which is the real issue. 

The fact that the husband is neglecting his wife is primary, the fact that he turns to porn is secondary and is an effect of the primary problem, not the cause. Emphasis is important. 

Emphasising the symptom and not the cause is counter-productive. That is why I am debating the terminology.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

drerio said:


> You appear to be an expert able to differentiate, so could you be more specific, what brain centers, what chemical, and how do you differentiate the 'high' from say the neuromodulator substance found in crack cocaine and that released when rolling the dice in anticipation of a win? I am not saying there is not, but if you could explain that to me to make it a clear differentiated term, I might accept your argument.


I don't claim to be an expert, but an educated layman. To use your example, the chemical "high" from rolling the dice is entirely internally produced...the body is manufacturing the euphoria on its own. With, as you say, crack, a foreign chemical is being introduced into the body. While the end result and internal stimulation of euphoria may be identical (or virtually so), it comes from the introduction of a foreign agent into the body that, given enough opportunity, the body becomes physically dependent upon. You can't ingest gambling.



> Again sounds semantic... And, alcoholism, the treatment would be to remove the antecedents and the substance itself from the person. The same as for any obsession, disorder or addiction. So I say again, you are wordsmithing.


To which I point out once again that using the same or similar treatment methods does not mean they are the same thing. With alcohol, you're removing (primarily, as there are also associated behaviors) the substance (alcohol) that the body had become accustomed to/dependent upon.



> And, this is exactly my point... everyone wants to get technical with terminology when in fact, it really does not matter. If a H is using porn excessively to the point that it affects the marriage, what difference does it make at that point on terminology that is not well defined even by experts.


The difference as I (and, it seems, others) see it is that the misapplication of the term serves to exacerbate the situation on a larger scale. While addressing the issue on the smaller, individual level, the specific terminology can be less important (as the patient and doctor are in direct communication), tossing the term "addiction" around to the larger populace can have several effects. For one, the branding of someone as an "addict" who's just an insensitive jerk. There's also the misappropriation of the term by those with an agenda who use the word as validation and "proof" of their stance. There's also a diluting effect, as everything suddenly becomes potentially "addictive." Let's not forget the excuse factor: "Sorry I ignored you...I'm an addict."

You may feel the exact terminology is unimportant. I'd even agree that sometimes misapplying terminology can have a benefit (ex: when I told my wife that her EA partner was "like an addiction," she researched online, took a self-eval for sex/love addiction, determined she met the criteria, and began treating her behavior accordingly). But, for me, words have meaning, and misapplying them can end up doing more harm than good.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> The difference comes in the emphasis. If you say your husband is 'addicted to porn' and neglects me, the emphasis is on the porn, rather than the neglect which is the real issue.
> 
> The fact that the husband is neglecting his wife is primary, the fact that he turns to porn is secondary and is an effect of the primary problem, not the cause. Emphasis is important.
> 
> Emphasising the symptom and not the cause is counter-productive. That is why I am debating the terminology.


You could exchange obsession or disorder in place of addiction. But what you are deriving is a possible cause and effect. And, frankly my original argument is we have no substantive data for your scenario. So it is still word smithing.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> You could exchange obsession or disorder in place of addiction. But what you are deriving is a possible cause and effect. And, frankly my original argument is we have no substantive data for your scenario.


Nor for yours, but the fact is that the onus is on you to prove your assertion that porn addiction exists, not on me to prove that it doesn't. 

Porn as a cause of neglect is unproven, as you have admitted. Neglect as a cause of marital problems is a priori, therefore it is is rational to treat the neglect, not an associated phenomena which has been rejected as an addiction by the pre-eminent authority on psychological disorders.

This is not 'word smithing' it goes to the very heart of how to deal with marital neglect.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

johnnycomelately said:


> Nor for yours, but the fact is that the onus is on you to prove your assertion that porn addiction exists, not on me to prove that it doesn't.
> 
> Porn as a cause of neglect is unproven, as you have admitted. Neglect as a cause of marital problems is a priori, therefore it is is rational to treat the neglect, not an associated phenomena which has been rejected as an addiction by the pre-eminent authority on psychological disorders.
> 
> This is not 'word smithing' it goes to the very heart of how to deal with marital neglect.


Thanks! That reminds me of another reason to not misapply terms. As you say, keeping the focus on the greater issue. Particularly with the word "addiction" attached, that becomes the focus...too many feel that if you deal with the "addiction," everything else will fall in line.

It's just so much easier to shout, "Addict!" than actually get to the root of the problem.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Grayson said:


> I don't claim to be an expert, but an educated layman. To use your example, the chemical "high" from rolling the dice is entirely internally produced...the body is manufacturing the euphoria on its own. With, as you say, crack, a foreign chemical is being introduced into the body. While the end result and internal stimulation of euphoria may be identical (or virtually so), it comes from the introduction of a foreign agent into the body that, given enough opportunity, the body becomes physically dependent upon. You can't ingest gambling.


You keep using the term 'high' and now you include produced on its own... you need to explain these in biochemical terms. Just so you know, true addiction is biochemical. So for me you will have to differentiate what you mean by these terms. 

Foreign chemicals can be exogenous agonist or antagonist... the body does not distinguish other than affinity strength, degradation and re-uptake. So the question is what biochemical pathway differentiates an addiction from a behavior? 



Grayson said:


> To which I point out once again that using the same or similar treatment methods does not mean they are the same thing. With alcohol, you're removing (primarily, as there are also associated behaviors) the substance (alcohol) that the body had become accustomed to/dependent upon.


I agree, that the similar treatments do not mean the same exact diagnosis. And, thus my argument in the first place. It is all semantics in the end. 



Grayson said:


> The difference as I (and, it seems, others) see it is that the misapplication of the *term serves to exacerbate the situation on a larger scale. While addressing the issue on the smaller, individual level,* the specific terminology can be less important (as the patient and doctor are in direct communication), tossing the term "addiction" around to the larger populace can have several effects. For one, the branding of someone as an "addict" who's just an insensitive jerk. There's also the misappropriation of the term by those with an agenda who use the word as validation and "proof" of their stance. There's also a diluting effect, as everything suddenly becomes potentially "addictive." Let's not forget the excuse factor: "Sorry I ignored you...I'm an addict."


You lost me on the bold phrase. Please explain. All addicts, those suffering from disorders or syndromes are individuals. I am not assuming everyone who gambles or watches porn is classed the same way. Our neurological system is different by less than 1% but still provides a fairly wide spectrum of normal. I am not interested in branding anyone. Nor do I excuse bad behavior in giving anyone an out. But, at the same end you can't completely dismiss something that has not been fully elucidated. 



Grayson said:


> You may feel the exact terminology is unimportant. I'd even agree that sometimes misapplying terminology can have a benefit (ex: when I told my wife that her EA partner was "like an addiction," she researched online, took a self-eval for sex/love addiction, determined she met the criteria, and began treating her behavior accordingly). But, for me, words have meaning, and misapplying them can end up doing more harm than good.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Terminology is important, and thereby is the problem... there is no clear biochemical differentiated way to parse out an addiction due to an exogenous from an endogenous source. If you can explain that I will accept your use of terms.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> Nor for yours, but the fact is that the onus is on you to prove your assertion that porn addiction exists, not on me to prove that it doesn't.
> 
> Porn as a cause of neglect is unproven, as you have admitted. Neglect as a cause of marital problems is a priori, therefore it is is rational to treat the neglect, not an associated phenomena which has been *rejected as an addiction by the pre-eminent authority on psychological disorders*.
> 
> This is not 'word smithing' it goes to the very heart of how to deal with marital neglect.


This I am calling you on because it is not completely true. Sure it may not ever be called an addiction as opposed to a disorder, but the treatment is all the same. Because they are currently contemplating calling a disorder rather than an addiction really is probably a better assumption as it allows more hypersexual problems to come under a bigger tent. 

In the new DSM there will no longer be a diagnosis for Asperger syndrome. These individuals will be folded into the larger tent of ASD. It still does not change their treatment. But, then again a lot of people think ASD is not a diagnosis but the fault of the parents. Trust me, I know.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> This I am calling you on because it is not completely true.


I am afraid it is true:

Sex Addiction: Rejected Yet Again by APA | Psychology Today


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> I am afraid it is true:
> 
> Sex Addiction: Rejected Yet Again by APA | Psychology Today


I read the article back a while ago... interested if you understand a review paper from first order research paper. This is a commentary. As all these opinions about the disorder. Trust me the list for and against are long and about the same. This May (I repeat) when the APA has their annual meeting a big push will be made make hypersexual disorder an appendix issue. Even your article alludes to the idea of making is so would open up research (as I have already indicated). 

DSM-5 Attempts to Sweep Porn Addiction Under the Rug | Psychology Today

Mental Illness & Hypersexuality: My real & not imagined life | Psychology Today

The 2012 Best/Worst Sex List | Psychology Today

The Danger of Hypersexual Disorder | Psychology Today

DSM-5 Is Diagnosed, With a Stinging Rebuke to the APA | Psychology Today


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

I simply am left with one conclusion, that the jury is still out. Maybe on technical terms one can suggest that such a disorder does not exist, but that is only because not enough data has been presented. "the end of the stone age did not mean stones no longer exist."

So rather than me try to sound like I am defending any diagnosis exist (which I am not), I am merely suggesting that a possibility of a disorder or addiction does exist. To continue to say it does not because it somehow minimizes other disorder or that it will cost too much to treat or that the controversy among researchers has not been vetted, does not summarily reject anything. 

I on the other hand would like to keep an open mind. It may be that such a disorder does not exist, but without more evidence, I am yet convinced one way or the other. 

However, again if pornography is a problem within an individual marriage it is a problem that needs to be addressed. That is something that the therapist will have to walk through (landmine analogy comes to mind).

I would hope others too keep an open mind and have some compassion for those whose marriages are possibly being affected by the chronic use of pornography by one of the partners. I still think this could easily be branded more correctly as ICD (impulse control disorder)

Annie if you are still reading... I did a little inquiry about ICD, it may fit. You may want to look into it.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Woodchuck said:


> After thinking about it I came up with what is the most honest expression on this debate that I can make.....
> 
> *Sex with a loving partner is an almost spiritual expression love affection and intimacy.........
> 
> ...


This may have a lot of truth, but I am not sure if I understand exactly what the moral of that story is... is it supposed to be justification? I see this definition as very compartmentalized, and for me I have realized that often sex with a loving partner is meant to be entertainment with an O attached, just as masturbation (without porn) is a spiritual expression of love and affection with oneself.

I don't think you can universally say what sex with a partner vs with porn is or is not supposed to be, it can be anything a person/couple wants it to be, no justification is needed to view and masturbate to porn, I quite like to sometimes. But for myself seeking too much personal entertainment has certain relationship costs associated with it (but it very well may not for many, just speaking my own thoughts on the matter).


----------



## AnnieAsh (Aug 22, 2012)

drerio said:


> I simply am left with one conclusion, that the jury is still out. Maybe on technical terms one can suggest that such a disorder does not exist, but that is only because not enough data has been presented. "the end of the stone age did not mean stones no longer exist."
> 
> So rather than me try to sound like I am defending any diagnosis exist (which I am not), I am merely suggesting that a possibility of a disorder or addiction does exist. To continue to say it does not because it somehow minimizes other disorder or that it will cost too much to treat or that the controversy among researchers has not been vetted, does not summarily reject anything.
> 
> ...


In the end the semantics, whether it is in the DSM, don't matter. All I know is that J's use is over the top. He even acknowledges he finds it hard to go without porn. He has risked his job and his family's security to get that hit. He has risked his physical safety (don't watch porn while you work undercover; bad guys could come up and pop you in the head.) It is interfering in my relationship and that sucks.

Got your pm. Thanks.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> I read the article back a while ago


Strange, then, that you accussed me of lying when it is there in black and white. Sex Addiction was rejected by the APA won't be in DSM 5. Although you can choose to ignore the pre-eminent organisation in this field, you cannot criticise others for accepting their judgement.


drerio said:


> This is a *commentary*. As all these *opinions* about the disorder.


Again you say 'the disorder' as though it has been accepted by the APA. It hasn't.


drerio said:


> the APA has their annual meeting a big push will be made make hypersexual disorder an appendix issue.


Of course there are many 'therapists' who stand to benefit professionally from its inclusion and will put financial gain ahead of good treatment.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

drerio said:


> I simply am left with one conclusion, that the jury is still out. Maybe on technical terms one can suggest that such a disorder does not exist, but that is only because not enough data has been presented.


_
Bertrand Russel - If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes.

But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. _


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> _
> Bertrand Russel - If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes.
> 
> But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. _


Yes that's logical, because there is no evidence that porn usage can be harmful. None at all. 

There are posts everyday on this forum about pornography. There are men who even post admitting porn is a problem for them. 

Many therapists report it as one of the major contributor to marital problems.

But really you like porn, so dismiss everything else that doesn't suit your agenda. 

The lack of compassion for women and men who are harmed by porn use is very apparent.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

johnnycomelately said:


> Strange, then, that you accussed me of lying when it is there in black and white. Sex Addiction was rejected by the APA won't be in DSM 5. Although you can choose to ignore the pre-eminent organisation in this field, you cannot criticise others for accepting their judgement. Again you say 'the disorder' as though it has been accepted by the APA. It hasn't.Of course there are many 'therapists' who stand to benefit professionally from its inclusion and will put financial gain ahead of good treatment.


I want to say I apologize if I implied you were lying. You are right the APA has rejected any implication of porn addiction or hypersexual disorder in the current version of the DSMV. The article you cited as the articles I cited were merely commentary articles from those that champion the cause for the disorder and those that do not. Just as you and I may disagree, even this body of professionals do the same. They have a governing body but not all members speak with a unified voice. 

However, I may have mis-spoken, but I thought I implicated that the fate of the disorder will be decided at the national May meeting as a possible revision in the appendix. I first said this on a primary source of colleague who attends the meetings regularly. So if I put the cart in front of the horse with assumptions, it was not intentional. I have no crystal ball to know how or if it will be accepted. 

The APA accepts disorders based on research data and not whether it provides financial benefit for its members. But if rejected again, "good treatment" cannot be render for something that is not recognized. 

This same colleague also suggested to me that APA, clinical members currently treat patients with 'porn addiction' (I put that in quotes to suggest it is not recognized but) under the current diagnosis of ICD. So it is being treated but just as effectively as if it had its own designation and possible refined treatment. So I hope you can understand why I may have been impassioned by my argument. But as always it is easy to to render too many biased assumptions when arguing on what may make sense rather than what is real and on the ground information. I may have biased my argument but do not reject the both the empirical and applied science.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> Yes that's logical, because there is no evidence that porn usage can be harmful. None at all.
> 
> There are posts everyday on this forum about pornography. There are men who even post admitting porn is a problem for them.
> 
> Many therapists report it as one of the major contributor to marital problems.


You realize, of course, that you're arguing a point I haven't seen anyone make...that (mis)use of porn - or any other activity - can't contribute to marital problems. The point I have seen argued is the one I porn "addiction," and whether or not any true addiction present is actually to porn.



> But really you like porn, so dismiss everything else that doesn't suit your agenda.


And, on the flip side, you dislike porn, so dismiss everything else that doesn't suit *your* agenda.



> The lack of compassion for women and men who are harmed by porn use is very apparent.


The bias against anyone who doesn't paint all sexually explicit material with the same demonizing brush is what's very apparent.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

Grayson said:


> And, on the flip side, you dislike porn, so dismiss everything else that doesn't suit *your* agenda.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think the same can be said for those who like porn as well.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

CallaLily said:


> I think the same can be said for those who like porn as well.


It *was* said, actually. You'll notice that's exactly the kind of statement I was replying to.

It's a statement, of course, from both sides, that assumes an awful lot about the other side. My comment was directed at one person specifically. I don't paint everyone who dislikes porn with the same broad brush, though. Some people don't like it, some do. I've never told anyone they're "wrong" for not liking it, but I have responded to some who've made blanket claims and explained why I disagree.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

*LittleDeer* said:


> Yes that's logical, because there is no evidence that porn usage can be harmful. None at all.
> 
> There are posts everyday on this forum about pornography. There are men who even post admitting porn is a problem for them.
> 
> ...


Actually we were having a debate about whether sex and porn addiction exists or not. Your insults and slander are not really contributing. Perhaps one day you will actually produce a peer-review statistical study to back up your position and have a mature debate.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Debating whether porn is an addiction I guess is not initially what I intended to partake in, since I have an indifference to porn. But, that is what happened. I wanted to keep an open mind about it. It really is nothing I ever thought much about. However, I have a great deal of compassion for those that have in some way felt it to have negatively affected their relationship with their SO. Or vis versa. 

I talked to a colleague of mine who is a faculty member as well as a practicing psychologist. She indicated to me that the idea that this an addiction or disorder is rejected currently on the basis of both the newness of thought and not enough studies have been conducted in the area. There are members who also reject it based on the strong religious moral implications. As she put it "opponents having a knee-jerk reaction to the plethora of faith based therapies". In some ways I can see being that way myself. Even scientist are human. She indicated that there never may be enough to categorize it as an addiction, but may fall into a broader class of a disorder, such as hypersexual disorder. 

She is aware of licensed psychiatrist and psychologist who treat patients with "porn obsession" under the diagnosis of Impulsive Control Disorder. It is termed such so that it can be covered under insurance. I asked if she has heard how effective the therapy is... "As for any disorder, we don't look for cures, we look to help patients use other tools to help them with their impulse controls". But, she could not verify any success. So, I think, Annie if you are still reading this thread and your H is willing, he may want to get evaluated. I also encourage both of you to seek marriage counseling. 

Thought it interesting to see a new thread started on a similar topic

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/showpost.php?p=1510987


----------



## rose111 (Apr 1, 2013)

May I ask what your definition is then, when a husband expects his wife to perform all the things he has seen in porn?? 
After having my marriage and family destroyed by my husand's porn addiction, which I lived with for 10 years, I don't believe it's possible for anyone who has not experienced for themselves the devastating effects a porn addiction can have, to give an informed definition on the issue.
It's a whole lot more complex than being just 'entertainment with an orgasm attached' and you appear to have missed out other associated factors such as trust and respect, which are fundamental to any good relationship.
How can something that causes many men to disrespect and lie to their partners, be considered harmless? 
Something like 80-90% of rapists use porn. 
A 14yr old boy in the UK was recently convicted of raping a 4 yr old girl after he 'lost his mind' through viewing porn.
Research has shown that porn contributes to more than 50% of divorces in Western society, so I don't know how anyone can claim it's just harmless entertainment. 
Though it's mainly men who watch porn that say it's harmless of course, somewhat biased i think.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

rose111 said:


> May I ask what your definition is then, when a husband expects his wife to perform all the things he has seen in porn??
> After having my marriage and family destroyed by my husand's porn addiction, which I lived with for 10 years, I don't believe it's possible for anyone who has not experienced for themselves the devastating effects a porn addiction can have, to give an informed definition on the issue.
> It's a whole lot more complex than being just 'entertainment with an orgasm attached' and you appear to have missed out other associated factors such as trust and respect, which are fundamental to any good relationship.
> How can something that causes many men to disrespect and lie to their partners, be considered harmless?
> ...


Do you have any evidence to back up your wild claims? 

As for the silly statistic of 80-90% of rapists using porn, you could say that 100% of them use telephones, so ban telephones because it makes men rape! 

The vast majority of men use porn and only a tiny minority rape women. Porn is illegal and not widespread in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the rape capital of the world. It has been conclusively proven that porn does not cause men to rape. 

These hysterical, irrational posts don't do your cause any good. In fact they provide evidence that the cause against porn is full of supersitition and ignorance.


----------



## Jamison (Feb 10, 2011)

Looks like there are some porn addicts, who don't even realize it.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

Jamison said:


> Looks like there are some porn addicts, who don't even realize it.


As has been extensively discussed in this thread there is currently no such disorder accepted by the American Psychological Association nor is there such an addiction included in the DSM. That besides there is no factual or moral justification for implying that porn users are more likely to rape. 

Labelling anyone who uses porn an 'addict' is ridiculous.


----------



## LouAnn Poovy (Mar 21, 2013)

AnnieAsh said:


> In the end the semantics, whether it is in the DSM, don't matter. All I know is that J's use is over the top. He even acknowledges he finds it hard to go without porn. He has risked his job and his family's security to get that hit. He has risked his physical safety (don't watch porn while you work undercover; bad guys could come up and pop you in the head.) It is interfering in my relationship and that sucks.
> 
> Got your pm. Thanks.


:iagree:


----------



## LouAnn Poovy (Mar 21, 2013)

johnnycomelately said:


> As has been extensively discussed in this thread there is currently no such disorder accepted by the American Psychological Association nor is there such an addiction included in the DSM. *That besides there is no factual or moral justification for implying that porn users are more likely to rape. *
> 
> Labelling anyone who uses porn an 'addict' is ridiculous.



Who said _that_?


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

rose111 said:


> Something like 80-90% of rapists use porn.
> A 14yr old boy in the UK was recently convicted of raping a 4 yr old girl after he 'lost his mind' through viewing porn.





*LittleDeer* said:


> I have also provided studies here before that show that watching porn leads to thinking in men and women where we have less empathy for women and are more likely to excuse rape and sexual assault etc that's very alarming to me.


Just two examples. There are many posts on this board that imply that men who use porn are more likely to commit rape. Just a cursory glance at all the statistical studies done on this subject will prove that this is false. Unfortunately some people will not let facts get in the way of what they want to believe.


----------



## Jamison (Feb 10, 2011)

johnnycomelately said:


> As has been extensively discussed in this thread there is currently no such disorder accepted by the American Psychological Association nor is there such an addiction included in the DSM. That besides there is no factual or moral justification for implying that porn users are more likely to rape.
> 
> Labelling anyone who uses porn an 'addict' is ridiculous.


Then if what I said, does not apply to you, then you will go about your day with no worries. If it does apply to you, then you will go on and on about it for several more pages on why you feel the way you do, like you have done so far.


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

Jamison said:


> Then if what I said, does not apply to you, then you will go about your day with no worries. If it does apply to you, then you will go on and on about it for several more pages on why you feel the way you do, like you have done so far.


That is a bifurcation. Not going to work on me I'm afraid.

If people make slanderous comments about the majority of us who use porn, I am going to respond. I think that is reasonable, don't you?


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Just another perspective, and according to this article which I have no reason to doubt, that the diagnosis of hypersexual disorder will be included in the May 2014 DSM-5 revision. 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3050060/


----------



## LouAnn Poovy (Mar 21, 2013)

*If porn use includes almost 100% of men, then it's close to impossible to determine the true effect of porn relative to rape. 

I'm not advocating it does or it does not. I have no idea.*


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

LouAnn Poovy said:


> *If porn use includes almost 100% of men, then it's close to impossible to determine the true effect of porn relative to rape.
> 
> I'm not advocating it does or it does not. I have no idea.*


Actually the most widely accepted number is 70% in the Western world. 

You can compare places where porn is widely used and places where it is not. Statistical studies, published in peer-reviewed journals, have been done in the US, Europe and Asia, analysing the incidence of sexual violence as internet porn became available. 

The studies showed that the incidence of rape and other forms of sexual violence against women _went down_ as porn became available. If there is a claim that porn causes rape then you would see the opposite. You can't have cause without effect or vice versa. 

_
“Rates of rapes and sexual assault in the U.S. are at their lowest levels since the 1960s,” says Christopher J. Ferguson, a professor of psychology and criminal justice at Texas A&M International University. The same goes for other countries: as access to pornography grew in once restrictive Japan, China and Denmark in the past 40 years, rape statistics plummeted. Within the U.S., the states with the least Internet access between 1980 and 2000—and therefore the least access to Internet pornography—experienced a 53 percent increase in rape incidence, whereas the states with the most access experienced a 27 percent drop in the number of reported rapes, according to a paper published in 2006 by Anthony D’Amato, a law professor at Northwestern University._


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

If there is something I have learned even the experts in the field of addiction don't agree. So where does that leave this discussion... not sure. No definite answer

http://www.surgicalneurologyint.com...=2;issue=1;spage=64;epage=64;aulast=Reid#ft15


----------



## Jamison (Feb 10, 2011)

johnnycomelately said:


> That is a bifurcation. Not going to work on me I'm afraid.
> 
> If people make slanderous comments about the majority of us who use porn, I am going to respond. I think that is reasonable, don't you?


Respond away, you have been feeling the need to continue to do so pages and pages later. Have a great day!


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

Jamison said:


> Looks like there are some porn addicts, who don't even realize it.


:iagree: 

It always shows through at some point. :rofl:


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

The APA is the org that labelled homosexuality as a disease.
I don't know why anyone would ever regard the APA as anything more than clueless for the rest of it's existence.
I tend to consider the entire field clueless but that's just my opinion.

Neuroscience is far too young a field to get anything other than "really interesting" results out of it as of yet.
They are rapidly getting all kinds of data about the human mind but couldn't say with any authority what correlates to what at this point.

There is no authority to turn to on this topic.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

tacoma said:


> The APA is the org that labelled homosexuality as a disease.
> I don't know why anyone would ever regard the APA as anything more than clueless for the rest of it's existence.
> I tend to consider the entire field clueless but that's just my opinion.
> 
> ...


APA rejected Homosexuality as a disease back in 1973... sooner than anyone else

First publication in the field of Neuroscience published in 1878. Society of Neuroscience founded in 1969, when over 10,000 joined the first year having already been actively engaged in this field of study two-decades prior. 

Both of these are based on experiential data... if not that what then do you trust?


----------



## salamander (Apr 2, 2013)

Woodchuck said:


> Who would marry a person so screwed up they could only engage in masterbating to porn....


And, one could also ask, who would marry a person so screwed up they run from pg-13 movies in shock and horror? It's easy to sit on your high horse and tell others about themselves, isn't it.

Since you think it is a woman's "insecurity" that makes her dislike her husband wasting all his sexual and intimate energy on e-*****s, why on earth would you torment that insecurity? Have you no respect or compassion for your wife? I don't see a lot in evidence in my two days on this board. I've seen you mock and demean her issues.

Everyone has insecurities. People who love one another don't press those hot buttons on purpose, they are kind and gentle and supportive and compassionate. If it makes a wife miserable and insecure for her husband to get more excited about the impossible standards of porn, the good husband would give a ****!

Just as I don't tease my husband about his areas of self-perceived inadequacies, I expect him to respect me enough not to harrangue me about mine, or go behind my back to indulge in things he KNOWS make me feel bad. It would be very similar to a wife bad-mouthing her husband's penis or sexual stamina to all her friends. BAD FORM!

BTW, porn actresses are not necessarily enjoying what they are doing, and that bothers women like me beyond the raw prurience . I have enjoyed porn and I have been hurt by it. I was molested and porn damaged at an early age and wanted to grow up to become a porn star when i was just 5. I have used porn and i have abused it. I have seen men use it, and abuse it and lose their wives to it. Porn convinced my husband that I needed to experience multiple men at once, which I warned him would end in tears, but his greed and lust was fired up by the feigned enjoyment on all those interchangeable faces..... Call it what you like, it is insiduous and highspeed internet is a whole other ballgame compared to Sears catalogue lingerie ads. I doubt you've even perused the material on Your Brain On Porn, or you wouldn't make such flimsy arguments.

It's my intuition that your frustration with your wife has generallized into a wider dislike and disrespect of women. You have a snarky attitude that does not lend itself to quality debate, and if that's how you approach your wife, it's no wonder she doesn't respond positively.


----------



## Grayson (Oct 28, 2010)

Salamander, please allow me to start by saying that, particularly in light of what happened in your youth, you appear to have a very honest, open, and realistic view on porn. There are a few of your points that, if you don't mind, I'd like to get some clarification or other perspective on.



salamander said:


> BTW, porn actresses are not necessarily enjoying what they are doing, and that bothers women like me beyond the raw prurience .


I'd say that the actresses not necessarily enjoying what they are doing goes without saying. By that, I mean that there are very few people at all who can say they enjoy every day of doing their job, regardless of what that job is. We all have co-workers that we'd prefer not to interact with, but have to fake our way through. And, there are certainly some people who don't enjoy any aspect of their job, porn actors and actresses included. Some get into it of sound mind while some because of personal damage they carry with them. At the end of the day, just like a "mainstream" actor, if they do their job right, the audience believes the performance.

Would you agree that it's fair to accept that, generally speaking, the average viewer is aware that it's an act to one degree or another, and any statements along the lines of, "They enjoy it." could as easily be interpreted as similar to saying, "salamander likes her job?"



> *Porn convinced my husband that I needed to experience multiple men at once, *which I warned him would end in tears, but his greed and lust was fired up by the feigned enjoyment on all those interchangeable faces.....


Can you expand on that a bit? I ask because I have difficulty agreeing with the notion that porn could "convince" someone with a healthy, realistic understanding of what they're seeing. It may have been his rationalization for pushing for it, but might that have been a matter if him trying to convince you both? That he wanted to do that, knew you were opposed, then consciously or unconsciously used porn as a scapegoat for his continuing to push for something he knew you didn't want to do? After all, porn couldn't sit down with him and say, "You know that salamander would love to have multiple men at once. Even if she says she doesn't, she really would. Just keep pressing the issue." Rather, I'd say that was a conversation he had with himself. To say that porn "convinced" him of this would be akin to me saying that watching _House_ convinced me that standard medical treatment in a hospital involves multiple misdiagnoses, bleeding out of every orifice, and being on the verge of death before an 11th hour accurate diagnosis and treatment saves me. They're both works of fiction, even so-called "amateur" porn, so allowing a work of fiction to "convince" one of what their partner does or doesn't want indicates deeper issues to me...issues of boundaries and respect, at the very least.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Woodchuck (Nov 1, 2012)

salamander said:


> And, one could also ask, who would marry a person so screwed up they run from pg-13 movies in shock and horror? It's easy to sit on your high horse and tell others about themselves, isn't it.
> 
> Since you think it is a woman's "insecurity" that makes her dislike her husband wasting all his sexual and intimate energy on e-*****s, why on earth would you torment that insecurity? Have you no respect or compassion for your wife? I don't see a lot in evidence in my two days on this board. I've seen you mock and demean her issues.
> 
> ...


I will repeat "Who in their right mind would marry a person who's only sexual expression was masterbating to porn"? I can deal with being scared of movies or the ferris wheel, or dogs or cats, or heights or the number 13...I could deal with just about any form of fear or anxiety..But absolutely could not deal with someone who could not engage in sex with a partner..Two entirely different things.....

As far as someone being convinced "BY PORN" to share their wife with other men...I throw ther BUllSH1T CARD....

As far as frustrations with my wife......I have NONE...She is the most perfect example of partner, helpmate, and lover I can imagine, and tell her so daily...

Here is a shortened version of the email I sent her 3 days ago....

Proverbs 31:10-31 
A worthy woman who can find? For her price is far above rubies. 
The heart of her husband trusteth in her, And he shall have no lack of gain. 
She doeth him good and not evil All the days of her life. 
She seeketh wool and flax, And worketh willingly with her hands. 
She is like the merchant-ships; She bringeth her bread from afar. 
She riseth also while it is yet night; 
And giveth food to her household, And their task to her maidens. 
She considereth a field, and buyeth it; With the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard. 
She girdeth her loins with strength, And maketh strong her arms. 
he praiseth her, saying: "Many daughters have done worthily, But
thou excellest them all. 

As far as my snarkey debate tactics....I only give my honest opinions backed by personal experience and scientific fact.......

While from others I get "I have made up my mind, don't confuse me with facts".......


Good luck
the woodchuck


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

salamander said:


> *Porn convinced my husband* that I needed to experience multiple men at once


I don't believe porn ever convinces anyone of anything. I don't believe that watching gay porn would convince me to be gay, no matter how much they seemed to be enjoying themselves.

Multiple sex partner scenarios have been part of the human fantasy repertoire forever. Marquis de Sade wrote about it and there are depictions of it on Hindu temples which are thousands of years old. Porn reflects taste, it doesn't create it.

This is a perfect example of the type of scapegoating that comes with ascribing porn with some kind of magical power over people. Porn didn't convince your husband to do this. He decided to do it. The blame lies with him. How is anyone going to resolve these issues if they don't hold people responsible for their actions?


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

drerio said:


> APA rejected Homosexuality as a disease back in 1973... sooner than anyone else
> 
> First publication in the field of Neuroscience published in 1878. Society of Neuroscience founded in 1969, when over 10,000 joined the first year having already been actively engaged in this field of study two-decades prior.
> 
> Both of these are based on experiential data... if not that what then do you trust?


Life experience.

Stating that the first publication in neuroscience was in 1878 gives it all the credibility of saying the first publication of building materials/architecture were Egyptian glyphs.
We have not had the tech to actually test any theory regarding brain chemical/hormonal interaction in the mind for much more than a decade and what we're finding is puzzling, very cool and interesting but nothing to hang your hat on just yet.

I happen to believe anything a human becomes obsessed with is potentially an addiction.
I believe one can become addicted to porn and that it like all addictions is harmful to other areas of our lives.

I think denying this regardless of which authority does or does not support it makes it impossible to have a rational discussion about it.

On the flip side, I hear the "Porn Addiction" battle cry belted out every time someone reports an open Victoria Secret sales add being read by their spouse.
This disturbs me because actually diagnosing such an addiction is not not and won't be for a very long time if ever actually diagnosable.

Back to life experience I guess.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

tacoma said:


> Life experience.
> 
> Stating that the first publication in neuroscience was in 1878 gives it all the credibility of saying the first publication of building materials/architecture were Egyptian glyphs.
> We have not had the tech to actually test any theory regarding brain chemical/hormonal interaction in the mind for much more than a decade and what we're finding is puzzling, very cool and interesting but nothing to hang your hat on just yet.
> ...


The technology for neuroscience Investigation has been around more than a decade. MRI and PET scan Technology dates back to the 1950s. CAT scan technology originating from an earlier time. We have been using radioisotopic tracing since 1940s. Advanced Molecular biology been around since the mid-80s. 

I'm not disagreeing completely with you, but there is an assumed molecular basis for clinical addiction.


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

drerio said:


> I'm not disagreeing completely with you, but there is an assumed molecular basis for clinical addiction.


I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you either but this descriptive carries a lot of weight with me.

Also to imply that the scanning/tracing tech we had in the fifties was even close to adequate for theoretical falsification of such a thing as addiction is disingenuous at best.

I stand by my statement...

"We have not had the tech to actually test any theory regarding brain chemical/hormonal interaction in the mind for much more than a decade.... "

Especially when concerning the neural chemical interaction of something as complex as addiction.

All I'm saying is we shouldn't take what we "think" we know for granted just yet and this is why these citations carry little weight with me.

I'm quite sure there were many people speaking out against homosexuality as a disease while holding the APA study determining it as so as reputable evidence back in '72.


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

tacoma said:


> I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you either but this descriptive carries a lot of weight with me.
> 
> Also to imply that the scanning/tracing tech we had in the fifties was even close to adequate for theoretical falsification of such a thing as addiction is disingenuous at best.
> 
> ...


Using words like 'assumed' and 'suggest' are commonly used in science. We are careful not to overstate anything to as imply our own biased arrogance. 

So you think we know nothing concerning addictions? Are you willing to stand by that statement? 

So we should disregard any scientific body of information like that cited previously? Are you serious?


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

The most addictive drug currently investigated is Methamphetamine. A drug that was invented by the Japanese Imperial Science League back during WWII. 

Since the late 1960s there has been well over 6,500 peer-reviewed journals written about this drug. Most of them primary research articles. We know so much about the cell and molecular addiction level of this drug. We also know peripheral damage it creates based upon the adjuncts used to make it. 

Nicotine, another very addictive substance, there are over 17K peer-reviewed research articles. Again most are primary research articles. We know a lot about the cell and molecular aspects of what makes this addictive as well. 

I could just start with those two and start listing the seminal articles and breaking down what we know in great detail, if anyone is interested.

Now, so as not to highjack this thread. Would a visual or other sensory input have the same sort of biochemical response as to assume addictiveness? There are article to suggest it, but nothing so far that would provide seminal data to have that a-ha moment.


----------



## vspinkgrl (Dec 4, 2012)

Glad my husband got all that rosy palm action out in his teens and has no attachment to porn. LOL
If my husband watched it more than once a month, then it's too much. 
Some women can live with the excuses and such some can't. 
I do hope those who are having ongoing issues in their marriage with it come to some sort of happy medium


----------



## anonim (Apr 24, 2012)

sparkyjim said:


> I understand that you don't believe in it - that's fine for you. But I know that it is real and there is a lot of science behind it. *11/10 citations of this on this forum have been pseudo science.*
> 
> It's funny what the brain can become addicted to. *Anything.*
> 
> ...


----------



## anonim (Apr 24, 2012)

drerio said:


> APA rejected Homosexuality as a disease back in 1973... sooner than anyone else. *You dont get credited as good for undoing something bad.*
> 
> First publication in the field of Neuroscience published in 1878. Society of Neuroscience founded in 1969, when over 10,000 joined the first year having already been actively engaged in this field of study two-decades prior.
> 
> Both of these are based on experiential data... if not that what then do you trust? *None.*


----------



## anonim (Apr 24, 2012)

AnnieAsh said:


> It makes me sad when people who have no experience with porn addiction unilaterally declare that it doesn't exist. I am sure if you had any idea of the SCOPE of some of these people's habits you might change your tone. *same might be said of anyone, and not just about porn.*


----------



## Ikaika (Apr 23, 2012)

Anonim

I guess the US does not get any credit for ending slavery... thus we need to make reparation for every new generation of African Americans, is that correct? 

So no need for any experimental evidence, just whatever anyone says, goes. I wonder if doctors should do that to treat all ailments. Whatever they feel like giving you they will?


----------



## johnnycomelately (Oct 30, 2010)

tacoma said:


> I believe one can become addicted to porn and that it like all addictions is harmful to other areas of our lives.


How would you define an addiction?


----------

