Wednesday, April 30, 2014

The Death of Words: R.I.P. "Porn Addiction" Done Away With By "Researchers"

It should be obvious to everyone that access to pornography is easier than ever thanks to the likes of Hugh Hefner, Larry Flynt, the internet, the personal computer, the courts, and of course, the sexual desires of people. In addition, since pornography has become much more "potent" much like marijuana growers have increased the THC content of their product, one has to wonder if this has increased people's attraction to pornography. It has been consider to be such an epidemic that for many years we have read articles about "sex addiction," and "porn addiction" with all the negative connotations that go along with those labels. There are even twelve step programs for people suffering from these problems, and all the while the porn industry marches on.

Maybe like the war on drugs, people will come to feel that any war on porn is a losing battle. After a while, people who are fighting a losing battle start to look for any excuse to surrender.

It looks like "Researchers" are making some headway into creating a potential exit strategy from the war on pornography as they are now saying that there is no such thing as porn "addiction."
February 12, 2014
Summary:
Journalists and psychologists are quick to describe someone as being a porn "addict," yet there's no strong scientific research that shows such addictions actually exists. So says a clinical psychologist in practice in a large behavioral health program.

"Instead, Ley and his team believe that the positive benefits attached to viewing such images do not make it problematic de facto. It can improve attitudes towards sexuality, increase the quality of life and variety of sexual behaviors and increase pleasure in long-term relationships. It provides a legal outlet for illegal sexual behaviors or desires, and its consumption or availability has been associated with a decrease in sex offenses, especially child molestation."
"The positive benefits... do not make it problematic de facto..." The clinical psychologists can call it an obsession rather than an classical addiction if they want to, but this group won't even call it an obsession. They go the full monty by stripping away all the negative connotations and exposing something that once was shameful and presenting it to all the world as a beautiful thing! I don't see the beauty, and I think there are real problems with the supposed health benefits and the alleged benefits to long term relationships the researchers claim. What does make it problematic for the Christian is that the Lord is quite specific in telling us that it is a problem,
"Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: but I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." Matthew 5:27-28

I don't know where Ley and his team are coming from, but I have a good idea as to where this advice might lead. The legitimization of any one particular sexual sin by so called "science" begins with a biased hypothesis that the behavior is natural or healthy and ends once that hypothesis is accepted as fact without ever having been fully tested. Society eagerly accepts such messages that condone sin, since they free us to pursue our human desires. We have seen this same pattern in other issues involving human sexuality where by simply changing the language of debate or by the psychological re-classification of a behavior we are softened up for the knockout punch which is, in the end, aimed at our souls.

Maybe somebody should strike back at this type of research by twisting the meaning of the word "research". On second thought, I think these researchers have already done just that.



4 comments:

  1. Anonymous4:16 PM

    I know here David Ley is coming from: He is the author of The Myth of Sex Addiction, and blogs on Psychology today, where you can find dozens of post proclaiming the porn addiction does not exist.

    It's not an accident that Ley was chosen by the Journal to do a so-called "review of the literature". This group of sexologist have a political agenda.

    I suggest reading this extensive analysis of the Ley review - The Emperor Has No Clothes: A Fractured Fairytale Posing As A Review" http://pornstudycritiques.com/the-emperor-has-no-clothes-a-fractured-fairytale-posing-as-a-review/

    You will discover that Ley, et al -

    1) Omitted all the studies demonstrating the negative effects of porn use. Yes, you read that correctly.

    2) Misrepresented the content of several studies they cited in support of their thesis. This was done by cherry-picking sentences out of context.

    3) Cited at least 10 studies that had absolutely nothing to with the associated text. Who proof-read this thing?

    4) Clearly believe only opioids can cause addiction - not cocaine, alcohol, or nicotine - and certainly not any behaviors. They are out of step with all addiction researchers and the DSM.

    5) Denounced the DSM5 for creating a behavioral addiction category. The same DSM they praised for not including porn addiction.

    6) Cited Nicole Prause's "in the press" studies, but refused to cite in the press studies by Cambridge University. Valerie Voon of Cambridge performed the first ever brain scan studies on porn addicts. Voon found all the markers of addiction.

    7) Clearly did not understand the role of DeltaFosB in reward or addiction. One of the top researchers on deltafosb said their section of Deltafosb was like a bad Saturday night parody.

    8) Ignored several brain studies on Internet addicts, which included porn addiction as one of the internet applications.

    9) Cited studies from 1980"s to refute the concepts of behavioral addictions.

    10) Omitted the mountain of empirical evidence that demonstrates behavioral addictions involve the same shared set of mechanisms and brain changes which occur in drug addictions.

    11) Omitted the 2011 new definition of addiction by the American Society of Addiction Medicine. ASAM sated that all addictions are one condition and that behavioral addictions, including sexual behavior addiction, are every bit as real as drug addiction. Note that ASAM contains Many of the researchers that provide the hard data.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bandura demonstrated that watching is a form of rehearsal. Ask the infamous late Ted Bundy where he got his start.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6VAN7ELkk0Ted bundy and porn

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dale,

      It might not qualify as a dress rehearsal, but rather an undress rehearsal.

      All joking aside, the fact is that our youngsters are being rehearsed in all manner of unnatural acts by viewing the modern porn industry's output. How this affects their subsequent attitudes and behaviors can't be good and certainly will be contrary to Christ's desires for us.

      Delete