in which inimalist describes why YBOP is actually probably evil [also probably tl;dr, so there is that]:
Ok, so the first thing I want to present is the idea of addiction as a symptom rather than a cause. That is basically psycho-babble for the idea that an addiction forms in response to other issues within an organism's environment. Not that I'm arguing biological addiction isn't a thing, just that in its purist form, what we call an addict almost always has behaviour issues rooted in something the addiction spawned from.
I'd put it best in a sort of "stress-relief" model of behaviour. Something like hunger or pain could be thought of as causing "stress" to the system, whereas eating or moving away from the painful stimuli would be thought of as "relief" (yes, I am aware I am paraphrasing from other, actual scientific things; plagiarism is good). To really become addicted to something, it generally needs to provide some degree of relief from a stress in your life. If porn addiction works like other addiction, and YBOP explicitly argues it does, this would indicate that individuals suffering from porn addiction are really simply compensating for other stresses in their lives. parenthesis has mentioned social anxiety as an underlying cause, which is possible, among other things, but YBOP doesn't really seem to address these. Rather, it seems to just repeat over and over how bad the porn you compulsively watch it and just how addicted to it you are and how silly and stupid you should feel for not being part of the "noFap" crew. Their "tools for change" section looks like it was written by a primary school homeopath, whereas they go to pains in other sections to try and look scientific, and there includes only the smallest mention that you might want to get some counseling [find it here: http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/tools-for-change]. There is nothing that looks even remotely like modern forms of cognitive behavioural therapy or any modern form of psychological assistance. Let me emphasize a point about real, problematic forms of addiction: the very first thing done for someone with substance abuse or other addictive illnesses is getting them into therapy or an in-patient center. It deserves somewhat more attention, I would say. However, if YBOP were actually an evil site peddling some bogus agenda, this would make more sense, no?
Which directly brings me into my next point. Substance abuse has a relapse rate of, iirc of course, close to 80%, anyways, its high. Among all their stories and posts by Dilbert creators or self-congratulatory "I noFapped for 700 years!" themes, there seems to be nothing about the actual psychological issues associated with not simply quitting the addiction, but maintaining that way. Not seeing even a mention of that type of thing will have clear effects on an addict who is backsliding. Not that this is an endorsement of AA or NA or whatever, but there is a reason they have you hook up with a sponsor. When you have an urge, you need to talk to someone who has been there and knows we are all human and have our flaws, but that we must overcome them. Rather, someone who opens YBOP in search of aide, will be greeted with this:
http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/okay-newbie-guys-what-it-takes-listen-man-and-quit-screwin
Okay newbie guys, this is what it takes: listen up, man up and quit screwin' up...
It doesn't take a superpower
....
"Just a little stroke," whines your penis. Tell it to clam up. And then do pushups.
...
That's a good thing. Now what are you gonna do about it? Channel that energy into the gym, into jogging, or just plan 'ole pushups. Start up a hobby, learn a craft, go walking, etc. Just get busy. Being a couch potato does not encourage you onward.
...
You gotta stay alert no matter if you're just beginning, in the middle or beyond the end. Stay smart. Don't get sloppy with your dick.
...
The real thing is multipliably times better than the plastic porn thing.
demeaning, trivializing, outright insulting at times and total bullshit. No support number to call, no links to addiction lines, nothing. I can practically feel Scott Adams' antiquated ideas about gender bleeding through my monitor. Again, if this were some evil site pushing a bullshit agenda, totally understandable.
ok, now, I know what you are thinking:
Originally posted by parentheses' mind
Golly gee inimalist, maybe you are right, but that doesn't mean they are evil. It just means a couple of jock bros run a website about something they insist is a scientific addiction without providing any relevant information to addicts. And even though what they do provide is, at best, useless, its not like they are hurting people. Ignorant, sure; self-aggrandizing, no doubt; downplaying the significance of what would otherwise be a reasonable concern for personal gain, can't argue there; but evil? no sir!
Well, here is the thing. parenthesis, you know how, after I described all the ways science says ED happens, you said this:
Originally posted by parenthesis
I don't see it as an epidemic. But you're right, it isn't anywhere as bad as my original post implies.However, there are extreme cases, and I believe it could get worse.
Meaning that, you admit, porn or masturbation addiction causing ED [if it actually does] would be an extreme case, and you downplayed its prevalence by saying it wasn't an epidemic. In fact, you made no effort to challenge the notion that internet pornography is not significantly adding to the rate of ED.
By your own admission then, you are saying that the majority of 20 year old ED sufferers are not suffering ED due to a porn addiction. Therefore, the majority of young ED sufferers who stumble upon this website are not likely to be suffering due to porn. To be fair, in the middle of their own home diagnostic test for porn-related ED, they do mention to see a urologist (http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/porn-induced-ed-start-here), but again, it is a flippant mention, and they do not recommend you see a doctor if you have porn-related ED. This science teacher is convinced he is qualified enough to treat your penis. So, that means, without doubt, there are people suffering from ED due to diabetes, heart disease, hypertension (any of which may or may not be diagnosed), who now think it is due to their porn use, and are going to make major changes in their lifestyle in an attempt to cure a problem they don't have. Additionally, of course, their real problem goes untreated, and possibly the individual misses an early warning sign of heart disease or whatever. if YBOP were actually an evil site peddling some b... you get the drill.
Originally posted by parentheses' mind
Maybe, but I'd still like you to prove they are actually causing a problem, rather than just making it worse
Ok, so remember how I said that most ED in 20 year olds is caused by psychological factors, like performance anxiety. Now imagine someone quits porn but their performance doesn't improve, even though they are explicitly told it will. You are now causing a person ED through psychological mechanisms, which will outlast the other physiological issues that may eventually be taken care of.
Originally posted by parentheses' mind
errr... well.... FINE! But can you prove it might also cause the very same thing it set out to stop?
Of course! thanks for asking 🙂
So, you now have an individual who has a working penis, but YBOP induced ED [If you want. I'll make a list of 5 reasons why YBOP ED is a real thing: http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/porn-pseudoscience-and-%CE%B4fosb]. Recall the "stress-relief" model of addiction I mentioned above. What might provide a guilt free, judgement free way for this individual to release the stress of sexual desire without the anxiety of performing in front of another person?
no...
****ing...
way...
anyways, ya, blah blah what you would expect if they were evil people shilling some propaganda yadda yadda
The other thing about a sponsor for AA and the like is not just having someone who's been there, it's that you have to focus on something other than your addictive behavior. Even just a few minutes paying attention to a discussion with someone else may be enough to help put the craving off for the time being so long as you aren't functionally dependent on the chemical high.
Originally posted by inimalist
Its hilarious when someone like Tiger Woods comes out and claims sex addiction, because it almost glamorizes it.
It pretty much ruined his life. The media did far from glamorize it. If anything, it made people take the "condition"* seriously instead of thinking of it being a back-alley self-help group thing that weirdos do. "Even big name, kind, celebrities can get this? This must be a serious problem."
Originally posted by inimalist
Its like some masculine power fantasy, where they are so addicted to sex that they have to have enjoyable sex every night with attractive women.
But here's the problem: almost all of the women Tiger got it on with were crack-ho caliber while his wife was smokin'. For many people*, it showed that his "sex-addiction" problem was so bad that he'd hump anyone.
Originally posted by inimalist
Like, I hate to do a gender critique of the media [re: shooting fish in a barrel/dead horse], but the way society looks at "sex addiction" is essentially the most male-centric sexual fantasy one can think of, as if being a sex addict made life as though you starred in a porn.
What kind of news programs were you watching? 😆
This perspective is weird/contrary to what I observed. They made him out to be scum who viewed women as sex-objects. A misogynist, ungrateful, adulterous, lascivious, etc. The only thing I saw of it, in the media, is it made it out to be a disease like leprosy but it was a disease one could help and had a choice concerning. And that "you may have this problem, too, and should seek help for it".
Things like "misogynistic bastard", "womanizing *sshole", and "using a real disease to cover up his preventable perversions" are things that were said.
*My personal opinion is much different from what the media portrayed. I did not see a sex addict. Sex addiction is a superficial problem that has other problems motivating it. Sex Addiction is superficial, imo. There's other things that need to be addressed/assisted with other than the therapy sessions. I liken it to putting a band-aid on a freshly popped zit...but the zit was only a dermal manifestation of cancer beneath the surface. The "iceberg" argument?
Originally posted by dadudemon
But here's the problem: almost all of the women Tiger got it on with were crack-ho caliber while his wife was smokin'. For many people*, it showed that his "sex-addiction" problem was so bad that he'd hump anyone.
Or that he's into those kinds of "trashy" women and/or what they'd do for him from a purely sexual standpoint.
Could also be he thought going after "crack-ho caliber" women, as you put it, it was the safest from a 'don't get caught' POV.
Originally posted by Robtard
Or that he's into those kinds of "trashy" women and/or what they'd do for him from a purely sexual standpoint.Could also be he thought going after "crack-ho caliber" women, as you put it, it was the safest from a 'don't get caught' POV.
Just looked up some of them. Some of them were quite hot. Some looked like Tranny's. Tiger has a fetish. 313
Originally posted by Ascendancy
The other thing about a sponsor for AA and the like is not just having someone who's been there, it's that you have to focus on something other than your addictive behavior. Even just a few minutes paying attention to a discussion with someone else may be enough to help put the craving off for the time being so long as you aren't functionally dependent on the chemical high.
what if ur eye wonders?
lol u'd think that but the mind is more powerful then u think; aleast my eyes wonder.. habits die hard and for someone with an addiction theres no point of saving them or distracting them unless its what they want. No one can make a person change, we can influence and push maybe even force but sooner or later they will go back to their ways, its because thats what they want.