HN Theater @HNTheaterMonth

Midwest US, mid 30's. This sort of view is strongly held by the intellectual and political circles I support and follow. I think it is a very insidious and corrupting addiction, and the modern incarnation of it is orders of magnitude more stimulating than in prior eras. Infinite access to a stimulus that simulates in male brains "mating" with ever varied women, which is hijacking a strong biological imperative.

As another comment mentioned a similar problem with "advertising" in general, I think sexualization and over stimulus of the population weakens people, and not to say there is some conspiracy purposefully pushing this (it may just emergent from technology and human instinct) I do think the corrupting influence weakens a population and makes them more easily dominated by strong forces... media, business, government, etc. All to say that, in terms of "what is best to cultivate a strong society and people" porn is extremely antithetical to this. A stronger society is one that would be avoiding, however necessary, consumption and production of pornography.

This presentation [0] on the physiological effects of porn consumption is very informative. Observations mirror what strong opiates do to the brain

A good overview of the public health problem of porn[1]

The psychologically destabilizing and weakening effects of porn, and how they breakdown willpower to oppose stronger forces are illustrated by the time when the Israeli military broadcast pornography onto the televisions of Palestinian residents of the besieged West Bank town of Ramallah [2]. Why would they do this if porn was good for you?

[0] "The great porn experiment | Gary Wilson | TEDxGlasgow" https://youtu.be/wSF82AwSDiU

[1] https://eppc.org/publication/a-science-based-case-for-ending...

[2] https://reason.com/2002/04/03/porn-and-politics-in-palestine...

⬐ octopoc

Thank you for this! This is something that is really really important to me and my wife. We have seen some horrible consequences in our parents' generation from porn addictions. I also had an addiction to it, but thankfully I am free now. My biggest desire as a father is that my children would grow up addiction free. Boys are exposed to porn when they are simply unable to understand what it is, what sex is, and what the price of the short-term pleasure is. I know I was. I hate what happened to me, I hate what I did, but I felt like I had to do it.

⬐ heavenlyblue

The parent is quoting a short article about porn in Israel from a questionable source with a questionable amount of facts in it.

And they have been quoting it in a few threads in this conversations.

⬐ ipaddr

Do you remember porn mags in the corner store growing up?

⬐ PKop

Yes, they weren't a good thing but even those were taboo and fairly inaccessible to the average kid and came with a stigma for the adults buying them in public.

Do you not see how the infinite novelty of endless porn videos accessible in the palm of your hand is different than the (crude and still objectionable) magazines sold in corner stores?

⬐ ipaddr

I would suggest the photocopy of a crunched up semi-nude Madonna photo from the 80s caused our imagination to soak much more than what is available online.

At the time many lighters and cards had nude images. It was much more common and celebrated.

There are endless videos on any topic.

⬐ sdoering

Oh wow. I am blown away. You just threw me back some 30 years.

Let me explain. About three decades ago I was (gladly not to strongly) part of a Christian youth group. Led by honorable members of the parish. They condemned porn, Sex, condemned schools doing sex ed. The condemned viciously youth magazines doing sex ed as well (German Bravo magazine).

Kids naturally discovered their budding sexuality. Looked at porn or nudism magazines. Tried maturation (oh what a sin in the eyes of the elders). As said everything sexusl, everything bodily was tabu.

Kids, especially in the inner part of these groups with parents active in the parish were fearful. Full of shame because they felt their bodies betraying them and their faith. Felt the touch of Satan. Felt dirty and without being worthy.

You (or at least others) might get the drift.

And - more importantly - these kids (boys and girls alike) were vulnerable. And believe me - easy prey. And prey they were. The most respected members of the flock, leaders of youth groups and excursions who prayed with us and always told us that we could always come to them with any question about our faith and life in general. These were the wolves. Males as well as females. They longed for the confessions. Let the kids show what they had done. Wanted to see in detail. Some even went further. Did not constraint themselves to confessions and private shows of underage maturation.

So yeah I learned early that porn is to blame for a rotten society. Porn is the culprit. Not people.

Sorry, but what you wrote is nearly verbatim the arguments that were hammered into us.

I don't buy them. Not anymore.

⬐ drekipus

this is a long winded approach to saying you enjoy wacking off. just admit it bro

⬐ PKop

Porn is not sexual, it is anti-sexual. Young adults are having less sex than prior generations. The birth rate is collapsing. To equate compulsive consumption of a synthetic substitute for real sex and the natural reason for its existence is ridiculous.

Like equating criticizing unhealthy eating of candy and junk food to an opposition to "food" would be similar.

⬐ D-Coder

> Young adults are having less sex than prior generations. The birth rate is collapsing.

You say that like those are bad things.

⬐ denton-scratch

How much sex people have is not nowadays closely-related to the birth-rate.

related ted talk on dopamine, the internet, and novelty seeking https://youtu.be/wSF82AwSDiU also related: the modern diet contains alot of calorically dense food, which means less stomach and intenstinal stretching, which means more ghrelin, which activates these novelty-seeking dopaminergic systems in the brain

as for the original question: a) as far as optimizing, I think that approaching the optimal state is less important than making improvements to a consistent performance ethic. Better to do something a little better every day than to miss days trying to do it better than everybody else. b) with information, I tend to focus on information that relates to a particular goal relevant to job performance or general wellbeing and then take notes on any new information and review prior notes relevant to the newest information in order to build an intuitive mental logical structure of the problem/goal and all of its moving parts. But since so few things are scientifically provable, I try to "bet" on certain things based on how more or less likely they are and an informal cost-benefit analysis

Heres that ted talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

⬐ roywiggins

TEDx is not exactly the same as TED. Just about anyone can organize a TEDx, and lots of cranks give "TEDx talks". There are dozens and dozens of "TEDxes":

https://www.ted.com/tedx/events

⬐ trident1000

I understand its not hard to get on the platform. Id just judge it on the content and presentation over the platform banner.

There is plenty of evidence of harm from porn usage, it hijacks the brain in a similar manner as hard core drugs. [0]

The social consequences are pretty obvious, satisfying fundemental bioligical needs through artifical manner degrades what those desires are meant to achieve: family formation, marriages, which it inhibits forming or ruins those that already exist.

Go spend some time on the no-fap sub-reddit to see the massive positive change that occurs when men quit consuming porn. Porn is a tool for social control, pacification and weakening culture [1], it is not empowering for either side of the equation.

If this wasn't true, it wouldn't have been used as a form of psychological warfare like it was in this situation [2].

Did they do this to "empower" their enemy?

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

[1] https://www.amazon.com/Libido-Dominandi-Liberation-Political...

[2] https://www.smh.com.au/world/middle-east/porn-run-on-seized-...

⬐ pjc50

This is the plot of Dr Strangelove.

⬐ saagarjha

I find it quite interesting that TED apparently felt it appropriate to include this disclaimer:

> NOTE FROM TED: This talk contains several assertions that are not supported by academically respected studies in medicine and psychology. While some viewers might find advice provided in this talk to be helpful, please do not look to this talk for medical advice.

⬐ PKop

Yep. But one only needs to use common sense, personal experience, and perhaps some further investigation to realize his claims about the addictive nature, and the mechanism by which human reward mechanisms are triggered by infinitely variable porn supply, are stupidly obvious and self evident.

Anyone trying to argue otherwise is likely an addict themselves or being disingenuous.

⬐ saagarjha

I'm sorry, but not providing any actual evidence to support your claim, then saying it's "common sense", "stupidly obvious and self evident", then calling anyone who even argues the point an addict or arguing in poor faith checks about every box in the "how to make it hard for people to actually continue a discussion with you in good faith" list.

⬐ PKop

How is it "poor faith"? I legitimately believe it to be true.

Moreover, if one conducts the experiment on themselves, porn usage then no-fap...they would observe the effect themselves. Not ever attempting to do so then defending porn is itself a bad-faith argument.

Many of these cultural type of debates have wider philosophical/political baggage that precludes and unbiased discussion. Often it just comes down to what one thinks of a certain thing... like that porn usage is degenerate and unhealthy. What would a study do to oppose that argument?

Do you doubt that the researcher in the video found evidence of brain effects similar to narcotics? No matter what evidence was presented, TED would say the same thing as they have a political angle to defend.

⬐ SpicyLemonZest

It's poor faith because it means anyone engaging with you has to drag themselves through the mud, either silently accepting your characterization that they're an addict or posting a defensive disclaimer that they're totally not.

⬐ PKop

Sure.. maybe my point is I'm certainly not looking for a debate with someone that would deny it. I wouldn't view them as a serious person, because of the self evident nature of what we would be "debating"

⬐ sokoloff

If you don’t want to hear from someone who doesn’t agree with you, I agree you’re not looking for a debate. The word instead is preaching.

(There’s not necessarily anything wrong with that, but it’s a quite different activity with a propensity to convince primarily people who already agree with you.)

⬐ saagarjha

You are welcome to believe anything you like, but when you try to convince other people of your viewpoint you must provide supporting evidence for it, while refraining from doing the things I mentioned. I do appreciate that your claim is actually testable, so that is a plus, although I cannot say that experimenting on myself is a great idea nor am I sure what effect I should be searching for. An actual study may have a hypothesis like "porn usage causes an increase of rates of depression or success in relationships" and then you could actually measure that and try to see if there was an actual difference (keeping in mind that such topics are often difficult to study, because people often lie and social sciences are often fuzzy anyways.) By the way, the "effects similar to narcotics" isn't really that great of a qualifier; for example, any pleasurable experience releases dopamine, whether it be hard, addictive drugs or spending time with your family. It would be absurd to try to continue an argument on that, wouldn't it?

⬐ PKop

>any pleasurable experience releases dopamine

This is a distinction of degree then perhaps. But you're on the right track. Spending time with your family is a good thing. Pursuing more drug usage and porn usage is not, not least of which because they'd probably lead to less "spending time with family" or no family at all.

That drugs and porn occupy your time, and reward you for it, and again, in an extreme way (large reward.. not just "reward") is the entire point.

>nor am I sure what effect I should be searching for

That you are even considering what you should be searching for is commendable. Most people here wouldn't even take the time to run the thought experiment or grant that self experiment is valid evidence. Nor would they go read no-fap discussions listing countless, endless examples of drastic improvements in individuals lives from before/after.

>keeping in mind that such topics are often difficult to study

Yep. And there are a lot of variables. See why waiting for a study is kinda silly? We don't need it. Though I'm sure there are or could be some good ones, those searching for the perfect one when self experience would show them all they would need, or 500 anecdotes. Again, it's self evident for anyone who puts in a bit of time willing to consider. Those that want to rationalize their unhealthy behavior will hold out, perpetually, for study.

Persuading those people is a lost cause. I think we can just take the heuristic of looking at how endless supply of novel, virtually "real" (to the brain) sexual stimulus is something never before existing in human history. We can point to delay and decline in marriage, birth rates, and family formation. Stories of teenagers and young children being exposed to hard core pornography early and finding themselves with a habit that leads to depression, anxiety, apathy, marriage problems for adults etc. They're out there. Nobody wants to do this study, but we can use our common sense and intuition anyways.

Here's an enlightening video on the detrimental effects of porn on the brain. Porn addiction shows similar effects as opiates.

https://youtu.be/wSF82AwSDiU

Related: "NoFap"

https://www.reddit.com/r/NoFap/

⬐ wavefunction

NoFap is of course the pseudo-scientific movement promoted by "Proud Boy" Gavin McInnes. When I consider the constellation of associated movements and groups with these sorts of things I have to step back and say "no."

You have to be careful about what people you associate yourself with and also with the subcultures and thought-forms you submerge yourself in.

⬐ PKop

Now that you bring it up, from what I gather the "Proud Boy"s like Gavin endorse the no-fap movement because they view committed monogamous relationships between to long term partners as the best outcome for society, and individuals as well, and porn use as essentially a mental poison akin to drug use. It diminishes one of the most powerful drives in men: desire to find a sexual partner and a long term relationship.

The modern view of degenerate behavior where unlimited sexual partners with no commitment is somehow seen as "empowering" is viewed by many as terrible advice, especially to women. The long term consequence is unhappiness and regret when people age out of the primary dating pool, having wasted their prime years either either engaging in casual sexual relationships or heavy porn use.

Young men would do themselves a service to actually look into these movements themselves, and things like "No fap" and discover the benefits, instead of listening to porn users who recoil at anyone criticizing their addiction and lifestyle choices.

⬐ mjfl

I'm not involved in it, but I know for a fact that the "NoFap" movement goes back like 8 or 9 years, and probably further back, and the Proud Boys have only recently come about, maybe in the last two years. In fact, I'm pretty sure the only association between the two groups is via endorsement by McInnes. I just want to clear that up in case someone's at a party and touting NoFap and an insane person like yourself concludes that they must be a Nazi.

You should be more careful about that.

⬐ deno

> You have to be careful about what people you associate yourself with and also with the subcultures and thought-forms you submerge yourself in.

Do you think you’ll catch wrongthink by even accidentally interacting with people that have different political views than your own?

I don’t have a dog in this fight but this just struck me as such small-minded thing to say…

No Fap is self-evidently apolitical. Though it’s true it is “pseudoscientific,” but really that should be obvious—it was started around a meme.

There’s also Porn Free[1] which evolved independently alongside the website Your Brain On Porn[2], that is very much evidence-based.

[1] https://reddit.com/r/pornfree

[2] https://yourbrainonporn.com/

⬐ StavrosK

"the detrimental effects of addiction on the brain", you mean.

⬐ erric

Right. Everything is fine in moderation.

⬐ ovao

Not everything is fine in moderation. Mainlining sulfuric acid, for example.

Whether porn consumption is fine in moderation is a subject of fair debate. Unfortunately, the science on this is not sufficiently clear.

⬐ ozim

I am not following that absurdity reduction. In the context of discussion you could compare it with alcohol not sulfuric acid.

Alcohol creates concrete bad outcomes when for instance driving. I think there is a lot less people watching porn while driving than driving under influence. Alcohol makes you prone to some kinds of cancers, porn not much. Watching porn is at least order of magnitude safer than drinking alcohol. There is no way you can use sulfuric acid injections as comparison for porn watching.

⬐ ovao

I think your reaction to the first statement is an indication that you didn’t read the second. I specifically argue that there is no clear scientific indication relating to moderate porn consumption, whereas there are clear indications about injecting sulfuric acid.

The point being: it’s unclear as to whether porn consumption is harmful in moderation and therefore problematic to suggest that it’s “fine”.

⬐ ozim

But your comparison is just wrong. You try to bash argument that "everything in moderation is harmless" by taking example of something that is out of scope. Person saying "everything in moderation" does not imply jumping into volcanos done in moderation is harmless. "Everything" in that statement is more like, alcohol, drugs etc. not sulfuric acid injections.

⬐ ovao

> Person saying "everything in moderation" does not imply jumping into volcanos done in moderation is harmless.

In which case, the word “everything” is entirely the wrong word, is it not? I think we can agree that “many things” would be a substantially better fit here.

Again, I feel you’re missing the point. It’s not about the semantics of the statement; it’s about porn viewing. Again, it’s unclear whether porn viewing in moderation is “fine”, by some variable definition of “fine”, which is why his first statement is problematic. It’s not because of any particular word or any particular other comparison you or I may contrive.

⬐ PKop

I think porn, like opiates and other drugs, are hard to do "just in moderation". There is a powerful dopamine effect that pushes one to consume more and more. But even simply addressing the term moderate, what does that even mean? How much? What is the unintended consequence of getting sexual satisfaction from porn vs real life long term relationship?

I would venture that unlimited availability of high quality sexual stimulation leads many to delay pursuing (with all the associated pain and challenge) real relationship. Especially for those who it is more difficult to find a mate.

Read up on countless discussions about how abstaining from getting sexual gratification from porn leads one to become more motivated to go out on dates, look for a partner, be more confident in approaching women etc etc.

Also, if you look into the "no fap" discussions, many report feeling a strong drive to be more productive in other areas of their life. See a powerful drive to go to the gym and workout, have a healthier lifestyle, easier ability to focus for long periods of time on intense work etc.

I think the people here dismissing the point of view that porn can be very harmful to so many are simply selfish, they are defending their own habits, and they are not considering the full context of what "no fap" and abstaining from porn completely can have an immensely beneficial effect on many people.

⬐ guskel

It's placebo.

⬐ ovao

Most likely, but potentially still quite useful.

⬐ erric

>Not everything is fine in moderation. Mainlining sulfuric acid, for example

Extremophiles (Snottite) will be quite happy in sulfuric acid

⬐ Sharlin

Anything in moderation is fine basically by definition, including injecting sulfuric acid. Botulinum toxin, the most potent poison known to mankind and lethal at concentrations of a few ng/kg, is used by celebrities to smooth wrinkles. It's all about dosage.

⬐ ovao

Perhaps it’s not the best example. Replace it with something more specific if you wish, like “placing live fragmentation grenades in one’s mouth in moderation”.

⬐ donutte

I’m not sure that’s a counterexample either? The claim is “if X is in moderation, then X is fine”. If we let X be necessarily not in moderation, the claim holds of X by impossibility of the antecedent.

IOW “if X is in moderation, X is fine” is logically consistent with “some things cannot be in moderation”.

⬐ Sharlin

Eh, live grenades are dangerous because their dosage is discrete. There's a qualitative difference. And if you argue that any amount of porn is harmful, well, that's a really strong claim and requires better arguments than silly analogues.

⬐ ovao

That’s not my argument at all, and never has been. I’ve been abundantly clear on this.

⬐ deno

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_Rocks

“Moderate use of porn” doesn’t have to mean hardcore pornography. Playboy and erotic novels are probably not equivalent to Anal Whores 3.

Similarly, I’ve also heard the argument that high-speed internet pornography and “tube” sites in particular are the problem, because of how they present to the user a never-ending stream of novelty, and not necessarily because of the particular type of content.

If that’s the case then obviously the argument about moderation would have its merits.

⬐ ovao

The tube sites sometimes lead viewers into a constant state of high-chasing, in which, over time, the severity of the porn gradually increases for the viewer to achieve the same feeling of excitement or gratification. So, from a relative perspective, it can begin with Playboy-type softcore content, but can lead fairly easily to much more hardcore porn. And because the tube sites are free, there's no particular self-checked motivator for someone not to graduate. It requires the cognizance that it can eventually lead to a particularly problematic state of addiction.

It's possible to become addicted to much softer varieties of porn, but the potential ramifications of that addiction may be less severe (or they might be problematic in another sense, like financially).

⬐ deno

Maybe then there’s some way to attack this problem without necessarily requiring full on abstinence from pornography, which is probably not realistic for the majority of people?

For example an extension that tracks your porn viewing habits and limits video recommendations.

⬐ ovao

I think that's a legitimately great idea, sure. I don't necessarily advocate abstinence (although I feel it's been a good thing for me, in general), so any tool that can help someone recognize when they might be veering down a path that may be harmful would probably be very useful.

⬐ PKop

It is important to be clear with our terms and definitions. Certainly we all can agree that we would need to know what a "moderate" amount of porn is right?

Also, the main problem here, and it is a problem with other highly addictive behaviors like drug use, is that simply sticking with a so called "moderate" amount is nearly impossible. It is the whole point of things being addicting, becoming habituated to them, seeing diminishing satisfaction to previous amounts etc etc (for some people at least.. and I would guess this number is quite large).

Watch the video I linked above and see if it resonates with your own experience. Many long term porn users find themselves seeking out more extreme content over time, as well as an increasing quantity of porn viewed over time.

And what about the opportunity cost? What choices and behaviors are given up in the process of receiving sexual satisfaction from porn? Many data sources show a delay in marriage and declining quantity of sexual relationships or volume of sex for young people. Would anyone argue that this might also come with psychological costs in the long term?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

^^ This really opened my eyes to this problem for me.. It's really rather worrying, and I guess my generation (early 30s) were the last to avoid this so it's kind of invisible to us because of how awkward it is to talk about such things.

We need to do something, perhaps better education and getting more comfortable talking about sex and relationships with young people is a better approach than failed-from-the-outset restrictions...

Either way, the points in that video are imo, valid, and should worry everyone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU Have you seen this TED talk about porn addiction and how it has similar effects like some sort of hard drug addiction on the brain. Everything uses the same pipeline.

Here is the truth - watch too much porn and you get erectile dysfunction:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

Why did it take me decades to find someone able to present that reasonably plausible reason as to why I should definitely not want to watch porn under any circumstances whatsoever?

The argument (with science) in the above TED talk is that if you do watch a lot of porn then you are not going to aroused by real women as much as you should, leading to unsatisfactory bedroom performances. Yep, porn is actually that dangerous.

I might not care for the traditional 'don't watch porn because it is porn'/'think of the children'/'porn exploits women' arguments, however, I do have enlightened self interest and loss of libido is so not what I want to have.

If I was in the UK government I would want to get this message out to kids in schools, not to scare them away from porn for the sake of it, but because they deserve to have 'normal', happy sexual health. By censoring porn they are not going to get this message, in fact they will be further away from it than they are now, doing what they can to get the 'forbidden fruit' instead of knowing why they just should not bother.

Instead of censoring they could have demanded that there be a banner on the pages of porn sites warning that use of porn leads to erectile dysfunction. This would be a proactive move, no harder to get into law than that stupid 'this site uses cookies' directive. They could get the ISPs to do it so porn from outer Mongolia would be suitably warned of too.

We have had a block on mobiles in the UK for some time now. There were no riots in the streets because of this, people are fine with it. The ISPs can take the block off for people and the system just works. This new move is an extension of what we already have, not some Orwell-nightmare-slippery slope thing. The politicians will get their votes, some people will grumble but that will be it.

⬐ SquareWheel

Two things.

1. This is a TEDx talk, not a TED talk. Very different. TED talks are given by experts, TEDx can be anybody who has something to say.

2. The science in this talk felt shaky at best. And frankly, from spending even a short period looking into Gary Wilson and his website yourbrainonporn.com, he comes off as an anti-porn conspiracy nut.

I think you need to apply more skepticism to the argument.

⬐ Theodores

Points taken. However his talk was the first time that dots were connected for me in a way that made sense to me.

I am far from against banning porn, however, in certain situations some people can get addicted to porn. They may not be physically addicted as per heroin addiction, however, some addiction to porn has crept up on a couple of friends, to have a negative effect on their relationships. At the time I lacked anything helpful to say, a warning that 'erectile dysfunction' is the result of porn addiction might have made things easier.

There are lots of people on the lecture circuit that go on and on and on about one thing. Dawkins is a bit like that, he irritates the hell out of me. Yet, despite his presentation, he is correct.

There are others that have the opinion that porn has a negative effect on male libido, Gary Wilson does actually quote some science in his talk.

Apparently there's some proof that too much pornography is bad for you. [1] Not too mention all the multitasking. Other than that the Internet is like every other thing. It has good and bad sides. I, for one, have faith in teenagers. They'll turn out alright. It's usually the old folks that make the bigger/worse mistakes.

  [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

⬐ Sagat

But it's the teenagers who turn into those old folks. So they don't turn out alright.

⬐ None

None

Porn can create/maintain different thinking patterns, underhabituate you for normal real-life cues. By withdrawing and resensitizing your dopamine circuits you might jumpstart your motivation, getting more fun and getting out of the rut. Shouldn't expect a miracle but may worth a try.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

good luck!

On the same topic, "The Great Porn Experiment" TED talk, which provides some empirical grounding for the anecdote in the article:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

⬐ rimantas

Minor detail: that's TEDx talk, not TED talk. And there were concerned posts recently about the quality of TEDx talks.

⬐ therobot24

Makes some valid points, but some of the evidence he uses in the talk reminds me of evangelical christians tv hosts - 'Just look at this testimonial! While on the porn he dropped out of college twice, was fired twice, was taking paxil, ritalin, and tried several anti-anxiety pills. BUT once he gave up porn he doesn't need those pills, has no depression or anxiety, and frankly...he feels like a stud!'

⬐ vy8vWJlco

The testimonial was after 2 months, which is about the longest I've ever restrained myself personally and frankly, by that point, I thought about nothing else. I felt like a stud alright. Everything was hyper-arousing. It just wasn't sustainable for me. It was fun, but I probably would have been arrested for public indecency if I tried for 3 months.

I think it's necessary to learn to live with and love your lusts if you want to be in control of them. "Know thyself."

I prefer this TEDX talk to Gallop's on a similar subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

Agree that the article is crap but at least regarding the internet porn part, it has all the requirements to become destructively addictive. And all stats show that men watch most porn so it's not unjustified sexism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

⬐ mindstab

And you could claim girls read more erotica and romance and watch more Disney, which one could also say skew social perspectives :P

Destroying a generation though?

⬐ zerostar07

i doubt one of these takes up similar percentages of their time. Now, shopping is addictive, but good luck regulating that.

⬐ cafard

Beer, cigarettes, and gambling have all the requirements to be destructively addictive. Yet while I've known alcoholics, a couple of smoking-related deaths, and one or two people who have hurt themselves financially by gambling, the generations they are sampled from have lived longer and one the whole more comfortably than the generations before them.

⬐ hollerith

Neither of those things are only one click away when you are at your computer trying to get work done. Being able to resist the temptation to buy beer or cigarettes when you are in a store is easier than resisting the constant temptations of the internet.

⬐ zerostar07

These are all regulated and continuously up for debate, because, in the end, all addictions become a social/economical problem. Plus beer, cigarettes or gambling certainly did not contribute to prolonging their lives. Porn is not regulated in the west. I m not saying it should, but let's keep a watchful eye.