• paultimate14@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I got a lot of downvotes on Reddit for pointing out that there’s no scientific evidence supporting porn addiction. It’s just the latest version of religious indoctrination. ISIS was using that as part of their recruitment process: men who are sexually repressed are easier for them to manipulate.

    • Victor Villas@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess it makes sense that the psychology community would push back against the claim that pornography fits a scientific definition of addiction. The same deal goes for sugar: many people talk about sugar being addictive, but it’s pretty absurd to classify sugar as addictive substance, and the article raises this point very explicitly:

      That isn’t to say that people can’t use pornography compulsively, as you may compulsively eat donuts or bacon every day against the best interests of your heart

      And that’s what most people usually mean when they’re addicted to it. So I wouldn’t say that it’s indoctrination or “hive mind”, it’s just how people use the word “addiction” in day-to-day, non-scientifically-precise ways. You’re absolutely right to point that out because people should not seek addiction treatment for porn consumption, but it’s also understandable to seek treatment for compulsive consumption of whatever. Just like sugar and junk food, while the science doesn’t say it’s addiction, it also presents endless evidence on the negative effects of common patterns of consumption.

    • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The basic mechanism of psychological addiction is there: a behaviour that creates an immediate reward.