Does it make sense to teach this to children? Just like "Smoking isn't good for your health."(which I believe worked for me) you could teach "Porn isn't good for you, if you want to enjoy sex."
I think the problem is our society's denigration of sex. We see it as consisting inherently of that mix of thrill and shame - when you're a teenager growing up in America, you're told to feel that way about any nudity, never mind penetration. So you come to associate arousal with this guilt - you never experience the one without the other - and then when you're looking for something to turn you on you're already feeling guilty, and there's a part of you that wants to. So you step a little deeper into the pool of fetishes, find something a little stronger (and I'm pleased that the author's actually given some realistic examples here), something that makes you feel guilty and ashamed and is all the more erotic for it. But the interest half-life for porn is tiny; what was dangerous boundary-pushing last week is pedestrian today. It's a feedback loop, one that can only possibly end somewhere unpleasant.
The author's already found the solution - we need to separate sexuality from guilt and shame, to be able to feel aroused and wholesome at the same time. But it's hard to do that after you've already fallen down the spiral. We need to make our children's first experiences of arousal feel natural and wholesome - which means more openness, more embracing of sexuality in artforms that are going to portray it positively. But that's a hard sell to middle America.
> So you come to associate arousal with this guilt
That's part of the puritanical and (maybe any religious) mind control. People need to feel guilty so they self-police themselves, and it also has to be something that is common (such as sex) so everyone is always guilty. Guilty people are vulnerable and easily controlled.
This has to be planted early in the childhood, then it sort of becomes automatic and not that easy to unlearn. Even rationally if some admit there is nothing wrong with this or that, they'll still feel guilty -- it because it becomes part of their personality.
I think the problem is our society's denigration of sex.
Is this really true anymore? It seems that the majority of the media consumed by young people carries the message that sex is extremely important and if you are not doing it with everyone in every way, you are brainwashed by religious or moral beliefs.
Obviously there is denigration of sex from many sources but which of these sources actually have an impact on young people?
I said society, not media. My own experience is that I felt very guilty and followed much the same path as the author - but then I was a geeky kid with few friends and a lot of respect for my (relatively old and catholic) parents. I wonder how popular/trendy the author was in high school, and whether those who were had a different experience.
"It seems that the majority of the media consumed by young people carries the message that sex is extremely important and if you are not doing it with everyone in every way, you are brainwashed by religious or moral beliefs."
Sex as necessary for social station is not being sex-positive.
I upvoted you, so I think you had some good points. I don't think, however, that our society denigrates sex. I think that what has happened was a cultural response to STDs, and the problem of rearing children. People (in my opinion) naturally pursue what makes them feel good, and sex is our number one feel-good activity. So we've been struggling with how to control it. You see the problems of unrestrained sex now with AIDS, herpes, new antibiotic resistant strains of clap, the rise of single-parent families, etc.
I dont think it makes it better or worse at all, with the exception of certain girls who like to watch it to get in the mood in which case its certainly a force for the better.
Putting the "its not good for you" label on it also makes it immediately more interesting than it should be. Increases the guilty pleasure and so on.
The guy in the article - maybe he would have erectile problems never having watched porn too. Performance anxiety is normal.
One thing I am sure about: The cure for bad sex is lots of sex.
Not that I know. Bad wording from my side, I was only thinking about teens (like the case of the author). Some day research might tell us, until then, you better avoid a risk to your child.
You know you've chosen the right side of an argument when everyone one the other side links to a single quack website backed up by anecdotes from "An Internet User".
Is it not true that many informative articles start with anecdotes to illustrate the subject at hand? If you have a problem with the science in the article, please explain; it would help me understand the flaws you are talking about.
The study on addiction linked to covers addiction to injections of MPH. It goes on to say that injected MPH and oral MPH have completely different effects. It follows that none of this generalizes to viewing pornography, seeing how the delivery mechanism is a factor in addiction and the study does not cover viewed material in any manner.
And that's from only reading the first couple sentences.
Mere bias does not invalidate an argument. As males we are naturally biased to believing porn is harmless. However it can be a real addiction to some (not all of course).
In my opinion it's important to know the symptoms of any addiction in case you see those patterns in your own or your peer's behaviors.
It'd make more sense to go broader and teach that due to how our brains work, all pleasure becomes diluted the more we have. Therefore, it is desirable to avoid living in unrestricted excess, be it with drugs, sex, food, or what have you. One should have control over their pleasures, not the other way around.
We have tested and tasted too much, lover--
Through a chink too wide there comes in no wonder.
But here in the Advent-darkened room
Where the dry black bread and the sugarless tea
Of penance will charm back the luxury
Of a child's soul, we'll return to Doom
the knowledge we stole but could not use.
It makes sense, if taught properly. But I would expect this to be yet another thing taught with the "daddy knows best" attitude that speaks in simplistic absolutes to make sure they instill their desired outcome rather than share a proper perspective with plenty of nuance and hope that the children come to the same conclusions as the person teaching. That is a very dangerous road to take. It depends on the message being correct, and the child to never rebel from that message when they wise up to the fact they weren't given the full picture and never succumb to their desires.
For me, in this day and age, its really hard to say one way or the other. How poorly done and/or wrong will it be, and is having it done that way better than nothing? I can't know, but I suspect that with societal attitudes on sex, "some porn is fine, how much is too much is different for everybody and here's how to tell where the line is" is too complicated of a message to effectively communicate. If it is even allowed to be communicated at all. Don't forget widespread acceptance of "abstinence only" rubbish isn't far behind us, I'm reminded of this every time I visit family in the South and see the big labels on every gas station condom dispenser reminding me that the only real way to avoid HIV/AIDS is monogamy and abstinence before marriage. Whereas growing up in the North, we didn't even have those dispensers. I suspect their presence is related to the greater taboos about sex in those areas, but in the north I was never scared away from buying rubbers at the counter when I was young.
No, because that is ludicrous. A porn addiction is bad for you, but watching other people fuck isn't necessarily bad. Just like certain electronic components exhibit weird properties when taken to extreme levels, we wouldn't write off using op-amps because they go funky when abused.
Porn is an instant pleasure. Enjoying sex in eight years (earlier if you're lucky but don't cross your fingers just yet) does not compare very well to that.
I've never tried to smoke so I can't really compare.
