Well mannered children in college. 17 and up. Porn doesn’t harm them. That’s what he said.
I’m someone’s child too, at age 64. The context he used it in was “young people”.
Porn lovers cannot think rationally and lie. That’s the way it’s always been on these threads. Plus they all get very angry and aggressive.
“Porn lovers cannot think rationally and lie.”
I think you meant they (porn addicts) can’t think rationally about porn, because they lose that capacity as part of the addiction. Denial, for example, is one of the personality traits of addiction.
“Well mannered children in college. 17 and up. Porn doesn’t harm them. That’s what he said.”
No, that’s not what he said. That’s what YOU want people to believe that he said, but he never said that in his post.
“I’m someone’s child too, at age 64. The context he used it in was “young people”.”
No, he was asking someone specifically about if they were worried about their college aged children seeing pornography. That was the context, referring to someone’s offspring.
“Porn lovers cannot think rationally and lie. That’s the way it’s always been on these threads. Plus they all get very angry and aggressive.”
I don’t know, the only one I have seen trying to stir up conflict and lying about other posters is you, and you don’t seem to be a porn lover.
I saw the comment before it was pulled. He asked if they would suffer permanent harm from seeing it, even if they did not continue to view it after that.
The only statements that I've seen to the effect that it does not harm them have come from you mischaracterizing that question.