Internet pornography destroying men's ability to perform with real women, finds study

Daily Mail [UK] ^ | 21st October 2011

[Slings and Arrows]

Internet pornography is creating a generation of young men who are hopeless in the bedroom, according to research.

Exposure to lurid images and films in the new media is de-sensitising so many young people that they are increasingly unable to become excited by ordinary sexual encounters, a report said.

-snip-

The report, called 'Porn-Induced Sexual Dysfunction is a Growing Problem', explains that the loss of libido 30 years early is caused by continuous over-stimulation of dopamine, the neurotransmitter that activates the body's reaction to sexual pleasure, by repeatedly viewing pornography on the internet.

A 'paradoxical effect' is created whereby with each new thrill, or 'dopamine spike', the brain loses its ability to respond to dopamine signals, meaning that porn-users demand increasingly extreme experiences to become sexually aroused.

[fightinJAG]

Every generation of mothers (well, except maybe the present one) has cautioned their daughters with some version of “leave something to the imagination!”

IOW, it’s not just about whatever is considered “modest” at that point in time. It’s actually about desensitizing men so that, almost no matter how much you take off, it’s . . . yawn.

Of course, a long time ago maybe moms were talking about a girl showing her ankle, or whatever.

But the fact is at some point there really is NOTHING left to the imagination. And the same thing happens that this study and others demonstrates happens with porn. Men become unarousable.

The amount of cleavage shown on Fox News these days would have been outrageous a few years ago. (Why do infobabes look like they are dressed for an evening cocktail party instead of a business lunch?) Now it’s all boobs all the time and — HELLO — no one cares. That literally means that no one cares.

Any woman who is okay with no one caring when she reveals her body is being very shortsighted, methinks. At some point (as you pointed out in your example), there’s nothing left to reveal and . . . then what when it really counts?

[wardaddy]

that will do it...my DroidX is not a master of FR posting

[wardaddy]

I care...I like the FOX babes

really...but I am not a woman obviously

and some are very good too

and other networks have them as well...the morning Headline News girl is a doll

it draws viewers and it helps when some like Guilfoyle and McCallum or Banderas have a decent viewpoint too...I like them

[huskerjim]

Ping

[huskerjim]

Ping

[suthener]

Whether they are right or not wasn’t really my point. Who knows? My point is that it seems if you live long enough you start to see the same stories (or variation on a theme {see global cooling in the 70s verses global warming in 90s}) all over again.

[Slings and Arrows]

Paging Group Captain Mandrake...

[little jeremiah]

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Surprise, surprise, surprise!!!! /NOT!!!

Remove sex from love, commitment and marriage - or even a real human being - and voila! Destruction of the natural biological urge. What to speak of relationships, marriage, families... and any children who are accidentally or even purposely exposed to the filth that is pornography.

People need to keep in mind that for the first 200 years of our country (maybe minus 20 years or so), no one thought that the First Amendment rights covered obscenity or pornography. Thanks to porn producers, the ACLU and a leftist dominated SCOTUS, we now have pornography without limits, abortion and homosexual indoctrination 24/7.

[Siena Dreaming]

The idea that women "feel" and that men "look" is laughable. If that were true please explain why women's fashion is so important.

Ummmm....so men will look and women will then feel good.

[hfr]

The point is that women use their eyes as much as men. Many circles ignore that fact, and essentially say that men are the only ones who sin through the lust of the eyes and that women are affected by feeling.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

I think not only pornography in particular but the popular culture as a whole is warping people's awareness of reality and is contributing to lower birth rates and a general aging, decay and death of moral society,

[madmaximus]

Well said. Pornography is worse than a lot of street drugs(No, I don’t support that), in terms of societal damage and addiction.

The goal is always to destroy the family and morality. Making way for big-government tyranny.

Not to mention a lot of homosexuals recruit or are recruited with pornography. Perverts are not born the way they are, they are created i.e. taught, recruited and hooked on perversion by pornography. It almost always starts out with pornography.

[TheOldLady]

[cough] Hi, Mr. Arrows. Good day to you, sir!

[Slings and Arrows]

And to you, Mrs Lady.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

[a fool in paradise]

I do believe this article, as there is an air-brushed perfection in all online content - not just pornographic, that leads to impossible expectations - nobody can live up to it.

[hadit2here]

Forgive me, but when I read something like this article that pretty much strikes my logic and common sense circuits in the same way that "Increasing Global Warming from CO2 will suffocate the entire planet by 2015" or "Blood will run in the streets if we let people carry guns whenever they want to" does, I just gotta go look at who the "author" of the piece is.

Marnia Robinson is a former corporate attorney with degrees from Brown and Yale who writes books about the unwelcome effects of evolutionary biology on intimate relationships and the striking parallels between recent scientific discoveries and traditional sacred-sex texts. Her cross-disciplinary perspective incorporates the insights of psychologists, psychiatrists, neuroscientists, evolutionary biologists, anthropologists and even ancient sages. With her husband Gary Wilson, who taught anatomy and physiology for years and is a neuroscience enthusiast, she writes articles for publications as diverse as The Evolutionary Review and the award-winning anthology Toward 2012: Perspectives on the Next Age. With Gary's help, she also blogs on "The Huffington Post" and "The Good Men Project." Cupid is available on Kindle and has been published in German.

At least she only specializes in "unwelcome effects of evolutionary biology on intimate relationships". Lord only knows what she'd find if she looked at "welcome effects" on things. But I can't help but wonder, although I can't find, if she specialized in "Womyn's studies" and "Gender studies". Well, she's a lawyer and has worked for Campbell's Soup, at least. And not to put too fine a point on it, she blogs at the Huff'nPuff.

Another red flag is when I see "cross-disciplinary perspective" or "interdisciplinary studies" in the biography of these "researchers." An interesting quote from her LinkedIn page: "No mammals are sexually monogamous, and yet close, trusted relationships are our best health insurance." HUH??

We all know that men are horny, pr0n addicted misogynists, but some statistics (from 2005-2006 but probably still valid) indicate that one in three visitors to pornographic websites are women. But 70% of them keep their cyber activities secret. Also, 17% of women admit to being addicted to pornography. Twice as many women as men favor chat rooms. And "Women, far more than men, are likely to act out their behaviors in real life, such as having multiple partners, casual sex or affairs." Or "Statistics indicate the term “sex” was searched for as often by female consumers as it was by males."

I wonder if Ms. Robinson read any of these statistics in her "cross-disciplinary" research on the "unwelcome effects" of porn.

It's always amazing to watch the knee jerk reaction against anything considered "porn", especially when you consider that Saudia Arabia, Iran, Syria, Bahrain, Egypt, UAE, Kuwait, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Kenya, India, Cuba, China are the top pornography banning countries; while searches for the keyword "sex" are from the countries 1. Pakistan, 2. India, 3. Egypt, 4. Turkey 5. Algeria 6.Morocco, 7. Indonesia, 8. Vietnam 9. Iran 10. Croatia. -- notice any sharia law countries in that list? Hmmmm? Poor little muzzies with their burqa clad wimmen can't get enough T & A? (Won't get into the list for "xxx" or "porn".)

Then there's this little gem: "Promise Keeper men who viewed pornography in last week - 53%". (But it was just for "research", I'm sure.)

While "The pornography industry is larger than the revenues of the top technology companies combined: Microsoft, Google, Amazon, eBay, Yahoo!, Apple, Netflix and EarthLink" and "US porn revenue exceeds the combined revenues of ABC, CBS, and NBC", China, South Korea and Japan have larger revenues from porn than the U.S. In fact, those top three countries' porn revenues are larger than all the rest combined... including the U.S.

Isn't it interesting that something so universally disparaged, excoriated and legislated against is still so popular with nearly every facet of the human population. Even those who are most against it. I think Ms. Robinson needs to take her "cross-disciplinary", gender studies glasses off and maybe look at the forest instead of the trees.

[Slings and Arrows]

I posted the article here because I thought my fellow FReepers would have interesting things to say about it. Thank you for confirming my theory.

Frankly, I’m a little skeptical about those revenue estimates for the porn industry, just because these days so much is given away for free. I have to wonder what businesses are included in that estimate (e.g., would strip clubs count?), and how they got their numbers.

[hadit2here]

You can go to the site I linked to and get all the info. Here's one breakdown:

2006 and 2005 Pornography United States Industry Revenue Statistics
	2006 (Billions)	2005 (Billions)
Video Sales & Rentals	$3.62	$4.28
Internet	$2.84	$2.50
Cable / PPV / In-Room / Mobile / Phone Sex	$2.00	$2.00
Exotic Dance Clubs	$2.19	$1.34
Novelties	$1.73	$1.50
Magazines	$.95	$1.00
	$13.33	$12.62
US porn revenue exceeds the combined revenues of ABC, CBS, and NBC.

Again, these statistics were for 2005-2006, but I don't doubt that the basics may still hold true, although numbers might be larger now.

[Slings and Arrows]

Thank you for the information.

Frankly, I would suspect the numbers would be lower today - when every Tom, Dick, and Jane record themselves doing the horizontal mambo and put it on the Internet, why pay? My gut feeling is that commercial porn may be going the way of the print newspaper, and for much the same reasons. Also, I’m not sure if adult toys and strip clubs should be considered porn - arguably prurient, but not necessarily porn.

I may have more to say once I visit the site - I’m very curious about the methodology used to arrive at those numbers.