[–] 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)

So you read it right? So you understand that this doesn't describe the normal human dependency on food? You understand that what they are addicted to is not food itself but some specific foods, because of specific things that eating those foods do for them? I mean, surely you actually read the thing you're throwing in my face and understand how it reinforces what I'm saying.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    You're right, my opinion doesn't mean people don't get addicted to porn. The consensus of the scientific community carries a bit more weight though, and that's what's behind my opinion. Believe whatever you want, but beware the ideological company you keep.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 4 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    You may have a point there, but consider this: Absolutely none of the people behind this "porn addiction" meme are qualified professionals in a position to make that distinction. Their disingenuous and manipulative nature is obvious as shit. You can argue about whether or not some form of porn addiction exists all day, but it doesn't matter whether or not it actually exists. They don't care how real it is or isn't. It's a useful tool for them to spread fascism, and that's reason enough to throw it in the garbage.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago (9 children)

    No, that's not how addiction is defined. Dependency is not addiction. You aren't addicted to food or air. What "porn addiction" proponents are trying to convince you of is that any use of porn constitutes an addiction for which the only reasonable treatment is to stop viewing porn entirely. This is a tactic designed to both control and frustrate men to make them easier to manipulate. It's a shame collar put around their necks to leash them. It's not scientifically valid, they know that, and they do not care. Don't mince words with me please.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • view more: next ›