I don't think people invented socially controlling practices because they found religion, I think they found religion to frame the invention of socially controlling practices.
Masturbation is a gratifying act that relives pressure to settle into a rigid domestic arrangement that serves to make more workers and soldiers, and create dependents that need fed, and whose well-being would be threatened if a parent became defiant and provoked the ire of elites.
Masturbation is good for the individual at the expense of the nation and its rulers. So it's inevitable that priests would decry it as an affront against god, as that's historically been their purpose.
Their statement started off with "I don't think" which generally means it's an opinion that may or may not have evidence. As long as they don't present it as truth and fact, it doesn't really need a citation.
That an opinion lacks evidence does not alleviate the requirement that its factual allegations be supported by evidence. "I don't think the surface of the earth is curved" may be an opinion, but it's a provably wrong assertion, and adding a disclamitory phrase to it doesn't excuse the statement from evaluation.
Then you should simply call that person a dumb ass and move on in that scenario. And their statement was loaded with qualifiers that indicates to the audience to not take their claim seriously. This isn't debate club or a Congressional hearing. It's a niche internet forum.
Pretty sad when religion claims to abhor evil, happens to be the source of a lot of it. Right? I can’t name a single thing religion ever did for me other than make me miserable.
IMO, and without actual data to back it up, I reckon religion (and religious difference) is responsible for the most suffering throughout the history of humankind.
Yeah, no dispute here, mate. We're pretty shocking like that. But I think religion stands out as an example of the worst, most inventive way we've come up with to subjugate and hurt people.
As a species, we've convinced ourselves that religion should be protected rather than inspected. We let lots of bad things happen in the name of religion. It's bullshit.
I don't think it's the source. I think it's a tool of social control that enables the powerful to create a bare minimum willingness to be ruled. For a long time the doctrine of Christianity was the Divine Right of Kings. Now it's the Prosperity Gospel. The books did not change but the people with all the money and power ensured the church leaders who served their interest had most of the money and thus followers.
If we didn't have religion, some other social construct would arise, and I'd argue, has arisen to fulfill it's role. Modern economic theory justifies the current power order in an unfalsifiable way that reminds me of religion.
Religion could be a liberatory force in society. In fact it has been. The liberation theology movement in South America and numerous heretical movements in the late medieval period are both examples of progressive Christian social movements.
I think the simpler answer is, you are so right, it barely has to be valorized. It sells itself.
I think the long answer is that porn addiction is a real thing that can affect people. Also lots of people in charge of things like sex education have historically been prudes who see masturbation as some sort of gateway to promiscuity.
While orgasms are normal and can potentially have some physical and mental benefits, there is no physical or mental necessity to have them (plenty of asexual and otherwise celibate people of all different kinds out there to prove it).
the "mental harm" is having to walk around horny all the time, constantly thinking of sex, and affecting your interactions
this is not a problem which normal people face. if you are constantly thinking about sex, you may have an addiction or an otherwise unhealthy relationship with sex
I mean addiction colloquially. The existence and over use of porn does cause some people and their relationship some level of affects. I don't think we can just hand wave it all away.
You are preaching to the choir here. Yes I can believe porn addiction only exists in the kinds of the those in the religious community. I'm still trying to provide a larger picture to answer the question of why the government doesn't tell you to masturbate every day.
Porn, for some people in contexts, has had drawbacks. Those people, in some contexts, have curtailed the valorization of porn writ large. Maybe this campaign has biased me to a degree as well.
I have never been to a Sex Addicts Anonymous meeting but I'm not about to write the whole idea off entirely.
Because easy dopamine hits are also easy to gain unhealthy addictions to. Because it's literally right there, easily accessible, at all times.
Couple this with how incredibly unhealthy the social relationships portrayed in most pornography are, and you're gearing up for a lot of young men addicted to wanking and having unrealistic expectations of sex. The porn young women read isn't necessarily much better, in the regard of healthy social sexual relationships.
Now, I'm not one of those weird "you shouldn't jerk it at all" folks because that's just extremism in the other direction.
Porn “addiction” is a misnomer because it doesn’t have much in common with drug addiction, gambling addiction, etc. Porn “addicts”, when you show them images of porn, do not have brain responses like those of addicts who are shown images of whatever they’re addicted to.
But what is a great predictor for whether or not someone will self report being a porn addict is shame. Gay men in particular are significantly more likely than straight men in general to say they’re addicted to porn. So are straight men with a heavily religious background.
Which isn’t to say that people who report porn addictions aren’t really suffering, it’s just not the same as an actual addiction and is instead the result of living in a culture telling you that your normal sexual desires are wrong.
I actually agree. What's addicting is the hit of dopamine from sexual release, not the porn itself. I see porn as more like how people who quit smoking often still find something to fiddle with in their hands and mouth. Biting on pencils, straws, etc. because part of their ritual of using the substance involved taking out a cigarette and putting it up to their mouth. The act of viewing porn itself isn't the addiction, but it's associated with it.
Like I said, moderation is key, because there's a wide difference between masturbating a healthy amount and filling various cumjugs with figurines in them. Like if you can go out and live a normal life after jerking it, awesome, fuck yeah, that's great. If you can't make it through a workday without going to the bathroom to crank it, maybe you've got a fucking problem. I shouldn't have to deal with some fucking weirdo breathing heavily and shaking the whole stall next to me in the bathroom because they can't wait until they get home.
The porn is rather a social knock-on effect because people often seek out porn to make the pathway to dopamine release easier. The seeking of the orgasm has almost nothing to do with the societal implications of porn and its impact on relationships. However, the social impact is that people begin to associate unhealthy aspects of porn with a sex life and achieving orgasm in a sex life.
There are unfortunately deep layers of exploitation, unhealthy power dynamics, and control in porn that can be healthy between consenting adults who have achieved trust but some people really start digesting this porn before they're mature enough to know how to healthily navigate those issues (especially in a society that sure as fuck isn't teaching them, because of the aforementioned religious demonization of sex). This leads to further unhealthy experiences with sex, and I don't think the gay (and LGBTQ+ community as a whole for that matter) community is free from that exploitation or people being exposed to it before they've had to education to navigate it healthily either. In fact, as a minority group, I would rather think they're more likely to be exploited by the same people who hate their very existence... which further ingrains and exacerbates the very problems I'm speaking to, because the exploitation aspect of pornography is normalized. The areas that consume the most LGBT themed porn tend to be the most religiously restricted, and their viewpoint of that porn is almost 100% exploitative. To me it's a hard sell that that's not somehow a net negative for the LGBT community and that they're mostly being exploited in pornograhy and in sex work by the very people who want to demonize their very existence.
The feeling of chasing that high, which scientists can show physical evidence of through brain imaging, isn’t present in people who self report porn addiction. What they’re calling addiction is frequently just enjoying masturbation, which they feel shame about, and that any amount is too much. If what people are self reporting as porn addiction neurologically doesn’t behave as an addiction, then therapies for addiction are not going to be evidence based treatments.
The people you’re talking about with cum jars often don’t even see their behavior as a problem, much less labeling themselves addicts. The overlap of the circles of people who masturbate in public and those that call themselves porn addicts is near zero. Calling all of that porn addiction is basically lumping all problematic sexual behavior together with people who think they’re part of that group because they look at porn and masturbate.
The professionals that treat porn addiction are also for the most part members of religious organizations that promote religious based solutions, which also doesn’t really offer much evidence against the idea that porn “addiction” is religious based shame.
The porn industry itself being exploitative of the workers is a completely different conversation than someone being “addicted” to porn.
I get that anyone who says they have a porn addiction isn’t having a good time. But we can’t ignore that there is a huge industry of religious quackery that is more than happy to take your money and tell you that you’re oh so sick, just as your shame and guilt tell you.
I want you to go back and re-read both of my posts and tell me where I said the words "porn addiction" or alluded to porn being the addiction. I'm trying to work with you here buddy, but you've decided that I'm saying something I haven't said, after I took the time to clearly explain as much.
I literally am not talking about porn addiction nor have I used the words porn addiction, so can you take your crusade elsewhere, please and thank you.
The people you’re talking about with cum jars often don’t even see their behavior as a problem, much less labeling themselves addicts.
Literally what I am talking about and why I didn't use the term porn addiction.
I’m sorry, I guess I don’t understand why you’re talking about addictions and how that relates to dopamine in your first comment if you’re not talking about porn addiction. I’m not using quotes around porn addiction to directly quote you, I’m using them because I don’t believe porn addiction is a real thing.
If your problem is specifically me using the word porn when you’re talking about masturbation more generally, with or without porn, does it help to add the context that “porn addiction” is used interchangeably by these groups with “masturbation addiction”? I’m not really sure where this is breaking down.
Phrases like "couple this with" from this sentence from my first comment are how I'm breaking it down. The meaning of this is "in addition to" not "these are equals." I'm sorry you've not managed to read the context words I added specifically for this purpose.
Couple this with how incredibly unhealthy the social relationships portrayed in most pornography are, and you’re gearing up for a lot of young men addicted to wanking and having unrealistic expectations of sex.
From my second comment:
The porn is rather a social knock-on effect because people often seek out porn to make the pathway to dopamine release easier.
Because it's true that people use shortcuts to cumming, like porn.
Dude, I’ve tried engaging with you politely on this and elaborating on each thing I was saying. If you’re married to the idea of masturbation addiction being real despite the scientific evidence for it being incredibly weak and the “treatment” being bankrolled by religious groups, knock yourself out.
Arguing all masturbation is inherently good isn't any better or morally superior than arguing all masturbation is inherently bad. Extremism is extremism and literally all I was talking about was moderation. If you can't handle someone arguing moderation, it sounds like maybe you really do have a problem.
Lmao, I’m at a stage of my life and on the types of medications that would make wanting to masturbate a lot a welcome change.
Masturbation (in private obviously) is a neutral act. Anyone trying to characterize it as inherently good or bad is suspect. Anyone trying to sell you a cure for something mainstream society tells you is shameful, doubly so.
Anyone trying to sell you a cure for something mainstream society tells you is shameful, doubly so.
Trumpers really took this one and ran with it during COVID with not masking and spitting in people's faces.
They literally want to hang the people who tried to sell them a cure for something mainstream society told them was shameful, a disease they decided was a "librul hoax."
...because guess the fuck what? They were actually, genuinely, acting shamefully. Too bad they had no shame.
I don't think this as strong of an argument than you think it is. Sometimes mainstream society can be right about an act being shameful.
What it seems you're describing is how nymphomania manifests in people without a partner. Nymphomania and porn addiction are two different things. Likewise I don't think nymphomania necessarily has the same underlying causes as say a drug addiction, it might be something like a hormonal issue. Hard to know without doing more research.
I, we all rather, are "addicted" to air, water, food, shelter, safety, rest, etc. - which as you say isn't the same as a true "addiction" at all. Wanting things that produce a healthy life is not a bad thing, and in fact quite the opposite. To the extent that religion or culture or whatever encourages the opposite (rather than e.g. moderation and consideration, like mindfulness), it is wrong and bad. Even for someone who believes in a God who is good, those false beliefs need to be cast aside, bc they hinder us from living well. I wish I had discovered this earlier in life.:-D
Couple this with how incredibly unhealthy the social relationships portrayed in most pornography are, and you’re gearing up for a lot of young men addicted to wanking and having unrealistic expectations of sex.
I don't really get this honestly. When people watch The Flash, they know that it's unrealistic for someone to move at that speed. When people read sci-fi, they know it's unrealistic to expect every problem to be solved by science in their lifetime. When people watch the show Superstore, they don't expect it to actually be a realistic representation on how a big box store runs. So I don't see why porn would be any different. They're all acting.
So, like, for the bulk of history, the people demonizing it are religious assholes.
They demonized sex out of wedlock, demonized wanking off; and any other kind of sexual release, while simultaneously deciding who you can marry (and therefore have kids with,).
It’s one of their core methods of social control, ensuring wealth is only passed on to children of wealthy and “faithful” families.
They also practiced polygamy, so that rich and influential men would have multiple wives and poor men would have none. Imagine the rage when you were a Shepherd tending someone else's flocks, knowing that you will never have a wife or family.
It makes sense to have occasional wars with neighboring tribes so that excess males can be removed from the system.
Your dick gets more and more insensitive. Some day you cannot get off inside a woman anymore, because you need such a strong level of friction that only a hand can create.
Most people start "enjoying their own company" years before getting to try for real.
If there was a question of insensitivity, then surely problems would be much more prevalent at ages when people are enjoying themselves more frequently. But it's not the case at all.
I get what they're trying to say, but they also carefully omit very important details. There are a lot of things that can be unbelievably bad for you, but essential in moderation. This is really no different. If you aggressively jerk off 15 times a day, obviously you are completely screwing yourself in multiple ways, but in moderation, it's good for your body
Endurance by reduced sensory input could also mean reduced pleasure.
Endurance by enhanced self control is what you really want, because then you can get more pleasure overall. It comes with age and practising (the real one).
It's also like saying that eating too much makes you not hungry, no shit einstein
if anything i'd posit that cranking the hog makes you more sensitive, because you'll be so used to it that abstaining for a week is almost unbearable, much like how most people in developed countries feel a pit in their stomach if they don't eat for half a day.
Thank you Mr Science, for the claim of addiction to a chemical produced by the body. Very smart.
Citation needed, literally everyone's got different equipment. Some people are more sensitive, others less. Some people get piercings in their back to increase sensitivity, others are already so ticklish they shiver just from the touch.
I actually asked my family doctor at one point about the health effects of masturbation. She said that as a guy, if you are not otherwise sexually active, it's good for the prostate to keep the plumbing working down there.
if you need lube to tickle the gherkin you're either the victim of genital mutilation (circumcision, which is fucked up that it's normalized in the US) or your technique terrifies me.
Surprisingly, our bodies have evolved to make stuff like this perfectly doable without assistence, it even helpfully dispenses some lube if you REALLY get into it!
Often times it's about control over people. Whether it's religion or capatilism sense it's something you can do yourself for free that gives you pleasure. Capatilism can't force you to pay for enjoying yourself and religion doesn't want you to do things that they don't control
For fuck sakes. Not everything has to do with capitalism. Puritanical belief exists long before capitalism, communism or whatever economic system you want to paint as the boogyman. And it will exist long after.
Religion is mostly to blame, but I think some of those religious teachings have been integrated into institutions and secular society as well. Notions that self gratification is a treat and not a need, the perception of masturbation that it's some teenage boy temporary phase and not for women or older married men. The idea that it can't be a social activity at all, even though it's free and safer than drugs.
You realize things aren't viewed the same all over the world right? Here in Sweden it's nothing bad or wrong, we generally have good sex education and parents that are fine with it as long as we keep it private and clean. And as adults it's completely normal, not that uncommon to talk about either. There was a monthly magazine for teens when I grew up that talked a lot about sex, sexual identity and stuff like that and the readers could send it questions to get answered by professionals or other readers. Very open and helped so many with things they didn't dare ask parents or others about and it was always a better source than the Internet when that came around. Pretty sure it's still a thing too.
So it's just seen as a thing everyone does and enjoys.
What has circumcision to do with sexual pleasure? Please do explain. I'm circumcised and I have no loss of sensation from not having foreskin. I also don't have a moist area for bacteria to multiply
There are people that were circumcized after becoming sexually active who can (and do) report exactly that.
Separately, we can simply ask people that have foreskins to describe the sensations they feel from that body part.
The only part that we can't say with confidence is how the neutral pathways develop (i.e. how we perceive the sensations) when it's the only way we've ever experienced.