Religion And "pornography Addiction", Reality And Perception Study.

[cinepro]

A recently released study looks at the correlation between people being religious and perceiving their viewing of pornography as an "addiction".

 

The Emperor Has No Clothes: A Review of the ‘Pornography Addiction’ Model

 

 

 

The addiction model is rarely used to describe high-frequency use of visual sexual stimuli (VSS) in research, yet common in media and clinical practice. The theory and research behind ‘pornography addiction’ is hindered by poor experimental designs, limited methodological rigor, and lack of model specification. The history and limitations of addiction models are reviewed, including how VSS fails to meet standards of addiction. These include how VSS use can reduce health-risk behaviors. Proposed negative effects, including erectile problems, difficulty regulating sexual feelings, and neuroadaptations are discussed as non-pathological evidence of learning. Individuals reporting ‘addictive’ use of VSS could be better conceptualized by considering issues such as gender, sexual orientation, libido, desire for sensation, with internal and external conflicts influenced by religiosity and desire discrepancy. Since a large, lucrative industry has promised treatments for pornography addiction despite this poor evidence, scientific psychologists are called to declare the emperor (treatment industry) has no clothes (supporting evidence). When faced with such complaints, clinicians are encouraged to address behaviors without conjuring addiction labels.

 

The LDS Church has gone "all in" on the Pornography Addiction model, and as the article points out, this emphasis itself is perhaps one of the greatest factors in people thinking they have an "addiction"!  In other words, it seems most other "addictions" have some sort of criteria that help in identifying the addiction.  But since that implies there is some level of use that isn't "addiction", is this an unnecessary idea for LDS and "Porn Addiction"?

 

I've shared my observation that the Church's approach to fighting pornography viewing among church members is doomed to failure.  Frankly, I don't know if there any sort of viable solution.  

 

The only solution I can see is if God were to "curse" everyone who looked at porn with green ears.  Other than that, it's only a matter of time before some other approach is figured out.  But what that approach will be, I have no idea.  I will be fascinated to see it, and am totally happy that the problem isn't sitting on my desk to solve for the Church!

 

So I ask again, what does the future hold for the LDS Church and its attitude towards pornography? Will it the institution stay the course on its current approach?  Or will it be like Birth Control and other moral issues that changed over time to adapt to reality?

Edited February 14, 2014 by cinepro

[The Nehor]

I wish we were more careful with the use of the word addiction. It can be a sin without being an addiction. Many sins are non-addictive.

I do not wish to diminish real addictions and real porn addictions do exist. Anyone who has been around helping someone detox from an authentic porn addiction can see the real difference.

The man who watches porn once every few months to masturbate may have a habit but he is unlikely to be an addict. The man who skips work to watch porn and spends hours with it every day desperately chasing a new sexual high through more extreme porn is probably an addict. The former will miss it when he quits and may be tempted to go back. The latter will probably have the shakes for weeks and sink into deep depression and other withdrawal symptoms for who knows how long if he tries to quit.

[cinepro]

Our stake used to have a Pornography Addiction Support group, but they met at a different location than the Church building to allow for more anonymity (or so I heard...)   One time I was given a clipboard to pass around EQ, but it wasn't obvious what it was, so I suggested it was the carpool list for the Pornography Support group.

 

 I don't know what it was for, but no one signed up  

Edited February 14, 2014 by cinepro

[bluebell]

Considering the harm that porn does to relationships, especially marriage, and the ability for people to be intimate with each other (there are too many studies and articles on this topic to link to all of them), i don't forsee the church becoming more morally relative in regards to porn.

[The Nehor]

Our stake used to have a Pornography Addiction Support group, but they met at a different location than the Church building to allow for more anonymity (or so I heard...)   One time I was given a clipboard to pass around EQ, but it wasn't obvious what it was, so I suggested it was the carpool list for the Pornography Support group.

 

 I don't know what it was for, but no one signed up  

The church has a 12 step program in every stake. It is not limited to porn. I know my stake has porn, alcoholism, drug addiction, and even people trapped in codependent tendencies attending.

[cinepro]

Considering the harm that porn does to relationships, especially marriage, and the ability for people to be intimate with each other (there are too many studies and articles on this topic to link to all of them), i don't forsee the church becoming more morally relative in regards to porn.

 

But that begs the question.  How much of that "harm" is a result of the Church's teachings against porn (and the assumptions thus engendered), compared to actual intrinsic harm?  

 

For example, suppose as a "control", there were a group of LDS couples who had actually never heard of the Church's 0-tolerance stance on pornography and either or both partners watched such materials in such a way that it didn't ruin their lives (i.e. in "moderation").  Then take another group who are fully cognizant of the Church's statements and programs against pornography,  Would the second group find pornography viewing by one or both of the partners to be more harmful than the first group?  

 

I suspect the answer is "yes", the second group would react much more negatively.  This isn't to say that viewing pornography doesn't have any negative effects, but if the Church's teachings about "addiction" are making the problem worse, is there an alternative?

[bluebell]

But that begs the question.  How much of that "harm" is a result of the Church's teachings against porn (and the assumptions thus engendered), compared to actual intrinsic harm?

 

None of the studies that i am aware of were done by members of the church, so i can't imagine that any of the perceived harm is the result of the Church's teachings against porn.

I'm sure there are studies and articles out there done by members, I just wasn't thinking of those when I posted.

Edit to add:

Here is just one of the many studies or articles that I was speaking of-

 

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/relationships/2011/02/the-risks-and-harm-of-pornography-on-couple-relationships-part-1-its-misleading-nature/

Edited February 14, 2014 by bluebell

[Mystery Meat]

HAHAHAHA! If I could count the ways that study is wrong. For now let it suffice to say that there is such a thing as porn addiction. There is a growing trend online for thousands of folks addicted to porn to discuss the ways in which it has wrecked their lives. Most of the folks who congregate (look up fapstronauts on reddit) and one of the movements principal heads (yourbrainonporn.com) are avowed anti-religious. In fact the purveyor of yourbrainonporn.com does think that religious guilt only serves to make the addiction more powerful (something I agree with), but maintains it is still an addiction. He talks about how a lot of people want to call this type of porn consumption a compulsion as opposed to an addiction, when in reality that is distinction without much of a difference. 

 

Quite frankly, I would not be surprised if the study was a reaction and funded in part by the adult entertainment industry due to how rapidly this movement is growing. There is a popular trend to blame all the worlds problems on religion right now, and blaming "perceived" porn addiction on the religions of the world has been happening long before this study came out. But, one doesn't have to be religious to see an addiction for what it is. In fact, there are currently 94,347 "Fapstronauts" on Reddit right now, with about 5,000 joining each month. Considering there are many, many more out there who view porn on a regular basis that number may seem small, but those 94,000+ are largely irreligious guys (some girls) who have seen the power of porn addiction in their lives. I do know that the porn industry hates these folks and has done everything they can to belittle them, such as calling their reported positive results after giving up porn a placebo effect. When it comes right down to it, I don't have the time to care enough to get into a prolonged debate about this topic with people. Porn is an addiction for a lot of people, and while the power and severity of that addiction varies from person to person, the addiction itself is nonetheless real. 

 

Now if we want to talk about the Church's current approach to pornography that is a better conversation to be having, but going 180 degrees in the opposite direction and treating it like its perfectly healthy and normal is not the answer.

 

P.S. We have said nothing of the effect of porn on the entertainers themselves, many of went into the industry emotionally broken, or as a result of the industry practices are trying to piece their lives back together. There is nothing lovely, praiseworthy, or of a good report about porn. Nothing. It will suck the life right out of A-N-Y-O-N-E it touches, be it performer or viewer.

 

Amen.

[CV75]

So I ask again, what does the future hold for the LDS Church and its attitude towards pornography? Will it the institution stay the course on its current approach?  Or will it be like Birth Control and other moral issues that changed over time to adapt to reality?

I suspect the Church's attitude and definition of "addiction" is not entirely clinical, allowing a broader invitation for people with destructive inclinations, proclivities and problems to seek the Lord's help, and that this would be the attitude entailed in its Addiction Recovery Program (http://addictionrecovery.lds.org/bc/content/arp/content/manuals/ARPGuide_English_36764.pdf?lang=eng)

 

From the manual, it seems that the Church recognizes there are many perspectives on what addiction is, but that the Lord can help with all of them.

 

"Some people consider addictions to be simply bad

habits that can be conquered by willpower alone, but

many people become so dependent on a behavior or a

substance that they no longer see how to abstain from it.

They lose perspective and a sense of other priorities in

their lives. Nothing matters more than satisfying their

desperate need. When they try to abstain, they experi-

ence powerful physical, psychological, and emotional

cravings. As they habitually make wrong choices, they

find their ability to choose the right diminished or re-

stricted. As President Boyd K. Packer of the Quorum

of the Twelve Apostles taught: “Addiction has the capac-

ity to disconnect the human will and nullify moral

agency. It can rob one of the power to decide” (in Con-

ference Report, Oct. 1989, 16; or Ensign, Nov. 1989, 14)."

 

So the Church includes behaviors along with substances as the focus for addiction, and describes the effects of each in a spiritual and doctrinal context (see the rest of the "Introduction").

 

With regards to the future as a result of this broader attitude and definition: it still allows people who did not know any better to overcome their sins when they covenant with the Lord, and it allows those who are ignorantly in captivity and cannot covenant to overcome their spiritual captivity so as to prepare themselves to covenant with the Lord, and it allows those who knew better to repent and/or overcome their spiritual captivity so as to keep their covenants with the Lord.

[thesometimesaint]

I can't tell you what pornography is, but I know it when I see it.

US Supreme Court Justice Stevens

[Coreyb]

Well, who knows? All I know is that I've seen a lot of people struggle with pornography use in and out of the Church. In every case it has been progressive, and I have never seen anything good come of it. Even if the user doesn't see it as a sin or addiction.

[Gray]

Interesting topic. I'd have to say porn use unethical on several levels, but we probably make matters worse (and drive addictive behaviors) by fueling so much shame around the subject.

Edited February 14, 2014 by Gray

[Buckeye]

Interesting topic. I'd have to say porn use unethical on several levels, but we probably make matters worse (and drive addictive behaviors) by fueling so much shame around the subject.

 

This.  IMO, the most effective change we could make in approach would be to de-stigmatize the problem so that we can actually work on it.

[Kenngo1969]

Yeah, some people have propounded the theory that alcoholics and drug addicts don't have to stop entirely.They can simply moderate their use.  It didn't work out too well for the movement's founder. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14627442/#.Uv6kfvldXVs

 

I understand that the  consequences of pornography addiction aren't necessarily as immediate or as dire as this example, but I'd be wary of concluding that something similar is possible for those who are addicted to it.

Edited February 15, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Mystery Meat]

This.  IMO, the most effective change we could make in approach would be to de-stigmatize the problem so that we can actually work on it.

 

I agree 100% with this. You can't keep putting porn addicts into a spiritual shame corner without their being bad consequences. And no offense to the lovely ladies of the board, but women in the church by and large have no ability to show any sort of understanding on the issue. 

[EllenMaksoud]

A recently released study looks at the correlation between people being religious and perceiving their viewing of pornography as an "addiction".

 

The Emperor Has No Clothes: A Review of the ‘Pornography Addiction’ Model

 

 

 

 

The LDS Church has gone "all in" on the Pornography Addiction model, and as the article points out, this emphasis itself is perhaps one of the greatest factors in people thinking they have an "addiction"!  In other words, it seems most other "addictions" have some sort of criteria that help in identifying the addiction.  But since that implies there is some level of use that isn't "addiction", is this an unnecessary idea for LDS and "Porn Addiction"?

 

I've shared my observation that the Church's approach to fighting pornography viewing among church members is doomed to failure.  Frankly, I don't know if there any sort of viable solution.  

 

The only solution I can see is if God were to "curse" everyone who looked at porn with green ears.  Other than that, it's only a matter of time before some other approach is figured out.  But what that approach will be, I have no idea.  I will be fascinated to see it, and am totally happy that the problem isn't sitting on my desk to solve for the Church!

 

So I ask again, what does the future hold for the LDS Church and its attitude towards pornography? Will it the institution stay the course on its current approach?  Or will it be like Birth Control and other moral issues that changed over time to adapt to reality?

A few words. Lifestyle. Media immorality. Two income households. Pressure and anxiety.  No one is interested in my solution.

[Rivers]

One's pornography use may not fit the clinical definition of an addiction but that doesn't mean it is not harmful. For example, a married man who has the habit of looking at porn alone and doing the "m" word once or twice a week. Wouldn't that be harmful to a marriage even though it is not technically an addiction?

Edited February 15, 2014 by Rivers

[Kenngo1969]

I can't tell you what pornography is, but I know it when I see it.

US Supreme Court Justice Stevens

Actually, I think that was Justice Potter Stewart.

Edited February 15, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[bdouglas]

I am a recovering addict. Not porn but drugs. I remember 20 years or so ago coming across an article in the Atlantic Monthly about shame and how shame was at the bottom of all addictions. This was like a revelation to me, the missing piece of the puzzle. I was ashamed. Whether this was biological, or whether it was due to my having been simultaneously sexualized and introduced to drugs as a thirteen year old by an adult female seemed to be immaterial. I was ashamed: in the deepest, most inner part of my being, I was ashamed of myself.

 

Once I began to address this issue of shame I slowly began to heal. Part of this process meant distancing myself, not from the Gospel, but from the awful, shame-inducing and humiliating high council court I'd gone through years earlier (drugs have a way of inflicting collateral damage); and it also involved relearning certain church teachings. I also sometimes today just have tune out certain talks, not only in church meetings but General Conference. These talks don't make me mad, like they used to, I just process them differently.

 

Shame, and shame-inducement. Porn is a plague of the worst kind. But as a church and as a people we have to learn to combat it without shame-inducement. Otherwise we are simply adding fuel to the fire.

Edited February 15, 2014 by bdouglas

[Bernard Gui]

After serving for 6 years as an LDS Social Services Addiction Recovery family support

group leader, I can call on my experience as evidence....call it what you wish, addiction or

bad habit, the use of pornography devastates spouses and families. See Jacob 2 for

how God feels about chastity and the abuse of women and the damage done to wives

and children by afflicted husbands and fathers. Pornography is gross

abuse of women, both those used to produce it and the victims of those who use it.

I cannot imagine any LDS person defending it in any way. Mrs. Gui

and I have sat in rooms with many women who have been destroyed by their husbands'

use of pornography.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

Edited February 15, 2014 by Bernard Gui

[mormonnewb]

Perhaps, the problem is that we are once again treating the symptom instead of looking to the root cause. For example, we decry that a man would retreat into his office and stay up half the night watching porn instead of retiring to his maritslmbed. Yet, what about the man who works late into the evening (or spends that time on this board)? Aren't both men spending time that could be better spent in the company of their wives? Is there any less intimacy between the couple because the one man is writing a legal brief (or constructing a model train set)?

Likewise, we decry that pornography viewers support an industry that does grievious harm to the participants. And this is undoubtedly true. However, boxing viewers support an industry that causes crippling brain damage to its participants. In both cases, the underlying problem seems to be a callous disregard for the well-being of others in pursuit of our own pleasure, whether it is the pleasure of sexual arousal or the pleasure of watching one man punch another man in the head until he is unable to stand.

Interestingly, I can freely admit on this board that I have watched professional boxing on two occasions this year and still keep my temple recommend. I don't have to enter a 12-step program for boxing "addiction." Nor is my wife considering leaving me for my "deviant" behavior. Why? Because my form of sin is within the proper bounds of acceptable Mormon behavior.

And, by the way, my point isn't that we're all sinners, so porn viewers should be free to have at it. Rather, my point is that we stigmatize and demonize the evils of porn while giving wide berth to equally unrighteousness behavior. In doing so, we exacerbate the negative consequences of porn and fail to even recognize the far more common forms of lust, greed and selfishness that threaten our progress towards being true saints.

[EllenMaksoud]

But that begs the question.  How much of that "harm" is a result of the Church's teachings against porn (and the assumptions thus engendered), compared to actual intrinsic harm?  

 

For example, suppose as a "control", there were a group of LDS couples who had actually never heard of the Church's 0-tolerance stance on pornography and either or both partners watched such materials in such a way that it didn't ruin their lives (i.e. in "moderation").  Then take another group who are fully cognizant of the Church's statements and programs against pornography,  Would the second group find pornography viewing by one or both of the partners to be more harmful than the first group?  

 

I suspect the answer is "yes", the second group would react much more negatively.  This isn't to say that viewing pornography doesn't have any negative effects, but if the Church's teachings about "addiction" are making the problem worse, is there an alternative?

Any sort of therapy or discussion that involves condemnation or shaming is counterproductive. One must look at the deep emotional needs that drive a person to use porn. Lets face it orgasm produces pleasure, and with a deficit of pleasure in one's life it sometimes becomes a replacement to intimacy. I have spoken to both men and women who felt they masturbated too much. As long as speaking of it has the ability to shame us, it can not be dealt with.

[Mystery Meat]

 

I am a recovering addict. Not porn but drugs. I remember 20 years or so ago coming across an article in the Atlantic Monthly about shame and how shame was at the bottom of all addictions. This was like a revelation to me, the missing piece of the puzzle. I was ashamed. Whether this was biological, or whether it was due to my having been simultaneously sexualized and introduced to drugs as a thirteen year old by an adult female seemed to be immaterial. I was ashamed: in the deepest, most inner part of my being, I was ashamed of myself.

 

Once I began to address this issue of shame I slowly began to heal. Part of this process meant distancing myself, not from the Gospel, but from the awful, shame-inducing and humiliating high council court I'd gone through years earlier (drugs have a way of inflicting collateral damage); and it also involved relearning certain church teachings. I also sometimes today just have tune out certain talks, not only in church meetings but General Conference. These talks don't make me mad, like they used to, I just process them differently.

 

Shame, and shame-inducement. Porn is a plague of the worst kind. But as a church and as a people we have to learn to combat it without shame-inducement. Otherwise we are simply adding fuel to the fire.

 

 

I could quibble on a few details, but I think this pretty much sums up how I feel. Well said.

[drums12]

To anyone who doubts that porn/sexual addiction is real I recommend reading the works of Patrick Carnes.  For LDS, I recommend "He Restoreth My Soul" by Donald S Hilton, a neurosurgeon.  He cites ample clinical studies showing the addictive effects of pornography on the brain. 

 

For anyone who is or has been in the clutches of porn and/or sexual addiction, no studies are needed.  At the end of 2012 I was completely demoralized after over 5 years of fighting to overcome my porn addiction.  I was disfellowshipped (for the second time) due to sexual transgression.  Only when I realized "oh man I'm hosed!  I can't stop," did the Savior do for me what I couldn't do myself.  I now have 13 months of abstinence, and I know it WAS NOTHING I DID.  When I am tempted, I ask God to do what I cannot.  And He does...every time.

[drums12]

HAHAHAHA! If I could count the ways that study is wrong. For now let it suffice to say that there is such a thing as porn addiction. There is a growing trend online for thousands of folks addicted to porn to discuss the ways in which it has wrecked their lives. Most of the folks who congregate (look up fapstronauts on reddit) and one of the movements principal heads (yourbrainonporn.com) are avowed anti-religious. In fact the purveyor of yourbrainonporn.com does think that religious guilt only serves to make the addiction more powerful (something I agree with), but maintains it is still an addiction. He talks about how a lot of people want to call this type of porn consumption a compulsion as opposed to an addiction, when in reality that is distinction without much of a difference. 

 

Quite frankly, I would not be surprised if the study was a reaction and funded in part by the adult entertainment industry due to how rapidly this movement is growing. There is a popular trend to blame all the worlds problems on religion right now, and blaming "perceived" porn addiction on the religions of the world has been happening long before this study came out. But, one doesn't have to be religious to see an addiction for what it is. In fact, there are currently 94,347 "Fapstronauts" on Reddit right now, with about 5,000 joining each month. Considering there are many, many more out there who view porn on a regular basis that number may seem small, but those 94,000+ are largely irreligious guys (some girls) who have seen the power of porn addiction in their lives. I do know that the porn industry hates these folks and has done everything they can to belittle them, such as calling their reported positive results after giving up porn a placebo effect. When it comes right down to it, I don't have the time to care enough to get into a prolonged debate about this topic with people. Porn is an addiction for a lot of people, and while the power and severity of that addiction varies from person to person, the addiction itself is nonetheless real. 

 

Now if we want to talk about the Church's current approach to pornography that is a better conversation to be having, but going 180 degrees in the opposite direction and treating it like its perfectly healthy and normal is not the answer.

 

P.S. We have said nothing of the effect of porn on the entertainers themselves, many of went into the industry emotionally broken, or as a result of the industry practices are trying to piece their lives back together. There is nothing lovely, praiseworthy, or of a good report about porn. Nothing. It will suck the life right out of A-N-Y-O-N-E it touches, be it performer or viewer.

 

Amen.

 

I read "Truth Behind the Fantasy of Porn" by Shelly Lubben, a former adult entertainer.  It really unmasks the industry for what it is, and what it does to those who work in it.  In fact, in his book "Broken Things to Mend," Elder Holland quotes Shelly Lubben thus:

 

Not long ago a Protestant periodical gave an account of a woman, now a believing, practicing Christian, who at one time acted in the kind of films a generation ago were found only in back alley movie theaters and are now openly sold in stores and shown on cable TV.  She writes:

[Pornography is] one of the greatest deceptions of all time.  Trust me, I know.  I did it all the time, and I did it for the lust of power and the love of money.  I never liked [men or] sex…  In fact I was more apt to spend time with Jack Daniels than [any other man of my choosing.  Who wouldn’t] hate being touched by strangers who care nothing about [you.  Who wouldn’t] hate being degraded… Some women hate it so much you can hear them vomiting in the bathroom between scenes...  One of my friends went home after a long night of numbing her pain and put a pistol to her head and pulled the trigger.   That was her way out.

 

The truth is there is no fantasy in porn.  It’s all a lie.  A closer look into the scenes of a porn star’s life will show you a movie [that] industry doesn’t want you to see.  The real truth is [if] actresses want to end the shame and trauma of our lives [in that world] we can’t do it alone.  We need you... to fight for our freedom and give us back our honor. 

 

We [need] you to throw out our movies and help [us] piece together the shattered fragments of our lives.  We need you to pray for us... so God will hear and repair our ruined lives (Shelley Lubben,

www.blazingrace.org/thetruth.htm

).

Did you catch her references to money and power?  The industry we’re fighting is not about men or women or love or intimacy — it’s about money, and the power money supposedly brings.  The tragedy here is that the human soul is not a commodity of exchange, not a thing to be consumed and discarded, a thing one can buy for $19.99 plus tax and then, when tired or ashamed of it, throw in the trash bin.