Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Did porn warp me forever?

salon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 347 posts

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#201

Post by rimantas »

FrojoS wrote: post #108

From my favorite Paul Graham essay, The Acceleration of Addictiveness http://www.paulgraham.com/addiction.html " Societies eventually develop antibodies to addictive new things. I've seen that happen with cigarettes. When cigarettes first appeared, they spread the way an infectious disease spreads through a previously isolated population. Smoking rapidly became a (statistically) normal thing. [...] As knowledge sprea…

Speaking of internet addictions, posts worth reading: http://mindhacks.com/2007/08/20/why-there-is-no-such-thing-a... http://mindhacks.com/2008/03/19/internet-addiction-nonsense-...

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#202

Post by rimantas »

nashequilibrium wrote: post #180
VigUi7vv8G2 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Each time you view something new, your brain gives a hit of dopamine. Oh dear god. That is not how dopamine works. Dopamine is a chemical that your brain secretes when you are trying to get something, not once you get it - so when you're hungry, for example, you'll have higher dopamine levels. Then when you eat, they go back down. The actual sensation of higher dopamine levels is stress and anxiousness - it actuall…

These kinds of comments prevent people expressing their feelings because of fear that every word, every technical detail will be analysed and if you are incorrect, someone will come down really hard on you and at the same time take away from the crux of the conversation. You may be right in the issues you point out but you are too harsh and not compassionate. A HN member has taken their time to share something person…

How about stopping being compassionate to nonsense?

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#203

Post by rdtsc »

jaggederest wrote: post #186
rdtsc wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would appreciate it Oh, you would? How dare everyone on the internet not cater to your expectations. Someone from the community shared a story of personal struggle. They didn't hide behind a pseudonym, and it was probably a hard decision for them. They also, did in hopes it would help someone else. They might not have used precise definitions or scientifically correct terms but they were honest and civil and even…

They were also clearly incorrect . No matter how hard their struggle is, it's akin to linking vaccines to autism - no amount of personal pain overrides factual inaccuracy . It's an extremely important part of public discourse that incorrectness be called out, in a polite way, but clearly and forcefully. This is akin to 'balancing' a debate about evolution by having an evolutionary biologist there and a doctor of theo…

They were incorrect on a side detail "shot of dopamine equals pleasure". That is not the main crux of the comment and latching onto that side detail and throwing "Fuck this and fuck that" around is is insulting the person and doesn't add anything to the discussion. Even after the original author politely answered and noticed the correction the insults continued with "this is not acceptable" .

> Just because there is debate does not mean that there is not a clearly correct answer.

The correct answer in this case doesn't really matter for the main point if we are talking about the dopamine. Which, from what I see is the clearly factually incorrect statement. Latching unnecessarily unto inconsequential details and derailing the conversion is also called trolling and bullying and will get the message downvoted or flagged.

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#204

Post by rimantas »

msluyter wrote: post #48

On the same topic, "The Great Porn Experiment" TED talk, which provides some empirical grounding for the anecdote in the article: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSF82AwSDiU

Minor detail: that's TEDx talk, not TED talk. And there were concerned posts recently about the quality of TEDx talks.

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#205

Post by konstruktor »

kjackson2012 wrote: post #195

As long as people realize that porn itself is a caricature of sex, then it's fine. Usually sex is a lot more clumsy, and a lot shorter than any of the porn movies you find on the web. Guys with huge penises that take 45 mins to climax, women with huge breasts that love to get finished on, etc, is not how most of the world is. It's certainly exciting to see, but it's totally unrealistic. It's sort of like martial arts…

I also hope hat young people also realize hat the depiction of sex in Hollywood movies or romantic novels is just as much an abstraction.

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#206

Post by doyoulikeworms »

_ddkb wrote: post #139
jrockway wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He said he enjoyed it a lot when he did it, therefore it's an addiction. This is America: if you like something, it's probably bad for you. (Less sarcastically: I remember reading that addicts don't enjoy their addiction anymore; they do it because they have to keep doing it. Kind of like me and "someone is wrong on the Internet".)

That is not what I meant. I am not against porn. If it is good for you then that is fine. It is not good for me and just because you may not have a problem with something doesn't mean other people do not. I have no problem drinking a beer but I understand that some people do have a problem drinking. > I remember reading that addicts don't enjoy their addiction anymore; they do it because they have to keep doing it. Y…

Ah...

> I am addicted to porn. ... I would look about once per week...

Might as well have said:

> I am addicted to heroin. ... I would shoot up about once per week...

I guess the point is simply that you did something that harmed your life, but you couldn't stop, eh?

It's strange that the word "addict" conjured up so many images of drugs and alcohol that I unconsciously threw the proper definition of the term right out the window.

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#209

Post by jxi »

haberman wrote: post #185
VigUi7vv8G2 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Each time you view something new, your brain gives a hit of dopamine. Oh dear god. That is not how dopamine works. Dopamine is a chemical that your brain secretes when you are trying to get something, not once you get it - so when you're hungry, for example, you'll have higher dopamine levels. Then when you eat, they go back down. The actual sensation of higher dopamine levels is stress and anxiousness - it actuall…

Find some decency. Your tone is appropriate for someone who is being argumentative or obstinate, not someone who has made himself vulnerable in a good faith attempt to help other people. Your content was helpful and your points are important; you could have done the same without being mean.

Just because you made yourself vulnerable doesn't mean it's OK to state incorrect/wrong things. The response to OP's posts are more valid and his tone is appropriate in expressing how wrong some of the original points were (IMHO).

Re: Did porn warp me forever?

#210

Post by jacoblyles »

philwelch wrote: post #196
jacoblyles wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Children raised in single-parent homes, children born out of marriage, and rates of divorce all started skyrocketing in the 60s. The upper class has been less effected, as Charles Murray's book "Coming Apart" shows. Divorce, single-parenthood, and other symptoms of sexual liberation went up slightly for the upper class in the 60s and then leveled off. But in the lower classes the standard family has become the except…

I think you're conflating two very different things. One is a growing bifurcation between rich and poor. The other is what you might call "sexual liberation", though it's much wider than that. For instance, a higher divorce rate is not necessarily bad. Decades ago, women had fewer rights in marriage and there was a cultural expectation for marriages to stay together, no matter how unhealthy, unhappy, or sometimes eve…

I don't see how anybody could look at the social changes of the last 50 years and see all good or all bad. I don't. Certainly at some point the human population needs to stop growing or we will have to begin colonizing other planets. So a lower birthrate is in some ways good, even if it causes other problems.

On the other hand, when couples decide that their marriage "is no longer serving ... their childrens' needs", they are most likely wrong. Children grow up with fewer problems if their parents stay together, on average. Easier divorce in cases of abuse is good. But how common is that out of the 50% of first marriages that break up? Divorce in cases of boredom have a high cost on children with little social benefit.

In many ways we are better off than our parents and grandparents. But I don't think cheap sex and disposable relationships represent an advance.

Post reply on HN