Why Does Porn Seem Hotter Than My Partner?

An explanation of the neurological repercussions of  porn and how it can affect your love life off of the Internet. 

Editor’s Note: The quotations (all italicized text), unless otherwise cited, were taken from the comments sections of posts and message board conversations where men were talking about sex.

♦◊♦

It’s really hard to get erections when I’m trying to [have intercourse]. Takes about 20 minutes or so to get it up. Really embarrassing. But if I’m sitting and watching my pornz, it’s almost instant.—Porn user in his 20s

Are you a heavy porn user who, during lovemaking, cannot consistently produce/sustain an erection or penetrate a real partner, feel much sensation, or climax (without difficulty)? If your doctor has ruled out organic causes for your woes, he/she is likely to hand you a trial pack of Viagra and refer you to counseling for your “sexual issues.” The medical assumption is that your issue is psychological (performance anxiety) rather than physiological. After all, if you can get it up for porn, your penile health is fine.

Growing evidence suggests that the problem is indeed in your head, not your penis, but that it is primarily physical. Specifically, overstimulation has produced plastic changes in your brain, which make you less responsive to pleasure—and yet hyper-responsive to Internet porn. These addiction-related changes are called desensitization and sensitization, respectively. Together, they explain why porn does the job and your hot babe doesn’t.

Before you panic, know that these brain changes appear to be reversible—most easily in guys who wired to real sex before highspeed Internet arrived. Guys who stop masturbating to porn generally regain their responsiveness during sex within a few months  (often after a nasty withdrawal and a disconcerting, temporary absence of libido):

(Age 30, 4 months) From the reboot standpoint, I’m doing spectacular! Any time my girlfriend and I make out, caress etc., I get rock hard and it lasts. I really just don’t worry about penile function anymore.

If performance problems are plaguing you, take this simple test. Do your problems appear to be porn-related? Keep reading to learn more about the changes going on in your brain. Otherwise, you may erroneously conclude that if you can climax to porn, you don’t have a problem, and that the problem lies in your alcohol use or your partner’s behavior or looks, or solely in your anxious feelings. You may spend thousands of dollars on counseling, or resort to costly, and increasingly ineffective, sexual enhancement drugs—and still be left with your problem:

I never had a problem getting hard for porn, but when it came to the real thing, I started taking Cialis. Over time, I took more, and even then there were times when it would only partly work. WTH? Yet I could still get hard to porn.

Why is Mr. Happy ignoring hotties?

With Internet porn it’s easy to overstimulate your brain. Each search, each novel image, each surprising visual, each new genre, and sexual arousal itself all release dopamine in your reward circuitry. Dopamine is the gas that powers the reward circuitry and it equates with desire, anticipation, cravings, and wanting something in particular.

Unfortunately, too much stimulation causes some brains to protect themselves by decreasing their sensitivity to dopamine, and thus to pleasure, for a while.  Obviously, if your brain does this and you are using porn frequently and heavily, your brain doesn’t ever have a chance to return to normal sensitivity. You may find yourself clicking to more extreme material to arouse your reward circuitry’s numbed pleasure center.

Over time, your brain adapts to this situation with measurable decreases in dopamine signaling. You want more, but experience decreasing satisfaction. This is an addiction process calleddesensitization. (See Intoxicating Behaviors: 300 Vaginas = A Lot of Dopamine.) Recent research confirms it occurs in behavioral addictions such as gamblingfoodvideo gaming, and Internet addiction (which includes cyber erotica addiction). When desensitized, you experience a numbed response to all so called “natural rewards”—including sex with hotties.

Your reward circuitry is the barometer for “How exciting is this?” so if dopamine signaling (desire) is low, erections are sluggish. Erections only arise when dopamine signals flow from the reward circuitry to the hypothalamus.

Why does Mr. Happy prefer porn?

If desensitization were the whole story, erections would be weak whether the stimulus were a girl, your imagination, or porn. But obviously it’s not the whole story, because porn still does the job. In fact, as you try to stop using, porn’s impact temporarily increases. This is where sensitized neural pathways come in.

Note: Addiction terminology is confusing. Desensitization refers to a general dialing down of your responsiveness to all pleasure…a baseline change. Sensitization refers to hyper-reactivity/excitement—but only in response to the specific cues your brain associates with your addiction.

If these two neuroplastic changes could speak, desensitization would be moaning, “I can’t get no satisfaction” (low dopamine signaling), while sensitization would be poking you in the ribs and saying, “Hey buddy, I got just what you need”…which happens to be the very thing that caused the desensitization. Over time, this dual-edged mechanism has your reward circuitry buzzing at the hint of porn use, but less than enthused when presented with the real deal.

Relapsed to porn once, and even though I didn’t get fully erect, I could not believe the intensity of the rush I got when I clicked to the site! Very powerful excitation – tingling, dry mouth, and even trembling. I hadn’t felt that kind of rush since I was at the height of puberty and got an unexpected view up a girl’s skirt!

Your higher brain forms a feedback loop

So exactly how does sensitization arise? In simple terms, sensitization involves two very normal brain mechanisms taken too far: long term potentiation (LTP), which is the strengthening of synapses, and long term depression (LTD), which is the weakening of synapses.

Long term potentiation (LTP) is the basis of learning and memory. It can be summarized as “nerve cells that fire together, wire together.” Memories arise in two steps. First, your reward circuitry signals that an experience is important by sending dopamine to your prefrontal cortex(PFC). The more dopamine the more importance your brain attaches to an experience.

Second, the PFC responds to your “This is important!” signal by (1) knitting together everything associated with the reward, and (2) forming a neural feedback loop heading back to the reward circuitry. Thereafter, any thought, memory, or cue associated with a particular reward activates the pathway, and sets your reward circuitry a buzzin’. It could be smells associated with your favorite burger joint. For a tomcat it could be the hole in the fence that led to a female in heat. For a bird it might be seeing the guy who fills the birdfeeder. Its evolutionary purpose is to help you remember the who, what, where, when and how of sex, food and rock ‘n’ roll.

Importantly, the feedback loop doesn’t run on dopamine. It runs onglutamate. Both neurochemicals have the power to activate “Go get it!” signals in your reward circuitry. Glutamate stimulation is why porn can still ring your chimes even when your reward circuitry has stopped responding to dopamine and real partners. Reward circuit (dopamine) → PFC (associations formed) → feedback loop (glutamate) to reward circuit.

Sensitization: creation of a super-memory

So far, the process is business as usual. Sensitization, however, transforms this normal PFC → glutamate feedback pathway to the reward circuitry into a super-memory in three steps:

  1. With sensitization, explicit memories (such as facts and events) transform into habits, which are known as implicitmemories. Example: knowing how to ride a bike without thinking. Addiction-related implicit memories are like Pavlovian conditioning on steroids—very hard to ignore. When a recently sober alcoholic walks by a bar, all the sounds of laughter and smell of stale beer can whip this sensitized circuit into a frenzy, setting off strong cravings…and possibly eliminating all resolve.
  2. LTP strengthens the feedback pathway such that a little squirt of glutamate is all you need to fire up the nerve cells that signal, “Gotta have this now!” Sensitized pathways are anon-dopamine mechanism for activating reward-circuitry neurons—come hell or high water. This sneaky feature seems to be at the core of all additions. Traffic jam on the main dopamine highway keeping you from feeling pleasure from real sex? No problem. You have another way to get home, but it’s only allowing one type of vehicle (stimulation): PORN.
  3. Continued use of your addiction activates a third mechanism in the sensitization process: long term depression (LTD). The reward circuitry’s innate braking system (GABA) weakens, further amplifying the “Go for it!” glutamate signals. Instead of normal brain operation, which is more like city driving where you check for oncoming traffic at every intersection, your sensitized porn pathway is the autobahn. There are no traffic lights and porn is the only BMW M-5 on the road.Sensitized porn pathway

The autopilot thing is definitely familiar to me. It’s like being possessed by a porn-crazed demon, and then once you’re finished, your real self returns and wonders what the hell just happened and why you just wasted all this time looking at disgusting videos.

Same master switch for sex/food as for drug addiction

The master switch that triggers these addiction-related changes is the protein DeltaFosB. High levels of consumption of natural rewards (sex,sugarhigh-fat) or chronic administration of virtually any drug of abuse cause DeltaFosB to accumulate in the reward center.

Note that addictive drugs only cause addiction because they magnify or inhibit mechanisms already in place for natural rewards. This is why the American Society of Addiction Medicine unambiguously states that food and sex addictions are true addictions.

DeltaFosB’s evolutionary purpose is to motivate us to “get it while the getting is good!”  It’s a binge mechanism for food and reproduction, which worked well in other times and environments. These days it makes addictions to junk food and Internet porn as easy as 1-2-3.

It not only initiates addiction, but also helps to sustain it for a prolonged period. In fact, it hangs around for a month or two after you stop using, making relapse more likely. Moreover, the sensitized memories it triggers linger for an unknown amount of time. In short, porn cues may electrify you for a long time.

Addiction neuroplasticity can be summarized as: continued consumption → DeltaFosB → activation of genes → changes in synapses → sensitization and desensitization. (See The Addicted Brain for more detail.) It appears that desensitization eventually leadsto loss of executive control (hypofrontality), another major feature of addictions.

Sensitized pathways and withdrawal…ugh

Let’s say you decide to make the ultimate sacrifice and stop using porn. You’ll probably feel rotten for a while. Remember, your brain initially perceived your heavy porn use as a genetic bonanza. It thought you were making babies with each ejaculation. It laid down the super-memories so you wouldn’t abandon your “valuable” bevy of beauties (or whatever you were climaxing to).

Now, as you defy your brain by abstaining, your already low dopamine drops further. Also, libido-squelching brain stress hormones CRF and norepinephrine shoot up. Your desensitization is in overdrive, so a real partner doesn’t stand a chance. No wonder most guys experience such intense withdrawal symptoms. They’re feeling less pleasure than ever in response to normal stimuli, feeling more anxious, and trying to quit the one thing that can still goose their reward circuitry. There are solid reasons why addictions are so tough to beat.

Worse yet, during abstinence the sensitized “goosing” pathways grow even stronger. It’s as if your pleasure center is screaming for stimulation…but only the addiction can hear the call. The branches (dendrites) on nerve cells processing reward signals become “super spiny.” This overgrowth of little nubs allows for more synaptic connections and greater excitation.  It’s like growing four extra pairs of ears while being stuck at a “Spinal Tap” concert. When cues or thoughts (glutamate) hammer your reward circuit, the craving scale hits eleven.

I’m finding that just random pictures in ads and stuff are setting off cravings. Even when the models are fully clothed, I really want to give in.

During recovery, it’s easy to mistake an activated sensitized pathway for true libido. This is particularly true if you experience the typical radical drop in libido at some point in your recovery. During this “flatline” phase, a porn cue may still fire you up, and even trigger an impressive erection. This can fool you into thinking that porn is thecure for your sluggish libido. The real cure is to patiently wait for structures in your brain to catch up with your new direction. Meanwhile, all other stimuli, including your partner, are less arousing.

Two months into my recovery I saw a simple frame of bare ass on an adult movie channel. Honest to god, it felt like I got injected with some kind of drug. I had the biggest urge in my penis and my mind, to put it back on. I literally ran upstairs and brushed my teeth. Had I stayed downstairs, I would have relapsed 100%. I could feel a part of me going, “WHAT THE HELL MAN? GO BACK DOWNSTAIRS!!!!!!!!!”. I was shaking and panting. After 8 min of brushing my teeth non-stop, I was back to normal.

Recovery turns sensitized pathways into paper tigers

Despite their enormous power, sensitized pathways eventually lose their grip as your brain returns to normal and everyday pleasures become more satisfying. Staring at pixels begins to register as an empty exercise, and eventually the brain allows the sensitized pathways to weaken at the same time it strengthens the pathways related to other promising rewards (such as real partners).

Here, guys describe what this shift feels like. Keep in mind that most of them have been through a tough withdrawal phase and a month (or several months) of avoiding porn/masturbation.

  • In the past I would get intense sexual cravings to view really extreme, hardcore explicit scenes. But now those types of cravings are diminishing. I’m no longer battling myself to visit a porn site – but rather to wanting to see a really stunning, toned, hot woman…even if she is wearing clothes. It’s like I am regressing to a state before hardcore – when more subtle sexual cues could get me excited. This is awesome and exciting! I remember when I got off of sugary drinks years ago – I used to drink 5 or more cola drinks per day. I never thought I was addicted but when I gave them up I wanted a coke badly at every meal. Just having water felt strange. But after sticking with it for about 2 months I was completely past it. Not even any cravings. I did once have a coke since then, and I didn’t really like it – I found I actually prefer water.
  • During the heights of my porn addiction, I never looked forward to much of anything: dreaded going to work, and never saw socializing with friends and family as all that great, especially in comparison to my porn rituals, which gave me more pleasure and stimulation than anything else. With the addiction gone, little things make me really happy. I find myself laughing often, smiling for no real reason, and just being in good spirits all around. I thought I was a pessimist, but really I was just an addict. Today, a spontaneous erection lasted over 25 minutes. I did not really feel the urge to masturbate. I just lay there and enjoyed the sensation, and thought about how far I’d come.
  • I’ve found as I progress, my dreams become more sex-oriented and more surreal, instead of just seeing myself spanking the monkey in front of my computer. Also, I feel more like masturbating when I see an attractive girl when I’m out—instead of feeling like looking at porn. Previously, I never felt like “just masturbating.” I always wanted porn.
  • I am still getting some porn flashbacks: porn stars or parts of scenes. At the beginning of my reboot, the first couple weeks, these flashbacks would make me strongly consider masturbating or looking at porn. Now, when I get them, I don’t really feel the desire to do those things. I get a small rush from seeing those images in my head, but that’s about it. I’m able to shake them away fairly quickly and without consequence. Their power is receding.
  • In the past I noticed beauty, of course, but never FELT a DESIRE to be with a girl. I directed all my sex drive toward porn. Everything sexual for me WAS porn. I could never think about me, this guy with this d*ck, having real sex with a real girl. Now, I feel like sex is the most natural thing to do. “Hell yeah it’s possible for me to have sex. Hell yeah there’s a lot of girls out there wanting to have it with me!” Suddenly, self-defeating thoughts seem so stupid and time-wasting. I finally feel what most males feel. And it’s awesome.
  • Eventually I decided to masturbate to some porn. One thing was strange: I didn’t seem to get the same enjoyment from the porn as I recalled. Even finding favorite scenes didn’t seem to deliver. Porn was a bit boring in some way. Even though it wasn’t as “good” as I remembered it, I was still drawn back to it. Since the porn was not nearly as great as I remembered it, not going back will be easier.
  • The first time I started masturbating again, I felt my brain looking for the porn. This is going to be hard to describe…there was a spot in my brain where the porn junk went (memories, cravings, etc). When I denied the porn, I literally felt a collapse or an empty feeling in that part of my brain. Like it just did not exist anymore and my brain realized it. It was like when you clap your hands. My brain was expecting something in between the hands, but then it realized there was nothing in between except air.

In short, cues may still evoke a powerful feeling of anticipation. Yet as you become more responsive to real pleasures, masturbation to pixels seems increasingly pointless and unfulfilling. Of course, if you return to exclusive porn use, you fire up the sensitization process again. In other words, recovery of sexual function doesn’t protect you against future excess.

Which event have you been training for?

Sadly, the young guys who arrive at our site with porn-induced sexual dysfunction often have the toughest time rewiring their brains. Here’s a typical scenario:

When I lost my virginity it really did not feel that good. I was bored actually. I lost the erection after maybe ten minutes. She wanted more sex, but I was done. The next time I tried to have sex with a woman was a disaster. I had an erection at first, but I lost it before I ever penetrated. Condom use was out of the question—not a hard enough erection.

Usually guys like him started with heavy Internet porn use at age 11 or so, and didn’t try to have sex with a partner for another decade. They’ve wired to super-high octane fuel in the form of ever-novel Internet porn, and it’s possible that their brains pruned back some of their under-used “mating” circuitry as they reached adulthood.

For a while after they switch to real mates (regular fuel), they ping along and occasionally stall out. Some have to make a concerted effort to spend time around real potential mates, and be patient as their brains catch up with their new direction. They sometimes need 4 months or more to respond normally to potential partners. A cuddle buddy helps.

In contrast, guys who wired to real mates before highspeed Internet still have those well developed “real-partner pathways” in place. Most didn’t notice performance problems until they overwhelmed their brains with synthetic stimulation via broadband. When they lay off the porn, their reward circuitry bounces back. Potential mates automatically start to look hot again. Most need about two months, but one 50-year old recently reported that, after three years of porn-related erectile dysfunction, he needed only 8 days porn-free to get back in the saddle.

If porn is the only way you can climax, it means you’ve wired your brain to the wrong target. It’s not that real giggles and wiggles aren’t appealing. They are. But while your reward circuitry is desensitized to normal pleasures, your gut-level (actually, brain-level) response to real potential mates is…meh. The only reason the porn signals still do the job is because you’ve created a neural sledgehammer powerful enough to get a rise out of your numbed reward circuitry—at least while you’re actually viewing porn.

Real sex is flirting, touching, being touched, smells, pheromones, connecting and interacting with a person. Internet porn is 2D voyeurism, clicking a mouse, searching, multiple tabs, isolation, constant novelty, a harem, and interacting only with your hand.

To use a sports analogy, which event has your brain been training for? If you want to shoot hoops like a pro, you don’t spend your time swinging a golf club. Have years of Internet porn use created a mismatch between what your brain expects and what actually happens during real mating? Time to rewire.

—Photo _sarchi/Flickr

About Gary Wilson & Marnia Robinson

Gary Wilson has taught anatomy, physiology, and pathology for many years. His wife Marnia is the author of Cupid's Poisoned Arrow: From Habit to Harmony in Sexual Relationships. Among other projects, they host the website Your Brain on Porn.

Comments

  1. Mr. Happy? Really?

    Also:

    “To use a sports analogy, which event has your brain been training for? If you want to shoot hoops like a pro, you don’t spend your time swinging a golf club. Have years of vibrator use created a mismatch between what your brain expects and what actually happens during real mating? Time to rewire.”

    Interesting…

    Actually I think it’s perfectly fine that men become just as dissatisfied with heterosexual sex as women are. It’s not like anyone’s telling women that they need to like heterosexual sex more then masturbation.

    • “It’s not like anyone’s telling women that they need to like heterosexual sex more then masturbation.”

      Nor are they telling women that if masturbation is more pleasurable then sex then they need to change something about their behaviour to make sex more pleasurable then masturbation.

      Funny that.

      • person says:

        You know, as a woman, I find your statements kinda offensive. (No, I am not trying to start a fight.) You think that it’s impossible that a woman who can get off on her own but who has trouble with a partner might wonder what’s going on? It seems entirely possible that women can experience the same thing as described in this article, whether or not porn is involved…. And be dissatisfied with it.

    • To typhoon:
      Huh? This article isn’t a “should” piece. It’s a “why” piece for those who are puzzled about their lack of sexual response to real partners. And, yes, we have written similar articles for women: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201106/vibrators-and-other-pleasures-when-moderation-fails

      This article is describing addiction related changes that lead to erectile dysfunction, anorgasmia and delayed ejaculation in young otherwise healthy men. If you want to see what these men actually think about their situation, please read the following:

      Too much porn/masturbation cause ED (1600 posts, and growing)
      http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Mens-Health/Too-much-porn-masturbation-cause-ED/show/183203

      22 with porn induced erectile dysfunction? (almost 400 posts, and growing)
      http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Mens-Health/22-with-porn-induced-erectile-dysfunction/show/469209?page=1

      Thread -300 hundreds posts, and growing. Ask a recovering porn addict anything.
      http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=137504963
      —————————————
      TALES OF PORN-RELATED ED
      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-of-porn-related-ed

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-porn-related-ed-2

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-porn-related-ed-3

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-porn-related-ed-iv

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-porn-related-ed-v

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-porn-related-ed-vi

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-porn-related-ed-vii

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/tales-porn-related-ed-viii
      ————————————————–
      PORN-INDUCED ED RECOVERY STORIES
      http://yourbrainonporn.com/erectile-recover-1

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/erectile-recovery-2

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/ed-recovery-stories-III

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/ed-recovery-stories-4

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/ed-recovery-stories-5

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/ed-recovery-stories-vi

      http://yourbrainonporn.com/ed-recovery-stories-vii
      —————————————–
      REBOOTING ACCOUNTS
      http://yourbrainonporn.com/rebooting-accounts
      —————————————
      OFF SITE BLOGS
      http://yourbrainonporn.com/site-porn-recovery-blogs

    • Where is the presumption that women are dissatisfied by hetero sex coming from?

      Second, Plenty of people are telling women not to like masturbation. It may not be scientific but the single most common thing asked on our blog by men is in regards to their wife/girlfriend/whatever liking masturbation more than sex.

      In the sex-positive communities in which we discourse, sure, everything’s about women’s pleasure… But out in the real world, men are still worried their partner will forge sex over a sex toy or manual masturbation, and women are still worried they aren’t sexy enough to compare to women in porn.

      • Forge=forget, obv. Sorry. iPad.

        • i don't believe you says:

          I’ve never considered the toys known as porn and vibrators to be sex positive. Sex involves others and for something to be positive it must augment the ability for others to give you pleasure and for you to give them pleasure. Porn and vibrators are for single people.

          • A female perspective.

            This comment posted today on our Psychology Today article, Porn-Induced Sexual Dysfunction Is a Growing Problem
            http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201107/porn-induced-sexual-dysfunction-is-growing-problem
            —————————————

            alina has commented on: ““How I Recovered from Porn-related Erectile
            Dysfunction””

            Subject: Yes. I’m a woman and I have

            Yes. I’m a woman and I have seen this happen to me. I’ve told my boyfriend, but he thinks I’m just over-reacting. The problem is I don’t get stimulated like before. Caresses, kisses don’t turn me on any more. I have to imagine sex scenes, to remember porn scenes. I’m determined to stop. Part of the matter is that I only watch online( I don’t download because my sister uses my computer sometimes and I don’t want her to find this stuff there; I’m pretty sure she doesn’t watch and wouldn’t understand it). It’s a problem because porn these days has escalated and I see all kinds of stuff.

            There’s just nothing that turns me on any more. I’ve seen to much. My boyfriend has old stuff downloaded on his computer. No anal ( he finds it disgusting), no swallowing, just normal sex or with oral. And I know he doesn’t watch the parts with the oral that much because he usually moves past them. I asked him about it and he said he’s not that interested in the guy’s pleasure…lol :) ).

            It’s about her pleasure …hm…He’s got tones of photos, though. Maybe men could try looking at photos or they could try old stuff, like he has. Just try watching normal or does that have only oral, masturbating, and not heavy stuff, like threesomes, gang-bangs etc. He’s too lazy to upgrade it. It’s hard, I know. I don’t even try watching other stuff, but it pops up on the sites, and nevertheless I think that I’ve desensitized myself in some way. I masturbate and I’m not interested in sex anymore. The problem is he is. I’m selfish because I don’t want to wait until I see him. I just use porn.

            Women don’t watch in such high percentage as men and they don’t actually have
            to be turned on to have sex. That’s the problem with women not reporting
            this. You don’t notice it until it’s reached the point of not feeling
            anything at all when he penetrates you, and must of the times it’s not the
            case. You can use lube and masturbate yourself prior and it will be ok for
            women. It’s just about the emotion..it’s kind of gone..and I miss it.

          • i don't believe you says:

            My definition of “toy” is less inclusive than yours, but either way vibrators don’t augment sex. Vibrators turn sex into enhanced masturbation with someone else doing the holding. Many couples prefer the direct touch of fingers, mouths, tongues and such over stimulation from mechanical surrogates. 1st world lovemaking is so processed!

            • i don't believe you says:

              Vibrators augment orgasm, not sex.

            • Dildos are not vibrators, which supply superhuman stimulation because they…vibrate as long as desired. Erotic cave drawings are not Internet porn use, which is superhuman stimulation due to the constant novelty, searching and possibility of escalating to more extreme material. Some of us assume that overriding our natural sexual satiety mechanisms with more extreme material has no repercussions, but for many brains, this is simply untrue. Yet few see the problem until they slam into a wall, realizing that they can no longer become aroused without their extreme stimulation.

              This important concept is often overlooked. Brain training and desensitization of the brain’s pleasure response matter. This isn’t a question of exposed genitals vs. “propriety” – or sexual freedom vs. moral values. It’s a matter of plastic brain changes, which, for many, increasingly result in decreased sexual responsiveness and addiction.

              It’s fine if people choose this for themselves, but they need to be made aware in advance of the difference in reward-circuitry impact between sex aids of yore and today’s extreme versions.

              • Marcus Williams says:

                This isn’t a question of exposed genitals vs. “propriety” – or sexual freedom vs. moral values.

                In that case, have you found any case studies or can you think of examples of porn use that you would consider proper and moral? Not the addictive stuff, which you’ve cited in detail, but some indication that you don’t think all porn use is bad?

                For example, if you were talking about alcoholics, it would be easy to find many examples of destructive alcoholism and people who improved their lives by kicking the addiction, but I wouldn’t expect you to say that someone who has a couple of drinks once or twice a month is a raging addict, or sure to become one. (You wouldn’t, would you?) I think I’ve seen you say before that you’re not anti-porn. What part of your message, over the course of several articles about how bad porn is, is supposed to sound like you favor porn temperance over porn abolition?

                If your only concern is about damaging plastic brains, then do you find porn morally acceptable if not for the dain bramage it causes?

                • The point of our articles is that Internet porn is different from porn of the past: rapid delivery, endless novelty, constant violation of expectations, multiple tabs, fast-forwarding to most erotic bits, etc.
                  We make no moral judgment about porn at all in any of our articles, although given what is becoming known about the Internet’s power to addict users, we do question some commenters’ common sense. This is not to say that everyone will become hooked, but right now people seem oblivious of the obvious symptoms of addiction as they develop.
                  Incidentally, we would say “altering plastic brains,” not “damaging” them, as we genuinely hope the changes will prove reversible as users stop using.

          • First, sex toys are for couples and single people. I know many men who really enjoying using a sex toy *on* their partners, as well as observing their partners use sex toys.

            Sex isn’t just penis-in-vagina. Sex is a myriad of fantastic experiences.

            • i don't believe you says:

              I am sure there are many couples who choose to use masturbation aids in the presence of each other and are very happy with that choice. Good for them. Sex is skin on skin though, it’s not skin on toy regardless of how arousing that may be for the person watching.

              • Marcus Williams says:

                If you prefer sex without toys, or only use toys for masturbation, that’s fine, but you’re mistaken if you think that’s the only way other people use them, with one person using a toy while the other person watches. Even a “masturbation aid” is often more fun when administered to or by an enthusiastic partner. Toys are usually about adding a different kind of touch to the experience, not replacing it. I’ve never said (or been told), “Okay, honey, step back and stop touching, I’m switching to a toy now.”

                • i don't believe you says:

                  Lol. This discussion is philosophical not instructional, but thanks for chiming in.

                  • Marcus Williams says:

                    In that case, I was instructing you that your sex toy philosophy was wrong once you tried to apply it to people generally and not just yourself. But you’re welcome.

      • Copyleft says:

        “Where is the presumption that women are dissatisfied by hetero sex coming from?”

        I think your very next paragraph answers at least part of that.

        Personally, I’m not sure what message to take away from this. Yes, addiction to ANYTHING can be bad and damage your relationships and life… and I suppose porn is one of those things you can become addicted to.

        I can’t see any reason to extend that finding to a general “porn use = bad,” though. I hope the study wasn’t trying for such a conclusion, because they didn’t succeed.

      • “In the sex-positive communities in which we discourse, sure, everything’s about women’s pleasure…”

        Wow, that doesn’t sound very sex positive to me.

        “Second, Plenty of people are telling women not to like masturbation. It may not be scientific but the single most common thing asked on our blog by men is in regards to their wife/girlfriend/whatever liking masturbation more than sex.”

        And you never have women saying ‘he shouldn’t be masturbating, he has me?’ Would you be offended by women expressing concern that their partners might like masturbation more then them?

        Look, men aren’t getting a free pass in this either. They have a very narrow range of activities in which they’re allowed to orgasm. PiV sex, missionary position. If they desire any other type of sexual activity, blow jobs, anal sex, they’re seen as depraved or wanting to dominate and defile their female partners. If they masturbate they’re either seen as pathetic for not having a sexual partner or as depriving their partner of their sexual energy.

        Do you really think conservative culture is a bastion of sexual freedom for men? It allows that men take pleasure in one sexual act and it assumes women don’t take pleasure from sex at all. Which isn’t a benefit to those men who don’t enjoy/orgasm from missionary position PiV.

    • Anthony Zarat says:

      I am astounded by the negativity towards Typhon’s comment. Typhon is perfectly correct: the article mixes a moral message with a practical message.

      >>> It is only a problem if the “patient” thinks it is a problem <<<

      " … organic causes for your woes …"
      " … medical assumption is that your issue is psychological …"
      " … the problem is indeed in your head …"
      " … and still be left with your problem …"
      " … Continued use of your addiction …"
      " … making relapse more likely …"

      I find this article to be incredibly judgemental and narrow minded. You have no right to call another person's individual choices a disease, a problem, an addiction, or any other medical jargon. Would you call an LGBT these things? Would you clinically dehumanize any other group for their personal, harmless, and individual choices?

      Here is what I think: this awful article criticises what has become the ONLY SAFE ALTERNATIVE FOR MEN who seek intimacy. You think it is OK to drive these men back to the dangers of false accusations and family court dehumanization?

      I can't go on, I really want to, but I am going to be sick if I say another word. I am in shock at the irresponsibility of this, and I have to get some air.

      • Julie Gillis says:

        Anthony I do understand your anger but still have questions about how a person can find intimacy ith visual images. Stimulation and release yes, but physical and emotional intimacy, while I can understand seeking intimacy with the self, is usually sought and achieved between people and does include honesty vulnerability, risk and trust. I understand you believe that risk is too high for Marriage especially, but I don’t understand how porn is a passage to intimacy if it is used solo. Release yes and perhaps that’s what you mean by intimacy, but when I thin of intimacy I think of two living people. I do think porn can be used within a relationship, but I don’t see how it builds intimacy if it is used solo. If I’m missing something let me know.

        • Anthony Zarat says:

          “.. how a person can find intimacy ith visual images .. ”

          Right now, I think that the majority of people (men and women) probably cannot easily find solo intimacy. I say “most people” and “easily” because real and effective intimacy can be experienced through imagination and/or dreams by:

          1) Some people at any time (for example, schizophrenics)
          2) Most or all people in certain situations (for example, extended solitary confinement)

          Intimacy is a basic human need that WILL be met. If it is not met, the human mind will find a way (think of the Wilson Sporting Goods volleyball in “Cast Away”, that Tom Hanks names “Wilson” — the ball becomes to important to Hanks that he is willing to risk his life to save the ball from “drowning”).

          Of course, right now most people have to experience almost unendurable privation before their brains are able to “conjure” intimacy without the need for “another person”. However, a growing number of people find intimacy in internet chat rooms and other “almost” solo environments. Although these people (mostly men) have usually experienced terrible loss, it is clearly a significantly lower bar than what is necessary to learn to adore a beach ball.

          The question is, what technologies can we expect to help people to experience “solo” intimacy? I am excited to think of how INCREDIBLY CLOSE we are to interactive “virtual” partners that can fulfill (relatively unimportant) “release” needs, but also (much more important) can also fulfill intimacy needs. If men can find intimacy in impersonal conversations with other men over the internet, and live (semi-) fulfilling lives in total isolation, why can’t men (and women) interact with a picture that talks, writes, reacts, desires, complains, hopes, and even feels? This is stage one, of course. The ultimate goal is committed, monogamous relationships with virtual partners enabled by computer aided dream-state virtual reality. Men and women could have partners that have personalities, stories, ambitions, etc. There would be romance, travel, adventure, excitement, and genuine compassion and love.

          • Anthony Zarat says:

            The great attraction of VR relationships is that there would be no risk, for either partner:

            * Men would be safe from collective violence. Courts, visitation, false accusations, and the awful consequences of asymmetric compassion (both women and men feel far more compassion for women, than they do for men — so men and boys will never find justice from law enforcement, courtrooms, or government institutions.)

            * Women would be safe from individual violence. DV, assault, etc would be a thing of the past.

            Aside from “novelty shock”, I would really like to know what is wrong with this idea? Morally, it appears to be a great collective good. So much pain and suffering would end, for no cost. So what if it is a little “different” from our past? Human history is so filled with horrors, it is a wonder that we continue to be suspicious of good ideas just because they are “different” from how our ancestors lived.

  2. i don't believe you says:

    I think the main reason one would find that porn is hotter than one’s partner would be that one is lousy at choosing partners. If I’m gonna keep a woman around (partner) you can bet your car that she not only looks good, but can fuck. This is not an article about “why” this is an article about “how” i.e. brain chemistry

    • DON’T said: I think the main reason one would find that porn is hotter than one’s partner would be that one is lousy at choosing partners.

      If you had read just a few of the links you would discover your theory is dead wrong.

      First, many of the men did not have steady partners, only hook ups. As they stated – these women were gorgeous and willing, yet they could not respond.

      As for the men who had partners, attraction and strong erections returned after abstaining from porn. It took 2-5 months, to fully recover. We have witnessed this ocuuring over and over again.

      The key word is “variable”.

      My website (www.yourbrainonporn) links back to hundreds of forums and websites, in about 25 different countries. Only 5-6 of these links have anything to do with porn recovery. The rest are places that men gather and post, such as: pick-up sites, sports sites, cars, current events, exercise, bodybuilding, you name it. In addition to the many visitors to our sites, I have read thousands of threads, some with hundreds of posts, discussing unexplained symptoms in young healthy men using today’s porn. These young men (ages 15 -35) have nothing in common other than years of heavy porn use and increasing sexual dysfunction. When that one and only one variable was removed, they eventually regained erectile health. All experienced withdrawal symptoms when they stopped porn, and nearly all experienced similar time frame in healing.

      No other hypothesis is needed when changing a single variable (porn use) resulted in a change in condition (no more ED) for all subjects.

      A survey by the Italian Society of Andrology and Sexual Medicine (SIAMS) confirmed porn-induced sexual dysfunction in young men. Italian urologists commissioned this survey when men in their early twenties arrived at urology clinics with unexplained ED. Upon questioning, doctors identified one common variable: heavy porn use starting in their teens. When that one variable was removed these young men slowly regained erectile function and libido.

      Italian men suffer ‘sexual anorexia’ after Internet porn use
      http://www.ansa.it/web/notizie/rubriche/english/2011/02/24/visualizza_new.html_1583160579.html
      Scientists: Too Much Internet Porn May Cause Impotence
      http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/02/25/scientists-internet-porn-cause-impotence/
      Sexual Anorexia: at-risk youth, the web as a cause
      http://donna.tuttogratis.it/salute/anoressia-sessuale-giovani-a-rischio-il-web-tra-le-cause/P128391/

      • Copyleft says:

        Noted. But I also question why this is presented as an inherent ‘problem’ rather than a preference.

        If a person derives more satisfaction from porn than from live sex, who’s being harmed?

        • Copyleft: Your two posts pose the same question.
          This isn’t about preference. Read the links!
          The men want to have normal sex – that’s their preference. A dick that works and having a decent orgasm is their preference. Is that so hard to conceive?

          If you can have your cake and eat it too, more power to you. This post is for those who can’t.

          • Copyleft says:

            I guess what I’m really wondering is why so many articles are posted about research into PORN addiction rather than any other types of addiction–gambling, alcohol, etc.

            It strikes me that there is often an intended subtext to such articles, attempting to convey the message that “porn is bad.” When that’s NEVER what the research actually shows. It shows that ADDICTION is bad, and that the object of the addiction can vary from person to person. Call me paranoid, but that’s what comes of reading one too many “porn is rape” messages from the radical fringe.

            • You may be paranoid.
              If you did a Google search, or a pubmed search, you would find tons written on pathological gambling, alcoholism, cocaine addiction, and very little exploring the science behind porn addiction, and virtually nothing describing porn-induced ED. The men suffering porn induced sexual dysfunction are desperate for information and thrilled when they find a solution.

              Then there’s the obvious: high-speed, free porn of endless variety is now available to all age groups. This is completely new phenomenon whose ramifications we are just beginning to see.

              Please don’t allude to straw men such as rape statistics, increased crime, banning porn, far right/left, or moralizing.

              As Joe Friday says, “Just the facts, ma’am”. This is basic physiology: Overstimulation leading to brain changes leading to sexual dysfunction.

            • Lisa Hickey says:

              Hi Copyleft,

              Last year, we did a special section on addictions of all kinds, here.

              We also have additional addiction articles since then in our health section.

              There are two forces going on which combine to give you the perception of subtext: 1) We are a community site, so we publish the well-written, well argued posts that are sent to us. Our “balance” often appears skewed just by whatever content is coming in the door. At various times since The Good Men Project’s inception we’ve been called out as being too liberal, too conservative, too male, too female, too gay, too heterosexual, too feminist, too MRA, etc, etc. 2) Articles on porn — whether they are seen as pro-porn (which we also run) or anti-porn, tend to get viewed a lot. They then get into our “most popular” lists, and get viewed even more. So if a piece that is perceived as “porn is bad” gets seen as very popular — by our community, mind you — it gives the appearance we are endorsing one side or another, which we are not. We are giving people the view from all sides so they can make their own decisions.

      • i don't believe you says:

        “First, many of the men did not have steady partners, only hook ups. As they stated – these women were gorgeous and willing, yet they could not respond.”

        I’m not buying what you are selling!

        I guarantee you that the right woman would have gotten a lot of these guys “up” and “off”. The female sexuality in porn is so different than the one you encounter during hookups that a comparison is apples and oranges. Women in porn aren’t “willing” they are actually “cock crazy”… big difference between the two.

        • I couldn’t have said it any better. Female sexuality in porn is different from reality. If only our lives were just like movies….wouldn’t that be great?

          If you had bothered to follow the links, you would read that many guys describe their hook-ups as mimicking porn. Others paid big money for “the hottest “escorts and still it wasn’t enough.

          When these same men abstained from porn for 2-5 months, all they needed was a gentle breeze to make them rock hard.

          Your assumptions do no fit the facts.

          • i don't believe you says:

            lol. Be careful what you wish for. I have an ex who is very “porny” in her sexuality. The transition to the the girl after her wasn’t as smooth as I would have thought.

          • Archy says:

            Does it vary upon type of porn? eg, would amateur porn of a real couple doing their normal thing cause an issue? Also what about porn where is it just solo, watching women masturbate?

  3. alice says:

    Well, of course. I could understand porn use occasionally or maybe as a tool, but too many men use it too often. It’s going to get worse because nowadays boys are starting off on online porn as opposed to starting off with mags in the old days. I used to think men only used porn when they just couldn’t get sex elsewhere, as a last resort, but now I know better.

    I’ve had men admit to me that porn is more exciting than real life sex, so I’m not surprised by the article. And they dont have the willpower/desire to change.

    I dated a man who had ED because of hours of daily porn use, so I’ve btdt as well.

    • i don't believe you says:

      Porn and vibes are the path or least resistance to an orgasm. It is the opposite of sex.

      • NickMostly says:

        That’s an interesting point you’ve made there. Why do you think that’s the case?

        • LF says:

          I think he might be saying (and I agree) that orgasms are not the only purpose of sex, and that one misses out on some of the other important aspects of sex if you take such a “goal oriented” approach as that.

          • LF says:

            Well of course, people enjoy orgasms too! :D To me though, orgasms are better if they’re more part of a complete package. Sure, we all have our days when we just want to get it done NOW :D , but by and large I experience orgasms more intensely if it’s a part of awesome sex in general… and to me, actual touch/skin contact is way better than contact with anything mechanical, a real person is better than someone in a video, etc.

            Yes, I realize others’ experience may be different, but I do think there is such a thing as over-stimulation which can desensitize a person to what I’d consider essential parts of sex. Like the article says about porn, I think the same thing can happen with vibrators. Within reason, no big deal, but a lot of people aren’t within reason. ;)

            • i don't believe you says:

              No one seems to believe in the “wrong” kind of stimulation. The women in porn are sexual athletes and very few non porn women can keep up with them… and by keep up I do not mean looks. Correspondingly a penis doesn’t vibrate. Just sayin’

              • i don't believe you says:

                Julie,
                Self stimulation is still self stimulation. Mechanical stimulation is still mechanical stimulation.

        • i don't believe you says:

          Because humans are designed to be as sexually dependent on one another as biologically possible, but we are very clever and have figured out shorts cuts to independence.

          So one end of the spectrum (where the not yet invented orgasm pill resides) is characterized by “on demand”, limitlessness, unanimity, and technology while the other end has attributes of seduction, compromise, collaboration, and naturalism. Where would you place porn and vibes on that continuum? How about sex? Masturbation?

          • The tragedy is that in their search for independence, many people can end up with a dependence (an addiction). This is particularly true in the case of super-stimulating versions of food and sex, because our brains are wired to give them extra attention.

            Unwanted brain changes that impair sexual responsiveness and feelings of wellbeing are the only spectrum we’re concerned with.

          • wellokaythen says:

            “Because humans are designed to be as sexually dependent on one another as biologically possible, but we are very clever and have figured out shorts cuts to independence.”

            At the risk of splitting hairs again: It’s not clear to me that humans are actually “designed” at all, whether by God or nature or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. The best I could say is that humans seem to have certain tendencies. Many people find sex with another person more pleasurable than sex by oneself, but that doesn’t mean humans are “designed” to be dependent on each other. If there is some kind of “designer,” he/she/they/it has seen fit to make the genitals within easy reach of the hands. If there’s some sort of reason for everything, then there must be a reason for that. Clearly humans have SOME degree of sexual independence.

            And, of course, humans have a brain that is capable of inventing the dildo, the vibrator, the internet, etc. Surely The Grand Design meant for that to happen, right? If we are designed, then we are designed to have a brain that invents these shortcuts, so the shortcuts are products of the design.

            • I suspect what he meant was that humans evolved in such a way that pair bonds promoted our survival. We’re part of the 3-5% of mammal species who are freaks in that regard. Sure, there are outliers, but the most of fit the bill regardless of our actual behavior today. This is not a moral argument, but an evolutionary biology one.

              • wellokaythen says:

                I would agree that pair bonding clearly is a part of H. sapiens mating patterns, but it is not the only part. There are other animals that have much more pronounced “mate for life” patterns than humans. Some of them will not mate anymore after the death of their mates. Even the most monogamous of humans tend to move on after that. For humans there may be a general tendency to form emotional bonds, but it is not automatic. My understanding is that compared to other mammals, humans are towards the bonded end of the spectrum, but certainly not the most monogamous animal – we’re promiscuous but with bonding tendencies.

                Perhaps pair bonding has contributed to human survival. We’re a pretty young species, so the jury may still be out about that. I would also note that one of the key characteristics of being a mammal is “play.” Surely human sexuality falls into that category as much as any other mammalian pastime. There are probably survival benefits to doing things just for fun.

                As I mentioned before, just because something is common in humans does not mean that it must therefore contribute to human survival. There are lots of dead-ends and “despites” and “tragic flaws” in the course of natural selection. And, just because a little something helps doesn’t mean that more of it is better. (One sickle cell trait parent is great for survival. Two parents is really bad for survival.)

    • Alice.

      Do you get more sexual pleasure from your vibrator then your sexual partners?

      If so, then what’s the difference between that and a man getting more pleasure from artificial methods of sexual stimulation (porn, toys) then his sexual partners?

      • alice says:

        What vibrator? lol I’m not really into sex toys, or penis substitutes or anything like that.
        So typhoon, you’d be cool with a man choosing porn over sex with you??? I thought sex was supposed to be with flesh and blood people. So are you trying to say that a woman should be cool with it if her spouse chooses porn over her/has more fun with the porn than with her?

        • Archy says:

          Alice, it’s a problem when anyone chooses something over their partner but do remember a lot of men and women have partners who may not be available, ready, willing to have sex as often as they would like. Getting a the right match up of sexual appetites is pretty hit n miss I’d say.

          • Anthony Zarat says:

            Alice and Archy: you are both wrong. It is not a problem to chose A over B. It is a CHOICE!!!!! It is the MAN’S CHOICE! It is his RIGHT to protect himself from the devastation of family courts and criminal courts that no longer regard him as human, because of the gender of his birth.

            What would you think of a man who tells an LGBT woman that her choice is morally wrong because it deprives him of access to her … “gifts”?!?

            I have no words, I just don’t.

            • Archy says:

              Anthony, I said “their partner” as in they have a partner, and I don’t feel it’s good to ignore them. It’s totally fine for someone to choose not to date someone, but that isn’t what I was discussing.

  4. Collin says:

    I can quit any time I like…

    To be honest, I don’t know anyone who watches porn for hours a day. Typically, it’s maybe 5 minutes a few times a day when jerking off.

    • A few questions: Have you tried quitting for an extended period? How do you know how millions of other people use porn?

    • Archy says:

      Who says every man can orgasm in under 5 minutes? Who says every man wants to. Some people want to delay orgasm and “ride the wave”, there’s no time limit for sex unless it’s interfering with a persons relationships or life in a negative way.

      I notice with waiting a day or 2 the orgasm feels better, but I like the calming effect after orgasm and I find it really really helps with my anxiety disorder, it really mellows out the nerves and allows me to continue the day focusing and being far more productive. But that’s with no woman and when I’m with a woman I have no interest in porn, just a tool for the lonely days:P.

  5. elissa says:

    The hole is greater than the sum of the parts – that should go without saying – music, food, vibrators, wine, Kush, partner, porn, oils – put them all together and kaboom!

    There exist 256 different orgasmic combinations just with the subset above. Are we now going to argue over having too much choice?

  6. deza says:

    “It’s a “why” piece.” Hmm. Has there ever been a why piece without an implied Should? In discussions of human action and drama, that is. Not in particle (or other) physics.

    Talking about all of this blythly in terms of brain science seems (unintentionally perhaps) cruel. No doubt the descriptions of brain patterns etc are just as described, studied, reported, imaged etc. And no doubt too the flood of personal accounts.

    But — if if addiction recovery programs were wholly a matter of science, they would work, work once and for all, and no one would have to repeat them. Right? Science is science, right?

    But humans are not animals. Reducing such things to bumperstickers like brainonporn is cruel. Take a look at the original AA book. Take a look at Eugenides’ The Marriage Plot for his portrait of the science of depression.

    • Certainly brains are not machines. Although understanding the brain science of addiction can, and does, help people enormously in recovery, it doesn’t guarantee they will never relapse. Knowing how a disease works doesn’t instantly cure and prevent it. Knowing how a cold “works,” won’t speed your recovery.
      But the ignorance you apparently champion is a lot crueler, as it leaves sufferers with no way forward other than accepting the misguided spin that “it’s all good no matter how much your addiction escalates.” Fact is, many people live much happier lives when they understand more about how their addictions are affecting their brains, and what they can do to reverse those changes…however long it takes. Some even notice their depression evaporates. Here’s a collection of self-reports for your reading pleasure: http://www.reuniting.info/download/pdf/0.BENEFITS.pdf

  7. elissa says:

    Speaking of the big O – link below – this woman volunteered to have an MRI while masturbating. I could never do that – claustrophobic

    http://bigthink.com/ideas/42058

    • wellokaythen says:

      There could be the equivalent of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle at work here – the very act of recording the orgasm with an MRI will probably have an impact on the data. What the MRI is actually recording is probably “the kind of orgasm she has when she’s in an MRI machine.” The orgasm is like an electron. You cannot observe it without affecting its very nature.

  8. Henry Vandenburgh says:

    Real is better, whatever real is. But erotica has its uses.

  9. Missy says:

    I actually think this phenomenon occurs because humans are not naturally /sexually/ monogamous by nature, if you try to be sexually monogamous with someone your going to have to play tricks on yourself to make it seem like you are having sex with a different person, if you don’t, you lose attraction to them.

  10. Missy says:

    I did however put my point rather wrongly, rather than ‘play tricks on yourself to make it seem like a different person’ which I don’t think is strictly correct, your going to have to find ways to work around the fact that only having sex with one same person is /supposed/ to make you lose attraction to them, it could work with a bit of ingenuity and creativity, but it’s not the way it’s biologically ‘supposed to be’ and the ‘Coolidge effect’ is exactly what I was on about.

  11. SteveS says:

    I don’t have time to read this entire article, but my problem is where I turn to for sexual gratification when I’m not in some kind of relationship. It always ends up being porn. And since I haven’t been in a relationship in over a year, and haven’t been with a woman in about six months, and on top of it al I have a very high sex drive, porn is hard to turn away. Does anyone else have this problem?

    Can get pretty depressing when there’s no one in your life giving you physical affection.

  12. April Baum says:

    I would like the author to cite/show their resources/studies for me to make an educated decision – this does not site their resources. Thank You.

  13. wellokaythen says:

    My first reaction to Robinson and Wilson’s work was disbelief, but I’ve come around quite a bit the more I think about it. I think what I didn’t understand before but do now is the crucial role that the self-referral plays in their view of diagnosing and treating porn addicts.

    Here’s where they’re on solid ground: there are men who are aware that they have a problem with porn. These men know they have a problem because they feel like their porn habits are out of control. Their sense of being out of control gives them a lot of stress, and a part of each of them wants to change but is not sure how. I have no doubt the testimonials are genuine.

    This is often how addiction or other psychological disorders are spotted and treated. Treatment often begins when the subject asks for help or when the subject identifies to himself that he has a problem. A diagnosis of porn addiction is literally “subjective” – based in large part on whether or not the subject thinks he has a problem. If he thinks he has a problem, then he probably does. This is a common threshold for a lot of conditions in the DSM-IV: the difference between a personal quirk and a disorder is how much it bothers the subject. If I have a problem with reliance on the subject’s own viewpoint, then I have a problem with psychiatry as a science in the first place.

    So, if a man prefers to masturbate to porn instead of his partner and this bothers him, or if he can only get an erection to porn and this bothers him, then he has a problem.

    My question is: if it doesn’t bother him very much, then can we still say that he has a porn problem? Maybe in some cases, maybe not. Maybe he’s addicted and he’s in denial, or maybe he doesn’t have a problem. That’s the tricky part.

    You could say that his addiction is harming his intimate relationships, but again that’s largely dependent on how the subject feels about it. If his partner has a problem with his porn use, then that’s not necessarily evidence by itself he’s addicted.

    From the diagnostic side of things, I’d be curious if the screening process has any possibility of a negative or inconclusive finding. Would a man refer himself to a porn addiction specialist and EVER be turned away because the clinic screens him and the test comes back “no evidence” or “not enough evidence to say yes”? If there’s a brain scan or qualitative survey and it always comes back positive for addiction, that sounds like a poor screening process, even for self-referrals.

    Theoretically a man could worry that he’s addicted to porn and it turns out he’s really not. Is there room in the diagnostic system for that possibility? How to weed out hypochondriacs, Munchausen’s, and other misdirected self-referrals. I bet VERY few people would claim to be porn addicts who aren’t, but how would one ever know?

    I totally agree that porn addiction should be treated as a serious problem. That means that there should be the most rigorous screening process possible. There should be extensive safeguards to prevent false positives and false negatives.

    • We participate on an academic listserve, and some of the sexologists there are in total denial about the possibility that Internet porn can cause addiction. When confronted with a young man using porn for 6 hours a day, one of them proudly recounted that he told the guy he had a “procrastination problem,” not a porn addiction. Now, that’s theoretically possible, and it suggests that there’s at the very least a vigorous screening process in force. However, from other comments by that well regarded, gay sexologist/psychologist, it’s clear his views are rather fixed, and do not take into account recent addiction neuroscience findings on Internet addiction.
      This is especially sad, as some of the folks hardest hit by porn addiction are gay. A bisexual friend attended a sex addiction 12 Step group in NYC, and said most all the guys in it were gay.
      However, as one often sees here on Good Men Project these days, it is PC to continue to insist porn addiction is a “lifestyle choice,” and can’t be a primary illness…despite the growing evidence to the contrary. See http://yourbrainonporn.com/internet-addiction-studies-summaries Eventually, this is going to prove very embarrassing for those who are ignoring the cold, hard research in favor of their political views.
      I suspect this is happening because sexologists are not required to study neuroscience and therefore simply don’t understand the significance of this research. Instead they continue to insist that sexual addiction is rare, and can only be a secondary illness, dependent upon another mental disorder (ADHD, OCD, depression, etc.). However, two of the new studies included control groups of former addicts, and addiction-related changes were already reversing themselves in their brains. This isolates Internet addiction as the cause of the brain changes.
      In time, the science gap will close, and the debate will end. The writing is on the wall. Meanwhile, a lot of naive information in the mainstream is discouraging porn users from considering that their (often grave) symptoms could be due to their Internet porn use.

      • We aren’t clinicians. Nor do we assess or diagnose anyone. We merely listen to men (primarily) as they experiment with giving up Internet porn and report their results.

        That said, any responsible clinician would need to be mindful of many possible causes of symptoms related by a client/patient. Through careful assessment those possibilities would be narrowed. The problem is that most(?) of today’s clinicians (doctors and sexologists) do not seem to be asking the right questions when it comes to assessing the possibility of Internet porn addiction. If they don’t ask, clients don’t tell, and any addiction remains invisible. The client is then often medicated for a disorder he doesn’t have. The medication doesn’t relieve his symptoms much, and he despairs unnecessarily.

        The questions that should be asked can be inferred from the criteria ASAM posted in its public statement in 2011. For more: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201109/toss-your-textbooks-docs-redefine-sexual-behavior-addictions

        As for the risk of a “false positive” – are you suggesting that if someone gives up Internet porn for a few months to see if it was at the heart of his problems, he’s somehow endangering himself? Seriously?? No one could even view highspeed Internet porn only a short time ago.

        • It’s you who start with a conclusion that mischaracterizes what we say. Please cite where we say – “ – porn is always bad and addictive”.

          We have answered these same questions over and over again in other posts and comments on this website. We cite more than anecdotal evidence, but massive anecdotal evidence, which has thousands of young men reversing multiple symptoms, should be considered.

          1) NON-ANECTODAL: All brain studies done so far on Internet addicts have pointed in only one direction. Internet addiction exists and involves all the same brain changes as found in drug addicts. Two of the studies followed former Internet Addicts and found reversal of brain changes. SEE BELOW

          2) Clinical diagnosis involves assessment. One of the most common set of criteria used to assess all addictions (or this one – http://www.addictionsandrecovery.org/definition-of-addiction.htm ) is

          The “four C’s” are one way to assess addiction:
          - Inability to Control use
          - Compulsion to use
          - Continued use despite adverse Consequences
          - Craving – psychological/physical

          3) A collection of specific signs and symptoms point to underlying pathological changes. When a diagnosis is given, it indicates that a specific collection of anatomical and physiological abnormalities have occurred. Clinical diagnosis is based upon these simple concepts. This was the primary message from The American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) : a collection of signs, symptoms, and behaviors represent a specific set of brain alterations. All addictions share the same neurological underpinnings and signs/symptoms.

          4) Marcus Williams: “I’m asking you to give examples of porn use you would recognize as non-addictive.”

          Addiction is based on brain changes not on description of use. This is what ASAM emphasized in their new definition of addiction.

          QUOTE FROM ASAM’S DEFINITION OD ADDICTION:
          This new definition makes clear that addiction is not about drugs, it’s about brains. It is not the substances a person uses that make them an addict; it is not even the quantity or frequency of use. Addiction is about what happens in a person’s brain when they are exposed to rewarding substances or rewarding behaviors, and it is more about reward circuitry in the brain and related brain structures than it is about the external chemicals or behavior that “turn on” that reward circuitry.” http://www.asam.org/docs/publicy-policy-statements/20110816_defofaddiction-faqs.pdf?sfvrsn=0#search=“new definition”
          ———————————-
          These articles will answer all your other questions:

          Start with Porn Then and Now: Welcome to Brain Training
          http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201108/porn-then-and-now-welcome-brain-training
          Porn, Novelty and the Coolidge Effect‏
          http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201108/porn-novelty-and-the-coolidge-effect
          Sexual brain training matters—especially during adolescence.
          http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201110/why-shouldn-t-johnny-watch-porn-if-he-likes

          ———————
          I know you want to argue, but I’m not sure where you are trying to take this. Are you saying Internet porn addiction doesn’t exist? If so, you are calling endless number of men liars. You are negating clinical evidence, experimental evidence, brain studies, and The American Society of Addiction Medicine which states that sexual behavior addictions exist.

          What is your point? And what is your evidence?
          ———————————————–
          —————–
          RECENT BRAIN STUDIES: ALL POINT IN ONLY ONE DIRECTION (there are several more on my website).

          Enhanced Reward Sensitivity and Decreased Loss Sensitivity in Internet Addicts: An fMRI Study During a Guessing Task (2011)

          J Psychiatr Res. 2011 Jul 16.

          As the world’s fastest growing “addiction”, Internet addiction should be studied to unravel the potential heterogeneity. The present study is set to examine reward and punishment processing in Internet addicts as compared to healthy controls.The results showed that Internet addicts associated with increased activation in orbitofrontal cortex in gain trials and decreased anterior cingulate activation in loss trials than normal controls. The results suggested that Internet addicts have enhanced reward sensitivity and decreased loss sensitivity than normal comparisons.

          COMMENTS: Both enhanced reward sensitivity (sensitization) and decreased loss sensitivity (lessened aversion) are markers of an addiction process

          Male Internet addicts show impaired executive control ability evidence from a color-word: Stroop task (2011).

          Neurosci Lett. 2011 Jul 20;499(2):114-8. PR China

          This study investigated the executive control ability of male students with Internet addiction disorder (IAD) by recording event-related brain potentials (ERP) during a color-word Stroop task. Behavior results showed that IAD students were associated with longer reaction time and more response errors in incongruent conditions than the control group. ERP results revealed that participants with IAD showed reduced medial frontal negativity (MFN) deflection in incongruent conditions than the control group. Both of the behavioral performance and ERP results indicate that people with IAD show impaired executive control ability than the normal group.

          COMMENTS: This study, like other recent fMRI studies on Internet addicts, showed reductions in executive control. Reductions in executive control in addicts indicate a decline in frontal cortex activity. this decline parallels loss of impulse control, and is found in all addictions.

          Microstructure Abnormalities in Adolescents with Internet Addiction Disorder. (2011).

          PLoS ONE 6(6): e20708. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020708

          Recent studies suggest that internet addiction disorder (IAD) is associated with structural abnormalities in brain gray matter. However, few studies have investigated the effects of internet addiction on the microstructural integrity of major neuronal fiber pathways, and almost no studies have assessed the microstructural changes with the duration of internet addiction.

          As one of the common mental health problems amongst Chinese adolescents, internet addiction disorder (IAD) is currently becoming more and more serious. Data from the China Youth Internet Association (announcement on February 2, 2010) demonstrated that the incidence rate of internet addiction among Chinese urban youths is about 14%. It is worth noting that the total number is 24 million.

          Conclusions: We provided evidences indicating that IAD subjects had multiple structural changes in the brain. The gray matter atrophy and white matter FA changes of some brain regions were significantly correlated with the duration of internet addiction. These results may be interpreted, at least partially, as the functional impairment of cognitive control in IAD. The prefrontal cortex abnormalities were consistent with previous substance abuse studies hence we suggested that there may exist partially overlapping mechanisms in IAD and substance use.

          COMMENTS: This study shows that those with Internet addiction develop brain abnormalities, which parallel those found in substance abusers. Researchers found a 10-20% reduction in frontal cortex gray matter in adolescents with Internet addiction. Hypofrontality is the common term for this change in brain structure. It is a key marker for all addiction processes.

          ————————–

          Reduced Striatal Dopamine D2 Receptors in People With Internet Addiction (2011).

          Neuroreport. 2011 Jun 11;22(8):407-11. Department of Brain and Cognitive Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, Korea.

          An increasing amount of research has suggested that Internet addiction is associated with abnormalities in the dopaminergic brain system. Consistent with our prediction, individuals with Internet addiction showed reduced levels of dopamine D2 receptor availability in subdivisions of the striatum including the bilateral dorsal caudate and right putamen. This finding contributes to the understanding of neurobiological mechanism of Internet addiction.

          COMMENTS: More evidence that Internet addiction exists. A reduction of striatal D2 dopamine receptors is the primary marker for desensitization of the reward circuitry, which is one the major changes that occurs with addictions,

          ——————-

          Gray Matter Abnormalities In Internet Addiction: A Voxel-Based Morphometry Study (2009).

          Eur J Radiol. 2009 Nov 17.. Jiao Tong University Medical School, Shanghai 200127, PR China.

          This study aims to investigate brain gray matter density (GMD) changes in adolescents with Internet addiction (IA) using voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis on high-resolution T1-weighted structural magnetic resonance images. Compared with healthy controls, IA adolescents had lower GMD in the left anterior cingulate cortex, left posterior cingulate cortex, left insula, and left lingual gyrus.

          CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggested that brain structural changes were present in IA adolescents, and this finding may provide a new insight into the pathogenesis of IA.

          COMMENT: Adolescents with internet addiction have decreased gray matter in portions of the frontal cortex. Decreases in size and functioning the frontal cortex (hyporfrontality) are found in all addiction processes, and is related to declining D2 receptors. Another example of a non-drug addiction causing brain changes similar to substance abuse disorders.

          ———–
          Functional magnetic resonance imaging of brain of college students with internet addiction (2011)

          Zhong Nan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2011 Aug;36(8):744-9. [Article in Chinese]

          Objective:To explore the functional locations of brain regions related to internet addiction (IA)with task-functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI).

          Conclusions: Compared with the control group, the IA group showed increased activation in the right superior parietal lobule, right insular lobe, right precuneus, right cingulated gyrus, and right superior temporal gyrus. Abnormal brain function and lateral activation of the right brain may exist in Internet Addiction.

          COMMENTS: Those with Internet Addiction had markedly different brain activation patterns than controls.

          ————–
          Increased regional homogeneity in internet addiction disorder a resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging study (2009).

          Chin Med J (Engl). 2010 Jul;123(14):1904-8.

          Background: Internet addition disorder (IAD) is currently becoming a serious mental health problem among Chinese adolescents. The pathogenesis of IAD, however, remains unclear. The purpose of this study applied regional homogeneity (ReHo) method to analyze encephalic functional characteristic of IAD college students under resting state

          Conclusions: There are abnormalities in regional homogeneity in IAD college students compared with the controls and enhancement of synchronization in most encephalic regions can be found. The results reflect the functional change of brain in IAD college students. The connections between the enhancement of synchronization among cerebellum, brainstem, limbic lobe, frontal lobe and apical lobe may be relative to reward pathways.

          COMMENTS: Brain alteration found in Internet addicts that do not exist in controls. Synchronization of brain regions leading to reward activation.

          Impulse inhibition in people with Internet addiction disorder: electrophysiological evidence from a Go/NoGo study. China. (2010)

          Neurosci Lett. 2010 Nov 19;485(2):138-42. Epub 2010 Sep 15.

          We investigated response inhibition in people with Internet addiction disorder (IAD) by recording event-related brain potentials during a Go/NoGo task. Results show that the IAD group exhibited lower NoGo-N2 amplitude, higher NoGo-P3 amplitude, and longer NoGo-P3 peak latency than the normal group. The results also suggest that the IAD students had lower activation in the conflict detection stage than the normal group; thus, they had to engage in more cognitive endeavors to complete the inhibition task in the late stage. In addition, the IAD students showed less efficiency in information processing and lower impulse control than their normal peers.

          Comments: Subjects with Internet addiction needed to “engage in more cognitive endeavors” to complete the inhibition task, and demonstrated lower impulse control – which can be related to hypofrontality

          • You still don’t get it. This is like asking what kind of beer causes alcoholism, or what kind of gambling causes gambling addiction. Are there good or bad types of gambling? The reward circuit doesn’t know what porn is; it only knows excessive stimulation. This is why addiction is determined at the level of the brain, the state of which is reflected in signs, symptoms, and behaviors. (See ASAM.)

            The internet studies include porn use and all point toward brain changes in some users’ brains. Where’s your evidence to refute clinical, experimental, anecdotal evidence? Also, where’s your evidence to refute the addiction experts at ASAM? They stated unambiguously that all addictions involve the same brain changes, and that sexual-behavior addictions exit.

            You clearly haven’t read the articles, the studies we cited, or ASAM’s definition of addiction. I’m just repeating myself and you don’t seem to have any legitimate point to make. This isn’t a TV show cross-examination. Whatever. I’m too busy to spoon-feed you the basics of neurobiology. No serious discussion is possible until you educate yourself better. Fini.

            • That Guy says:

              “You clearly haven’t read the articles, the studies we cited, or ASAM’s definition of addiction. I’m just repeating myself and you don’t seem to have any legitimate point to make. This isn’t a TV show cross-examination. Whatever. I’m too busy to spoon-feed you the basics of neurobiology. No serious discussion is possible until you educate yourself better. Fini.”

              My amateur opinion based on the DSM-IV would be that the language in this paragraph could be evidence of a Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

          • wellokaythen says:

            “Are you saying Internet porn addiction doesn’t exist? If so, you are calling endless number of men liars.”

            This is related to what I have been trying to get at in terms of diagnostic tools. There is a third possibility besides lying and telling the truth: being mistaken. A person could be mistaken about a self-diagnosis, or could lack the information to come to the most precise conclusion.

            If all it takes is for a man to say that he’s addicted to porn, then that means there’s no real need to cite the scientific studies. It’s immaterial in that case as to whether neuroscience can describe it or not, unless the whole point of the studies is to describe what the subject thinks he’s going through. Or, are the studies just to reassure the subject that he’s correct about his self-diagnosis, so he knows he’s not alone?

      • wellokaythen says:

        I see your point. Too many psychologists, psychiatrists, and addiction specialists are not treating porn addiction as a real, serious condition, or are not treating it as a condition on its own. Mental health professionals are not aware or vigilant enough about the possibility. I have no doubt that is true in many cases. Maybe we’re a long way from porn addiction being too quickly diagnosed.

        Perhaps we’re not there yet, but my message was just wondering out loud how to prevent professionals becoming hyper-aware to the point that they *overdiagnose* this condition. It could become a therapy fad like so many things nowadays, and then, unfortunately there will be a backlash that discredits it as a serious condition.

        I also see your point about questioning how bad a false positive could really be. Sure, giving up internet porn for six months may not have much of an impact on a person’s quality of life. In fact, if the person is not addicted, then it shouldn’t be a hardship at all. Very true.

        However, thinking of oneself as a porn addict because of a false positive, carrying that label when it’s not accurate, may have other negative consequences. Surely thinking you’re addicted to something when you are not adds unnecessary stress, hurts one’s relationships with other people, and carries a stigma. (Imagine that word gets out that you’re a porn addict, and then it turns out you’re not. Would people really change their mind about you?) It may also lead to spending more resources than necessary on addiction counseling. In a society of finite resources, time and money spent on unnecessary treatment is time and money that could be better spent on more necessary medical care. “I had to skip my yearly physical because I had to spend that money on addiction therapy.”

        • I don’t see your concerns as real problems. You don’t need a professional in order stop watching porn so no one needs to know. If you are quitting porn to address a diagnosed condition such as erectile dysfunction, you will soon know whether porn was a factor. As far as a “label,” no one is branding you with a big red P.

          This is really simple: quit porn for a few months and see what happens. If there’s no change in your condition, start watching again.

          What do you do if you are starting to experience bloating and gas? You could cut out dairy to see if that helps. Or your knees are sore for days after your workout….you could cut out the leg extension machine to see if that helps.

          • wellokaythen says:

            Then I guess I’m confused again.

            Porn addiction is something that a man can diagnose for himself without any professional help? No one else needs to know.

            So then, the role of scientists and medical professionals in fighting this serious addiction is_____?

      • This is especially sad, as some of the folks hardest hit by porn addiction are gay. A bisexual friend attended a sex addiction 12 Step group in NYC, and said most all the guys in it were gay.
        However, as one often sees here on Good Men Project these days, it is PC to continue to insist porn addiction is a “lifestyle choice,” and can’t be a primary illness…despite the growing evidence to the contrary.

        Are you saying more gays more likely to get porn-addicted than heterosexuals, or that porn addiction is harder on a gay individual than a heterosexual individual? In either case, please elaborate, because I don’t see how it would be any different.

        Also, I don’t recall porn addiction ever being described as a “lifestyle choice”, but I’ve often heard homosexuality described by that phrase, most often by people who think it’s a choice and not an orientation people are born with. (I.e. Typically by people who think heterosexuality is deviant.) Given how the preceding sentences seemed to link gays to porn and sex addition, and then the phrase that’s usually not gay-friendly, it kinda sorta sounded like you were saying homosexuality itself is an illness.

        • Oh please. Again you are completely mischaracterizing what we said and our views. My point is simply that that particular gay sexologist might want to be a bit more openminded given that many of his compadres seem to be hard hit by porn addiction. Neither you nor we have any way to know the percentage of porn users affected, or whether percentages vary by sexual orientation.

          • Ha ha! Not because they’re “gay and all,” but because the 12-Step groups my friend attended in NYC were overwhelmingly gay…to the point where he remarked on it because he found it striking. So more than ‘gut feeling,’ and less than hard evidence.

      • That Guy says:

        “In time, the science gap will close, and the debate will end. The writing is on the wall.”

        My goodness, this is a dramatic statement for a scientist to make about scientific evidence. It’s practically messianic. (In psychological terms, it may be an example of “grandiosity” in a person’s psyche.) It is hard to find language like this even in popular science magazines, much less among scientists talking to their peers. Is this language because of the nature of the GMP site, or in order to grab the reader’s attention, or is this the approach taken to all of the authors’ assertions?