Always young. Always beautiful. Always new. Porn keeps dopamine surging in the brain. But at what point does chronic stimulation become chronic dissatisfaction?
If you’re married and using Internet porn regularly, your sex life—the one with your wife—is probably a lot less satisfying than it could be.
You probably know that from an evolutionary standpoint, a man is rewarded for spreading his seed. But your wedding vows have an evolutionary purpose, too: they increase the chances that your joint offspring will have two caregivers, thus improving the odds that your genes will survive.
Internet porn, it turns out, messes with both these instincts. The endless variety and overstimulation may initially help you get more excited during sex, but over time it has the opposite effect: porn can dull your ability to please, and be pleased by, your partner.
When free, streaming porn became available, psychiatrist Norman Doidge, in The Brain That Changes Itself, noticed something unsettling among his porn-using patients:
They reported increasing difficulty in being turned on by their actual sexual partners, spouses, or girlfriends, though they still considered them objectively attractive. When I asked if this phenomenon had any relationship to viewing pornography, they answered that it initially helped them get more excited during sex but over time had the opposite effect.
Today’s porn can dampen your sexual responsiveness to your partner by over-activating three brain mechanisms. First, an ancient biological program in the brain overrides natural satiety when there are lots of mates begging to be sexed. Your brain perceives each new individual on your screen as a valuable genetic opportunity. Second, too much stimulation can numb the pleasure response of the brain for a time, pumping up cravings for more novel stimuli. Therefore, a familiar mate—your spouse—appears less and less enticing. And finally, too much stimulation of the brain’s sex and mating circuitry obstructs the mammalian instinct toward monogamy.
The result? Indifference.
♦◊♦
Meet the Coolidge Effect (or, What You Have in Common With an Oversexed Rat)
Consider what happens when you drop a male rat into a cage with a receptive female rat. First, there’s a sexual frenzy. Half a dozen copulations later, the fireworks fizzle. Even if she wants more, he’s not interested. His brain chemistry whispers, “Roll over and snore.” However, if a new female shows up, his exhaustion will miraculously fade long enough for him to gallantly attempt his fertilization duties. You can repeat this process with fresh females until the male nearly dies of exhaustion.
His renewable virility is not indicative of an insatiable libido. Nor does it increase his wellbeing—although it may look (and temporarily feel to him) that way. He goes after each new female because of surges of dopamine in his brain. They command him to leave no willing female unfertilized.
Scientists know this biological program as the Coolidge Effect.
Dopamine, the “gotta get it!” neurochemical behind all motivation, is central. Without it we wouldn’t bother to court, pursue climax, or even eat. When dopamine drops, so does motivation.
The more the rat copulates with the same female, the less dopamine he gets for his efforts—until he heads for the recliner, toting the remote.
Consider this graph. The fifth time a rat copulates with the same female, it takes him 17 minutes to get off. But if he keeps switching to novel females, he can do his duty in less than two minutes, five times in a row.
Unlike rats, humans are pair bonders. We’re wired, on average, to raise offspring together. But that doesn’t mean the Coolidge Effect isn’t strong in us, too. One man said,
I watched a documentary on guys with extremely expensive “love dolls.” One guy had so many that he was running out of room in his home. Even though these were dolls, he had already started to see them as girls he had spent enough time with. Probably why guys collect so much porn. I thought I was amassing some wonderful database of pleasure. But I can’t remember ever actually going back. The compelling part is the new image, the novel image … the novel love doll.
The uniqueness of Internet porn can goad a user relentlessly, as it possesses all the elements that keep dopamine surging. The excitement of the hunt for the perfect image releases dopamine. Moreover, there’s always something new, always something kinkier. Dopamine is released when something is more arousing than anticipated, causing nerve cells to fire like crazy.
In contrast, sex with your spouse is not always better than expected. Nor does it offer endless variety. This can cause problems because a primitive part of your brain assumes quantity of dopamine equals value of activity, even when it doesn’t.
Indeed, porn’s dopamine fireworks can produce a drug-like high that is more compelling than sex with a familiar mate. In a Playboy interview last year, musician John Mayer admitted he’d rather jerk off to images than have sex. He explained,
Internet pornography has absolutely changed my generation’s expectations. How could you be constantly synthesizing an orgasm [with a person] based on dozens of shots? You’re looking for the one … out of 100 you swear is going to be the one you finish to, and you still don’t finish. Twenty seconds ago you thought that photo was the hottest thing you ever saw, but you throw it back and continue your shot hunt and continue to make yourself late for work. How does that not affect the psychology of having a relationship with somebody? It’s got to.
Mayer is slave to the Coolidge Effect. His brain lashes him with dopamine each time he clicks to a novel “mate.” Keep in mind that dopamine is the hook in all addictions.
♦◊♦
Why Isn’t My Spouse Doing It for Me?
Why does your beloved start to look to you like cold oatmeal, even if others see her as homemade pumpkin pie? One factor may be the degree of abnormal stimulation of Internet porn.
Too much stimulation can actually numb the pleasure response of your brain, producing a variety of symptoms. We know this from recent research on gamblers, overeaters, and, of course, drug users. The brain starts to respond more weakly to whatever dopamine is around—such as that produced by your spouse’s “Honey, it’s date night.”
Dopamine is the gas for your desire engine. Blunted sensitivity means that even if you have plenty of gas, your V-8 is only running on four cylinders. Your numbed brain simply doesn’t respond to her as it did before.
Lack of desire was a factor in the failure of my marriage, and the failure of a relationship subsequent to that. I am in my late 30s, have used porn heavily since my teens, and have blamed my problems on partners (“I’m just not attracted to you,” “I wish you were more responsive”), the newness of partners (“I need to give my body time to catch up to my brain,” “I need to get over my ex”), fitness levels, diet, age, stress, performance anxiety …
Like a lot of men, I went to a doctor, got a physical that ruled out any serious medical conditions, and got Viagra. Once my marriage failed and I was single again, porn use went into overdrive—at least once a day and often two or three times. But when I realized I could no longer even masturbate to orgasm without porn, something clicked. Cause and effect seem blindingly obvious now, of course.
I’m with a new partner to whom I am very attracted and with whom I am very comfortable sexually—but I still cannot perform. Thankfully she is open to frank discussions about this stuff.
Ironically, even if sex with your spouse isn’t calling to you, you may feel intense cravings for something hyperstimulating (novel, risky). You keep slamming down that dopamine accelerator because your brain desperately wants to feel good again. As comedian Bill Maher once observed, that’s what led Hugh Grant, who had Elizabeth Hurley at home, to end up with “Marvin Hagler in a wig.”
Why would we have evolved to be more dissatisfied after particularly intense stimulation? It may be that this mechanism drove our ancestors to override their natural satiety during mating season, or when high-calorie food was around. Think the Coolidge Effect on twin turbos.
For example, when a guinea pig broke into a cage of females, he managed to father 42 pups. (When apprehended, he slept for two days straight. Brains need time to recover from such intense stimulation.) When we flood our brain with too many visuals of mates begging for our sexual favors, our brain perceives a similar genetic bonanza and obligingly drives us to binge by subtly numbing our pleasure response.
Unless you understand this hidden brain mechanism, which urges you to step on the gas even when you’ve had more than enough, it’s hard to connect an insatiable libido with a less responsive brain. After all, it feels like your libido is getting stronger. The reality is that neurochemically induced dissatisfaction deep in the brain is urging you to seek more stimulation.
Clues that your libido thermostat has been readjusted would be: you feel restless and dissatisfied more of the time; want kinkier sex with your mate; find your mate less attractive or compelling than the Internet; need more extreme material; and so forth. Experts call this effect “tolerance.” It can indicate an addiction process at work in the brain.
I’ve started speaking to my ex again. I explained that I wasn’t distant because I found her sexually uninteresting, but because I had been watching so much Internet porn that she’d have needed to be juggling with her feet, sucking off a horse, and rimming a [transsexual] for me to be fully engaged during lovemaking.
♦◊♦
How Does Porn Interfere With My Instincts for Monogamy?
If pair bonding benefits us and our offspring, then why are we so vulnerable to becoming hooked on the dopamine rush of novel cyber “mates?” Paradoxically, it’s partly because we possess the brain mechanisms to fall in love. This ability to pair-bond is completely dependent on blasts of dopamine goosing our love circuits. In the 97 percent of mammals that are promiscuous, these brain circuits for lasting bonds are missing.
When scientists compared the socially monogamous prairie vole with its promiscuous cousin, the montane vole, they discovered two curious things:
- Animals that form pair bonds, or fall in “love,” are more prone to addiction. They get a bigger dopamine blast from addictive substances. This may be why many of us are easily lured by dopamine-producing substances and activities such as Internet porn and gambling.
- Even more telling is what didn’t happen when scientists artificially flooded the pair bonders’ brains with chemical stimulation. These naturally monogamous animals no longer formed a preference for one partner. The artificial stimulation had hijacked their dopamine-dependent bonding machinery, leaving them just like regular (promiscuous) mammals.
Having a brain that’s sensitive to the high of falling in love supports your pair bond. You get somewhat “hooked” on your mate (provided there’s no scientist drugging you). Ideally, you stick around snuggling just as you evolved to do—because there isn’t a lot of other temptation. (Of course, if temptation falls in your lap, your genes may crack their dopamine whip.)
It’s evident, however, that the same sensitivity that urges you to fall in love becomes a vulnerability when you’re saturated with hyperstimulating sexual goodies. Suddenly, the circuitry your pair bond depends on is inundated with dopamine associated with stimuli other than your mate. It can make a mate uninteresting, and override your normal satiation mechanisms.
Far from just “rubbing off,” we chronic masturbators generally engage in a practice we call “edging”: bringing ourselves to the brink of orgasm repeatedly, without ejaculation. [Thanks to porn,] we can sustain extremely high levels of sexual arousal literally for hours. I am an active participant in several masturbation-focused Internet groups, and moderator of one.
Many of us go so far as to abandon partner-sex, even while the partner remains available and willing. We’ve also coined the term “copulatory impotence” for the common phenomenon of being able to get it up to Internet porn, but not for a partner.
Does this mean everyone who views porn will give up on his marriage? Of course not. However, support for the hypothesis that supernormal stimulation—even in less-stimulating versions than Internet porn supplies—interferes with human pair bonds has already shown up in research.
According to a 2007 study, mere exposure to images of sexy females causes a man to devalue his real-life partner. He rates her lower not only on attractiveness, but also on warmth and intelligence. Also, after pornography consumption, subjects in a 2006 study reported less satisfaction with their intimate partner—including the partner’s affection, appearance, sexual curiosity, and performance. Moreover, they assigned increased importance to sex without emotional involvement.
Obviously, if you want to stay married in reasonable contentment, you make your task easier by choosing not to trigger perception shifts that cause your partner to look like Hamburger Helper.
So, what’s in it for the contented pair bonder? Aside from only having the expense of maintaining one household, he gains health benefits. For example, research shows that intercourse has more beneficial effects on the body than masturbation. It releases neurochemicals that reduce stress better, and the benefits linger for days. Also, daily warm touch between couples benefits men by lowering blood pressure.
The Internet can’t do that. As one man observed,
In the long run, fantasy based on pornography creates stress. Craving the unattainable is just hollow and unsatisfying.
In contrast, relaxed intimacy with an emphasis on affectionate touch not only soothes, but also automatically strengthens bonds.
During the middle years of our marriage, I quit worshiping my wife. Instead there was plenty of yoni to worship, courtesy of the porn industry. Always young. Always beautiful. Always horny. Always new. Always able to get an orgasm. And never fulfilling. I recently unplugged totally from porn, and I have returned my wife to her pedestal. Our marriage has come out of a long stale period and is rejuvenated. We are closer than we have been for years, in bed and throughout the day. I am really enjoying the long, slow, non-goal-oriented lovemaking that never really ends—we just take a break and start again the next day. I feel better, and my libido seems to be present more continuously.
♦◊♦
How Do I Get the Magic Back?
You can re-link your sexual arousal to your spouse. Stop climaxing to stimuli that produce more dopamine than she does. Remember, a primitive mechanism in your brain always urges you to focus on the option that releases the most dopamine. It doesn’t care what best eases your stress, protects your health, or sustains your relationship. When an e-babe beckons, your brain assumes you’re in the gene-spreading business—a top priority.
Extreme stimulation can innocently tarnish your appreciation of your spouse by messing with your brain’s pleasure center. It’s up to you now: simply understanding our atavistic programming is the easy part.
Since I stopped masturbating to porn a couple of weeks ago, things are changing. When I see a woman with long hair walk by in a nice skirt or dress, I get that physical rush of energy. Used to be I needed a stronger pornographic fantasy from the Internet to get any type of arousal.
In another few weeks even his wife will give him a rush.
♦◊♦
More From Our Special Marriage Section:
Even stellar relationships lose their spark over time; here are the ingredients of a lasting, fruitful partnership, and techniques for weathering the the stormy times: What Your Marriage Needs to Survive
When Tom Forrister transitioned from female to male, his same-sex marriage became a federally-recognized, “traditional” marriage. The one constant was the bond he shared with his wife: My Exemplary, Everyday Marriage
Encouraging princess culture—however innocently—contributes to the sexualization of girls. Men can be part of the solution to the “princess problem”: Men and the Sexualization of Young Girls
The nightmare of family court is enough to deter a guy from even thinking about tying the knot. Marriage: Just Don’t
For all the stories written by and for women on this issue—and there are few—men are more likely to be absent from the public dialogue about intentional childlessness. Why aren’t men’s stories also being heard? Two Is Enough
Men are more promiscuous than women, but that doesn’t mean we should buy the cultural fallacy that men are programmed to cheat; the vast majority of men are happily, naturally monogamous: Are Men Natural-Born Cheaters?
Tom Matlack talks to married men to find out when they knew their wife was “the one”: She’s the One
As Gabi Coatsworth’s son’s bipolar disorder gave way to full-blown manic episodes, she watched her husband slip deeper into drink and detachment: Reading Between the Silences
Monogamy sounds like “monotony,” but it doesn’t have to be monotonous. Hugo Schwyzer explores how we can have the security—and the novelty—we desire in our relationships: Red-Hot Monogamy
♦◊♦
—Photo jguild12/Flickr
About Gary Wilson & Marnia Robinson
“During the middle years of our marriage, I quit worshipping my wife …”
Any man who worships his wife needs to start using more porn, quick.
A thoughtful and interesting article. I always suspected that porn created certain sexual ideals so unattainable to most that their influence might create a certain psychology in heavy users that would make it difficult if not impossible for them to realize a satisfactory sexual relationship with an actual woman (who they CAN get). The studies pointing to physiological influences is confirmation of sorts, and perhaps the biochemical cause of the psychological effects of heavy porn use.
A pity that there are so many defensive comments in the thread, but I find that interesting, as well, because the author didn’t say porn as a whole is bad, just that the heavy use as is so common today may have biological consequences that are not in alignment with most men’s life goals and aspirations. They protest too much. The subject is about brain wiring in mammals, it’s not a moral or condemning treatise on pornography. So take it easy, guys. Nobody is trying to take your joy stick away or make you feel bad about what you like.
I applaud Good Men for having the cojones to discuss.
One of the issues that bugs me is that porn doesn’t create sexual ideals. Instead, it often features unattractive kink that I’m not convinced that men naturalistically desire. Too frequent anal intercourse, facuial ejaculations, degrading language used on women, and so forth. This all does seem to have a ratcheting effect, however, so that may indicate an addictive pattern generally.
This year’s porn has to be more extreme than last year’s, or it loses out. There are definitely sexual addicts to porn. No question.
Casual utterances by my students I’ve overheard may indicate that young people are using porn as a model for real sexuality– when it’s the un-sex in actuality.
I think erotica ias possible, and sometimes happens in porn, almost accidentally.
I’m 29 years old and I only recently came to terms with a simple fact: The things that mainstream porn says that I should like… I don’t like. Mainstream porn says that I should be looking for a woman with the proportions of a Barbie doll. I’d rather be with someone curvy. Mainstream porn says that I should be thrilled about the prospect of anal sex. I’m not particularly enthused about it. Mainstream porn says that I should dominate my partner, that I should *fuck* and she should *be fucked*. I prefer gentler, shared experiences, where we’re equals.
So yes, porn does often lead to unrealistic views of sex. There is porn that is better, though, even though it runs up against the other problems mentioned in the article.
I liked your response until you said, “I applaud The Good Men Project for having the cojones to discuss.” Very male chauvinistic and very offensive.
Please don’t equate courage with maleness.
I completely agree with you. For the last 8 years I have used porn almost every day. There came a point when I could no longer masterbate without porn or even have sex without watching porn simultaneously.
Just last night I visted this a sexual partner of mine and she could not get me to cum. During this period I was able to get her to cum multiple times. Months before I had 2 ladies in my bed and I was still unable to cum, but I satisfied them both.
This is not good and I have decided not to watch porn any more….I may take a peak now and then, but no more porn used to get me off. I have destroyed relationships in the past, and it probably was because of my porn usage.
Guys we need to wise us. Let’s love our women and treat them right. Porn is not good for us.
James Caan
Thanks for sharing your experience. It’s amazing how such a harmless-seeming activity can have such a powerful impact on some brains. But then, since the advent of cheap junkfood, we see 79% of adult Americans overweight and half of those obese (addicted to food), so it’s likely extreme versions of food and sex can really hijack a lot of brains.
It’s great that you’re putting it altogether. It will be interesting to hear if you experience withdrawal symptoms when you quit. For more: http://yourbrainonporn.com/what-does-withdrawal-from-porn-look-like
I’m glad at least a handful of men can see the harm.
Hay James
My story is the same, 9 years of porn has made me unable to masturbate to orgasm without it, sometimes even unable to gain an erection without porn. I am of the believe that my lack of sexual performance killed my last relationship, and I have tried several times to quit but I always go back, hopefully this time I can stick to it and not just for a week or so like last time.
Good luck.
This FAQ conatins a lot of info or porn-induced ED. Is my erectile dysfunction (ED) related to my porn use?
http://yourbrainonporn.com/erectile-dysfunction-question
Thanks for this. My boyfriend has long struggled with a porn addiction, and a few months ago, he was able to break from it. I still struggle with the damages done. His addiction killed my self-esteem, and nearly killed our relationship. Reading articles like this one really help me to understand his addiction, and why he was doing it. They also help me to move on a little bit.
Thanks for your comment. Just think…if we had been men, *we* might have been struggling with this.
And we’re not? Speak for yourself. It’s a pity (though I know this is a men’s mag, technically) that it focuses so much on the biology of fertilization, b/c that doesn’t explain what I struggle with.
Hi Julia. Sorry you’re struggling. When we broadened the focus of our posts here, the editor revised the articles to focus on men. But here’s one that may be relevant to your situation. “Vibrators and Other Pleasures: When ‘Moderation’ Fails” http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201106/vibrators-and-other-pleasures-when-moderation-fails Good luck.
The article’s rationale is all about straight porn, and those whose sexuality is built around extending their gene pool. As a gay man in a long-term sexually satisfying relationship and using porn, my experience is quite different. This article seems either to have nothing to say to me, or to attempt to extend its analysis based on hetero assumptions. The comments appear to me to be based on either experience or assumptions that folks are eager to confirm with an article like this. The article’s hetero bias is one I’ve experienced before in this site.
1. “Edging” is also called Tantric Yoga.
2. There is no such thing as “the monogamy instinct.”
Sorry
to Henrey
Are you suggesting that Tantric masters would advise edging to internet porn for hours? I never read that in the ancient texts.
You are incorrect about “no monogamy instinct”. In fact, the brain structures and neurotransmitters that, when activated, cause social monogamy have long since been identified in prairie voles. Further studies found these same neurotransmitters and structures functioning in other socially monogamous mammals. Humans are socially monogamous. Only 3% of mammals are socially monogamous, which means capable of forming a pair bond. The ability to form a pair bond is purely biological. Either an animal has what are called the ‘neural correlate’s to form a pair bond, or it does not. The other 97% of mammals are classified as promiscuous. This means humans are capable of forming a pair bond (falling in love). Keep in mind that no species of animal appears to sexually exclusive.
I would suggest reading our PT article on this subject: Committed Relationship: Like It Or Not, You’re Wired For it. (Pair bonding is a biological program not a cultural construct.)
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201103/committed-relationship-it-or-not-you-re-wired-it
In addition, there are hundreds of research studies on the neurobiology of pair bonding, bonding and attachment. Here are a few to start with:
The neurobiology of love
http://www.soc.washington.edu/users/brines/biooflove.pdf
Anatomy and Neurochemistry of the Pair Bond
http://www2.gsu.edu/~bioazm/pdfs/Young%20et%20al%202005.pdf
The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love
http://www.kyb.mpg.de/fileadmin/user_upload/files/publications/attachments/Bartels2004_maternalLove_%5B0%5D.pdf
Romantic Love A Mammalian Brain System For Mate Choice
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1764845/
Monogamy gene found in people
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14641-monogamy-gene-found-in-people.html
Hi Gary,
I’m a sociologist who is studying biological issues as possible partial explanations for human behavior. I’m sorry to have left such brief and probably cynical comments. My understanding, though, is that humans are right on the line between monogamous and polygynous species, based on testicle and penis size, considered in comparison to body mass. The line about tantic sex was meant to be funny, but my understanding is that sexual tantra is, in fact, many times practicing what’s called “edging” here, but typically with a partner.
Thanks for the URLs. I do promise to read them, and they look interesting. I’ve been fond of some of the Freudian literature, but am venturing (and am just really at the starting point) into more empirical studies.
I think I see the problem with the article’s argument. I think humans tend to be emotionally monogamous during limerance, which is hardly mating for life. I think the authors are correct when they talk about a dopamine mechanism similar to that of voles pertaining to humans. The problem is that human males, at least, are capable of being in limerance with one woman and mating with another anyway. I believe that they are unlikely to get into limerance with the second one, however, as long as the are in love with the first. But it doesn’t insure monogamy by any means.
Humans are much longer-lived than voles, so it’s not a surprise when the seven year itch comes along and makes partners of either sex look less attractive. Marriage can certainly be renewed, of course, but depending on the vole comparison is too reductivist for human mating.
I think you are missing some major points of the article. Our argument is not that humans are sexually monogamous, as most are clearly not. Our argument is that we have the brain programs for social monogamy, and this has many implications. Our GMP blog will have further articles on this sticky topic, so you may have to wait for all our thoughts on this.
The linked article was written in response to the argument that only culture separates humans from bonobos. Others contend that if we simply adopted bonobo behaviors, the world would live in peace, harmony and love. I can hear “this is the dawning of the age of aquarius” playing in the background. Our neurobiology is not the same as a bonobo, so neither are our behaviors, drives or social structures. One cannot learn about a pairbonder (humans), from studying an animal that never pairbonds (bonobos, chimps, snakes, etc.).
We contend that:
1) Humans are socially monogamous mammals, but not a sexually monogamous species. (as stated, there are no sexually monogamous species)
2) As socially monogamous mammals we possess neurological programs that when activated cause love and pair bonding with a significant other. These bonds can last an entire lifetime for some.
3) Specific behaviors and practices can enhance or erode this neurological based pair bond. “Bonding behaviors” enhance the pair bond. Overstimulation is another behavior that can lead to the Coolidge effect, habituation to a partner (as you described), and erosion of the pair bond.
All the above, and much much more, is the basis of our book – Cupid’s Poisoned Arrow: From Habit to Harmony in Sexual Relationships
http://www.reuniting.info/cupids_poisoned_arrow
The voles are short-lived, yet monogamous primates have relatively long lives. You can read about Tamarins and what behaviors they engage in strengthen their pairbonds.
Why are pair-bonding tamarins and humans different from chimps?
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201011/staying-in-love-monkey-style
Humans add layers of mental complexity to their relationships, but all animals run the basic programs for parent-child bonding, attachment, and pair-bonding. “Love” appears to be the same in all mammals. Our contention is that one can alter brain biology with certain behaviors, and by pass the larger rational brain and target the limbic brain that controls love and bonding.
You can read more about what strengthens and what may erode pair bonds in these articles:
The Lazy Way to Stay in Love
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/200909/the-lazy-way-stay-in-love
An Uncanny Love Potion
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201007/uncanny-love-potion
Besides yearning to be with that special one, there are other implications for us as pair bonding mammal. One being that pair bonders are more vulnerable to addictions, and probably other mental disorders such as depression and anxiety.
Are Pair Bonders More Vulnerable to Addiction?
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/200911/are-pair-bonders-more-vulnerable-addiction
We agree with you that love can be fragile, indeed. Learning what behaviors directly speak to the limbic brain to strengthen bonds, and what signals can urge mates to separate is our message.
One of the Love’s Poisoned Arrow pieces talked about ED. I wanted to add the caveat that (as a well-known defender of Viagra here), I don’t think all ED is a result of porn addiction. Mine is probably related to high blood pressure medication. I endorse the business about Karaza (this was the technique the Oneida Colony used to prevent pregnancy.) I think I’ve used this very technique in every long-term relationship I’ve had. I was always a reluctant ejaculator anyway. I think women vary in appreciation of this (although the best three sexual relationships I had were characterized by hours-long lovemaking.) Some are like proverbial men– one pop and they want to get up. Some are continuous climaxers– they’re climaxing even if you’re not– and this is their nature– not something they can apparently change. My experience with both of these types is that they do seem to go someplace else during intercourse– so intimacy gets lost.
I think women (this is just my experience) who meet one emotionally can go for hours in non-climactic sex. So, interesting pieces.
If you consider the 4 basic needs (safety, variety, relationships, respect) I think you might get a different picture. From the viewpoint of safety, bonding for life with one person seems like a great idea. But that definitely inhibits the need for variety, thought is definitely strengthens the possibility of a stronger relationship. Perhaps it comes down to respect – if the person you with doesn’t make you feel needed or appreciated, then you will seek it elsewhere. The bottom line is that you need to find positive ways to meet all four needs that are in line with your ultimate 5th need, life’s purpose. If we are wired for monogamy, and it seems we are, then you must put forth the effort to ensure that all needs are being met in a positive way so that the need for “additional variety” never becomes an issue.
Good point. Staving off habituation is a challenge for most couples. It seems there are two ways to go about that. One is to try to increase variety with more, or more types of, stimulation; the other is to make the brain more sensitive so that subtler “variety” registers as thoroughly enjoyable. This is a topic we discuss at length in Cupid’s Poisoned Arrow: From Habit to Harmony in Sexual Relationships. Here’s a synopsis of some key ideas: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/200908/how-talk-cupid
Thanks for bringing some light to this issue. My fiance has been porn-free for 18 months now and it is incredibly liberating for him, and for me. It really is just “him and me” in bedroom and I think that lays the groundwork for a happy marriage. I just wish we could get this message through to men at a younger age. We are both around 30 years old and lucky to have been able to reach this point despite years of the media telling us otherwise.
Thanks for sharing your experience. As the scientists aren’t yet doing the necessary research (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201104/the-end-the-porn-debate), people benefit a lot from others’ actual experiences as a way of countering the current misinformation in the mainstream.
Or more truthfully: how FEMINISM has ruined marriages:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plkeKMTDM9g
If porn erases the desire for real women, I encourage every young man to watch it. This fiction beats the std infested twats anytime.
This is an interesting article to be sure, but it seems filled with the kind of pseudoscientific gobbledegook that pervades all evo-psych explanations of behavior.
At it’s core is a fairly (to me) uncontroversial thesis: porn will make normal women less attractive to you. (A straight male.) But this holds true for so many things in so many ways: media will make men and women less attractive in general. Escapist fantasy might make reality less attractive. Artificial flavoring and food might make ‘normal’ food less attractive. The list goes on. Manufactured stimulation is everywhere.
Another problem I had was the distinction between ‘social monogamy’ and ‘sexual monogamy’, which was never really explored. The whole article really deals with people wanting to be sexually monogamous, but all the science seems to deal with social monogamy in animals. They are not the same. To put it crudely, I think many more marriages would stay together if everyone cheated but no one ever found.
And finally, the article says only one thing about why sexual monogamy is desirable in the first place:
“So, what’s in it for the contented pair bonder? Aside from only having the expense of maintaining one household, he gains health benefits. For example, research shows that intercourse has more beneficial effects on the body than masturbation. It releases neurochemicals that reduce stress better, and the benefits linger for days. Also, daily warm touch between couples benefits men by lowering blood pressure.”
That seems kinda flimsy. I mean, has there been research is achieving lower blood pressure and better stress reduction via masturbation? Is there something intrinsic about masturbation that says it’s not possible (relative to sex with a partner)? Might it also not be simply that the prevailing social climate frames masturbation as lower status than sex, which causes all the other negative effects?
You’re right that engineered stimulation is everywhere, but it’s especially treacherous in intimate relationships because when habituation strikes, mates assume they’ve “fallen out of love.” As a happy primary pair bond ranks highest in importance to over all happiness (in a recent survey, at least), helping lovers to keep from wreaking on the shoals of habituation is a high priority. By understanding that habituation has a neurochemical component, which is to a degree under their control, they can better steer for the relationship results they want…or at least avoid speeding up habituation inadvertently with internet porn/vibrator use.
As for your research questions, have a look at the research of Stuart Brody. This is a relatively new area, as for decades sexologists assumed that all orgasms are the same in their effects. Not so.
YOU SAID: “Is there something intrinsic about masturbation that says it’s not possible (relative to sex with a partner)? ”
There’s definitely research showing the benefits of affectionate touch and close, trusted companionship. Masturbation can’t supply those – unless you’re in love with your hand.
YOU SAID: “Might it also not be simply that the prevailing social climate frames masturbation as lower status than sex, which causes all the other negative effects?”
Our article is about porn use, not pornless masturbation. In any case, masturbation seems to be quite mainstream and no longer censored.
It’s easy to label things “gobbledegook,” but that doesn’t help us respond to your conclusions. Could you be more specific about what you take issue with? Thanks.
WOW… there are a lot of wankers justifying their behaviour. The fact stands. Marriages and relationships are ruined by porn and in particular online AND offline porn addition. Do the math. Figure it out. Get your hand off your piece and onto the live, human piece in your bed.
I don’t have an argument with some of the points in this article but the very same thing can be said of women’s use of vibrators and other sex toys.
We completely agree. That’s why we wrote this article found of Psychology Today
Vibrators and Other Pleasures: When ‘Moderation’ Fails http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201106/vibrators-and-other-pleasures-when-moderation-fails
Is it just me? Or is it hilarious that there’s a Vaseline ad on this page?
???
I am in the battle with eliminating the porn influences in my life. I struggle with the reason I find it appealing, My wife and I hit our 7 year itch. A wedge had started to grow. Now looking back I see it as cohabitation. The spark was dying. We now longer strived to be more for each other! We began to settle into our roles and out of respect didn’t ask for more, just found other things to do to stave off the urges. Chain reactions! Reactions to reactions and years later, suddenly its all my fault. One thing to remember, It takes two to screw up a relationship! If your spouse is engaged in “Other” activities its not ALL their fault! The “victim” may have started a chain reaction, creating a situation where given the right situation, they may not want to fight as hard for their hum drum marriage/ relationship! Never quit trying to be better for your significant other!
I feel you Steve. It does take 2 to screw it up. I am man and we are essentially visual creatures. I will not deny that. But after trying to keep things interesting in my relationship. The lack of interest from my partner has led me to seeking other stimuli. Purely because I am a man and I have needs too.
This is an excellent article while focused on the effects of porn on partnered couples. As I single woman I have pretty much given up on trying to date right now.
Note: **This is not an “uninformed feminist rant”, I am a long time regular porn user and understand in detail the ways porn has been changing over the past 20+ years.**
It really does seem like single men have become much harder to impress and they commonly expect sex without bothering with any form of courtship. Most real women can not be prettier then the women in porn, nor do most of us want to be as selflessly accommodating as porn ‘actresses’. Expectations are going up about how we ideally would look and behave, while rewards for doing so seem to be going down.
I miss the now ancient traditions of flirting, seduction, courtship and developing love and intimacy….
“Dating” without those aspects is not worthwhile to me.
I shared your remarks on our forum, and a guy there had some thoughts you might want to read. http://www.reuniting.info/node/7631#comment-46007 He says he wants your number.
The same is true of women using sex toys. Her brain and nerves become accustomed/addicted to unnatual stimulation which her husband (nor any other man) can compete with. Some of these women find it hard or even impossible to climax through regular sex and therefore have even less desire to engage in it. Men have not yet evolved the ability to vibrate and grow their penis to 12″.
Dude, we get it. You hate vibrators and romance novels.
So then why do you attack people (often women) who question porn use in men?
Okay, so I don’t use vibrators or read romance novels. When I’m in a relationship do I get to expect my boyfriend to not look at porn?
All of this sound so rational and well thought, one of the best articles on the matter i ever read, thanks for explaining with so much base to me, but if i stop watching porn online, isn’t gonna make me more likely to cheat on my girl?
Dunno. In theory, the less you overstimulate your brain, the less demanding the need for novelty. If you’re feeling adventurous, you two might like to try something unfamiliar: http://www.reuniting.info/node/7220
I like how on the advertisements for this article is a young tart half-naked posing for American Apparel. Nice touch.
While I am aware that this article is written for a very specific audience of monogamous couples who are NOT hyper-sexual (like I am), I do feel compelled to point out a few assumptions that I find troubling. (And once again, I know I’m in the minority, but I want this viewpoint and voice to be heard.)
Assumption 1) Women don’t like porn. I don’t generally watch it, but I did find myself going through my husbands little collection the other day for fun and getting aroused. I let him know, he came home that night, we watched some together, and then frolicked like teenage bunnies in heat. Some women do like porn, and I say, if you find some you like, watch it together! It’s fun. And no, I have no self-esteeem issues with those women. Why on earth would I want fake tits, too much make-up, long fingernails and bleached hair? And why would my husband want me to look like that? I know he thinks I’m the sexiest person to have crossed this here earth. (At least, he better. He’s watching me type this!)
Assumption 2) You SHOULD be monogamous. Now, I am not a social scientist, so I lay no claims as to whether social or sexual monogamy is better, hard wired, created culturally, or anything else, BUT, the idea that human being are SUPPOSED to be monogamous is a toxic one to people who are decidedly not, like me. It was by far easier, healthier, and more honest to tell my husband (then, boyfriend) that I was not a sexually or emotionally monogamous person, and have him agree to let us be open. Which, we have been, successfully, for the past six years (two of them married). We are committed to each other’s well being, happiness, and future, but we take on lovers–I’ve had a long-term one for the past year– and we both truly enjoy it.
Assumption 3) You will become addicted to porn or create unrealistic fantasies because of it. Most men I know watch porn every now and then, wank off, and then get on with their lives. It’s a non-issue. They do realize that it’s fake– for example, I cannot go for hours at a time. My vagina just won’t do it. It doesn’t matter; the men who truly make love to women love who they actually are. They appreciate that we don’t look like those porn stars. And since I don’t make the habit something forbidden or evil, it loses its allure. This is not to say that some men don’t fall prey to addiction (it takes all kinds!), but watching a little porn now and again isn’t going to tear you apart if you’re just smart about it.
Assumption 4) All porn is the same. It’s not. I have porn that is real couples, not porn stars, telling their sweet love stories, and then getting filmed in the bedroom. It’s not paid, it’s not professional, and it’s certainly not faked. And it’s damned beautiful to watch. There are many types of porn out there, not just the raunchy free stuff you find through search engines.
I have no idea if this will make it through the filter, but I wanted to let everyone know that there are two sides to every story. This is mine.
In my experience, yes, but let’s be real that won’t stop men. *shrug*
Even men who dont become “addicted” get weird ideas from it. Not to mention the really young guys are accustomed to the fake porn bodies. And this is me reporting from the front lines. In short, women cannot compete with porn, but men will not stop. If the wife/gf is offended he doesn’t care.
And yes, men go for hours and hours. There are men who physically injure themselves from masturbating so much. But yet, they dont stop.
Most women dont come from vaginal sex, and that has nothing to do with romance novels, vibrators, whatever. Speaking of vibes- i wonder if any man would give up porn if women gave up the novels and vibes. Me thinks not! Men think what they do is ok as long as they say I love you to the wifey/gf in the end. *roll eyes*
Men dont like to be stereotyped as lust driven beasts, but they act like lust driven beasts. I don’t get it.
Because lust is natural, and not a problem in many cases. How about asking the man why he looks at porn or the woman why she reads the novel (or whatever each uses)?
“Men dont like to be stereotyped as lust driven beasts, but they act like lust driven beasts. I don’t get it.”
Women dont like to be stereotyped as golddigging beasts, but they act like golddigging beasts. I don’t get it. – Does that illustrate why it’s offensive? Because people are individuals and some men are lust driven (to excess I guess you mean), others aren’t. Unless you are inside the man’s brain, you will never know exactly why he does it just like I don’t know why women do some of the stuff they do. Maybe he watchs it simply to give visuals to aid in a fantasy where he’s actually picturing his wife/gf/crush. Maybe JUST the mechanics itself turns him on, maybe the woman and/or the man in the video are who he is fantasizing about. He might fantasize about having sex with 20 models or he fantasize about being in relationship and is single. It varies person to person, porn and toys/etc harm some relationships and enhance others.
You’re also assuming these young guys are accustomed to these fake (I guess you mean surgically enhanced female bodies, and not all are. In fact many guys dislike the fake breasts, etc, they look at amateur porn of real couples having sex, a wide variety of body types and personalities, sexual positions, styles, etc. In personal experience I’ve found women to judge a woman’s body much harsher than a man, and yes there are some of each gender that do this but it doesn’t mean all do it. There are are plenty of women of all shapes and sizes with partners who love them and are 100% attracted to them, some of them look at porn and some don’t.
Hate bad porn all you want but porn is a medium and it’s a very diverse medium, there is porn with men and women of all shapes, sizes, races, ages (stick to 18+ !). All manner of kinks and fetishes and quite “normal” behaviour too. I personally think some women’s magazines are as harmful as the portrayal of women in porn, the level of airbrushing, digital manipulation, diet guides make it downright insecurity builders. Quite frankly it’s disturbing the manipulation allowed in magazines, many of which are accessible to kids and the level of harm they must do is incredible.
Btw, recent studies show men are just as insecure of their bodies as women are now so I guess it’s a cultural wide problem, and quite serious of both genders are bothered by it. Basically, there are more elements at play than just bad porn.
Thanks for pointing out that men’s self images are being destroyed too. We hear that all the time from heavy porn users. They think that because they don’t look like alpha males (in their estimation), because they don’t have giant porn penises, and because those penises increasingly are not standing up when they try to have real sex, they are not attractive enough to be “relationship material.” This drives them further into porn.
The good news is that they are surprised and delighted when they stop using porn and suddenly notice women noticing them and flirting with them. Many also report feeling like alphas.
You’re right that porn is not the only contributor to this tragic low-self-esteem phenomenon, but it is likely to be a major contributor given porn’s ubiquitous use among some generations.
The suggestion that “all elements must be discussed, or no discussion is valid” would curtail the writing of any brief article.
Your critique doesn’t successfully discount the points we’re making about the risks of today’s porn, in terms of its power to desensitize the brain. Its power has more to do with the constant novelty and searching it makes possible (each of which release dopamine with each click), rather than with “normal” or “abnormal” content. For more, see “Porn Then and Now: Welcome to Brain Training” http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201108/porn-then-and-now-welcome-brain-training
The original title we proposed to this piece was “Porn, Novelty and Dissatisfaction.” The editor made it more moralistic sounding.
The critique was for the comment above, not the article:P
“You’re right that porn is not the only contributor to this tragic low-self-esteem phenomenon, but it is likely to be a major contributor given porn’s ubiquitous use among some generations. ”
With this do you mean penis size or all body image images? From what I can tell of body issues it’s a mix of penis size which would be porn, but also the chiseled body look/low fat/large muscles that is basically in magazines, movies, tv shows.
Would it be safe to assume that porn in moderation could be fine, like other forms of entertainment and stimulation? It sounds like the type of porn viewed and content in it also plays a large role, amateur content with a wide variety of body shapes and sizes is something I’d guess to be great for the medium instead of always the very narrow barbie type body.
Maybe a good warning label is needed, or at least education as you are doing. Thank-you though for the article. Everything in life seems to be moderation is key
Thanks for sorting us out.
Frankly, we think the viewer matters as much as the porn. So, as with alcohol, some people can watch a lot of porn with very little obvious effect. Others have brains that swiftly adapt to overstimulation. So “moderate” is relative.
We don’t think warning labels will discourage teens, whose brains are wired to seek excess. See http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/cupids-poisoned-arrow/201110/why-shouldn-t-johnny-watch-porn-if-he-likes But we do think education about the agenda (food and sex at the top of the list) of the brain’s reward circuitry and its vulnerability in today’s environment is critically needed.