A powerful letter from the wife of a inappropriate content addict...

[Michie]

Where does the Bible say inappropriate content destroys the soul?

I feel like I'm pulling thread out of a cat's mouth slowly. Ever so slowly.

Does the Bible say simulations where men shoot guns and kill fake people destroys the soul?

The Bible does not talk about the internet & cars either.

 

[Rhamiel]

LOL! Using inappropriate content to beat up on men? Seems you are getting very defensive.

that is not far from the truth, not accusing anyone in this thread of doing that, but just a few days ago I heard something on this very topic on youtube

I can not post it here because the language and subject matter is not fit for CF
the women who host the radio show are athiests and use very colorful language

 

[Nani-Day]

Where does the Bible say inappropriate content destroys the soul?

Context of the scriputures and common sense tells you that inappropriate content is destructive...It's quite obvious.

If even a super liberal atheist caught a Christian watching inappropriate content, Im pretty sure that they'd scream "hypocrite!" because even someone like that would know that a Christian has no business watching inappropriate contentography.

 

[MikeK]

Pointing out the extreme lengths you give and the homelessness and hold-ups, and death, isn't that an apples and oranges argument? You are arguing that inappropriate content isn't as addictive because people don't hold up liquor stores over inappropriate content or become homeless over inappropriate content. Why would they? How could you become homeless from inappropriate content? Why would you need to hold up a liquor store or bank for inappropriate content?

Addictive doesn't equal arrests, shooting oneself, and homelessness. Addiction is thinking you can't live without something. Addiction is when you keep something up without end. You've never heard of people binging inappropriate content for 5, 6, 7, or 8 hours? I have. You've never heard of people's work being affected and losing their jobs over inappropriate content? I have. You've never heard of marriages ending over inappropriate content? I sure have! You've never heard of sex addiction? Have you watched any of the legit studies about how the brain gets rewired and dopamine gets all screwed up and out of wack thanks to inappropriate content? People binge on inappropriate content and get caught up in it and it is like a gateway, man. You start with magazines, then videos, then peep shows then strip clubs then hookers and online virtual junk, spending thousands on it, ruining relationships.

They say that half of most churches are full of men looking at inappropriate content. Can we say that half of most churches are alcoholics or cocaine junkies?

I don't understand your argument.

You don't understand my argument because I haven't made an argument. I am asking for a statement of fact that was offered to be backed up. The fact that some people go on 4 hour inappropriate content binges doesn't substantiate the claim that the author made that it is more addictive than heroin or cocaine. While they, whoever they are, might say that half of the men in most churches are looking at inappropriate content, that is not evidence that it is more addictive than anything. What would happen to the inappropriate content addicts tomorrow if God snapped his Holy fingers and took all the inappropriate content away instantly, never to return? Would they get the shakes? Would they scratch their skin off? Would they die? There exist or have existed places where inappropriate content is illegal, presumably there is also an underground market for inappropriate content. Donor did those societies have huge crime issues involving people robbing and killing to get it?

And? Does that discount the addiction & the harm it does? I'm not going to ignore the big picture for your nitpicking how an author titles his article.

inappropriate contentography is more available than it has ever been before. It is still being studied & so far the findings are not all that favorable. You are expecting long term results while professionals are still studying the ramifications & effects.

Instead of addressing the actual subject you still are finding fault with the things that deflect.

If you feel comfortable downplaying other's pain that have been through it then just go on & stick your head in the sand if it makes you feel better.

I don't know who's pain you think I'm downplaying. We have a duty to stand for truth. I have stated that inappropriate content is bad. inappropriate content is a grave evil. We can make good, reasoned arguments why inappropriate contentography is bad without resorting to unsubstantiated statements, just like we can show that contraception is a grave evil without resorting to fudging numbers re the effectiveness of NFP. When we are trying to convince someone that something they like is wrong, like we are with modern society and inappropriate contentography, we need to be careful not to form alliances with those who spread comfortable falsehoods that will harm our cause in the long run. Our house must be clean in that regard, lest all our arguments be dismissed as crying wolf.

Great post Gurney. There is no reason for a Christian to go into apologetic fits over inappropriate contentography not being all that bad. Talk about tunnel vision.

Your words betray you here. The fact that I advocate for reason and am not ready to accept off-the-cuff statements without evidence as facts does not mean that I don't think inappropriate contentography is all that bad. I don't believe that it is more addictive than hard street drugs because I haven't seen evidence supporting that claim, I do believe that partaking in it is gravely evil because I trust the voice if Christ's Church on the topic. That's all.

 

[MikeK]

Where does the Bible say inappropriate content destroys the soul?

I feel like I'm pulling thread out of a cat's mouth slowly. Ever so slowly.

Does the Bible say simulations where men shoot guns and kill fake people destroys the soul?

The statement of Our Lord on lust and adultery should just about sum it up. inappropriate content might not be intrinsically evil, as I suspect that a detective would have reason to watch it while gathering evidence that some crime had been committed, but it is evil so long as it is being viewed to stimulate sexual arrousal, and that is the purpose it exists for.

 

[Antigone]

And? Does that discount the addiction & the harm it does? I'm not going to ignore the big picture for your nitpicking how an author titles his article.

So you're okay with a title that's an outright lie (nowhere does the article reach this conclusion) as long as it gets the message across?

Honestly, I'm asking.

 

[Ren207]

I've known inappropriate content addicts and I've known opiate addicts. I have yet to meet a person who was homeless due to inappropriate content. I have yet to lose a friend who held up a pharmacy and shot himself in a highway median after a police chase to get his inappropriate content fix. I have never known a person to die because they were locked up and couldn't get to their inappropriate content.

I don't like using hyperbole (inappropriate content is worse than cocaine) either but you're not much better here. There is absolutely no reason for a inappropriate content addict to go shoot up a pharmacy to get his inappropriate content fix. All he needs is online access and there you have it. For free! Every kink and taste covered! The worst that can happen to him is public shame (like that schoolkid who was caught masturbating in a library).

The whole legalize movement argues the same thing that if drugs were available legally then it would cut down drug crime dramatically. They do have a point...

Now if inappropriate content were to be made illegal and you could go to prison for 20 years for owning some... there might very well be a few highway police chases...

PS. I'm hoping Christians aren't lobbying to make inappropriate content illegal? Please let us have our freedom to sin... -_-

 

[MikeK]

I don't like using hyperbole (inappropriate content is worse than cocaine) either but you're not much better here. There is absolutely no reason for a inappropriate content addict to go shoot up a pharmacy to get his inappropriate content fix. All he needs is online access and there you have it. For free! Every kink and taste covered! The worst that can happen to him is public shame (like that schoolkid who was caught masturbating in a library).

I appreciate your comment, as I like being called out if I am out-of-line. It is sometimes difficult to see the planks in our own eyes.

That said, you would have a solid argument, if inappropriate content were always available to every addict in every place and time. It isn't. There are inappropriate content addicts who travel extensively abroad in relatively unsettled areas with no access to inappropriate contentography or serve on submarines for 3 months at a crack where inappropriate contentography is prohibited, there is zero internet access, and a man has only what he can fit in a large duffle bag.

The whole legalize movement argues the same thing that if drugs were available legally then it would cut down drug crime dramatically. They do have a point...

Now if inappropriate content were to be made illegal and you could go to prison for 20 years for owning some... there might very well be a few highway police chases...

Here again I think we need to isolate groups who have less access to inappropriate content and study their actions. We''ve seen, with hard drugs, that countries with liberal drug laws tend to have lesss drug-related violent crime. I don't know that we have data to sugggest that if we banned inappropriate content we would have a markedly more violent society, as criminals fight over inappropriate content distribution turf.

If anyone is interested in a study on inappropriate contentography in a modern, populated country, inappropriate contentography is categorically illegal in China and there is certainly no shortage of travel bewteen the United States and China. inappropriate contentographers are somnetimes punished with up to life in prison. We could look into what lengths Chinese citizens and/or American business travelers go to to get their inappropriate contentographic fix in China and assses the level of crime that exists do to adddicts going to great lengths to get their hands on the stuff.

PS. I'm hoping Christians aren't lobbying to make inappropriate content illegal? Please let us have our freedom to sin... -_-

I would prefer inappropriate content were illegal, but I would want the definition restricted to full-on penetration for the purpose of inciting sexual arousal in the viewer. I've seen a staggering ammount of legitimate literature and theatre and art callled inappropriate contentography by prudes.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

The problem with your statements is that they're asking for something scientific in something that can NEVER be scientific? Is there an official "addictiveness" test? How does one compare cocaine addiction severity to heroine addiction severity to alcoholism severity? What would that test look like, Mike? Doe they put these folks into a room with see-through glass watching people with withdrawals and count how many times each one vomits? What does this test look like? Do they count how many times each addict shivers or cries out? Do they count the number of times the person babbles or falls out of bed? Do they do a longitudinal study measuring how much $$$$ the addict has lost and compare net worths?

Do you see that your request is unreasonable? What you're asking is about as reasonable as saying, "I don't believe Peanut Butter Cups are the tastiest candy bar until I see some hard data!" Really? How will that test look? Same with addiction levels. Addiction comes from common sense and observation by society, doctors, and health care experts. There is no "this one is worse than that one" in addiction severity. Can you show me anything pointing to the drugs being compared in a legitimate test already?

Perhaps the claim in the OP is overstated? I don't know! But I do know for a fact that inappropriate content is EXTREMELY addictive. I have friends and family who ARE inappropriate content-addicted. I am not going to go into details, but you just need to trust my word when I say, I've watched people reach rock-bottom, have their marriages destroyed, have seen financial problems from spending thousands on inappropriate content, etc. They have encounter AA-style groups for inappropriate content addicts. I knew people in high school who ditched school to go get inappropriate content from a liquor store because they' hadn't masturbated or looked at inappropriate content in 24 hours. I knew people who you'd see after Mass looking at inappropriate content at a nearby magazine store, people singing in the choir. I knew people who were in marriage counseling with their priest over it. I know people who lost their job over it as well as a broker for a realtor my wife worked for years back who was so inappropriate content-addicted that it cost him the franchise (long story).

Instead of debating this issue, trying to "win" some kind of argument or acting like we're on Crossfire, why don't we just all agree on the addictive nature of it and pray for the folks addicted and miserable? Why don't we Christians just all agree that it's a serious problem instead of treating each and every issue like a debate. That's what's wrong here.

You don't understand my argument because I haven't made an argument. I am asking for a statement of fact that was offered to be backed up. The fact that some people go on 4 hour inappropriate content binges doesn't substantiate the claim that the author made that it is more addictive than heroin or cocaine. While they, whoever they are, might say that half of the men in most churches are looking at inappropriate content, that is not evidence that it is more addictive than anything. What would happen to the inappropriate content addicts tomorrow if God snapped his Holy fingers and took all the inappropriate content away instantly, never to return? Would they get the shakes? Would they scratch their skin off? Would they die? There exist or have existed places where inappropriate content is illegal, presumably there is also an underground market for inappropriate content. Donor did those societies have huge crime issues involving people robbing and killing to get it?



I don't know who's pain you think I'm downplaying. We have a duty to stand for truth. I have stated that inappropriate content is bad. inappropriate content is a grave evil. We can make good, reasoned arguments why inappropriate contentography is bad without resorting to unsubstantiated statements, just like we can show that contraception is a grave evil without resorting to fudging numbers re the effectiveness of NFP. When we are trying to convince someone that something they like is wrong, like we are with modern society and inappropriate contentography, we need to be careful not to form alliances with those who spread comfortable falsehoods that will harm our cause in the long run. Our house must be clean in that regard, lest all our arguments be dismissed as crying wolf.



Your words betray you here. The fact that I advocate for reason and am not ready to accept off-the-cuff statements without evidence as facts does not mean that I don't think inappropriate contentography is all that bad. I don't believe that it is more addictive than hard street drugs because I haven't seen evidence supporting that claim, I do believe that partaking in it is gravely evil because I trust the voice if Christ's Church on the topic. That's all.

 

[MikeK]

The problem with your statements is that they're asking for something scientific in something that can NEVER be scientific? Is there an official "addictiveness" test? How does one compare cocaine addiction severity to heroine addiction severity to alcoholism severity? What would that test look like, Mike? Doe they put these folks into a room with see-through glass watching people with withdrawals and count how many times each one vomits? What does this test look like? Do they count how many times each addict shivers or cries out? Do they count the number of times the person babbles or falls out of bed? Do they do a longitudinal study measuring how much $$$$ the addict has lost and compare net worths?

Addictiveness would be quantified, I suspect, by observing either the rate at which a person exposed to something becomes addicted, or the strength of that addiction. It isn't clear exactly what the author is claiming, because her icle is about something other than what the title states.

Do you see that your request is unreasonable? What you're asking is about as reasonable as saying, "I don't believe Peanut Butter Cups are the tastiest candy bar until I see some hard data!" Really? How will that test look? Same with addiction levels. Addiction comes from common sense and observation by society, doctors, and health care experts. There is no "this one is worse than that one" in addiction severity. Can you show me anything pointing to the drugs being compared in a legitimate test already?

If you are correct, which you aren't, then the statement that "inappropriate contentography is more addicting that heroin or cocaine" is a ridiculous one and you should be calling it out as such.

Where you err is in the idea that things that are difficult to quantify are immeasurable. We can say with some certainty how good a peanut butter cup tastes to the typical human by offering a randomly selected group a single piece of candy from a selection of many and analysing the results. We can say with some certainty how addicting something is by analyzing either what percent of people exposed to it develop habits that they cannot break even though they want to, or we can study how addicted they are by noting the lengths they will go to to get a fix or what happens to them emotionally and physically if they are unable to fix.

Perhaps the claim in the OP is overstated? I don't know! But I do know for a fact that inappropriate content is EXTREMELY addictive. I have friends and family who ARE inappropriate content-addicted. I am not going to go into details, but you just need to trust my word when I say, I've watched people reach rock-bottom, have their marriages destroyed, have seen financial problems from spending thousands on inappropriate content, etc. They have encounter AA-style groups for inappropriate content addicts. I knew people in high school who ditched school to go get inappropriate content from a liquor store because they' hadn't masturbated or looked at inappropriate content in 24 hours. I knew people who you'd see after Mass looking at inappropriate content at a nearby magazine store, people singing in the choir. I knew people who were in marriage counseling with their priest over it. I know people who lost their job over it as well as a broker for a realtor my wife worked for years back who was so inappropriate content-addicted that it cost him the franchise (long story).

Instead of debating this issue, trying to "win" some kind of argument or acting like we're on Crossfire, why don't we just all agree on the addictive nature of it and pray for the folks addicted and miserable? Why don't we Christians just all agree that it's a serious problem instead of treating each and every issue like a debate. That's what's wrong here.

I don't contend that inappropriate content is not adddictive and that it does not ruin some lives. We should unite in making our case clearly and reasonably. If we allow our "team" to make unsupported statements unchecked, then it is far easier for the fence-sitter to conclude that we're a bunch of nutjobs. Allowing questionable statements to stand just because we might appreciate the sentiment does real tangiable harm to our cause, that is why it is worthy of mention.

 

[Michie]

I don't like using hyperbole (inappropriate content is worse than cocaine) either but you're not much better here. There is absolutely no reason for a inappropriate content addict to go shoot up a pharmacy to get his inappropriate content fix. All he needs is online access and there you have it. For free! Every kink and taste covered! The worst that can happen to him is public shame (like that schoolkid who was caught masturbating in a library).

The whole legalize movement argues the same thing that if drugs were available legally then it would cut down drug crime dramatically. They do have a point...

Now if inappropriate content were to be made illegal and you could go to prison for 20 years for owning some... there might very well be a few highway police chases...

PS. I'm hoping Christians aren't lobbying to make inappropriate content illegal? Please let us have our freedom to sin... -_-

Thank you. The article mentions the same. Withdraw symptoms can be severe but they do not manifest in the same ways.

 

[Rhamiel]

so much argument over splitting hairs


why must we over analyze and talk everything to death? getting bogged down in minutia


inappropriate content is evil

simple enough to understand

 

[Michie]

so much argument over splitting hairs


why must we over analyze and talk everything to death? getting bogged down in minutia


inappropriate content is evil

simple enough to understand

That's what I mean by ignoring content for the sake of argument for arguments sake.

Seriously comparing the severity of withdrawl symptoms by the severity of physical symptoms is like telling someone with mental issues that their are no wounds to be seen so they're fine.

The addiction is not measured by the severity of withdrawls. Addiction is addiction & if it is having consequences on you & those around you then it is a problem. Period. As a Christian? Well, that goes without saying.

Everything I posted explains it quite well. But you cannot have fundamentalist mindset when it comes to an expected set of withdrawl symptoms to define it. We've moved way beyond that.

Reminds me of when mom was telling me of nobody understanding post traumatic stress, OCD, depression, or even tourettes syndrome. If you can't see it it does not exist mentality.

People are affected differently by different things.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

So you actually think we can start an addiction meter study and treat is like a taste test. Ay yay yay.....

When you say, "if you are correct, which you aren't," what are you saying I'm incorrect about in that specific paragraph?

Can you at least appreciate my point and concede that you cannot say that inappropriate content isn't as addictive as these drugs because we have no metric at this point? You threw out some symptoms of drug addiction, and I threw out some symptoms of inappropriate content addiction, and you claim these symptoms you throw out are somehow legit, and despite there being no proof that the OP article claimant is full of it, you seem to think there is proof?

Have you actually taken the time to study inappropriate content addiction and done any research before lampooning all this? And as Rhamiel said wisely, why does everything have to be a debate? Why must responding to a simple article have to get nasty and arrogant? I'm open to your statement being correct that the OP article makes a claim that can't really be backed up scientifically, but I'm also open to the fact that you can't prove the reverse.

Addictiveness would be quantified, I suspect, by observing either the rate at which a person exposed to something becomes addicted, or the strength of that addiction. It isn't clear exactly what the author is claiming, because her icle is about something other than what the title states.



If you are correct, which you aren't, then the statement that "inappropriate contentography is more addicting that heroin or cocaine" is a ridiculous one and you should be calling it out as such.

Where you err is in the idea that things that are difficult to quantify are immeasurable. We can say with some certainty how good a peanut butter cup tastes to the typical human by offering a randomly selected group a single piece of candy from a selection of many and analysing the results. We can say with some certainty how addicting something is by analyzing either what percent of people exposed to it develop habits that they cannot break even though they want to, or we can study how addicted they are by noting the lengths they will go to to get a fix or what happens to them emotionally and physically if they are unable to fix.



I don't contend that inappropriate content is not adddictive and that it does not ruin some lives. We should unite in making our case clearly and reasonably. If we allow our "team" to make unsupported statements unchecked, then it is far easier for the fence-sitter to conclude that we're a bunch of nutjobs. Allowing questionable statements to stand just because we might appreciate the sentiment does real tangiable harm to our cause, that is why it is worthy of mention.

 

[Michie]

So you actually think we can start an addiction meter study and treat is like a taste test. Ay yay yay.....

When you say, "if you are correct, which you aren't," what are you saying I'm incorrect about in that specific paragraph?

Can you at least appreciate my point and concede that you cannot say that inappropriate content isn't as addictive as these drugs because we have no metric at this point? You threw out some symptoms of drug addiction, and I threw out some symptoms of inappropriate content addiction, and you claim these symptoms you throw out are somehow legit, and despite there being no proof that the OP article claimant is full of it, you seem to think there is proof?

Have you actually taken the time to study inappropriate content addiction and done any research before lampooning all this? And as Rhamiel said wisely, why does everything have to be a debate? Why must responding to a simple article have to get nasty and arrogant? I'm open to your statement being correct that the OP article makes a claim that can't really be backed up scientifically, but I'm also open to the fact that you can't prove the reverse.

Thank you.

 

[Antigone]

That's what I mean by ignoring content for the sake of argument for arguments sake.

Seriously comparing the severity of withdrawl symptoms by the severity of physical symptoms is like telling someone with mental issues that their are no wounds to be seen so they're fine.

The addiction is not measured by the severity of withdrawls. Addiction is addiction & if it is having consequences on you & those around you then it is a problem. Period. As a Christian? Well, that goes without saying.

Everything I posted explains it quite well. But you cannot have fundamentalist mindset when it comes to an expected set of withdrawl symptoms to define it. We've moved way beyond that.

You're missing the point. Nobody here is defending inappropriate contentography, nobody is saying it is harmless. But the links you posted provide nothing but lies and half-truths and nobody benefits from that. Is that really so hard to understand?

Again, I ask you: do the means justify the end? Do you think it is justified to lie in order to get people to see inappropriate content as evil?

 

[Michie]

You're missing the point. Nobody here is defending inappropriate contentography, nobody is saying it is harmless. But the links you posted provide nothing but lies and half-truths and nobody benefits from that. Is that really so hard to understand?

Again, I ask you: do the means justify the end? Do you think it is justified to lie in order to get people to see inappropriate content as evil?

Again, point them out & prove them wrong. I posted it.

 

[Gwendolyn]

Several pages back, Michie indicated that she might like to hear my experiences on trying to find a husband amidst men who are inappropriate content consumers.

Here are things I have noticed as being common among regular inappropriate content consumers.

NOTE: This refers to the age group that has grown up with inappropriate content available at the click of a button on the internet.

• Objectify women more frequently and easily - catcalling, happily staring and ogling, commenting about clothing (or what is beneath it), talking about how they would have sex with a certain women, stuff like that.
• Desensitised to regular stimuli - they are so used to inappropriate content that real-life sexual situations are not as arousing, so they have to conjure up inappropriate content fantasies in their minds just to make sex even work. (I have not had experience with this, though I have had men tell me this.)
• Physically desensitised due to frequent masturbation - inappropriate content consumption led to masturbation which led to solo indulgence, and now sex isn't physically stimulating enough.
• More likely to refer to women as b***, and other casual, degrading names.
• More likely to tell sexist jokes.
• More likely to turn down sex in favour of inappropriate content consumption OR, claim that they HAVE to watch inappropriate content and touch because the two of you aren't having ("enough") sex.
• Entitlement in relationships - want to take all the pleasure and attention they can get, but don't want to return any.
• More likely to claim they "can't help it" because "boys will be boys", and "it's just what men do".
• More likely to collect sexy pictures of women to ogle at, either in poster form on their walls (seriously) or in image collections on their computer.
• More likely to be selfish lovers.
• More likely to treat women as disposable.

It is difficult for me to respect or think much of men when most of them are quite happily rolling in the mud, chasing after inappropriate content fantasies. That is my failing.

I haven't actively dated a lot of men because I spend most of my time weeding out the inappropriate content-saturated ones. What I'd really like to find is a man who views sex as worthy of respect, and who treats it with such.

I was fortunate enough to have a three-year relationship with a man who treated me with utmost respect despite his struggles with inappropriate content. He was one of the rare men who actually fought against the tendency to objectify women, and he worked hard to help himself become a better man. I'm afraid I won't find another man like him. He was truly a gem.

Some people view being single as this great and wonderful world of sunshine and rainbows. I view it with dread, because I'm afraid the sort of man I hope to find is so rare that I'll spend my time wading through men who are happy to accept the status quo and keep watching their inappropriate content because it's "normal".

I can also attest to the fact that regular inappropriate content consumption messes up the way you think and interact with the world, as I struggled briefly (a year or two) with inappropriate content after my first boyfriend introduced me to it. I saw the changes that happened in my mind, and I know the sort of mental work it took to change it.

Don't scoff at the fact that some people have difficulty fighting off the effects of our sex-saturated culture.

 

[Michie]

Several pages back, Michie indicated that she might like to hear my experiences on trying to find a husband amidst men who are inappropriate content consumers.

Here are things I have noticed as being common among regular inappropriate content consumers.

NOTE: This refers to the age group that has grown up with inappropriate content available at the click of a button on the internet.

• Objectify women more frequently and easily - catcalling, happily staring and ogling, commenting about clothing (or what is beneath it), talking about how they would have sex with a certain women, stuff like that.
• Desensitised to regular stimuli - they are so used to inappropriate content that real-life sexual situations are not as arousing, so they have to conjure up inappropriate content fantasies in their minds just to make sex even work. (I have not had experience with this, though I have had men tell me this.)
• Physically desensitised due to frequent masturbation - inappropriate content consumption led to masturbation which led to solo indulgence, and now sex isn't physically stimulating enough.
• More likely to refer to women as b***, and other casual, degrading names.
• More likely to tell sexist jokes.
• More likely to turn down sex in favour of inappropriate content consumption OR, claim that they HAVE to watch inappropriate content and touch because the two of you aren't having ("enough") sex.
• Entitlement in relationships - want to take all the pleasure and attention they can get, but don't want to return any.
• More likely to claim they "can't help it" because "boys will be boys", and "it's just what men do".
• More likely to collect sexy pictures of women to ogle at, either in poster form on their walls (seriously) or in image collections on their computer.
• More likely to be selfish lovers.
• More likely to treat women as disposable.

You are spot on. And there are much more serious effects from it as well but not really appropriate for discussion. A lot of women like me trying to make it work might participate with the husband to hold a relationship.... DO NOT DO IT! Opens a whole new can of worms.

It is difficult for me to respect or think much of men when most of them are quite happily rolling in the mud, chasing after inappropriate content fantasies. That is my failing.

That is not a failing.

I haven't actively dated a lot of men because I spend most of my time weeding out the inappropriate content-saturated ones. What I'd really like to find is a man who views sex as worthy of respect, and who treats it with such.

Another effect of inappropriate content, it caused trust issues. Look at the poor woman in the OP, she thought she was getting something she was not. Now she feels duped.

I was fortunate enough to have a three-year relationship with a man who treated me with utmost respect despite his struggles with inappropriate content. He was one of the rare men who actually fought against the tendency to objectify women, and he worked hard to help himself become a better man. I'm afraid I won't find another man like him. He was truly a gem.

Prayers for his success.

Some people view being single as this great and wonderful world of sunshine and rainbows. I view it with dread, because I'm afraid the sort of man I hope to find is so rare that I'll spend my time wading through men who are happy to accept the status quo and keep watching their inappropriate content because it's "normal".

*nods* I was so messed up after my first marriage it took me years to recover. It is not a walk in the park & being single again in a lot of ways amplified my issues.

I can also attest to the fact that regular inappropriate content consumption messes up the way you think and interact with the world, as I struggled briefly (a year or two) with inappropriate content after my first boyfriend introduced me to it. I saw the changes that happened in my mind, and I know the sort of mental work it took to change it.

EXACTLY!

Don't scoff at the fact that some people have difficulty fighting off the effects of our sex-saturated culture.

Amen. And thank you for sharing Gwen. If we were face to face I'm sure we could have a very long discussion about this.

 

[MikeK]

There exist addiction levels, so there must then also exist parameters of severity, or which one is worse. Nobody has argued that inappropriate content isn't as addictive as cocaine or heroin. The claim that it is was made but not supported. I am skeptical that it is correct.

I wouldn't say that I've studied inappropriate content addiction with any sort of academic rigor, but I have observed it and am certainly aware that it exists and is not something you would want a loved one falling victim to. Again, I am not saying that inappropriate content is less addictive than heroin or cocaine. I am saying that I think that a person that says it isn't in the headline of an article has a duty to back that statement up with something more than "inappropriate contentography can ruin relationships".

I don't think I've been nasty here and I don't get the accusation. I'm not being cruel. You don’t have to debate me on this topic. You could have merely said "Yeah, that isn't a defensible statement. Bad article." and moved on. We need to be very careful about the image we sell.