Triumph Of The Willie
When you gave advice to the woman complaining about her husband surfing the Internet for porn and swimsuit photos of Serena Williams, you seemed to have missed a word in her question. That word is "husband." I doubt people get married with it being okay for another man or woman to be involved in their marriage. Pornography causes great harm to marriages. It's not okay. It's not normal. It's a selfish and destructive choice.
--Appalled Wife
It's hard to have a rational conversation about porn because people's first reaction is so often knee-jerk hysteria. I got a lot of that in response to this particular column; for example, as one guy wrote, "Porn focuses on body parts, not on sex. This is how bestiality develops." Yes, we see that all the time: One week, a guy's surfing the net for busty blondes; the next, he's got the hots for the neighbor's Labradoodle.
While you seem to be under the mistaken impression that I missed the word "husband" in the woman's question, you seem to have missed most of the words in my answer. Serena Williams isn't "involved" in this couple's marriage; the guy was just using pictures of her to ring some doorbell in his brain. As I explained in that column, "Seeing pictures of hot women activates the 'reward centers' in men's brains -- the parts that go 'Yeah, baby!' to stuff like drugs, beer, and money." Just as the guy isn't connecting emotionally with a can of Bud, he isn't emotionally involved with Serena, who "might as well be a big, tennis-playing ham sandwich."
Not only is it "normal" for men to look at porn, so many men look at it that what would qualify as deviant behavior would be not looking at it. Men also ogle hot women on the street and everywhere they go, but a man's forehead doesn't come with a browser history. If it did, it would likely reflect what one female reader wrote: "My husband once told me that he thinks about having sex with every woman he sees. That's Every. Single. One." She keeps this in perspective: "I have absolutely no doubt that he has been completely faithful to me. None. I don't care (about these thoughts), just like I don't care that he watches porn on the Internet. My only request is that he keep his anti-virus software up to date."
Sure, porn can pose problems in a marriage or relationship -- when used to excess. The same goes for golf clubs, credit cards, and Hostess Ding Dongs. Of course, when there are problems, people love to blame the thing being used instead of the person doing the using. This thinking is fed by the damaging contention that addiction is "a disease." Multiple sclerosis is a disease. You can't decide to not have multiple sclerosis. You can decide to stop engaging in some behavior. You might not want to stop, it might be terribly hard to stop, but if the stakes are high enough, you will. Just ask some guy who tells you he can't stop looking at porn. Sorry, but if his house catches fire, he's not going to sit there at the computer simultaneously getting off and getting crispy.
The hysteria about porn is reminiscent of the hysteria surrounding pot from early on, ever since the propaganda classic "Reefer Madness" depicted it as a demon weed that causes rape, murder, suicide, crazed piano playing, and hit-and-run driving. Of course, if you know any potheads, you know the stuff is far more likely to cause them to lie on a beanbag chair polishing off the collected works of Sara Lee. Similarly, shrill ravings about porn keep the facts about it from being heard, keeping people from being able to differentiate between porn as a problem and porn as a pastime.
This woman's husband hadn't stopped showering, going to work, or having sex with her to lock himself in a room with the naked sex workers of the World Wide Web. In fact, she described him as a sweet, loving, "deeply caring" man who only watches porn when she's out and he's bored. The actual problem in her marriage was her unfounded fears about his porn consumption -- which led to her feeling resentful and shutting down between the sheets. This sort of sex and affection strike can compel even a man who wants to be faithful to expand his horizons from sightseeing in the virtual world to getting naked with co-workers and rent-a-booty in the real one. So, as I advised this woman, no man "only has eyes for you," but if you'd like keep the rest of your husband's body parts from wandering, you should see to it that your bedroom isn't the one place in the world that he can't get sex.
yay. i hate women who get all huffy about their men watching porn. watch it with them sometime. it's fun. also i hate women who expect their mate's behavior to suddenly change the day they get married. it won't. your man is not going to suddenly stop watching porn just because he has a ring on his finger any less than you are going to suddenly stop being insecure just because you have a ring on yours.
miki at February 8, 2011 11:21 PM
Nice response.
This thinking is fed by the damaging contention that addiction is "a disease." Multiple sclerosis is a disease. You can't decide to not have multiple sclerosis. You can decide to stop engaging in some behavior. You might not want to stop, it might be terribly hard to stop, but if the stakes are high enough, you will.
Good point and I generally agree that addiction shouldn't be regarded as a disease. It makes it too easy to make excuses to start with and therefore harder to beat it. And in most cases, yes, addicts can control their cravings at least temporarily (otherwise I wouldn't be able to hold my job!). But I will note that there are some who do die rather than give up. I don't mean accidental ODs here, I mean for example drinkers who get told they can't have a liver transplant until they stop and still can't, even though they are going to die. It doesn't have the immediacy of a house on fire but it's not far off. Those extreme cases are rare though.
Ltw at February 8, 2011 11:30 PM
Eh, I've seen relationships harmed by porn. Happened to several people I know... guy got so into porn and masturbation that he stopped being interested in real sex. This also happens sometimes with single guys who use a lot of porn, and then find that women just aren't the same as the hand and the lady on the screen. Dan Savage talks about this, and recommends using different grips, particularly lighter ones, when masturbating.
I agree that a bit of porn now and then is not going to destroy most marriages. But that doesn't mean that excessive use isn't a problem.
Also, couples should sit down and talk about what the consider to be cheating, because that line is different for everyone. They need to make sure they are on the same page. Everyone's line is different so it is important to be clear about what your partner's line is, and if you are ok with it.
Saying "Pornography is harmful to marriages" or "It's great for marriages" or "Sleeping with other people is harmful to marriages" isn't really useful, as what is harmful to a marriage is really on a case-by-case basis, though some behaviors are more generally agreed upon by others.
NicoleK at February 9, 2011 12:50 AM
Anything in excess is probably bad. That said, I must be a guy - I love porn.
I know my man has some porn mags (and Internet access) and he knows I do - unless you are watching it to the exclusion of leaving the house (or sex with your SO), I fail to see the problem.
Women who get all butthurt about a "normal" use of porn (I don't know where the line is exactly, but you can't expect a man to be a monk except for the few hours a week he's screwing you) probably have some deeper insecurity issues.
As Amy has said multiple times, men are visual. Mine likes the occasional foray into porn, but he likes me more. If I ever become #2 to his porn, then we have a problem.
I suspect the fact that he was comfortable enough to "accidentally" let me find his stash early on speaks volumes to our relationship. I'm not intimidated by two-dimensional women, but again, I'm still the focus of his attention. YMMV.
And yes, I know I got me a good one.
Daghain at February 9, 2011 1:46 AM
Oh, and Amy, this will make you LOL:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0404364/
Seriously funny, and the DVD has the original on it. Watch them back-to-back. I have never laughed so hard.
Daghain at February 9, 2011 1:49 AM
"[Pornography]'s not normal."
I love how she defined normal as her viewpoint, without bothering to slow down and realize that somewhere around 98-99% of men very much like looking at naked women or pictures of naked women. So, to say that men who *do* look or have regularly in past looked at pictures of naked women (again, likely somewhere well above 90% of the men who can actually access porn) are engaging in behavior that is "not normal" is to use the term "normal" in a fashion I simply don't understand.
She takes a thin sliver percentage in the bell curve of human behavior on this topic and declares that normal. Then she lards up her ignorance and stupidity with a large dollop of self-righteousness and Church Lady superciliousness.
God, people are so goddam dumb sometimes. Do we have to let all those people vote? Really, do we?
Spartee at February 9, 2011 5:03 AM
God, people are so goddam dumb sometimes. Do we have to let all those people vote? Really, do we?
Yeah, it's unfortunate, but we do.
Flynne at February 9, 2011 6:25 AM
I think that porn often gets blamed for outcomes in a marriage for which it's a symptom rather than a cause. Though I do suspect that there are situations in which it can amplify malignant preferences.
But if a woman is going to take such a hard line about porn, she should be ready for the consequences. Her husband may want to have sex with her more often, or worse, not at all. Without the porn, they're going to have the face the reality of their sexual compatibility. This is an issue where I think that most women will be better off letting sleeping dogs lie.
mike at February 9, 2011 6:39 AM
If you don't get fed at home you eat out....
mike 2 at February 9, 2011 7:47 AM
Good answer. For me it's not the porn itself so much that's bothersome as the industry and how horribly destructive it is to people's lives (particularly the actors). There's just so much of it one has to wonder what is really going on here, because it obviously hits nerves one way and another.
I understand this wife's concern and how it's difficult to not just have the shields of moralistic thinking take over to shut it down rather than sit with the discomfort of the whole issue. On the other hand, those with attachments to porn have to put aside their attachments as well and try to look at it more objectively.
That something is widespread doesn't make it good, it just makes it common and points to something that it probably wouldn't hurt to take a deeper look at.
One more point, while I agree that addiction isn't a disease in the sense that MS is a disease, it is a symptom of a spiritual or mental disease. The success of programs like AA and religious based quit programs do show that there is a need for spiritual healing and that it's not as simple for an addict to "just stop."
Thag Jones at February 9, 2011 7:50 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1840583">comment from NicoleKI've seen relationships harmed by porn
I've seen relationships harmed by food. One person starts chowing down and chowing down and blows up and becomes unattractive to the other partner.
Amy Alkon at February 9, 2011 8:47 AM
The success of programs like AA and religious based quit programs do show that there is a need for spiritual healing and that it's not as simple for an addict to "just stop."
A.A. tells you to do stuff like asking god to remove your shortcomings.
You stop a behavior through self-discipline. And instead of "turning your life over to a higher power" and never drinking again (imagine that if you're a food abuser), you figure out what you're escaping with your drinking and learn to deal with it in a rational and healthy way.
Amy Alkon at February 9, 2011 8:52 AM
"It's not okay. It's not normal."
Says who? He needs to move her out into the garage until she gets some valid sense of her place in the relationship.
Jim at February 9, 2011 9:12 AM
"One week, a guy's surfing the net for busty blondes; the next, he's got the hots for the neighbor's Labradoodle."
OMG I almost shot soda out of my nose!!
hisprincess at February 9, 2011 9:17 AM
Actually, having a supportive, understanding been-there community like AA really helps keep that discipline. It's also a community that you can call on mostly worldwide and at any time, day or not. That's powerful help.
I suspect that the spiritual part is helpful too - there are a lot of atheists in AA. My fiance is an athiest and seven years sober. He credits AA a lot. He doesn't exactly know why it works - he shrugs and says - but it does.
I think the the stats bear out that AA is one of, if not, the most successful way for people to stay sober. For whatever reason tt helps a lot of people - religious and atheist.
AntoniaB at February 9, 2011 9:35 AM
It's transparent to anyone who spent any length of time around livestock that most people who shout "that's unnatural" haven't actually checked with mother nature first. A good example is that cows unmated when they come in season will "bull" each other.
It should also be clear as day that masturbation isn't anything like as satisfying as sex with a real live person. If it was the human race would have died out long,long ago.
If someones partner *prefers* porn and solo masturbation to having sex with them then there's either something wrong or someones forgotten "vanilla" isn't the only flavor.
I worked in an isp for a few years and from my experience there most people look at some form of erotica or another - type varies from person to person but those fastest to shout "whores" at the site of the web cam girls are the types who dive into "Romance" novels at the end of the day.
Thankfully I have never seen any Labradoodle porn...
Mr H at February 9, 2011 9:47 AM
If you don't get fed at home you eat out....
As a woman who appreciates that my husband appreciates porn, I have to say that this isn't the point. If you are fed lobster and filet mignon every night at home, you still want the occasional trip to check out the funky new gastropub. If you're lucky, your wife or girlfriend is a, er, foodie, too.
Beth Cartwright at February 9, 2011 10:15 AM
I don't see any information in the LW's letter to suggest that there's any form of addiction in question. She's complaining about pictures of Serena Williams, which hardly qualify as hard core porn. Basically the LW objects to married men viewing any image of any woman that they may find erotic. This is a pretty extreme position and is evident of a desire to control mens' sexuality beyond any normal or acceptable boundary.
I can appreciate that women generally don't like the idea of men looking at porn, but attitudes as strident as the LW's seem to arise from a discomfort w/ male sexuality more so than a concern for the harm that porn may bring.
molo at February 9, 2011 10:31 AM
NicoleK wrote:
I agree that a bit of porn now and then is not going to destroy most marriages. But that doesn't mean that excessive use isn't a problem.
My ex-wife would argue that porn was definitely a factor in the breakup of our marriage, and she's right. But I would argue that it was a response to lack of sex. I didn't have a porn habit when we got married. When our sex life went from twice a week to once a month, I needed to do something.
I never cheated on her. But, when the two of you vow never to have sex with anyone else, it's implicit that you will have sex with each other. Why is it that the first option is considered a valid reason to end a marriage and the second is not? (That's a rhetorical question.)
art.the.nerd at February 9, 2011 10:35 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1840631">comment from art.the.nerdSome of the most depressing e-mails I get are from men whose wives who will no longer have sex with them but who won't let them go have sex with anyone else, either. These men typically write that they love their wives and want to stay married for their children's sake. Sad.
Amy Alkon at February 9, 2011 10:54 AM
Just like drinking some can totally enjoy it others are soon addicted and lose control of reality.
Addiction IS a disease and we don't all have it.
Gina at February 9, 2011 11:18 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1840646">comment from GinaWhat support do you have for the claim you make that addiction is "a disease"?
Amy Alkon at February 9, 2011 11:23 AM
Some of the most depressing e-mails I get ..
This seems to be a common problem, even among younger couples. I think that a lot of women experience a decline in their sex drive once they've settled down. If they didn't have much of a sex drive to begin with, the decline may result in none at all, even an antipathy towards sex.
Mel at February 9, 2011 11:35 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1840662">comment from MelMel, people make a big mistake by marrying too soon. Michele Weiner Davis explains why in a terrific book, The Sex-Starved Marriage. The initial stages of a relationship can make a low-testosterone, low-sexual-desire person seem like a person who desires sex more than they actually will at their regular baseline.
Furthermore, people have the wrong idea about the female cycle of sexual desire, which is "triggerable." I've written about this a number of times, and Davis is another who writes about it as well. I also heard her speak about it at the Evolution of Psychotherapy conference a few years back. I don't respect many therapist, but she sure is one of the few I do.
More on the cycle here, and the work of Rosemary Basson:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/mt4/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=3&search=basson
Amy Alkon at February 9, 2011 11:46 AM
@ Amy - Thanks for the link. As the low sex drive partner in the relationship, it's good info to have and I'll be buying the book. While we have compromised (I have sex more often than I want, he has it less), it could only be better if we had it a little more.
As for porn, not a fan and choose not to support it for various reasons. As for his viewing of porn, that's his business. And based on my lower sex drive, I wouldn't argue with a little supplementation.
N at February 9, 2011 1:21 PM
Re: "triggerable."
I've read about that. It's a shame that the findings haven't been popularized. Because the conventional wisdom, that diminished drive is due to some flaw in the relationship, causes a lot of problems.
joel at February 9, 2011 3:02 PM
There's a claim above that a man won't give up pr0n for sex.
I would. I did. Hotness, beautiful, athletic and demanding, was all I needed, but unfortunately, I wasn't enough.
That's been many years ago. When everything clicks, it's amazing - and then she's addictive.
Now, most of the protests really stem from the idea that she's not enough for him. That might be true in your case. You can step up, or step off, but unless you realize that, face up to the reality, you have unrealistic expectations. Viagra isn't here solely because of men getting old.
Radwaste at February 9, 2011 3:34 PM
Look, it's really simple. Women like the LW who assert that looking at porn is "not normal" have the view that all men are defective by design.
There's no point in dealing with them other than to slap the taste out of their mouths when they spout their bullshit in your face.
I'll bet this woman doesn't put out. Once again, it's not about the activity that the writer claims to dislike, it's about the fact that they want to use it to have power over another human.
brian at February 9, 2011 3:53 PM
What do AA, Ouija boards, Aldous Huxley and LSD all have in common? Bill Wilson (co-founder of AA)check it out...
http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/publish/article_15043.shtml
IMHO --Many people who are addicts suffered some negative environmental factors during childhood. If you have spent any time with children who cannot speak, then you understand the "language of behaviors." What AA gives to addicts, who never learned another language because they got stuck, is a new language (12 steps, etc) and support. It works because, once addicts are able to articulate what's keeping them stuck in a behavior rut and have the support they so badly needed as youngsters, they can move on with their development and their lives. The spiritual component probably helps bc, as we all know, one can know something intellectually and can still not really feel it--the spiritual component helps people feel it. I support whatever helps people increase the quality of their lives. If they want to call it a disease, fine. Words are pretty powerful, but the real threat to the well being of any person who is suffering is (((((silence))))).
On porn: I am pro-porn, pro-prostitution, pro- freedom of expression. Amy's right, people want to blame porn and not the user. "Oh look, that bad man is using porn to seduce a nine year old! Let's ban porn!" No. Fuck that guy! Let's BAN HIM by supporting strict laws regarding child molestation, and human trafficking. Someone shows porn to your kid, go to where they work and announce it with a fucking megaphone, Chris Hansen style.
As for men who get more into porn than their wives-- that totally happened to someone I know. Her husband could not get off w/o porn so they had it on every time they fucked. This makes me sad bc it indicates a lack of creativity. She divorced him, problem solved.
Gspotted at February 9, 2011 4:10 PM
"I've seen relationships harmed by food. One person starts chowing down and chowing down and blows up and becomes unattractive to the other partner."
eye of the beholder, Amy.
http://vimeo.com/17785299
Gspotted at February 9, 2011 4:43 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1840965">comment from GspottedGenerally, Gspotted, people don't want the person they're with to be substantially different from how they were when they got together. Some people are into fat women (and men). For those people, if the girlfriend goes on a dieting kick, there's a problem.
Amy Alkon at February 9, 2011 5:07 PM
It puzzles me why the writer wrote this. Without even a specific example, if you know the advice columnist has a position, and you send her your feeling of the opposite position, what does the writer think is going to happen?
I've stopped reading Amy's blog because I've gotten tired of the articles that seem to say that Christians are idiots. I'm Christian, so that gets on my nerves after a while.
KrisL at February 9, 2011 5:26 PM
"For me it's not the porn itself so much that's bothersome as the industry and how horribly destructive it is to people's lives (particularly the actors)."
The mainstream movie industry isn't any better. From Fatty Arbuckle to Marilyn Monroe to Judy Garland to River Phoenix: illicit sex, neglected children, fraud, theft, booze, drugs, and suicide, it's all there. The reality of the mainstream movie industry is every bit as horrifying as anything that one might suspect the porn industry is. Same goes for the music industry. If we're going to ban porn because the industry is harmful to the people in it, then we need to ban all forms of mass entertainment.
Cousin Dave at February 9, 2011 6:29 PM
@ KrisL I like reading Amy's blog bc I only agree with it 20% of the time. I have pretty strong opinions about things, and a unique perspective ( a co-worker told me that on friday :))Anyway, I like reading it bc it's different from what I think. So often, people just want to curl up with other people who think, dress and act just as they do. I guess I just get bored with that. Whatever anyone puts out there, whether it's the blogoshere, TV, song lyrics, whatever media- it's all bullshit. Amy's a damn good bullshitter. Don't get all butthurt bc you don't agree. NOT being in agreement should only strengthen your own sense of who you are, what you believe in, and where you stand.
@ Amy- I see your point.
Gspotted at February 9, 2011 7:26 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1841047">comment from GspottedWhatever anyone puts out there, whether it's the blogoshere, TV, song lyrics, whatever media- it's all bullshit.
Speaking of bullshit, that's an overgeneralization.
My column is based in both reason and research. There are many times that I do not put something in a column or do not put out a column I've done a considerable amount of work on because I find flaws in a study or studies.
My lack of belief in god likewise corresponds to the lack of evidence that there is a god. I read a great deal on common human cognitive errors -- like god belief, hypocrisy, and self-justification -- both because they're interesting and because I seek to not make these errors or make them as often as I would, just being human.
Amy Alkon at February 9, 2011 7:53 PM
Happened to several people I know... guy got so into porn and masturbation that he stopped being interested in real sex.
Did he stop being interested in sex, or did he stop being interested in the inveitable no that followed the request?
I know alot of guys who simply stop asking or attempting to initiane sex because of one long unending stream of no's.
I know a number of girls who issued a long unending string of no's becuase they never got off. Usually becuase they were faing orgasm to 'spare his feelings' and slowly came to resnt the fact that 'he couldnt tell I was faking'
Most guys understand girls get off differently then guys(at least the guys who have that explained to them know this)
Every guy understands that there are different 'levels' of an orgasm, even we men have big and little O's.
And if you ladies would take the time to let you partners know that even if they do everything right you still might not make it all the way most men would be able to handle the fact that it is sometimes beyond their control.
But I do wonder how many of the guys who are 'addicted' to porn are with a partner that denys them, and how many of those women shut down sex becuase they are tired of faking orgasams and never getting off themselves
lujlp at February 9, 2011 8:25 PM
On any given day, more damage is done to marriages by soap operas and chick flicks than by porn.
That opinion will probably draw a lot of fire, but I believe it is true
Trust at February 9, 2011 8:31 PM
When I was in college, Dr. Ruth gave a lecture. She disturbed the female audience by saying that it only takes a few minutes of work for either men or women to get the other off, so there's not much of an excuse for either men or women to act like it's a big imposition to take care of the other's needs. It's sad, but true. Five minutes of work is all most wives would need to put into it to make most men happy.
Mike T at February 10, 2011 4:15 AM
Yet another lady who loves porn here. I do enjoy watching it with my sweetheart, but also it's just darn convenient--sometimes one simply wants to have a couple of orgasms, release some built up tension, and get on with the day, rather than having a lovely romantic encounter. Porn and a Hitachi magic wand can accomplish in 5 minutes what might take at least an hour otherwise. The hour is more romantic and wonderful and all that, but there is room in life for both the 4-course gourmet mean and the microwave burrito.
Dating a man who's much younger than me for the past 4 years, I've come to a theory that porn can actually be really helpful to a relationship. When I was growing up, we were limited to Hustler magazines we found in someone's dad's garage, and the steamier bits of romance novels. He had 24-hour access to all the Internet has to offer.
I think--contrary to what the anti-porn folks say--that made him a more aware, more adventurous lover. He didn't feel ashamed of himself for his thoughts or feelings, because he could see a whole range of people doing whatever it was he was curious about, and know he wasn't alone. And he learned all sorts of nifty things that it took me years of experimentation in college to figure out!
Yes, if he had mainly watched, I dunno, hentai or labradoodle porn or something it could have given him a warped idea of what the ladies like, but instead his viewing of relatively realistic porn simply seems to have made him a more open-minded, adventurous lover.
ymmv
Anathema at February 10, 2011 6:12 AM
*gourmet meal
damn stubby fingers . . .
Anathema at February 10, 2011 6:14 AM
Oh, and on the addiction thing . . . yeah, opening up that debate is opening a whole big bag of snakes since people feel so strongly, but here I go commenting anyway.
I totally get it that all sorts of things release those "feel-good" hormomes in the brain--heroin, cocaine, exercise, sex, Ben & Jerry's, looking at pictures of kittens. That said, I don't think we can jump to the "doing it makes people feel good, not doing it makes them feel less good and they crave it, therefore it's a disease."
Running long distances makes me feel really, really good. When I can't do it, I'm sad and cranky. I do not think I'm addicted to running--rather, I really like it and am bummed when I can't do it. And there is a neurochemical component. Still doesn't make it a clinical addiction.
When I was in rehab many, many years ago, there were people there who had to be hospitalized because detoxing from their drug of choice could kill them. There were people who had to be physically restrained because of the horrible effects of detox. Even people like myself with less-crippling addictions (in my case, an incorrect belief that I was a 1950s housewife, and hence that living on vodka martinis and pills was cute rather than stupid) spent an awful lot of time curled up in bed heavily medicated and sick as dogs. I just have a hard time imagining that if you take a bloke's porn away (even a "totally addicted" bloke) that he'd need to be hospitalized so that his body didn't shut down as it cleared the addiction. Just sayin'. Doesn't me he wouldn't be sad and cranky, but there is a difference.
Anathema at February 10, 2011 6:23 AM
Happened to several people I know... guy got so into porn and masturbation that he stopped being interested in real sex.
I guess that this is possible, but it seems extremely unlikely for normal healthy people. I've gone through dry periods, when my only friend was lefty, and never found myself losing interest in real sex - if anything my desire for sex intensified.
There are probably two issues at play here..
1. Some women get into a condition, or behave in a manner, that you just don't want to have sex with them.
2. Some women regard their libido like the tides and feel that the expectation that they should be accommodating as tantamount to rape.
In either situation, it's always easier for the man to allow the woman to blame something else. So porn becomes 'his problem', which allows him to address 'her problem'. Because in my experience, if a woman's behavior is at fault, the man needs to assume blame as well, or you're not going to get anywhere.
Also I think that there is something to the idea that women tend towards asexuality, especially as they get older. It's pretty well established that most women have no sex drive at all after menopause. It's been my experience that the only times that women really do have a noticeable sex drive is when they're young and looking for a mate. But once they have someone, all bets are off.
Unfortunately the popular description of women's sexuality is based on PC myths, and I think that this often makes it difficult to address the issue head on. We're all supposed to believe that men and women have similar sex drives, so any significant change in sex drive is due to social / environmental factors. The short period of elevated sex drive associated with perimenopause is presented as evidence that women are highly sexual throughout their lives. You'll even see claims that older women have higher libidos than men of the same age. These are all lies, but suit the times.
Nicolas Promiscuous at February 10, 2011 6:55 AM
"God, people are so goddam dumb sometimes. Do we have to let all those people vote? Really, do we?"
Totally off-topic, but if we actually held politicians to abide by the Constitution, it wouldn't matter letting stupid people vote because the damage those in power could do would be highly limited. (Technically, this is democracy = mob rule vs. (enforced) constitutionalism = a mechanism for inhibiting the negative effects of mob rule.)
But sorry, back on topic ..
"Eh, I've seen relationships harmed by porn. Happened to several people I know... guy got so into porn and masturbation that he stopped being interested in real sex"
NicoleK, I would bet money that in most cases the 'causality' is the other way round, if you *really*, *brutally honestly* go look at the details of what happened. See people will never admit all the details because people seldom will admit if e.g. their own behavior was contributing to a dull sex life, not even your best friends may tell you such details, they will naturally spin it differently, that's just human), but I think it *starts* when there is something lacking between the sheets in the actual bedroom, that is causing the sex life to deteriorate. Then the couples don't deal with this. So the man gets frustrated because there is something lacking, and THEN he starts using more porn just as an alternate release (and probably because he doesn't want to cheat, initially). He may then become resentful that he's having to use porn because the sex life is so dull, and that in turn sours the relationship further, and if they're not good at communicating or dealing with things, or if one person is stubborn in their position, things will head south from there. Of course, the woman will feel better "blaming the porn".
As a rule men prefer the real thing to porn. But it's not only cases where the man "isn't getting any" that he might turn to porn. It might be some psychological unfulfilled need in the bedroom. E.g. it might be that the woman obliges when he wants sex, but doesn't show reciprocal desire, and then having sex starts to feel like a constant reminder to the man that he's not really desired. (As Amy has pointed out here before, for a man that can be perceived as rejection, no matter how much she really, really loves him.)
In other cases it could be because either of the two has let themselves go (e.g. get fat or whatever), and then mutual physical attraction really does die (but for the man, not his libido).
Whenever women like the LW make comments like this, with such strong feelings about it, I can't help get the feeling that maybe they let the spark go out of their own relationships, and the man is unhappy, but instead of doing something about it, they browbeat the man and try guilt him into staying "faithful" to them by playing the 'husband' card or whatever, and making him feel guilty.
If a man is looking at porn *instead of trying to fix the relationship*, then he is of course complicit in the downward spiral; I'm not absolving him of blame. Both members of a relationship are equally responsible for trying to keep things going well, so if he doesn't communicate what is making him unhappy effectively, then sure, then he is also at fault.
Lobster at February 10, 2011 7:08 AM
"Whatever anyone puts out there, whether it's the blogoshere, TV, song lyrics, whatever media- it's all bullshit"
@Gspotted - People become cynical and adopt attitudes like this because they were never taught the particular reasoning methods that really can help you sift out the truth from all the bullsh-t out there. If you don't have those skills, that 'mental toolbox', navigating the world of information and misinformation would be nigh impossible. Every human is capable of picking up and developing these skills though, no matter how late in life. If you follow Amy more carefully, you'll see she relies heavily on proper research, reason, science etc.
Lobster at February 10, 2011 7:22 AM
If we're going to ban porn because the industry is harmful to the people in it, then we need to ban all forms of mass entertainment.
Sounds good. Seriously though, I never said anything about banning anything, just an observation. I don't consume much mass entertainment either because I find it boring as all get out, nor do I pay attention to Hollywood morons and their shenanigans. It's like the once in a while junk food for me. I even replaced my TV with a bookshelf because I like to minimise the crap I consume.
It doesn't hurt for people to know what they're supporting, that it's not innocuous entertainment, and that it's designed to be addictive. What they do after that is their choice.
Thag Jones at February 10, 2011 7:39 AM
It doesn't hurt for people to know what they're supporting, that it's not innocuous entertainment, and that it's designed to be addictive. What they do after that is their choice.
But not all porn is equivalent. There's plenty of porn that is simply pictures of pretty young women laying around looking sexy. These girls aren't performing sex acts. Much of it is actually very tame, even by the standards of popular entertainment.
e.g. NSFW! - http://www.met-art.com/
melvin at February 10, 2011 8:38 AM
"your man is not going to suddenly stop watching porn just because he has a ring on his finger any less than you are going to suddenly stop being insecure just because you have a ring on yours."
love this. so many women see marriage as the ultimate act of validation for a relationship. "If only he would marry me I would stop having these doubts/would know he really loves me/would stop looking pathetic to my friends." If there are problems, there are problems.
Marriage may or may not cause a temporary shift in state of mind, but ultimately, it is an act that takes places during a short amount of time on a single day.
Mary at February 10, 2011 9:11 AM
Thag:
Sorry but I don't buy your argument about addiction. Someone a while back figured out that a lot of money could be made treating (or mis-treating) all sorts of behaviors that some people do to excess. This was done by medicalizing the excess behavior into an "addiction".
Suddenly you could become addicted to anything and everything, including shopping, the internet, whatever.
This was a bonanza for two groups:
Con srtists who set up treatment facilities and programs to siphon vast sums of money from them, their insurance companies, and the government.
Power-hungry legislators and prudes of every stripe, who just knew that they should control everyone else's behavior (for their own good, of course).
You can certainly do whatever you like with your time and money. But you seem way too interested in making sure everyone else makes the same choices.
alittlesense at February 10, 2011 9:37 AM
@AntoniaB:
"Actually, having a supportive, understanding been-there community like AA really helps keep that discipline. It's also a community that you can call on mostly worldwide and at any time, day or not. That's powerful help."
I agree. I think this "is it a disease or not?" argument is a waste of time. The fact is that after a certain point, an addiction, once it really takes a hold of a person, starts to ACT like a disease and so in my opinion the point is moot.
I think dealing with "what is" is more important than descending into the madness of a chicken or egg argument. When I see an argument like this coming--as I occasionally do in my work--I excuse myself and let people with a real need to let their blood boil have their fun. In other words, I stay well out of it.
I've done actual research on this and almost all treatments that offer an alternative to 12 step groups have microscopically low success rates compared to AA. Their proponents are almost always people who have a hard time with spiritual aspect of the AA program.
These people reject the notion of "God" being involved and seem unanimously pissed off about its being an integral part of 12 step programs. Their anger is always interesting because I think it says an awful lot about them, and it's fascinating to watch them argue because they are so blind to that.
It's like lovers who always need to be "in love" with someone. Watch them in action for a while and you can see that they are more enchanted by the feeling of being "in love" than with the object of that love.
Some people are like that with anger. They need to be "in anger" all the time and it's these sort of people, I find, who seem inexorably drawn into this controversy. That's why I stay out of it. I've learned from experience that no matter what I say, I won't really be heard.
And I know the argument will be made that AA's success rate isn't huge either, but it's way better than everything else by comparison. If individuals are prepared to join a group like AA and stop drinking and drugging, then we all benefit. I don't argue with the means, I just appreciate the end.
ie at February 10, 2011 9:59 AM
Lobster, sure, maybe the problem was in the relationship already... I didn't pry too deep into these people's business (knowing this much about their sex lives is deep enough).
I've known a few socially awkward guys who consumed a lot of porn, and then weren't able to enjoy the real thing. A lot of guys who go a long time before they have sex get very used to the feel of their hand, and wonder why a vagina doesn't feel like that, and get very used to the way girls act in movies, and wonder why real girls don't act like that.
My experiences with the industry is that its rather fucked up, and the whole "sex positive" thing is anything but. That's my personal experience, though, and purely anecdotal. I never ran into any kidnapped Ukrainian teenagers or anything. Just a lot of fucked-up Americans working through issues.
NicoleK at February 10, 2011 10:49 AM
The reason that arguments against the promotion of addiction as a disease are relevant, is because it's harmful to conflate these terms.
For example, diseases are not addictions. You would endanger people if you treated their diseases in the same way that you treat addictive behavior.
The etiology and manifestation of diseases are also very different from the process of addiction. It's not helpful to claim that they are the same by analogy. Analogies are too imprecise for medical science, where the standard of care demands that harm to the patient is minimized.
Frankly I have never heard a good argument for why addiction is a class of disease. The justifications tend to emphasize that addiction is physically damaging, and that addiction deserves the serious recognition that medical science can offer. But this is an attempt to ride the coat tails of medical science to improve the standing of addiction research.
If you think that addiction is as serious as a medical disease, then prove that directly, don't try to hijack medical pathology.
And to be clear, I am not arguing that addiction can not result in disease. That's a different matter. Coal mining can result in black lung, but the practice of coal mining is not a pathology.
Also if you want to call addictions diseases, then all addictions are diseases. You can't cherry pick the addictions w/ pathological or genetic complements and claim that all addictions are diseases because a few exploit disease aspects.
Pedanticus MD at February 10, 2011 12:02 PM
I dont think addiction is a disease, more likey I think it is a common component to neurological disorders.
Given rewarding endorphins flood the brain every time the 'addiction' is indulged, at least at first, I'd say addiction is an indicator of a more serious problem
That being said, teating addiction in and of istelf does nothing for most people. Which is why I think AA works for some people because it isnt just about the addiction to alcohol, but a supposrt system where people can talk about everytin in their lives.
lujlp at February 10, 2011 12:25 PM
I would not call addiction a disease. That said, there are people who, through either personality or unfortunate biochemistry, are more prone to addiction. It's just harder to avoid getting sucked into whatever may bring pleasure, no matter what damage they know may be done.
I take no issue in trying to not offer temptation to people who need that little bit of help.
I just wish that people would realize that we can't demand anything/everything that others *might* become addicted to be taken away, blocked, or banned from use by all.
"Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it."
Steph at February 10, 2011 1:36 PM
*****As a woman who appreciates that my husband appreciates porn, I have to say that this isn't the point. If you are fed lobster and filet mignon every night at home, you still want the occasional trip to check out the funky new gastropub. If you're lucky, your wife or girlfriend is a, er, foodie, too.*****
A-freaking-men.
Daghain at February 10, 2011 1:38 PM
"You would endanger people if you treated their diseases in the same way that you treat addictive behaviour."
But aren't you conflating here too? Surely different diseases are treated differently, no? If you want to create a similar dichotomy, how about comparing cancer treatments to the treatment of diabetes? Those approaches aren't swappable either.
You are reducing this to an over-simplified dichotomy, genuine disease on one side and addiction on the other. Of course it would be silly to treat illnesses (like cancer) in the same way that addiction is treated. No one is suggesting that.
However, saying that, some diseases ARE being treated, at least in part, in a way that is similar to how an addiction is treated. Group support for cancer survivors, for example, is being offered in many hospitals. And it's being offered because it works.
"If you think that addiction is as serious as a medical disease, then prove that directly, don't try to hijack medical pathology."
I said it ACTS like a disease. I'm not sure you were responding directly to me, but if you were, can you please read my posts carefully?
The DSM IV has it listed as a disease. The people you should be arguing with are on your own team.
ie at February 10, 2011 1:49 PM
I think with addiction there is often an underlying disease. Most alcoholics I've known suffer from depression or anxiety (or both) and have used the alcohol as "medication" for their disease.
Snoopy at February 10, 2011 4:45 PM
IE I wasn't actually responding to you, but you are making some of the types of arguments that I'm referring to. I am not proposing a strict dichotomy between addiction and disease, that addiction and organic pathologies never coincide. These processes are not immiscible, but they are distinct. You can have addictions which manifest disease and diseases that provoke addiction. There's also some good evidence that certain addictions do have genetic predicates. But the psychological process of addiction is not the same as pathogenesis, which initiates and proceeds principally at a biological level. My point is that nothing useful is gained by claiming that addictions are diseases, and that this conflation can actually do harm.
Also to my knowledge, the DSM does not define addiction per se. They define substance abuse, and compulsions, and both are disorders. The DSM typically reserves the term disease for organic disorders, like Alzheimers.
Let me ask you, why do you think that it's important to recognize addiction as a disease, or as acting like a disease? What's to be gained by this?
Pedanticus MD at February 10, 2011 5:58 PM
I'm about to be married in eight days to a man who likes to surf a few porn sites on Saturday and Sunday morning while I laze around with a book. So effing what if he does? Do you think he's going to call up one of those chix and ask for a date? Of course not, he's just looking at videos. Hell, we've been together for almost 15 years and never once has cheating been on his mind.
To you bimbos who complain about your men looking at porn: what do you do for kicks? More than likely you are out shopping on his dime, running up his credit cards to the max, and then lunching with your "girlfriends" so you can dis all the husbands and boyfriends. Really, you pigs make me sick.
A Nonny Mouse at February 10, 2011 6:26 PM
"I am not proposing a strict dichotomy between addiction and disease."
Really? The following sounds like you are arguing for a strong distinction:
"For example, diseases are not addictions. You would endanger people if you treated their diseases in the same way that you treat addictive behavior."
You are arguing to remove it from the spectrum of disease entirely, saying it exists outside it, which sounds like a dichotomy to me.
You ask what's to be gained by saying addiction acts like a disease? (And please note that I did not say "recognized"--that's your sleight-of-hand wording, not mine.) I would argue that the analogy helps lay people understand that there is an involuntary component to addiction, which kicks in, in my opinion, somewhere along the continuum of use of a substance. It varies from person to person.
The involuntary nature of the late stage of addiction is what allows us to treat addiction in ways that are more open-handed and open-hearted. This more sympathetic approach is more helpful in the long run, in my opinion.
And if you want to see what a less sympathetic approach looks like, I suggest you study what happens to addicts in countries like Iran, Iraq or China. It's reminiscent of how people with mental illnesses were treated in America in the 19th century. Brutal, in other words.
"Analogies are too imprecise for medical science, where the standard of care demands that harm to the patient is minimized."
This would make sense if addicts were actually being treated in hospitals, but they're not. They may come in to emergency wards when they have overdosed, but long term treatment happens at treatment centers, where they are primarily aided by counsellors, not MDs.
I should add that in the States many of these places are not government sponsored, but are private, so why should the terminology matter to the medical establishment when they are not losing out on funding and are usually not directly involved?
As for funding, I agree it may aid in the raising of government funds, but then a community that is over-run by drug users IS better off if there are treatment centers or at least some facilities available to help addicts stop using.
The level of property crime that occurs in these communities is significant. I'd rather live in a community that cares about helping addicts stop than live in one that's adopted a garrison attitude. Moreover, many facilities support 12-step programs and the great thing about them is that they are free. No cost to the taxpayer.
For the DSM IV, look it up under substance dependence. And really, I don't think you're an MD if you don't have one handy to check, although well done, you nearly had me fooled.
ie at February 10, 2011 6:56 PM
IE
Your arguments..
I would argue that the analogy helps lay people understand that there is an involuntary component to addiction..
and
The involuntary nature of the late stage of addiction is what allows us to treat addiction in ways that are more open-handed and open-hearted. This more sympathetic approach is more helpful in the long run, in my opinion.
go to my point that..
The justifications tend to emphasize that addiction is physically damaging, and that addiction deserves the serious recognition that medical science can offer. But this is an attempt to ride the coat tails of medical science to improve the standing of addiction research.
You're not actually arguing that addiction is a disease, rather that you wish that addiction had the standing of a disease in order to improve the public's perception of these afflictions and to inspire a more 'open-hearted' approach.
Apparently all good things flow from medicalization.
Also the term dichotomy has a specific meaning, which is not simply that of a distinction. A dichotomy arises from splitting a whole into two distinct parts that do not intersect. Being that I've stated that addiction and disease do intersect, it follows that I don't regard them as a dichotomy.
As for the DSM, you need to look it up, because your claim that they've classified substance dependency as a disease isn't apparent from my resources. Their current criteria are..
A maladaptive pattern of substance use, leading to clinically significant impairment or distress, ...
But you're right about the MD. I assumed that taking the name Pedanticus was enough to avoid confusion. What's worse is that my field underlies medical diagnostics, and so I'm all too familiar with where the lines are drawn, and what the effects of altering them can be.
Pedanticus MD at February 10, 2011 8:02 PM
I think the the stats bear out that AA is one of, if not, the most successful way for people to stay sober. For whatever reason tt helps a lot of people - religious and atheist.
and That being said, teating addiction in and of istelf does nothing for most people. Which is why I think AA works for some people because it isnt just about the addiction to alcohol, but a supposrt system where people can talk about everytin in their lives.
I've been involved in the 12 step fellowships for years. None of them have been shown to be more effective at treating addiction than people doing it on their own.
In fact, the fellowships are more harmful than going it alone in some cases. I met a young man a few weeks ago who is just off heroin. He's been going to meetings and his head is being filled with the "progressive, incurable and fatal disease" bullshit. He's being told complete abstinence is the only way, and any slip is a failure. What do you think the chances are that one drink or a hit of a joint will result in him shooting heroin? Pretty damn high. (Pun!)
In NA they say the phrase "once an addict always an addict is a lie." But, they also enforce self-identifying as an addict. I did drugs between ages 13 to 25. I've not done drugs since then - 22 years. In those 22 years I've accomplished a great deal. Identifying based on behaviors from my younger years defines who I was, not who I am today.
PS Amy said something about the 7th step - asking god to remove shortcomings. I worked through the steps the 1st time with a devout born again Xian. As an agnostic I was told to make a list of the better behaviors to practice in place of the shortcomings I'd listed in the 5th step.
Based on that and other things I've seen over the years, my conclusion is the 12 step fellowships are just evangelical movements aimed at people with life problems. From where I sit today, Dale Carnegie's book on winning friends has more value than any of the 12 step books. If you want a better life, stop doing detrimental behaviors and start living the way Dale taught.
PPS I wrote a book about my experiences going back to meetings after a long period of absence. It's a free download from the link on my name.
Terry Gibbs at February 10, 2011 10:06 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1841869">comment from Terry Gibbsmy conclusion is the 12 step fellowships are just evangelical movements aimed at people with life problems.
I agree, and recommend the work of Stanton Peele.
Amy Alkon at February 10, 2011 11:08 PM
What's the big deal? I may be over-sharing here, but I watch porn with my boyfriend. We have been together ten years and it really did us some good when we started doing this. I was very sexually inexperienced and timid when we got together and couldn't even utter the word "vagina" without blushing (and I had had a baby by the time I met him, keep in mind) and it really hindered us in the bedroom. My man was very gentle and understanding about this, but he wanted more from me sexually and approached me about watching a "mild porn film." My idea of porn involved violence and degradation toward women and it wasn't like that at all. I know a lot of porn films are, but my boyfiend knows that I will not tolerate that kind of crap. I actually enjoyed myself, during the movie and the after-show activities. I learned that the naked female body is a beautiful thing and became a little less embarassed about sex, period. Ten years later, our relationship is strong in every area and we look forward to those nights every couple months or so when it's just us and it's "movie night!"
Jessica at February 11, 2011 12:57 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1841925">comment from JessicaYay, Jessica!
Amy Alkon at February 11, 2011 1:02 AM
"You're not actually arguing that addiction is a disease, rather that you "wish" that addiction had the standing of a disease in order to improve the public's perception of these afflictions and to inspire a more 'open-hearted' approach."
No, I don't "wish". It's happening now. And it's not for the purpose of medicalization. Far from it; more medicalization (and medication) is the last thing addicts need!
It's an "analogy" to help lay people understand the process and problems of addiction. Perhaps you should look up the term? When people tell you it's raining cats and dogs, do you believe them?
"Also the term dichotomy has a specific meaning, which is not simply that of a distinction..."
That's one definition. There are more. The one I'm referring to is the one of "mutual exclusiveness." Yes, you conceded that addiction shares some traits with disease pathogensis that is suggestive of disease--your attempt to dazzle us with your scientific vocab--but your very sloppy reference to treatment belies your real belief which, face it, is quite different.
You are playing fast and loose with terms here and obfuscating with what sounds like an ad hoc lesson in the science of disease. Yes, I'm sure that for many diseases there is a biological trajectory of development, biologically based and with discernible phases, but please, not all diseases start the same way and follow the same trajectory. You are grossly over-simplifying by suggesting that they do.
Regarding the DSM IV, looking it up is exactly what I did, (I knew the entry was there, but double checked because some of us who post here like to be accurate). But I knew even before I did that you couldn't be an MD. You obviously don't have a clear understanding what the DSM IV is about.
Using "MD" may only be a handle here on this list, but I would suggest you stop using it.
ie at February 11, 2011 3:23 AM
"PPS I wrote a book about my experiences going back to meetings after a long period of absence. It's a free download from the link on my name."
Thank you for "plugging" this! LOL.
I wonder why so many people who end up walking away from AA feel the need to write about it? The market place is flooded with people who write (or who are trying to write) about this sort of thing.
Publishers of self-help books (and I'm thinking of one I know personally) get these kind of manuscripts on a depressingly regular basis, some of them so badly written, it's not funny.
Isn't there something pathological about the need to write about this too? Doesn't that suggest some sort of pathology in and of itself? Or is it only "other people" who suffer from "life problems"?
If people didn't have life problems, I guess advice columns wouldn't exist, right?
ie at February 11, 2011 3:37 AM
@NicoleK: "A lot of guys who go a long time before they have sex get very used to the feel of their hand, and wonder why a vagina doesn't feel like that, and get very used to the way girls act in movies, and wonder why real girls don't act like that."
_______________
And a lot more women immerse themselves in chick flicks, soap operas, romance novels, and start to wonder why their man doesn't act like the guy in the story (who probably has a dozen female scriptwriters), and get an unrealistic notion of what makes a good relationship.
I'm not saying porn has not hurt any relationships, but I don't think it does as much harm as most women think. Few men expect that from their women (and most men don't measure up to the men in the films either). I honestly think the subtle IV drip of misandry, with the regular regimen of reverence for all whims female, in modern entertainment has done more harm.
Trust at February 11, 2011 5:15 AM
IE it seems that you've chosen to distract attention from the lie I'd caught you in by getting nasty. I'll stop using MD if you stop making up claims about the DSM.
Also the fact that you assume that the DSM governs medical diagnosis demonstrates that you don't actually know anything about medical diagnostics. The lies you tell should be about the ICD, which also provides criteria for substance dependency, but recognizes it as a syndrome.
So despite my deep and abiding character flaws, and generally wicked nature, I am correct about the current medical diagnosis of addiction. You are not. You're going to have a hard time finding much support for the position that we should pursue diagnostics with an eye towards providing useful analogies to the lay public. That's not what diagnostic classifications are for.
Yes, I'm sure that for many diseases there is a biological trajectory of development, biologically based and with discernible phases
.. and that's when I realized that I was arguing with someone who knew absolutely nothing about the subject at hand.
so goodbye
Pedanticus MD at February 11, 2011 6:14 AM
In my experience Trust, if I acted like the men in romance novels, soap operas, rom-coms, etc, I would either get laughed out of the room or slapped in the face. But maybe that has more to do with generally dating sensible partners that aren't bowled over by constant gifts and romantic gestures, but appreciate real affection and attention. Not that I don't do those things sometimes, but the classic "proclaim your love across a crowded room" wouldn't have cut it with any of my girlfriends. Modern entertainment may be having some impact, but I don't think everyone responds to it - sometimes I wish it was that easy...
Ltw at February 11, 2011 6:17 AM
Pontificator is right IE, there's no use of the term 'disease' in the DSM IV or the ICD references. I'm a psychiatric nurse, so I think that I'd be aware if there were.
Lola at February 11, 2011 7:38 AM
"For me it's not the porn itself so much that's bothersome as the industry and how horribly destructive it is to people's lives (particularly the actors)"
This is my only issue with porn, after having seen the industry up close because my friend is a male porn star. The girls are pretty degraded, at least those who do the hardcore porn (girly magazines are an entirely different thing).
I'm very liberal about sex and never had a problem with porn before, even while being married to a guy who was arguably addicted to it. But now, after overhearing how the women "actors" are cut down, made fun of, laughed about, called names, and paid a pitance most of the time for the loss of their dignity...well, I feel bad supporting that kind of industry.
One girl showed up to film a scene with my friend and, I swear, she looked no older than my daughter. They'd checked her ID and said she was 19, but still. I watched her suck his cock for over an hour then him spew his load on her face, which is the money shot they always try to get.
Then I listened while they edited the film and talked about her like she was a piece of meat. She was paid around $200 for this fun day of work, so guys can jerk off to her at home, and she can have that clip out there on the internet for the rest of her life.
Oh, and he fucked her without a condom. They don't wear protection, and some do get HIV. My friend is HUGE, and he thinks it's funny when he tears a girl up. He's in Thailand now and sleeps with prostitutes, then he'll fly back to LA and shoot a film. He's tested every couple of months, but just think about the risk to the women he works with.
It's an ugly business, folks. Yes, it's fun to watch, like hamburgers are fun to eat, but when you really see the ugly business of how it's made, it might change your view. It did mine.
My guy has some Playboys and a couple of tame videos, but I'm really happy he's not consuming porn to any excessive degree.
lovelysoul at February 11, 2011 8:07 AM
> I watched her suck his cock for over an hour...
> She was paid around $200 for this
Or she could have done about 3 entire days work at McDonald's, Walmart, etc. for the same amount of money. From her perspective, she probably got a good deal.
[Why were you watching her suck his cock?]
Snoopy at February 11, 2011 10:35 AM
Ms Alkon, has your research showed an increase of male viewership of porn that corresponds with the rise and dominance of feminism the general anti-male bias in society? There may be more at work here than raw animal hormonal sex.....
BBC at February 11, 2011 11:16 AM
Snoppy, I was invited to watch while he was filming. I know that's weird, but hey...I've already seen his films, so it's not like he has anything to hide.
I've known this kid since he was 17, and I'm actually kind of responsible for him getting into the business. Once I discovered he was hung (saw some photos from Fantasy Fest in Key West, where he was naked), My girlfriend and I jokingly suggested he go into porn, which he took seriously. That very night, he emailed photos of his giant member to some production companies, and the rest is history.
So, I really tried to see the positives, and justify what was happening, but what I came away with is that it isn't a great opportunity, especially for the girls. It's very exploitive and degrading. Many of them are vulnerable (drugs, bad familes, homeless, etc). I've met quite a few, and they're sad, desperate people. Sure, a few, at the very top, make great money, but the bulk of porn produced for the internet today involves the seedier side of the industry.
My friend is making a lot of money now because he recruits "talent" and films his own movies, which are distributed all over the internet. He started out with Bangbros, which is a disgusting operation here in Miami that produces the "Bang Bus," where they supposedly pick up a girl off the street, film her having sex in the back of the bus, then kick her out on the curb. Hilarious, right? Those were his first films - he was so proud he brought them over for me to see.
If you experience the industry up close, it'll turn your stomach. We are a consumptive society, and we tend not to care how what we consume gets made or delivered to us, just as long as we enjoy it. If you like porn, fine, but I want people to at least be aware of the ugly side - the fact that young girls (and guys) are being exploited, degraded, and put at risk for HIV, etc, all for your viewing pleasure.
That's vastly different from working at McDonalds. I wish my friend still worked selling boats, frankly, and I'd never suggested porn to him. What this has done to him as a person isn't positive, even though he is on the profitable end of things. The toll it takes on the young women involved is far worse in most cases.
lovelysoul at February 11, 2011 11:37 AM
@Lola, Please read my posts more carefully.
I didn't use the word "disease." Just said addiction acts like one. The DSM IV uses the term term "substance dependence." Why put it in there at all if an addiction is only a weakness of will, as some people are arguing here?
As a psychiatric nurse, I'm sure you've seen mentally ill patients come in who have been self- medicating to the point where they will experience perhaps life-threatening withdrawal if they come off the drugs (alcohol, prescription or street) that they're on.
That's not a problem?
ie at February 11, 2011 11:44 AM
"IE it seems that you've chosen to distract attention from the lie I'd caught you in by getting nasty. I'll stop using MD if you stop making up claims about the DSM."
WHAT lie? You're the one who lied about being a doctor!
Here's an interesting link:
http://www.behavenet.com/capsules/disorders/subdep.htm
ie at February 11, 2011 11:57 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1842301">comment from BBCPorn consumption, BBC, mostly seems to be associated with its availability. As availability increases, porn consumption increases. It directly corresponds to the availability of Internet access. (As states have gotten it, porn consumption has gone up...and interestingly, sex crimes have usually gone down, and sometimes, considerably, or at least they have not increased.)
Amy Alkon at February 11, 2011 11:59 AM
LS: "Oh, and he fucked her without a condom. They don't wear protection, and some do get HIV. My friend is HUGE, and he thinks it's funny when he tears a girl up. He's in Thailand now and sleeps with prostitutes, then he'll fly back to LA and shoot a film. He's tested every couple of months, but just think about the risk to the women he works with."
There was a sad story about a young woman from Montreal here who went to LA to do porn and her first and only time out contracted AIDS. I heard the description about how she got it--and I'm still not sure I believe the story--but she too was torn, anally, decided never to do it again, but it was too late. The local newspaper did a profile on her. She was so young!
A friend of mine has a daughter who's doing internet porn. It's completely torn her up. I never thought I'd know someone with a link to the industry, and certainly the link I have is not as strong as yours, but it does give one pause.
Listening to this woman talk about her daughter is difficult because of course she's aware of how her daughter's being treated. The surprising thing, at least from my perspective, is that the daughter is a member of a very close, seemingly well-adjusted family. It's hard to understand why she chose porn when she was given all sorts of opportunities and support to do other things.
ie at February 11, 2011 12:21 PM
That's very sad, ie. The amazing thing is that she came forward and let them profile her. I suspect this happens a lot more than we know because most people wouldn't come forward. The industry certainly doesn't want to publicize it.
According to my friend, some of the male actors are bisexual and do gay films also. This is one way that HIV is spread. Although they are tested every other month for STDs, there is that window of risk. He worked with a girl who later caught HIV from anal sex with a bisexual actor, and apparently, another male actor also caught it at the same time because they were doing the anal scene together (two guys, one girl, if you get the gross picture).
That's the thing. I used to enjoying watching porn, but, somehow, I assumed it was safe. I never really considered that they weren't using protection (although it's obvious - guess I figured they had invisible condoms or something). As I said, we consume porn without giving much thought to how it is produced and delivered to us.
I mean, people who buy organic, farm-raised meat or whatever because they're against animal cruelty, or are outraged by the mistreatment of women in ordinary circumstances, will watch porn without considering the risk, sacrifice, and degradation involved in making it. Hate to be a downer, but that's really what is happening.
lovelysoul at February 11, 2011 12:57 PM
Oh, and my friend says EVERYONE has herpes. You can't be in the industry without getting it.
lovelysoul at February 11, 2011 1:02 PM
"they were doing the anal scene together (two guys, one girl, if you get the gross picture)."
That's the story this girl told! The story I wasn't sure I could believe...so it does happen. Wow.
ie at February 11, 2011 1:03 PM
Wow, maybe it was the same girl! But I thought she'd been doing porn for awhile. Maybe my friend just knew her but hadn't worked with her yet. But, really, who would start doing porn on that kind of scene? I think she may be fudging the truth a little there.
lovelysoul at February 11, 2011 1:08 PM
I can't say for sure, but I do seem to remember that she tried to say no and that some sort of threat was involved. Not physical, but more along the lines of "If you don't do this, we'll make sure you never work again" sort of thing. And for some reason, she was planning a career in the industry, so she reluctantly went along with it. (This isn't my friend's daughter, but the one profiled.)
She did the film and came home immediately because the experience had put her off. She found out later, while back in Montreal, that she had contacted HIV.
It seemed hard to believe--for me it was more of a "why the hell would you plan that sort of career issue--but I really can't say one way or the other.
ie at February 11, 2011 1:15 PM
@ltw: "In my experience Trust, if I acted like the men in romance novels, soap operas, rom-coms, etc, I would either get laughed out of the room or slapped in the face. But maybe that has more to do with generally dating sensible partners that aren't bowled over by constant gifts and romantic gestures, but appreciate real affection and attention. Not that I don't do those things sometimes, but the classic "proclaim your love across a crowded room" wouldn't have cut it with any of my girlfriends. Modern entertainment may be having some impact, but I don't think everyone responds to it - sometimes I wish it was that easy..."
_____________
I have no doubt that men would be mocked if they acted like Edward "I want to kill you but I'm a sweetheart" Cullen, but that doesn't stop women from feeling like their men are deficient after crushing on him.
I think modern entertainment (actually, not so modern) has more of an impact on girls and women than most suspect. We start them off in their cribs reading about the frog prince (your kiss will transform toads into princes). Then we move them on to Lady and the Tramp (homeless, unemployed chicken thief tramps are good matches for nice girls with sheltered lives). We then have a steady regimen of Disney which impresses upon girls that they can make a man out of a monster (Beauty and the Beast), and thieves are really diamonds in the rough who will show them a world that they have not even seen themselves (Aladdin). Then, as these girls start becoming women, we'll teach them that the best men always crash onto the scene on a motorcycle beating up the villains, who are always educated rich men wearing ties (almost any soap opera). From there, a buffet of chick flicks (where bad men always change), with a yummy dessert assortment of vampires who are have an urge to kill them (Twilight) and werewolves who they can't make too upset lest they turn and eat them (Twilight sequels). Sprinkle some anti-husband hostility from talk shows, magazines, friends, co-workers, hair stylist, and most groups of women, and you have a recipe for a wife that *sarcasm on* so appreciates *sarcasm off* her husband.
Of course, if this very same husband was given sex every 2 or 3 days during courtship, is now working 60 hours a week to make all her dreams come true, and now only gets sex once every 2 or 3 years... if he in his involuntary celibacy turns to porn rather than adultery, he is destroying his marriage. The reverse is not true, as men don't have feelings anyway.
One of these days, I'll tell you how I really feel. :)
Trust at February 11, 2011 1:21 PM
"I've stopped reading Amy's blog because I've gotten tired of the articles that seem to say that Christians are idiots. I'm Christian, so that gets on my nerves after a while."
If you're not an idiot about it, you'll be fine. Maybe you haven't noticed - but as Jesus' core message is that the highest calling is your unheralded sacrifice for another, Amy enjoys encouraging that same thing.
Now, if you want to go on about a big boat saving the animals or a "young" Earth, you can expect to eat quit a bit of heavy documentation - just not from Amy, who is tired of irrational claims. The first of which always seems to be that they're not irrational. Whew.
-----
Back to the pr0n: if your SO is not your hero, well, think about this. Did you rush into the relationship? Can you fix it now? How? Did one of you blow up, or change into something else? Should you end it, and how quickly?
Because the logical development is high-risk behavior, which we see on the 11-o'clock news constantly as cases where people catch STDs, up to and including Smith & Wesson disease*.
I suggest that this is not wise.
-----
* SWD presents as one to several acute hemorrhagic lesions, not confined to any particular part of the body. Sufferers - those minimally affected - report hearing loud noises, sometimes accompanied by flashes of light. Some patients report no pain; rather, an impact is felt. Severity ranges from anxiety and emesis to shock and sudden death from tissue damage. Examination reveals the body has concentrated nodes of lead, copper and sometimes trace aluminum at wound sites. No vaccine exists to prevent this affliction. Treatment is limited to removal of metallic cysts and supportive care.
Radwaste at February 11, 2011 3:36 PM
"Ms Alkon, has your research showed an increase of male viewership of porn that corresponds with the rise and dominance of feminism the general anti-male bias in society? There may be more at work here than raw animal hormonal sex....."
It would probably not be possible to demonstrate that correlation one way or another because of too many confounding factors, such as the rise of cable TV, home video players, and the Internet. As Amy said, availability has increased hugely since about 1975.
Cousin Dave at February 11, 2011 4:11 PM
"I watched her suck his cock for over an hour then him spew his load on her face, which is the money shot they always try to get. "
Blah, that's also the type of porn I find a turn-off.
Lobster at February 11, 2011 4:19 PM
@Trust I've seen some of that in younger women, but for women my age (early 30's) I think many go to the opposite extreme. They want a guy who is so stable and vanilla that it's unrealistic. He's has to own a house and have a great career etc. They're certainly not looking for bikers or artist types.
mel at February 11, 2011 6:13 PM
@mel: "I've seen some of that in younger women, but for women my age (early 30's) I think many go to the opposite extreme. They want a guy who is so stable and vanilla that it's unrealistic. He's has to own a house and have a great career etc. They're certainly not looking for bikers or artist types"
__________________
I don't doubt what you say, but consider this... after spending their 20s choosing what popular entertainment has conditioned them to choose, their prospects are not nearly as good in their 30s. Not only that, but they are competing against the 20 somethings too.
I do agree that women tend to seek more of the stable provider as 30 looms. But I think that is also why marital sex lives dry up within a year or so... if that type person is what really pushed her buttons, she wouldn't have spent her 20s riding the bad boy carousel. Instead, she finds herself married to a good man she isn't attracted to, once the family courts are in her corner she no long has a need to feign the attraction, and we end up with a man surfing porn because he's tired of begging for a twice a year quickie, during which she pops her knuckles and rolls her eyes, if she bothers moving at all.
As always, this doesn't describe all women, just an all too common situation. I think people underestimate how much damage state law meddling has done to the institution of marriage.
Trust at February 11, 2011 6:40 PM
Ms Alkon, Cousin Dave: I was just wondering if anyone had tried sussing out this angle. From my own unscientific experience, I know many men who are profoundly dissatisfied with their marriages. But, they won't get out because they will be royally fucked by the system.
Most of them do access pornography, but in their fantasies they do NOT envision the sexy young thing as a controling, demanding, frigid harridan with the law almost exclusively on her side.
They fantasize about good sex and a humane, warm understanding partner. Perhaps with the heaviest accent on the humanity of the partner.
BBC at February 11, 2011 7:22 PM
It works both ways. I'm sure there are some simply cold, frigid women, but, in my discussions with girlfriends (and, as y'all can tell, I'm pretty blunt) most of them turn off to sex because they feel unappreciated, hurt, or mistreated.
Men often don't realize how emotionally wired in the female sex drive is, which is lower to begin with, so if a guy isn't being affectionate or kind throughout the day, women will completely turn off. Because our main motivation is connection, not orgasm, there's very little incentive to do it when the emotional attachment is suffering.
I don't always feel like having sex, but I always feel like making my man happy because he does everything he can to make me happy. He tells me he loves me throughout the day, looks out for my well-being, thinks of little ways to show me how much he appreciates me, and hugs and kisses me at OTHER times, not just when he wants sex.
I just read the other day a good article about kissing, and how, so often, couples let that habit wane. They reduce it down to a peck on the cheek, as they run out the door, if at all. So these 7 or 8 women featured in the article tried an experiment with kissing their men more often, and it did wonders for their sex lives! At the end of the experiment, all the relationships were better because of it. Some couldn't keep their hands off each other again.
So, kiss your wife...be affectionate and thoughtful..and unless she's a heartless bitch, I predict the sex will improve and maybe you won't need so much porn.
lovelysoul at February 11, 2011 8:22 PM
Here's the article:
http://lifestyle.ca.msn.com/love-sex-relationships/hearst-article.aspx?cp-documentid=26594040
lovelysoul at February 11, 2011 8:28 PM
@lovelysoul
That sounds logical, if you believe what most modern women say over what they do, and, more importantly, over who they do.
Trust at February 11, 2011 9:21 PM
Lovelysoul - you mentioned Bang Bus as your friend's start in porn. That falls into the category of "stuff I won't watch anymore, even though I used to". Not something I'm proud of. I'm well aware the industry is hard on people, you can see in some porn that the girl especially is in pain even through the acting. I try to avoid that, and sometimes it really sickens me. I may be fooling myself that the occasional stuff I do watch seems better than that - maybe they're just better actors. I don't really know for sure.
If your friend is who I think he is, he may be hung but he's not exactly good looking.
Ltw at February 12, 2011 7:02 AM
So, kiss your wife...be affectionate and thoughtful..and unless she's a heartless bitch, I predict the sex will improve and maybe you won't need so much porn.
Can't agree with this enough. Doesn't always work, but it's the best option you have.
Ltw at February 12, 2011 7:25 AM
"You mean I can get paid for sucking cock? Where do I sign?"
That's what gets young women into the industry. Dreams of making it big like Jenna Jameson or Asia Carrera.
brian at February 12, 2011 7:26 AM
@brian, I'm not sure I believe that, although I'd be the first person to admit that I have no idea what goes on the minds of women who make these choices.
My friend's daughter is working in Montreal, not in LA, so I don't think she's aiming for the big time. Mind you, there's a whole French industry, so maybe she's making it big there.
Which reminds me of the opening of the film "The Decline of the American Empire" (or it might be "Jesus of Montreal," but it's a Denys Arcand film at any rate. It begins with scenes at a dubbing studio where francophone actors are dubbing over a porno film that was obviously done in English originally. It's sooooo funny. The inane dialogue alone is hilarious, never mind watching the actors acting to make it sound credible.
ie at February 12, 2011 9:33 AM
IE, it's not surprising at all. When I was in college, I and several friends did some internet porn. Nothing terribly hardcore, mostly nudie shots and masturbation and girls kissing and that sort of thing. I did it for a couple years out of college, too, and supported myself on it for a little while.
Looking back I'm all, "WTF was I thinking", but honestly for me it stemmed out of low self-esteem, mainly due to being overweight with enormous breasts. Here was a place where being overweight with enormous breasts was a -good- thing... in fact, I was more successful than my slim friends thanks to the wonders of niche marketing.
There was also an element of "do me feminism"... as in "If guys can fuck around I should be able to, too! Hear me roar!"
If you had asked me about it then I would have used words like "empowering" and "sex positive" and "pushing bounderies". A lot of my friends were polyamorous as well, though I never got into that. There also seemed to be overlap between being a geek and being into gothic bdsm.
The money was nice, but it was more about the rush and the high of people wanting to pay to see me naked. I mean... me! Dorky, chubby, me! It's because I smiled in the pics and wore lipstick and cute costumes. Most fat girls don't. Even chubby chasers don't want to be with some depressed-looking fat chick.
In retrospect, the one good thing was I'd get fan mail that said stuff like, "My wife had low self esteem because she's overweight and wouldn't believe me when I told her overweight people could be sexy, so I showed her your site so she could see that she could be sexy, too, and now our marriage is better". So I'm glad I could help someone.
In some ways I regret it, in some ways I don't. It happened. It's embarassing. I hope my inlaws don't find out...
NicoleK at February 12, 2011 9:44 AM
Oh, and I can attest to the fact that a lot of guys, in fact, DO call (or email) the girls on the sites and ask for dates.
My policy was all, "Sure I'll get coffee but we're not having sex". I was very curious as to who my fan base was. For the most part, they were nice.
NicoleK at February 12, 2011 9:46 AM
"Even chubby chasers don't want to be with some depressed-looking fat chick."
This gave me a chuckle! I don't think depression looks good on anyone, and I can attest since I went through my college years being depressed most of the time. It's like a big neon sign saying "stay away!"
I don't think you should feel any regret--at least it sounds like you had more fun in college than I did! And I'm sure it gave you a new perspective of yourself, which is always interesting.
I like what you said about the men writing in and your helping them with their self-conscious wives. There are so many preconceived ideas people have about attraction and I love it when I hear stuff like this. There are so many women who make men's hearts go pitter-patter and a lot of them aren't a size two with long hair and model looks.
Thank you for sharing this information.
ie at February 12, 2011 10:44 AM
Funny you should bring up Asia Carrera...
I think she's a smart nutcase. Now, whoever writes the blog Grace Undressed... there's a gifted writer telling her story.
Radwaste at February 12, 2011 11:43 AM
Amy, love the blog, thanks for your delightful writing.
You said,
"You stop a behavior through self-discipline."
You haven't been around alcoholics much if you still think that finger pointing and telling them that they lack discipline gets people sober.
It's all about looking at the big picture and beginning to believe that someone "as messed up as me" really can improve themselves.
I very much appreciate the example in your column: if you have MS, you don't put it down and run out of your burning house- that's an important difference between a disease and a behaviour.
Now, when you write about being Black, do your opinions override what Black people report? Assuming that you're not Gay, are your opinions about Gay people more accurate than their assessments?
Can you explain why you don't believe ex-drinkers when they say that AA is helpful?
AA gets people off the sauce, and unlike cults, churches, and evangelical organizations, (not to mention writers who try to explain alcoholism from the outside) no one is using AA funds to buy mansions and yachts.
I agree with you that AA falls down when it claims that you can't get or stay sober without it, my only question is, why would a person tough it out on their own when you could sober up with other people and share "experience strength and hope"?
I put down alcohol 18 years ago, and I feel fortunate that I had AA people to hang out with, because it was REALLY REALLY difficult. Worth noting is that the folks I spent time with weren't AA book- thumpers, just people who liked having the support of a sort of family of other struggling people.
I only went to meetings for the first seven or eight years, after that Buddhist teachings (which BTW do not include "God") helped me grow up enough that I was able to use discipline to maintain sobriety in a happy way.
Andy G. at February 12, 2011 12:32 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1842944">comment from Andy G.You haven't been around alcoholics much if you still think that finger pointing and telling them that they lack discipline gets people sober
I would be really shitty at what I do if I thought merely criticizing people or telling them what to do were effective motivational tactics.
I write about human nature. Black people, gay people, and alcoholics are human. My "assessments" are research and reason as well as observation and insight-based. Peele gets into it here along with other treatments that are effective.
http://www.peele.net/faq/goodtreatment.html
Hint, regarding your experience: The plural of anecdote is not data. Also, people with issues of overeating can't stop consuming food, and it's possible for alcoholics to learn to drink moderately once they stop using alcohol to mask/avoid problems that it cannot solve.
I describe motivational interviewing here. This is what I essentially do in my columns -- lay out the absurdities of people's behavior, compare them to their values or what people generally want (love and affect rather than hate and beatings, for a simplified example), and let them come to the conclusion of what they need to do. Here's a bit on this from one of my columns:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2007/03/scum-kind-of-wo-2.html
Amy Alkon at February 12, 2011 12:49 PM
The percentage of alcohol abusers or "alcholics," (I'll use both terms since terminology seems a bit of a problem with this issue) who can go back to moderated drinking is 4%.
I know this opens the door to discussing who is and isn't an alcoholic, but I'll define it the way it was defined for me: it's anyone who's life is being negatively affected by their excessive drinking. (And we're not talking about an occasional hang-over.)
I did say earlier I'd done research on alcoholism and this information (including the above description) came from an out-patient rehab affiliated with the Montreal General Hospital. It's a rehab that is NOT 12-step based, btw. The founder, like a lot of people on this list, had a very strong dislike of AA.
ie at February 12, 2011 1:21 PM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1842961">comment from ieThe percentage of alcohol abusers or "alcholics," (I'll use both terms since terminology seems a bit of a problem with this issue) who can go back to moderated drinking is 4%
People love to throw around stats to support their arguments (and when you do, kindly throw in a resource for that stat), but there's no way anybody can come up with an accurate stat on this, and why would it matter, anyway? If you can't do moderate drinking, don't.
Plenty of people all of us know have had a problem with their drinking and cut back -- and without assistance from or measurement by the rehab industrial complex.
Amy Alkon at February 12, 2011 1:51 PM
The info came from Griffith Edwards, whose name graces the name of the rehab. Here's a link:
http://www.ias.org.uk/resources/publications/alcoholalert/alert200003/al200003_p16.html
Another interesting link comes from the CBC, quoting WHO:
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2011/02/11/health-alcohol-deaths.html
ie at February 12, 2011 1:56 PM
The thing to keep in mind when making claims about the effectiveness of one treatment model vs another is that some proportion of the addict population will overcome their addiction 'spontaneously'. Meaning that they'll quit anyway, without the assistance of a program. This figure seems to be pretty consistent at around 5% of control groups, and about 50% over lifetime for alcoholics ( see the Harvard Mental Health Letter vol.12, #4). These observations call into question the actual effects of treatments, as their success rate is reported at about 5%.
silas at February 12, 2011 5:04 PM
I've heard the 50% rate for alcoholics. The problem these days is that most addicts are cross-addicted, so as soon as you start adding drugs, especially street drugs, or gambling or sex to the equation, the success rate for recovery takes a very sharp nosedive. The rehab people I spoke to said about 80% of their clients were now cross-addicted and that they were experiencing lower success rates as a result.
"This figure seems to be pretty consistent at around 5% of control groups." Do you know how this figure was arrived at? (I'm genuinely curious, btw.)
I'm wondering how they formed a control group. It's just that most alcoholics and addicts are not known for their honesty and so I'm wondering if this is based on self-reporting or based on groups that were tested (as in did these people pass random urine tests?). Be interesting to know.
It's just that when you think of the failure of opiate-blockers (like Naltrexone) and other medications like Antabuse (which makes you sick if you mix it with alcohol), it's clear that medication alone usually doesn't cut it. I'm not sure what the answer is.
Most of the AA people I interviewed mentioned the 5% success rate as well. I do know of one case where a woman quit spontaneously. Apparently she wasn't too easy to live with without the alcohol though.
ie at February 12, 2011 7:49 PM
It's just that most alcoholics and addicts are not known for their honesty
Tell me about it ie - I'm more honest here than I am anywhere else in my life, except with a few special people.
other medications like Antabuse (which makes you sick if you mix it with alcohol)
Real alcoholics are pretty used to being sick. It might not apply to everyone, but when you learn to tolerate DTs every morning, sweats during the day while you're working, the slow recovery while you drink at night - you get very familiar with feeling ill. I'm not surprised the medication route doesn't work well, I can't imagine the illness that would stop me from drinking. I've never tried it so I don't really know.
Ltw at February 12, 2011 9:17 PM
It's not at all surprising that the model you prefer for personal progress is that of a kindly, wiser individual talking sense to a messed up individual, and the one with the problem sees the light and decides to change.
This is one of the Great Truths of personal growth, and it's rare to see a person make big progress without a mentor.
What is surprising is your need to negate one of the two other huge people-changers: Entrainment.
When people spend time in a group, they take on the behaviors of the other members- and if that includes sobriety, that's not such a bad thing.
We're herd animals, and if we can't hang out with the ultra kool kids because we're pathetic addicts, we'd best look for a group of messed up addicts like ourselves who show signs of progress.
Sure, it's spooky if the person in question doesn't have the sense to avoid unhealthy entanglements- the AA groups I was involved with strongly discouraged sexual relations with other members without years of mutual sobriety. Shall we toss some numbers around re: professional helpers getting involved with their clients? Especially if we include clergy, The Numbers would make any sensible person a bit jumpy about seeing a psychiatrist without a chaperone present...
As far as the 5% figure, I suspect that it's handy because one only needs a single typewriter key to express it- it simply doesn't match my observations over time. If fifty scientists wearing "The Sky is Green" t-shirts tell me that the sky is green, I'm going to ask them to remove their tinted shades, and go on my way wondering what made them feel the need to "prove" it.
Your columns and blog are hilarious and wonderfully written, and I'm *blush* addicted! but....as far as actually changing people's behaviors, what's YOUR success rate? 5%?
When it comes to writing an engaging column, though, it's 100%. You simply rock.
Andy G. at February 13, 2011 12:09 AM
How exactly is Amy negating brainwave synchronization?
juke at February 13, 2011 5:45 AM
@Ltw: well, believe it or not, in the name of doing proper research, I actually took an Antabuse pill and had one drink (this was back a number of years when I was younger and still feeling stupidly invincible).
The mix of Antabuse and alcohol produces acetone in the body (I believe it's acetone;it's been a while), an ingredient of nail polish remover. I turned pink, had difficulty breathing and wondered if I should head to emergency. The pressure on my chest was that awful. I didn't because I wasn't sure I'd be believed (really, doctor, it was all in the name of research!), but it totally scared the bejesus out of me. I felt that way for about 8 to 9 hours and was slightly agitated, so couldn't even sleep it off.
I swore never again to do something so stupid. When I told one of the rehab people I interviewed, they read me the riot act, wanted to know who'd supplied with me the Antabuse, etc. In other words, they were not impressed with my diligence when it came to research.
Basically, if you take Antabuse and drink, you don't have a hangover, you have difficulty breathing and the effect lasts for hours. Nothing at all like a hangover. I don't recommend it!
@Andy G: one rehab I visited had been around since the early 60s and was 12 step based. It started in an old farmhouse miles outside of Montreal.
I talked to one of the founders and he said that in the early days, when most people who came were only addicted to alcohol (and not cross addicted), their success rate was about 50%. He said he could safely say this because that was roughly the number of ex-residents who stayed in touch with the rehab center and attended a weekly meeting there.
So like you I suspect the 5% rate for AA is low as an estimate, but unfortunately there's no way no way of substantiating that.
ie at February 13, 2011 6:41 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/ag-column-archives/2011/02/triumph-of-the.html#comment-1843313">comment from Andy G.as far as actually changing people's behaviors, what's YOUR success rate? 5%?
I have no idea how to measure -- but at least I know that. I do get many, many letters from people who tell me that I change their behaviors. I hope some of them will see this and comment here.
Amy Alkon at February 13, 2011 7:06 AM
That sounds awful ie - remind me never to go near Antabuse then. My best is cheating and smoking a couple of cigarettes with a nicotine patch on - believe me, you feel that, nicotine poisoning becomes very real when your heart starts racing and you get dizzy. I didn't have the research excuse though!
Ltw at February 13, 2011 7:39 AM
How the fuck does this woman think she knows what is "normal" for men?
Robert at February 16, 2011 11:57 AM
I actually got into this post. I located it to be fascinating and loaded with exclusive points of interest. I like to read material that makes me believe. Thank you for writing this fantastic content. cedegabkeddb
Johnd331 at May 5, 2014 10:58 PM
Leave a comment