Kirsten Andersen

‘Malarkey’: Expert reacts to sexpert’s claim that there’s no such thing as porn addiction

Kirsten Andersen
Kirsten Andersen
Image

Updated at 7:46 p.m. Eastern time.

ALBUQUERQUE, NM, February 21, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Despite a growing number of studies showing that pornography affects brains the same way as alcohol or drugs, a New Mexico-based sex researcher says porn use is not addictive and may be positive – a conclusion an expert told LifeSiteNews is “malarkey.”

“The Emperor Has No Clothes” is the inflammatory title of an article written by clinical psychologist David Ley for the Current Sexual Health Report medical journal. In it, Ley notes that only 37 percent of current studies on compulsive pornography use the word “addiction” to describe the behavior, and that there is no such addiction listed in the DSM-V, the manual psychiatrists use to diagnose their patients.

Dr. Monica Breaux, a sex therapist who often deals with porn addiction in her practice, told LifeSiteNews that Ley’s conclusions are “malarkey.”

She said, while the DSM does not list pornography addiction as a disorder, the scientific community is just now catching up to what those working with patients have known for some time: pornography is addictive, and it’s ruining people’s lives.

To write her doctoral dissertation on sexual addiction, she interviewed hundreds of students at Arizona State University who, regardless of religious or irreligious beliefs, overwhelmingly recognized that pornography and sex addiction were real and affecting the lives of their peers.

“What I showed in my doctoral dissertation was that just questioning students at Arizona State University, they had already informally assessed their peers for sex addiction, even though there was no formal assessment on sexual addiction at that time,” she said.

“When people can informally assess sexual addiction, the formal will naturally follow,” said Breaux. “We didn’t have a formal assessment for alcoholism prior to an informal assessment” that imbibing too much alcohol was bad for people.

Dr. Ley said that people who seek help for compulsive pornography are often religious, and feel deeply guilty for engaging in behavior that conflicts with their values.

Another study released around the same time as Ley’s found that religion played a large role in whether people sought help for compulsive use of pornography. That study found that religion also affected whether clinicians were likely to diagnose a patient with porn or sex addiction – religious clinicians were much more likely to see compulsive pornography use as a problem and encourage users to quit.

Dr. Breaux, who is Catholic, rejects the idea that porn addiction is simply a manifestation of religious guilt.

“There are so many therapists making a living off of pornography addiction,” Breaux said. “I make my living off of pornography addiction. To suggest it doesn’t exist is malarkey.”

Psychotherapist Paula Hall, who chairs the Association for the Treatment of Sex Addiction and Compulsivity, told the UK’s Independent newspaper that Ley’s allegations were not only incorrect, but harmful.

“The clients are very very real, and comments like this dismiss and belittle the very real pain that people suffer,” Hall said. “We are inundated with requests for help from people who want to get back on with their lives.”

“[Porn use] impacts relationships, social lives, work, studies, after a while it can escalate to the person paying for sites and so there’s also a financial implication,” Hall added. “When you work with these people it’s just ridiculous to say it doesn’t exist.”

Instead of focusing on or “pathologizing” the negative cases that Breaux and Hall deal with, Dr. Ley argues that clinicians should focus on the purported “benefits” of pornography, such as its promotion of “sexual novelty,” which he argues can lead to more satisfying sex for users.

“More [pornography] viewing has been related to greater likelihood of anal and oral sex and a greater variety of sexual behaviors,” wrote Ley. “This increased breadth of sexual behaviors could arise by increasing a person’s feeling of empowerment to suggest new behaviors or by normalizing the behaviors.”

He did not explain how couples would enjoy more satisfying sex when repeated porn use is observed to lead to male impotence, even among young healthy men.

Ley said another benefit of pornography is the emotional rush it gives users. “[Pornography] can promote pleasant feelings in the moment,” he wrote, “such as happiness and joy.”

He also suggested pornography might give users “a legal outlet for illegal sexual behaviors or desires,” such as rape or child molestation. Child porn necessitates the abuse of children in order to produce it, and possessing it is in itself a crime.

Ley denies that there has been an explosion in pornography use since the advent of the internet, noting that Google’s search frequency for the word ‘sex’ has stayed stable since it began tracking such data in 2004.

But the word “sex” has always hovered near the top of Google’s search rankings, and its cousins “porn,” “free porn," and “porno” have been on an exponential rise since 2004. Together with “sex,” those search terms are together responsible for 22,820,000 queries every month. ‘Porn’ is most popular, followed by “free porn,” “sex,” and “porno.” That doesn’t begin to cover the millions of searches for individual sex acts, porn genres, or specific websites.

An estimated 30 percent of all internet traffic is related to pornography.

Click "like" if you say NO to porn!

One of the largest internet forums for people struggling with porn addiction is Reddit’s “NoFap” subgroup, which was founded by an atheist.

Boasting nearly 100,000 members, the group is made up of men and women from all over the world who are encouraging each other in their goal of abandoning sexual self-gratification.

According to group creator Alexander Rhodes, the “NoFap” challenge is not about guilt or societal expectations, but about “devoting yourself completely to your significant other instead of random pixilated girls on the internet who you've never met…enhancing your meaningful relationship, instead of establishing five-minute relationships with virtual girls online.”

Men, and women, who have given up pornography report dramatic increases in social confidence, energy levels, concentration levels, mental acuity, motivation, self-esteem, emotional stability, happiness, sexual prowess, and attractiveness to the opposite sex.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
LifeSiteNews staff

,

Quebec groups launch court challenge to euthanasia bill

LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

As announced when the Quebec legislature adopted Bill 52, An Act respecting end-of-life care, the citizen movement Living with Dignity and the Physicians’ Alliance against Euthanasia, representing together over 650 physicians and 17,000 citizens, filed a lawsuit before the Superior Court of Quebec in the District of Montreal on Thursday.

The lawsuit requests that the Court declare invalid all the provisions of the Act that deal with “medical aid in dying”, a term the groups say is a euphemism for euthanasia. This Act not only allows certain patients to demand that a physician provoke their death, but also grants physicians the right to cause the death of these patients by the administration of a lethal substance.

The two organizations are challenging the constitutionality of those provisions in the Act which are aimed at decriminalizing euthanasia under the euphemism “medical aid in dying”. Euthanasia constitutes a culpable homicide under Canada’s Criminal Code, and the organizations maintain that it is at the core of the exclusive federal legislative power in relation to criminal law and Quebec therefore does not have the power to adopt these provisions.

The organizations also say the impugned provisions unjustifiably infringe the rights to life and to security of patients guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. They further infringe the right to the safeguard of the dignity of the person, which is also protected by the Quebec Charter.

In view of the gravity of the situation and the urgent need to protect all vulnerable persons in Quebec, they are requesting an accelerated management of the case in order to obtain a judgment before the Act is expected to come into force on December 10, 2015.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
LifeSiteNews staff

,

Colorado baker appeals gvmt ‘re-education’ order

LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

A Colorado cake artist who declined to use his creative talents to promote and endorse a same-sex ceremony appealed a May 30 order from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission to the Colorado Court of Appeals Wednesday.

The commission’s order requires cake artist Jack Phillips and his staff at Masterpiece Cakeshop to create cakes for same-sex celebrations, forces him to re-educate his staff that Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act means that artists must endorse all views, compels him to implement new policies to comply with the commission’s order, and requires him to file quarterly “compliance” reports for two years. The reports must include the number of patrons declined a wedding cake or any other product and state the reason for doing so to ensure he has fully eliminated his religious beliefs from his business.

“Americans should not be forced by the government – or by another citizen – to endorse or promote ideas with which they disagree,” said the cake artist’s lead counsel Nicolle Martin, an attorney allied with Alliance Defending Freedom. “This is not about the people who asked for a cake; it’s about the message the cake communicates. Just as Jack doesn’t create baked works of art for other events with which he disagrees, he doesn’t create cake art for same-sex ceremonies regardless of who walks in the door to place the order.”

“In America, we don’t force artists to create expression that is contrary to their convictions,” added Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “A paint artist who identifies as homosexual shouldn’t be intimidated into creating a painting that celebrates one-man, one-woman marriage. A pro-life photographer shouldn’t be forced to work a pro-abortion rally. And Christian cake artists shouldn’t be punished for declining to participate in a same-sex ceremony or promote its message.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

In July 2012, Charlie Craig and David Mullins asked Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, to make a wedding cake to celebrate their same-sex ceremony. In an exchange lasting about 30 seconds, Phillips politely declined, explaining that he would gladly make them any other type of baked item they wanted but that he could not make a cake promoting a same-sex ceremony because of his faith. Craig and Mullins, now represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, immediately left the shop and later filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division. The case now goes to the Colorado Court of Appeals as Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Craig.

“Jack, and other cake artists like him – such as those seen on TV shows like ‘Ace of Cakes’ and ‘Cake Boss’ – prepare unique creations that are inherently expressive,” Tedesco explained. “Jack invests many hours in the wedding cake creative process, which includes meeting the clients, designing and sketching the cake, and then baking, sculpting, and decorating it. The ACLU calls Jack a mere ‘retail service provider,’ but, in fact, he is an artist who uses his talents and abilities to create expression that the First Amendment fully protects."

Celebrity cake artists have written publicly about their art and the significant expressive work that goes into the artistic design process for wedding cakes.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Tony Gosgnach / LifeSiteNews.com
Tony Gosgnach

,

Prisoner of conscience Mary Wagner appeals her conviction

Tony Gosgnach
By Tony Gosgnach

TORONTO -- As promised, Mary Wagner has, through her counsel Dr. Charles Lugosi, filed a formal notice of appeal on numerous points regarding her recent, almost two-year-long court case that ended on June 12.

Justice Fergus O’Donnell of the Ontario Court of Justice rejected every application made by the defence – including for access to abortion center records, public funding, standing for a constitutional challenge and for expert witnesses to be heard – before he found Wagner guilty and sentenced her to five months in jail on a charge of mischief and four months on four counts of failing to comply with probation orders.

He further levied two years of probation, with terms that she stay at least 100 metres away from any abortion site. However, because Wagner had spent a greater time in jail than the sentence, she was freed immediately. She had been arrested at the “Women’s Care Clinic” abortion site on Lawrence Avenue West in Toronto on August 15, 2012 after attempting to speak to abortion-bound women there. She then spent the duration of the trial in prison for refusing to sign bail conditions requiring her to stay away from abortion sites.

Wagner is using the matter as a test case to challenge the current definition of a human being in Canadian law – that is, that a human being is legally recognized as such only after he or she has fully emerged from the birth canal in a breathing state.

Wagner’s notice states the appeal is regarding:

  • Her conviction and sentence on a single count of mischief (interference with property),
  • Her conviction and sentence on four counts of breach of probation,
  • The order denying public funding,
  • The order denying the disclosure of third-party records,
  • The order denying the admission of evidence from experts on the applicant’s constitutional challenge concerning the constitutional validity of Section 223 of the Criminal Code,
  • The order denying the admission of evidence from experts concerning the construction of Section 37 of the Criminal Code,
  • The probation order denying Wagner her constitutional rights to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion on all public sidewalks and public areas within 100 metres of places where abortions are committed,
  • And each conviction and sentence and all orders and rulings made by O’Donnell.

In the notice of appeal, Lugosi cites numerous points on which O’Donnell erred:

  • He denied Wagner her constitutional right to make full answer and defence.
  • He denied Wagner her right to rely on Section 37 of the Criminal Code, which permits “everyone” to come to the third-party defence and rescue of any human being (in this case, the preborn) facing imminent assault.
  • He decided the factual basis of Wagner’s constitutional arguments was a waste of the court’s time and that no purpose would have been served by having an evidentiary hearing on her Charter application because, in the current state of Canadian law, it had no possibility of success.
  • He misapplied case law and prejudged the case, “giving rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias and impeding the legal evolution of the law to adapt to new circumstances, knowledge and changed societal values and morals.”
  • He accepted the Crown’s submission that it is beyond the jurisdiction of the courts to question the jurisdiction of Parliament legally to define “human being” in any manner Parliament sees fit.
  • He ruled Section 223 of the Criminal Code is not beyond the powers of Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
  • He ruled Section 223 of the Criminal Code does not violate the Preamble to, as well as Sections 7, 11(d), 15 and 26, of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
  • He denied Wagner standing to raise a constitutional challenge to the validity of Section 223 of the Criminal Code.
  • He ruled that Section 223 of the Criminal Code applied generally throughout the entire Criminal Code and used it to deny unborn human beings the benefit of equal protection as born human beings under Section 37 of the Criminal Code.
  • He denied the production and disclosure of third-party records in the possession of the “Women’s Care Clinic” abortion site, although the records were required to prove Wagner was justified in using reasonable force in the form of oral and written words to try to persuade pregnant mothers from killing their unborn children by abortion.
  • He denied Wagner the defence of Section 37 of the Criminal Code by ruling unborn children did not come within the scope of human beings eligible to be protected by a third party.
  • He ruled Wagner did not come within the scope of Section 37 because she was found to be non-violent (in that she did not use physical force).
  • He ruled the unborn children Wagner was trying to rescue were not under her protection.
  • He denied Wagner the common-law defences of necessity and the rescue of third parties in need of protection.
  • He denied Wagner public funding to make full answer and defence for a constitutional test case of great public importance and national significance.
  • He imposed an unconstitutional sentence upon Wagner by, in effect, imposing an injunction as a condition of probation, contrary to her constitutional rights of free speech, freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Among the orders Lugosi is seeking are:

  • That an appeal be allowed against conviction on all counts and that a verdict of acquittal be entered on all counts,
  • That Section 223 of the Criminal Code be found unconstitutional  and contrary to Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, as well as the unwritten constitution of Canada,
  • That the sentence be declared unconstitutional and contrary to Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and the unwritten constitution of Canada or that a new trial be conducted, with Wagner permitted to make full answer and defence, be given standing to make a constitutional attack on Section 223 of the Criminal Code, with the admission of expert witnesses,
  • That the Women’s Care Clinic abortion site be made to produce third-party records pertaining to patients seen on August 15, 2012 (when Wagner entered the site),
  • And that there be public funding for two defence counsels at any retrial and for any appeal related to the case.

No date has yet been established for a decision on the appeal or hearings.

A defence fund for Wagner’s case is still raising money. Details on how to contribute to it can be found here.


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook