Denver, Colo., Jun 11, 2017 / 04:07 pm (CNA).- One of music artist John Mayer’s most signature songs is “Daughters,” a sweet and simple tribute to the importance of parents’ influence on their little girls. Here’s the refrain:
“So fathers, be good to your daughters, Daughters will love like you do. Girls become lovers who turn into mothers, So mothers, be good to your daughters too.”
But when John Mayer isn’t crooning about your beautiful daughters, he’s looking at naked pictures of them, sometimes hundreds at a time before he gets out of bed in the morning. In fact, he often prefers that to an actual human being, according to his wildly controversial 2010 interview with Playboy magazine.
“You wake up in the morning, open a thumbnail page, and it leads to a Pandora’s box of visuals. There have probably been days when I saw 300 (naked women) before I got out of bed,” he told the magazine.
Unfortunately, Mayer’s morning routine is not unique to him. Studies show that easy access to free internet pornography is having devastating effects on real-life relationships.
Preferring pixels to people
“For many individuals, the more porn they consume, the more likely it is that they can end up preferring the fantasy to reality, they can end up preferring the pixels to a person, and that’s really messing up relationships, as you can imagine,” said Clay Olsen, co-founder of the internet movement “Fight the New Drug” (FTND).
The FTND movement, so named because of porn’s addictive properties, aims to raise awareness of the harmful effects of pornography through creative mediums such as blogs, videos and infographics. The website includes personal stories as well as scientific studies to illustrate pornography’s effects on the brain, the heart (relationships), and ultimately on the world.
“Our goal is to change the conversation from ‘Dude, check this out,’ to ‘Dude, that’s messed up,’” Olsen told CNA.
The longstanding, pervasive cultural narrative surrounding pornography is that it is a healthy sexual outlet and can improve sex lives. However, science begs to differ. Several studies cited in FTND’s article, “Porn Ruins Your Sex Life,” found that pornography not only leads to dissatisfying sex, it can lead to less sex with actual human beings.
In a series of studies examining pornography use, “The Social Costs of Pornography: A Collection of Papers” published by the Witherspoon Institute, researchers found that those who viewed pornography became less satisfied with their sex lives, and that viewing porn just once can lead to feelings of dissatisfaction towards a human partner.
According to an article in Psychology Today by clinical psychologist Tyger Latham, Psy.D, erectile dysfunction, while once considered an issue plaguing old men, is cropping up more in young men who rely heavily on pornography to become sexually aroused. A study by the Italian Society of Andrology and Sexual Medicine surveyed 28,000 men on their internet porn habits, and found that porn use over time led to a lower sex drive and an eventual inability to become aroused at all.
“As soon as they try to actually get close to someone and commit to somebody and have an intimate relationship with somebody, it’s in those moments that the harms of pornography show their full colors and truly manifest themselves,” Olsen said. “The unrealistic expectations are completely exposed…
And we now see people in their 20s having porn-induced erectile dysfunction because they cannot get excited or aroused without the presence of pornography.”
A decline in marriage rates
Not only is pornography use destroying the physical sexual life, it may be impacting the number of people pursuing marriage or committed sexual relationships.
In the fall of 2013, an article in The Guardian sounded the alarm that fewer people in Japan were having sex, citing as evidence numerous statistics on the country’s declining birth rate, marriage rate, and even rates of young people who are dating or who are interested in dating.
A follow-up article on Slate found that while the actual number of people having or not having sex might not be definitively pinpointed, the statistics on falling marriage and birth rates only mean Japan is leading a world-wide trend, rather than bucking one. While it’s not clear whether porn is directly influencing these numbers, many have speculated that it is.
Researchers with The Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) in Germany found an increase in free Internet pornography is at least correlated with a significant decrease in the percentage of young married men, and it may even be contributing to the trend. A 2013 Pew study found that 71 percent of single Americans were not looking for a committed relationship. Another study found that nearly 40 percent of American women had never been married.
“The results in this paper suggest that such an association exists, and that it is potentially quite large,” the study notes, as reported in the Washington Post.
The study used General Social Survey (GSS), a comprehensive, nationally representative survey which analyzed internet use of 1,500 men ages 18-to-35, between the years 2000 and 2004. The researchers studied the number of hours spent on the internet per week, how often internet pornography was used in the past 30 days, as well as other activities such as use of religious sites.
Even when adjusted for variables such as age, income, education, religion and employment, the study found that generally, the more a person used the internet, the less likely they were to be married. Additionally, it found that the more a person used internet pornography, the less likely they were to be married. On the other hand, the use of religious websites was positively correlated with marriage.
Mark Regnerus, an associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas at Austin and a Catholic who has studied religion and sexual behavior, cautioned against assuming that correlation equals causation in such studies – but said that pornography use is likely part of a more complex reason for dropping marriage rates.
“We know that both things are occurring, but it’s difficult to establish a causal connection,” he told CNA in an e-mail interview. “A variety of things are contributing to the declining marriage rate.”
“I don’t think porn use necessarily causes that, but contributes to it (together with diminished earnings power, diminished confidence, etc.),” he added. “To be sure, porn use doesn’t help build confidence in men, something that’s pretty necessary (but not sufficient) to be considered marriageable. So I’d say porn use is a suspect here, but connecting the dots is hardly straightforward.”
Increasing awareness
Only in the past few years and months has a conversation countering the “it’s healthy, it’s normal” narrative been emerging in mainstream media about pornography. Several celebrities are speaking up, and there are an increasing number of websites dedicated to helping people fight pornography addictions.
In 2015, the release of the controversial “50 Shades of Grey” movie sparked a conversation on social media about sexual violence against women in media, with the hashtag #50dollarsnot50shades encouraging people to forgo the movie and instead donate to places that help victimized women.
The movie sparked a response from an unlikely source – British comedian Russel Brand, whose short video about the problems with pornography went viral, generating over 500,000 views on his YouTube channel and over 2 million views on FTND’s website.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt is another celebrity who has been outspoken about the negative impact of pornography, most notably in his 2013 movie “Don Jon,” which he wrote, directed and co-starred in along with Scarlett Johansson. The film explores the unrealistic expectations of love and relationships that come from pornography addictions and from the media at large.
“I think that there’s not a substantial difference between a lot of main-stream culture and pornography. They’re equally simplistic, reductionist,” Gordon-Levitt said in an interview with NPR about the film.
“Whether it’s rated X or ‘approved by the FCC for general viewing audiences,’ the message is the same. We have a tendency in our culture to take people and treat them like things.”
But the internet has been around for decades now – why has it taken society so long to catch on to the fact that pornography is harmful?
“Science has caught up with the fact that pornography’s harmful,” Olsen said, “but society is still catching up.”
It often takes years for something that was once culturally accepted as true to be flipped on its head as science proves otherwise, Olsen said, so Fight the New Drug knows they still have a lot of work ahead of them.
“We’re very excited to see some of this progress and some of these mainstream media outlets kind of following suit and starting to talk about the negative impacts, we couldn’t be more excited about it, but we still have a long way ahead of us.”
Some other websites that are also trying to raise awareness and give help to those struggling with pornography include The Porn Effect and Covenant Eyes, and internet filtering and accountability system.
The best way to kick a porn habit? Keep fighting it and lean on the sacraments, Regnerus said.
“(My) advice: don’t give up hope; pursue confession regularly; recognize and avoid the contexts which give rise to temptation. That’s a start.”
This article was originally published on CNA April 16, 2015.
[…]
He didn’t have a problem with making a judgement for other people when he handed down the vaccine mandate. But I suppose he’ll have that debate at the pearly gates.
Abortion is a Justice issue because it violates the Natural Law, the ground of justice and civil law, and the right to life. Human life in the womb deserves full protection under the law, not a wrongly adjudicated proscription that allows for murder of the prenatal infant.
Biden, is both an heretical Catholic and a lawless politician. Roe is shown to have no basis in the practice of justice.
Why should he have to explain himself to some EWTN reporter when he clearly has the favor of both the Cardinal of Washington DC and the Pope? The ashes on his forehead effectively amount to the stamp of approval from Gregory and Bergoglio. Catholic politicians who flagrantly defy Church teaching are not the biggest problem we face – bishops and a pope who happily let them get away with it are. When we frankly admit that bitter enemies of the Faith occupy most of the highest positions of the hierarchy, including the top one, then we’ll have taken the first step in dealing with the crisis.
The top of my head just blew off.
Biden is “giving up” sweets for Lent? But, at the same time, enabling the systematic killing of millions upon millions of children around the world?
My God!
Doesn’t anyone see the hideous, monstrous, unthinkable incongruity there?
If Joe Biden is Catholic, then the word has no meaning.
This questioning perpetuates the wrong notion that Catholics are to politically engage or vote on the issue of abortion only, and neglect the issues of racism, economic inequity, broken immigration system, inaccessible health care, climate emergency, death penalty, euthanasia. Read Matthew 25, Acts 2, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Social Teachings of the Church, or the latest “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship” of the USCCB. President Biden is correct not to directly answer the question which would have involved explaining theology and especially the matter of conscience. The reporter thought he got a scoop but actually only showed his cluelessness about theology and especially about the use of one’s conscience in determining complex matters. This again shows that EWTN is not fully Catholic by not presenting the full spectrum of Catholic teaching in reporting about social issues. This aligns with the regular pattern of EWTN in disrespectfully and disloyally bashing Pope Francis or in resisting or rejecting some of the reforms mandated by the Second Vatican Council. The fullness of catholicity of EWTN is questionable.
Oh, please. You’re committing the same embarrassing mistake as Joe Biden: pretending this is a “theological issue”, when it is no more specifically theological than is the issue of racial equality or economic justice for poor people. It’s not “complex”. It 101 science, commonsense, and human decency. And the questioning of Biden is completely legit: he (and his team and the media) continually promote his “Catholic faith”, and yet he is most passionate (in terms of policy and also, at times, personal comment) in pushing for “reproductive health”. Finally, one’s conscience as a Catholic is to be formed by Church teaching, and it is very clear on this matter:
That’s. Very. Clear. Very.
Thank you, Mr. Olson.
Your answer to Noel’s comment was far more cogent — and far less rude — than mine would have been.
The left’s effort to characterize abortion as a complex theological issue beyond the ken of us ordinary folk who ain’t got us the book larnin’ ya need ta unnerstand it good is, frankly, pathetic.
It’s also very clear this is a moral issue with wide consequences even for those who view themselves at the periphery of the discussion. The decriminalization of abortion in the US was a Republican initiative in the 60s. It was furthered by doctors, nearly all male, who had a motive to avoid imprisonment in exchange for a rather lucrative cash stream for what they viewed as a medical procedure. It was constitutionally enshrined by GOP appointees to the US Supreme Court. Mr Nixon’s justices went 3-1 in favor, and the structure was set that executives and legislatures were sidelined for the next fifty years. Both major US political parties knew they were insulated as long as judiciaries controlled the matter.
The truth is that unlike China, one of main pressures to procure abortions in the US is personal. It comes from parents and partners. Secondarily, it is economic: people need jobs, they are fearful of providing for a child or for themselves. These factors can all be wrongheaded, and likely are.
So yes, a lot of otherwise good and moral Christians contribute to the culture that supports abortion. Yes also, racism, anti-labor initiatives, and other political factors contribute to abortion. The lack of support for women with children is no less remote a cooperation as advocating for a useless law that won’t affect the big abortion ticker at all.
I know: the Right isn’t big into compassion. Or self-examination. They want to turn away when priests and conservative politicians pay for the abortions of mistresses, girlfriends, daughters, or wives. They complain about boycotting China–it’s too difficult; everything I buy comes from there!
What many pearl-clutchers don’t realize is that the culture of life starts with them: how they give good or bad example. That includes how they treat women, death-row convicts, immigrants, people of color, and even their white neighbors.
Mr Biden’s approach raises questions, but not as many as the politically-opposed-but-morally-in-favor crowd.
Todd, your assumptions here are offensive.
Have there been Republicans who favored abortion? Of course. In a country of hundreds of millions of people, there are always outliers who can be used to try to derail any argument.
But how often in the past 49 years, friend Todd, has abortion been a Republican Party platform plank?
(For the Democrats, the answer is, every one of those 49 years. The Republicans? Never.)
When has opposition to abortion been verboten for Republican candidates?
(The answer, again, *never.*)
You try to run away from the Democrats’ history as the all-in, flat-out, straight-up, passionate and rabid pro-abortion party. But it’s a fool’s errand.
In the past half century, Democrats have espoused no issue more consistently than abortion, prioritized no policy before abortion, promoted no policy more strenuously than abortion.
Whereas the raison d’etre for the Democratic Party pre-1964 was white supremacy, since 1973, it has been abortion.
The Democrats are the all-abortion all-the-time party.
Indeed, what party has even recently abolished the informal, Republican-initiated agreement to prohibit the use of federal dollars to fund abortions? The Democrats.
Most offensive of all is your illogical, almost comical, assertion that opposing abortion means unconcern for troubled women, or disdain for the poor, or a failure to floss adequately, or low scores on the SAT’s, or whatever else you were claiming.
Unless you can claim to have polled each of the dozens of millions of Republicans in America, your assertion is patently absurd.
Actually, no. Even more offensive is your assumption that we who denigrate the Democratic Party for its absolute and unwavering support for abortion are Republicans.
I, good Todd, am personally insulted at your implication.
I have long considered most Republican politicians to be spineless, soulless, unprincipled poltroons.
In fact the only good thing I can think of to say about them is that, in most cases anyway, they’re not Democrats.
Sir, if you choose to vote Democratic despite their unwavering promotion of killing every cute, sweet, funny, beautiful baby they can get their initiatives on, that is your business. And I will pray for you.
But your decision implies nothing about what I do or believe or support.
Noel, your argument doesn’t hold water…
It’s like arguing that the Titanic was in no danger because, after all, there’s more parts to the the Barque of Peter than a simple hole below the waterline.
Not that “complex” after all.
As for the USCCB, here’s what they had to say back in 1998, about faithful citizenship:
…Any politics of human dignity must seriously address issues of racism, poverty, hunger, employment, education, housing and health care” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 23). We pray that Catholics will be advocates for the weak and the marginalized in all these areas. “But being ‘right’ in such matters can never excuse a wrong choice regarding direct attacks on innocent human life. Indeed, the failure to protect and defend life in its most vulnerable stages renders suspect any claims to the ‘rightness’ of positions in other matters affecting the poorest and least powerful of the human community” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 23).
The theological poison of the late Bernardin is fully on display with a defender of Biden.
Biden, Pelosi, et. al. – ‘catholic’ with a small c.
And yet it stings deeply they are all Catholic, still large-C, still going to Mass, still receiving Communion, still going to confession and receiving absolution, and still walking around not getting hit by lightning. Political lay people don’t get to decide who’s in and who’s out. Last time I checked, the Last Judge is in charge. And he’s not y’all.
President Biden, Pelosi – their actions are beyond disgraceful. It’s one thing to make mistakes in ignorance; it’s another thing entirely to willfully and obstinately promote an evil that robs innocent human beings of their lives. They, as we all, will answer for their actions in this life. Given the Church’s constant teaching, it’s not difficult to imagine how difficult it will be for anyone who remains unrepentant. The stain of mortal sin – i.e., indifference to the murder of countless millions by enabling a culture of death – will be exposed and judged accordingly. “Almighty God, unto whom all hearts be open, all desires known, and from whom no secrets are hid… .” – from the Collect for Purity, Divine Worship: the Missal
Biden’s implication that those of us who don’t have a theology degree can’t grasp the enormity of abortion is patronizing and insulting.
P.S. More than one of those lettered theologians have helped bring about the moral confusion we currently live in.