Re: Response to ( annilid worm reference deleted) Buffalo.

[_Buffalo]

Try this out: whatever you do, DON'T think about a pink elephant!

Pink elephants are imaginary creatures that have no moral/ethical weight or consequences attached to the thought of them.

Do you disagree that, for someone raised in a strict religious setting anyway, one look at porno brings intense feelings of guilt and shame and immense failure?

No.

Do you disagree that when someone feels they've failed in some essential regard, there is increased motivation to do it again because they are "screwed," anyway?

That's a feature of certain kinds of psychologies, and especially adolescent psychologies, not by any means all.

Do you disagree that another look at porn and the endorphins you get from seeing nekkid women is a temporary antidote to all that religious shame?

No. In my experience, especially with alcohol, it creates a cascading avalanche of shame and self loathing in a deeply compulsive, repetitive cycle. The cycle itself medicates those feelings of shame (or compensates briefly for them) in the same why one's drug of choice "medicates" those aspects of one's self perception within which lie the origin of one's addiction. That cycle is what must be broken through the process of "recovery."

That's the abstinence violation effect.

[/quote]

Yes, exactly. That's why black and white thinking and intense religious guilt fuels the fires addiction.

[_stemelbow]

Yes, exactly. That's why black and white thinking and intense religious guilt fuels the fires addiction.

That only works if only religious or LDS people are addicted to porn. I just don't think that's the case at all--but what the garbage do I know I'm not expert on addiction like Droopy is.

[_Droopy]

Yes, exactly. That's why black and white thinking and intense religious guilt fuels the fires addiction.

You might want to take a look at your own source here:

Abstinence violation effect refers to the guilt and perceived loss of control that a person feels whenever he or she slips and finds himself or herself returning to drug use after an extended period of abstinence. Other definition:
Abstinence violation effect refers to a person's sense of loss of control over his/her Behavior that has an overwhelming and demoralizing effect. Other /More definition:
Abstinence violation effect refers to a feeling of loss of control that results when one has violated self-imposed rules, such as not to smoke or drink.

Abstinence violation effect is what happens when a person attempting to abstain from alcohol use ingests alcohol and then endures conflict and guilt by making an internal attribution to explain why he or she drank, thereby making him or her more likely to continue drinking in order to cope with the self-blame and guilt

The source makes no mention of "black and white thinking" or "intense religious guilt." Those are your interpretations of the definition as given, not a part of them as given. The guilt occurs as a natural and inherent feature of the relapse. A recovered person may slip now and then, but does not "relapse," and has learned to observe and understand those dynamics for what they are.

[_beastie]

I do suppose I should remind all here that I've never, here or anywhere else, made the claim that I am a porn addict.

I mentioned a while back that I had some experience with it, and that it was a part of my life as an alcoholic. Beyond that, I never - and wouldn't - talk about it with anyone here save a few select people, and not in this forum.

I have never asserted that I was "struggling with porn addiction." Buffalo, meet MsJack. Jack, meet Scratch. Scratch, meet beastie. I have had personal experience with it, and studied it intensely. I have also known others who have had problems with sex addiction, and I do know about addiction.

Welcome to the cesspool.

You appear to be insinuating that I have falsely attributed statements to you.

For those who are interested, this thread lists the offensive statements of Droopy's which he now seems to pretend never existed:

viewtopic.php?p=157878#p157878

Here's my personal favorite:

Let's change the focus of this thread, shall we (say don't you notice its always the same lefties and cultural libertines who are drawn to threads about sex and masturbation. Beastie, Moniker, Schmo, B&L, Harmony (oh, and Coffecat, she really liked porn...).

Drag 20 dollars through a trailer park and who knows what you'll find...

viewtopic.php?p=149827#p149827

[_Buffalo]

Yes, exactly. That's why black and white thinking and intense religious guilt fuels the fires addiction.

That only works if only religious or LDS people are addicted to porn. I just don't think that's the case at all--but what the garbage do I know I'm not expert on addiction like Droopy is.

"Fuels the fires" is the key phrase. Some people have addictive personalities or inclinations. But the church makes it worse for those like that and creates addictions where none might exist.

[_Buffalo]

Yes, exactly. That's why black and white thinking and intense religious guilt fuels the fires addiction.

You might want to take a look at your own source here:

Abstinence violation effect refers to the guilt and perceived loss of control that a person feels whenever he or she slips and finds himself or herself returning to drug use after an extended period of abstinence. Other definition:
Abstinence violation effect refers to a person's sense of loss of control over his/her Behavior that has an overwhelming and demoralizing effect. Other /More definition:
Abstinence violation effect refers to a feeling of loss of control that results when one has violated self-imposed rules, such as not to smoke or drink.

Abstinence violation effect is what happens when a person attempting to abstain from alcohol use ingests alcohol and then endures conflict and guilt by making an internal attribution to explain why he or she drank, thereby making him or her more likely to continue drinking in order to cope with the self-blame and guilt

The source makes no mention of "black and white thinking" or "intense religious guilt." Those are your interpretations of the definition as given, not a part of them as given. The guilt occurs as a natural and inherent feature of the relapse. A recovered person may slip now and then, but does not "relapse," and has learned to observe and understand those dynamics for what they are.

Black and white thinking is implied. Intense religious guilt is encompassed by the definition. Any sort of conditioned guilt response would work, but religion tends to be the most effective means of spreading guilt and shame.

[Guest]

You appear to be insinuating that I have falsely attributed statements to you.

You and I know exactly and precisely what you have done, which is to attribute to me a history of sexual innuendo aimed a females. To have done so is a lie. But for you, this is, of course, well trod soil.

For those who are interested, this thread lists the offensive statements of Droopy's which he now seems to pretend never existed:

viewtopic.php?p=157878#p157878

Here's my personal favorite:

Let's change the focus of this thread, shall we (say don't you notice its always the same lefties and cultural libertines who are drawn to threads about sex and masturbation. Beastie, Moniker, Schmo, B&L, Harmony (oh, and Coffecat, she really liked porn...).

In other words, let's dogpile on Droopy and see if we can start another orgy of blood with the resident hyenas.

That's not a sexual innuendo, but a correct observation of the material churning around in the minds of several of the posters mentioned there (and always have been) and the continual interest in sex and the Church's position on it. Coffeecat did, on several occasions, mention that she loved to indulge in pornography. I've also mentioned Paul Osborne's fixation on
sexual vulgarities in the past.

And?

Drag 20 dollars through a trailer park and who knows what you'll find...

And?

In other words, you have bloody nothing, and you've made a jackass of yourself yet again in public. This is, indeed, exactly the tactic used to go after Will. Unlike Will, however, I've supplied you with literally no ammunition. I see nothing offensive, in point of fact, anywhere here. Don't like the "trailerpark" references? Then stop acting like the proverbial trailer trash to which such references refer.

[_beastie]

You and I know exactly and precisely what you have done, which is to attribute to me a history of sexual innuendo aimed a females. To have done so is a lie. But for you, this is, of course, well trod soil.


That's not a sexual innuendo, but a correct observation of the material churning around in the minds of the several of the posters mentioned there, and the continual interest in sex and the Church's position on it. Coffeecat did, on several occasions, mention that she loved to indulge in pornography. I've also mentioned Paul Osborne's fixation of sexual vulgarities in the past.


In other words, you have bloody nothing, and you've made a jackass of yourself yet again in public. This is, indeed, exactly the tactic used to go after Will. Unlike Will, however, I've supplied you with literally no ammunition.

Delightful, Droopy, just delightful. You clear yourself of the charge of using sexual innuendo against females because you're just making accurate statements.

So when you repeatedly called Moniker "hef", you weren't making a sexual innuendo. You were just making an accurate statement. And when you said "drag a 20 dollar bill through a trailer park" you weren't making an innuendo about prostitution, you were just making an accurate statement.



And I'm the jackass here.

And you're just delightful.

[_EAllusion]

Just so everyone knows, there is solid empirical evidence in favor of the "forbidden fruit" theory - that an objects attractiveness to subjects increases when it is labeled as forbidden. If I recall, there's even a good case for when that phenomenon tends to take hold in human development. It's one of the challenges of creating warning labels for things. (e.g. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~bbushman/bs96.pdf) Put a skull and cross-bones on a pack of cigarettes and you've made them more appealing. It's a problem.

Droopy just dismisses this with thought-terminating labels and no argument. It's a shame for his own point of view. If it were the case that porn was one of the worst plagues visited upon humanity and it was a good idea to get people to avoid it, then it would be in his interest to deal with the pitfalls of the forbidden fruit effect intelligently.

[_Droopy]

Delightful, Droopy, just delightful. You clear yourself of the charge of using sexual innuendo against females because you're just making accurate statements.

I've asked you for CFRs repeatedly to back up this charge, and, as of yet, not a one. I wonder why that might be, beastie?

So when you repeatedly called Moniker "hef", you weren't making a sexual innuendo. You were just making an accurate statement.

I have no idea why I would have ever called her "hef," as Hugh Hefner is a male. In any case, there was only one case in which I used a sexual reference with Moniker, and it was not an innuendo (which implies a kind of flirting) but an insult, for which I immediately apologized, and which she accepted.

Move along, nothing to see here.

And when you said "drag a 20 dollar bill through a trailer park" you weren't making an innuendo about prostitution, you were just making an accurate statement.

I was throwing aspersions upon the trailerpark..er...this place, based primarily, interestingly enough, not only on the extremely rough, vulgar, sexual, and blasphemous language that has characterized it since its inception, but on the preoccupation with - sexual innuendo - by a number of its key posters.

No need to shoot the bearer of the news.

And I'm the jackass here.

You're far, far worse than that, but I will forbear on that wise.