[patmcc]

They may both be damaging, but currently we have a lot more porn than censorship, so it looks like it's causing more damage. If we flip to having a lot more censorship we'll feel that damage more clearly. Or we won't, depending how successful the censorship is.

[jennyholzer]

> we have a lot more porn than censorship

How do you know what you're missing? IMO media platforms are heavily censored in comparison to ~10 years ago, to the severe detriment of American pop culture.

[_bent]

> it looks like it's causing more damage

what damage is it causing?

[drdeca]

I can say that I think my past use of pornography has harmed me. I haven’t used it in over 2 years, but I still on a daily basis observe the effects it had on me. Others might argue that it is only because of my views that the effects are “harmful”, but I think they are wrong.

[supplied_demand]

Can you clarify how it “harmed” you? You didn’t quite answer that question.

[fipar]

I’m against censorship, well, except for stuff that would already be illegal.

But as to the potential harm, I recommend “Homemade” by Sebadoh.

Example verse: “There’s still pictures in my mind. I’ve been addicted all this time. It taught me everything I know. Tell me girl, did it leave me cold?”

We don’t need to ban porn. We need better sex ed, ideally starting at home.

[drdeca]

https://xkcd.com/598/

(Except, remove the last panel)

[toomanyrichies]

It sounds like you're saying porn either "gave" you a fetish, or uncovered a latent fetish you didn't know you had (and /or preferred not to know about). If that's an accurate read, can I ask what harm it causes you to have a fetish? Provided it doesn't harm anyone else, what's wrong with liking what you like?

[drdeca]

I don’t buy the “revealed a latent fetish” explanation. I don’t think people are born with a fetish baked into their soul.

Like, the people with the “blueberry expansion” one, you really think they were born with that? No, of course not, that would be dumb.

I think the main reason people put forth the “latent fetish” explanation is in order to argue that pornography is harmless.

As for why it harms me?

The purpose of sexuality is for relations with one’s spouse. On average, I expect it to be counterproductive in that regards. Most women wouldn’t find it appealing, and looking for specifically women who would find the idea appealing would substantially restrict the pool to search among. Also, most of the versions of the fantasy I have violated conservation of energy, and therefore cannot be physically achieved. Why would I want to want something impossible?

And, generally, lust promotes lust.

[justanotherjoe]

I would say all knowledge have that effect on us. Kinda the inherent drawback of it. Lessens enjoyments somewhat.

[GoblinSlayer]

Good for you. IME porn is very standardized and can't be arsed to include my fetishes.

[cortesoft]

What were the effects?

[throwaway283185]

for me it really hurts life satisfaction. my porn tastes are basic. i like beautiful women in their 20s. when i was in my 20s that seemed fine, but i got older and my tastes did not change. coincidentally, my wife also got older.

she is awesome, and very responsive in the bedroom, but she is no longer a beautiful woman in her 20s. if i've been watching porn in the last month or so, my satisfaction with our sex is much lower. if i haven't, i'm happy.

there is also a lot of stuff that seems default in porn, like choking or anal. when i watch porn, i want those things. when i do not watch porn, i don't. my wife does not enjoy those things, but will do them if i ask. but they honestly do not make the sex any better for me.

you will say, "well don't watch porn then." but it isn't easy to not watch it. it has a powerful draw. i enjoy watching it in the moment. and it is always just a few taps away on the phone. it takes willpower not to watch it. if all the tube sites were banned, my life would be better.

the damage to me is small. i do not have an addictive personality. i do have a lot of willpower. other people might not be as lucky.

[overfeed]

> it takes willpower not to watch it. if all the tube sites were banned, my life would be better.

Now imagine if this was done for different proclivities: alcoholics, speadfreaks, over-eaters, game-addicts. Do you want the government limiting those activities for everyone because a minority lacks self-control?

[throwaway283185]

regulating drugs, highly processed foods, and addictive games sounds good to me. they all exploit vulnerabilities in the human brain. if your product triggers a dump of dopamine, it is suspect.

[immibis]

What thing do humans do that's not an exploit? Isn't HN also a dopamine exploit? Would you ban it?

In other words how do you distinguish between a dopamine exploit and just dopamine?

[overfeed]

> regulating drugs, highly processed foods, and addictive games sounds good to me.

"Regulating" and banning/limiting intake are 2 different things. What's the limit of sucrose you can buy/consume?

[winrid]

It raises your dopamine tolerance - part of why people tend to get into more and more crazy types of porn to get the same fix (see randy in south park :) ).

Also, since your dopamine tolerance is higher, you enjoy real life less, which is bad mkay

[immibis]

Yeah, but that's also true for video games, board games, social media (HN included), and yummy food. Pretty much everything anyone ever enjoys, actually. The difference is that some of them (like, I'm assuming, board games) are associated with other outcomes you want (real life socialization)

I am writing this from the tail end of a 4-day techno music festival. I haven't taken any mind-altering substances, but I've enjoyed dancing to the music. Should it be banned?

[winrid]

I'm not of the opinion it should be banned. Demonize it, yes. Also I think the repeated daily dopamine spikes, which are also much higher with porn, is much worse. It also probably has an adverse affect on young men that would normally better themselves to find a women.

[__MatrixMan__]

I don't think there's a good way to compare the amounts of these things. I think the best you could do is ask how many bits would be flipped/added/removed had the thing not existed/happened.

Porn might involve large media files which gives it an up-front advantage re: "more", but it doesn't create shockwaves the way censorship does. Remove a porn video and the world stays largely unchanged. Undo an act of censorship and, well, maybe the world stays unchanged, or maybe everything is different.

[gitt67887yt7bg]

I would say we are already pretty severely censored. We no longer have social tools to vet misinformation. We can't publicly insult dumb people and their wrong ideas to their faces. There are people -professional trolls- who, while they should not be deplatformed, should have their ideas publicly scrutinized and yes, humiliated. But we can't do that, because it's cyber bullying, or whatever.

Irl, if a crazy person gets on a soapbox and starts shouting at everybody, then people can shout back. Online, anybody who flamebaits is protected by the platforms and can censor the responses. They delete opposing comments, shadowban users, harsh language usually gets automatically deleted by the platform - and all that shouting-down is actually just counted as "engagement" which algorithmically boosts and spreads the bad idea further. The argument just directly profits the person with the bad idea, and incentivizes them to come up with even worse ideas to make everybody even madder.

This kind of censorship is causing a whole lot of problems right now.