[CKKim]

"I am addicted to porn"..."I would look about once per week"

It seems odd to me that being addicted to porn would go with only looking "about once per week". I think I understand how this could still be technically an addiction, but compared to other addictions and - I imagine - especially porn addictions, it seems rather bizarre. Certainly if pornography was only being consumed once a week then the rate of let's call it "stimulation inflation" can't have been that high, or can it? Could you elaborate?

[_ddkb]

The definition of addiction I heard that I agree with was something like "An activity that causes an overall negative effect on your life that you do not have control over."

This definitely fit with my experience. It was definitely a cycle for me. Alcoholics do not have to have a drink every day to be an alcoholic. In fact, one of the points of the AA program that people need to learn is they are always an alcoholic.

In my experience, I would just feel an uncontrollable urge which would lead me to view porn. Once I started, I would be in a trance-like state which is common from other experience I have read about. What kind of really hit home is hearing a non-addict say something like he would view porn for 15-20 minutes and then it would get boring and he would stop. That is the complete opposite of me, and other addicts. Once we start, it becomes almost impossible to stop until we are completely "drunk." In my experience, I would notice that I would put so much stress on my body, that it would really take me about a week to recover and feel normal, and then the cycle would start again.

[Falling3]

There are many criticism towards the AA program... just because Bill Wilson think you're always an alcoholic does not make it so.

[_ddkb]

I understand the 12 step programs are not perfect. No program is perfect. I don't understand your point. Are you trying to say that I'm not addicted? It took me many years to realise that this is an addiction for me but it did help me to admit that. I do believe in that part of the program that it needs to be considered a problem before a person can work on improving it.

Edit: I can't respond to your comment below but thanks for your follow up.

[Falling3]

I'm not making any judgements on your own addictions - I'd never be that presumptuous. To be honest, I've only begun to look into AA's culture and theories. I feel it's an understatement to say that it's not perfect. Half of the steps specifically mention god - that does not sound like me like a necessary (or even helpful) part of treatment for alcoholism. People have also pointed out similarities between them and cults (which I have begun to see in the members that I know).

I don't know how I feel yet about the idea that someone is always an addict. I do know the fact that AA believes and teaches it is absolutely no reason to consider it to be factual.

[Falling3]

>Most of what you're saying about AA is false. 4 of the 12 steps mention God. And if you look deeper into the material, God is in reference to a Higher Power or "Power greater than ourselves."

>Some examples of a Higher Power can include: a sponsor, the group in general, a (big G or little g) god, a door knob. The principle is about believing in something greater than yourself.

No, it is not. Four of the steps use the word use the word "God", 1 uses only the word "Him" (and that obviously refers to the same thing), and 1 uses the word "Power" (notice the upper case).

The claim that these are intended to be anything "greater" than yourself such as a sponsor or the group clearly is not what is intended (and, from what I have heard, not what is taught). I don't know what the hell your door knob comment is about - I assume it was for comic effect.

http://www.aa.org/en_pdfs/smf-121_en.pdf Read the steps. A sponsor is not going to remove our shortcoming or character defects. We don't pray to the group so that we might know their will. You're either ignorant of the actual teachings or being extremely disingenuous.

[gavingmiller]

When, therefore, we speak to you of God, we mean your own conception of God. - pg 47 of The Big Book of Alcoholics Anonymous; Fourth Edition

One's own conception of God could be any of those things I listed. Personally, I have spent nearly 4 years in an AA group. So rest assured, I have read the steps.

As to what is taught - God referring to Allah, The Flying Spaghetti Monster, Jesus, Mohammed, etc. - depends on the group/person/persons you've received your information from. There is no governing body for AA, and every group is completely self sustaining. Individual traditions, teachings, and cultures grow naturally in each group providing slight variance from group to group. However the core will always come back to God being whatever you choose God to be.

[Falling3]

>One's own conception of God could be any of those things I listed.

The definition and teachings leave it open to your interepretation of God... to some extent. It still must comply with many Western concept of a god - loving, benevolent, intervening. You cannot follow those steps as they are laid out and pretend that substituting a sponsor, group, or door knob means the same thing. It just doesn't.

[gavingmiller]

Most of what you're saying about AA is false. 4 of the 12 steps mention God. And if you look deeper into the material, God is in reference to a Higher Power or "Power greater than ourselves."

Some examples of a Higher Power can include: a sponsor, the group in general, a (big G or little g) god, a door knob. The principle is about believing in something greater than yourself.

edit: AA has its roots in Christianity, however being in AA doesn't mean you have to be a Christian or a theist.

[snogglethorpe]

I went to AA meetings for a while with someone whose mother was an alcoholic (I don't really remember what this was supposed to accomplish, but...) and the atmosphere was kinda weird... the people there, at least, really did invoke god/jesus/etc a lot, and there was a funny sense they were looking for something to replace the alcohol, and jesus (etc) was a popular candidate... and there was a palpable sense of peer pressure to say similar things.

I suppose all this stuff varies from group to group, and no doubt the "official" stance is more neutral and well-considered. Still, after that experience, I'd feel a bit leery about recommending AA to someone who was vulnerable.

[BSousa]

I'm reading the Power of Habit and the author mentions AA. According to the theory of the book, for habits (drinking) to change permanently, people have to believe in something. According to the author, that ingrained belief of AA is what makes it work for so many people, but as mentioned, you can ignore god in the steps and replace it with something else (family, sponsor, local communities, etc).

[gavingmiller]

Typically someone in AA will say that they're a recovering alcoholic vs an alcoholic. There is a distinct difference.

[CKKim]

Ah, got it. Thanks very much for the explanation. The alcohol analogy makes it lucid. When it comes to pornography I'm definitely a "glass of red wine with dinner from time to time" kind of person (TMI?), so it was out of my frame of reference to know what kind of behaviour you were describing.

"I would notice that I would put so much stress on my body, that it would really take me about a week to recover and feel normal, and then the cycle would start again" sounds, well, pretty wild and probably jolly good fun to be honest, but I can see how that could be problematic as a regular and difficult-to-resist habit rearing its head every week or so.

[Evbn]

It would be really sweet if you meant that as a nice meal, a glass of wine, a laptop, and a towel.

[CKKim]

Needless to say I didn't mean it that way, but the imagery in your comment did make me laugh a lot on an otherwise depressingly rainy Monday morning with three meetings scheduled for the afternoon that I'm really not looking forward to leading. Thank you! :)

[jdietrich]

There's no clear evidence that AA works:

http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD005032/alcoholics-anonymous-....

[mamoswined]

That is not the definition of addiction (actually in their working, dependence) as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (D.S.M.). And that's just PART of the AA definition too. I would also note that the DSM has sex addiction under its broad draft "behavioral addictions" because there is not enough research on it.

I would encourage you to see a psychologist and possibly get a referral for a psychiatrist to get a real diagnosis. The deceptive thing about these mangled pop-sci porn addiction tropes is that they try to get people with these problems to believe that their issues are a normal reaction to the evils of pornography (and if you did deeper Maria and Gary in general believe this about orgasms, even during sex), when it reality they could be a symptom of a host of psychological issues and disorders.

If it truly is an addiction, you should be not self-treating it on the internet.

[atesti]

I'd guess that other people watch porn exactly as long as they get "excited" enough to do something I don't describe here. After this is "done", there is no need to watch more of it for at least the length of the refractory period, but better for longer.

Why would one continue to watch it afterwards? One can't be addicted to porn under my definition, but just to doing "that". This can of course be addictive and negatively affect one's life. Also the stimulus surely can get weaker and weaker thus leading to "harder" porn each time which looks like a bad cycle