this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2023
358 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

58405 readers
3713 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Porn sites must have government health warning in Texas from September 1st::Just when we didn’t think the state of Texas could get any more wacko on tech policy, this latest bill really suggests otherwise. House Bill 1181 is an age verification measure that is similar to what we’ve seen in the state legislatures across other red U.S. states. You have an age verification proposal that is similar…

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (6 children)

All of that is backed up by actual evidence though. It’s not really disputed that porn affects self esteem and body issues or desensitizes reward circuits of the brain.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, yes it is disputed. Those claims are just plain totally made up. The other bits about how watching porn makes you become a pedophile, even more so.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they were going to totally make up claims they’d choose better ones to go with. These are actual topics based on evidence, even if inconvenient truths for those who support or oppose porn.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Not convinced. The claims being made are obviously parodies of tobacco health warnings, with reference to far-right sexual guilt propaganda.


Here's a hint: If you're a worker, and a politician tells you that your dissatisfaction with your lot in life is the fault of sex workers, probably of ethnic minorities ... that politician is a fascist.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

You’re getting off topic by trying to bring up race or sex work.

[–] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would love for you to provide a source for "all of that is backed up by actual evidence", and change my mind! I always want to learn.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, you linked an entire website, I guess that's a bit better thank just linking google, but doesn't give me any specific info about your claims.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I specifically linked a list of resources that are well cited. The original topic is multiple points, so this is evidence for each one, unless you want to discuss a specific item.

[–] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Well, why don't you chose one or two items from your list, and then show me a peer reviewed study proving it!

I don't view "I made so many different claims that I can't bother proving any specific one" as a great argument.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

As I just said above, there’s too many points in the original article. Texas requires multiple warning labels and each one has some backing. Why don’t you pick ONE topic and we can discuss it.

[–] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

So, you make a claim, asked to provide any proof of any single one, and go "nah, you do it for me, I'm too lazy"

I'm sorry, that's just not a convincing argument!

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sigh. I guess I’ll have to spell it out for you. The article says porn “potentially biologically addictive, is proven to harm human brain development, desensitizes brain reward circuits, increases conditioned responses, and weakens brain function.” Or, that exposure to porn “is associated with low self-esteem and body image eating disorders, impaired brain development, and other emotional and mental illnesses.”

I’m not going to debate each and every one of them, so I offered YOU the choice to pick ONE of those aforementioned topics to discuss at a time. The ball is on your court, and you’re whining that im not engaging with you.

[–] Smokeless7048@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Ok, so to be clear, no, you don't have evidence of the list.

Good to know.

[–] catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’ll bite. Show us the evidence. Peer-reviewed, published studies in respectable journals.

[–] weedazz@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

From JAMA Psychiatry https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24871202/

The negative association of self-reported pornography consumption with the right striatum (caudate) volume, left striatum (putamen) activation during cue reactivity, and lower functional connectivity of the right caudate to the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex could reflect change in neural plasticity as a consequence of an intense stimulation of the reward system, together with a lower top-down modulation of prefrontal cortical areas. Alternatively, it could be a precondition that makes pornography consumption more rewarding.

As OP said constantly stimulating your reward pathway with instant gratification like porn does have lasting changes in your brain.

But fuck Texas also I don't support this bill

[–] AcornCarnage@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Alternatively, it could be a precondition that makes pornography consumption more rewarding.

It could change your brain. Or it could not. They're just theorizing.

[–] catastrophicblues@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Interesting. The study seems to indicate a negative correlation between porn usage and gray matter. I’d love to see more research on this, perhaps over the course of several years. I’d also love to know what the r64 metric they kept using for correlation is.

[–] rekliner@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Those claims are about porn addiction. Not the act of watching porn. On top of that, putting the burden of child trafficking and abuse onto the sites that would publicly host porn is like blaming climate change on people putting plastic in the wrong bin. Places that propagate the awful content mentioned by this warning are already against the law and flying under the radar. This is just BS that gets righteous Texan votes, not something that helps victims. It certainly doesn't accept that consensual adults make and watch porn in healthy ways. It's also why these folks get called out for their scandals, which wouldn't be news worthy if they didn't grandstand.

[–] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

No, the claims are not about porn addiction, which is another issue. Legally the sites already have a burden to take down child abuse material and they do so. Complaining that the warning labels don’t account for healthy porn use sounds like the same whining that smoking warnings don’t also address people who occasionally smoke.

[–] uxia@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

No clue why you have so many downvotes, I guess we got a bunch of weirdos in here. Porn is poison. It's what happens when patriarchy meets capitalism.