Cambridge University neuropsychiatrist Valerie Voon has recently shown that men who describe themselves as addicted to porn (and who lost relationships because of it) develop changes in the same brain area — the reward center — that changes in drug addicts. The study, not yet published, is featured this week in a program on British TV — Porn and the Teenage Brain. Neuroskeptics may argue that pictures of the brain lighting up in addicts tell us nothing new — we already know they are addicted. However, they do help: knowing the reward center is changed explains some porn paradoxes.
In the mid-1990s I, and other psychiatrists, began to notice the following. An adult male, in a happy relationship, being seen for some non-romantic issue, might describe getting curious about porn on the burgeoning Internet. Most sites bored him, but he soon noticed several that fascinated him to the point he was craving them. The more he used the porn, the more he wanted to.
Yet, though he craved it, he did not like it (porn paradox 1). The cravings were so intense, he might feel them while thinking about his computer (paradox 2). The patient would also report that, far from getting more turned on by the idea of sex with his partner, he was less attracted to her (paradox 3). Through porn he acquired new sexual tastes.
We often talk about addicts as though they simply have “quantitative problems.” They “use too much” and should “cut back.” However, porn addictions also have a qualitative component: they change sexual taste. Here’s how.
Until recently, scientists believed our brains were fixed, their circuits formed and finalized in childhood, or “hardwired.” Now we know the brain is “neuroplastic,” and not only can it change, but that it works by changing its structure in response to repeated mental experience.
One key driver of plastic change is the reward center, which normally fires as we accomplish a goal. A brain chemical, dopamine, is released, giving us the thrill that goes with accomplishment. It also consolidates the connections between neurons in the brain that helped us accomplish that goal. As well, dopamine is secreted at moments of sexual excitement and novelty. Porn scenes, filled with novel sexual “partners,” fire the reward center. The images get reinforced, altering the user’s sexual tastes.
Many abused substances directly trigger dopamine secretion — without us having to work to accomplish a goal. This can damage the dopamine reward system. In porn, we get “sex” without the work of courtship. Now, scans show that porn can alter the reward center too.
Once the reward center is altered, a person will compulsively seek out the activity or place that triggered the dopamine discharge. (Like addicts who get excited passing the alley where they first tried cocaine, the patients got excited thinking about their computers.) They crave despite negative consequences. (This is why those patients could crave porn without liking it.) Worse, a damaged dopamine system makes one more “tolerant” to the activity and needing more stimulation, to get the rush and quiet the craving. “Tolerance” drives a search for ramped-up stimulation, and this can drive the change in tastes towards the extreme.
The most obvious change in porn is how sex is so laced with aggression and sadomasochism. As tolerance to sexual excitement develops, it no longer satisfies; only by releasing a second drive, the aggressive drive, can the addict be excited. And so — for people psychologically predisposed — there are scenes of angry sex, men ejaculating insultingly on women’s faces, angry anal penetration, etc. Porn sites are also filled with the complexes Freud described: “Milf” (“mothers I’d like to fuck”) sites show us the Oedipus complex is alive; spanking sites sexualize a childhood trauma and many other oral and anal fixations. Porn does not “cause” these complexes, but it can strengthen them, by wiring them into the reward system. The porn triggers a “neo-sexuality” — an interplay between the pornographer’s fantasies, and the viewer’s.
Teenagers’ brains are especially plastic. Now, 24/7 access to Internet porn is laying the foundation of their sexual tastes. In Beeban Kidron’s InRealLife, a film about the effects of the Internet on teenagers, a 15-year-old boy of extraordinary honesty and courage articulates what is going on in the lives of millions of teen boys. He shows her the porn images that excite him and his friends, and describes how they have molded their “real life” sexual activity. He says:
“You’d try out a girl and get a perfect image of what you’ve watched on the Internet... you’d want her to be exactly like the one you saw on the Internet ... I’m highly thankful to whoever made these Web sites, and that they’re free, but in other senses it’s ruined the whole sense of love. It hurts me because I find now it’s so hard for me to actually find a connection to a girl,” he says.
The sexual tastes and the romantic longings of these boys have become dissociated from each other. Meanwhile, the girls have “downloaded” on to them the expectation that they play roles written by pornographers. Once, porn was used by teens to explore, prepare and relieve sexual tension, in anticipation of a real sexual relationship. Today, it supplants it.
In her book, Bunny Tales: Behind Closed Doors at the Playboy Mansion, Izabella St James, one of Playboy magazine publisher Hugh Hefner’s former “official girlfriends,” described sex with Hef. Hef, in his late 70s, would have sex twice a week, sometimes with four or more of his girlfriends at once. He had novelty, variety, multiplicity and women willing to do what he pleased. At the end of the happy orgy, wrote St James, came “the grand finale: he masturbated while watching porn.”
Here, the man who could actually live out the ultimate porn fantasy, with real porn stars, instead turned from their real flesh and touch, to the image on the screen. Now, I ask you: “What is wrong with this picture?”
Norman Doidge, a physician, is author of The Brain That Changes Itself.
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
The National Development Council (NDC) on Wednesday last week launched a six-month “digital nomad visitor visa” program, the Central News Agency (CNA) reported on Monday. The new visa is for foreign nationals from Taiwan’s list of visa-exempt countries who meet financial eligibility criteria and provide proof of work contracts, but it is not clear how it differs from other visitor visas for nationals of those countries, CNA wrote. The NDC last year said that it hoped to attract 100,000 “digital nomads,” according to the report. Interest in working remotely from abroad has significantly increased in recent years following improvements in
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
RSS