Is porn actually harmless, or are we just pretending?

[Carl-Richard]

On 30.3.2026 at 10:44 PM, Basman said:

 Prove it then.

Prove what? That triggering a neuronal response tends to lead to desensitization especially if it's a hedonic stimulus and not a noxious stimulus?

Here is a thing about studies: they don't actually "prove" anything. They provide evidence for or against. They update your priors. Finding a specific theoretical rationale based on more general connections between basic (strongly scientifically supported) concepts does essentially the same thing. It's all probabilistic at the end of the day. A specific study, or two, or three, is just one step further in the process.

If your only approach to epistemology is to read the conclusion of one or two studies from Dickwad University with a crappy self-report-based correlative design and paper-thin sample sizes and barely <.05 p-values and mixed results between 10 comparative measures, that's your prerogative.

Edited 6 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Infinity16]

On 3/29/2026 at 11:31 PM, Carl-Richard said:

We're not talking about the law here, you're lost in a different discussion. We're talking about whether porn is harmful or not. Why are you concerned about the "burden of proof" in this context?

Because if there is strong evidence that porn is harmful, that will presumably lead to more government regulation. This is what happened with tobacco.