I actually find this to be encouraging. You might wonder why. Look at the facts. Most people participating here, when NOT on a "streak," watch porn daily, and from multiple sites. Each of those "hits" to the various sites would be "duplicates" as far as representing a single porn-watcher, so counting various porn site visitor statistics as being additive is not easily provable. Sure, there will be a few who visit only one site--but if I understand correctly, most of those here who watch porn enjoy the novelty of multiple sites, as loaded in multiple browser tabs. Considering that some do not watch porn every day, let's say they watch only once a week. Let's make it 50/50 on the stats between the daily watchers and the weekly watchers. That would amount to no more than about 520 million total porn watchers. Divided by about 9 billion world population, we end up with less than 6% who were visiting that site--and many of these are likely the same ones represented in the site statistics for other sites. But even supposing that we had at least five sites that, for whatever reason, showed that same number of visitors and which were entirely unique in terms of persons represented, we would still have only 30%. That's a far cry from the 90% of people estimated to be watching porn according to some here--and, mind you, I have tried to be generous with these counts. Suffice it to say, perhaps the porn problem is not as big as forum.nofap.com tends to present it. This is why I find those statistics encouraging. Of course, to have such a great number of people--to have anyone, for that matter--addicted to pornography is a very discouraging fact at the outset. I am very thankful that I have never become one of the statistics in that number, but I trust that it is possible to be redeemed from the addiction and to have a new life. Take courage! Others have gained a victory in this area, and so can you.
this is what i was asking, if they release their traffic data, they should at least tell us how they got them maybe at the very least that will take some fire off their back.
But they ppl they are defending are usually at the bottom of society with no other way to make end meet than sexual one's. Can you elaborate on your victimhood culture?
I don't think the first part is true-- that's not to say that some people on the left or the right don't care about poor people (believe me, I think hatred and care for the poor left the political discussion quite a long time ago), but people like the woman in the tweet certainly do not. You have to be contemptuous of the general population to think that the main problem with porn is that it isn't "feminist" enough, and that this supercedes protecting children from it. You have to be worlds away from an ordinary adult. It is imagining the pseudo-moral and political fancies of bourgeoise manners as the most important things of the day. It'd be like speaking to a crowd of people living in tents about the proper way to lift a cup of tea to your face, and how barbaric they are for not doing so. As to the second part, I mean that playing a victim has so much currency in our culture right now that Hollywood actors/ actresses, politicians, even just typical rich or upper-middle class joes that you meet on the street in America will talk about their oppression. I live near one of the wealthiest townships in America, and I once had a dude from it tell me I had more privilege than him because I was straight and he was gay. The guy was from an $8 million home. That is not being victimized, it's wearing victimhood as a currency.
We don't really follow modern politics much but isn't every essential thing meant to help the poor such as health care and welfare considered to be liberal and mostly denounced by conservatives? honestly while that tweet may have been stupid ppl are blowing it out of proportion; it is true that porn is mostly about humiliating and degrading woman and that many teens even as young as 11 may watch it, the ideal solution would be to keep them away from it but how would such a thing even work? She already mentioned that she was not talking about pubescent kids and she likely won't be able to take the bullying that is going on for long before she close her account. Her solutions was stupid but everything she said was true. This one is no fan of rich ppl(even if they carry the nation), but maybe that guy was referring to the discriminations he face as a homosexual among his peer and maybe the general public and the opportunities that are denied to him because of that? or that the road was harder for him or would have been harder if you had started at the same level? but yes it is true that some ppl will inevitably profit from it but instinct tell us that the oppressions is still real for the majority of their kind.
But wouldn't the rich(or whoever you think is responsible) reduce their own income by conniving to reduce the population thereby losing precious mindless consumer? And from a strictly evolutionary viewpoint, wouldn't someone who has been successful in life-ie rich proved that his genes are superior? then him being able to reproduce more than those who are not rich should benefit the specie as a whole yes? The ideal solution would be a stationary population and an economic model that work with one.
Fucking idiots .... Who takes that shit seriously apart from the ridiculousness of it .... Catering for every sexual taste ... You don't need porn to have sex wtf .... It's all about the $$$$ these fucking sickos like it's a sexual movement or something
Is hard to horrify me when it comes to this matter, but that.....that....p for children? Are we in the endgame? love is love? normalization of pedophilia is coming?
That girl was just attention whoring, who cares about idiots anyway. One must rather pity than condemn them. Some people will tweet the dumbest things to then jack off to all the likes and retweets they get. Such is this utterly shallow world where attention and "popularity" are the core values. Democracy did this to us.
She's a social activist and I fully believe she means the things she says. After she deleted the tweet, she tweeted how upset she was that people were criticizing her take. The likes may play a part, but even the dumbest takes have people believing them.
Look man, I don't appreciate when people try to discredit a "conspiracy" based on the logic of "why would they do that." It's quite frankly, ridiculous. You don't have nearly enough knowledge to understand why people would do such a thing. The only reasonable thing to do is take the evidence for what it is. Bill gates literally said 10 years ago that "if we do a good job with vaccines, we can reduce the population by 10-15%." These people are constantly talking about overpopulation and that doesn't ring any alarm bells for you? This goes far beyond money. I suggest you educate yourself on how the federal reserve operates.. then you might realize these people have more money than they could ever need. Thanks to ever advancing technology, their need for our slave labour is diminishing. Someone who is rich is genetically superior? That's the most absurd logic I think I've ever heard as it relates to this topic. People are born into wealth from the great grandfathers centuries ago. Rich people reproducing would benefit the species as a whole.. wow thats some crazy talk. Do you have any idea how corporations operate? They destroy the health of the environment and human lives for the sake of profits. You think people behind those things are going to produce offspring that will benefit society? You need help.
I like talking about "conspiracy" topics too, but it's hard to do with those unacquainted with the material. It's just not in people's experience. The Georgia Guide Stones are a good place to start if one is wondering "why." That doesn't mean I believe in anything, but that's a good start.
Basically if you're on nofap you're already a conspiracy theorist because doctors say it's healthy and no one's teaching us in school not to pmo. Especially if you're into semen retention.. these are conspiracies, and so is the evil of the porn industry. Why some people accept that the porn industry is evil but not other industries? Beyond me.
It's funny. This is pretty off-topic, but this thread already is. I had the pleasure of meeting one of the most prolific playwrights in the country. Aside from being a playwright, he's a psychiatrist and lawyer. Guys a modern-day Da Vinci, but as expected he's quite academic. He's written several papers advocating the legalization of bestiality and incest. And the play that I read before meeting him had some unfortunate sexual innuendo. I can only imagine what his views on other things were. I won't drop his name, to avoid eliciting a sneedclave reaction to him.
On a a strictly evolutionary viewpoint yes, even if you ignore the clear correlation between iq and social class those that do better than the average joe tend on average to be richer and as far as the survival of the fittest go they would have a better chance to reproduce with it being easier for them to get women, then by this kind of logic they re genetically superior. Not that we are agreeing with this kind of viewpoint, this was merely an attempt to refute all these conspiracy about weakening *manhood*. https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-gates-vaccine-idUSL1N2MF1L8. “The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent. But there, we see an increase of about 1.3. When he later saw data suggesting that when mortality rates fall, so, too, do birth rates, Gates shifted his focus from preventing births to saving people already alive. “We moved pretty heavily into vaccines once we understood that,” he told Forbes." But since both are owned by corporations we don't expect it to convince you of anything. "Look man, I don't appreciate when people try to discredit a "conspiracy" based on the logic of "why would they do that." It's quite frankly, ridiculous. You don't have nearly enough knowledge to understand why people would do such a thing. The only reasonable thing to do is take the evidence for what it is." If you have arrived t this kind of thinking we doubt the comment of some random guy on the net will change it. "Thanks to ever advancing technology, their need for our slave labour is diminishing." - we believe there is a clear correlation between population number and economic development, wouldn't a depopulated america be weakened compared to other countries like china or india and wouldn't that affect those corporation with the rise of protectionism?
