Sexual studies dump

This should keep you all busy for a while.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26332467/

Women’s Preferences for Penis Size: A New Research Method Using Selection among 3D Models

Women’s preferences for penis size may affect men’s comfort with their own bodies and may have implications for sexual health. Studies of women’s penis size preferences typically have relied on their abstract ratings or selecting amongst 2D, flaccid images. This study used haptic stimuli to allow assessment of women’s size recall accuracy for the first time, as well as examine their preferences for erect penis sizes in different relationship contexts. Women (N = 75) selected amongst 33, 3D models. Women recalled model size accurately using this method, although they made more errors with respect to penis length than circumference. Women preferred a penis of slightly larger circumference and length for one-time (length = 6.4 inches/16.3 cm, circumference = 5.0 inches/12.7 cm) versus long-term (length = 6.3 inches/16.0 cm, circumference = 4.8 inches/12.2 cm) sexual partners. These first estimates of erect penis size preferences using 3D models suggest women accurately recall size and prefer penises only slightly larger than average.

but different races have sexually selected different averages, even by nation? So the mean IS the ideal.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19139986/

The association between penis size and sexual health among men who have sex with men

Larger penis size has been equated with a symbol of power, stamina, masculinity, and social status. Yet, there has been little research among men who have sex with men assessing the association between penis size and social-sexual health. Survey data from a diverse sample of 1,065 men who have sex with men were used to explore the association between perceived penis size and a variety of psychosocial outcomes. Seven percent of men felt their penis was “below average,” 53.9% “average,” and 35.5% “above average.” Penis size was positively related to satisfaction with size and inversely related to lying about penis size (all ps < .01). Size was unrelated to condom use, frequency of sex partners, HIV status, or recent diagnoses of HBV, HCV, gonorrhea/Chlamydia/urinary tract infections, and syphilis. Men with above average penises were more likely to report HPV and HSV-2 (Fisher’s exact p <or= .05). Men with below average penises were significantly more likely to identify as “bottoms” (anal receptive) and men with above average penises were significantly more likely to identify as “tops” (anal insertive). Finally, men with below average penises fared significantly worse than other men on three measures of psychosocial adjustment. Though most men felt their penis size was average, many fell outside this “norm.” The disproportionate number of viral skin-to-skin STIs (HSV-2 and HPV) suggest size may play a role in condom slippage/breakage. Further, size played a significant role in sexual positioning and psychosocial adjustment. These data highlight the need to better understand the real individual-level consequences of living in a penis-centered society.

so men with big wangs, at least the ‘gay’ ones, are rendering themselves infertile or birth defect risks by sharing it around. Y NO str8 studies?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32201145/

Female Orgasm and Overall Sexual Function and Habits: A Descriptive Study of a Cohort of U.S. Women

Results: FSFI scores, which were calculated for the 230 women who reported having had a steady male sex partner in the preceding 6 months, showed that 41% of the 230 women were at risk for female sexual dysfunction (a cutoff less than 26.55) and 21% were dissatisfied with their overall sexual life. Almost 90% of the overall cohort reported good emotional contact with their partner, that their partner was willing to have sex, satisfaction with the partner’s penis size (wherever applicable), and good erectile function and ejaculatory control of their partner (wherever applicable). 81% of the overall cohort claimed to be sexually active. Around 70% (70-72) did reach orgasm frequently, but around 10% never did so. Vaginal intercourse was reported by 62% of the overall cohort as the best trigger of orgasm, followed by external stimulation from the partner (48%) or themselves (37%). External stimulation was reported to be the fastest trigger to orgasm.

Clinical implications: The knowledge on how women reach orgasm and how it is related to the partners’ willingness to have sex and other factors can be incorporated in the clinical work.

Strengths & limitations: The use of a validated questionnaire and the relative large number of participants are strengths of the study. Limitations are the cross-sectional design, the lack of a sexual distress measure, and a possible selection bias.

Conclusion: Most women in the overall cohort were satisfied overall with their sexual life and partner-related factors, even though 41% (of those who cited a steady sex male partner) were at risk for female sexual dysfunction. Most women did reach orgasm through different kinds of stimulation. Correlation was good between preferred and performed sexual activities and positions. Shaeer O, Skakke D, Giraldi A, et al. Female Orgasm and Overall Sexual Function and Habits: A Descriptive Study of a Cohort of U.S. Women. J Sex Med 2020;17:1133-1143.

I bet the inorgasmic had ‘cut’ men, who produce fewer orgasms in all women in studies.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22729523/

Impact of penile size on male sexual function and role of penile augmentation surgery

Penile augmentation is an ongoing debate. Emerging evidence proves a relationship between dissatisfaction with penile size and sexual dysfunction. Despite a widespread belief of the value of penile size, and the prevalent complaint of a “small penis,” penile augmentation still stands short of addressing the demand. This report highlights the studies added to medical literature on penile augmentation in 2011-2012, including data on normal penile dimensions and the expected dimensions for a normal person, determination of the prevalence of the dissatisfaction with penile size, its effect on erectile function, female partner’s opinion of the value of penile size, as well as further experience with augmentation techniques.

It’s mental, they need therapy. Also, I see the joke.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26639576/

Why Are Men Satisfied or Dissatisfied with Penile Implants? A Mixed Method Study on Satisfaction with Penile Prosthesis Implantation

The issue is mental?

Content analysis revealed four main themes for men’s satisfaction with the PPI: (i) psychological factors were reported 54 times (n = 54) and included positive emotions, self-esteem, confidence, enhancement of male identity, major live change, and self-image;

– mental

(ii) improvement of sexual function was reported 54 times (n = 54) and referred to achievement of vaginal penetration, increase of sexual desire, sexual satisfaction, penis size, and improvement of erectile function;

– satisfaction is a female metric? ED is mental?

(iii) relationship factors were reported 11 times (n = 11) and referred to relationship improvement and the possibility of giving pleasure to the partner; and (iv) improvement in urinary function (n = 3).

– not possible with implants, all surgeries produce numbness and see above study

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18649002/

Association between human papillomavirus in men and their sexual partners and uterine cervical intraepithelial neoplasia

“The sample size employed was not large enough to be able to determine any differences between both study groups.” aka useless study

Stop linking to bullshit. Slutty men are just as bad for society as the women. Blame shifting is blue pill.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33793040/

A preliminary investigation of a novel method to manipulate penis length to measure female sexual satisfaction: a single case experimental design

Results: On average reducing the depth of penetration made a statistically significant 18% reduction of overall sexual pleasure with an average 15% reduction in length of the penis. The longer the erect penis, the less likely the rings had an impact on sexual pleasure. There was however a range of individual responses with a minority of women reporting that reducing the depth of penetration was more pleasurable on some occasions.

– the G spot?

Conclusions: Size may matter in women in a healthy stable relationship when there is penile shortening. Because of the small number of couples and men with an apparently long penises, our results are preliminary, and we welcome replication in a larger sample with a more diverse range of penile lengths. Our results should not be misinterpreted as meaning that increasing penile length will increase sexual pleasure in women.

shortening with age, and no, supplements don’t help

unless you want earlier mortality (T-levels)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5715194/

Non-pharmacological and non-surgical strategies to promote sexual recovery for men with erectile dysfunction

-quit the porn? sigh

the tobacco-lung cancer connection of this generation
history will know you as a bunch of wankers

Erectile dysfunction (ED), the most commonly reported sexual problem for men,

in dick-mutilated, porn-addled America? also Israel?

reduces the quality of life for both patients and their partners. Even when physiologically effective, long-term adherence to ED treatments is poor.

– it’s behavioral…

We review here the implication of having patients’ partners involved in ED treatment, starting with treatment selection. We suggest that having partners engaged from the outset may promote an erotic association of the treatment with the partner, i.e., conceptually linking the aid to the sexual pleasure that the partner provides.

– quit ‘supernormal stimuli’ aka lechery, your dopamine is fried?

We hypothesize that this erotic association should enhance the sexual aid’s effectiveness and might potentially help improve long-term adherence. The primary focus of this review, though, is non-pharmacological and non-surgical options for maintaining sexual activity for men with ED. Though not ED treatments per se, anecdotal data suggest that these options may be effective for some patients and their partners in regaining a satisfying sex life. The aids discussed include external penile prostheses, penile sleeves, and penile support devices.

-easier just to give up the sexual visual crack, surely?

These devices can allow men to participate in penetrative sexual intercourse despite moderate to severe ED.

-aging happens, it’s natural selection

External penile prostheses can be personalized so they match in size and shape a man’s normal full erection.

– that is sad

Penile sleeves can similarly be customized with a lumen that fits best a patient’s penis for optimal tactile stimulation.

– so they’re fucking a toy? …. not the man…..

We review how multi-sensory integration can enhance sexual arousal for men who use such devices, allowing them to achieve orgasm despite intractable ED.

-it’s a silicon sock

Patients are not always advised within ED clinics about these options nor why and how they can facilitate non-erection dependent sexual recovery. Clinicians need to be aware of these devices and their positive attributes, so they can objectively counsel and encourage couples to explore their use as an alternative to more invasive treatments. The most commonly promoted non-medical ED aid offered to patients is the vacuum erection device. We discuss how erections achieved with the vacuum erection device have a “hinge effect”, that is an underappreciated barrier to the effectiveness of the erection. With a hinged erection, the penis points downward rather than upward. We show how the normal kinematics of the penis during coitus is not strictly linear (i.e., not uniaxial; not just in-and-out), and is impeded by hinging. Positional adjustment, such as the receptive partner being on top, may help overcome this problem for some couples. Lastly, we suggest that, in the case where ED can be anticipated from a pending medical treatment, such as a prostatectomy, pre-habilitative approaches may potentially improve adherence to sexual aid use in the long-term. In conclusion, non-pharmacological and non-surgical options for sexual recovery are available. Scientific studies on the effectiveness of these interventions in restoring satisfying sex are warranted.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/

Is Internet Pornography Causing Sexual Dysfunctions? A Review with Clinical Reports

Traditional factors that once explained men’s sexual difficulties appear insufficient to account for the sharp rise in erectile dysfunction, delayed ejaculation, decreased sexual satisfaction, and diminished libido during partnered sex in men under 40.

-no shit

This review (1) considers data from multiple domains, e.g., clinical, biological (addiction/urology), psychological (sexual conditioning), sociological; and (2) presents a series of clinical reports, all with the aim of proposing a possible direction for future research of this phenomenon. Alterations to the brain’s motivational system are explored as a possible etiology underlying pornography-related sexual dysfunctions. This review also considers evidence that Internet pornography’s unique properties (limitless novelty, potential for easy escalation to more extreme material, video format, etc.) may be potent enough to condition sexual arousal to aspects of Internet pornography use that do not readily transition to real-life partners, such that sex with desired partners may not register as meeting expectations and arousal declines. Clinical reports suggest that terminating Internet pornography use is sometimes sufficient to reverse negative effects, underscoring the need for extensive investigation using methodologies that have subjects remove the variable of Internet pornography use. In the interim, a simple diagnostic protocol for assessing patients with porn-induced sexual dysfunction is put forth.

– it’s a supernormal stimulus designed to make you impotent, it’s a delusion that alters the brain

Based on the findings of historical studies cited earlier, older men would be expected to have far higher ED rates than the negligible rates of younger men [2,7]. However, in just a decade, things changed radically. The 2001–2002 rates for older men 40–80 were about 13% in Europe [5]. By 2011, ED rates in young Europeans, 18–40, ranged from 14%–28% [6].

duh, porn addicts also look older, do that study

Finally, another 2015 study on men (mean age approximately 36), reported that ED accompanied by a low desire for partnered sex is now a common observation in clinical practice among men seeking help for their excessive sexual behavior, who frequently “use pornography and masturbate” [15].

aimed at Europeans, squarely

make them hypersexual, extreme r, and re-productively useless

The sole qualification for being a masculine man is having a functioning dick but they cuck for the industry ruining their lives.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6679165/

The Potential Associations of Pornography Use with Sexual Dysfunctions: An Integrative Literature Review of Observational Studies

This paper reviews the associations between pornography use and sexual dysfunction based on evidence from observational studies. The existing data in this regard mostly derive from cross-sectional investigations and case reports. There is little if no evidence that pornography use may induce delayed ejaculation and erectile dysfunction, although longitudinal studies that control for confounding variables are required for a full assessment.

– decades later, we’ll be dead demographically…

The associations between pornography use and sexual desire may differ between women and men although the existing data is contradictory and causal relationships cannot be established. The strongest evidence is available for the relation of pornography use with decreased sexual satisfaction, although the results of prospective studies are inconsistent. The paper outlines future research prospects beneficial in understanding the nature of associations between pornography use and sexual dysfunctions in men and women.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6352245/

Online Porn Addiction: What We Know and What We Don’t—A Systematic Review

In the last few years, there has been a wave of articles related to behavioral addictions; some of them have a focus on online pornography addiction. However, despite all efforts, we are still unable to profile when engaging in this behavior becomes pathological.

– publishing bias

Common problems include: sample bias, the search for diagnostic instrumentals, opposing approximations to the matter, and the fact that this entity may be encompassed inside a greater pathology (i.e., sex addiction) that may present itself with very diverse symptomatology.

= excuses so you don’t get later sued

Behavioral addictions form a largely unexplored field of study, and usually exhibit a problematic consumption model: loss of control, impairment, and risky use. Hypersexual disorder fits this model and may be composed of several sexual behaviors, like problematic use of online pornography (POPU). Online pornography use is on the rise, with a potential for addiction considering the “triple A” influence (accessibility, affordability, anonymity). This problematic use might have adverse effects in sexual development and sexual functioning, especially among the young population. We aim to gather existing knowledge on problematic online pornography use as a pathological entity. Here we try to summarize what we know about this entity and outline some areas worthy of further research.

dupe

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2874247/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4994844/

brain differences in the slutty

Risky sexual behaviors typically occur when a person is sexually motivated by potent, sexual reward cues. Yet, individual differences in sensitivity to sexual cues have not been examined with respect to sexual risk behaviors. A greater responsiveness to sexual cues might provide greater motivation for a person to act sexually; a lower responsiveness to sexual cues might lead a person to seek more intense, novel, possibly risky, sexual acts. In this study, event-related potentials were recorded in 64 men and women while they viewed a series of emotional, including explicit sexual, photographs. The motivational salience of the sexual cues was varied by including more and less explicit sexual images. Indeed, the more explicit sexual stimuli resulted in enhanced late positive potentials (LPP) relative to the less explicit sexual images. Participants with fewer sexual intercourse partners in the last year had reduced LPP amplitude to the less explicit sexual images than the more explicit sexual images, whereas participants with more partners responded similarly to the more and less explicit sexual images. This pattern of results is consistent with a greater responsivity model. Those who engage in more sexual behaviors consistent with risk are also more responsive to less explicit sexual cues.

– it’s r/K

trans. r-types seem to have dulled sexual perception (abnormal) so over-estimate opportunity in compensation

Reminder:

Mother Nature WILL have her pound of flesh.

MSM push on male impotence and normalization of mutation

Studies are in their description, duplicated below.

Reminder: ED is the PC term for impotence – and a common side effect of porn addiction.
How about studying penis size between promiscuous men and chaste ones? They’d never publish it. I’d read it. Why are we not funding this?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280349/

Decrease in Anogenital Distance among Male Infants with Prenatal Phthalate Exposure

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4937858/

Prenatal Exposure to Phthalates and Anogenital Distance in Male Infants from a Low-Exposed Danish Cohort (2010–2012)

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26672060/

Prenatal Exposure to Phthalates and Anogenital Distance in Male Infants from a Low-Exposed Danish Cohort (2010-2012) – same?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25697839/

First trimester phthalate exposure and anogenital distance in newborns

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16466537/

Possible impact of phthalates on infant reproductive health

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25353625/

Prenatal phthalate exposures and anogenital distance in Swedish boys

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7437820/

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals: implications for human health

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7483495/

The Endocrine Disruption of Prenatal Phthalate Exposure in Mother and Offspring

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7652773/

Phthalates in the diet of Mexican children of school age. Risk analysis

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30677661/

The role of exposure to phthalates in variations of anogenital distance: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Environmental chemicals such as phthalate esters may have adverse effects on anogenital distance (AGD), but the evidence in both genders has not been reviewed systematically. The objective of the present study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that analyzed the relationship between exposure to phthalates and AGD. English papers published up to March 2018 were searched in PubMed, Scopus, Clarivate-Web of Science, and Google scholar. We applied fixed-effects models to calculate pooled beta coefficient [β]. In the case of heterogeneity, random-effects models were used. Using the comprehensive search strategies, 313 papers were identified and after screening, 10 of them were included in this study. In primary analyses, we found that exposure to phthalates was not associated with short AGD (β = -0.11; 95% CI, -0.27, 0.06; I2 = 0%). However, results of subgroup analyses indicated that in boys, the sum of di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate (∑DEHP) metabolites had significant association with the risk of shortened anopenile distance (AGDAP) (β = -0.915, 95% CI: 1.629, -0.2) and anoscrotal distance (AGDAS) (β = -0.857, 95% CI: 1.455, -0.26). In addition, urinary monobutyl phthalate (MBP), monoethyl phthalate (MEP), and monoisobutyl phthalate (MiBP) were associated with short AGDAP. We also observed significant association between monobenzylphthalate (MBzP) and anofourchette distance (AGDAF) in girls. Our study provided findings on significant association of exposure to ∑DEHP metabolites, MBP, MEP, and MiBP with shortened AGDAP in boys. The mechanisms of phthalates effect on AGD may involve receptors and enzymes involved in steroidgenesis, negative influence on Leydig cells, cell proliferation, gonocyte cell numbers, and testosterone production.

Hook-up culture’s natural outcome: rising impotence

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/apr/22/sexual-dysfunction-cuts-risk-leaving-thousands-in-uk-without-help

Of course, they’re willing to sell you medical interventions.

Maybe snake oil?

Just don’t give up porn or stop fucking around.

Because while you’re weirdly the first active generation to have these problems EVER, it cannot be modern habits empowering, sorry, causing them.

And in the women’s case especially, it isn’t their bodies telling them (as in the men’s) that not bonding* with the sexual partner fully (emotionally) eventually causes physical problems?

Nah, can’t be. Would the sexologists of postmodern academia lie about this?

Don’t look at the conservative sex life study, whatever ya do.

Nor ask if they’re vegan. Check their hormones. Nah. Sure it’s fine.

*What would that even be called? Who ever heard of pair bonding in evolutionary mating patterns?

https://www.amazon.com/Hooked-Science-Casual-Affecting-Children/dp/0802450601

As one reviewer pointed out how sluts whip manwhores:

Often referred to as the “monogamy molecule,” vasopressin seems to be the primary cause of men attaching to women with whom they have close and intimate physical contact.

into marrying the ho.

Right-wingers are different

It’s that time of year for a study-dump. Read until the end.

Better-looking (on AVERAGE):
https://sputniknews.com/viral/201801311061239797-physically-attractive-people-right-wing/

“Good-looking individuals are more likely to have right-wing political views than less physically attractive people, according to a university study.
The authors of the report, Rolfe D. Peterson from the US Susquehanna University and Carl L. Palmer from the Illinois State University, examined the connection between physical attractiveness and political beliefs, applying multiple surveys measuring people’s attractiveness.
“More attractive individuals are more politically efficacious than their peers and more likely to identify as conservative and Republican than less physically attractive citizens of comparable demographic backgrounds,” the report read.”

Comparable demographic background, an important control.

Better-looking again:
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/effects-of-physical-attractiveness-on-political-beliefs/D5214D0CAE37EE5947B7BF29762547EE
PDF at: https://about.illinoisstate.edu/clpalme/Documents/Peterson%20Palmer%20The%20Effects%20of%20Physical%20Attractiveness%20on%20Political%20Attitudes.pdf

“Controlling for socioeconomic status, we find that more attractive individuals are more likely to report higher levels of political efficacy, identify as conservative, and identify as Republican.”

SES control is important.

Better-looking:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272716302201

“Politicians on the right look more beautiful in Europe, the U.S. and Australia.”

How to tell May isn’t really right-wing.

They should also study disease load (emphasizing STDs, which do affect appearance) compared to partisanship.

Support meritocracy, oppose the cult of equalism:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597814000223

“Higher self-perceived attractiveness (SPA) increased support for inequality.”

Self-perceived, relative.

Have a ‘look’:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886916312028

“The political sympathies of scholars can be accurately assessed from photographs.”
“In contrast to politicians, Right-leaning scholars were not more attractive.”

The scholars haven’t hired image consultants.

What, do you think a man buys an expensive suit just for the suit?

“Right-leaning scholars were better groomed.
Controlling for grooming, Left-leaning scholars were more attractive”

This is supposed to be looking at genetic attractiveness, true attractiveness, not clothing/haircare/make-up?
Okay, I’ll let them have that one. They’re better at faking it, a trait of narcissism.

Less likely to cheat when expected to cooperate:
https://reason.com/blog/2014/07/22/socialists-are-cheaters-says-new-study

Neurologically different:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/

“Political Orientations Are Correlated with Brain Structure in Young Adults”
We found that greater liberalism was associated with increased gray matter volume in the anterior cingulate cortex, whereas greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala.”

So they’re more gender neutral in the brain?
https://www.webmd.com/brain/news/20050121/intelligence-may-be-gray-white-matter#1
Because the same IQ can still be produced by structural differences between the sexes.

“Researchers found major differences in the amount of gray and white matter in the brains of men and women of the same intelligence, suggesting that men and women may derive their intelligence in different ways.”

“”These findings suggest that human evolution has created two different types of brains designed for equally intelligent behavior,” says researcher Richard Haier, professor of psychology at the University of California, Irvine, in a news release. “In addition, by pinpointing these gender-based intelligence areas, the study has the potential to aid research on dementia and other cognitive impairment diseases in the brain”

Again, the same IQ score.

SAME.

Man Card isn’t a MENSA card, accomplish something.

Sexual dimorphism didn’t stop at the neck.

But white matter is generally more important for HIGH IQ:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/412678/brain-images-reveal-the-secret-to-higher-iq/
White matter could only be imaged recently.

“They found a strong correlation between the integrity of the white matter and performance on a standard IQ test.”

Although grey matter can matter too, white matter cannot be denied EITHER:
https://academic.oup.com/cercor/article/17/9/2163/272753

Positive relationships were found between FSIQ and intracranial gray and white matter but not cerebrospinal fluid volumes. Significant associations with cortical thickness were evident bilaterally in prefrontal (Brodmann’s areas [BAs] 10/11, 47)

IQ so real you can scan someone’s brain, almost.

and posterior temporal cortices (BA 36/37) and proximal regions.

Sex influenced regional relationships;

Before any sexist bitch goes to twist this, different does not mean inferior. This is a study of intelligence, NOT stupidity.

You can’t prove a negative and individuals are not groups?

The obvious pointed out? Okay, let’s continue.

women showed correlations in prefrontal and temporal association cortices, whereas men exhibited correlations primarily in temporal–occipital association cortices.

K.

An idiot reading that would assume women are smarter, prefrontal doesn’t always mean smarter, necessarily, it’s just a group-level skew of structural difference. However, it does explain the higher female average.

Again, average.

In healthy adults,

important distinction, many brain studies are conducted on the undeveloped (teens) or pathologies

neither of which generalize to a HEALTHY, ADULT population

[sorry for the smart people tuning in, idiots twist what I type]

greater intelligence is associated with larger intracranial gray matter and to a lesser extent with white matter.

Plot twist: both matter.

Almost like we evolved.

Variations in prefrontal and posterior temporal cortical thickness are particularly linked with intellectual ability.

PF – registered as female strength, generally.
PT – registered as male and female strengths, generally.

This isn’t better/worse, it’s apples/oranges.

Even race overwhelms sex as a confound in IQ (so does class, education etc).

Sex moderates regional relationships that may index dimorphisms in cognitive abilities, overall processing strategies, or differences in structural organization.”

Trans. sex differences real yo.

Overall, key word.

Moderates, may index, differences. As in, these processes still occur but like a road trip, each take different paths different enough to map but not distinct enough to be unrecognizable.

Reminder

Estrogen, which men also NATURALLY produce, also boosts brainpower.
https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2015/11/07/estrogen-boosts-brainpower-actually/
Study here but my commentary explains it:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4104582/
Whereas, everyone knows, testosterone (which women also produce) correlates to violence.
Nothing is all-good, all-bad in hormones.
“A moment of silence for all the women in history who married dumber men.”

They should study political economic wing and compare it to natural/un-supplemented hormone levels.
As in, a man who ‘needs’ steroids for vanity is less of a man.

They should also look at whether men going onto steroids drop in IQ score because it competes with their organic estrogen that makes them handle stressors better.

[Update: after checking, they did. Here it is.]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3608708/

“long-term high-dose AAS exposure may cause cognitive deficits, notably in visuospatial memory.”

“These results remained stable in sensitivity analyses addressing potential confounding factors.”
The dumb jock stereotype is true!

WAIT.

It gets better!

Actually, it causes brain damage!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25986964
This is amazing!


Fake masculinity is really bad for men. You can’t cheat code becoming a man.

CONCLUSIONS:

Long-term AAS use is associated with right amygdala enlargement and reduced right amygdala rsFC with brain areas involved in cognitive control and spatial memory, which could contribute to the psychiatric effects and cognitive dysfunction associated with AAS use.

The MRS abnormalities we detected could reflect enhanced glutamate turnover and increased vulnerability to neurotoxic or neurodegenerative processes, which could contribute to AAS-associated cognitive dysfunction.

Now the right amygdala enlargement sounds like the natural conservative difference but understand it’s rooted, not in experience and genuine masculine virtue, but chemical dependence. Without the drugs, it’ll shrink right back and possibly atrophy.

This would be like congratulating a tall guy who took HGH for his superior genetics. No. It’s a superficial, fake result.

The cognitive control is impaired, that’s regression. The meat head stereotype is true, biologically. Useless.

I wonder how many male suicides were on steroids? Both groups happen to be middle-aged men in fear of the Wall.

Whatever the details, it makes them biologically vulnerable compared to their natural state, the opposite of fitness.

Ironically, they’re more vulnerable to microplastics and xenoestrogens. 

To further screw the point in… that brain region explicitly mentioned?

Right amygdala rsFC study:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3997418/
“In high HA scorers, we also observed stronger right amygdala rsFC with the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC), which is implicated in negative affect regulation.”
It’s a girly brain thing to do with harm avoidance. [aka common sense]
“may represent a vulnerability marker for sensitivity to stress and anxiety (disorders).”
So the meat head with reduced volume (therefore not conservative*) is dumber, senses dulled by drugs and more likely to fail to get the brain signals to avoid trouble. Sounds like a future in handcuffs. They can’t perceive danger nor regulate negative emotions like anger or shame after rejection. Basically, they’re future chimp-outs waiting to happen, whatever their race**. Less able to CONTROL emotions, the broflakes.***

Hair-trigger temper calling out people for looking at him.

The guy who picks on people but never actually expects to get hit.

Will grab a woman and be shocked she slaps him. That’s the one.

*because, again “greater conservatism was associated with increased volume of the right amygdala.”

[as referenced above]

yet they have less?

So steroids make men more left wing. It isn’t the correct area and type to be considered otherwise.

ISN’T SCIENCE FUN, FELLOW RED PILLS.

ACCEPTING FINDINGS EVEN WHEN WE DON’T LIKE THEM, BRO.

My guess is it messes with their sexual reward system and produces impotence, porn addiction, dissatisfaction.

https://www.simplymedsonline.co.uk/blog/how-does-anabolic-steroid-use-affect-erectile-function/

Steroids do cause impotence (PC term is ED). Does it lower sperm count?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4744441/

DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER.

“Anabolic steroids abuse and male infertility”

I am good at this.

“Infertility is defined by the WHO as the failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after 12 months or more of regular unprotected sexual intercourse and a male factor is present in up to 50 % of all infertile couples. Several conditions may be related to male infertility.

Substance abuse, including AAS, is commonly associated to transient or persistent impairment on male reproductive function, through different pathways. Herein, a brief overview on AAS is offered. Steroids biochemistry, patterns of use, physiological and clinical issues are enlightened. A further review about fertility outcomes among male AAS abusers is also presented, including the classic reports on transient anabolic steroid-induced hypogonadism (ASIH), and the more recent experimental reports on structural and genetic sperm damage.”

hypogonadism = tiny balls

“In layman’s terms, it is sometimes called interrupted stage 1 puberty”

You’d have to be a moron already to think supplementing that shit makes you manly.

Nice muscles bro, shame you hit rewind on puberty!

They impair their body’s ability to naturally produce testosterone in future…. idiots.

Darwin Award category?

Big Pharma’s best customer? Like Israel’s Viagra use. Israel and America, top consumers.

https://www.haaretz.com/life/MAGAZINE-israeli-porn-is-booming-and-the-industry-insists-it-s-about-more-than-just-sex-1.5472336

(((Coincidence)))

**Logically we should restrict steroid use to lower the crime rate. We can’t have gorilla people chimping out and blaming da drugs.

***There are few things less masculine than a man who throws tantrums because Hulk RAGE entitlement. The mantrum has neurological correlates, as we can see.

As for the ACC lefty brain finding:

https://www.neuroscientificallychallenged.com/blog//know-your-brain-cingulate-cortex

..I didn’t forget.

“Through these connections, the ACC is thought to be involved with a number of functions related to emotion including the regulation of overall affect, assigning emotions to internal and external stimuli, and making vocalizations associated with the expression of states or desires.

No comment.

The ACC also seems to contribute to the regulation of autonomic and endocrine responses, pain perception, and the selection and initiation of motor movements. Additionally, there are other areas of the ACC that are involved in various aspects of cognition ranging from decision-making to the management of social behavior.”

And about sexual potency….

I order these for a reason.

Right-wingers more sexually satisfied:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/8943/study-conservatives-have-better-sex-lives-liberals-amanda-prestigiacomo

“A new YouGov survey, which asked over 19,000 participants from the UK, France, Germany, Sweden and Denmark about both their politics and their sex lives, has found conservatives to be happier in the bedroom than liberals, with those identifying as “very right-wing” found to be the happiest.”

So much for the benefits of slutting. Muh experience. Yes, experiencing a burning sensation.

If you want a better sex life, don’t be a manwhore.
Chastity is a virtue. Less stress when single, hot sex when married.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/02/right-wing-people-more-likely-to-be-happier-with-their-sex-lives/

Sluts reee.

I deserve an Ig Nobel for all this connection-making. It could save the West.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/baby-bust-fertility-is-declining-the-most-among-minority-women

While I’m putting out fires imagined by shrill men.

Click through.

BAFFLED, JENKINS!

Circumcision, risky behaviours studies

Almost 7000 words. That was more than I expected to type. Circumcision studies generally. A post for men.

https://journals.lww.com/jaids/Abstract/1999/11010/Sexual_Behaviors_and_Other_HIV_Risk_Factors_in.12.aspx
“Circumcised men also reported a preference for nonwet sex. “

Men concerned about HPV-cancer link:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.24097

“In multivariable analyses, detection of any HPV infection was significantly associated with reported race of Asian/Pacific Islander…
NonOncogenic HPV infection was independently associated with lifetime number of sexual partners. Circumcision, assessed by clinical examination, was associated with reduced risk of HPV detection across all categories of HPV evaluated. HPV detection in men in the current study was strongly related to sexual behavior and circumcision status. Interventions such as circumcision may provide a low‐cost method to reduce HPV infection.”

Really?

Hey, just in case you get a broken leg, get them amputated!

Significantly higher risk of HPV detection was associated with increasing numbers of lifetime female sexual partners (OR 6.96–9.01 for nononcogenic, any HPV, and oncogenic HPV infections among men reporting ≥50 partners compared to 1 partner), number of female partners in the past 3 months (OR 2.31–3.43 for nononcogenic, any HPV, oncogenic HPV infections among men reporting 3–30 partners compared to no female partners), number of new female partners in the past 3 months (OR 2.64–2.85 for nononcogenic, oncogenic and any HPV type among men with ≥3 new female partners compared to no new partner), and anal sex with either a male or female (OR 1.40–1.45 for any HPV, and oncogenic HPV infections).”

Good luck trying to find studies brave enough to look at anal sex frequency alone!
They wouldn’t DARE.

What do they care if men get cancer, right?
Penile cancer is on the rise but do anal and never use a condom because a TV told you to!

Slut shaming also applies to men. Manwhores are disease-ridden.

“For example, the odds ratios for any HPV increased with increasing number of lifetime sexual partners peaking at an odds ratio of 6.65 among men who reported 20–49 partners.”

Er…. that’s well above average.

Here the lifetime partner rate is 4 and likely lower.

“However, the few published studies reporting HPV antibody status among men suggest that a smaller proportion of men than women are HPV antibody positive, despite a high HPV DNA prevalence among men.15″

Men are spreading it.

If I had to mock this, I’d get a tranny to dress up as Lady Gaga and sing “let’s have some fun this beat is sick, I wanna touch you with my cancer stick”… if only people had a sense of humour anymore.

“Don’t think too much, no condom bitch, ’cause porn is God and anal’s quick”

If I had to write the most unPC comedy show ever. No more jokes in this piece, it takes a serious turn.

Finally, Castellsague et al.8 demonstrated a profound and significant reduction in invasive cervical cancer risk among women whose male partners were circumcised.8″

So… what about male cancer risk? Shouldn’t you study that too?
And they wouldn’t spread HPV if they didn’t catch it being sluts.

Prevention > whatever this is.
They’re basically operating on baby boys, assuming they’ll be manwhores when they’re older.
No?

http://www.bioline.org.br/pdf?hs16015

” Policies and programmes should thus focus on the attitudes underlying sexual behaviour. “

Normally, studies of intact men are confounded by poverty and drinking.

And being promiscuous, obviously.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3700546/

HPV16, the most prevalent HPV type in this population (9.9%), also had the highest incidence (10.9/1000 person-months). A high incidence of HPV16 has been similarly reported in other studies among both men6, 7, 9, 14 and women.26 The high rate of acquisition of HPV16 has a clear implication for increasing cancer risk among men and their sexual partners, as HPV16 is the most common HPV type found in penile cancer among men;2 cervical, vulvar and vaginal cancers among women;1, 27 and in anal and oropharyngeal cancers in both sexes.3, 4

Finally!

If you’re avoiding performing oral on a woman, what makes you think she doesn’t have it in her mouth too and second, you’d better not be doing anal in that case….

Penile HPV IRs in our study were higher in the glans specimen, including the inner foreskin, compared with the shaft (HR=2.1; 95% CI 1.7 to 2.4). Our results are in contrast to the findings of a US study of 240 men.7 In this highly circumcised US population, the cumulative probability of incident HPV infection did not differ by anatomical site (44.3% in glans vs 45.4% in shaft). Among uncircumcised men, there may be a larger disparity in HPV acquisition by penile site, potentially attributable to keratinisation of the glans epithelium and removal of the inner foreskin after circumcision.”

Circumcised men aren’t less likely to catch it.

They’ll catch it somewhere more fatal. Increasing the rate of penile cancer.

Because you literally cannot catch it in a foreskin you NO LONGER HAVE.

So it’s a trick of linguistics. There’s less disease – of the foreskin. That you lack.

Click to access SRBs%20and%20circumcision%20in%20Uganda_1652_fullpaper_PAA2016.pdf

“Conclusions
This study indicates higher prevalence of sexual risk behaviours among circumcised men in each
survey and a reduction in use of condoms with non-marital sexual partners among circumcised
men from 2004 to 2011, suggesting that promotion of male circumcision could result in risk
compensation.

Considering the high levels of sexual risk behaviours among men who are already
circumcised observed in this study, the Ministry of Health and partners need to continue
sensitising the sexually active population to use condoms even when a man is circumcised. These
messages should target both circumcised men and their sexual partners. Educating men
10 undergoing circumcision also needs to be strengthened to avoid sexual risk taking post
circumcision”

If they weren’t lied to, they wouldn’t want it.

https://www.malecircumcision.org/research/social-and-behavioural-research

“Data on changes in the sexual performance or sexual satisfaction of adolescents or men following circumcision are limited and conflicting.

Not really. Sunk cost fallacy is strong.

One study conducted among 138 Korean men an unknown time (possibly years) after circumcision found that 20 percent reported decreased sexual pleasure and 8 percent reported increased sexual pleasure following the procedure.3″

“Sixty-four percent of the circumcised men who were available for follow-up at 24 months reported greater penile sensitivity after circumcision, and 54 percent reported enhanced ease in reaching orgasm.6”

That is physically impossible, nerve endings are removed and existing ones covered with scar tissue.
Scar tissue is numb.

Phantom foreskin sensation?

3 – Kim DS, Pang MG. The effect of male circumcision on sexuality. BJU Int 2007;99(3):619-622.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06646.x

“Masturbatory pleasure decreased after circumcision in 48% of the respondents, while 8% reported increased pleasure. Masturbatory difficulty increased after circumcision in 63% of the respondents but was easier in 37%. About 6% answered that their sex lives improved, while 20% reported a worse sex life after circumcision.”

Men deserve to know this.
Sounds like surgical differences. Or maybe the men reporting more sensation had a thicker foreskin, limiting sensation?

“There was a decrease in masturbatory pleasure and sexual enjoyment after circumcision, indicating that adult circumcision adversely affects sexual function in many men, possibly because of complications of the surgery and a loss of nerve endings.”

Possibly? The surgery is intended to remove nerves and nerve endings. It REMOVES.

It’s literally taking away the thing that makes them a man, the crown of their manhood itself, the most important and sexually responsive organ to sexual pleasure.

http://www.thebodypro.com/content/art58409.html
https://www.poz.com/article/MSM-HIV-Circumcision-Study-Disregards-Roles-in-Anal-Sex-19575-6792
It is almost impossible to find them recording anal sex data, which harms men by omission.

http://cirp.org/library/anatomy/ohara/

Circumcision could be contributing to male fertility issues.

Laumann et al. [5] found that circumcised men had different sexual practices from genitally altered men. Circumcised men were more likely to masturbate, to engage in heterosexual anal and oral sex, and to engage in homosexual anal sex.

Why does the porn industry want all men circumcised, it’s a mystery.
Masturbation suggests dissatisfaction with normal, spousal sex, as do the others.

In the male rat, removal of the penile sheath markedly interferes with normal penile reflexes and copulation. When circumcised rats were paired with sexually experienced females, they had more difficulty obtaining an erection, more difficulty inserting the penis into the vagina, and required more mounts to inseminate than did unaltered males [6].

Unusual longevity is not good, it’s a common sign of impotence, porn lies.
Difficulty finishing, medically.

Preputial secretions in mice and rats are a strong attractant for female mice and rats [7-11], and may provoke the onset of oestrus in mature females [12].”

I’m not kidding, impotence issues in performance, it’s tragic.

In addition, if humans do secrete pheromones, I’d expect to see that impact circumcised male fertility especially.

“The study results may reflect the tendency of people to choose the familiar and shun the unfamiliar. In a survey conducted on the Internet, circumcised men were significantly more likely to use additional artificial lubricants during sexual activity (odds ratio, OR = 5.64, 95% CI = 3.65 – 8.71) [16].”

That’s abnormal you shouldn’t need those, but without a foreskin there’s more friction, the prepuce evolved in men to reduce penile friction. Without the existence of lube, which might cause problems by ingredients, that suggests circumcised men would find it too painful to have sex at all. 

Great profit margins for the lube companies though.

The 12th century physician and rabbi Moses Maimonides advocated male circumcision for its ability to curb a man’s sexual appetite [17].

Yep, it’s a punishment.

Further, he implied that it could also affect a woman’s sexuality, indicating that once a woman had taken a lover who was not circumcised, it was very hard for her to give him up.

Data supports this, keep reading.
There is a HUGE improvement in sexual performance for intact men.
When you ask the people judging said performance.

The impact of male circumcision on the sexual pleasure experienced by both males and females is largely unstudied. While the brain is often cited as the primary ‘sexual’ organ, what impact does surgical alteration of the male genitalia have for both partners? Based on anecdotal reports, a survey was developed to determine the effect of male circumcision on a woman’s ability to achieve vaginal orgasm (both single and multiple), to maintain adequate vaginal secretions, to develop vaginal discomfort, to enjoy coitus and to develop an intimate relationship with her partner. This review presents the findings of a survey of women who have had sexual partners both with and without foreskins, and reports their experiences.”

“Of the women, 73% reported that circumcised men tend to thrust harder and deeper, using elongated strokes, while unaltered men by comparison tended to thrust more gently, to have shorter thrusts, and tended to be in contact with the mons pubis and clitoris more, according to 71% of the respondents.”

So… the circumcised are bad in bed. No wonder American women don’t orgasm.

Objectively, the only way circumcised men can sexually perform is badly.
None of their behavioral pattern is pleasurable. None of it. Performance is judged by the recipient.

Again, everything porn tells you to do in bed is wrong.
It’s all the stuff that makes men bad in bed – that’s kinda why men enjoy viewing it, psychologically it’s telling them they’re normal by making bad performance in bed appear common and pay women to act aroused, contrary to honest data, like lonely women reading tons of romance novels and telling themselves “there’s nothing wrong with me”!

It’d be easy to test.

Do circumcised men enjoy watching intact men in porn? I’d bet not.
I’d bet they’d feel inferior. You think the industry doesn’t know that?

“While some of the respondents commented that they thought the differences were in the men, not the type of penis, the consistency with which women felt more intimate with their unaltered partners is striking. Some respondents reported that the foreskin improved their sexual satisfaction, which improved the quality of the relationship. In addition to the observations of Maimonides in the 12th century, one survey found that marital longevity was increased when the male had a foreskin [21]. Why the presence of the foreskin enhances intimacy needs further exploration.”

Circumcision increases divorce risk.
Really.
The study mentioned is linked below, Hughes, but nobody followed up on it.

Too controversial, plus the timing of his death is ..interesting.

“During prolonged intercourse with their circumcised partners, women were less likely to ‘really get into it’ and more likely to ‘want to get it over with’ (23.32, 11.24-48.39). On the other hand, with their unaltered partners, the reverse was true, they were less likely to ‘want to get it over with’ and considerably more likely to ‘really get into it.'”

“When the women were divided into those with more or fewer than 10 lifetime partners, those with >10 were more likely to have orgasms with their circumcised partners than those with fewer partners, but still less frequent orgasms than they had with their unaltered partners. Women who preferred a circumcised partner overall were more likely to have had <10 partners (3.52, 0.92-13.50).”

i.e. Don’t trust the sluts.

“The women who preferred circumcised partners (as elicited in one of three questions, n=20) were more likely to have had their first orgasm with a circumcised partner (8.38, 2.88-24.35) than those who preferred unaltered partners. Although these women preferred circumcised partners, they still found unaltered partners to evoke more vaginal fluid production, a lower vaginal discomfort rating and fewer complaints (Sets 1 and 2, Table 3) during intercourse than their circumcised partners. In women who preferred circumcised men, there was no difference in their comparison of circumcised and unaltered men other than overall rating and a higher rate of premature ejaculation in their unaltered partners (4.63, 2.36-9.07)

That isn’t premature, that’s normal. The circumcised were demonstrating a sign of impotence.

These women had fewered unaltered partners (2.47 vs. 3.78, Z=-1.68, P=0.045), which suggests that their limited exposure to unaltered men may have been a consequence of ‘premature ejaculation’.

Note the quote marks, they’re actually the normal ones.

The inability to detect a difference in orgasm frequency, coital duration, coital complaints or satisfaction, and ‘yet to formulate a preference’, suggests that factors of conformity may be influential.

It’s… clear-cut.

“When women were grouped based on the preputial status of their most recent partner, women with unaltered partners had a higher rate of orgasms with them, at a mean (SEM) of 70 (31%)vs 56 (40%) (Z=2.28, P=0.01). They were more likely to rate circumcised partners lower (Z=-2.61, P0.0047) and unaltered partners higher (Z=2.83, P=0.002). When only women whose most recent partner was circumcised, the results were consistent with the results from the entire study population.”

Burn.

When women who preferred vaginal orgasm were compared with those preferring orally or manually induced orgasm, the former rated unaltered men higher (Z=2.12, P=0.016), had more positive post-coital feelings (Set 3; Z=2.68, P=0.003) with their unaltered partners, and rated these men higher overall (Z=2.12, P=0.016).”

It cannot be more obvious.

Biology lesson:

“When the penile shaft is withdrawn slightly from the vagina, the foreskin bunches up behind the corona in a manner that allows the tip of the foreskin which contains the highest density of fine-touch neuroreceptors in the penis [1] to contact the corona of the glans which has the highest concentration of fine-touch receptors on the glans [18]. This intense stimulation discourages the penile shaft from further withdrawal, explaining the short thrusting style that women noted in their unaltered partners.

The one they always preferred?

This juxtapostion of sensitive neuroreceptors is also seen in the clitoris and clitoral hood of the Rhesus monkey [19] and in the human clitoris [18].”

Men need to be told this nerve information in biology class.
Male is comparable to female circumcision. It causes blatant nerve damage.
It destroys the experience of sexual intensity and intimacy.

It removes neuroreceptors!

“Several respondents commented that the foreskin also makes a difference in foreplay and fellatio. Although this was not directly measured, some respondents commented that unaltered men appeared to enjoy coitus more than their circumcised couterparts. The lower rates of fellatio, masturbation and anal sex among unaltered men [5] suggests that unaltered men may find coitus more satisfying [20].

I try to warn you.

Clearly, the anatomically complete penis offers a more rewarding experience for the female partner during coitus. While this study has some obvious methodological flaws, all the differences cannot be attributed to them. It is important that these findings be confirmed by a prospective study of a randomly selected population of women with experience with both types of men. It would be useful to examine the role of the foreskin in other sexual activities. Because these findings are of interest, the negative effect of circumcision on the sexual enjoyment of the female partner needs to be part of any discussions providing ‘informed consent’ before circumcision.”

And male enjoyment too. I think they’d wanna know.

20 is Van Howe http://www.cirp.org/library/general/laumann/letters.html#vanhowe

Of course adult feelings are not so easily dismissed. A preliminary survey of 75 men suggests that the more men know about the important functions of the prepuce, the more likely they are to be dissatisfied about being circumcised.3 Now that an increasing number of men are learning about the prepuce and expressing this dis-satisfaction, clinicians must acknowledge that is impossible to predict how a male infant will feel when he is older. A prudent course of action would be to allow men to make the decision about circumcision themselves when they reach adulthood.”

Men need informed consent, it’s THEIR penis.

More biology!

A hypothesis is needed to explain the findings of Laumann et al in the light of the known neurohistology. We suggest that a penis with foreskin and its full complement of neuroreceptors may make heterosexual coitus more satisfying, thereby making the man less likely to seek out alternate forms of stimulation. The only portion of the prepuce remaining in a man with surgically altered genitals is the remnant between the corona and the scar. While there are some fine-touch receptors in this tissue, the most sensitive portion of the prepuce at the tip is removed in even the most moderate circumcision.2 The remaining prepuce and any remaining portions of the frenulum can be preferentially stimulated by masturbation and oral sex, whereas the sensation of deep pressure dominates during hetero- sexual coitus. The imbalance from not having the input from the missing fine touch receptors may make the experience less satisfying, causing a man with an incomplete penis to supplement his sexual experiences with other forms of stimulation.

Explaining the risky sexual behaviors e.g. objecting to condom use. It doesn’t numb them, they’re already numb.

The only reason they want more oral, anal etc is to stimulate the remaining, tiny area of foreskin!

I wonder if the number of bisexual and gay men is lower in prevalence in intact men.

To date the effect of circumcision on sexual function has not been carefully studied. In rodent studies, removal of the prepuce resulted in marked changes in the mechanics of copulation,4 the hormonal response of the female partner, and aggressive behavior. In humans, behavioral alterations have been demonstrated in the pain response of circumcised infants.5 Unfortunately, studies of men circumcised as adults have had too few subjects or differences in sensation were not well documented. Testing penile vibratory thresholds has demonstrated that men experience increasing thresholds with age,

the penis does not age well

while those with premature ejaculation have low thresholds regardless of age.5 Application of this technique could be used to demonstrate if a sensation differences exists between circumcised and uncircumcised men.”

Other studies do now.

http://cirp.org/library/sex_function/fink1/

“Our findings may help urologists better counsel men undergoing circumcision as adults. Prospective studies are needed to better understand the relationship between circumcision and sexual function.”

Men deserve to know, informed consent.
This is based on a medically necessary population, not a NORMAL one – note.

Adult circumcision appears to result in worsened erectile function (p = 0.01), decreased penile sensitivity (p = 0.08), no change in sexual activity (p = 0.22) and improved satisfaction (p = 0.04). Of the men 50% reported benefits and 38% reported harm. Overall, 62% of men were satisfied with having been circumcised.”

They note in bold: “There was no clear sample of normal, healthy, intact men for comparison. Even so, thirty-eight percent of the circumcised men were dissatisfied with the results of their circumcision.”

It isn’t surprising you couldn’t find healthy adult men willing to chop off the most sensitive part of their manhood.

Hard sell.

Hughes: http://www.cirp.org/library/general/hughes/

“John G. Swadey, MD (New England Journal of Medicine, 1987) states that circumcised men show a “somewhat higher incidence of genital warts, nongonococcal urethritis and scabies.“”

Risky behaviour.

“Our survey suggests that there is a difference between the sexuality of the circumcised and uncircumcised male during his lifetime. It also suggests that the uncircumcised male has a more favorable sexual compatibility in his marriage.

During my experiences in medicine and surgery, occasionally there arose the question of circumcision and sexual compatibility. It seemed to me that the uncircumcised male had less of a problem in sexual compatibility.”

Sadly, he died before we could see his data.
Someone else, do the study!

Do circumcised men around the world also have higher divorce rates?
Easy to observe.

The UK, latest from newspaper article:

“The latest divorce figures, released last year, revealed the divorce rate for heterosexual couples in the UK was at a 45-year low, with 101,669 divorces of heterosexual couples in England and Wales.”
And we have low circumcision rates, mostly religious.

https://circumcision.org/how-male-circumcision-harms-women/

“With circumcised partners, women were less likely to have one or multiple vaginal orgasms, and their circumcised partners were more likely to have a premature ejaculation.”

Explains why American men complain their wife doesn’t enjoy sex. It’s them.

ED is the modern PC term for impotence. 

https://www.livescience.com/15750-erectile-dysfunction-sexual-problems.html

Half of all American men 40-70 have trouble finishing (delayed orgasm), isn’t that oddly close to the circumcision rate?

http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/
That is hardly getting better with age.
2011 study year-55 study age median = 1956
80% circumcised, of those born in hospitals.

Some good news.

“The new statistics showed a steep drop in the number of circumcisions performed in the United States.
The CDC data, reported by the New York Times, showed that the incidence of circumcision declined from 56 percent in 2006 to 32.5 percent in 2009. According to these statistics, non-circumcision or genital integrity has become the normal condition among newborn boys in the United States.”

Current circumcision rate 2006: 56.1%

Good news for men.

Other news from 2018

https://www.circinfo.org/news_2018.html

“A Federal judge in Detroit, Michigan, has ruled that the Federal United States law criminalising any form of female genital mutilation (FGM) is unconstitutional.”
“Critics have since pointed out that these observations are equally applicable to circumcision of boys and that there were also grounds for finding the FGM law unconstitutional in the basis that it denied equal treatment to males.”

They’re pushing FGM because male is considered legal.
Two wrongs do make a right?

It is thus perfectly obvious that circumcision does not significantly reduce a male’s risk of contracting an STD, and that organisations (such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and Centers for Disease Control itself) who identify prevention of STDs as the most important “benefit” of circumcision, do not know what they are talking about. There is in fact evidence going back to the 1850s that circumcised men are at greater risk of gonorrhoea and other urethral infections than men with normal genitalia. It may be that the foreskin acts as a barrier to the entry of certain pathogens.”

I wonder if circumcised men are likelier to carry super gonorrhea.

Seems like it.

A study of a rural community in South Africa has found that circumcised men generally are more likely to be infected with HIV, and that males circumcised in hospitals are 20 per cent more likely to be HIV positive than those left intact. Where 24 per cent of uncut men were found to be HIV positive, the incidence of HIV among males circumcised in hospitals was 31 per cent. These findings have come as a shock to the South African Medical authorities who have been following the orders of US and WHO health officials and “rolling out” the provision of mass circumcision as a response to the nation’s AIDS crisis. As the authors of the report comment ruefully, it seems that when it comes to the spread of HIV, anatomy is less important than behaviour – exactly what critics of the circumcision programs have been arguing for years. In fact, many other studies have found that in the real world there are many regions in Africa where there is little or no difference in the incidence of HIV infection between cut and uncut men, and that in quite a few places cut men are more likely to be HIV positive.”
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201445

Don’t trust the WHO, they lie to you.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326040454_Factors_associated_with_early_deaths_following_neonatal_male_circumcision_in_the_United_States_2001-2010
A new study finds that in the United States approximately 20 neonatal deaths per year can be attributed to circumcision. Neonatal here means within the first 30 days of life, so the study does not count deaths that occur after the first month. This might seem a small figure in relation to the overall number of births, but what death rate would be acceptable for a medically unnecessary operation performed without the consent of the subject? The abstract of the paper follows.

Ooh, salty.

We sought to quantify early deaths following neonatal circumcision (same hospital admission) and to identify factors associated with such mortality. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent circumcision while hospitalized during the first 30 days of life from 2001-2010 using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Over 10 years, 200 early deaths were recorded among 9,899,110 subjects (1 death per 49,166 circumcisions). Note: this figure should not be interpreted as causal but correlational: it may include both under-counting and over-counting of deaths attributable to circumcision. Compared to survivors, subjects who died following newborn circumcision were more likely to have associated co-morbid conditions, such as cardiac disease (OR: 697.8 [378.5-1286.6] p<0.001), coagulopathy (OR: 159.6 [95.6-266.2] p<0.001), fluid and electrolyte disorders (OR: 68.2 [49.1-94.6] p<0.001), or pulmonary circulatory disorders (OR: 169.5 [69.7-412.5] p<0.001). Recognizing these factors could inform clinical and parental decisions, potentially reducing associated risks.”

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2985419
“Permanent physical change” is also called disfigurement, in English.

“A recent judgment by a lower court in Germany brought the problem of ritual male circumcision to the consciousness of the wider public and legal academia. This essay weighs in on this emerging discussion and argues that ritual male circumcision is not covered by parental authority because it violates the human rights of the boy on whom it is imposed. It first considers and dismisses the best interest test of parental authority which, by focusing on the well-being of the child as opposed to his (future) autonomy, fails to take the boy’s human rights sufficiently into account. Instead, the essay proposes what it terms the autonomy conception of parental authority, according to which parental authority must be exercised such as to ensure that the child will become an autonomous adult. While parents may raise their child in line with their ethical, including religious, convictions, respect for his autonomy requires that this be done in a way that allows the child to later distance himself from these values; this implies, among other things, that irreversible physical changes are impermissible. This conclusion holds even if it could be assumed that the child would later come to endorse his circumcision: a proper understanding of autonomy implies that the religious sacrifice of a body part can only be authorised by the person whose body it is. Thus, ritual male circumcision is outside the scope of parental authority because it usurps the child’s right and responsibility to become the author of his own life.”

http://www.cuaj.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/5033/3371
“The statement is at pains to point out that the evidence as to the benefits and risks of circumcision is contradictory and inconclusive, and that much of it is of poor quality, especially studies claiming to show that circumcision has little impact on sexual sensation and function. The final conclusion is that while circumcision does offer some advantages, they are small, can be achieved by other, non-surgical means, and are outweighed by the risks and harms. This being the case, routine circumcision is not justified as a health measure and cannot be recommended.”

Very good news, their bold title:

… circumcision advocates have nowhere left to hide

The terms of the debate about non-therapeutic circumcision of minors have changed. The issue is no longer whether the so-called “benefits” outweigh the risks, or even whether the benefits outweigh the risks and harms. (As for the troglodytes who still mutter about pros and cons …) Coming on top of the judgement of a German court that circumcision is bodily harm and that it violates the child’s right to religious freedom, a leading legal philosopher now argues that boys have an inherent right not to be circumcised without medical need. In a paper forthcoming in Health Matrix, Stephen Munzer argues that current norms of autonomy and bodily integrity give male minors “a moral, anticipatory right-in-trust not to be circumcised without a medical indication.” Even more remarkably, it is now conceded by a prominent defender of religious/cultural circumcision that the practise is harmful and does violate the rights of the child. Writing in the Journal of Applied Philosophy, Joseph Mazor acknowledges the physical and moral harms of circumcision and admits that the child has “a right of moderate strength” not to be subjected to “presumably harmful circumcision”.

Both Munzer and Mazor go on to argue that, given the importance of circumcision within the cultural/religious communities that follow this tradition, the practice should not be criminalised.

You admit it’s abuse, fuck you.

Religious rape isn’t legal either.

This is a fair point, far less important than the vital concession that circumcision is harmful and does violate the rights of the child to bodily integrity, personal autonomy and an open future. The argument about these points is over; the debate now is whether non-therapeutic circumcision is or should be illegal.

You’d have to re-write all abuse laws, NO.

No means NO.

Stephen Munzer. Examining nontherapeutic circumcision. Health Matrix 28 (1) 2018: 1-77 (in press). Full text at SSRN.

Joseph Mazor. On the Strength of Children’s Right to Bodily Integrity: The Case of Circumcision. Journal of Applied Philosophy, on-line first, 24 May 2018.

Mazor https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/japp.12275
Munzer https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3180209

http://www.thewholenetwork.org/twn-news/does-circumcision-cause-erectile-dysfunction

The United States, a nation with 4.5% of the world’s population, consumes 47% of the world’s Viagra (Pfizer’s own figures). Turns out the same nation has been circumcising the majority of its male infants for generations.”
“A new study in the International Journal of Men’s Health shows that circumcised men have a 4.5 times greater chance of suffering from erectile dysfunction (ED) than intact men, revealing what appears to be a significant acquisition vector. Other studies have previously observed that circumcision’s damage results in worsened erectile functioning, inability to maintain an erection, and reducing the glans sensitivity, including an overall penis sensitivity reduction by 75%. A recent study discovered that premature ejaculation is five times more likely when adjusted for erectile dysfunction and circumcision.”

Full links in that article. It’s sickening how people try to justify this.

If the kid won’t get it done at 18, why does the parent want it done against their will?
That’s assault.

75% reduction study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847
5x ED more likely: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02280.x/abstract

It also relates to alexithymia, a psychiatric condition
https://web.archive.org/web/20130831161657/http://www.mensstudies.com/content/2772r13175400432/?p=a7068101fbdd48819f10dd04dc1e19fb&pi=4

 Alexithymia in this population of adult men is statistically significant for having experienced circumcision trauma and for erectile dysfunction drug use.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/jul/24/male-circumcision-the-issue-that-ended-my-marriage
God doesn’t make mistakes, circumcision is offensive to God, if anything.

An idiot theorized in “Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence”, that societal violence is caused by lack of pleasure, a theory so ridiculous if one only looks at Africa – highly sexual, high rape rate, high murder rate. It’s actually IQ. Sexual and violence behaviors differ according to standard IQ deviations, it is well known most violent criminals are less intelligent, yet highly promiscuous.

However, nations of high circumcision uptake do report more violence.

It’s also a proxy for low IQ, the practice of circumcision in countries predicts lower national IQ. I wonder if the circumcised are more likely to be low IQ, a correlation?

The UK used to circumcise more often until the NHS came along and didn’t allow doctors to charge for it, suddenly it ceased to be medically necessary!
The foreskin is the primary erogenous organ in men, the area in adults is 3×5 inches, with 50,000 nerve endings.
Minor circumcision is a human rights crisis.

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/august312012/circumcision-violence-rm.php

“In Norway, the only country that records the circumcision status of rapists, 2% of the population are circumcised and commit more than 80% of their rapes. And, since 1991 almost all wars involved one circumcised country with some conflicts between both factions being circumcised. This includes all USA conflicts since Vietnam.

Wouldn’t it be hilarious if religion had nothing to do with war, just circumcision?

No other statistical records are kept regarding the individual and social percentile circumcision status of serial killers or rapists. Yet, over 50% of rapes in Sweden are perpetrated by the minority of men who belong to circumcising cultures. Circumcision status may factor highly in the USA’s highest of all other country’s incarceration rate to population.”

“Original FBI’s Criminal Profilers who led the Behavioral Science Unit in Quantico, Virginia know circumcision is a factor in some serial killings and partly responsible for America’s generalized asocial violence.”
“It has been inferred Robert Ressler, in an off the record comment when interviewed by Mothering Magazine’s web-editor, related the fact that the FBI realizes circumcision is a factor in violence. He explained they do not mention this because they would be considered raving lunatics and lose their jobs. Robert Ressler coined the term Serial Killer.”

Same: http://www.academia.edu/7151881/Circumcision_Serial_Killing_and_Criminal_Behavior_in_American_Medical_Violence

“Serial killing as we know it today began in the last two decades of the 19th Century. – Robert Ressler, FBI.[2]”

Same time circumcision picked up. Complete coincidence.

Related: https://www.thelocal.no/20131112/norway-to-legislate-on-circumcision

I wonder why….

What about studies on white men?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21672947

Circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men and with a range of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, dyspareunia and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfilment. Thorough examination of these matters in areas where male circumcision is more common is warranted.”

Crime and IQ

This is oddly missing but said
“In arguing that IQ is a significant cause of crime, the researchers cite studies to indicate that criminal populations generally have an average IQ of about 92, 8 points below the mean.”
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=183065

1929 paper:

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2123&context=jclc

“Illustrative to a still further degree of the point made above concerning the ineffectualness of the present penal system are the results of a comparison of the percentages for recidivism with those for long-term sentences.

Losing the death penalty is a mistake.

As may be seen above, although 56.7% of offenders are recidivistic or habitual offenders and hence incorrigible in the main, as has been mentioned above, only 16% to 23% are serving long term sentences. This fact, then, signifies that the greater per cent of recidivists are serving terms of more or less brevity. That little benefit to society may be expected from such terms is not to be doubted since sentences of three to five and even ten years are without effect upon recidivistic offenders and possess value only by virtue of segregating the offender for a while and thus sparing society a greater or less number of crimes.3‘ At best, such sentences, in so far as recidivists are concerned, constitute nothing more than a flimsy makeshift in dealing with the problem of repeated criminality. In-deed, the statistics of crime as well as the teachings of history confirm the absolute inadequacy of the present system of punishments against crime.12

Especially is this so in regard to the feebleminded recidivists who are accountable for a full 25% of the entire problem of repeated criminality and whose deficiency of intelligence effectually and completely militates against any possibility of regeneration or correction. That penalties are established by statutes and are based wholly upon a consideration of the material act constitutes an actual social injury since society thereby derives a false sense of having adequately and securely provided against a danger.

Because men are NOT made equal, biologically.
They should study criminal’s children to be sure.

In reality, it has not, for the harm is merely postponed. Commitment to prison should be determined not by the nature of the offense but by the nature of the offender, 33 and with a view toward the causes of the delinquency, the effect upon the individual, and the moral prognosis.3 4 Only in this way may adequate social provision be made for the warped, deficient, defective, and unregenerate enemies of the social order.”

Prison doesn’t work.

We know now from MRI psychopaths and other types literally gain pleasure from other’s pain and experience no/less fear and a neutral response to appeals for mercy. Something biologically less humane requires other treatment.

page 14 on the pdf looks at crime type

Married men are less likely to be criminals (selected by women)?

“Accordingly, the assumption of the stabilizing influence of marriage appears well substantiated. Or, it may be that the fundamental constitution of the delinquent is of such a nature that he is frequently antagonistic toward the assumption and maintenance of marital duties and thus fails even to experience contact with any presumably stabilizing influences of marriage. At any rate, marriage, together with any of the beneficial influences it may exert upon the individual, is of markedly less frequent occurrence among criminal classes than among the general population”

R-types.

“That slightly over 50% of criminals, including even the low grade morons, are married with the consequently increased possibilities of the propagation of the species is somewhat disheartening.”

Er, why isn’t there a basic legal requirement of an IQ test to marry?
Low IQ people cannot consent. To prove they can consent.

“This equality of incidence is strongly suggestive that the criminally inclined nature, regardless of intellectual endowment, is fundamentally lacking in those personal and social requisites essential for the assumption and maintenance of marital duties. Or it may be that this marked prevalence of divorce indicates the failure of the stabilizing influences of marriage and home life because of the inherent instability of the criminal classes preventing the reception of any such benefits.”

Part of the reason bachelors are looked down on.

And divorced men.

“As it is, the percentages of actually disrupted marriages range from 29 for the low grade morons to 36% for the group of subnormal intelligence and 32% for the normal intelligence group. And when it is considered that 36% to 58% of the groups respectively are still within the age group of 21 to 30 years, it is reasonable to suppose that a contrasting of these percentages with figures for a like proportion of the geners1 population would render the above figures comparably much higher.
However, from a eugenical point of view as regards the propagation of the species, this high percentage of disrupted marriages is a most hopeful sign.”

Let idiots get divorced!

“It will be noted at once that the greater number of children and the greater number of families with children occur in the groups of deficient intelligence, particularly so in the low grade moron group. This is quite in accord with the findings of other investigators and the generally conceived opinion of the greater fecundity of the classes of deficient intelligence.61”

R-selection, lower quality per child.

And another investigation of the Harvard Graduates of 1894 revealed 20% without children, 13.1% with one child, 18.1% with two children, 22.5% with three children, and 25.5% with four or more children. 65
This makes an average of 2.44 children for each individual, a figure which gives the college bred man of Harvard the lead over even the low grade moron delinquent. Further, it has been estimated by Kehrer that the proportion of childless marriages for civilized countries ranges between 10% and 15%,”; which means that the ordinary middle-class citizen, taking the criminalistic and the college-bred classes as the extremes, bears the burden of restocking the population.”

I bet that isn’t true now, they think they’re too good to have kids!

And that explains dwindling IQ compared to the Victorians, the middle class were less intelligent and the upper class dropped the ball. The middle class only seem intelligent due to their education.

The above table shows clearly that the foreign-born stock does produce more than its due quota of our specified delinquents, especially so in regard to those of deficient intelligence. This is most marked regarding the low grade morons, where the foreign-born stock produces more than 235% of its due quota of offenders as determined by population ratios while the proportions for the other three groups ranges from 125% for the group of normal intelligence to 144% for the high grade feebleminded delinquents.

This finding is substantiated by the findings of the Immigration Commission of 1910.98 and also by Laughlin in his report to the Congressional Committee. 99 And similar findings have been reported by the Massachusetts Department of Corrections.'” In addition, Laughlin also found that the second generation of foreign stock had an increased crime incidence over and above that of foreign stock in general, probably because that generation represents the transitional stage between the discarding of the customs of the old country and the adopting of those of the new. Undoubtedly this fact accounts for a proportion of the increased percentages in the above table. Obviously then, there is an undeniable danger in the admission of unselected foreign stock, both from the aspect of their own undesirability and from the aspect of their reproduction of their kind. Hence, there is  an unquestionable and appealing need of a closer and more intelligent supervision of immigration, with more ample provision for the means of so doing.”

You lost the war.

You know you did.

A second consideration evident from the above table is the increase among offenders of individuals having one parent foreign-born and the other native-born. The percentages given above nearly double that for the general population. Various investigations have shown that there is a decided tendency for the home of mixed parental nativity to produce delinquents.”°

No, it’s because they’re mixed race.

That went off on a tangent but a potentially relevant one.

Hot v. Beautiful

Nope, hot does not exist.

That’s Hollywood and porn brainwashing.

It didn’t exist fifty years ago.

There was sultry or alluring but it was a type of beauty, as it should be.

e.g.

That’s natural (whereas mainstream ‘hotness’ is normally plastic surgery, which a biologist has no valid comment on as a fashion trend).

Natural always wins. It’s the genetic billboard.

Nowadays, men are programmed to find the cheap sexual signals of desperation attractive.

Cheap is the correct term because there’s little to no investment required.

It’s obvious with celebrities.

Jessica Alba. Note the manjaw. Hot?

Markle. Again with the manjaw. Hot?

What are you being told to select by media?

The Jewess Johansson, post-nosejob. Hot?

The Jewess Jolie, same. Again, post-surgery and owns a manjaw. Hot?

There’s a reason he didn’t name names or dare show photos.
Hollywood only hires the whores, with manjaws. There’s no control group.

Another chameleon face to illustrate the point:

Which one of those four pictures is hot and how many are beautiful?

I’d say one “hot” and zero beautiful. The hotness is confounded by make-up and hair dye, which he didn’t mention!

Nor did he mention male beauty, which obviously does exist.

I see it all the time.

e.g. Jakob Hybholt. This is a real man. He exists.

Men in studies have different risks of abusing their spouse (aggression) based on their facial features. Again, something you’d think he’d mention?

At least “handsome” (a word that used to be applied to women too) versus “sexy”.

Adonis versus Hercules. Any man who’d get insecure about this is deluded.

We don’t get insecure about Athena and Aphrodite. Typical model versus lingerie model.

But they’re both forms of beauty. Neither is better and it really is a spectrum because both must be fundamentally fit (Darwin) and hence, beautiful. So two sisters, one can be hotter (the “hot one”) and the other more pretty, hot features age badly after ten years as fertile markers and pretty remains constant as a purer genetic quality, easier to pass on to male and female offspring too. Hotness has no history as a concept, as he alludes it’s based in 60s advertising. Surgeons can fake “hot” but never beautiful because it’s genetic and individual. The 60s allowed people to display “hot” but again, that’s a fashion trend, our bodies didn’t magically change.

This evobio guy makes a basic error – you can”t assume modern male preferences are historic.

In fact, basic pop culture evidence from the past century suggests otherwise.

“Hotness” is easier to market.

You can buy hotness, beauty is genetic.

He blatantly lies “the majority of human cultures have been polygynous” is a lie.
A Cultural Marxist myth. Look at a family tree, we have them stretching back a thousand years.

He could possibly get away with polygamous if you included sex slavery (rape).

That is bad evolutionary biology. Sexual selection must be a choice to be valid.

Most tribal humans were monogamous and this is why the sexes are born approximately at 50/50, we keep digging up archaeological evidence of couples. Also, savages are not models of civilization, they keep trying that on.

He could mean serial monogamy if the spouse dies (divorce or breaking up doesn’t actually count as this) but he doesn’t.

Most men are not r-selected, he lies again. If so, all men would visit brothels instead of the omega minority. Parental investment outcomes show this strawman single mother scenario leads to death and dysfunction.

Mathematically, he is lying there. Monogamy is better for male DNA.

No sexual selection without natural selection, many feeble, weak r-selected males died off and now we have “crime” in society because they’re still bluntly, stupidly trying to compete without the reward in a society structure. Wars were invented to cull them but we had to mess that up too with draft qualifications and nukes. Without the dregs of men (see: where have all the good men gone?) removed, they are free to multiply with the dregs of women, producing more dregs than ever before. Previously, those women would die alone with no suitable man.

It’s like pulling up weeds.

Idiocracy could only happen when war ceased being common. Who dies first in battle?

Reproduction is the reward (not sex), for survival.

He hints at the rapist strategy of extreme r-types but dances around it. If men would find sex “difficult to resist” and could overpower a woman, surely that suggests…. that her choice didn’t factor into it?

That’s why he refuses to discuss rapists, which are not a viable strategy actually*. He’s pretending there’s a selection without choice, I’m sick of these slutty intellectually dishonest assholes acting like they’re the model of humanity.

*Women can easily not carry to term by starvation, various herbs in every location, punching themselves in the stomach. Why do you think traumatized women stop feeling hungry? Anti-rape baby instinct!
Witches provided abortifacient herbs.

Men aren’t “wired” any way, that’s sexist and poor science (it’s a limited metaphor not used in this field) and it’s the naturalistic fallacy. Most men are faithful and generally good. They have a natural disgust for easy women.

Broadcasting hotness – is not a thing. That’s sexual desperation, a personal choice, not fertility. Plenty of American men willingly prefer infertile women and women who look like it (swollen breasts as if already pregnant, narrow hips, muscled suggesting high testosterone and manjaw, short legs like a child). Those are typical r-types, both trying to avoid pregnancy.

So as far as an evolutionary biologist is concerned, that sexual interaction doesn’t exist because it’s a dead end.

It’s like counting homosexual sex – that doesn’t lead to babies either!

There’s no life created, it’s nothing to them. Except maybe a disease risk, funny he doesn’t mention STD-caused infertility….

You cannot switch reproductive strategy, it’s neurobiological, ask Anonymous Conservative. Your amygdala volume cannot magically change on a dime.

This guy keeps lying.

You cannot have it all, spoiled rabbits.

There’s a reason manwhores, when they marry, tend to get divorced (or cheat). It’s them.

Neither can you turn a ho into a housewife, same reason. It’s them.

This is why the evolutionary types are distrusted in academia, you must prove you’re not one of these guys that is totally excusing half the promiscuity that is completely novel to society now (with fake history) while claiming from the other side of their face that the other half is impossible (women aren’t sluts – but men are sleeping with them somehow) because of babies that don’t exist. (Pre-marital birth rate says different).

Other, lesser mammals were polygamous, not humans!

He doesn’t tell you this.

It would be akin to saying humans can self-clone because you used to be an amoeba, it’s bad science.

Read The Mating Mind for good evobio.

The concept of “hotness” (sciencey) isn’t mentioned.

This guy might as well be an astrologer. This is cold reading a modern culture and trying to re-write history.

He also misrepresents Freud. Madonna/Whore is a specific complex and has nothing to do with that.

NOTHING.

Madonna is marrying a woman for reputation then cheating on her with whores because the male is too immature to view the mother of his children as a viable sexual and romantic outlet, abandoning her emotionally and sexually in fear. The complex is the split (between socially attractive women to other men and baby-making women at home) and it’s as bad for you as a split personality. That’s it. That’s the complex. It describes a common form of impotence.

They can’t get it up for the wife they chose, assuming childbirth gave her cooties.

Nothing to do with evolution. This guy is full of shit.

Simple question: what is “hotness” without porn?

Do you even know? (no) That’s the purpose of sexual programming. The mind control nobody talks about. Insulting the father figure and telling him housewife types are boring in bed. Old as the musical Grease.

comment

I’m surprised by this conversation between Joe and Bret. I’ve asked multiple men before if they could see someone as only aesthetically pleasing but not sexually pleasing, and they never could (including my boyfriend.)

True, they were lying, assuming the other could.

Women, on the other hand, always could.

Women are more attuned to appearance in general.
Men don’t notice cuticles.

I can find a man or woman aesthetically pleasing, without seeing them as sexually pleasing. Seems like most men either find them sexually pleasing or they don’t.

If they’re honest.

An erection is a solid binary.

If they don’t find them sexually pleasing, they don’t find them aesthetically pleasing either. ‘I would fuck it or I would not fuck it.’ Lots of guys can’t seem to appreciate attractiveness without it being of a sexual nature. This conversation seems like it’s on similar lines as the question I’ve asked people before and yet both men were able to grasp it. Good on them

Men who can are called gay.

That’s why I laughed when they tried to compete by claiming they could do it.

Sluts are shamed because the entire tribe pays for it. Male or female.

Men have to pay with resources taken from the family or possibly a war in revenge for stealing a woman.

Then there’s disease risk, a major source of the shame is avoiding death and defects.

Many STDs are just passed by social contact and as a touchy species, viruses spread easily with hugs, kisses, grooming common to mammals.

comment

I personally think the people who use the word hot to describe women are immature and shallow. I have noticed that the more people use words like that to describe people the worse off our future will be.

It’s so cringe-worthingly American, isn’t it? They sound like rappers.

Not just women, if all a man can be is hot, he must be a real loser.

It’s the one thing you can call a vapid moron. “At least he’s hot”.

Women use it this way primarily, it’s our new ‘nice’. It’s a backhanded compliment, like telling someone they could be a stripper. (Tatum)

comment

These people are so condescending and boring

They think they’re important. E-celebs, aw. Adding nothing to history.

He totally ignored the data on how much women value looks.

comment

Are these two fools trying to pass off this non-think as if it were based on biological fact? Women have a much greater capacity for sex than men.

Shh, don’t tell them! (They won’t listen anyway, they actually think sex is a male thing).

Imagine if men had multiple orgasms and no refractory period, chaos!

It’s like how they say women get triggered easily but if you insult Rick & Morty…

You don’t see many unstable women threatening to rape men online but okay, women are the mad ones. Okay.

Link between mental health and ….bad health

The types of “health” are related, really? Shook over here.

If only there were a physical connection we could see like some kind of fleshy vehicle of testable units, a body of some description. No, we’re floating blobs of consciousness in a cloud of feels, aren’t we?

Mutation (genetic) load is true, at least somewhat but who dares to directly study it? Instead we are left with related variables.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3048500/

The lifespan of people with severe mental illness (SMI) is shorter compared to the general population. This excess mortality is mainly due to physical illness. We report prevalence rates of different physical illnesses as well as important individual lifestyle choices, side effects of psychotropic treatment and disparities in health care access, utilization and provision that contribute to these poor physical health outcomes.”

Detailed.

“Nutritional and metabolic diseases, cardiovascular diseases, viral diseases, respiratory tract diseases, musculoskeletal diseases, sexual dysfunction, pregnancy complications, stomatognathic diseases, and possibly obesity-related cancers are, compared to the general population, more prevalent among people with SMI.”

People with mental problems can’t take care of themselves, really?

Not to be harsh but, is this news?
I searched, not one mention of fitness.

Ability to reproduce (here it would be impotence for age in the male) and carry (childbearing without issue for age, the female) is a significant component of it (organism fitness, for the nerds at home).

https://www.age-of-the-sage.org/quotations/darwin_survival_fittest.html

“struggle for existence”, he repeated in description
the vindicated theme for this post

“Besides modifiable lifestyle factors and side effects of psychotropic medications, access to and quality of health care remains to be improved for individuals with SMI.”

#sigh

Enough of that for now.

And they’re exponentially more expensive.
https://www.healthcatalyst.com/understanding-risk-stratification-comorbidities/
I dislike this fact but…. the information is out there. We can’t help by lying.

There isn’t just one thing causing the “mental” disease and another separate thing causing the “bodily” disease.
It’s all genetic! At least, moderately genetic.
And remember I said exponential risk of suck?

“Charlson Comorbidity Measure: The Charlson model predicts the risk of one-year mortality for patients with a range of comorbid illnesses. Based on administrative data, the model uses the presence/absence of 17 comorbidity definitions and assigns patients a score from one to 20, with 20 being the more complex patients with multiple comorbid conditions. It is effective for predicting future poor outcomes. This method is explained in further detail below”

You cannot fight math. You will lose.

#struggle4life

poor outcomes = death, more or less

This is tough to read like the IQ link. I wouldn’t blame you skipping all this. You cannot unsee it.

“One thing all of these models have in common is that they are based, in some degree, on comorbidity. Understanding comorbid conditions is a critical aspect of population health management because comorbidities are known to significantly increase risk and cost. In fact, a study from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports that care for patients with comorbid chronic conditions costs up to seven times as much as care for those with only one chronic condition.”

Twice the condition can be seven times the cost. I’ll leave you to think about that.
Is this systemic injustice?
No!
The body is complex, various conditions interact with one another. Not killing the patient by accident due to Condition B to treat Condition A needs time and more research and more money!

https://www.rwjf.org/en/library/research/2011/02/mental-disorders-and-medical-comorbidity.html

“Expenditures and gaps in health care delivery are not evenly distributed across the population, however. To improve health care quality and reduce costs, policy-makers must focus on particular subgroups who are at greatest risk. Persons with mental health and medical comorbidities represent just such a population.”
“The pathways causing comorbidity of mental and medical disorders are complex and bidirectional.

What I said.

Medical disorders may lead to mental disorders, mental conditions may place a person at risk for certain medical disorders, and mental and medical disorders may share risk factors

Yup.

It’s all healthcare, people!

ALL OF IT.

For instance, low IQ can also ’cause’ someone to more likely get heart disease.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heart-intelligence/low-intelligence-among-top-heart-health-risks-study-idUSTRE61903L20100210

Here’s a clunker of a line.

“When mental and medical conditions co-occur, the combination is associated with elevated symptom burden, functional impairment, decreased length and quality of life, and increased health care costs.”

This upsets me. Just world is a fallacy.

Bear in mind the IQ/depression link in the last post:

“At the same time, major depression is a risk factor for developing chronic conditions, such as cardiovascular disease.”

If the economy is making people of a certain IQ band effectively useless, they’re going to be depressed.
Especially if “their” jobs owed by their home country are outsourced to visa people.

“Exposure to adverse childhood experiences such as trauma, abuse, and chronic stress are all associated with both mental and medical disorders, and responsible for much of the high rates of comorbidity, burden of illness, and premature death associated with chronic illness.”

It’s sad. It’s sad to read about. That is a harrowing existence.

But stress shouldn’t be lumped in with trauma and abuse.

“Many of the most common treatments for diseases may actually worsen the comorbid condition.”

You tell me where the solution is because I don’t see it.

A society of hospital patients (don’t forget aging demographics).

Over to Oz.
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/publications/publishing.nsf/Content/mental-pubs-m-mhaust2-toc~mental-pubs-m-mhaust2-hig~mental-pubs-m-mhaust2-hig-men
Mental disorders were more common among people with chronic physical conditions (28.0%) when compared to people who did not have a chronic physical condition (17.6%).
The data is usually out there. Tough to find but present.

Another!

Click to access 109-117.pdf

This article briefly reviews the associations
among alcohol dependence, major depressive disorder, and
posttraumatic stress disorder. Dysregulation of the brain’s and
body’s stress system (i.e., the limbic–hypothalamic–
pituitary–adrenal axis) might serve as a common mechanistic
link to explain some of the relationships among these
frequently comorbid conditions. Finally, the article examines
the role of sex differences in stress circuitry. These differences
may explain why men and women differ in their risk for
developing comorbid alcoholism and stress ­related disorders.”

Addictions play into it too, because of course they do.

And you can’t really blame sexism for an individual’s brain circuitry.

Let’s look at one more substance and how it alters development (i.e. when children/teens/young adults use it).

An interaction of marijuana and low IQ they won’t study so here’s something odd.

Click to access 2017-aas.pdf


“Psychotic patients who used cannabis frequently before illness onset have higher genetic predisposition to schizophrenia than those who did not”
“Our study supports an association between high SZ-PGRS and frequent cannabis use before illness onset
in psychosis continuum disorders.”

Before someone points to this classic arse-covering exercise,
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/01/twins-study-finds-no-evidence-marijuana-lowers-iq-teens
I linked because you wanted info on school shooters and pot use is a major factor.
Naturally the drug use wouldn’t change IQ because the IQ is the causative factor in having a childhood addiction problem.
However the study compares ongoing users to abstaining, not ongoing addicts to a twin who never did the stuff, there is no control group, making this link pointless so don’t try to send me it. I’ve seen it.

When the brain is developing, there is a permanent loss of functioning.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/travisbradberry/2015/02/10/new-study-shows-smoking-pot-permanently-lowers-iq/

And abnormal function. Like with any drug to any developing organ.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161005160733.htm

For the ‘self-medication’ lie:
“The use of marijuana did not correct the brain function deficits of depression, and in some regions made them worse.”

“Of additional interest, those participants who used marijuana from a young age had highly abnormal brain function in areas related to visuo-spatial processing, memory, self-referential activity and reward processing.”
No, they cannot perceive themselves accurately.

This whole drug study in children (<25) thing is like breaking someone’s kneecaps with a baseball bat and wondering why they can’t sprint. You wouldn’t give them alcohol and tobacco, why give them anything else that’s an addictive drug and think it’s fine? Why not nice and “natural” opioids next?

[ I googled this as a joke and fuck you, America.
nytimes.com/2018/05/09/magazine/children-of-the-opioid-epidemic.html
axialhealthcare.com/opioid-use-safety-children/
druggy parent trash pushing it on the kids? That’s low. ]

Why not the ankles too? Why not?

I firmly believe some of these kids have the misfortune that their parents are their worst enemy in life.

Anyway.

“The study found that early marijuana use was also associated with lower IQ scores.”

Associated. Which first? The lower IQ or child drug abuse?

“With past research suggesting a genetic role between marijuana use and depression, Dr. Osuch and her collaborators at Western University’s Robarts Research Institute also conducted genetic testing on participants. They discovered that a certain genetic variation of the gene that produces Brain Derived Neurotropic Factor (BDNF) was found in greater proportion in youth who used marijuana from an early age. BDNF is involved in brain development and memory, among other processes.

Could be a race-based finding, unclear.

“This is a novel finding that suggests this genetic variation may predispose youth to early marijuana use,” said Dr. Osuch.”

So how many of you heard about it in the MSM?

Funny how they trust none of the political news but all the scientism rationalizing living like a CA Democrat member.

It doesn’t have to be good universally for you to do it, like smoking tobacco, just admit it can be bad for society and move on. Denial of biology makes it more annoying and a full ban more likely. Shaming normal people for being “squares” is what all druggies do including alcoholics.

Why link that here?

What would drug use increase, in the organism? Mutation rate. The genetic load (whatever it was) becomes heavier. So to do that before reproducing, knowing the adverse effects, the child/ren will be worse off as well. So much for “doing no harm” and “victimless crime”. Eventually parents will be sued by their children for bad lifestyle habits that damaged their personal genome (and their children’s genome etc). It’s coming.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/10/15/lawyers_unaware_children_can_sue_parents_for_support.html

https://abcnews.go.com/US/adult-children-sue-mom-bad-parent/story?id=14407409

https://worldnewsdailyreport.com/red-haired-teen-sues-his-parents-for-2m-for-being-born-ginger/

I warned you, cannot unsee it.

Modern men’s sexual dysfunction

https://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/unveiling-madonna-whore-complex

Ah, the projection is funny to watch. The woman who slept with two men including them is a “whore” but the speaker at 20+ is as morally, spiritually pure as virgin snow. Pull the other one.

The delusions….

Having a tendency to ruin themselves on cheap types and, once burned out, wonder why they hate decent people as boring and resent good women and marriage.

Orgastic impotence (bad sexuality) intrudes too. Plenty of fuckboy types write long articles online that just telegraph to anyone with a functioning upstairs brain that they’re sexually damaged and incapable of intimacy, physical or emotional (typical of narcissists).

As it applies in the context of relationships in modern times, Madonna-whore complex generally manifests itself after marriage or the birth of a child as Dr. Suraci explains:

“A man may think of his wife as a mother and not an appropriate sex partner.

Conditioning.

He is accustomed to having intercourse with a sexy woman and his wife does not fit the bill.

Rude.

She is now the mother – Madonna. Unconsciously, she may remind him of his mother who cannot be a sexual being,” he said.

Idiotic.

You should be able to divorce for that, the husband has duties. Sexual performance and sexual fidelity, physically and emotionally.

According to Dr. Joel Block, Ph.D., a psychologist who specializes in couples and sex therapy, some of these men have a difficult time committing:

They “stray” to keep their vulnerability in check.

emotional immaturity

Cannot have emotional intimacy.

They are usually unconsciously fearful of getting too attached.  Having a woman on the side gives them a better sense of control.  With all this effort, many guys do start seeing their women, especially in long term relationships, resembling their mom”, he told Alternet.

Then they complain when she files for divorce from the biggest baby.

Ask yourself why cheating is the most common reason for divorce.

Well, it’s better than stoning, isn’t it?

While Stefan is going on about the importance of marriage, special attention needs to go on the basic common sense DON’T CHEAT.

However, Dr. Kanaris says that the disorder is exacerbated in a variety of ways, not necessarily just through affairs, but essentially manifests through the male diverting sexual energy away from the primary relationship

That’s what adultery is.

That’s it.

– such as toward pornography or erotic massage.

Still cheating, seeking physical satisfaction elsewhere. How would they feel if the other spouse did it?

Normalised in this society is not normal.

To look with lust in your heart yada yada.

Porn ruins marriages

It ruins your pair bond. Accept it and forgo use (you shouldn’t need medically and do not need psychologically) or don’t complain when you’re a bitter divorcee. A crack addiction is less harmful to marriages than a porn one because crack addicts admit they have a problem and society (including marriage counselors!) doesn’t tell them it’s good for them! A marriage is literally a pair bond enforced with sexual monogamy, there is nothing else. That is what the religious vow and the law bind. They bind the two individuals before there is a bond between them and the marriage is the bond’s maintenance.

It’s considered the man’s duty to keep a marriage good because they are the ones sexually performing. If they cannot perform and maintain the bond, if they are impotent, what marriage is there exactly? This was the Catholic Church’s position!

How does porn ruin marriage? [I hate these posts, might stop doing them.]

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4081&context=etd

It’s unnatural.

Porn user = Incompetent husband. (I’d say the same thing about an addicted wife). You should be working out any kind of sexual energy on the spouse, that’s their role. At least, masturbate in private and not directing those vital energies outside the marital bed.

The male typical skills valued in the marriage are lost.

“her male partner’s low engagement, responsiveness, and accessibility in their relationship was predicted by his pornography use”

Insecure attachment predicts divorce, it can literally simulate a damaged childhood.

https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/committed-relationship-youre-wired-for-it

The vital point is that our pair bonding penchant arises from physiological events, not mere social conditioning. It evolved from the infant-caregiver mechanism, and the two mechanisms still overlap in the brain’s reward circuitry. So, even though many Westerners appear to be caught up in a chaotic hook-up culture for the moment, it doesn’t mean that we humans are, by nature, as promiscuous as bonobo chimps or that pair-bonding inclinations are superficial cultural constructs.”

The Sexual Revolution was a lie and water is wet.

“In short, if you are hooking up with multiple partners purely for recreation you could be an outlier. Your behavior is not typical human behavior—a point that is easily overlooked by Western researchers.”

Low historical rates of cuckoldry in Western European genetic ancestry
https://www.yourbrainonporn.com/comment/3650#comment-3650

Suck it, most men and women are NOT cheats and neither were their ancestors.

Honour culture wasn’t a farce.

https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2275&context=etd

It’s an addiction, a valid reason to terminate a marriage, Biblical adultery aside.
The heart of all addictions is selfishness.

“Online sexual activities, including pornography use, have drastically increased in recent
years. Many studies have examined the impact that pornography use can have on marriages and
families. One of the key findings has been that pornography use can negatively impact trust in
relationships. This study focused on understanding the mechanisms involved when a husband’s
pornography use negatively impacts his marital relationship and his wife’s emotional well-being

That’s called emotional abuse.

The selfishness of addiction is such that they will always expect it to go one way. Of course, when you’re married you are no longer an individual and this is why selfishness becomes the worst possible sin. What you take for yourself, you take from your spouse.

A taste of their own medicine may be warranted, since that’s the one way the stupider men can learn if all else fails.

If the woman wants to teach him what it’s like, just flirt with any man more attractive than him when he’s around and tell him it isn’t your fault, it’s evolution. Or sitting there ogling pictures of Channing Tatum in that stripper film, maybe frame it on a wall and stare.

He can’t get defensive, the guy isn’t really there, in the bedroom.

Or masturbate to gay porn where both men are better looking than he is.
It’s just porn, right? No big deal, no reason to get upset. It’s just energy he was never going to require from you anyway, right? It isn’t like you owe him 100% as part of the marriage thing or there’s less to go around for him or there’s an insult against him personally in the act at all. Right?

“(1) a breakdown of expectations and assumptions central to the marriage, (2) a sense of distance or disconnection from their husband and (3) a general sense of being emotionally and psychologically unsafe and insecure in their relationship. Further, it was found that loss of trust was greatly influenced by the sexual nature of pornography and the deceit surrounding its use. These two factors combined to produce a loss of secure attachment, particularly for attachment-oriented and attachment-idealizing wives, who hold the belief that pornography use is not appropriate.”

You don’t get to change the rules after they were agreed upon. You show me one woman who would marry a porn addict if she knew that beforehand.

It’s cheating, the brain doesn’t know the difference. A man who needs porn to get it up or orgasm is impotent, by dictionary definition.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impotence
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/impotence

It also used to mean lack of restraint (like a man who cheats…) because the husband’s energy is directed outside the marital unit.

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=3946

It’s poor performance with a real life woman, the wife in this case.

“A common problem among men characterized by the consistent inability to sustain an erection sufficient for sexual intercourse or the inability to achieve ejaculation, or both. Impotence can vary.

So if they can’t get it up to their wife, but they can still do it to a mistress or porn, they are still impotent. This is basic medical fact. They can train other circuits but there is still an impaired circuit, the only important one.

It can involve a total inability to achieve an erection or ejaculation, an inconsistent ability to do so, or a tendency to sustain only very brief erections.”

That performance failure of male duty used to be sufficient reason to get divorced when the Catholic Church was in power, that’s how major it is.
The man’s sexual function in a marriage is more important than the wife’s participation. To blame the woman for his chosen addiction is weak.
If he can’t get it up, that’s his body. She isn’t controlling it Svengali style. He needs a doctor.

“Overall, it was found that a husband’s involvement with pornography can result in a lack of emotional, psychological, and physical availability and responsiveness, and a decrease in closeness and intimacy.”

Exactly the same result as literally going out and screwing those women. Note the type of porn they watch is intended for you to replace the male “actor”, it’s psychological cheating.

It’s voyeurism too, would voyeurism IRL not be cheating somehow?

Masturbation isn’t so much the problem, masturbation and pornography use/addiction are completely separate things.
If he can’t masturbate without porn, which is almost always the case… he has a problem.

“Interacting with the impact of deceit, a spouse’s pornography use clearly provides ample opportunity for the breakdown of secure attachment at a level that can be classified as an attachment rupture or trauma.”

Same result as literal adultery. HD videos trick the brain into treating events as real. It’s worse than real actually, it’s a supernormal stimulus. He wouldn’t film himself screwing one of those women, would he? No, that would seem extreme…..

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10720160903202679
The term emotional infidelity is useful here.

Love and cherish?

“Analyses uncovered three attachment-related impacts from husbands’ pornography use and deception: (1) the development of an attachment fault line in the relationship, stemming from perceived attachment infidelity; (2) followed by a widening attachment rift arising from wives’ sense of distance and disconnection from their husbands; (3) culminating in attachment estrangement from a sense of being emotionally and psychologically unsafe in the relationship. Overall, wives reported global mistrust indicative of attachment breakdown.

Well, escalation involves going out and literally re-enacting it. So yes, practice?
If a spouse practiced murdering you for fun, you’d feel less safe. This abandonment threat is very real and backed up by all metrics, as you’ll see.

Building on this data, we build an attachment-informed model of effects of pornography use and concomitant deception in the pair-bond relationship.”

Pornography is literally clinically damaging to the user.
It does cause ED (PC term for impotence, amazing how men resent un-PC terms on anything relating to them…)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5039517/

“Traditional factors that once explained men’s sexual difficulties appear insufficient to account for the sharp rise in erectile dysfunction, delayed ejaculation, decreased sexual satisfaction, and diminished libido during partnered sex in men under 40.”

Alterations to the brain’s motivational system are explored as a possible etiology underlying pornography-related sexual dysfunctions.”

Aforementioned training of responses.

“This review also considers evidence that Internet pornography’s unique properties (limitless novelty, potential for easy escalation to more extreme material, video format, etc.) may be potent enough

I see what you did there. Subtle. I like it.

to condition sexual arousal to aspects of Internet pornography use that do not readily transition to real-life partners, such that sex with desired partners may not register as meeting expectations and arousal declines.”

Husband’s sexual failure. He might as well cut it off, as far as his wife’s concerned, because he’s preventing her from working with it by breaking its healthy function.
She literally cannot do her job, far from it being her fault.
He also makes his own satisfaction impossible, which is deserved all things considered.

It’s like a cocaine user complaining their nose doesn’t work.

Cause and effect doesn’t stop at particles, mate.

“Clinical reports suggest that terminating Internet pornography use is sometimes sufficient to reverse negative effects, underscoring the need for extensive investigation using methodologies that have subjects remove the variable of Internet pornography use.

Translation: they don’t want to look “sex negative” i.e. medically realistic.

If a sex therapist tells you to use porn to spice up your marriage, run.
They make more money off divorced sluts, remember!

I mean, if Elon can be turned off by Amber, this is some major shit we’re dealing with here. Impotence isn’t really a laughing matter. Okay, maybe one prod…

Hardness! Hardness! My billions for some consistent hardness!

Had to get that out of my system. In many cases, the original cause is guilt and the outcome is depression. Since the cause is guilt, the depression is never resolved. Therapists are pussies in this century.

In the interim, a simple diagnostic protocol for assessing patients with porn-induced sexual dysfunction is put forth.”

Translation: we know it’s bad but we don’t know what to do.

Porn addiction and brain damage


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3050060/

A significant postulate of this commentary is that all addictions create, in addition to chemical changes in the brain, anatomical and pathological changes which result in various manifestations of cerebral dysfunction collectively labeled hypofrontal syndromes. In these syndromes, the underlying defect, reduced to its simplest description, is damage to the “braking system” of the brain. They are well known to clinical neuroscientists, especially neurologists and neurosurgeons, for they are also seen with tumors, strokes, and trauma. Indeed, anatomically, loss of these frontal control systems is most apparent following trauma, exemplified by progressive atrophy of the frontal lobes seen in serial MRI scans over time.”

In short, no, they cannot make the decision for themselves to continue its use.
That’s like letting a suicidal person cut themselves, also an addiction.

No, they are not allowed that choice. It isn’t a choice. They have to stop.

I know it’s hard. Or at least it would be, if they’d stop.

Compare it to a bad sex diet.

Click to access May%20MP%202015.pdf

” Ironically, a common correlate of pornography use has been found to be a damaged marital sex life.”

No, it makes them worse lovers. Obviously it would, it’s calling doing it not watching it.

Porn has no educational value. There are books and damn, cartoons even depicting and describing positions. Women have no problem viewing those and magazines are full of them. You aren’t supposed to be distracting yourself with masturbation while studying.

“Elliott and Umberson (2008) investigated this very subject, the nature of sex in marriage, and found that 94% of their participants established that sex is a keystone and integral part of marital success; and furthermore, describe sex as a barometer of the health of their marriage.

No, it isn’t just orgasms. It isn’t just sex.

Consequently, marital sexuality also creates a context for potential harm where that vulnerability is not held by one spouse with complete fidelity and trustworthiness.

Porn’s purpose is clear, it’s cheating intellectually. It’s reverse cuckoldry, in a way. They get off, but on the fact they’re picturing themselves doing it with another, instead of actually viewing their Other with someone else. They’re poles apart but very similar.

“Many authors (Brezsnyak & Whisman, 2004; Regan, 2000: Sprecher, 2002; Leavitt & Willoughby, 2015) have found that sexual desire plays an integral role in the marital satisfaction. Consistently, respondents who perceive their marriage to be “happy,” report creating positive experiences within their relationships, tend to label sexual interactions as one way to facilitate and nurture closeness and intimacy with their partners (Impett, Strachman, Finkel, & Gable, 2008).”

My advice to those women is to stream gay porn constantly without doing anything. After all, it’s “entertainment”, like a film? No need to object.

I cannot be bothered to look up any more for now.
The fact this is a subject of discussion is ridiculous, none of you have bothered to look it up.

In medical terms, a thing is harmful until proven healthy. That’s never going to happen with porn but they tried.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10720160600870711?src=recsys

“A review of the research that does exist was undertaken and many negative trends were revealed. While much remains unknown about the impact of Internet pornography on marriages and families, the available data provide an informed starting point for policy makers, educators, clinicians, and researchers.”

Men are pathetic in direct proportion to their sexual desperation.

Porn is causing that, all the attributes of the pajama boy.

It weakens you as men.

Back to the under-covered attachment thing, briefly.

A few studies on how insecure attachment styles (like those caused by porn) make divorce almost a dead-cert. The marriage is over the first time you click online instead of turning to your spouse, really.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J087v31n01_07

“attachment style, as a personality trait, has implications for the higher divorce rate. The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between attachment style and marrying multiple times. The findings indicate that multiple marriers are more likely to be avoidantly attached and less likely to be anxiously attached. Additionally, those marrying for the first time to a previously married person have similar insecure attachment Styles.”

Like attracts like.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3061469/

“Husbands’ lower initial level of marital satisfaction measured around the first child’s transition to school was the only significant predictor of marital dissolution.”

Yep, the dude’s fault again.

“In one study of dating relationships, Kirkpatrick and Hazan (1994) found that in a 4-year period, individuals with a secure attachment style had more stable and committed relationships than those with insecure attachment styles. A 31-year longitudinal study (Klohnen & Bera, 1998) revealed similar results.”

You might say, oh, but how do we know porn is making it worse? A fair objection. The methodology would be unpopular but ethical and possible. You study the child’s attachment when it forms and record it throughout the teens, also recording initiation into pornography addiction. If previously secure boys become insecurely attached men, porn is literally ruining men for women by reducing the husband qualities required.

Study women too, that’s fair. It’s just hardly any will statistically count as porn addicts.

If women are to follow their husbands in anything, they must feel supported.

 This study revealed that low levels of perceived spousal support among women characterized as ambivalent were associated with significant declines in marital satisfaction for both the women and their husbands.

Porn takes that away, as studies above show. This is not a minor point. It would be like going to a mechanic that hates cars or a hydrophobic plumber. If something’s wrong, you’d leave it to fester.

How does it work?

The woman senses this emptiness from the man first before he feels the effect on the pair bond between the two of them.

“Another possibility is that attachment security buffers against declines in marital satisfaction, such that the differences between secure and insecure individuals become larger over time.”

That one.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11584789

It would make sense to spot insecurity early and seek treatment. In a eugenic society.

However, a spouse who brings it on themselves merits no sympathy for the choice they know will harm their partner.

The second possibility (buffers) because insecure children also present problems that are consistent and grow over time.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2010.01352.x

“insecure infants are at an increased risk for behavioral disturbances, poor peer relations”

I don’t think you can pin that on a spouse they don’t have?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2741157/

This study extends the existing adult literature on insecure attachment as a predictor of depression and anxiety by examining these pathways in a sample of adolescents. In addition, dysfunctional attitudes and low self-esteem were tested as mediators of the association between insecure attachment and symptoms of depression and anxiety. Youth (N =350; 6th–10th graders) completed self-report measures of attachment, dysfunctional attitudes, self-esteem, and symptoms of depression and anxiety in a 4-wave prospective study. Results indicate that anxious and avoidant attachment each predicted changes in both depression and anxiety (after controlling for initial symptom levels). The association between anxious attachment, but not avoidant attachment, and later internalizing symptoms was mediated by dysfunctional attitudes and low self-esteem. Effects remained even after controlling for initial co-occurring symptoms.

Also no spouse to blame.

Imagine if women had some ailment with their mammary glands and blamed their husband. Impotent men who blame the wife are insane, it’s completely disconnected from reality.

In fact, improper attachment may contribute to mental diseases.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3266769/

Specifically, we review research findings showing that attachment insecurity is a major contributor to mental disorders, and that the enhancement of attachment security can facilitate amelioration of psychopathology.

Yes, they can make their spouse suffer. The personality changes caused by the porn are inherently abusive, more in common with a psychopath (psychopaths are almost entirely porn-addicted).

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3402/tdp.v3.28647

It’s the brain.

Recent models have moved towards the incorporation of neurodevelopmental, biological and psychosocial approaches to human development. Consequently, there has been a significant conceptual shift, where social experience is currently seen to play a role in shaping the biology and genetic programming of human development,

hence any damage from minors viewing porn is at least somewhat permanent

This is not a church lady problem, it’s worse than drugging kids who hate school. Those seldom cause damage like that, it’s psychological circumcision. It’s horrifying. Addictions disable the mind.

The priming to bring in young boys too, by showcasing schoolgirls. The grooming element of that, imagine a parade of schoolboy porn*, the MRAs would have a field day. Imagine that was considered normal in society, how sick that society must be.

*If it does exist, don’t tell me. Please, I’ve suffered enough.

rather than the simple ‘unfolding’ of a predetermined sequence of developmental stages. In the case of human infants, developmental models need to account for the increasingly recognised contribution of the infant to the social environment and their capacity to interact with and shape environmental responses.

Training. Training their own brain by their chosen habits.

The resilience required of a spouse, especially a husband, is wanting.

http://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1457&context=etd

 

“According to Sroufe (2000), securely attached children are fundamentally different from those classified as insecurely attached. At two years of age, they are more likely to be enthusiastic and persistent in solving easy tasks”

Useful in a marriage….

“Secure school-age children are more sympathetic to peer distress, more assertive about getting their needs met, more likely to be leaders, are better prepared for school”

Useful skills in a future husband.

insecure attachments (i.e., “attachment trauma”)

A child with a history of an insecure attachment may struggle with trusting the intentions and emotional responsiveness of others

So ironically they cause this in spouses with deceitful and demeaning behaviours (including requests of humiliating performance from the spouse to compete with literal whores) pushing them away to validate the paranoia. Yes, that’s what borderlines do too. It’s sadistic. They enjoy breaking people. Testing their limits, crushing their self-respect.

may learn to cope with stressful stimuli by inhibiting strong feelings

Cheating of any sort is a punishment to the existing spouse. Passive aggression is still aggression.

are more likely to have behavior problems, poor peer relations, and lack resilience

problems includes addictions, FYI

Resilience is the number one required quality in a husband.