realybop first RETWEETS -pornhub

RealYourBrainOnPorn tweets: Daniel Burgess, Nicole Prause & pro-porn allies create a biased website and social media accounts to support the porn industry agenda (beginning in April, 2019)

  1. Attempted illegal trademark grab.
  2. @BrainOnPorn twitter now named in two defamation lawsuits
  3. RealYBOP is Nicole Prause’s second iteration of a pro-porn industry website and associated social media accounts: The first was “PornHelps”!
  4. The RealYBOP “experts”: Some are being compensated by porn industry giant xHamster to promote its websites and convince users that porn addiction & sex addiction are myths
  5. How does the new site further the interests of the porn industry?
  6. The pro-porn tweets by @BrainOnPorn (collected here due to ongoing proceedings): written in Prause’s distinctive, misleading style

Attempted illegal trademark grab

This alliance of agenda-driven porn-science deniers has had two different names. One of them, “RealYourBrainOnPorn,” (RealYBOP) was founded on an illegal trademark squatting effort. Lawyers are now involved.

In addition to creating “RealYBOP”, on January 29, 2019, pro-porn activist Nicole Prause filed a trademark application to obtain YOURBRAINONPORN and YOURBRAINONPORN.COM. These marks have been used by the popular website www.YourBrainOnPorn.com and its host Gary Wilson for nearly a decade – facts long known to Nicole Prause, who has frequently disparaged the latter website and its host since 2013.

The organizers of the imposter site employed many tactics calculated to confuse the public. For example, the new site attempted to trick visitors, with the center of each page declaring “Welcome to the REAL Your Brain On Porn,” while the tab falsely proclaimed “Your Brain On Porn.” Also, to advertise their illegitimate site, the “experts” created a Twitter account (https://twitter.com/BrainOnPorn), YouTube channel, Facebook page, all employing the words “Your Brain On Porn.”

In addition, the “experts” created a reddit account (user/sciencearousal) to spam porn recovery forums reddit/pornfree and reddit/NoFap with promotional drivel, claiming porn use is harmless, and disparaging YourBrainOnPorn.com and Wilson. It’s important to note that Prause has a long documented history of employing numerous aliases to post on porn recovery forums and Wikipedia.

These 3 pages have documented numerous online aliases Prause has created to propagandize and defame individuals and organizations: page 1, page 2, page 3 (it appears that all RealYBOP social media accounts are more Prause aliases). Her easily recognizable comments promote her studies, attack the concept of porn addiction, disparage Wilson and YBOP, belittle men in recovery, and defame porn skeptics.

In a further attempt to confuse the public, the press release announcing the infringing site falsely claims to originate from Wilson’s hometown – Ashland, Oregon. (None of the “experts” named at the new site live in Oregon, let alone in Ashland.) See the Cease & desist letter sent to Nicole Prause and other RealYBOP “experts” (May 1, 2019).

Confirming suspicions, the replies by RealYBOP experts to YBOP’s C&D letter clearly exposed Prause as being in charge of the RealYBOP website and social media accounts.

Update (July, 2019): Legal actions revealed that Daniel Burgess is the current owner of the realyourbrainonporn.com URL. In February & March of 2018, Daniel Burgess appeared out of nowhere, engaging in targeted harassment and defamation of Gary Wilson and YBOP on multiple social platforms. Some of Burgess’s libelous claims and disturbed rantings are documented and debunked here: Addressing Unsupported Claims and Personal Attacks by Daniel Burgess (March, 2018) (Unsurprisingly, Burgess is a close ally of Nicole Prause).


 

@BrainOnPorn twitter now named in two defamation lawsuits

Prause is now embroiled in two defamation lawsuits (Donald Hilton, MD & Nofap founder Alexander Rhodes), a trademark infringement case, and a trademark squatting case.

On January 26, 2020 Alex Rhodes filed an amended complaint against Prause which also names the RealYBOP twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) as engaging in defamation. For the story, and all the courts documents, see this page: NoFap founder Alexander Rhodes defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause / Liberos. RealYBOP’s lies, harassment, defamation, and cyberstalking have caught up with it. The @BrainOnPorn twitter is now being named in two defamation lawsuits. PDF’s of court documents naming @BrainOnPorn:

Who’s legally responsible: only Prause, or only Daniel Burgess, or both, or all the RealYBOP “experts”? Relevant excerpts from the Rhodes complaint:

—————————-

On March 23, 2020 Alex Rhodes filed his opposition to Prause’s motion to dismiss. His court filings contain new incidents & evidence, additional victims of Prause, greater context/background: Brief – 26 pages, Declaration – 64 pages, Exhibits – 57 pages. @BrainOnPorn twitter account is named yet again. Excerpts describing these new incidents of harassment & defamation:

Another incident:

In reality, @BrainOnPorn has posted dozens of additional tweets targeting Rhodes and Nofap: Nicole Prause, David Ley & @BrainOnPorn’s long history of harassing & defaming Alexander Rhodes of NoFap


RealYBOP is Nicole Prause’s second iteration of a pro-porn industry website and associated social media accounts: The first was “PornHelps”

In 2015, after UCLA did not renew her contract, Nicole Prause created a username called “PornHelps,” which had its own Twitter account (@pornhelps) and a website. All promoted the porn industry agenda as well as outlier studies reporting the “positive” effects of porn. “PornHelps” chronically badgered the same people and organizations that Prause also often attacked. In fact, Prause would team up with her apparent alias PornHelps to attack individuals on Twitter and elsewhere in tandem with her other identities. Some of the Prause/PornHelps coordinated attacks are documented in these Prause-page sections:

The @pornhelps twitter account and PornHelps website were suddenly deleted when it became apparent to that Prause was the individual behind both. While many of us being attacked knew “PornHelps” was really Nicole Prause, the following @pornhelps tweet left no doubt:

Prause, a Kinsey grad, calls herself a neuroscientist, and appears to have started college about 15 years earlier than the above 2016 tweet. In response to several ad hominem attacks by “PornHelps,” which perfectly mirrored many of Prause’s usual comments, “PornHelps” was confronted in the comments section of Psychology Today with this and other evidence:

Within a few days of the above Psychology Today comment the PornHelps website and @pornhelps Twitter account vanished without a trace! All that remains of PornHelps are a smattering of comments on various sites and this abandoned disqus account (listing 87 comments). Want more confirmation that PornHelps was really Prause? This collection of comments, tweets, and coincidences make it apparent.

Prause has formed a second pro-porn sexology association in a glossy reincarnation of her now-defunct “PornHelps” effort. (Not to be confused with PornHelp.org)

The RealYBOP “experts”: Some are being compensated by porn industry giant xHamster to promote its websites and convince users that porn addiction & sex addiction are myths

Regardless of its ultimate name, let’s look briefly at the site’s cast of characters. The new site’s faction of sexologists and their chums is not representative of the views of the preponderance of researchers doing research on the effects of today’s porn. (Nicole Prause, Marty Klein, Lynn Comella, David J. Ley, Emily F. Rothman, Samuel Perry, Taylor Kohut, William Fisher, Peter Finn, Janniko Georgiadis, Erick Janssen, Aleksandar Štulhofer, Joshua Grubbs, James Cantor, Michael Seto, Justin Lehmiller, Victoria Hartmann, Julia Velten, Roger Libby, Doug Braun-Harvey, David Hersh, Jennifer Valli, Joe Kort, Charles Moser)

Upon closer examination, almost half of the new site’s “experts” are non-academics, not employed by any university. Not one of the listed “experts” has ever published a neurological study on a group of porn addicted subjects (Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder subjects).

Who’s missing and why? Ask yourself: why are the researchers who authored the preponderance of the relevant evidence on porn’s effects excluded from the “experts” in this alliance?

As of July, 2019 three of the better known RealYBOP “experts” are openly collaborating with the porn industry: David Ley, Justin Lehmiller and Chris Donaghue. All 3 are on the advisory board of the fledgling Sexual Health Alliance (SHA). In a blatant financial conflict of interest, David Ley and the SHA are being compensated by porn industry giant xHamster to promote its websites (i.e. StripChat) and to convince users that porn addiction and sex addiction are myths! See “Stripchat aligns with Sexual Health Alliance to stroke your anxious porn-centric brain.”

In the xHamster/SHA maiden voyage Ley is going to tell xHamster customers what “medical studies truly say about porn, camming and sexuality”:

Will Ley tell xHamster customers that every study ever published on males (about 65) links more porn use to less sexual and relation satisfaction? Will Ley tell them that all 45 neurological studies on porn users/sex addicts report brain changes seen in drug addicts? Will he inform his audience that 50% of porn users report escalating to material they previously found uninteresting or disgusting? Somehow I doubt it.

In their promotional tweet we are promised a slate of SHA brain experts to soothe users’ “porn anxiety” and “shame” (Ley and other SHA “experts” are light years away from being brain experts).

The official StripChat Twitter account reveals the true reason for paying SHA “experts”: to soothe their anxieties to prevent the loss of paying customers. The SHA will accomplish this by “talking about the latest research on sex, camming and addiction,” that is, cherry picking the work done by “their” researchers. Will Ley/SHA mention that hundreds of studies link porn use to myriad negative effects?

In this article, Ley dismisses his compensated promotion of the porn industry:

Granted, sexual health professionals partnering directly with commercial porn platforms face some potential downsides, particularly for those who’d like to present themselves as completely unbiased. “I fully anticipate [anti-porn advocates] to all scream, ‘Oh, look, see, David Ley is working for porn,’” says Ley, whose name is routinely mentioned with disdain in anti-masturbation communities like NoFap.

But even if his work with Stripchat will undoubtedly provide fodder to anyone eager to write him off as biased or in the pocket of the porn lobby, for Ley, that tradeoff is worth it. “If we want to help [anxious porn consumers], we have to go to them,” he says. “And this is how we do that.”

Another talk by David Ley, disparaging No-NutNovember (the real target is Nofap), and promoted by RealYBOP:

Look how RealYBOP is tagged by Stripchat. Nothing suspicious here, folks:

Biased? David Ley, Justin Lehmiller and Chris Donaghue remind us of the infamous tobacco doctors, and the Sexual health Alliance reminds us of the Tobacco Institute.

How does the new site further the interests of the porn industry?

Next, let’s take a closer look at some of the ways the new website + related social media campaign further the interests of the porn (and sexual-enhancement drug?) industries.

The new site’s collection of cherry-picked, often irrelevant, papers misrepresent the preponderance of the research on porn’s effects. For example, these 44 neurological studies on porn users and CSBD subjects are missing from the “experts’” research list. So are studies revealing a link between porn overuse and a range of sexual dysfunctions. For details see Porn Science Deniers Alliance.

The fact is, the deniers are out of step with the experts who drafted the world’s most widely used medical diagnostic manual, The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). The porn industry is well served by a group of purported “experts” who boldly misrepresent the balance of existing research and ignore the preponderance of the research. The latter undercuts the new site’s agenda by pointing to measurable harms associated with porn overuse.

While there’s no evidence of any of Prause’s many victims stating that Prause receives direct funding from the porn industry, anyone might be forgiven for wondering if she is indeed influenced by the porn industry. The Prause pages on this website are just the tip of a very large Prause Icebergs (page 1, page 2). She has posted thousands of times, attacking everyone and anyone who suggests porn might cause problems. (Prause recently purged her twitter account of 3,000 or more incriminating tweets.) She has defended the industry at every turn, much as a paid industry thought-leader could be expected to do.

Clearly Prause, who lives in LA, enjoys a cozy relationship with the pornography industry. See this image of her (far right) apparently taken on the red carpet of the X-Rated Critics Organization (XRCO) awards ceremony. According to Wikipedia,

“The XRCO Awards are given by the American X-Rated Critics Organization annually to people working in adult entertainment and it is the only adult industry awards show reserved exclusively for industry members.[1]

Prause at a reserved table with porn industry friends:

Watch this 20-minute video of the 2016 XRCO awards (pretty racy). Prause can be seen around the 6:10 mark sitting at a table with porn star buddy Melissa Hill:

From her tweets, it appears that Prause has also attended the Adult Video News Awards. In June, 2015 Prause describes hearing Jeanne Silver’s (a porn star) story “at AVN” (we must assume the Adult Video News Awards, because a Google search for Adult Video News returns mostly the AVN awards; second was the AVN expo).

Trolling PornHarms, Prause offers free t-shirts to others willing to troll with her. The t-shirts are a tasteless parody of the FTND porn kills love t-shirts. The 3 winners are porn stars!

One of the porn stars (Avalon) is from Australia. She tells Prause that it’s too expensive to ship a t-shirt to her. Prause asks Avalon if she would like to pick up her t-shirt at “the AVN”. The only logical conclusion is that Prause will be attending AVN awards, the AVN EXPO, or both.

Avalon tells Prause to have an amazing time at the AVN.

And on and on it goes with Nicole Prause and the porn industry. Hundreds of documented examples located here: Is Nicole Prause Influenced by the Porn Industry?

Is it any surprise that a casual observer might wonder if Prause, a former academic with a long history of harassing authors, researchers, therapists, reporters and others who dare to report evidence of harms from internet porn use, who lives in LA, who has obtained study subjects through the FSC, who hangs out with big names in the industry, who attends porn industry award ceremonies, and who has publicly been offered (and accepted) support by the FSC, might be influenced by the porn industry?

Again, no one has claimed Prause receives direct funding from the FSC or the “porn industry”. In fact, it seems most unlikely that the FSC would make any such arrangements directly, let alone make them public, even if they did exist. Nor has anyone stated that Prause is “in the porn industry” or “has, herself appeared in pornography“, as she falsely asserted in her bogus cease and desist letters, and in her response to Don Hilton, MD’s defamation lawsuit against her.

We are all wondering why she goes to such extreme lengths, including attempting to steal YBOP’s trademark and URL, while creating & managing realyourbrainonporn and its twitter account (@BrainOnPorn). Will the actual facts ever be revealed?

The pro-porn tweets by @BrainOnPorn (collected here due to ongoing proceedings): all written in Prause’s distinctive, misleading style

Judge for yourself whether they further the interests of the porn industry or rather the authentic search scientific truth. Note: the Twitter accounts for RealYBOP and Prause have never tweeted a study reporting negative outcomes related to porn… even though the vast preponderance of pornography studies report negative outcomes. This alone exposes both accounts as promoting the porn industry’s agenda.

We start with the very first tweet by the new RealYBOP. Notice that about half of the retweets were by accounts associated with the porn industry. As the RealYBOP account had no followers yet, this means these fans were likely notified via email. It appears that PornHub was first account to retweet this, suggesting a coordinated effort between PornHub and the RealYBOP account!

It appears that PornHub was the first account to retweet the above!

Is this evidence that RealYBOP’s Twitter and website are cozy with the porn industry? It’s clear that Pornhub knew about RealYBOP’s twitter account before it was created. Enough said.

—————-

Promoting their disparaging press release:

——————

——————–

Just as Prause often does, RealYBOP trolls an account that claims porn use may cause problems:

———————-

Trolling another porn skeptic:

——————

Just like Prause, RealYBOP attacks state porn resolutions:

——————-

RealYBOP tweeting under a Ley tweet libeling Wilson (Prause & Ley’s top targets are Wilson and YBOP). Who else but Prause would do this?

——————

Overview of RealYBOP’s cherry-picked, often dubious papers

A closer examination of RealYBOP’s list of studies reveals cherry-picking, bias, egregious omission, and deception. Here’s an analysis of its initial line-up of studies.

First, half of the papers listed were authored by RealYBOP “experts.” It should be noted that RealYBOP studies by the likes of deniers Prause, Kohut, Fisher or Štulhofer never seem to find any negative effects from porn use (actually, negative effects can often be parsed from their data, as we will see below). The RealYBOP studies are out of alignment with the preponderance of the research in the field. For example, Taylor Kohut’s 2017 non-quantitative study on relationships and porn use claimed to find few negative effects. Kohut’s cunningly designed paper contradicts every other study ever published on males: Over 70 studies link porn use to less sexual & relationship satisfaction, with all studies involving males reporting that more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

Second, the list omits not only the preponderance of evidence, but also the work of every academic neuroscientist who has published studies on porn users or CSBD subjects. These include Marc Potenza, Matthias Brand, Valerie Voon, Christian Laier, Simone Kühn, Jürgen Gallinat, Rudolf Stark, Tim Klucken, Ji-Woo Seok, Jin-Hun Sohn, Mateusz Gola and many others. As one example, why are Matthias Brand’s studies omitted from the deniers’ list? Brand has authored 310 studies, is the head of the Department of Psychology: Cognition, at the University of Duisburg-Essen, supervises a lab with over 20 researchers, and has published more neuroscience-based studies on pornography users/addicts than any other researcher in the world. (See his list of his porn addiction studies here: 20 neurological studies and 5 reviews of the literature.)

Third, eight of the 50 papers listed are mere opinion pieces, not actual studies. Talk about citation inflation.

Fourth, the list contains no reviews of the literature and only one meta-analysis, which limits itself to 21 studies assessing the porn use of adult sexual offenders: The use of pornography and the relationship between pornography exposure and sexual offending in males: A systematic review. While this meta-analysis concludes porn use is not related to adult sexual offending there’s good reason to question its findings. For example, the authors retrieved 189 studies, but included only 21 in their review. Put simply, numerous studies with opposing results were excluded.

The absence of reviews of the literature and meta-analyses is a giveaway that RealYBOP cherry-picked outlier studies (usually the “experts'” own). While most of RealYBOP’s puzzling research categories don’t lend themselves to literature reviews or meta-analysis, a few might: “love & intimacy” or “youth.” Why not provide the reader with one of the literature reviews on pornography and “youth” (adolescents), such as: review#1, review2, review#3, review#4, review#5, review#6, review#7, review#8, review#9, review#10, review#11, review#12, review#13. Why doesn’t a RealYBOP “love & intimacy” category provide a literature review on pornography and sexual or relationship satisfaction, such as: review#1, review#2, review#3? The answer is clear: no review aligns with RealYBOP’s agenda.

Fifth, and most telling, RealYBOP’s list excludes nearly every study linking porn use to negative outcomes (these represent the majority of porn studies). Moreover, in those few studies listed that did report negative outcomes, RealYBOP omits these findings from their description. By using YBOP’s list of relevant studies we can easily identify their deceit:

  1. RealYBOP omitted all 45 neurological studies on porn users and CSB subjects, except for Prause et al., 2015 (they don’t tell the readers about the 9 peer-reviewed papers that say that Prause’s EEG study actually supports addiction model).
  2. RealYBOP omitted all but two of these 70 studies linking porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction. RealYBOP misled the reader on those 2 studies (and others in the “love” category): as both link porn use poorer relationship satisfaction or more infidelity: study 1, study 2.
  3. RealYBOP omitted all 24 recent neuroscience-based literature reviews & commentaries, authored by some of the top neuroscientists in the world. All 24 papers support the addiction model.
  4. RealYBOP omitted every study on this list of over 35 studies linking porn use to “un-egalitarian attitudes” toward women and sexist views. They omitted this 2016 meta-analysis of 135 studies assessing the effects of porn & sexual media use on beliefs, attitudes and behaviors: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015.
  5. RealYBOP omitted all but two of the papers in this list of over 40 studies reporting findings consistent with escalation of porn use (tolerance), habituation to porn, and even withdrawal symptoms (all signs and symptoms associated with addiction). The two studies are by Nicole Prause and Alexander Štulhofer, whose artfully crafted write-ups mislead the reader: study 1 (Prause et al., 2015 – again); study 2 by Štulhofer.
  6. RealYBOP omitted all but three of the papers in this list of over 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. Not surprisingly, the 3 studies are by RealYBOP “experts” Alexander Štulhofer, Joshua Grubbs, and James Cantor. In a blatant example of RealYBOP misrepresenting their own studies, all 3 papers reported links between sexual problems and porn use or porn addiction: study 1 by Štulhofer; study 2 by Grubbs; study 3 by James Cantor.
  7. RealYBOP omitted all but two of the 28 studies countering the talking point that sex & porn addicts “just have high sexual desire” (same two papers misrepresented in the previous list: study by Štulhoferr; study by James Cantor).
  8. RealYBOP omitted all the papers in this list of over 75 studies linking porn use to poorer mental-emotional health & poorer cognitive outcomes.
  9. RealYBOP omitted all 250 studies in this comprehensive list of peer-reviewed papers assessing porn’s effect on adolescents.

————————–

Truth in preceding section, not in tweet below:

Half of the outlier papers are by RealYBOP “experts.” Most of these papers have been exposed on this page as not what they claim to be.

—————————

Trolling some random Twitter thread:

—————–

More trolling in support of porn industry:

———————

Just as Prause often does, RealYBOP cites Taylor Kohut’s outlier, non-quantitative study on relationships:

Taylor Kohut’s skewed qualitative paper, which is thoroughly dismantled here: Perceived Effects of Pornography on the Couple Relationship: Initial Findings of Open-Ended, Participant-Informed, “Bottom-Up” Research (2016), Taylor Kohut, William A. Fisher, Lorne Campbell. The intention behind this Taylor Kohut study is to (attempt to) counter the over 70 studies linking porn use to negative effects on relationships. The two main problems with Kohut’s study are:

  • It does not contain a representative sample. Whereas most studies show that a tiny minority of females in long-term relationships use porn, in this study 95% of the women used porn on their own. And 83% of the women had used porn since the beginning of the relationship (in some cases for years). Those rates are higher than in various studies in college-aged men! In other words, the researchers appear to have skewed their sample to produce the results they were seeking. The reality? Cross-sectional data from the largest nationally representative US survey (General Social Survey) reported that only 2.6% of married women had visited a “pornographic website” in the last month. Data from 2000, 2002, 2004 (for more see Pornography and Marriage, 2014).
  • The study used “open ended” questions where the subject could ramble on about porn. Then the researchers read the ramblings and decided, after the fact, what answers were “important,” and how to present (spin?) them in their paper. In other words, the study did not correlate porn use with any variable assessing sexual or relationship satisfaction. Then the researchers had the gall to suggest that all the other studies on porn and relationships, which employed more established, scientific methodology and straightforward questions about porn’s effects were flawed. Is this really science?

—————-

Promoting one of RealYBOP’s experts (Justin Lehmiller) who happens to be a writer for Playboy:

——————–

Prause promoting RealYBOP:

———————

Misrepresenting the actual findings of a new study:

The abstract attempts to obfuscate the basic correlations, which were pretty straightforward: More porn use was related to greater depression & loneliness/less relationship satisfaction & closeness. Affection substitution: The effect of pornography consumption on close relationships (2019) –Excerpts:

In this study, 357 adults reported their level of affection deprivation, their weekly pornography consumption, their goals for using pornography (including life satisfaction and loneliness reduction), and indicators of their individual and relational wellness…. As predicted, affection deprivation and pornography consumption were inversely related to relational satisfaction and closeness, while being positively related to loneliness and depression.

———————–

RealYBOP promoting its professionally produced YouTube video. Question: who is paying for all this?

——————–

RealYBOP trolling Skeptic Magazine editor Michael Shermer (who published 2 articles by Gary Wilson and Phil Zimbardo).

——————-

—————–

Promoting RealYBOP “expert” Marty Klein, who once boasted his very own webpage on the AVN’s Hall of Fame in recognition of his pro-porn advocacy serving the porn industry’s interests (since removed).

——————-

Promoting 2 RealYBOP “experts,” who appear to be as biased and pro-porn as Prause (Ley & Kohut):

———————

Trolling another person’s thread:

———————-

Trolling another person’s thread, defending the porn industry, and speaking as if the writer possesses insider info on the porn industry:

————————

Promoting superfans of porn, who attended the AVN convention:

The paper’s criteria for “less sexism” is dubious, to say the least.

——————-

Spinning an incident involving a mentally ill person as “shame.” Nice.

———————–

Again, trolling a thread to spread propaganda and falsehoods. RealYBOP is lying about the World Health Organization’s diagnostic manual, the ICD-11, just as Prause has in many earlier tweets, and in her Slate article: Debunking “Why Are We Still So Worried About Wat­­ching Porn?” by Marty Klein, Taylor Kohut, and Nicole Prause (2018).

RealYBOP echoes all of Prause’s favorite talking points in this second tweet (all debunked many times over in preceding section).

——————-

Promoting RealYBOP “expert” Chris Donaghue, who just happens to be engaged to a porn star (no bias there).

—————–

Promoting a new study on female porn stars, which reported an expected finding: lower rates of sexual dysfunction than the general population. Noteworthy: RealYBOP did not tweet a study by the same research group, which found much higher rates of ED in male performers! The research survey of male adult film actors published in 2018 reported 37% of male porn stars, ages 20-29, had moderate to severe erectile dysfunction (the IIEF, which measures function during partnered sex, is the standard urology test for erectile function).

—————-

This tweet is about Wilson and his paper involving 7 Navy doctors, which has been a Prause obsession for 4 years running: Prause’s efforts to have Behavioral Sciences review paper (Park et al., 2016) retracted. The paper in question: Is Internet Pornography Causing Sexual Dysfunctions? A Review with Clinical Reports (Park et al., 2016). As of early 2019, Park et al., 2016 has been cited by over 40 other peer-reviewed papers, and is the most viewed paper in the history of the journal Behavioral Sciences.

Two lies in RealYBOP tweet:

  1. Real YBOP lies about replication, as Park et al., 2016 was review of the literature, while the new study was survey data from a naval urology clinic. (Reviews can’t be “replicated.”)
  2. The authors of the new paper believe it supports the existence of porn-induced ED.

The authors of the current study do not agree with spin and omissions by “RealYBOP.” The US Navy doctors believe their data lend support to the existence of porn-induced ED (see screenshots). They suspect sexual conditioning, rather than porn addiction (which is what YBOP has said for years). Graph:

Excerpt from study:

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

——————-

RealYBOP mimics the unsupported talking point that Prause always says, that the problem is masturbation, not porn…. never porn:

RealYBOP continues with falsehoods, asserting that porn is good for relationships. A falsehood as over 70 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction. As far as we know all studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

More Prause-like spin, trying to blame masturbation, rather than porn:

Reality: Critique of Samuel Perry’s “Is the Link Between Pornography Use and Relational Happiness Really More About Masturbation? Results From Two National Surveys” (2019).

  • After sophisticated statistical “modeling” (under pressure from Prause?) Perry proposed that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship problems. In reality, more porn use was related to less satisfaction.
  • The gaping hole in Perry’s analysis is the absence of specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency. Without that, his claim is little more than hypothetical.

——————-

RealYBOP posts on Gary Wilson thread as part of this 4-tweet series. Both Prause and RealYBOP blocked Wilson so they could sneak tweets onto his threads. Are they afraid that Wilson will debunk their misinformation?

———————-

Trolling, with bizarre tweets:

—————-

April, 28th, 2019 RealYBOP trolls a few old tweets by Director of Abolition for Exodus Cry, Laila Mickelwait. This is no coincidence as Prause too has harassed and libeled Exodus Cry, their CEO Benjamin Nolot, and Laila Mickelwait. For details see this section of Prause page #2: February, 2019: Prause falsely accuses Exodus Cry of fraud. Asks twitter followers to report the non-profit to the Missouri attorney general (for spurious reasons), Appears to have edited the CEO’s Wikipedia page.

RealYBOP tweets under 2-week old tweet, misrepresnting the reserach (sounds exactly like Prause):

RealYBOP trolls another old Mickelwait thread, informing her that Norman Doidge is mistaken about porn-induced ED:

Here are some actual scientists: 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions.

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

——————-

In a very Prause-like move, RealYBOP spins a sex addiction study (hypersexuality) as debunking sex addiction:

Link to the study – A Randomized Controlled Study of Group-Administered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Hypersexual Disorder in Men

Abstract. Does this sound like it debunked sex addiction?

Hypersexual disorder (HD) is defined as a condition in which the individual loses control over engagement in sexual behaviors, leading to distress and negative effects on key life areas. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has been proven to reduce symptoms of hypersexual behavior; however, no randomized controlled study of CBT interventions for HD has been reported previously.

A significantly greater decrease in HD symptoms and sexual compulsivity, as well as significantly greater improvements in psychiatric well-being, were found for the treatment condition compared with the waitlist.

In fact, the full paper actually debunks Prause’s ongoing spin around the ICD-11’s CSBD diagnosis:
In the revision of​ the ICD-11, the diagnostic category compulsive sexual behavior​ disorder is included in the section for impulse control disorders.​ The criteria bear many similarities to those of HD and a more​ nuanced research on possible social, psychological, and biological​ causes can now be performed.

Although Rettenberger et al identified sexual excitation as the most important predictor of hypersexual​ behavior, it is reasonable to assume that there are differences​ between those engaging in interpersonal sexual behaviors (ie,​ sexual behaviors with consenting adults) and those engaging in​ solitary sexual behaviors (eg, pornography consumption,​ masturbation). It has long been argued that HD can be subclassified​ into sexual behaviors used as a strategy for coping with​ anxiety and negative mood states on the one hand and a​ sexually motivated condition, with emphasis on loss of impulse​ control and sexual sensation-seeking, on the other hand. Sexual​ behaviors with consenting adults may be further subdivided​ based on, for example, repeated purchases of sexual services or​repeated establishment of short-term sexual relations.

——————

Supporting porn industry. Many of the films were violent or degrading porn.

——————

Promoting their porn-friendly “experts” to TeenVogue:

——————

Disparaging sex and porn addiction models.

——————

RealYBOP trolling sex addiction therapist Paula Hall. Prause has harassed Hall in the past, see – September 25, 2016: Prause attacks therapist Paula Hall. Notice that RealYBOP’s comment is identical to Prause’s claims: Pornography use is “overwhelmingly positive” for most people.

——————-

RealYBOP trolling another account to counter Gail Dines. Prause has disparaged Dines in the past, see – April, 2017: Prause insults Professor Gail Dines, PhD, perhaps for joining the “Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography?”

Real YBOP claim is BS, and only based on two studies that employ questionable criteria for “egalitarianism.” The truth is that nearly every study assessing porn use and egalitarianism (sexual attitudes) has reported that porn use is associated with attitudes toward women that both liberals and conservatives regard as extremely problematic. RealYBOP’s list of research omitted every study on this list of over 25 studies link porn use to “un-egalitarian attitudes” toward women and sexist views. They also omitted every meta-analysis or review of the literature on the subject, such as this 2016 meta-analysis of 135 studies: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015. Excerpt:

The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. The focus was on research published in peer-reviewed, English-language journals between 1995 and 2015. A total of 109 publications that contained 135 studies were reviewed. The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

——————

RealYBOP trolling another account, in support of the porn industry’s agenda:

Note: the above study is one of only 5 studies Prause cited in her op-ed attacking FightTheNewDrug. This debunking of Prause’s op-ed pointed out her cherry-picking Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography?

On the basis of a single citation we are asked to believe the production of pornography promotes “higher self-esteem” for performers while its consumption “reduc[es] violence and sexual assaults”—this, without mention of either six studies confirming mental and physical health problems of female performers or a full 50 peer-reviewed studies directly linking porn use to sexual violence.

——————

As Prause has done countless times, RealYBOP smears FTND (note – troll, and Prause ally, nerdy kinky commie had his original Twitter account permanently banned for misdeeds while targeting FTND):

The following sections of the Prause-Harassment pages contain numerous documented incidents of Prause & David Ley defaming and harassing FTND:

—————–

RealYBOP tweets to “peddler of perversion,” describing her defense of porn producer @linabembe:

Interesting how both RealYBOP and Prause have cozy relationships with adult performers and porn producers.

—————-

Tweeting about RealYBOP “expert” William Fisher’s testimony opposing Canada’s Motion 47:

Motion 47 would have been a PR blow to the porn industry.

————————

Promoting Alan McKee’s claim that porn use does not cause aggression. (Note that Mckee once published a study funded by the porn industry!)

————————

Supporting Prause & Ley’s prime objective: trying to discredit the phenomenon of porn-induced sexual dysfunctions:

But all RealYBOP can cite is a 3-year old article, in Dutch. All the Dutch sexologist can do is disparage UK sex therapist Angela Gregory, and lie about the state of the research. Articles featuring Angela Gregory:

The state of the research: 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions.

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

————————–

RealYBOP being very cozy with porn producer (https://www.provillain.com/):

———————–

Trolling well know blogger, neuroskeptic:

———————

RealYBOP tweets outlier study by denier Alexander Štulhofer, who always seems to report few porn-related problems in his studies. He has played games by downplaying significant findings in write-ups, manipulating regressions to achieve results, and omitting data presented earlier at a conference. Example of omissions of data.

Štulhofer’s reported findings are countered by over 75 studies linking porn use to poorer mental-emotional health & poorer cognitive outcomes. What about the porn use and adolescents? Check out this list of over 260 adolescent studies, or these reviews of the literature: review#1, review2, review#3, review#4, review#5, review#6, review#7, review#8, review#9, review#10, review#11, review#12, review#13, review#14, review#15.

———————–

On May 1, 2019 the attorneys for the common-law owner of the trademarks “Your Brain On Porn” and “YourBrainOnPorn.com” (this website) sent a cease and desist demand to all of those who appeared to be behind the infringing site (the “Experts”). They also demand that Dr. Prause abandon her malicious trademark-squatting application for the marks “Your Brain On Porn” and “YourBrainOnPorn.com.”

Instead of complying with the reasonable, well documented demands, a number of the RealYBOP Experts responded with a derisory Twitter rage storm, baseless accusations that their “free speech rights” were being violated, and clear indications of malicious intent, such as threats to go to the press to have their infringing activities mischaracterized as free speech.

Here’s a Twitter response to the C&D letter by one of the experts, Lynn Comella, who incorrectly spins this as squelching her freedom of speech. PornHelp.org educates Comella. Eventually RealYBOP responds with a link that only Prause ever posts:

The CBC link is mischaracterized by RealYBOP, as it has always been by Prause. It’s part of a very long saga, with Prause’s first Twitter account being permanently banned, Prause asking Gary Wilson about the size of penis…and so much more. See:

Prause and RealYBOP mirror each others tweets:

RealYBOP continues rampage against Wilson, looking more and more unhinged.

Above tweet is nearly identical to 2 earlier tweets by Prause:

RealYBOP comes back with a bizarre tweet under a 2-week old libelous tweet by David Ley. (Prause ally Ley actually stated that “the folks at YBOP” threatened his life. This untrue accusation of a felony constitutes “defamation per se,” and is actionable.)

RealYBOP claims Wilson has a puppet account (he doesn’t) – and of course fails to link to support for the accusation.

———————————–

In support of porn industry agenda:

———————–

RealYBOP, once again promoting Perry’s dubious suggestion that masturbation, not porn, affects relationship happiness:

Reality: Critique of Samuel Perry’s “Is the Link Between Pornography Use and Relational Happiness Really More About Masturbation? Results From Two National Surveys” (2019).

  • After sophisticated statistical “modeling” Perry (under pressure from Prause?) proposed that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship problems. In reality, more porn use was related to less satisfaction.
  • The gaping hole in Perry’s new analysis is the absence of specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency. Without that, his claim is little more than hypothetical.

————————

Trolls another thread with pro-porn propaganda: porn use is just fine for kids.

RealYBOP’s research section is cherry-picked, especially the “youth” section where RealYBOP purposely omits all reviews of the literature and meta-analyses, such as: review#1, review2, review#3, review#4, review#5, review#6, review#7. The RealYBOP “youth” section omitted all 230 studies in this comprehensive list of peer-reviewed papers assessing porn’s effect on adolescents.

————————

Same as preceeding tweet, falsely claiming that RealYBOP’s handful of cherry-picked adolescent studies represents the state of the research. This time RealYBOP trolls a sex education organization:

———————–

More trolling and as with preceding tweet, falsely claiming that RealYBOP’s handful of cherry-picked adolescent studies represents the state of the research:

———————–

Cherry-picks oulier finding from 2-3% of study’s subjects. Omits primary findings, and 65 other other studies:

Primary findings of the study in question – Does Viewing Pornography Reduce Marital Quality Over Time? Evidence from Longitudinal Data (2016). Excerpt:

This study is the first to draw on nationally representative, longitudinal data (2006-2012 Portraits of American Life Study) to test whether more frequent pornography use influences marital quality later on and whether this effect is moderated by gender. In general, married persons who more frequently viewed pornography in 2006 reported significantly lower levels of marital quality in 2012, net of controls for earlier marital quality and relevant correlates. Pornography’s effect was not simply a proxy for dissatisfaction with sex life or marital decision-making in 2006. In terms of substantive influence, frequency of pornography use in 2006 was the second strongest predictor of marital quality in 2012.

Second, as previously stated, over 70 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction. As far as we know all studies involving males (which is the majority of studies) have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

Third, when evaluating the research, it’s important to know that coupled females who regularly use internet porn (and can thus report on its effects) make up a relatively small percentage of all porn users. Large, nationally representative data are scarce, but the General Social Survey reported that only 2.6% of all US women had visited a “pornographic website” in the last month. The question was only asked in 2002 and 2004 (see Pornography and Marriage, 2014). Studies reporting that more porn use is correlated to greater satisfaction in women are referring to a relatively small percentage of women (perhaps only 1-2% of the female population).

———————–

RealYBOP’s spin and misrepresentation is so egregious that even Taylor Kohut corrects her misleading tweets:

———————–

Trolling another thread, in support of porn industry agenda:

———————–

RealYBOP and David Ley respond to OBGYN, Jennifer Gunter calling out Ley’s pro-porn propaganda:

Gunter, not buying Ley’s lone irrelevant study:

David Ley cites this irrelevant study: EXPOsing Mens Gender Role Attitudes as Porn Superfans. Sociological Forum. doi:10.1111/socf.12506 Link to web

Seriously? Interviewing “Porn superfans” attending the AVN Adult Entertainment Expo passed peer-review? What’s next, interviewing bar patrons to see what they think of beer? Even if taken seriously, the study tells us nothing about the effects of viewing porn as it didn’t correlate porn use with the four criteria. Contrary to the RealYBOP summary, the narrow criteria employed assessed “gender roles,” not sexist or misogynistic attitudes. For example, Harvey Weinstein would score exceptionally high on their gender-role assessment. In more extreme example, any pimp who wants his “hoes” working for his benefit would agree that women should work, but that doesn’t rule out extreme misogyny on his part.

As with the Taylor Kohut studies cited by Prause & Ley, it’s easy to see that religious/conservative populations would score lower than secular/liberal populations on these carefully chosen criteria. Here’s the key: secular populations, which tend to be more liberal, have far higher rates of porn use than religious populations. By choosing certain criteria and ignoring endless other variables, Kohut, Fisher, and the authors the current paper knew they would end up with porn use (greater in secular populations) correlating with carefully chosen selection of what they would have defined as “egalitarianism.

RealYBOP jumps in to defend porn:

None of the studies on RealYBOP support Ley or contradict Gunter. RealYBOP omits the following studies validating Gunter’s concern. Both found that deviant (i.e., bestiality or minor) pornography users reported a significantly younger onset of adult pornography use. These studies link earlier onset of porn use to escalation to more extreme material.

1) Does deviant pornography use follow a Guttman-like progression?” (2013). An excerpt:

The findings of the current study suggest Internet pornography use may follow a Guttman-like progression. In other words, individuals who consume child pornography also consume other forms of pornography, both nondeviant and deviant. For this relationship to be a Guttman-like progression, child pornography use must be more likely to occur after other forms of pornography use. The current study attempted to assess this progression by measuring if the “age of onset” for adult pornography use facilitated the transition from adult-only to deviant pornography use. Based on the results, this progression to deviant pornography use may be affected by the individuals “age of onset” for engaging in adult pornography. As suggested by Quayle and Taylor (2003), child pornography use may be related to desensitization or appetite satiation to which offenders begin collecting more extreme and deviant pornography. The current study suggests individuals who engage in adult pornography use at a younger age may be at greater risk for engaging in other deviant forms of pornography.

2) Deviant Pornography Use: The Role of Early-Onset Adult Pornography Use and Individual Differences” (2016). Excerpts:

Results indicated that adult + deviant pornography users scored significantly higher on openness to experience and reported a significantly younger age of onset for adult pornography use compared to adult-only pornography users.

Finally, the respondents’ self-reported age of onset for adult pornography significantly predicted adult-only vs. adult + deviant pornography use. That is to day, adult + deviant pornography users self-reported a younger age of onset for non-deviant (adult-only) pornography compared to the adult-only pornography users. Overall, these findings support the conclusion drawn by Seigfried-Spellar and Rogers (2013) that Internet pornography use may follow a Guttman-like progression in that deviant pornography use is more likely to occur after the use of nondeviant adult pornography.

Two more RealYBOP tweets in the Gunter thread:

As Prause and Ley always do, RealYBOP says masturbation, not porn, is the problem.

In the same thread, RealYBOP promotes Ley’s porn book:

————————-

Once again, RealYBOP disparages state resolutions deeming porn a public health issue. Her tweet contains several falsehoods:

RealYBOP falsehoods and spin related to the organizations cited:

————————

There’s nothing that RealYBOP won’t use to support the porn-industry agenda, including shaming a women for making a choice, re-labeling the choice as “anti-porn shaming.” Question: is RealYBOP exhibiting misogyny?

———————–

RealYBOP trolling a year-old tweet by SASH (an organization Prause has previously defamed on social media):

Notice how RealYBOP says “as Dr. Geoffrey Reed, chair, described for us.” The “us” is Nicole Prause as she emailed (harassed) Dr. Reed several times and tweeted one his out-of-context replies multiple times. One example:

Geoffrey Reed isn’t an official WHO spokesperson, and this was only a private email to Prause to get her off of his back. In truth only one official WHO spokesperson officially commented on CSBD – Christian Lindmeier. If you have any doubts about the true nature of the Prause/RealYBOP campaign, carefully read this responsible article about compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD). It quotes official WHO spokesperson Christian Lindmeier. Lindmeier is one of only four officials WHO spokespersons listed on this page: Communications contacts in WHO headquarters – and the only WHO spokesperson to have formally commented about CSBD! The SELF article also interviewed Shane Kraus, who was at the center of the ICD-11’s Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder (CSBD) working group. Excerpt with Lindmeir quotes makes it clear that WHO did not reject “sex addiction”:

In regards to CSBD, the largest point of contention is whether or not the disorder should be categorized as an addiction. “There is ongoing scientific debate on whether or not the compulsive sexual behavior disorder constitutes the manifestation of a behavioral addiction,” WHO spokesperson Christian Lindmeier tells SELF. “WHO does not use the term sex addiction because we are not taking a position about whether it is physiologically an addiction or not.”

For an accurate account of the ICD-11, see this recent article by The Society for the Advancement of Sexual Health (SASH): “Compulsive Sexual Behaviour” has been classified by World Health Organization as Mental Health Disorder. It begins with:

Despite a few misleading rumors to the contrary, it is untrue that the WHO has rejected “porn addiction” or “sex addiction.” Compulsive sexual behavior has been called by a variety of names over the years: “hypersexuality”, “porn addiction”, “sex addiction”, “out-of-control sexual behavior” and so forth. In its latest catalogue of diseases the WHO takes a step towards legitimizing the disorder by acknowledging “Compulsive Sexual Behaviour Disorder” (CSBD) as a mental illness. According to WHO expert Geoffrey Reed, the new CSBD diagnosis “lets people know they have “a genuine condition” and can seek treatment.”

————————-

Disparaging sex addiction therapist (as Prause & Ley always do):

Documenation of Ley and Prause harassing and defaming sex addiction therapists:

————————–

Trolling researcher Michael Flood. Pro-porn RealYBOP attempts to smear what she calls “anti-porn” activists.

———————–

RealYBOP re-tweets porn performer, once again confirming its pro-porn industry agenda (while taking a swipe at “activists”):

If the illegitimate website (RealYBOP) is suppose to be about porn’s possible effects on users, why does RealYBOP regularly tweet propaganda for the porn industry?

———————

Three RealYBOP tweets of 15 years old data from Norway (only), claiming (for some unknown reason) that gay people are no more likely to be addicted to porn.

Another example of RealYBOP cherry-picking, as most other studies report that gays and lesbians have higher rates of porn use and porn addiction (CSBD). From The Role of Maladaptive Cognitions in Hypersexuality among Highly Sexually Active Gay and Bisexual Men (2014):

Problematic hypersexuality is a particular concern for gay, bisexual, and other MSM given the unique psychosocial factors driving this problem among this group, including minority stressors across development (Parsons, Grov, & Golub, 2012; Parsons et al., 2008) and the relationship between problematic hypersexuality and HIV risk (Dodge et al., 2008; Grov, Parsons, & Bimbi, 2010). In addition to experiencing disproportionate problems with hypersexuality compared to heterosexual men (Baum & Fishman, 1994; Missildine, Feldstein, Punzalan, & Parsons, 2005), gay and bisexual men contend with elevated rates of other factors shown to be associated with both hypersexuality and maladaptive cognitive processes, including childhood sexual abuse (Purcell et al., 2007) and stressors related to social prejudice and stigma (Muench & Parsons, 2004; Pincu, 1989). These stressors combine with mental health problems, such as problematic hypersexuality, to form a synergistic cluster of risks, or syndemic, that simultaneously threaten the health of this group of individuals (Parsons et al., 2012; Stall et al., 2003). Thus, the identification of treatable components of any one of these health risks has the potential to disrupt the health-depleting cascade of interrelated risks facing members of this population.

———————

More propaganda serving the porn industry’s agenda:

———————–

One of Prause’s obsessions is FightThe NewDrug. RealYBOP trolls a FTND supporter with her usual ad hominem attacks:

More trolling, citing Prause’s SLT op-ed:

Prause’s 600-word Op-Ed is chock full of unsupported assertions meant to fool the lay public. It fails to support a single assertion as it cites only 4 papers – none of which have anything to do with porn addiction, porn’s effects on relationships, or porn-induced sexual problems.

Several experts in this field debunked its assertions and empty rhetoric in this relatively short response – Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography? (2016). Unlike the “neuroscientists of the Op-Ed,” they cited several hundred studies and multiple reviews of the literature.

More attacks the next day:

Even more attacks on FTND:

Several Prause Wikipedia sockpuppets tried to place the above on the FTND Wikipedia page. See: Others – March 17, 2019: Numerous Prause sock-puppets edit the Fight The New Drug Wikipedia page, as Prause simultaneously tweets content from her sock-puppets’ edits

———————–

Once again, promoting a new study on female porn stars, which reported an expected finding: lower rates of sexual dysfunction than the general population.

Acting as a if it were a propaganda outlet for the porn industry, RealYBOP did not tweet a study by the same research group, which found much higher rates of ED in male performers! The research survey of male adult film actors published in 2018 reported 37% of male porn stars, ages 20-29, had moderate to severe erectile dysfunction (the IIEF, which measures function during partnered sex, is the standard urology test for erectile function).

———————

RealYBOP promoting a “study” claiming that using prostitutes is aligned with the principles of sexual health.

Why does RealYBOP constantly tweet in support of porn industry and prostitution, when the site claims to be about the effects of porn on the user?

———————-

RealYBOP disparages anti-pornography feminists. The source? An article by Jerry Barnett (AKA pornpanic), who once owned a porn site!

RealYBOP continues:

Prause has openly attacked Gail Dines in the past: April, 2017: Prause insults Professor Gail Dines, PhD, perhaps for joining the “Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography?”

If you have anything disparaging to say about porn you could be attacked or harassed by RealYBOP. The porn industry must love RealYBOP.

———————–

Surprise. RealYBOP retweets a Prause tweet that disparages state resolutions:

—————————

RealYBOP promoting a study, while incorrectly claiming it doesn’t support addiction model. In fact, it’s about porn addiction – Sexual Desire, Mood, Attachment Style, Impulsivity, and Self-Esteem as Predictive Factors for Addictive Cybersex (2019):

Another tweet:

Contrary to RealYBOP’s claim, higher sexual desire was not the strongest predictor of cybersex addiction. Rather, depressive mood, avoidant attachment style, and male gender were better predictors (than “sexual desire”):

We concluded that addictive cybersex use, as assessed by the CIUS adapted for sexual activities, is associated with sexual desire, depressive mood, an avoidant attachment style, and male gender. As shown in Table 3 (standardized coefficients), the results suggest that the most important influence on the CIUS scores is depressive mood, followed by avoidant attachment style, male gender, and sexual desire.

Debunking RealYBOP’s unsupported talking point that “high sexual desire” explains away porn or sex addiction: At least 25 studies falsify the claim that sex & porn addicts “just have high sexual desire.”

It’s important to address the unbelievable claim that “high sexual desire” is mutually exclusive to porn addiction. Its irrationality becomes clear if one considers hypotheticals based on other addictions. (For more see this critique of Prause’s flawed EEG study – High desire’, or ‘merely’ an addiction? A response to Steele et al., by Donald L. Hilton, Jr., MD*.)

For example, does such logic mean that being morbidly obese, unable to control eating, and being extremely unhappy about it, is simply a “high desire for food?” Extrapolating further, one must conclude that alcoholics simply have a high desire for alcohol, right? In short, all addicts have “high desire” for their addictive substances and activities (called “sensitization”), even when their enjoyment of such activities declines due to other addiction-related brain changes (desensitization).

Another, more legitimate, way to interpret “higher desire” to masturbate or have sex: This is quite possibly evidence of sensitization, which is greater reward circuit (brain) activation and craving when exposed to (porn) cues. Sensitization can be a precursor to addiction.

Most addiction experts consider “continued use despite negative consequences” to be the prime marker of addiction. After all, someone could have porn-induced erectile dysfunction and be unable to venture beyond his computer in his mother’s basement. Yet, according to these researchers, as long as he indicates “high sexual desire,” he has no addiction. This paradigm ignores everything known about addiction, including symptoms and behaviors shared by all addicts, such as severe negative repercussions, inability to control use, cravings, etc.

———————–

RealYBOP had to go all the way back to 1989 to cherry-pick an outlier study:

The truth is that nearly every study assessing porn use and egalitarianism (sexual attitudes) has reported that porn use is associated with attitudes toward women that both liberals and conservatives regard as extremely problematic. Check out this list of over 25 studies link porn use to “un-egalitarian attitudes” toward women and sexist views, or this 2016 meta-analysis of 135 studies: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015. Excerpt:

The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. The focus was on research published in peer-reviewed, English-language journals between 1995 and 2015. A total of 109 publications that contained 135 studies were reviewed. The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

Also – this review of the literature: Pornography and Attitudes Supporting Violence Against Women: Revisiting the Relationship in Nonexperimental Studies (2010). An excerpt:

A meta-analysis was conducted to determine whether nonexperimental studies revealed an association between men’s pornography consumption and their attitudes supporting violence against women. The meta-analysis corrected problems with a previously published meta-analysis and added more recent findings. In contrast to the earlier meta-analysis, the current results showed an overall significant positive association between pornography use and attitudes supporting violence against women in nonexperimental studies. In addition, such attitudes were found to correlate significantly higher with the use of sexually violent pornography than with the use of nonviolent pornography, although the latter relationship was also found to be significant.

———————–

Tweeting a 10-year old outlier study on adolescents:

Check out YBOP’s expose’ on RealYBOP’s cherry-picked collection of adolescent studies: Youth Section

As always, the Alliance provides only a handful of outlier studies or fillers to delude journalists and the public that porn use is harmless for adolescents. As with the other sections, the Alliance provides no reviews of the literature or meta-analyses. Why did the Alliance omit these seven literature reviews on pornography and “Youth” (adolescents): review#1, review2, review#3, review#4, review#5, review#6, review#7, review#8, review#9, review#10, review#11?

Why has the Alliance omitted all 240 studies in this comprehensive list of peer-reviewed papers assessing porn’s effect on adolescents? The answer is clear: the reviews, as with the vast majority of individual studies, fail to align with the Alliance’s pro-porn agenda. Here we present the reviews the Alliance omitted with relevant excerpts…..

———————–

Tweeting an outlier study employing the PCES (which ALWAYS finds that more porn is beneficial):

As for the findings, this to be expected as the study used the porn use questionnaire known as the Pornography Consumption Effect Scale (PCES). As explained in this critique by YBOP and a psychology professor the study creating the PCES may be the most egregious porn study ever published (Hald & Malamuth, 2008).

The PCES questions are designed and scored so that the more porn one uses the greater the benefits. In fact, if you don’t use porn, the lack of porn use is having a negative effect on your life according to this instrument. This is no exaggeration as many PCES-based studies conclude just that! This 7-minute video critique of the PCES reveals Hald & Malamuth’s primary results from what a dismayed psychology professor called a “psychometric nightmare”:

  • Porn use was almost always beneficial – with few, if any, drawbacks, for anyone.
  • The more hardcore the porn the greater its positive effects in your life. Put simply, “More porn is always better.”
  • For both genders the more porn you use, the more you believe it represents real sex, and the more you masturbate to it, the more positive the effects it has in every area of your life.

The PCES almost always reports benefits because:

  1. Hald & Malamuth randomly decided what was a “positive” and “negative” effect of porn use. For example “added to your knowledge of anal sex” is always beneficial, while “reducing your sexual fantasies” is always negative.
  2. The PCES gives equal weight to questions that do not assess equivalent effects. For example, compare the gravity of “Has added to your knowledge of anal sex?” with “Has led to problems in your sex life?” Whether or not you think superficial effects are positive effects, they are in no way equivalent to reduced quality of life (job loss, divorce), or problems in your sex life (erectile dysfunction, no sex drive).

In other words, your marriage could be destroyed and you could have chronic ED, but your PCES score can still show that porn has been just great for you. As one recovering porn user said after viewing the 47 PCES questions:

Yeah, I’ve dropped out of university, developed problems with other addictions, never had a girlfriend, have lost friends, got into debt, still have ED and never had sex in real life. But at least I know about all the porn star acts and am up to speed on all the different positions. So yeah, basically porn has enriched my life no end.

———————-

Tweets that porn is a source of inspiration:

“Source of inspiration” mean greater use of sex toys and more anal sex. From the study:

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between pornography use and sexual behavior in young adults from two culturally different countries. Data were collected in an online survey among German (n = 1,303; G) and Polish (n = 1,135; P) university students aged 18 to 26 years. Pornography use was associated with engaging in a greater variety of sexual activities (e.g., sexual role playing, using sex toys; G > P) rather than with a high number of sex partners or condom use consistency. The differences between the samples were found primarily for females (in anal sex experience and age at the first sexual intercourse;

———————

Ah yes, the usual talking point that greater availability of porn leads to lower rates of sex crimes. The porn industry no doubt loves that myth:

Three problems:

  1. Its not a peer-reviewed study.
  2. The author of the paper carefully selected only the years 1998-2003, only males ages 15-19, only the USA.
  3. It’s not really accurate. See – Rape rates are on the rise, so ignore the pro-porn propaganda (2018).

——————-

Trolling a 2-month old tweet by anti-porn activist Suzzan Blac:

YBOP’s critique of RealYBOP’s “sex offender” section: Sex Offender Section.

The next day, Suzzan Blac calls out RealYBOP (Prause), and Prause replies with her usual lies, even implying that Gary Wilson has sent death threats. Prause provides no proof (she never does for any of her victim claims), because she is lying.

The truth is on these extensive pages:

RealYBOP blocked Suzzan Blac so she couldn’t see the RealYBOP/Prause’s defamatory reply. Blac reponded anyway:

 

——————–

Trolling a well-known therapist with falsehoods – (Note: RealYBOP often simultaneously tweets & blocks so that the person being trolled is never aware, and doesn’t reply):

YBOP’s critique of RealYBOP’s “relationship section”: Love and Intimacy Section. Reality – Over 75 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction. As far as we know all studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

——————–

Third trolling episode of the same. More propaganda:

RealYBOP is referring to Taylor Kohut’s study that she has tweeted 40 times (as documented on this page). Exposed here: Critique of “Is Pornography Really about Making Hate to Women? Pornography Users Hold More Gender Egalitarian Attitudes Than Nonusers in a Representative American Sample” (2016), Taylor Kohut, Jodie L. Baer, Brendan Watts.

YBOP’s critique of RealYBOP’s section with the above studies: Attitudes Towards Women Section.

———————-

Trolling a 4th person, with the usal Prause propaganda that the ICD-11 rejected porn addiction:

RealYBOP (Prause) tweets a link to an excerpt from Prause’s Geoffrey Reed email. Geoffrey Reed isn’t an official WHO spokesperson, and this was only a private email to Prause to get her off of his back. In truth only one official WHO spokesperson had commented on CSBD – Christian Lindmeier. If you have any doubts about the true nature of the Prause/RealYBOP campaign, carefully read this responsible article about compulsive sexual behavior disorder (CSBD). It quotes official WHO spokesperson Christian Lindmeier. Lindmeier is one of only four officials WHO spokespersons listed on this page: Communications contacts in WHO headquarters – and the only WHO spokesperson to have formally commented about CSBD! The SELF article also interviewed Shane Kraus, who was at the center of the ICD-11’s Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder (CSBD) working group. Excerpt with Lindmeir quotes makes it clear that WHO did not reject “sex addiction”:

In regards to CSBD, the largest point of contention is whether or not the disorder should be categorized as an addiction. “There is ongoing scientific debate on whether or not the compulsive sexual behavior disorder constitutes the manifestation of a behavioral addiction,” WHO spokesperson Christian Lindmeier tells SELF. “WHO does not use the term sex addiction because we are not taking a position about whether it is physiologically an addiction or not.

A January, 2019 WHO paper also discusses CSBD (Innovations and changes in the ICD‐11 classification of mental, behavioural and neurodevelopmental disorders):

Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder is characterized by a persistent pattern of failure to control intense repetitive sexual impulses or urges, resulting in repetitive sexual behaviour over an extended period (e.g., six months or more) that causes marked distress or impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning.

Although this category phenomenologically resembles substance dependence, it is included in the ICD‐11 impulse control disorders section in recognition of the lack of definitive information on whether the processes involved in the development and maintenance of the disorder are equivalent to those observed in substance use disorders and behavioural addictions.

Note: A new WHO paper (Geoffrey Reed is one of the authors) calls out Prause’s behavior on ICD-11 comment section: Public stakeholders’ comments on ICD‐11 chapters related to mental and sexual health (2019). WHO discusses public comments made in the proposed ICD-11 mental disorders comment section, including “compulsive sexual behavior disorder” where Nicole Prause posted more comments than everyone else combined (22), disparaging individuals and organizations, making false accusations and engaging in libel. Bold type describes Prause comments:

Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder received the highest number of submissions of all mental disorders (N=47), but often from the same individuals (N=14). The introduction of this diagnostic category has been passionately debated3 and comments on the ICD‐11 definition recapitulated ongoing polarization in the field. Submissions included antagonistic comments among commenters, such as accusations of a conflict of interest or incompetence (48%) or claims that certain organizations or people would profit from inclusion or exclusion in ICD‐11 (43%).

Click here if you want to read the public comments on the ICD-11 CSBD sections (including the hostile/defamatory/disparaging ones). You will need to sign up with a username to view comments.

Prause’s Op-Ed is chock full of unsupported assertions meant to fool the lay public. It fails to support a single assertion as it cites only 4 papers – none of which have anything to do with porn addiction, porn’s effects on relationships, or porn-induced sexual problems. Several experts in this field debunked its assertions and empty rhetoric in this relatively short response – Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography? (2016). Unlike the “neuroscientists of the Op-Ed,” they cited several hundred studies and multiple reviews of the literature.

———————

The Guardian article got it wrong, as the study in question did not ask about porn use.

———————

RealYBOP retweeting a “call girls” tweet:

——————–

May, 2019: David Ley and RealYBOP misrepresenting Staci Sprout’s tweet. Sprout said nothing about “sex addiction”:

RealYBOP (Prause) harassing Staci Sprout, yet again: January 24, 2018: Prause files groundless complaints with Washington State against therapist Staci Sprout. RealYBOP tweets a link to an excerpt from Prause’s Geoffrey Reed email (discussed above). Contrary to RealYBOP assertion, Sprout’s tweet is completely accurate, says nothing about “sex addiction,” and links to yet another 2019 paper by WHO in World Psychiatry:

The new WHO paper linked to by Sprout (Geoffrey Reed is one of the authors) calls out Prause’s behavior on ICD-11 comment section: Public stakeholders’ comments on ICD‐11 chapters related to mental and sexual health (2019). WHO discusses public comments made on proposed ICD-11 mental disorders, incuding “compulsive sexual behavior disorder” where Nicole Prause posted more comments than everyone else combined (22), disparaging individuals and organizations, making false accusations and engaging in libel. Bold type describes Prause comments:

Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder received the highest number of submissions of all mental disorders (N=47), but often from the same individuals (N=14). The introduction of this diagnostic category has been passionately debated3 and comments on the ICD‐11 definition recapitulated ongoing polarization in the field. Submissions included antagonistic comments among commenters, such as accusations of a conflict of interest or incompetence (48%) or claims that certain organizations or people would profit from inclusion or exclusion in ICD‐11 (43%).

Click here if you want to read the public comments on the ICD-11 CSBD sections (including the hostile/defamatory/disparaging ones). You will need to sign up with a username to view comments.

———————-

Obsessively tweeting same thing over and over again:

7th or 8th tweet of the day, mentioning WHO and the ICD-11 diagnosis for CSBD:

Exposing RealYBOP’s “Models of Hypersexuality”section – with its handful of irrelevant papers – as irresponsible: Models of Hypersexuality Section.

More ICD spin:

The truth:

1) “Most contested”: If RealYBOP means most comments on ICD-11 beta draft, it was Prause who created the “most” comments as she posted more than all others combined! Add in Prause allies such as David Ley, Roger Libby and others, and all the “contested comments” came from a handful of obsessed spammers (who now run the RealYBOP Twitter account!). A new WHO paper (Geoffrey Reed is one of the authors) calls out Prause’s behavior on ICD-11 comment section: Public stakeholders’ comments on ICD‐11 chapters related to mental and sexual health (2019). WHO discusses public comments made on proposed ICD-11 mental disorders, including “compulsive sexual behavior disorder” where Prause posted more comments than everyone else combined (22), disparaging individuals and organizations, making false accusations and engaging in libel. Bold type describes Prause comments:

Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder received the highest number of submissions of all mental disorders (N=47), but often from the same individuals (N=14). The introduction of this diagnostic category has been passionately debated3 and comments on the ICD‐11 definition recapitulated ongoing polarization in the field. Submissions included antagonistic comments among commenters, such as accusations of a conflict of interest or incompetence (48%) or claims that certain organizations or people would profit from inclusion or exclusion in ICD‐11 (43%).

2) ICD rarely changes. The 1990 ICD, without homosexuality, was ICD-10. The previous ICD-9 was created in the mid 1970’s. The DSM had homosexuality in the DSM until 1973.

———————-

According to RealYBOP – “A majority of women have enjoyed rape pornography, while a minority of women describe it as their most preferred content.”

Propaganda. No citation for the claim. The linked to article contains no citation to support this claim. The “realYBOP” research page contains no study to support the claim that most woman enjoy rape porn.

—————–

RealYBOP (Prause aliases) cites an article by the Adult Video News (AVN) to disparage FTND. Sounds like someone is back-tracking as no amount of editing could put words in the former porn star’s mouth (and he hasn’t asked FTND to take down the interview). Interview: Most Successful Male Porn Star Of All Time Speaks Out On Porn

While Prause and RealYBOP have posted countless times that FTND misrepresents studies, they never link to an example of misrepresentation. Never.

——————

Innacurate claims by RealYBOP:

First, studies examine neutral constructs like sexual or relationship satisfaction. More is better, less not so much. These types of studies are the most legitimate.

Second, as for “participants reported greater positive self-perceived effects” this to be expected as the study used the porn use questionnaire known as the Pornography Consumption Effect Scale (PCES). As explained in this critique by YBOP and a psychology professor the study creating the PCES may be the most egregious porn study ever published (Hald & Malamuth, 2008).

The PCES questions are designed and scored so that the more porn one uses the greater the benefits. In fact, if you don’t use porn, the lack of porn use is having a negative effect on your life according to this instrument. This is no exaggeration as many PCES-based studies conclude just that! This 7-minute video critique of the PCES reveal Hald & Malamuth’s primary results from what a dismayed psychology professor called a “psychometric nightmare”:

  • Porn use was almost always beneficial – with few, if any, drawbacks, for anyone.
  • The more hardcore the porn the greater its positive effects in your life. Put simply, “More porn is always better.”
  • For both genders the more porn you use, the more you believe it represents real sex, and the more you masturbate to it, the more positive the effects it has in every area of your life.

The PCES almost always reports benefits because:

  1. Hald & Malamuth randomly decided what was a “positive” and “negative” effect of porn use. For example “added to your knowledge of anal sex” is always beneficial, while “reducing your sexual fantasies” is always negative.
  2. The PCES gives equal weight to questions that do not assess equivalent effects. For example, compare “Has added to your knowledge of anal sex?” with “Has led to problems in your sex life?” Whether or not you think superficial effects are positive effects, they are in no way equivalent to reduced quality of life (job loss, divorce), or problems in your sex life (erectile dysfunction, no sex drive).

In other words, your marriage could be destroyed and you could have chronic ED, but your PCES score can still show that porn has been just great for you. As one recovering porn user said after viewing the 47 PCES questions: “Yeah, I’ve dropped out of university, developed problems with other addictions, never had a girlfriend, have lost friends, got into debt, still have ED and never had sex in real life. But at least I know about all the porn star acts and am up to speed on all the different positions. So yeah, basically porn has enriched my life no end.”

——————–

RealYBOP retweets a tweet by an advocy group for porn performers: Adult Performers Unite:

——————

More support for porn industry agenda” ‘fake porn panic”:

—————-

Links to two PhD’s who think it’s just fine to let sexual offenders use porn:

——————

David Ley and Prause (as RealYBOP Twitter & “sciencearousal”) continue their campaign to connect porn recovery forums to white supremacists/Nazis. It’s 2019 and not much has changed. David Ley and Prause (as RealYBOP Twitter & “sciencearousal”) are still campaigning to connect porn recovery forums and anti-porn activists to anti-Semitism and fascism. This is just the latest, as we have already documented Prause and Ley’s previous attempts in other sections:

It appears that David Ley collaborated again with journalist Rob Kuznia to produce the following June, 2019 NY Times piece: “Among Some Hate Groups, Porn Is Viewed as a Conspiracy.” Back in 2017 Kuznia collaborated with Prause and Ley to produce a factually inaccurate hit-piece for The Daily Beast. As was cleverly done in his 2017 Daily Beast article, Kuznia tricks the reader into presuming connections that don’t really exist. For example, in this new piece he places two unconnected sentences into a single paragraph to fool the reader into thinking that reddit/nofap is populated by white nationalists and somehow connected to the Proud Boys.

For example, a forum on Reddit is a support group of sorts for 440,000 members who take breaks from masturbation and porn for what they believe to be mental, physical and sexual-health reasons. The Proud Boys, a self-professed “western chauvinist” group, encouraged a similar message.

Neither is the case, and Kuznia provides no evidence. But hey, that’s what you can expect from agenda-driven journalists.

Concurrently with the latest Kuznia smear, Prause tunes up with two aliases representing her new website (which illegally infringes on YBOP’s trademarks): realyourbrainonporn twitter account and reddit user scienceofarousal. First, here are the targeted tweets (which both Ley and Prause retweet):

RealYBOP falsely claims the “anti-porn” movement is rooted in hate groups.

Next, RealYBOP links to the Xhamster thread where (in December, 2018) Prause defamed Alexander Rhodes of NoFap. (For details, see December, 2018: Prause joins Xhamster to smear NoFap & Alexander Rhodes; induces Fatherly.com to publish a hit-piece where Prause is the “expert”.)

RealYBOP trolls another thread with Prause’s standard claims about being stalked or receiving rape threats. Prause has yet to provide documentation for these incidents. On the other hand, the page you’re reading, and its sister page, document Prause lying numerous times by making false claims that Gary Wilson, Alex Rhodes, and Clay Olsen have threatened or stalked her physically.

As RealYBOP was tweeting, the RealYBOP Reddit account (user/sciencearousal) was spamming r/nofap with the Kuznia article, implying that r/nofap is a hate group:

Sciencearousal (Prause) followed up her post with what on the surface appears to be an uncharacteristically sincere answer:

However, closer examination reveals a link to one of Prause & Ley’s all time favorite propaganda articles: a 2016 David Duke article with a link to Gary Wilson’s TEDx talk. Ley and Prause have used this over and over to suggest (falsely) that Wilson is allied with Duke. That’s what sciencearousal is trying to do with her oh-so-reasonable comment (hoping not to be deleted). Disgusting ploy.

A few more examples:

Prause immediately retweeted it (then later deleted her tweet):

Wilson’s TEDx talk has some 11 million views, so thousands of folks of all stripes have linked to (and recommended) Wilson’s talk, “The Great Porn Experiment.” How does this implicate Gary Wilson as a “white supremacist?” It doesn’t, of course. This ridiculous assertion is like suggesting all dog lovers are Nazis because Hitler loved his dogs.

RealYBOP continues, trolling a thread to spread her usual propaganda:

——————

RealYBOP & Ley team up again to attack the concept porn-induced sexual dysfunctions (Prause’s #1 obsession). Both tweeted in reponse to a person questioning Ley, and citing YBOP’s research page (which has about 500 studies that debunking Ley’s talking points):

No, RealYBOP didn’t “look hard”. YBOP critque of RealYBOP’s section: Erectile And Other Sexual Dysfunctions Section. Reality: This list contains over 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions.

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

RealYBOP continues, appearing to suggest that porn is OK for kids:

RealYBOP links to its laughable “youth section”, which YBOP dismantled here: Youth Section. As always, RealYBOP provides only a handful of outlier studies or fillers to delude journalists and the public that porn use is harmless for adolescents. As with the other sections, RealYBOP provides no reviews of the literature or meta-analyses. RealYBOP/Prause omitted these 12 literature reviews on pornography and “Youth” (adolescents): review#1, review2, review#3, review#4, review#5, review#6, review#7, review#8, review#9, review#10, review#11, review#12? RealYBOP/Prause omitted all 260 studies in this comprehensive list of peer-reviewed papers assessing porn’s effect on adolescents.

——————

A RealYBOP tweet that is unrelated to Fight The New Drug, cites Prause’s debunked op-ed disparaging FTND:

Reality concerning her 600-word op-ed: Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography? (2016)

RealYBOP cherry-picks a study, then misrepresents it:

Here’s the abstract and what it actually says:

Using a probability-based sample of young Danish adults and a randomized experimental design, this study investigated effects of past pornography consumption, experimental exposure to nonviolent pornography, perceived realism of pornography, and personality (i.e., agreeableness) on sexist attitudes (i.e., attitudes toward women, hostile and benevolent sexism). Further, sexual arousal mediation was assessed. Results showed that, among men, an increased past pornography consumption was significantly associated with less egalitarian attitudes toward women and more hostile sexism. Further, lower agreeableness was found to significantly predict higher sexist attitudes. Significant effects of experimental exposure to pornography were found for hostile sexism among low in agreeableness participants and for benevolent sexism among women.

YBOP debunks and exposes RealYBOP’s research section – Love and Intimacy Section

—————–

More propaganda. In reality “sex addiction” was never considered for the ICD-1. Neither the the ICD-11 nor the DSM uses the word addiction, for any addiction. Both use “disorder”:

The deniers of porn addiction are agitated because the latest version of the World Health Organization’s medical diagnostic manual, The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), contains a new diagnosis suitable for diagnosing what is commonly referred to as ‘porn addiction’ or ‘sex addiction.’ It’s called “Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder” (CSBD). The first section of this extensive critique expose Prause’s falsehoods surrounding the ICD-11: Debunking “Why Are We Still So Worried About Wat­­ching Porn?” by Marty Klein, Taylor Kohut, and Nicole Prause (2018).

RealYBOP was informed about the ICD-11. She reponded with her usual factually innacurate reply:

——————-

RealYBOP fabricates excerpt. Even though the new paper is by close ally Samuel Perry – it never said that masturbation is the functional equivalent of porn:

—————–

Faced with a corrleation she doesn’t care for, RealYBOP makes unsupported claim. The correlation: “higher likelihood of committing infidelity is associated with preferences for gangbang scenes in pornography”. Nope, the study to not turn “the causal arrow”, and the authors of the study do not make this assertion:

——————-

RealYBOP falsely claims that a study “busts the myth” that men watch more porn than women. Numerous individuals mock her for this misrepresentation:

The next day:

Another PhD making fun of RealYBOP’s “myth-busting”

Yet more criticism:

Within a day RealYBOP has become an internet meme, yet she still defends her original tweet. In this thread RealYBOP argues that being drunk does not impair driving:

RealYBOP exposed.

—————–

Upset by a new study, RealYBOP tries to spin the findings.

RealYBOP is busted. Unfortunately for her, the full paper is available here: The Effects of Pornography on Unethical Behavior in Business (2019) Excerpts:

Given the pervasive nature of pornography, we study how viewing pornography affects unethical behavior at work. Using survey data from a sample that approximates a nationally representative sample in terms of demographics, we find a positive correlation between viewing pornography and intended unethical behavior. We then conduct an experiment to provide causal evidence. The experiment confirms the survey—consuming pornography causes individuals to be less ethical. We find that this relationship is mediated by increased moral disengagement from dehumanization of others due to viewing pornography. Combined, our results suggest that choosing to consume pornography causes individuals to behave less ethically.

——————-

Tweets pro-porn activist, and former porn site owner, Jerry Barnett’s (“@PornPanic”), propaganda:

———————-

More pro-porn propaganda, from 1988!

——————-

About the 500th time Prause/RealYBOP has tweeted about Mormons and attacked porn as a public health issue. This incredibly biased video by “slutever” contains Mormon porn (not kidding):

——————-

Tweet about Grubbs CPUI-9 studies:

In reality level of porn use was strongest predictor of porn addiction, not moral anything. See:

——————–

RealYBOP says treaments for porn related problems should NOT involve reduction of use. Porn industry loves that.

——————-

Once again, RealYBOP misrepresents the ICD-11 diagnosis:

—————-

Is RealYBOP supporting sex trafficking (via their support for BackPage)? What does BackPage have to do with the effects of porn on the user?

1) More about BackPage.

2) The lawyer for Nicole R Prause in her attempt to steal the YBOP trademark and URL was the lawyer for BackPage!

——————-

Never asks about negatives, never tweets a study reporting negatives.

——————-

Disparaging an article about the negative effects of porn:

—————–

Tweets article by biased researchers:

Reading their paper exposes them as biased. More importantly, the author tags RealYBOP, Prause, Ley, Josh Grubbs, Sam Perry (all involved in illegal trademark infringement of YBOP) in this tweet, while hashtag’s pathologizing-porn.

—————–
ReaYBOP tweets the 3rd junk paper by NZ grad student Kris Taylor. Taylor is beyond biased – and knows nothing about neuroscience. He’s a sociologist. YBOP critiqued a 2017 article by him where he disparaged Gary Wilson and the review with US navy doctors (Taylor often resorts to simply lying in his article): Debunking Kris Taylor’s “A Few Hard Truths about Porn and Erectile Dysfunction” (2017)

Taylor’s 2 earlier papers are favs of Prause and Ley (especially the one about r/nofap), with Prause’s Wikipedia aliases inserting both into Wikipedia pages. Prause obsessively cites (and misrepresents) Taylor’s paper about Nofap.

—————–

Retweets RealYBOP “expert”, grad student Madita Oeming’s tweet about her biased article trying to blame religion and the media for porn addiction:

In her article Madita Oeming admits she knows nothing about addiction, or neuroscience, or the neurological studies on porn users, but she is miraculously confident that porn addiction doesn’t exist. Her qualifying statement:

I am neither a neurobiologist nor a behavioral psychologist, so I have no expertise in judging whether pornography is actually physically addictive. But first, it will be discussed among those who have this expertise. Although the WHO has now decided to “obsessive-compulsive sexual behavior”, including apparently also “excessive consumption of porn” , from 2022 to include in their diagnostic catalog. And secondly, I’m dealing with something completely different. As a cultural scientist, er, poetry interpreter, I understand pornography primarily as a narrative.

A poetry student?

——————-

RealYBOP trolling the New York Times OBGYN Jen Gunter because she’s not a fan of porn. RealYBOP links to an article by Free Speech Coalition employee Lotus Lain. Helping out the porn industry whenever she can:

RealYBOP claims that “Many viewers also experience improved body image” are debunked here: Body Image Section.

—————–

Why does RealYBOP chronically posts tweets in support of the porn industry, when RealYBOP claims to be concerned about porn’s effects on the users?

The answer is obvious.

——————-

Another fine example of RealYBOP omitting the primary findings while highlighting irrelevant findings (a form of propaganda):

The important findings:

Controlling for pornography viewing frequency, religious identity, and sexual orientation, structural equation modeling revealed power over women and playboy norms as associated with increased problematic pornography viewing, while emotional control and winning norms were negatively related to problematic pornography viewing. Of these associations, power over women norms produced consistent positive direct effects across all dimensions, whereas emotional control norms produced consistent negative direct effects

Put simply – power over women is associted with probelmatic porn use (porn addiction).

—————–

RealYBOP (Prause) retweets David Ley propaganda piece, where he asserts that he and others are victims of “ant-porn activists (Prause being reported to California Board is recounted, but she is not named). In fact, the opposite is true as Prause and Ley are the perpetrators, with Prause reporting over 20 individuals and organizations to governing bodies (Prause’s comaplinst were all dismissed as being without merits. These pages contains hundreds of instances of Prause and Ley defaming, stalking and harassing those they disagree with about porn’s effects:

——————

A joke tweet?

Never blame the porn industry, just those who suggest porn may cause problems. The article.

—————–

As for the findings, this to be expected as the study used the porn use questionnaire known as the Pornography Consumption Effect Scale (PCES). As explained in this critique by YBOP and a psychology professor the study creating the PCES may be the most egregious porn study ever published (Hald & Malamuth, 2008).

The PCES questions are designed and scored so that the more porn one uses the greater the benefits. In fact, if you don’t use porn, the lack of porn use is having a negative effect on your life according to this instrument. This is no exaggeration as many PCES-based studies conclude just that! This 7-minute video critique of the PCES reveals Hald & Malamuth’s primary results from what a dismayed psychology professor called a “psychometric nightmare”.

—————–

Tweeted a highly criticized paper:

Getting a lot of press, falsely claiming that men and women are no different in how they respond to porn. The headline doesn’t match the study or authors spin as they did assess MAGNITUDE of brain respo

But questions remain. The latest study was not able to look at whether the magnitude of the changes of brain activity were the same for both biological sexes.

So it doesn’t assess if men are more turned than women by the same images – so the headlines are BS. As I pointed out in my critique of Prause’s EEG studies (which mixed males, females, gay straight) – men and women have different brain responses to the same sexual images. That’s what these studies and reviews found:

Here are 3 comments by PhD’s from an academic sexology listserve. Two of the three have done reviews of the literature on this very subject. The 1st is Mike Bailey, who runs the listserve. I omitted the name of the 2nd name. The 3rd is Kim Wallen who runs a journal and did earlier stduies on Amygdala described in RealYBOP’s tweet.

On Tue, Jul 16, 2019, Mike Bailey wrote:

Um, no
> *Women as likely to be turned on by sexual images as men – study*

Subject: Re: Women as likely to be turned on by sexual images as men – study

I agree with Mike.

While I appreciate that they included a lot of our work, I have some concerns about this paper.

1. I could be mistaken, but it doesn’t seem like they’re taking into account effect sizes from the original studies. It’s one thing to say that areas are likely to “show up”, but this doesn’t address the question, “how much.” Without taking this information into account, these may not be sound statistical inferences.

2. Many of the individual studies show male>female responses (e.g. Karama et al., Sabatinelli et al., Hamann et al., Sylva et al., Safron et al. (in press)), and I don’t believe any show effects in the opposite direction. In case anyone wants more details on that, I’ve attached an unpublished
manuscript I wrote in 2015 where I reviewed much of this literature. I probably should have published it, but perfectionism got in the way, and then I got distracted. Reminder to self: Perfect is the enemy of the good.

3. They don’t really show any clearly reward-related activations. Only ventral striatum has been shown to be valence specific (and even then you can have mixed results). One could make a case for hypothalamus, but even then, I worry about the poor spatial resolution of non-invasive neuroimaging (although 7T scanning might be a game changer).

This study never would have been published if it didn’t further political agendas.

This study will be interpreted as pushing back against patriarchal assumptions that biased scientific practice and reporting. I imagine this was the case in the past, but I don’t think it’s been an accurate description for a long time, and now may frame the situation precisely backwards.

Politics is the minds killer.

—-B

Subject: Re: [External] Re: Women as likely to be turned on by sexual images as men – study

Thanks for your insightful comments. I would add a few additional concerns. I was particularly struck by the fact that the authors highlighted Stephan Hamann’s and my study in 2004 where we demonstrated a sex difference in amygdala activation. The authors went on to say that when they used the whole sample they didn’t find this sex difference. There are two aspects of this that I find curious. The first is that in 2014 Stephan and I replicated our 2004 finding in the control men and women in our CAIS study. Interestingly this study is not in the metaanalysis sample (I have asked logothetis why this was not included). It would seem that replication with comparable effect sizes in both samples would warrant some consideration.

A second issue is that from the sample size the authors claimed to have used to assess sex differences in amygdala activation, they clearly used all of the subjects including nonheterosexuals and trans people. This strikes me as inappropriate as our samples were limited to heterosexual men and women. Since that is the population from which the sex difference was identified it would seem that the heterosexual portion of the MA sample (about 90% of the sample) should have been the sample to compare to our samples.

I think there is also a concern about the earlier conclusion that there are not sex differences. This too is based on the whole sample. They found sex had <1% predictive value, whereas sexual orientation had 15% predictive value. Given that for 90% of the sample sex and sexual orientation are congruent it is surprising that sexual orientation shows an effect, but sex doesn’t. This leads me to think that SO interacts with sex in a manner that eliminates the sex effect. This most likely reflects that sex in this analysis is categorical, whereas SO is a more or less continuous variable. I would have liked to see a metaanalysis that used only the heterosexual sample to investigate the sex difference in response. I didn’t see such an analysis in the supplementary materials, maybe I missed it. Given the findings for SO I suspect that sex differences would be found in the heterosexual only sample.

I am not sure that I agree that this illustrates that a political agenda drives this paper, though it is in the current zeitgeist. Sadly I think it more reflects that age old circumstance where members of the NAS can publish whatever they damn well please. Those must have been some sweetheart reviews that this got

Kim Wallen, Ph.D.

——————–

RealYBOP saying addiction model causes harm (she cites nothing to support propaganda):

———————–

Propaganda: trying to blame masturbation, not porn, for the hundreds of studies that link porn use to myriad negative effects.

Ongoing tactic by Ley & Prause, as chronicled in this article – Sexologists deny porn-induced ED by claiming masturbation is the problem (2016)

———————-

Tweeting another junk-science paper by sociology grad student Kris Taylor:

YBOP exposed Taylor as making several false statements in this critique: Debunking Kris Taylor’s “A Few Hard Truths about Porn and Erectile Dysfunction” (2017).

————————

RealYBOP tweeting unsupported claim by realYBOP “expert”, Joshua Grubbs (how scientific of Grubbs to make definitive pronouncements, backed by nothing)

Link to the YBOP analysis of the RealYBOP research section (which discredits Grubbs definitive pronouncement): Sex Offender Section.

Grubbs spouting more unsupported definitive statements in support of porn and gaming industry

————————

RealYBOP cites a 30-year old outlier study to convince us that employing misogynistic images of females to sell goods is OK:

Porn industry thanks you, RealYBOP.

—————————-

Two for one: 1) misrepresentation of the tweeted study, 2) ignoring every quantitative study on relationships

Misrepresentation – “subliminal but not supraliminal exposure”. In other words ,subliminal had a transient effect, but actual porn exposure did help out the situation.

As a pro-porn shill, RealYBOP never tells the truth about the preponderance of studies. Continued use is bad for relationships. Porn’s effects on relationships? Over 70 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction. As far as we know all studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

——————–

RealYBOP directly promoting the porn industry:

——————–

RealYBOP once again pushing her lies about anti-porn activists

If you have any doubt about who RealYBOP might be, see these pages:

———————————

If you still have doubt: July, 2019 – Prause supplies troll NerdyKinkyCommie with a YBOP trademark lawsuit document; NerdyKinkyCommie lies about a document; & RealYBOP experts spread his libelous tweets, adding their own lies

The venomous instigators: David Ley and Nicole Prause’s October, 2018 blog post (Why Fascists Hate Masturbation: The rise of nationalism coincides with anti-masturbation movements) and Twitter tirade attacking & libeling Alexander Rhodes/Nofap, is the culmination of a malicious 3-year campaign to associate YBOP, and men in recovery, with neo-Nazis. In Ley’s reprehensible October 27, 2018 tweet promoting his defamatory blog post, he asks “who knew that YBOP, Nofap, and fascism were really connected?”

Ley and Prause minions: NerdyKinkyCommie, whose Twitter handle is @SexualSocialist, appears to be a prolific troll. He freely admits to being obsessed with porn and sex and revels in harassing and defaming anyone who suggests that internet porn might cause problems. Among his favorite targets are Alexander Rhodes, NoFap, Fight The New Drug, Gary Wilson, and men in recovery from porn-related difficulties. Nerdy’s original Twitter account was permanently banned for relentless harassment of Fight The New Drug (Prause’s original account was also banned for harassment). In violation of Twitter rules, and just like Prause, Nerdy created a new Twitter account for trolling: https://twitter.com/SexualSocialist

NerdyKinkyCommie often re-tweets Ley, RealYBOP and Prause propaganda. Prause, Ley and Nerdy regularly engage in friendly banter, expressing their disdain for the aforementioned targets. In June and July, NerdyKinkyCommie trolled Gary Wilson threads posting material mirroring Prause & Ley’s disgusting tweets and screenshots struggling in vain to connect Gary Wilson, YBOP and Nofap with Nazis and white nationalists. One example of many such tweets:

Prause’s disgusting collaboration with NerdyKinkyCommie resulted in a 7-day Twitter-ban for Nerdy:

Wilson reported NerdyKinkyCommie, who was eventually banned for a week by Twitter.

After the ban, NerdyKinkyCommie continued where he left off, this time aided by Prause, the RealYBOP Twitter account, and RealYBOP “experts.”

On July 21 David Ley tweets in Nerdy’s thread that defamed Wilson:

The next day NerdyKinkyCommie produced a tweet that was most certainly constructed by Nicole Prause.

  1. It falsely accused Wilson of being funded by The Reward Foundation (Prause concocted this lie in 2016, repeating it on social media and on Wikipedia)
  2. The screenshot is of a the YourBrainOnPorn UK trademark provided to Prause’s lawyers, by Wilson, in trademark infringement case made necessary because Prause had filed an application for an infringing trademark.

What the above screenshot actually shows: Acting as Gary Wilson’s UK representative and using Wilson’s money, The Reward Foundation (a UK charity) paid the UK government to trademark YourBrainOnPorn in the UK. The UK trademark was a response to Prause trying to shut down YBOP by:

  1. filing a trademark application to obtain YOURBRAINONPORN and YOURBRAINONPORN.COM in January of 2019 (click for much more), and
  2. publicizing a new website with the trademark-infringing URL realyourbrainonporn.com in April of 2019.

As thoroughly explained elsewhere Wilson donates the proceeds of his book to The Reward Foundation. Wilson accepts no money, and has never received a dime for any of his efforts. YBOP accepts no ads and Wilson has accepted no fees for speaking. As documented in these sections, Prause has constructed a libelous fairy tale that Wilson is being paid by the same charity he donates his book proceeds to:

In fact, this is not true. The above two sections are addressed in Gary Wilson’s sworn affidavit, which is part of the Dr. Hilton’s defamation lawsuit filed against Dr. Prause. Here are the relevant sections of Wilson’s sworn affidavit filed in Federal Court: Gary Wilson of YBOP (affidavit #2 in Hilton defamation lawsuit):

Put simply, Nikky and Nerdy are collaborating in provable defamation (to repeat, Prause provided Nerdy with the “evidence” for his misleading tweet). Then RealYBOP, RealYBOP “experts” and good old PornHub jumped aboard. First we have RealYBOP (Prause) immediately retweeting Nerdy’s lies, and adding her own (RealYBOP “expert” Roger Libby also comments):

All lies. RealYBOP isn’t a registered non-profit. In fact, all the experts advertise their services on RealYBOP. Moreover, David Ley and two other RealYourBrainOnPorn.com “experts” (Justin Lehmiller and Chris Donaghue) are being paid to promote xHamster websites! If you believe that RealYBOP isn’s biased, check out their tweets, or their so-called “research page”. Other RealYBOP “experts” joined NerdyKinkCommie in defaming the legitimate YBOP, Wilson, and The Reward Foundation. First, “expert” Victoria Hartmann:

Then, of course, David Ley:

Taylor Kohut (as Smart Lab), who rarely tweets

Finally we have PornHub, a RealYBOP ally, “liking” the defamatory tweet (PornHub’s was the second Twitter account to tweet about RealYBOp’s new Twitter account and website when it appeared):

Hmmm… PornHub, Prause, Ley and Hartmann all “liking” the tweet of an obscure Twitter troll who had recently completed a 7-day ban for harassing Gary Wilson. Go figure.

The cherry on top of RealYBOP’s targeted defamatory cyberstalking: As described here, RealYBOP’s reddit account, sciencearousal trolled and spammed reddit porn recovery forums, usually posting wherever Gary Wilson’s name or “Your Brain On Porn” appeared. In her recent reddit posts, sciencearousal spammed a nofap subreddit with the same Rob Kuznia article frequently tweeted by RealYBOP and Nikky (Kuznia is pals with Nikky). Nofap deleted her post:

RealYBOP/sciencearousal comment where she links to her fav – David Duke’s article about porn, which conatins a link to Gary Wilson’s TEDx Talk (Sciencearousal comment was deleted):

Scouring the internet for anything Ley can use to smear Wilson, he pounced upon an obscure (and disgusting) David Duke blog post containing a link to Gary Wilson’s TEDx talk. Wilson’s TEDx talk has some 11 million views, so thousands of folks of all stripes have linked to (and recommended) Wilson’s talk, “The Great Porn Experiment.”

How does this implicate Gary Wilson as a “white supremacist?” It doesn’t, of course. This ridiculous assertion is like suggesting all dog lovers are Nazi’s because Hitler loved his dogs. It’s the equivalent of claiming that the producers of “The Matrix” are neo-Nazis because David Duke liked their movie. See: Ongoing – David Ley & Prause’s ongoing attempts to smear YBOP/Gary Wilson & Nofap/Alexander Rhodes by claiming links with neo-Nazi sympathizers.

—————

RealYBOP lying about the research on violence portrayed in porn (no one is buying it). RealYBOP debunked here: Attitudes Towards Women Section

The porn industry thanks you, RealYBOP.

@RealFeminist4 starts her own twitter thread about ReaYBOP’s propaganda, RealYBOP jumps in to support porn industry agenda (RealYBOP cites no research to support its claim).

More accounts pile on RealYBOP’s supprt of the porn industry agenda:

RealYBOP cites nothing.

———————–

RealYBOP promoting paid porn site, with claim that is countered by nearly every published study – Over 70 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction.

So testimonials are OK, as long as they support the porn industry. Just checking, RealYBOP.

————————

RealYBOP doesn’t limit herself to saying porn is great for most everyone, she also retweets propaganda making fun of sex trafficking

———————–

RealYBOP & RealYBOP expert Hartmann attempt to dismiss findings of new study strongly correlated violent porn viewing with dating violence.

The porn industry applaudes your efforts.

——————————

On same day as above, RealYBOP posts propaganda for the porn industry, as she assures us RealYBOP is not directly funded by the porn industry:

However, 3 of RealYBOP experts are now openly funded by the porn industry: David Ley is now being compensated by porn industry giant xHamster to promote its websites and convince users that porn addiction and sex addiction are myths!

————————-

RealYBOP and David Ley teaming up to make fun of porn “being bad” (Ley makes joke about sex trafficking):

————————-

Not only is this tweet defamatory, it reveals that RealYBOP claims to have inside information on what porn performer think or believe.

———————-

For the 100th time or more, RealYBOP (Prause) tweets misinformation about CSBD (covered above and here):

——————–

RealYBOP promoting a paid porn site, implying we should get our sex education from streaming tube sites

Continues, pimping a paid porn site as the cure for ED and other troubles:

——————————-

Fabrications in service to porn industry:

The above is pure BS:

  1. There are not “thousands of studies” assessing physiological responses to viewing porn. Not even 100. Only 2200 PubMed indexed studies mention pornography (dating back to 1951).
  2. Neurological responses cannot be classified as “positive or “negative” in relation to their effect. Eye blink response, galvanic responses, EEG readings, blood flow to sections of the brain are not “positive”. Exposes RealYBOP as knowing nothing about basic biology.
  3. For example, a neurological response isn’t “better” or “more pleasant” because it is of greater magnitude: Ingesting cocaine induces greater activation of the reward than ingesting blueberries. Should we consume cocaine because of this? Idiocy from RealYBOP.
  4. The OBVIOUS: greater or lesser physiological responses in a lab tells us absolutely nothing about the long-term effects of chronically using porn, any more than greater brain activation when snorting cocaine or eating Bic Macs informs us of long-term effects of either.

——————

Prause as RealYBOP contradicts Prause silly talking point that viewing puppies is neurologically identical to watching porn (one of many examples –Penthouse Magazine, featuring Prause). In the hit-piece we find Prause’s hilarious assertion that viewing images of puppies has exactly the same effect as watching hard core porn:

It’s true — pornography does that,” Dr. Prause said previously. “It’s also true with images of chocolate and images of puppies. You don’t see puppies being declared a public health hazard. These sex addiction studies are relying on ignorance, claiming that pornography is the same thing as cocaine and hoping you don’t know any different.

One of Prause’s core claims is that viewing puppies play, or eating cheese/chocolate are neurological & hormonally no different than masturbating internet porn. This talking point is meant to debunk any and all neurological studies on porn users. No actual neuroscientist agrees with Prause’s claim, including Prause tweeting as RealYBOP. Prause contradicts herself when she tweets as RealYBOP (August, 2018), stating that pornography is uniquely pleasurable:

Propagandist speaking out of both sides of her mouth.

——————–

Making ridicuoulsy false statemenst about “porn activists”, while promoting a paid porn site:

———————–

RealYBOP disparaging NoFap, mischaracterizing what Paula Hall said:

It’s important to note that Nicole Prause has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. Finally, it’s important to note that author Nicole Prause has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

—————————–

RealYBOP trolls an account it long ago blocked, with more of its usual pro-porn propaganda:

———————————

Pro-porn propaganda.

————————

RealYBOP disparaging fMRI study by top neuroscentists: Can Pornography be Addictive? An fMRI Study of Men Seeking Treatment for Problematic Pornography Use (Gola et al., 2017)

Study by RealYBOP member Samuel Perry. After sophisticated statistical “modeling” Perry proposed that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship happiness. The gaping hole in Perry’s new analysis is the absence of specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency, as he only asked “When did you last masturbate?” Without solid data on frequency, his claim is little more than a hypothetical. From Perry’s study:

Masturbation Practice. Both the NFSS and the RIA ask the same two questions about masturbation that the author combined into a single masturbation measure for both surveys. Participants were first asked if they have ever masturbated (Yes or No). Those who answered that they had ever masturbated were then asked, “When did you last masturbate?” Responses ranged from 1 = today to 9 = over a year ago.

Perry continues:

“While this question technically does not inquire about frequency…..”

No kidding. And yet Perry, Prause, Ley, Grubbs and others are now making extraordinary claims based on this solitary study, relying on these highly dubious data. The Alliance propaganda machine is in full view with respect to Perry’s re-analysis. Perry’s assertions are countered by over 75 studies linking porn use to lower sexual and relationship satisfaction – and Perry’s current study which correlated more porn use with less relationship happiness. That’s right, greater porn use was associated with less relationship happiness in both Perry samples (A & B):

———

Perry’s claims that he could magically tease apart porn use from masturbation cannot be taken seriously – especially since he lacked accurate data for masturbation frequency.

———————–

Promoting pro-porn course by ReaYBOP member who claims that porn use is only beneficial

More about it – https://twitter.com/LailaMickelwait/status/1164558559897505792

———————-

WOW!

RYBOP saying that kids who don’t know that porn isn’t reality is the only problem with kids watching porn? Instead of using “teens” they used “kids” Kids.

And only kids who don’t know that porn isn’t reality. Otherwise, kids watching porn = ok for them?

Meaning like ages 3-12?

———————————-

Promoting a silly study on horny guys attending a porn convention (AVN)

Seriously? Interviewing “Porn superfans” attending the AVN Adult Entertainment Expo passed peer-review? What’s next, interviewing bar patrons to see if they like beer? Even if taken seriously, the study tells us nothing about the effects of viewing porn as it didn’t correlate porn use with the four criteria. Contrary to the Alliance’s summary, the narrow criteria employed assessed “gender roles,” not sexist or misogynistic attitudes. For example, Harvey Weinstein would score exceptionally high on their gender-role assessment. In more extreme example, any pimp who wants his “hoes” working for his benefit would agree, but that doesn’t rule out extreme misogyny on his part.

As with the Taylor Kohut studies cited here, it’s easy to see that religious/conservative populations would score lower than secular/liberal populations (AVN attendees) on a these carefully chosen criteria. Here’s the key: secular populations, which tend to be more liberal, have far higher rates of porn use than religious populations. (clearly, all the AVN attendees in this study used porn). By choosing certain criteria and ignoring endless other variables, Jackson et al. knew porn fans would score higher on their highly selective version of “egalitarianism.”

Reality: Check out individual studies – over 40 studies link porn use to “un-egalitarian attitudes” toward women and sexist views – or the summary from this 2016 meta-analysis: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015. Excerpt:

The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. The focus was on research published in peer-reviewed, English-language journals between 1995 and 2015. A total of 109 publications that contained 135 studies were reviewed. The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

RealYBOP decided to comment under the article, saying porn is only bad if the guy doesn’t know how to lube an anus:

The above cherry-picked papers are discussed here: Attitudes Towards Women Section. We also expose what studies RealYBOP omitted.

————————

Logical fallacies abound. RealYBOP paints “anti-porn” as a single entity, then tells twitter whatt “ant-porn’ believes about performers:

Again, why is a site supposedly about porn’s effects on the users, tweeting pro-porn industry propaganda?

——————–

Anecdotes in silly articles are ok, as long as they potray porn as beneficial:

RealYBOP trolling, tweeting under a tweet Gary Wilson retweeted, (with a comment)

There’s no falsification of anything: Debunking RealYBOP’s reasearch page section covering porn and relationships – Love and Intimacy Section.

—————————-

Posts a a 2003 study that revaels nothing about porn use. Then makes false staement:

Falsehood: “There is no evidence that people who view more porn have decreased neural responses to it.

Realityty – Prause et al., 2015 reported that more frequent porn users had less brain activation to vanilla porn than did controls? Given the high percentage of porn users who report escalation to more extreme material, sluggish response to laboratory porn would hardly be surprising. In fact, the findings of Prause et al. 2015 align with Kühn & Gallinat (2014), which found that more porn use correlated with less brain activation in response to pictures of vanilla porn, and with Banca et al. 2015, which found faster habituation to sexual images in porn addicts.

RealYBOP caught lying.

—————————-

Tweets a Joe Kort interview of Prause (Both are RealYBOP “experts”):

The interview seems focused on a solitary irrelevant EEG finding showing that watching porn is not neurologically identical to having sex (of course having sex produces different EEG readings than watching porn). Plus an addedl straw men no one ever said (“triggers dangerous neurochemical changes in the brain”). Podcast description:

There’s been a lot of noise in the media about porn use, with many doomsayers claiming that it triggers dangerous neurochemical changes in the brain. However, newer research says that just isn’t so. This week Joe talks with American neuroscientist, Nikki Prause, who thinks that porn and sex are totally different in the brain. Hear Nikki explain how her brain research debunks the myth that you can have an addiction to sex or porn. Brain science is hot these days, so listen to Nikki and Joe talk about how rigorous studies have not found sex addiction to be a real dependency, or reflective of any brain-related compulsion issues at all …

Brushing my teeth is neurologically different than watching cat videos. So what? Anyone who has taken a neuroscience course knows that non-identical activities involve different brain regions activated in a unique sequence or pattern. I hear the sound of real neuroscientists laughing at thsi monumental discovery.
Omission: It’s what porn and sex have in common that matters – same reward system regions activated, same high levels of reward-related neurotransmitter, same brain and hormonal changes induced at orgasm, same powerful learning.


Special Section – Realyourbrainonporn (Daniel Burgess) defamation/harassment of Gary Wilson: Fake porn URLs “found” in the Internet Wayback Archive (August, 21-27, 2019)

Context: realyourbrainonporn.com, Daniel Burgess and Nicole Prause

Prior to February of 2018 I had never heard of Daniel Burgess LMFT. Suddenly, out of nowhere, Burgess used multiple social media platforms to attack me and YBOP. Burgess’s targeted harassment and defamation occurred on Twitter (under several @YourBrainOnPorn tweets) and Facebook (the YBOP Facebook page, one of Burgess’s Facebook pages, and the Marriage and Family Therapists Facebook page).

During his February/March, 2018 social media campaign, Daniel Burgess defamed and harassed me – regurgitating Nicole Prause’s usual set of lies and fabrications of victimhood, which she has spewed for several years. Burgess’s comments and tweets were nearly identical to Prause’s litany of invented misdeeds, leaving no doubt that Burgess and Prause collaborate and are in close communication. (There are rumors of a private Facebook group.) As an example of his malice, I’ll provide Burgess’s initial comment on YBOP’s Facebook page. It includes Nicole Prause’s baseless 2015 cease and desist letter to me (how did Burgess obtain this letter?):

We long ago addressed Prause’s trumped up cease and desist letter. Nothing in it was true. Prause regularly sends spurious C&D letters (obviously written by her, not her lawyer) as a tactic of intimidation: Ongoing – Prause silencing people with fake “no contact” demands and spurious cease & desist letters (Linda Hatch, Rob Weiss, Gabe Deem, Gary Wilson, Marnia Robinson, Alex Rhodes, etc.). Since the C&Ds are fiction, with never an iota of supporting evidence, Prause’s victims pay them no mind.

Soon after Burgess defamed me on the YBOP Facebook page and Twitter, he set his sights on “Marriage and Family Therapists.” The eighteen replies to Burgess by therapists Staci Sprout and Forest Benedict are all that remains of Burgess’s defamatory tirade. Because Burgess displayed his defamation before 6,000 licensed therapists and the YBOP Facebook audience, I felt it necessary to debunk his malicious comments (and his unsupported claims about the preponderance of porn research): Addressing Unsupported Claims and Personal Attacks by Daniel Burgess (March, 2018).

Daniel Burgess’s choice to become Nicole Prause’s errand boy is a key element of this story, as a year later they collaborate once again: (1) engaging in unlawful trademark infringement of YourBrainOnPorn.com by creating realyourbrainonporn.com, and, (2) operating the social media accounts for realyourbrainonporn.com (specifically the trademark-infringing Twitter account – @BrainOnPorn). In fact, in late July, 2019 Daniel Burgess was exposed as the person controlling the trademark-infringing URL www.realyourbrainonporn.com.

Before we return to the failed “Fake URLs” smear campaign of August, 2019, a brief history of Dr. Prause is in order.

In 2013 former UCLA researcher Nicole Prause began openly harassing, libeling and cyberstalking Gary Wilson. (Prause’s UCLA contract was not renewed and she has not been employed by an academic institution since January, 2015.) Within a short time she also began targeting others, including researchers, medical doctors, therapists, psychologists, a former UCLA colleague, a UK charity, men in recovery, a TIME magazine editor, several professors, IITAP, SASH, Fight The New Drug, Exodus Cry, NoFap.com, RebootNation, YourBrainRebalanced, the academic journal Behavioral Sciences, its parent company MDPI, US Navy medical doctors, the head of the academic journal CUREUS, and the journal Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity – to name a few.

While spending her waking hours harassing & defaming others, Prause cleverly cultivated – with zero verifiable evidence – a myth that she was “the victim” of most anyone who dared to disagree with her assertions surrounding porn’s effects or the current state of porn research. To counter the ongoing harassment and false claims, YBOP was compelled to document some of Prause’s activities. Consider the following pages. (Additional incidents have occurred that we are not at liberty to divulge – as Prause’s victims fear further retribution.)

Years of harassment and defamation finally caught up with Burgess’s partner Prause. On May 8, 2019 Donald Hilton, MD filed a defamation per se lawsuit against Nicole Prause & Liberos LLC. On July 24, 2019 Donald Hilton amended his defamation complaint to add (1) a malicious Texas Board of Medical Examiners complaint, (2) false accusations that Dr. Hilton had falsified his credentials, and (3) sworn affidavits from 9 other Prause victims of similar harassment (John Adler, MD, Gary Wilson, Alexander Rhodes, Staci Sprout, LICSW, Linda Hatch, PhD, Bradley Green, PhD, Stefanie Carnes, PhD, Geoff Goodman, PhD, Laila Haddad.)

You would think that a $10,000,000 defamation suit against his chum might have tempered Burgess’s defamatory impulsiveness. Apparently not. In addition to the character-impugning porn-smear campaign (below) conducted by the “Real Brain On Porn” Twitter account (which mirrors Nicole Prause’s litany of falsehoods), the Twitter account also explicitly accused me of at least 3 felonies:

  1. Stalking women in person
  2. Making death threats, and
  3. Hacking into websites.

As explained in more detail below, concurrent with @BrainOnPorn’s 4-day, 100+ tweet rampage, the“RealYourBrainOnPorn” website admin (under Burgess’s control) emailed friends of mine with similar astounding lies.

Publicly accusing people of sexual misconduct and felonies is actionable. In fact, the above libelous statements are deemed “defamation per se” – which means that I need not show any commercial damages in order to recover (the proceeds from my book go to charity and I make no money from YBOP).

August 21, 2019: @RonSwansonTime (likely Burgess alias), Nicole Prause, NerdyKinkyCommie, and David Ley magically “discover” fraudulent porn URLs on the Internet WayBack Machine

On August 21, 2019, a likely Burgess alias (@RonSwansonTime – more on “RonSwanson” below) tweeted a screenshot of fraudulent porn URLs (of pages that never existed). It appeared under a NerdyKinkyCommie tweet ranting about me. (Nerdy is a professional troll and Prause-collaborator who received a 7-day Twitter suspension for harassing me.):

After being outed as a likely Burgess alias, @RonSwansonTime apparently thought better of his participation and set his Twitter account to “protected” (just more evidence that Ron Swanson is really Burgess). The initial Twitter thread “discovering” Mormon porn URLs on the Wayback Machine (8/21/19):

These tweets are the first I, or anyone else, had ever heard of the existence of the fake URLs (of nonexistent pages on YBOP’s Wayback Machine archive).

Initial sequence of events on August 21st:

  1. Nerdy trolls me (for the 100th time or so)
  2. @RonSwansonTime immediately post 2 tweets on the thread, with screenshots and links to the WayBack Machine
  3. Nicole Prause immediately joins the thread
  4. David Ley adds his two cents

Aug 22, 2019: realyourbrainonporn.com admin sends emails containing libelous claims to Gary Wilson’s friends and associates (on the same day @BrainOnPorn posts 14 tweets targeting Wilson)

As expected the trolls and stalkers upped their harassment and defamation. On August 22 this email by the realyourbrainonporn website admin was forwarded to Gary Wilson. (As Burgess owns the URL, we must assume the following was sent by him.)

As the organization forwarding the email knows me, and is keenly aware of RealYBOP’s trademark infringement, and Prause’s long history of defaming and harassing those in the porn skeptics movement, they knew it was all lies.

At the same time RealYBOP sent out libelous emails, its Twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) began furiously pumping out libelous tweets insisting that I had placed 300 “Mormon porn” URLs on my website over a 3-year period starting in 2016 (without anyone ever noticing). One of the fourteen @BrainOnPorn tweets targeting me on August 22nd:

Although @BrainOnPorn began its obsessive Twitter rampage with the Mormon-porn fabrication, it quickly descended into numerous incidents of unrelated defamation. By the end of the weekend @BrainOnPorn had posted over 100 tweets targeting me. @BrainOnPorn often tweeted in my existing threads, or under anyone who had tagged me, or harassed those who retweeted one of my tweets.

Aug 22, 2019: Concurrently, a fake Twitter account is created to post content duplicating RealYBOP’s emails and tweets: https://twitter.com/CorrectingWils1

At the same time that RealYBOP was sending libelous emails and obsessively tweeting fake porn URLs, a fake Twitter account appeared posting the same drivel: https://twitter.com/CorrectingWils1. The CorrectingWilson account tagged the exact same Twitter accounts as RealYBOP was tagging in dozens of similar tweets (Gail Dines, Fight The New Drug, John Foubert, SASH123, and YourBrainOnPorn):

It’s no secret who created https://twitter.com/CorrectingWils1. The troll account was reported and Twitter promptly banned it:

How mentally unhinged is RealYBOP? Or is RealYBOP serving another master?

August 22-24, 2019: Gary Wilson responds, debunking lies that YBOP ever contained Mormon porn URLs or content

In this August 24, 2019 Twitter thread I expose RealYBOP’s targeted harassment/defamation and explain how anyone can insert fake URLs into the Internet Wayback Machine.

This juvenile attack was apparently orchestrated over 2 years and came to light on on August 21, 2019, as explained above. It involved fraudulent URLs (of nonexistent pages) placed on the Internet Wayback Machine, an archive of snapshots of websites across time (operated by a non-profit).

In addition to grabbing screenshots of webpages, the Wayback Machine lists URLs it has archived – or been requested to archive – on its site. The following link goes to all 100,000 YBOP URLs archived since YBOP was created in 2010 (it takes a while to load): https://web.archive.org/web/*/www.yourbrainonporn.com/* As of this writing, the first 3 pages (out of 2,000) contain URLs for what would appear to be “Mormon porn. A few examples from the first 3 pages:

The “Mormon porn” URLs only ever existed in the Wayback Machine Archive. They were requested to be archived there simply to defame. They never existed on my site (and consequently they never had any content…sorry, porn fans).

The bogus Wayback archive “porn” links go nowhere except to “Page not found” pages on the Wayback Machine (404 pages). This establishes that they never existed because legitimate Wayback archive links go to screenshots of webpage content instead. Try it for yourself. Click on any of the Mormon porn URLs and all you will get is a “Page not found” screenshot. Never existed.

An example of a random Mormon Porn URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20170212162002/http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/hot-blonde-mormon-feet – A “record” of the fake URL in the archives:

The Wayback screenshot of the above URL from 2017 (notice how its the old version of YBOP):

Another example says the page was never archived: https://web.archive.org/web/2017*/http://www.yourbrainonporn.com//milf-by-a-cottonwood-tree-at-age-43/

All the Mormon porn URLs are fake, manually inserted by a trickster.

Here’s what a legitimate archived YBOP page from the past looks like: https://web.archive.org/web/20150412200603/http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/age-40s-brain-fog-cured-forever-no-more-pixel-paradise

Simplified: The Wayback Machine URL is only real if it grabbed a screenshot of an actual page with content, not if it grabbed a screenshot of a “page not found” (a 404) error.

August 22-24, 2019: To prove anyone can insert fake URLs into the Wayback machine, I did it for YBOP

RealYBOP falsely asserted in multiple tweets that fake URLs could not be inserted into the Wayback Machine. So I did it (as did a few of my techie friends). The “Using the Wayback Machine” page located here provides instructions. An excerpt:

Can I add pages to the Wayback Machine?

On https://archive.org/web you can use the “Save Page Now” feature to save a specific page one time. This does not currently add the URL to any future crawls nor does it save more than that one page. It does not save multiple pages, directories or entire sites.

So I went to archive.org/web and requested that it archive a page on my site at “yourbrainonporn.com/testing-can-random-people-insert-links“, the Wayback Machine created this: https://web.archive.org/web/20190515000000*/http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/testing-can-random-people-insert-links. A screenshot of the fake YBOP URL archived in the Wayback Machine:


As with all the “YBOP” Mormon porn URLs, a screenshot of a “page not found (404)” error is archived into the Wayback Machine :

I also inserted another very relevant fake URL into the Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20190801000000*/http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/cyberstalkers-on-twitter/

Ignoring my evidence that fake URLs had just been inserted into the Wayback Machine, RealYBOP continued shrieking that it could not be done – “a computer engineer already documented it is not possible“:

RealYBOP repeated this disproved mantra in dozens tweets over the weekend, even claiming to have “talked to the director of Google about it”. Oh please.

August 23-24, 2019: An anonymous ally inserted fake URLs into Wayback Machine archive of RealYourBrainOnPorn.com

In a failed attempt to “prove” that fake URLs cannot be inserted into the Wayback Machine, RealYBOP tweeted a screenshot RealYBOP’s 11 archived URLs: https://web.archive.org/web/*/www.realyourbrainonporn.com/*

Big mistake. An ally let me know that an anonymous person inserted two fake URLs into realyourbrainonporn’s own Wayback Archive:

  • https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.realyourbrainonporn.com/we-are-terrible-people
  • https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.realyourbrainonporn.com/we-stole-the-name-from-yourbrainonporn.com

Screenshot of the “impossible” below. (Again, who was the ‘computer engineer” that said this couldn’t be done?)

Screenshot of the archived fake realyourbrainonporn page: https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.realyourbrainonporn.com/we-are-terrible-people

Applying the false logic of RealYourBrainOnPorn, if the Wayback Machine archived it, the URL “RealYourBrainOnPorn are terrible people” must be on their website, and true.

Again, I had nothing to with the above demonstration (but it is hilarious).

In response to the above evidence, a normal defamer would have put down the smartphone, and stopped tweeting the same disproven lie that URLs cannot be inserted into the WayBack archive. But @BrainOnPorn is far from normal. After I tweeted the above, @BrainOnPorn added 60 or more tweets to his unhinged and defamatory attack on me.

August 22-25, 2019: How did the trickster get the “Mormon porn URLs” to group together on only the first 3 pages (out of the 2,000 pages of YBOP archived URLs)?

How did the cyber-trickster cause the “Mormon porn URLs” to group together on the first 3 pages (out of 2000 pages of YBOP URLs)? S/he put double backslashes (//) into the fake porn URLs. Because the WayBack Machine archive organizes URLs alphabetically, the porn URLs with the extra symbol appeared (alphabetically) above normal URLs (a symbol is before a letter or number). Here’s how to compare a real YBOP archived URL vs a fake archived URL:

  • Legitimate YBOP URL on the Wayback Machine – http://www.yourbrainonporn.com/big-list-tips-tricks
  • Fake YBOP URL on the Wayback Machine – http://www.yourbrainonporn.com//mormon-woman-bare/

A screenshot of a few of the trickster URLs that were inserted into the Wayback Machine:

As legitimate URLs only contain a single backslash, this screenshot confirms that the Wayback “porn URLs” were fraudulent.

Hey @BrainOnPorn what was the name of that computer expert you claimed said the porn URLs were real? Oh yeah, you never provided a name.

August 26, 2019: In a 4-day rampage @BrainOnPorn posts over 100 tweets targeting Gary Wilson (many containing defamation per se).

As mentioned in the intro, @BrainOnPorn posted over 100 tweets targeting Gary Wilson during a 4-day Twitter rampage. Nearly every @BrainOnPorn tweet contained at least one defamatory statement (most contained several). Rather than posting 100+ tweets here, including tweets RealYBOP posted under other comments out of context, visit this link to see all the @BrainOnPorn tweets targeting me between August 22-26: Over 100 RealYBOP tweets targeting Gary Wilson from August 22-26. Most contain defamation by RealYBOP.

In addition to the character-impugning campaign conducted by the “Brain On Porn” Twitter account, the Twitter account also explicitly accused me of at least 3 felonies (screenshots below):

  • Stalking women in person
  • Making death threats, and
  • Hacking into websites.

Publicly accusing people of sexual/professional misconduct and felonies is actionable. In fact, if a tribunal deems RealYBOP’s (Burgess’s) actions “defamation per se,” I need not show any commercial damages in order to recover. I am investigating the remedies open to me to seek redress for RealYBOP’s (Burgess’s) actions.

A few disgusting examples taken from the many RealYBOP tweets engaging in defamation:

All the above mirror the lies Nicole Prause has posted countless times. (These 2 pages provide extensive documentation of Prause’s lies and harassment and my responses: page 1, page 2.) Since all are addressed on the Prause pages I’ll provide short responses with links for each incident of defamation.

1) lied he’s a professor

Prause has been spreading this lie for years, yet she has never provided an iota of documentation (never does). A few articles by journalists who never contacted me referred to me incorrectly by various titles, including “professor.” This was their error, not mine. This section of the page documenting Prause’s harassment exposes this tired falsehood: Ongoing – Prause falsely claims that Gary Wilson has misrepresented his credentials.

2) lied his account was hacked with porn

Addressed on the current page.

3) lied he taught a college class

Not only has Prause falsely claimed that I never taught at Southern Oregon University, she and David Ley falsely claimed I was fired from SOU. Prause even wrote an article about about my supposed firing, which she placed on a porn industry website. SOU lawyers had to get involved! See – Nicole Prause & David Ley libelous claim that Gary Wilson was fired from Southern Oregon University.

In her pornography website article and on Quora, Prause posted redacted copies of my employment records (see above link) and knowingly, falsely stated that Southern Oregon University had fired me. On the same day she published her Quora article, Prause posted ten more demeaning and untruthful comments about me all containing a link to her defamatory piece. She tweeted her articles and Quora comments. This resulted in Prause being permanently banned from Quora for harassing and defaming me, and Prause’s Liberos Twitter account being suspended for violation of Twitter Rules.

I taught at Southern Oregon University on two occasions. I also taught anatomy, physiology and pathology at a number of other schools over a period of two decades, and was certified to teach these subjects by the state education departments of both Oregon and California.

4) was told by ACLU to stop harassing us

Not so. As explained in the “Ron Swanson” section below, on June 21, 2019 RealYBOP involved the Southern California ACLU in my trademark infringement dispute with Prause (Nicole Prause resides in LA). A SoCal ACLU lawyer sent a bizarre letter to my trademark lawyers, asserting that RealYBOP experts had a right to disparage me and YBOP. The SoCal ACLU lawyer was only responding to a section of a single sentence from my 8-page cease and desist letter to RealYBOP and Nicole Prause (the sentence in question was taken out of context and misrepresented by SoCal ACLU). The ACLU letter has nothing to with the trademark dispute. How RealYBOP persuaded SoCal ACLU to produce an irrelevant, inappropriate letter for RealYBOP to misrepresent in tweets is beyond comprehension. (Note – we have contacted the national ACLU asking for a formal investigation.) Bottom line: Our legal actions against Daniel Burgess and Nicole Prause proceed, unaffected by the irrelevant ACLU letter.

5) has many FBI and police reports for stalking

I have never stalked anyone. In another tweet, RealYBOP claimed I physically stalked women. This lie constitutes defamation per se.

Prause has been lying about reporting me to the FBI and other police authorities for 6 years running. Prause has also repeatedly lied about reporting NoFap founder Alexander Rhodes to the FBI. Both Rhodes and I filed filed an FOIA request with the FBI to find out if Prause had ever filed a report naming us. As expected the FOIA revealed that Prause has never filed a FBI report, even though she has tweeted this multiple times and posted this same claim on the FTND Facebook page (see this section May 30, 2018: Prause falsely accuses FTND of science fraud, and implies that she has reported Gary to the FBI twice). See these pages for documentation:

We do know that Prause has an FBI report filed on her (for lying about filing FBI reports): December, 2018: Gary Wilson files an FBI report on Nicole Prause.

6) promotes antisemitism that sends death threats to us

Both are lies. Once again, RealYBOP provides no documentation of either assertion. Falsely stating that I sent death threats constitutes defamation per se.

As for antisemitism or white supremacy, I am, in fact, a far left liberal and the very antithesis of a “white supremacist.” For the truth, listen to this interview: Porn Science and Science Deniers (Interview with Wilson). Please note that calling people names (and then attempting to establish “guilt by association”) is a favorite tactic of those who can’t take on the substance of the porn debate. Have a look at these sections of a page documenting some of the many attacks I and others have been subjected to:

August 26, 2019: @BrainOnPorn justifies his 100+ defamatory twitter rampage by falsely claiming RealYBOP experts are mentioned 100’s-1000’s of times on YBOP

@BrainOnPorn justified his 100+ defamatory Twitter rampage by claiming YBOP has mentioned RealYBOP experts hundreds to thousands times. Since YBOP contains 12,000 pages and is a clearinghouse for everything porn related (studies, articles, videos, lay articles, critiques, analyses, etc.) it does contain multiple mentions of some of the “experts’. However, RealYBOP’s numbers are wildly exaggerated in order to construct a distorted narrative.

 

The “case” is far from closed.

Because Google translates each YBOP page into 100 languages, a solitary mention on a single YBOP page can lead to a Google search returning 100 pages. In other words, you might need to divide RealYBOP’s number by 100. I’ll provide an example using “Michael Seto,” which is falsely claimed to appear on YBOP 392 times.

A proper Google search (michael seto site:yourbrainonporn.com) returns 103 “Seto” pages, but almost all are duplicate YBOP pages, in other languages. The accurate way to search is use YBOP search engine, which returns only 7 instances. All 7 returns are pages related to our trademark dispute with RealYBOP and Nicole Prause.

Michael Seto is mentioned on YBOP because he is a proud member of RealYBOP “expert’s” page, and YBOP has several pages devoted to ongoing litigation with RealYBOP, RealYBOP’s misrepresentation of the research, RealYBOP’s defamatory social media campaigns, and dirty tricks.

What about RealYBOP’s claim that “Prause” is found 9,710 times on YBOP? Nope. Although 10,000 instances would seem about right considering YBOP contains 6 extensive pages (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) documenting 7 years of Prause defaming & harassing me and many others.

In reality, a valid Google search for “Prause” (prause site:yourbrainonporn.com) on September 2nd, returns only 5,500 results (not 9,710). And like the Google search for “Seto,” the majority of the returns are duplicated YBOP pages, in other languages. For example, one of the Google search pages (8 out of 10 are duplicates):

In October, 2018, before YBOP was redesigned to employ “Google Translate” the true result for “Prause” on yourbrainonporn.com is 565 mentions (I say “true” because Prause has employed a clever trick to produce fraudulent Google search numbers, as explained in this section: Prause falsely claims in a tweet that her name appears over 35,000 (or 82,000) times on YBOP):

Why does YourBrainOnPorn.com contain more than 500 instances of “Prause?” First, the pages chronicling Prause’s behaviors alone contain hundreds of instances of “Prause.” Second, YBOP contains about 12,000 pages (and growing). It’s a clearinghouse for nearly everything associated with Internet porn use and its effects on users. Prause has published multiple studies about porn use and hypersexuality, and describes herself as a professional debunker of porn addiction and porn-induced sexual problems.

A Google search for “Nicole Prause” + pornography returns about 37,000 pages. Perhaps thanks to her pricey public relations firm, she’s quoted in hundreds of journalistic articles about porn use and porn addiction. She has published several papers related to pornography use. She’s regularly featured in the media, claiming to have debunked porn addiction with a single (heavily criticized) study. So Prause’s name inevitably shows up a lot on a site that functions as a clearinghouse for research and news associated with Internet porn’s effects.

Not only do Prause’s studies appear on YBOP, so do thousands of other studies, many of which cite “Prause” in their reference sections. Also, YBOP has published very long critiques of seven Prause papers, and hosts at least 18 peer-reviewed critiques of her studies. Further, YBOP contains at least a dozen lay critiques of Prause’s work.

YBOP also hosts many journalistic articles that quote Nicole Prause, and YBOP often responds to Prause’s claims in these articles. YBOP also debunks many of the talking points put forth by Prause and her close ally David Ley (and now, RealYBOP).

Of course, this isn’t about Prause; YBOP also critiques other questionable research on porn and related subjects. All critiques are not personal, but rather evidence-based.

Addendum – Evidence that @RonSwansonTime is really Daniel Burgess, owner of realyourbrainonporn

The “Ron Swanson” Twitter account is fake. It’s over 3 years old, has only tweeted maybe 20 times, and Mr. Swanson doesn’t exist (a dead give-away).

On June 14, 2019 I posted the following Twitter thread in response to harassment and defamation from the “RealYourBrainOnPorn” Twitter account. (As explained here, the RealYBOP website & social media accounts are engaging in illegal trademark infringement and trademark squatting.) On June 15th the dormant “Ron Swanson” account entered my thread claiming to have a background in law, offering me legal assistance:

A quick examination of “Ron Swanson’s” Twitter revealed it was fake and probably conducting a fishing expedition. I suspected “Swanson” was Burgess because out of its 20 tweets in 3 years one linked to pictures of Burgess and his wife engaging in a CrossFit competition (prior to deletion, Burgess’s primary Facebook page was CrossFit Dan). The “Ron Swanson” tweet with a link:

The link goes to this NugentTherapy Instagram post (oops, it’s suddenly deleted):

It’s no secret that Burgess and his wife met at CrossFit. He’s even created a Facebook page chronicling all this. (Note: because Burgess is not only defaming me, trolling me, sending me threatening letters, engaging in blatant trademark infringement, and now litigation, we have been forced to document his and his aliases online behaviors.)

Mystery of “Ron Swanson” solved.

The minute RealYBOP tweeted the SoCal ACLU letter (described earlier on this page) “Ron Swanson” tweeted it four times, all at @YourBrainOnPorn. The “Ron Swanson” account hadn’t tweeted anything since his two June 15 tweets offering sage legal advice. The four tweets:

Suspicions confirmed.

The “Ron Swanson” account went silent until August 21, 2019, when “Ron” was the first account to tweet about the fake “Mormon porn” URLs on the Wayback Machine archive:

After Ron Swanson was formally outed as a likely Burgess alias, “Ron” made his Twitter account (with 9 followers) private:

Why would a fake Twitter account go private? To hide evidence?

END OF SPECIAL SECTION


RealYBOP promotes Ley PT article which is pure spin and a few lies.

Ley article flouts on a new study interviewing “Porn superfans” attending the AVN Adult Entertainment Expo. The narrow criteria employed assessed “gender roles,” not sexist or misogynistic attitudes. For example, Harvey Weinstein would score exceptionally high on their gender-role assessment. In more extreme example, any pimp who wants his “hoes” working for his benefit would agree, but that doesn’t rule out extreme misogyny on his part.

Reality:Check out individual studies – over 35 studies link porn use to “un-egalitarian attitudes” toward women and sexist views – or the summary from this 2016 meta-analysis: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015. Excerpt:

The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. The focus was on research published in peer-reviewed, English-language journals between 1995 and 2015. A total of 109 publications that contained 135 studies were reviewed. The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

————————–

Retweeting RealYBOP “expert” Emily Rothman’s propaganda:

————————

Ley, Prause and RealYBOP are obessesed with opinion papers by NZ grad student Kris Taylor. Taylor, who is beyond biased – and knows nothing about neuroscience. He’s a sociologist. YBOP critiqued a 2017 article by him where he disparaged Gary Wilson and the review with US navy doctors (Taylor often resorts to simply lying in his article): Debunking Kris Taylor’s “A Few Hard Truths about Porn and Erectile Dysfunction” (2017)

Taylor’s 2 earlier papers are favs of Prause and Ley (especially the one about r/nofap), with Prause’s Wikipedia aliases inserting both into Wikipedia pages. Prause obsessively cites (and misrepresents) Taylor’s paper about Nofap.

Taylor’s paper on poirn addiction somehow forgets to cite any of these:

 

———————-

Trolls a thread with the usual “masturbation is the problem, never porn” propaganda.

More of the same BS

Another tweet:

After sophisticated statistical “modeling” the above Samuel Perry (who is a RealYBOP expert) study proposed that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship problems. The gaping hole in Perry’s claim:

  1. Perry’s new analysis of his old data contains no specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency. Without that, his claim is little more than a hypothetical.
  2. Perry’s assertions are countered by over 75 studies linking porn use to lower sexual and relationship satisfaction (including 8 longitudinal studies). As far as we know all studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

The porn industry applauds RealYBOP and its “experts” (some of who are paid by the porn industry!).

The next day RealYBOP obsessively tweets in the same thread, with more of the same propaganda about masturbation – relying ONLY on Perry’s study:

Tweets a single study where they showed guys Playboy bunnies (while ignoring every single study correlating porn viewing with sexual and relationship satisfaction):

The 2017 study attempted to replicate a 1989 study that exposed men and women in committed relationships to erotic images of the opposite sex. The 1989 study found that men who were exposed to the nude Playboy centerfolds then rated their partners as less attractive and reported less love for their partner. As the 2017 study failed to replicate the 1989 findings, we are told that the 1989 study got it wrong, and that porn use cannot diminish love or desire. Whoa! Not so fast. The replication “failed” because our cultural environment has become “pornified.” The 2017 researchers didn’t recruit 1989 college students who grew up watching MTV after school. Instead the new subjects grew up surfing PornHub for gang bang and orgy video clips. For more see: Does exposure to erotica reduce attraction and love for romantic partners in men? Independent replications of Kenrick, Gutierres, and Goldberg (1989) study 2 (2017) Balzarini, R.N., Dobson, K., Chin, K. and Campbell, L.

Bottom line – tells us nothing about long term use.

RealYBOP argues with a doctor who runs a clinic:

Then RealYBOP says Jay Daniels is harming his pateints by having them eliminate porn use (the RealYBOP link goes to its research page, not to any study):

RealYBOP proceeds to argues with TIME editor Belinda Luscombe who wrote Porn and the Threat to Virility. After TIME publsihed this cover story, Nicole Prause, David Ley, and Prause alias “PornHelps” harassesd and defamed Luscombe on social media (section 1, section 2):

RealYBOP continues to harass Luscombe, lying about what Gary Wilson said, and lying about Gary Wilson misrepresenting his credentials (Pathological liars Prause & Daniel Burgess/RealYBOP obsessively tweet that Wilson claimed to be a professor – which he never did. See: Ongoing – Prause falsely claims that Gary Wilson has misrepresented his credentials). 4 RealYBOP tweets about Wilson’s time at SOU:

RealYBOP says “our group”. There was no group, only Prause and her aliases harassing Luscombe and TIME.

Belinda Luscombe makes fun of RealYBOP, who continues:

Wilson taught at Southern Oregon University on two occasions. Gary also taught anatomy, physiology and pathology at a number of other schools over a period of two decades, and was certified to teach these subjects by the education departments of both Oregon and California.

—————————

RealYBOP exposing its profound ignorance by trying to ‘debunk” the Coolidge Effect. Ley & RealYBOP are clueless as to what the Coolidge effect entails. RealYBOP fabricates gibberish about it involving production of sperm (uh, no)

Horace Juvenal tries to educate Ley and RealYBOP. Wikpedia does a decent job:

The Coolidge effect is a biological phenomenon seen in animals, whereby males exhibit renewed sexual interest whenever a new female is introduced to have sex with, even after cessation of sex with prior but still available sexual partners

————————–

Tweets interview by Mormon ally Natasha Parker. Parker is a very close friend of Daniel Burgess, who owns the RealYBOP URL. She has disparaged Gary Wilson, FTND, and anyone who believes porn addiction exist. Parker has written articles with Prause and appeared on podcasts with Prause. No bias here:

———————-

RealYBOP tweeting hit-peice on NoFap by the Guardian:

For years Nicole Prause, David Ley and now RealYBOP, have teamed up to defame, harass and cyber-stalk individuals and organizations that have warned of porn’s harms or publicized research reporting porn’s harms – especially NoFap and Alex Rhodes. See this extensive page doumenting ther defamation and harassment: Nicole Prause & David Ley’s long history of harassing & defaming Alexander Rhodes of NoFap

Prause is getting sued for libel (about time) and Rohdes provided a 67-page sworn affidavit – July, 2019: Alexander Rhodes affidavit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause & Liberos LLC.

—————————

Excellent example of RealYBOP acting as a porn-industry shill. RealYBOP highlights only 1 finding – young men use porn to masturbate. He/she does this because RealYBOP is obsessed with diverting blame away from hundreds of studies correlating porn use with negative effects.

 

The important findings in this study on sexual minority adolescents (ages 14-17) were:

  1. Almost all use porn, a lot.
  2. Porn greatly influences how they think about—and behave—sexually.
  3. Viewing risky sexual behaviors in porn was associated with actual sexual behavior in real-life.

RealYBOP not even pretending anymore.

———————-

Propaganda. We cannot trust medical doctors speak about porn’s effects (but we can trust PhD’s who have their picture taken on the red carpet of the XRCO awards):

———————

As mentioned numerous, because porn-induced sexual problems are the biggest threat to the porn industry agenda, RealYBOP is obsessed with debunking porn-induced ED. In this tweet RealYBOP insinuates that Gabe deem and Alex Rhodes are lying about PIED (and are doing so for profit):

RealYBOP claims are untrue and disgusting.

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

RealYBOP again:

Typical propaganda. The 13-page commentary is not about porn-induced ED. Only a single paragraph mentions ED! From the paper:

We largely agree with Prause on this point and caution against overstating possibilities for porn-induced erectile dysfunction

The commentary cites the highly criticized Prause paper as support for unsupported claim. Reality = This list contains over 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli.

————————–

For no reason in particular RealYBOP attacks two antiporn non-profits:

RealYBOP experts have a history of defaming and harassing FTND and Exodus Cry:

—————————–

RealYBOP says that toxic effects of porn are just normal sexual preferences (exactly what porn industry claims)

—————————-

RealYBOP whining about Andrew Yang’s tweet, where said:

As a parent of young kids I believe rampant access to pornography is a real problem. We need to empower families to be able to moderate what our kids see and when.

RealYBOP makes 2 unspoorted claims (Even a PhD supporter of RealYBOP calls her out):

2 false statements by RealYBOP:

  1. Porn is not positive for majority of adults. For exmaple, every quantitative study on males reports more porn use related to less sexual & relationship satisfaction. The 75 studies omitted from RealYBOP’s cherry-picked list: Over 75 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction.
  2. @BrainOnPorn list of “youth” studies omits over 250 adolescent studies reporting harm. RealYBOP omits every meta-analysis & review on adolescents & porn. 15 listed here in our debunking of RealYBOP “youth section”: Youth Section

More RealYBOP nonsense (section 230 has nothing to do with this):

—————————

Serious scientists

————————

Looks like RealYBOP is attempting to normalize children using internet porn:

RealYBOP reponds with falsehoods to criticism of the above tweet:

We debunk RealYBOP’s link here: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”). It examines the trademark infringers’ “research page,” including its cherry-picked outlier studies, bias, egregious omission, and deception.

—————————-

RealYBOP disparages the the ICD-11. Why? Because it now contains a new diagnosis suitable for porn addiction: “Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder (note: the DSM also had a diagnosis for homsexuality).

RealYBOP members has posted more comments in the beta-draft comment section than everyone else combined, usually. See – May, 2019: The World Health Organization publishes a paper describing Nicole Prause’s numerous ICD-11 comments (“antagonistic comments, such as accusations of a conflict of interest or incompetence”).

————————-

For the 100th time or so, Prause/Ley/RealYBOP tweets Taylor Kohut’s qualitative study where almost all of the coupled females regularly used porn.

Exposed here: Critique of “Perceived Effects of Pornography on the Couple Relationship: Initial Findings of Open-Ended, Participant-Informed, Bottom-Up Research” (2017), Taylor Kohut, William A. Fisher, Lorne Campbell

Reality: Over 75 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction. All studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

———————-

For the umpteenth time Prause/Ley/RealYBOP tweets the PCES

RealYBOP members has posted more comments in the beta-draft comment section than everyone else combined, usually. See – May, 2019: The World Health Organization publishes a paper describing Nicole Prause’s numerous ICD-11 comments (“antagonistic comments, such as accusations of a conflict of interest or incompetence”).

————————-

RealYBOP searching twitter to tweet pro-porn propaganda

This article debunks RealYBOP assertions (it contains 100 studies countering RealYBOP claims) – Debunking the realyourbrainonporn (pornographyresearch.com) “Sex Offender Section”: The actual state of the research on porn use and sexual aggression, coercion & violence

—————————-

SPECIAL SECTION: September, 2019: In response to a CNN special involving NoFap, the RealYBOP twitter (run by Prause & Burgess) defames and harasses Alex Rhodes of Nofap (over 20 tweets)

For years RealYBOP members Nicole Prause and David Ley have teamed up to defame, harass and cyber-stalk individuals and organizations that have warned of porn’s harms or publicized research reporting porn’s harms. Since its inception, RealYBOP twitter has done the same. One of Prause, Ley and RealYBOP’s favorite targest is Alex Rhodes of Nofap – Nicole Prause & David Ley’s long history of harassing & defaming Alexander Rhodes of NoFap. Important to note – July, 2019: Alexander Rhodes sworn affidavit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause & Liberos LLC.

In response to a CNN program featuring NoFap and Rhodes, RealYBOP engages in targeted harassment and defamation, tweeting its lies in CNN threads and elsewhere:

Justin Lehmiller’s article was published to promote counter Lisa Ling’s broadcast. The article cites no studies to support Lehmiller’s assertions. Very important to note that Lehmiller is paid by Playboy, is member of RealYBOP (the group infringing on YBOP trademark), and is on the board of the SHA – the group collaborating with xHamster to promote its websites.

Alex Rhodes did not lie. RealYBOP fails to cite an example of anyone lying. Research vs. RealYBOP propaganda? Check out the main YBOP research page, which contains links to about 1,000 studies associating porn use with myriad negative outcomes.

More bizarre responses:

More personal attacks and falsehoods. YBOP debunked RealYBOP claims here: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”). The page examines the trademark infringers’ “research page,” including its cherry-picked outlier studies, bias, egregious omission, and deception.

RealYBOP twitter continues its cyberstalking of Alex Rhodes:

On the day of Lisa Ling broadcast, RealYBOP’s cyberstalking escalates, with silly slides that have nothing to do with the program, and entering threads wherever Nofap is mentioned.

What the public may not know is that neither the ICD-11 nor the APA’s DSM-5 ever uses the word “addiction” to describe an addiction – whether it be gambling addiction, heroin addiction, cigarette addiction, or you name it. Both diagnostic manuals use the word “disorder” instead of “addiction” (i.e. “gambling disorder,” “nicotine use disorder,” and so on). Thus, “sex addiction” and “porn addiction” could never have been rejected, because they were never under formal consideration in the major diagnostic manuals. Put simply, there will never be a “porn addiction” diagnosis, just as there will never be a “meth addiction” diagnosis. Yet individuals with the signs and symptoms of consistent with either a “porn addiction” or a “methamphetamine addiction” can be diagnosed using the ICD-11’s provisions. For a complete debunking of Prause’s claims, see: Debunking “Why Are We Still So Worried About Wat­­ching Porn?,” by Marty Klein, Taylor Kohut, and Nicole Prause (2018).

RealYBOP falsely claims that porn has never caused harm to children.

Reality: over 250 adolescent studies link porn use to myriad harms.

Claims porn has no effect on brain:

Reality: This page lists 45 neuroscience-based studies (MRI, fMRI, EEG, neuropsychological, hormonal). They provide strong support for the addiction model as their findings mirror the neurological findings reported in substance addiction studies.

RealYBOP suggests that it is unliekly your kid will see porn

Reality: Study on Australians ages 15-29 found that 100% of the men (82% of women) had viewed porn. Young Australians’ use of pornography and associations with sexual risk behaviour (2017)

Trolling:

Trolling Lisa Ling. Fails to describe “false informatiom” (never does):

Ouch: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”)

Trolls Noah Church (RealYBOP blocks accounts, then tweets in their threads without them knowing it).

RealYBOP links to a Psychology Today blog pots by Prause and David Ley (it’s not a study – only suspect data from Prause):

RealYBOP BS: Nofap is not selling a ‘product, it’s a free website. Nofap does not offer treatments:

Trolling, harassment:

Again no one diagnosed anyone. RealYBOP making stuff up:

Justin Lehmiller’s article was published to promote counter Lisa Ling’s broadcast and cites no studies to support its assertions. Very important to note that Lehmiller is paid by Playboy, is member of RealYBOP (the group infringing on YBOP trademark), and is on the board of the SHA – the group collaborating with xHamster to promote its websites.

RealYBOP trolls Gabe Deem (RealYBOP long ago blocked Deem);

Nicole Prause and her fake account PornHelps has harassed Deem in the past:

Continues to troll threads. Falsely claims that stats were false, but provides no example:

Trolls another person in Lisa Ling’s thread:

RealYBOP lies about the nature of its experts, claiming most are university professors: https://www.realyourbrainonporn.com/experts

Reality: Of the 19 “experts” who still allow RealYBOP to use their picture, only 6 are at universities.

In this tweet, RealYBOP seems to be encouraging other to report Alex Rhodes to the Pennsylvania Psychology board.

It wouldn’t surprise us to eventually learn that RealYBOP filed a false and malicious report on Rhodes (numerous incidents of Prause’s false and malicious reporting are on these pages – page 1, page 2).

Trolling CCN

RealYBOP links to page we have debunked: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”).

Now RealYBOP goes after Gary Wilson

While the WIPO decision did not go his way (these are complex matters), Wilson will continue into federal courts, if necessary.

RealYBOP re-tweeting porn star complaining about CNN program (appears to have been egged on):

Note: Prause/RealYBOP falsely claims that others (wilson, Rhodes, etc.) are stalking her. If this were true (it’s not) why does Prause/RealYBOP continue to enter Wilson and Rhodes twitter threads – tagging both, naming both, and aggressively harassing both? The answer – Prause/RealYBOP is lying about being stalked.

——————————-

RealYBOP twitter (Prause & Daniel Burgess) defame Alex Rhodes & Gabe Deem, falsely claiming both tried to “take down” realyourbrainonporn.

In its twitter tirade, RealYBOP coughed up its usual lies about Alex and Gabe, while adding a new one: Gabe and Alex were involved in the legal actions by YBOP to defend its trademark. Or as RealYBOP incorrectly describes it:

“Tried to have our website taken down bc he cannot answer science”

RealYBOP is referring very specific legal actions by the owners of YBOP to defend our trademark. Our legal proceedings have nothing to do with Alex Rhodes or Gabe deem. RealYBOP (Prause & Burgess) lied, defaming Rhodes and Deem. By the way, the RealYBOP tweets give the false impression that our legal actions are over. Not even close. On to RealYBOP’s defamation:

September 30, 2019 tweet about Alex Rhodes. In it RealYBOP falsely sates that NoFap tried to silence the actual science, but they lost (linking to the WIPO decision in favor of RealYBOP)

In this tweet, RealYBOP sais Gabe Deem “Tried to have our website taken down bc he cannot answer science”:

RealYBOP continues, defaming Deem, and stating that he tried to silence scientists (linking to WIPO decision).

No one is trying to silence anyone. YBOP is simply protecting its trademark. Note: The original name of their website was ScienceOfArousal.com? Why did these self-proclaimed experts change their site name to mirror our website’s name, when their first-choice URL was ScienceOfArousal.com? Proof: copy & paste this URL into your browser. It will redirect you to “realyourbrainonporn” – https://www.scienceofarousal.com . Why do they now claim that they have been censored by a request to cease their trademark infringement, when they could simply revert to their erstwhile brand name ScienceOfArousal.com and continue to operate freely and legally?

We have never attempted to censor opposing views and critiques, unlike one of the Alliance “experts,” Dr. Prause, who has repeatedly tried to remove evidence of her behavior with groundless DMCA takedown requests. We simply ask that that these vocal spokespersons hold forth from their original pulpit, the URL and brand name “Science of Arousal” (ScienceOfArousal.com). And that they relinquish the subsequent name they employed along with the corresponding trademark application (for a name that YBOP has operated under for almost 10 years). Why do they engage in these apparent attempts to suppress traffic to our website and confuse the public?

The next day, RealYBOP trolls Gabe (whom she has blocked):

Note – Gabe is not a coach and has never coached anyone. RealYBOP claims about studies on porn and sexual problems are debunked here: Erectile And Other Sexual Dysfunctions Section

More of the same, falsely claiming Gabe was involved in the Burgess lawsuit

Lies by @BrainOnPorn exposed:

  1. Only 6 of 19 “experts” pictured are employed by universities: https://realyourbrainonporn.com/experts
  2. Gabe provides no treatment
  3. Gabe’s not involved with our lawsuit with Burgess
  4. RealYBOP lies about harm (cites nothing)

END OF CNN/LISA LING SECTION

———————————————————————-

Wow. RealYBOP retweets Jerry Barnett’s (he once owned a porn site) instructions for kids to bypass age verification:

—————————–

Falsehoods about FTND:

———————–

More of the same BS from RealYBOP/Prause/Burgess:

—————————-

RealYBOP member Hartmann & RealYBOP twitter disparaging feminist Julie Bindel and her article, promoting an XBIZ article:

They no longer hide their intimate relationships with the porn industry.

——————————

Claims that violence in porn occurs equally to men and women (uh…no)

——————————

RealYBOP seems to be urging the reporting of sex/porn addiction therapists. Does it rise to illegal targeted harassment? Nikky joins in: so we have Prause tweeting with Prause (RealYBOP)

Prause is known for this: Prause urges patients to report sex addiction therapists to state boards. Just the tip of the iceberg. See –Nicole Prause’s Malicious Reporting and Malicious Use of Process

—————————–

Retweet of a tweet promoting porn:

—————————-

Misrepresents a study, falsely stating that this study assessed porn use:

The study does no metion porn. It’s a review, and none of the “search terms” are porn related. From the study:

The search strategy included the following relevant terms: screen time, screen media, electronic media, internet use, computer use, mobile phone use, television watching, TV watching, television viewing,TVviewing, television programs, video game, and video viewing; scholastic, academic performance, academic achievement, school grades,mathematics, language, reading, and writing; and children, childhood, preschooler, schoolchildren, preadolescent, adolescent, and youth.

RealYBOP lied. Not surprising, as RealYBOP chronically misrepresents studies, including its own: Peer-reviewed critiques of Steele et al., 2013.

—————————-

RealYBOP tells her audience that a quantitative study is a “panicdote”, then proceeds to tweet a bunch of random, once-sentence, pro-porn anecdotes. Just crazy. First, the study that is a panicdote:

The above is followed by a string of the RealYBOP unsourced one-sentence anecdotes. Interspersed is warning about “anecdotes” from medical doctors (huh?):

Same day – More unsourced anecdotes (I gues RealYBOP ran out of studies it could misrepresent):

Same day – More unsourced anecdotes:

——————————-

RealYBOP misrepresents NPR program, falsely claiming that Cantor mentioned sex addiction (no one mentioned sex or porn addiction). See – https://www.npr.org/2019/10/10/766834753/growing-efforts-are-looking-at-how-or-if-metoo-offenders-can-be-reformed

—————————-

Again, why is a site claiming to be about the effects of porn on users tweeting about the porn industry and performers?

———————–

Disparaging sex & porn addiction therapists. Just making stuff up (as usual). Joe Kort is a member of RealYBOP

———————-

For no particular reason (on a Sunday) RealYBOP disparages NoFap. RealYBOP/Prause/Burgess are obsessed with porn recovery forums (probably because they hurt the porn industry’s bottom-line).

RealYBOP falsely calls nofap “anti-sex”. In reality, a large percentage of individuals abstaining from porn (NoFap) are doing so to regain normal sexual function.

—————————-

Citing a Justin Lehmiller (who is a RealYBOP member and regularly paid by the porn industry) article, which features a highly dubious study:

The study did not assess what it claimed to have assessed: Critique of “Harder and Harder? Is Mainstream Pornography Becoming Increasingly Violent and Do Viewers Prefer Violent Content?” (2018).

——————————

Propaganda: RealYBOP’s attempting to debunk porn-induced ED (PIED), but doesn’t seem to know (or care) that PIED isn’t reduced erectile functioning with porn. PIED is poorer erectile functioning WITHOUT porn!

Reality: Porn and sexual problems? This list contains over 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions.

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

——————————–

RealYBOP promoting porn performer/producer

——————–

After 50 or so tweets about Nofap, we can officially refer to RealYBOP as Nofap/Alex Rhodes’s stalker. After its sunday tweets, RealYBOP scoured the millions of Nofap.com comments for just the right ones to smear Nofap. RealYBOP screenshots a few random comments, tweeting 3 of them with her out-of-context take any human on the planet can comment on Nofap, including RealYBOP).

Another by RealYBOP:

Yet another

RealYBOP the cyberstalker (Note: RealYBOP has posted 250 tweets about Gary Wilson in the last few months). Question: Are the RealYBOP experts legally liable for its twitter hrassment?

—————————–

RealYBOP disparages Phil Zimbardo, yet again. As porn industry shills Ley, Prause & RealYBOP often disparage Zimbardo because he has exposed porn’s negative effects on young people in the following presentations, books and articles:

  1. The Demise of Guys?: Philip Zimbardo: Excellent TED talk on (as the title says) the “demise” of young men. Zimbardo speaks of excessive Internet use (porn and video games) as “arousal addiction.”
  2. Philip Zimbardo’s Psychology Today blog post “Is Porn Good For Us or Bad For Us?” (2016).
  3. His book – Man, Interrupted: Why Young Men are Struggling & What We Can Do About It.
  4. Two articles co-authored by Phil Zimbardo and Gary Wilson: How porn is messing with your manhood, by Philip Zimbardo, Gary Wilson & Nikita Coulombe (March, 2016); More on porn: guard your manhood—a response to Marty Klein, by Philip Zimbardo & Gary Wilson (April, 2016)

Non-academics Ley & Prause are also jealous of Zimbardo’s fame, success and influence.

David Ley tweets under RealYBOP, lying about his interactions with Phil Zimbardo. In reality, it was Ley who went after Zimbardo on Psychology Today. While Zimbardo ignored Ley, Gary Wilson debunked Ley’s factually inaccurate hit-piece here: Dismantling David Ley’s response to Philip Zimbardo: “We must rely on good science in porn debate” (March, 2016).

Publisher of Skeptic magazine, Michael Shermer, calls out an article about Zimbardo’s famous “Stanford Prison experiment” as a fraud. Shermer posted several defenses of the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Here is Phil Zimbardo’s response to his critics – What’s the scientific value of the Stanford Prison Experiment? Zimbardo responds to the new allegations against his work.

—————————

Defense of the porn industry, while lying about what NCOSE actually said (notice how RealYBOP never ever backs up her claims with an example of anyone “lying”):

—————————-

No surprise. RealYBOP thrilled that age-verification died:

More customers for the porn industry.

————————————-

RealYBOP promoting and supporting prostitution:

Again, why does a website claiming to be about the effects of porn on the consumer promote the porn industry and prostitution?

————————–

Trolls, with more anecdotes, while lying about Fight The New Drug:

Hilarious that RealYBOP’s anecdote is a guy complaining that he cannot orgasm watching porn!

Neotrad Feminist exposes RealYBOP’s “anecdote” for what it truely is (porn-induced sexual problems) – causing realYBOP to enage in ad hominem fallacy:

In the same thread, with additional misrepresentations:

Debunking RealYBOP’s unsupported talking point that “high sexual desire” is related with high porn use: Over 25 studies falsify the claim that sex & porn addicts “just have high sexual desire”.

————————-

Cyberstalker RealYBOP tweets about Gary Wilson for 170th time, lying as usual:

Wilson didn’t push theDopamine Fast, just tweeted it without comment. RealYBOP also misrepresents what neuroscientists Berridge & Bowman said.

Kent Berridge, Ph.D., is a psychologist at the University of Michigan and runs a lab that literally studies pleasure in the brain. He explains that there may actually be some truth to the idea that dopamine is all around us.

“It is definitely true that we live in a reward-rich world and we live in a reward-cue rich world,” he tells Inverse. “Even when we’re not consuming rewards, we’re often encountering cues for them — in advertisements and imagery, opening the refrigerator, on the web, the internet, and emails. So that would keep us in a kind of constant or repeated frequent repetition of dopamine activation.”

But to say whether or not human dopamine receptors actually do decrease is complicated. Berridge explains, in animal studies where the animal is exposed to high-fat, dopamine-igniting diets, receptor reduction happens temporarily and “receptors mostly come back during abstinence.” When it comes to humans, the answer is “a bit controversial,” “may depend partly on context,” and mostly comes from studies on people who use drugs and alcohol.

Even if this is a “reward-rich world,” we still don’t know if it’s rich enough to cause lasting changes in the brain. Taken together, Bowman says that, actually, some ideas behind the dopamine fast seem to check out when examined in isolation — but not all of them.

“Overall, I think it is plausible that dopamine fasting might impact modestly on the dopamine system, but no doubt it has effects on many other brain – and body – systems,” Bowman says.

———————-

RealYBOP turning questionable study on screentime effcst into a comment on porn’s effects:

PS – the man tweeting this works for Microsoft

—————————

RealYBOP, Prause, Ley and thier followers often tweet materials by Andrew Przybylski and Amy Orben, two agenda-driven academics who pump out papers claiming to find little evidence of problems related to internet use (funny how thousands of studies counter their papers).

They do so to disparage gaming addiction and internet addiction (internet porn addiction is sub-category on internet addiction)

Reality: John Carr exposes inaccuracies and bias in Amy Orben’s article in The Guardian (Farewell the ‘porn block’ – a PR exercise and lousy policy):Journalism and wishful thinking

Which brings me to the article in yesterday’s Observer by Amy Orben.

Orben opened by asserting the Government’s plan to introduce age verification to restrict children’s access to online pornography was not only “dead” but had been for “months, if not years”. As someone who had been involved with this initiative from Day 1 that came as a revelation.

There was nothing in the Government’s statement of 16th October which supported Orben’s view. On the contrary the Secretary of State was clear that, in the Government’s new and expanded vision for policy in this area, she “expects age verification to continue to play a key role in protecting children online.”

On 17th October, in response to an Urgent Question tabled by Margot James MP, in the House of Commons the Parliamentary Under Secretary at DCMS faced a barrage of hostile questioning from more than a dozen MPs. At no point did he swerve or even hint at a swerve on the matter of age verification for dealing with online pornography. He said he wanted to locate it within a broader range of measures but that is not the language of abandonment or dilution.

So whatever Orben was expressing in the article in The Observer it had no factual basis.

—————————

RealYBOP going to bat for the porn industry, while simultaneously attacking Fight The New Drug:

Data? RealYBOP failed to cite a single study. Here are six studies confirming mental and physical health problems of female performers.

———————–

RealYBOP misrepresents what the study’s author said.

Whatever the doctor says, numerous women in her study said that porn influenced their decision to have labiaplasty. Moreover, other studies (never tweeted by RealYBOP) reveal that porn plays a significant role: Major Motivators and Sociodemographic Features of Women Undergoing Labiaplasty (2018) – An except:

Half of the patients reported that they had an idea about the female genitalia (50.7%) and they were influenced through the media (47.9%). The majority of those (71.8%) stated that they did not have normal genitalia and considered labiaplasty more than 6 months ago (88.7%). The pornography consumption rate in the last month was 19.7% and was significantly related with lower genital self-image and self-esteem. The main motivation was found as having improvement in appearance (43.7%) and a better sexual life (26.8%). Patients reported aesthetic (52.1%), sexual (46.5%), and psychological (39.4%) reasons leading to their decision.

————————-

RealYBOP promoting prostitution

No suprise that Prause and Daniel Burgess’s legal counsel is Wayne B. Giampietro, who was one of the primary lawyers defending backpage.com. Backpage was shut down by the federal government “for its willful facilitation of human trafficking and prostitution.” (see this USA Today article: 93-count indictment on sex trafficking charges revealed against Backpage founders).

————————–

RealYBOP retweets ant-sex addiction gibberish by a self proclaimed witch/astrologer:

—————————-

Retweets a 3-year old “article” by former porn site owner Jerry Barnett (who now campaigns against age verification for porn sites):

————————-

Retweets old article disparaging porn as a public health issue. It’s by Justin Lehmiller, who’s a regular paid contributor to Playboy Magazine and close ally of Nicole Prause; a member of RealYBOP (a group formed to steal YBOP’s trademark); and on the board of the SHA – the group collaborating with xHamster to promote its websites.

————————

Tweets a talk from a porn film festival (Oeming is a pro-porn grad student and member of RealYBOP):

————————–

Retweest propaganda from pornhub (via RealYBOP member Ley).

————————

Out of blue, RealYBOP disparages neuroscience professor William Struthers. Why? Because Struthers believes in porn addiction.

Check out Struthers home page: https://www.wheaton.edu/academics/faculty/william-struthers/. Unlike Prause he’s employed by a university, an academic, runs a lab, and teaches university courses.

———————-

About as pro-porn as humanly possible:

I got an idea – Let’s remove warnings from cigarette packs to prevent cancer!

—————————

Umm.. only according to Nikky:

————————

In the last few years, the porn recovery community designated November as No-Porn November. From October 30 to November 2, RealYBOP obsessively trolls other accounts tweeting dumbass memes to encourage porn use:

tweet 2

tweet 3

tweet 4

tweet 5

tweet 6

tweet 7

 

tweet 8

tweet 9 – You can see this inane, factually innacurate promotion porn, which RealYBOP tweet 10 times. Question – who provided the money for this video?

tweet 10

tweet 11

tweet 12

tweet 13

tweet 14

tweet 15

tweet 16

tweet 17

tweet 18

tweet 19

tweet 20

If there was ever any doubt that ReaYBOP is nothing more than a shill account for the porn industry the preceeding obsessive tweeting settles it. Keep in mind that Xhamster made a big deal last year about no-porn November, complaining it cut into their profits. And three RealYBOP members are being paid by Xhamster to promote its porn sites.

——————————————-

Upset because the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) contains a new diagnosis suitable for diagnosing what is commonly referred to as ‘porn addiction’ or ‘sex addiction.’ It’s called “Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder” (CSBD).

——————————

RealYBOP saying you are abusive if you don’t “allow” your partner to watch porn.

——————————

Tweets non-porn study, with a link to RealYBOP member Sam Perry’s questionable study supporting porn industry agenda:

Reality: Critique of Samuel Perry’s “Is the Link Between Pornography Use and Relational Happiness Really More About Masturbation? Results From Two National Surveys” (2019). After sophisticated statistical “modeling” (under pressure from Prause?) Perry proposed that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship problems. In reality, more porn use was related to less satisfaction. The gaping hole in Perry’s analysis is the absence of specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency. Without that, his claim is little more than hypothetical.

————————

Misrepresents claims, which is that porn users escalate to child porn – it’s well established that these individuals do NOT act out.

Lies about currrent state of research on escalation: Over 40 studies reporting findings consistent with escalation of porn use (tolerance), habituation to porn, and even withdrawal symptoms (including 8 stduies descrbing porn users escalating to child porn).

——————————————————————-

Special section – October-November, 2019: In response to “The Doctors” featuring Alex Rhodes, RealYBOP twitter (Prause & Daniel Burgess) cyberstalks, defames & harasses Rhodes with numerous tweets

On October 30, 2019 the TV show “The Doctors” featured Alex Rhodes in a segment on porn addiction. In response, realyourbrainonporn twitter posted numerous tweets under “The Doctors” many tweets about the show. RealYBOP’s tweets involve defamation and expose RealYBOP as a cyberstalker. RealYBOP scoured the web for anything it can weponize against Alex, including random comments on Nofap (there are literally millions of comments on Nofap.com and reddit/nofap). On to RealYBOP’s obsessive cyberstalking.

Below, RealYBOP refers to specific legal actions by the owners of YBOP to defend our trademark. Our legal proceedings have nothing to do with Alex Rhodes. RealYBOP (Prause & Burgess) lied, defaming Rhodes in this tweet.

Claims about misogyny are BS. In reality, men using porn (not those quitting) have higher rates of misogyny: over 35 studies link porn use to “un-egalitarian attitudes” toward women and sexist views.

————————-

Once again, RealYBOP saying not using porn = misogyny (the porn industry isn’t misogynistic, right?). As usual RealYBOP cites Grad student Kris Taylor’s paper, lying about what its methodology and what it stated. Contrary to lies by Prause/RealYBOP, Taylor’s paper was not an analysis of Nofap or its users. Nor was it about misogyny (word is not found it paper).

Prause falsely asserts that Kris Taylor’s paper was an analysis of nofap comments. In reality Taylor’s dissertation only assessed 15 comments from reddit/nofap. “Masculinity” search criteria for the 15 cherry-picked comments. Taylor’s explicitly states the 15 comments were not representative of Nofap as a whole:

See this back and forth between Prause and bart taken from Psychology Today concerning the Taylor joke of a paper. Bart makes a fool of Prause, who resorts to ad hominem when exposed as lying about Taylor’s paper.

In addition, while Prause claims Taylor’s paper is about misogyny prevelant on NoFap, misogyny is only mentioned once:

“some scholars suggest that men(almost exclusively) can be incited to commit violent sexual acts as a result of viewing misogynistic pornography”

That’s it. More farbircations from you know who. Note: Prause Ley, Prause and RealYBOP are obessesed with opinion papers by NZ grad student Kris Taylor. Taylor, who is beyond biased – and knows nothing about neuroscience. He’s a sociologist. YBOP critiqued a 2017 article by him where he disparaged Gary Wilson and the review with US navy doctors (Taylor often resorts to simply lying in his article): Debunking Kris Taylor’s “A Few Hard Truths about Porn and Erectile Dysfunction” (2017). Note: Prause’s Wikipedia aliases have inserted both Taylor papers into Wikipedia!

——————-

More of the same, but also attacking Fight The New Drug:

Prause and RealYBOP obsessively cyberstalk FTND also:

———————–

RealYBOP exposes itself as the cyberstalker, trolling millions of NoFap comments for just the right one to take out-of-context and spin

More comments taken out-of-context (out of millions of comments. For exmaple, the use of “little bitch” was a guy describing his own penis and loss of erection due to porn-induced ED. He wasn’t calling anyone a bitch.

More trolling of forums full of young men, looking for just the right out-of-context excerpt to tweet:

——————–

Cyberstalking continues:

RealYBOP lies (while citing nothing):

  1. There is no treament offered on Nofap.
  2. RealYBOP is suggesting that quitting porn “makes men worse”. OK

————————–

Creepy. RealYBOP taking screenshots of Rhodes’s youtube presentations. Also attacks Kanye West for saying he was addicted to porn:

The above excerpt is a fabricated assertion from a blog post. It cites nothing. Complete BS.

—————————

RealYBOP asking twitter to un-verify the Nofap account.

Again, citing a blog, that cited nothing.

———————

First, neither the ICD-11 nor the APA’s DSM-5 ever uses the word “addiction” to describe an addiction – whether it be gambling addiction, heroin addiction, cigarette addiction, or you name it. Both diagnostic manuals use the word “disorder” instead of “addiction” (i.e. “gambling disorder,” “nicotine use disorder,” and so on). Thus, “sex addiction” and “porn addiction” could never have been rejected, because they were never under formal consideration in the major diagnostic manuals. Put simply, there will never be a “porn addiction” diagnosis, just as there will never be a “meth addiction” diagnosis. Yet individuals with the signs and symptoms of consistent with either a “porn addiction” or a “methamphetamine addiction” can be diagnosed using the ICD-11’s provisions.

The deniers of porn addiction are agitated because the latest version of the World Health Organization’s medical diagnostic manual, The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), contains a new diagnosis suitable for diagnosing what is commonly referred to as ‘porn addiction’ or ‘sex addiction.’ It’s called “Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder” (CSBD). The first section of this extensive critique expose Prause’s falsehoods surrounding the ICD-11: Debunking “Why Are We Still So Worried About Wat­­ching Porn?” by Marty Klein, Taylor Kohut, and Nicole Prause (2018). For an accurate account of the ICD-11, see this recent article by The Society for the Advancement of Sexual Health (SASH): “Compulsive Sexual Behaviour” has been classified by World Health Organization as Mental Health Disorder.

————————–

More of the same BS:

Notice how RealYBOP nevers give an exmaple of “fraudulent medical information”. Never.

———————————–

Tweeting Kris Taylor’s paper and misrepresenting it:

——————————

Tweeting the same excerpts, again (the young man is describing PIED)

——————

RealYBOP member Davis Ley joins the attack:

———————–

At the same time RealYBOP is tweeting on “The Doctors” threads, she tweets lies about porn recovery forums promoting ant-semitism.

Let’s be very clear: Nicole Prause and David Ley, are the ones who initiated this disgusting smear campaign years ago. Have a look at these sections of a page documenting some of the many attacks Nofap and others have been subjected to:

————————————–

RealYBOP tweets RealYBOP member Madita Oeming who also asks twitter to de-platform Nofap:

————————-

Cyberstalker RealYBOP continues: November 5th, 2019, it tweets a hit-piece that cites nothing to support its propaganda.

RealYBOP dishonestly posts a screenshot of a conversation from a completely unrelated forum.

——————————-

RealYBOP monitors everything Nofap tweets. Clear support for porn industry in this tweet:

UPDATE – October 23, 2019: NoFap founder Alexander Rhodes files a defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause / Liberos LLC.

END OF SPECIAL SECTION

———————————————————

RealYBOP enters a thread I posted in the previous day, correcting Stoya’s the false information. Notice that RealYBOP tags friend and porn producer/performeer “ProVillian

—————————–

Just funny. Pot calling the kettle black…

———————–

Retweets former porn site owner Jerry Barnett, who tweets in support of prostitution:

———————-

RealYBOP tweets under Gary Wilson in a thread where xHamster tagged Wilson, suggesting Wilson was religious and anti-masturbation (he is neither). RealYBOP blocked Wilson, yet continues to cyberstalk him.

RealYBOP is tweeting Prause’s lies and obsessions. Wilson is not paid by The Reward Foundation or anyone else. See: May – July, 2018: In emails, in the ICD-11 comments section, and on Wikipedia, Prause and her sockpuppets falsely claim that Wilson received 9,000 pounds from The Reward Foundation. The document reveals that Wilson sent money to the UK charity to resister his trademark (He did this because Prause is attempting to steal his trademark).

——————————

RealYBOP enters a thread where Gary Wilson had tweeted, and proceeds to lie about MDPI rating:

RealYBOP & Prause are obsessed with MDPI because (1) Behavioral Sciences published two articles that Prause disagrees with (because they discussed papers by her, among hundreds of papers by other authors), and (2) Gary Wilson is a co-author of Park et al., 2016. Prause has a long history of cyberstalking and defaming Wilson, chronicled in this very extensive page. The two papers:

For much more, see: From 2015 through 2019: Prause’s efforts to have Behavioral Sciences review paper (Park et al., 2016) retracted.

Here are examples of Prause (as Sciencearousal) inserting her usual drivel. First, she tried to insert a mistake by the Norwegian Register, who accidentally downgraded MDPI’s rating from the normal “1” to a “0”. The downgraded rating was a clerical error, and had long been resolved on the MDPI Wikipedia page. Prause knows the zero rating was a clerical error, yet she and RealYBOP tweet that MDPI was downgraded and that MDPI is a predatory journal (both are false and both are in Sciencearousal’s Wikipedia edit).

Those debating RealYBOP ask for a link, but RealYBOP blocks both, retweets her lie, and runs away.

 

———————

David Ley’s disgusting, factually innacurate interview attacking nofap becomes a pinned tweet:

This leads to RealYBOP tweeting NumbNutsNovember for the 20th time:

———————

Enters a thread where Gary Wilson had already posted numerous tweets.

RealYBOP NEVER links to official statemenst by the WHO, only to its own site. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), contains a new diagnosis suitable for diagnosing both porn addiction and sex addiction. It’s called “Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder.” Neither the ICD-11 nor the DSM5 ever use the word “addiction” to describe an addiction – whether it be gambling addiction, heroin addiction, cigarette addiction or you name it. Both diagnostic manuals use the word “disorder” instead of “addiction” (i.e. “gambling disorder” “nicotine use disorder”, and so on). Thus, “sex addiction” and “porn addiction” could never have been rejected, because they were never under formal consideration in the major diagnostic manuals. Put simply, there will never be a “porn addiction” diagnosis, just as there will never be a “meth addiction” diagnosis. Yet both pathologies can be diagnosed using the ICD-11’s provisions.

——————

RealYBOP supports the use of “under-age” dolls for pedophiles!

————————-

Retweeting hit-piece by Rolling Stone (by an author who regularly places RealYBOP members in her articles):

Check out Nofap’s threads exposing the hit-piece:

RealYBOP and sidekick NerdyKinkyCommie, troll Gabe Deem (note that Gabe had blocked both, but that doesn’t stop cyberstalkers):

First, the links posted by trolls Nerdy and James F. were given to them by RealYBOP/Prause.

Second, Nerdy’s screenshot has been tweeted dozens of times by Prause & RealYBOP. It had nothing to do anything in thread, but it matters not, because RealYBOP/Prause are obsessed with MDPI (parent company of the journal Behavioral Sciences). Behavioral Sciences published Is Internet Pornography Causing Sexual Dysfunctions? A Review with Clinical Reports (Park et al., 2016). Nerdy is lying about MDPI’s rating. Here are examples of Prause (as Sciencearousal) inserting the above clerical error by the Norwegian Register, who accidentally downgraded MDPI’s rating from the normal “1” to a “0”. The downgraded rating had long been resolved on the MDPI Wikipedia page. Prause knows the zero rating was a clerical error, yet she and RealYBOP tweet that MDPI was downgraded and that MDPI is a predatory journal (both are false and both are in Sciencearousal’s/Prause Wikipedia edit).

Third, the 5-year video has nothing to do with China, or internet addiction boot camps. It was about porn.

——————-

Blocked troll Nerdy quote-tweets Gabe (who healed porninduced ED), and RealYBOP joins in with falsehoods:

RealYBOP’s screenshot contains 7 papers, from the ED section of its so-called “research page”. We debunk it here: Erectile And Other Sexual Dysfunctions Section. Reality: This list contains over 35 studies linking porn use or porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions.

Lie #1: There is no study that has assessed poprn induced ED with penile gauges.

Lie #2: The nationally representative study reported a strong corrleation between porn use and ED: Critique of “Is Pornography Use Related to Erectile Functioning? Results From Cross-Sectional and Latent Growth Curve Analyses” (2019), by Josh Grubbs

Lie #3: As for the 7 RealYBOP studies, she’s trying to fool the public. Four studies of the seven reported significant links between porn use and sexual problems. Data in all 4 of these studies run counter to the Allliance’s claims:

  1. Erectile Dysfunction, Boredom, and Hypersexuality among Coupled Men from Two European Countries (2015)
  2. Patient Characteristics by Type of Hypersexuality Referral: A Quantitative Chart Review of 115 Consecutive Male Cases (2015)
  3. Is Pornography Use Related to Erectile Functioning? Results From Cross-Sectional and Latent Growth Curve Analyses” (2019)
  4. Survey of Sexual Function and Pornography (2019)

Of RealYBOP’s remaining three citations, one is not peer-reviewed, while the other two were formally criticized in the peer-reviewed literature.

More trolling Gabe (who RealYBOP has blocked):

Nope what?

RealYBOP trolling Gabe Deem, again:

Reality: Gabe was accurate for a drawing. The other 2 comments are red herrings. However, RealYBOP’s comments are irrelevant. Instead, this twitter account claims represent 20 experts, yet its trolling accounts it has blocked, with inane, spurious tweets. How embarrassing. How mentally deranged.

——————-

Pushing porn industry agenda concerning porn performers

———————–

Even after Alex Rhodes filed a defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause (who appears to be managing @BrainOnPorn twitter), RealYBOP continues to defame and harass NoFap and Alex Rhodes:

——————–

RealYBOP retweets stripchat’s upcoming session with RealYBOP member David Ley. Stripchat is owned by xHamster:

See: David Ley is now being compensated by porn industry giant xHamster to promote its websites and convince users that porn addiction and sex addiction are myths!

—————————

Immediately fter Alex Rhodes filed a defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause (who appears to be managing @BrainOnPorn twitter) becomes public (see fundraiser), Prause gives David Ley a 2015 YBR podcast to disparage:

————————-

RealYBOP follows up with a veiled attack on NoFap (after Alex Rhodes filed a defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause, who appears to be managing @BrainOnPorn twitter):

————————-

Same day – veiled attack on nofap, while promoting porn-industry agenda

——————-

Next Day: RealYBOP engages in defamation per se of Alex Rhodes.

RealYBOP (likley Prause) has now addead another instance of defamation to Alex’s lawsuit.

Continued attacks on Alex Rhodes & Nofap, even though he filed a defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause (who appears to be managing @BrainOnPorn twitter).

—————–

RealYBOP tweets factually innacurate hit piece by VICE:

Few things. The author Samantha Cole wrote a hit-piece on Nofap last year: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/7xywwb/let-this-be-the-last-no-nut-november-nofap-meme-explained – basically calling them all Fascists. Current article interviews Nicole Prause, David Ley, The Free Speech Coalition, and the Vice President of stripchat (owned by xHamster). NOTE: The connections:
1) FSC and Prause:

2) David Ley and xHamster:

Would love to know who contacted Samantha Cole. Let’s hope that Rhodes’s lawyers are able to subpoena emails related to the VICE article. Are we looking at a 2nd conspiracy lawsuit?

The next day 3 of the 4 porn-industry shills from the VICE hit-piece are involved in the same two tweets promoting Ley’s upcoming paid appearance on xHamster-ownedstripchat.

  1. Nicole Prause – likely operator of @BrainOnPorn
  2. David Ley, who is being paid by stripchat (Xhamster)
  3. Vice President of stripchat, who is paying Ley

The tweets disparaging No-NutNovember (the real target is Nofap)

Nothing suspicious here, folks. The official tweet:

So, the 3 people collaborating in the Vice article to defame and disparage NoFap, do the same on twitter, to increase stripchat’s traffic, and thus xHamster’s profits.

Stripchat follows up with a tweet linking to the VICE hit-piece, containing numerous lies:

————————

RealYBOP misrepresents study:

The study: Effect of pornography on married couples (2019) – While the study reports porn use increasing parameters of arousal, the long-term effects don’t match porn’s short-term effects.

The study shows that watching pornography has a statistically positive correlation with years of marriage. This was in agreement with Goldberg et al. [14] who stated that pornography is highly addictive.

There is a highly negative correlation between satisfaction of sexual life and watching pornography as 68.5% of positive watchers are not satisfied with their sexual life.

Pornography increases masturbation among 74.6% of watchers, but it could not help to reach orgasm among 61.5% of them. Pornography watching increases the incidence of divorce (33.8%) (P = 0.001).

Conclusion: Pornography has a negative effect on marital relation.

—————————-

RealYBOP retweeting promotion of a porn site

———————–

RealYBOP lies about what she linked to actually said:

Link says nothing about porn – http://www.atsa.com/sex-addiction-sexual-abuse-and-effective-treatment-0

————————

November, 18 2019: Staci Sprout made a video supporting a fund raiser for NoFap founder Alexander Rhodes’s defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause / Liberos. In retaliation, RealYBOP (an alias account of Nicole Prause) disparages Staci Sprout:

While RealYBOP did not name Sprout, it tweeted a screenshot of her article.

————————

Porn performer/producer Tim Woodman approves of RealYBOP claiming that porn use is largely beneficial because it is associated with better knowledge of genital anatomy.

Seems like half of RealYBOP’s followers are in the porn industry. Here’s’ a thought: Google an anatomy textbook, skip the porn.

Note: July, 2019: Staci Sprout, LICSW affidavit: Donald Hilton defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause & Liberos LLC.

—————————-

RealYBOP randomly disparaging Fight The New Drug:

Tweet #1: The panelists lied about most everything.

Tweet #2: Several experts in this field and I debunked its assertions and empty rhetoric in this relatively short response – Op-ed: Who exactly is misrepresenting the science on pornography? (2016). Unlike the “neuroscientists of the Op-Ed,” we cited several hundred studies and multiple reviews of the literature.

———————–

RealYBOP disparages Don Hilton, MD (he was one of the many individuals in a CBS segment about porn). RealYBOP just makes stuff up, as there are now 45 neuroscience-based studies. They provide strong support for the addiction model as their findings mirror the neurological findings reported in substance addiction studies.

Madita Oeming chimes in, yet she admits to knowing nothing about neuroscience or addiction. She is a member of RealYBOP expert page & close ally of Prause. The title of her upcoming PhD is “porn addiction as moral panic”. RealYBOP is pissy because Hilton dismantled her junk study back in 2013: Peer-reviewed critique: ‘High Desire’, or ‘Merely’ An Addiction? A Response to Steele et al. (2014) by Donald L. Hilton, Jr., MD.

————————–

RealYBOP retweets garbage tweet, disparaging NCOSE, her by buddy XBIZ:

————————

For the 8th or 9th time RealYBOP tweets the one so-called “benefit” of porn use:

Shillin’ for the porn industry, just sayin’.

————————-

Coincidence? Within the hour of NoFap tweeting congratulations to those who attempted NoNutNovember, RealYBOP tweets her numbnutsnovember video:

Note: The person managing RealYBOP twitter is being sued for defamation by Nofap founder Alex Rhodes.

——————

This is what a porn-industry shill would tweet:

Thoroughly discredited in this extensive article: Debunking the realyourbrainonporn (pornographyresearch.com) “Sex Offender Section”: The actual state of the research on porn use and sexual aggression, coercion & violence.

A women informs RealYBOP that her sex worker friend is seeing clients who mimic violence in porn. RealYBOP tells her it’s NOT the porn:

———————

Promoting news from the porn industry, while having a friendly chat with a porn site:

—————————-

Why is a website that claims to be about porn’s effects on the user so concerned with the health of the porn industry?

——————–

More promotion of the porn industry via rewteeting The Adult Performer Advocacy Committee.

Why is a website claiming to be about porn’s effects on the user so concerned with the health of the porn industry?

———————–

More porn industry propaganda retweeted by RealYBOP:

————————-

What? Erice Sparnkle is a huge supporter of prostitution, and the newest member of RealYBOP.

———————-

RealYBOP spending saturday trolling anti-porn accounts, falsely stating that porn has nothing to do with sex trafficking:

RealYBOP link has zero studies about trafficking & porn. Cause none support its falsehoods.

———————-

More Saturday night trolling. RealYBOP upset that others suggest age-verification for porn:

————————-

More Saturday night trolling

Do not need “supraphysiological” levels of dopamine to induce downreguation of dopamine. Numerous studies on binge eating, gambling, and interent addiction report dowregulation of dopamine receptors and dopamine transporters.

————————–

More trolling on a Saturday night:

RealYBOP tweets her joke of a “science page”: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”).

—————————–

More trolling of others (link by RealYBOP has no relevant studies):

Trolls same thread:

Cites nothing, but debunked link – Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”).

——————————

Tweets article she has tweeted a dozen times (nothing but propaganda):

The whole white supremacy lie was fabricated by Prause and Ley:

Scathing expose’ of serial false accuser, harasser, cyber-stalker Nicole Prause (the person behind the false accusations of white supremacy)Alex Rhodes of Porn Addiction Support Group ‘No Fap’ Sues Obsessed Pro-Porn Sexologist for Defamation (By Megan Fox, of PJ Media). Excerpt related to Prause’s fabrications that I, Alex, and anyone who suggests porn might cause problems, is a white supremacist:

Perhaps most illustrative of Prause’s character in this saga is her charge that Rhodes is a Nazi and white-supremacist, as detailed in the lawsuit. This should not surprise anyone who has been paying attention since 2016. The minute an SJW disagrees with someone, that person becomes a Nazi. Rhodes’s crime? He allowed political commentator Gavin McInnes to interview him while he was still working for Vice. And since Prause found out that Rhodes spoke to McInnes one time and didn’t throw a drink in his face, she has been accusing him of supporting the Proud Boys (who got in a lot of trouble for street brawling with Antifa). It’s still a stretch, in my opinion, to call the Proud Boys anything but a male drinking club, but Rhodes actually has disavowed the Proud Boys as an “extremist group” on several occasions. He was never a member, nor a supporter. No Fap has never been political and is dedicated to providing addiction help to anyone who needs it. This does not stop Prause from continuing to link him to “white supremacists” through the weak association of one interview with McInnes, who isn’t a white supremacist either.

The lawsuit should be interesting to watch as it opens up statements on Twitter to legal scrutiny. Will Prause be held accountable for publishing false claims on social media?

In a disgusting tweet, RealYBOP calls Gabe Deem a white supremacist (RealYBOP regularly defames and harasses individuals and organizations who say porn use might cause problems).

So liking a tweet of someone you don’t know makes you a white supremacist? All this does is expose RealYBOP as a cyberstalker.

————————-

RealYBOP harasses Alex Rhodes of Nofap (who quoted a study):

RealYBOP continues to attack/disparage Alex Rhodes, even though Alexander Rhodes filed a defamation lawsuit against Nicole Prause / Liberos

————————-

RealYBOP misrepresents Taylor Kohut’s (SmartLab) sudy. Kohut is a member of RealYBOP. . He corrects her:

—————————

What can you say?

———————-

RealYBOP trolls Gabe Deem again: She lies about the research an attacks him personally. It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

Reality: This list contains 38 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions. The ONLY causation study one can do on porn-induced ED is elimination of porn use.

RE: Cameron Staley’s TEDx Talk. He was a grad student of Prause when he gathered data for Steele et al. 2013. Just a few his falsehoods in his TEDx talk where he cited zero studies to support his propaganda:

  1. Staley says his “mentor was a renowned sex researcher!” What? No one had heard of Prause before Steele et al. was published in July of 2013 (Prause misrepresented its findings).
  2. Staley lies about about the actual results of Steele et al, 2013. He states that “the subjects brains didn’t look like brains of addicts” – but he never tells us how their brains differed from addicts (because they did not). 8 peer-reviewed papers disagree with Staley, and point out that the subjects brains looked exactly like an addict- Peer-reviewed critiques of Steele et al., 2013 (greater cue reactivity correlated with less desire for sex with a partner). Note: Steele et al., did NOT have a control group!
  3. Staley gets into Grubbs “perceived porn addiction” study, falsely stating that Grubbs assessed belief in addiction.
  4. Staley says porn related problems do not constituean epidemic: nly our belief that viewing porn is a problem, is a problem.
  5. He says porn cannot cause PIED, even though 7 peer-reviewed papers report cases of men recovering by quitting porn. And 30 more studies link porn to sexual problems/lower arousal – including his own – Steele et al., 2013 (greater cue reactivity related to less desire to have sex with a partner).
  6. He says porn is not a problem for relationships, yet 75 studies link porn use to poorer sexual and relationship satisfaction.

Bottom line according to Staley – believe porn use is just fine and you will be just fine using porn. Unsupported propaganda refuted by hundreds of studies.

————————

Disparaging sex addiction therspists, calling them frauds:

—————————–

RealYBOP takes a comment on the ICD-11 beta-draft page out of context (it was NOT an official WHO comment).

Real Your Brain on Porn excerpted a few lines from ICD-11 comments section. The comment was by MSAC (it was not an official WHO statement) and was in a comment rejecting a request to “delete CSBD”. A key excerpt conveniently omitted by Real Your Brain on Porn:

“The ICD-11 approach is consistent with the findings of a recent review of the neurobiology of compulsive sexual behaviour (CSB), which concluded that growing evidence suggested that CSB shared many similarities with addiction but more work was to elucidate specific mechanisms. However, the authors supported its inclusion in ICD-11 because this provides a framework for further study and ultimately refinement of the diagnostic classification for CSBD.”

ENTIRE MAC COMMENT

The rationale for compulsive sexual behaviour disorder (CSBD) and its placement in the grouping of impulse control disorders was first described by the Working Group on Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders, reporting to the Mental Health TAG and consisting of global experts in the area:
Grant, J. E., Atmaca, M., Fineberg, N. A., Fontenelle, L. F., Matsunaga, H., Reddy, Y.C. J., Simpson, H. B., Thomsen, P. H., van den Heuvel, O. A., Veale, D., Woods, D. W., & Stein, D. J. (2014). Impulse control disorders and “behavioural addictions” in the ICD-11. Word Psychiatry, 13, 125-127. doi: 10.1002/wps.20115

A more explicit explanation of the rationale, placement, and definition for CSBD was recently provided by 11 leading global authors on the topic, consisting of scientists and practitioners with direct experience treating or studying compulsive sexual behaviour:
Kraus, S.W., Krueger, R.B., Briken, P., First, M.B., Stein, D.J., Kaplan, M.S., Voon, V., Abdo, C.H.N., Grant, J.E., Atalla, E., & Reed, G.M. (2018). Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder in the ICD-11. World Psychiatry, 17, 109-110.

These groups have both argued that CSBD identifies a clinically important population in need of health services and that the consequences of the condition can be severe—even sometimes fatal—if left untreated. Inclusion of CSBD allows for greater access to health care services for those affected by the condition and is also expected to de stigmatize help seeking for affected persons.

In terms of placement of the entity, although the term ‘sex addiction’ has been taken up by the popular media, the Working Group concluded that available evidence did not support this conceptualization. Instead, a more incremental approach was recommended, placing the category in the grouping of impulse control disorders, with repeated difficulties in repeated controlling one’s sexual impulses and behavior as the core diagnostic feature. In this regard, the proposal mischaracterizes the approach introduced in ICD-11.

The ICD-11 approach is consistent with the findings of a recent review of the neurobiology of compulsive sexual behaviour (CSB), which concluded that growing evidence suggested that CSB shared many similarities with addiction but more work was to elucidate specific mechanisms. However, the authors supported its inclusion in ICD-11 because this provides a framework for further study and ultimately refinement of the diagnostic classification for CSBD. See:

Kowalewska, E., Grubbs, J.B., Potenza, M.N., Gola, M., Draps, M., & Kraus, S.W. (2018) Neurocognitive mechanisms in compulsive sexual behavior disorder. Current Sexual Health Reports, 10, 255-264.

In terms of the expressed concern about misuse, the definition clearly states that ‘Distress that is entirely related to moral judgments and disapproval about sexual impulses, urges, or behaviours is not sufficient to meet this requirement.’

Overall, the links provided in this proposal are dated, and lead to material that was posted prior to the publication of the rationale and definition of ICD-11 CSBD in World Psychiatry. Most are discussions of “sexual addiction” or “pornography addiction.” As noted, materials related to the ICD-11 make very clear that CSBD is not intended to be interchangeable with sex addiction, but rather is a substantially different diagnostic framework.

RECOMMENDATION: MSAC recommends rejection of the proposal {to delete CSBD}

—————————-

Bizarre attack sex addiction therapists and a lie:

RealYBOP lie: Sex addiction therapists have published numerous studies on treatment modalities for porn and sex addiction: Pornography Use & Sex Addiction Studies

———————–

Random attack on unnamed “anti-porn groups”. Provides no example:

Vast majority of porn studies report negative outcomes related to porn use: The Main Research Page.

—————–

Uses any random tweet to spread its propaganda:

Atypical? Every study ever published involving males has reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction: Over 75 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction.

———————–

Idiotic assertion by RealYBOP: researchers must talk to porn producers to understand the effects of porn on the user.

One thing is for sure. No researcher has talked to more porn industry insiders than RealYBOP: SECTION 1: Nicole Prause & the porn industry.

————————

RealYBOP uses 4 tweets to misrepresent a FTND article about a study:

Full study here and the FTND article here –Research Reveals Child-On-Child Sexual Abuse Directly Linked To Porn. Nothing “fake” about the FTND article as the study and its author saw porn use as significant factor in child on child sexual abuse.

Excerpts from study:

The third opportunity for prevention identified by the young people related to the trouble they had managing pornography. Out of the 14 young people, 12 talked about being exposed to pornography and three talked about how pornography was one of the factors that triggered their harmful sexual behavior. They implied the likelihood of their harmful sexual behavior occurring could have been reduced if pornography had not been present.

The study’s authors:

“We can’t, on the one hand, say we don’t want to talk with young children about sexuality, while on the other hand do nothing about the multi-billion-dollar pornography industry and the telecommunications industry that is enabling access,” McKibbin added.

“It may be that government needs to intervene at this point. Pornography can’t be seen as the sole responsibility of parents or schools because it has gone way beyond that. We probably need to engage directly with the pornography industry and the telecommunications industry,” she said.

———————–

3 tweets sum up RealYBOP agenda: Promoting prostitution, citing a factually-inaccurate hit-piece targeting FTND by AVN, promoting a porn twitter account

——————-

On December 15, 2019 the most comprehensive, research-based article yet on porn’s effects was published by Pascal Gobry: A Science-Based Case for Ending the Porn Epidemic. RealYBOP and Nicole Prause responded with 90 rambling tweets consisting of personal attacks, ad hominem, false accusations – yet nothing specific about the article. Gobry’s initial tweet:

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1206662934388191233

One example of Prause/RealYBOP’s inability to address a single sentence in Gobry’s extensive article:

As always, RealYBOP links to its debunked research page: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”).

Prause attacks author Pascal Gobry. He deftly responds to all her trolling (Prause eventually makes her twitter account private, switching to RealYBOP twitter to defame Gary Wilson and others – cause that’s what she does). Responses from Gobry:

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1207220871733096453

————————-

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1207236180519063552

———–

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1207198225897275392

———————

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1207351846991540225

—————————

What?

———————–

RealYBOP attacks “Anti-porn activists” with fabricated tall tales:

Suggests donations to a dubious “protection” organization that supports porn use and prostitution.

———————–

RealYBOP is a joke. While dopamine does not ‘increase” AT orgasm, it is high during sexual arousal (equivalent to morphine and nicotine, and far higher than all other natural rewards). Dopamine drops right after orgasm.

By the way, dopamine levels in the blood and CSF tell us nothing about dopamine levels in the reward system. Dopamine in the reward system can only be DIRECTLY measured in animals – not humans! RealYBOP playing twitter sycophants for fools.

RealYBOP then lies, saying that dopamine doesn’t go up during sexual arousal.

RealYBOP is lying. Both sexual arousal and alcohol increase dopamine levels by 100%. Image from Dynamic Changes in Nucleus Accumbens Dopamine Efflux During the Coolidge Effect in Male Rats (1997)

——————–

More falsehoods. Notice she cites nothing. There were no pre-registered studies.

As mentioned numerous times about RealYBOP always cites fellow RealYBOP member Taylor Kohut’s paper with some very creative methodology apparently employed to produce the desired results. In reality, Kohut’s findings are contradicted by nearly every other published study. See this 2016 review of the literature: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015.

——————-

RealYBOP joining another thread to disparage Fight the New Drug. Notice that neither cites a study to support assertions.

FTND says porn kills love. Whether it does or not, EVERY study on male porn users reports that more porn use is linked to less sexual or relationship satisfaction (about 70 studies). And NONE of those 70 studies are on RealYBOP’s joke of a research page.

———————

Re-tweets 6-month old tweet that attempts to downplay sex trafficking. RealYBOP often tweets in support of prostitution and the porn industry. Odd for a site supposedly about effects of porn use.

Orginal material comes from a “sex worker” site.

——————————–

Quote-tweets an irrelevant tweet with an untrue assertion:

Really? Here are over 40 porn studies involving female subjects that report negative effects on arousal, sexual satisfaction, and relationships.

—————————-

LOL. RealYBOP only tweets studies it views as being positive (that’s why it rarely tweets porn studies). Mostly it misrepresents the research:

Truth: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”)

————————-

Even though RealYBOP has blocked Gabe Deem she still cyberstalks him:

Disgusting how a “Psychologist” is allowed to say that a young man faked erectile dysfunction (RealYBOP is a liar – Gabe makes no money off of this)

—————————-

RealYBOP and Ley tweet in support of the very shady group, The False Memory Syndrome Foundation (which is being closed down):

Places sex addiction therapists in same category as reparative therapists. More libel by RealYBOP.

Long thread with the truth about The False Memory Syndrome Foundation:

Prause-RealYBOP entered the above thread to lie about Staci Sprout (who doesn’t back down from RealYBOP).

Two defamation suits and counting for Prause.

——————————-

This is from a person (RealYBOP/Liberos) who offers a completely unproven TMS device to supposedly lower or increase sex drive. Yeah right.

Unlike the methods used by sex and porn addiction therapists, Prause’s Liberos treatments are unproven.

—————————–

RealYBOP disparages this article by PhD student in neuroscience. (Nolan Brown knows nothing about this subject – she’s just spouting off):

Note: RealYBOP’s numerous comments under Rachel Ann Barr’s article were deleted for violating Medium’s rules (they were nothing more than ad hominem and defamation).

——————-

Even though Prause is being sued by Alex Rhodes of Nofap for defamation, she uses her RealYBOP account to add to her defamation:

——————–

RealYBOP engages in defamation of Staci Sprout (who filed an affidavit in Don Hilton’s defamation suit against Prause):

Staci did not have Bipolar Disorder or “numerous addictions”. RealYBOP is a pathological liar, cyberstalker.

——————————

Out of nowhere, RealYBOP misrepresents a 10-year old commentary by Don Hilton (who is suing Prause for defamation). Hilton and Watts commentary: Pornography addiction: A neuroscience perspective

Exposing RealYBOP as a shill: 45 neuroscience-based studies. All provide strong support for the addiction model as their findings mirror the neurological findings reported in substance addiction studies.

————————

Again, going after Pascal Gobry who wrote a fanstastic article, causing Prause /RealYBOP to tweet 90 times at him.

No, RealYBOP’s debunked research page does NOT have hundreds of citations: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”).

A few tweets by Gobry making fun of Prause/RealYBOP and her truly ignorant minions:

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1211746635992182787

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1211749288990191616

https://twitter.com/pegobry/status/1211751684927565826

————————-

Attacking the 10th person on New Years Eve, RealYBOP teams up with co-cybertsalker James F – who self owns by tweeting my research page, and my NCOSE presentation (Gary Wilson – “Porn Research: Fact or Fiction?”)

Seriously? This is all they can say?

——————————-

RealYBOP trolls a young women, claiming to be the victim of imaginary ‘extremists”, while linking to its debunked page.

Yet RealYBOP is the perpetrator.

————————-

RealYBOP trolls under Gary Wilson (even though I blocked her and she blocked me), tweeting about Hilton & Watts, 2011 – again:

In 2011 there was one smaller neurological study on sex addicts. Now there are 45 neurological studies. Hilton has been proved correct.

————————

Trolling the thread of a man who posted his podcast about porn’s effects:

More of same:

RealYBOP never cites a study or a review of the literature, because none support RealYBOP’s propaganda. Its one link is debunked: Porn Science Deniers Alliance (AKA: “RealYourBrainOnPorn.com” and “PornographyResearch.com”).

————————–

Cyberstalker/defamer RealYBOP tweets a screenshot of my 2-year-old tweet of a New York Times opinion piece called “Let’s Ban Porn”, falsely accusing me of wanting to ban porn. This is what Nikky always does – “fabricate non-evidence”. And it’s these fabrications that have resulted in Prause became embroiled in two defamation lawsuits (Donald Hilton, MD & Nofap founder Alexander Rhodes).

Note the preceding 20 trolling and disparaging tweets were all posted on New Years Eve. Crazy, huh?

————————-

After over 20 tweets in onde day disparaging & defaming anyone who suggests porn might cause a problem, RealYBOP plays the victim card.

Notice how RealYBOP/Prause never screenshot an example. In November, 2019, Diana Davison became the first journalist to do an investigative Prause’s claims of victim-hood. Over a week of communications and Prause was unable to provide any evidence. Davison’s expose’ – The Post Millennial expose’ on Nicole Prause. Diana Davison also produced this 6-minute video about Prause’s fake victimhood and the defamation lawsuits filed against Prause.

Below are very revealing comments under the Diana Davison video (in response to an obsessive commenter):

———————————

———————————

In the same week another investigative reporter Megan Fox of PJ Media produced a similar article about Nicole Prause: “Alex Rhodes of Porn Addiction Support Group ‘NoFap’ Sues Obsessed Pro-Porn Sexologist for Defamation”.

Prause/RealYBOP is the perpertrator, not the victim.

—————-

A 69 year-old man is treated for watching porn up to 6 hours a day (often til 3am ) and Ley & realYBOP say porn addiction treatment is harmful:

——————–

For the 3oth time tweets Kohut et al., 2016 (Taylor Kohut is a realYBOP member). It’s a non-quantitive, non-representative study that is countered by nearly every quantitative study published.

RealYBOP omits all the many negative effectst reported in the study. See: Critique of “Perceived Effects of Pornography on the Couple Relationship: Initial Findings of Open-Ended, Participant-Informed, Bottom-Up Research” (2017).

—————–

Continues its cyberstalking, going back years, searching through twitter accounts for anything she can misrepresent. Here she attacks DJ Burr (whom Prause harassed and threatened, then maliciously reported to the State of Washington Department of Health:

Going after Staci Sprout (who filed an affidavit in Hilton’s defamation suit)

———————

Tweets RealYBOP member Marty Klein, who once boasted his very own webpage on the AVN’s Hall of Fame in recognition of his pro-porn advocacy serving the porn industry’s interests (since removed).

RealYBOP motto – “Stop blaming porn“.

—————————

RealYBOP trolls new paper by fellow RealYBOP member, Samuel Perry. Even though it was a very slanted write-up, Perry couldn’t fully disguise the fact that poorer relationship quality is nearly always associated with porn use. Excerpt:

Conversely, except for one unclear exception, pornography use was never positively associated with relationship quality. Associations were only occasionally moderated by gender, but in inconsistent directions. While this study makes no claims about causality, findings clearly affirmed that, in instances where viewing pornography is associated with relationship quality at all, it is nearly always a signal of poorer relationship quality, for men and women.

Perry is a proud member of RealYBOP. See critique: Critique of Samuel Perry’s “Is the Link Between Pornography Use and Relational Happiness Really More About Masturbation? Results From Two National Surveys” (2019). After sophisticated statistical “modeling” (under pressure from Prause?) Perry proposed that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship problems. In reality, more porn use was related to less satisfaction. The gaping hole in Perry’s analysis is the absence of specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency. Without that, his claim is little more than hypothetical.

——————–

Retweet has nothing to do with porn. Just another chance to claim that using porn makes you a good person:

———————-

RealYBOP retweets a porn producer’s tweet (“Bright Desire“):

——————-

Promotes a porn performer’s grab at fame:

—————–

3 week later and RealYBOP is still making fraudulent claims about Pascal Gobry’s A Science-Based Case for Ending the Porn Epidemic. The following is a lie:

The article linked to by RealYBOP said nothing about Gobry’s article, only that it existed.

————————

Propagandist RealYBOP links to 8-month old article by friend EJ Dickson. Makes false calims about “dark money”, whatever that means:

——————-

RealYBOP spins findings:

Abstract reveals that it wasn’t “higher desire” for sex with a partner, but higher scores for craving both sex and masturbation. Cravings (cue-reactivity) is a sign of addiction-related brain changes.

Here we show that individual differences in human reward-related brain activity in the nucleus accumbens to food and sexual images
predict subsequent weight gain and sexual activity 6 months later. These findings suggest that heightened reward responsivity in the
brain to food and sexual cues is associated with indulgence in overeating and sexual activity, respectively, and provide evidence for a
common neural mechanism associated with appetitive behaviors.

————————–

RealYBOP retweets Joe Kort’s podcast. Kort resorts to fiction, as it’s not “dangerous neurochemical changes (whatever than means), its addiction-related brain changes

Assertion that Nikki has “new research” that debunks porn addiction is BS. All she has is Prause et al., 2015 – which actually found desensitization/habituation in frequent porn users (which is consistent with the addiction model): 9 peer-reviewed critiques of Prause et al., 2015 expose the truth.

———————

First, RealYBOP is once again tweeting screenshots of an accounts that has blocked it –@LailaMickelwait. Laila also filed and affidavit in Donald Hilton’s defamation lawsuit against Nicole R Prause. Second, idiot RealYBOP is apparently arguing against “neuroplasticity” occring whne watching porn. It would be impossible for learning NOT to occur while doing anything, let alone masturbating to porn.

As for studies, 45 neuroscience-based studies strongly suggest neuroplasticity in the form of addiction-related brain changes. Ley and RealYBOP are such shills.

——————–

RealYBOP, Prause, Ley and their followers often tweet materials by Andrew Przybylski or Amy Orben, two agenda-driven academics who pump out papers claiming to find little evidence of problems related to internet use (funny how thousands of studies counter their papers). They do so to disparage gaming addiction and internet addiction (internet porn addiction is sub-category on internet addiction).

Funny how RealYBOP complains about proper controls when Prause’s most infamous study had no control group for comparison, its subjects were not screened for mental disorders or addictions, and its questionnaires were not validated for porn use or porn addiction.

—————————

Upset that Laila Mickelwait’s tweet disparaging PornHub went viral, RealYBOP tweets at 1 am that “rough sex is just great” and if you say anything negative about it, you are sex negative. First @LailaMickelwait‘s viral tweet:

Then we have RealYBOP’s weak response, and an irrelevant paper (that was not about porn):

It was not **breaking news*** as it is 9 months old… and it’s not about porn, so it’s irrelevant (notice that RealYBOp made it a pinned tweet – at 1am):

Why doesn’t RealYBOP tweet that 75 studies link porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction, including every study involving males!

——————————-

Disparaging sex addiction, tweeting RealYBOP member Joe Kort:

The Kort article contains many falsehoods, specifically:

  • Sex Addiction therapy is “sex negative.” So quitting porn is “sex negative”.
  • Comparing Sex Addiction therapy to conversion therapy is grossly negligent. Libelous.
  • Sex Addiction treatment does not teach that “you can never again do what you like sexually because you felt it was getting out of control”.
  • Sex Addiction treatment does not say, “Your partner or your religion is upset with this, so you have a problem, so let’s fix you.”

————————

RealYBOP trolls Ed Latimore who tweet his extensive article: 6 Signs That You’re Definitely Addicted To Porn

Tweet is full of lies:

  1. WHO did not reject porn addiction
  2. APA in 2012 rejected hypersexuality, not porn addiction
  3. The AJPH journal has no position on porn addiction
  4. There are not many studies: REalYBOP lists zero studies that falsify porn addiction
  5. It’s actually RealYBOP and Prause making threats, harassing and stalking.

—————————–

RealYBOP, Prause, Ley are beind the disgusting propaganda that porn recovery forums are inhabited by Nazi’s. See – Ongoing – David Ley & Nicole Prause’s ongoing attempts to smear YBOP/Gary Wilson & Nofap/Alexander Rhodes by claiming links with neo-Nazi sympathizers

Prause is being sued by Alex Rhodes for calling him antisemitic (among other things), yet RealYBOP keeps tweeting her propaganda.

———————-

RealYBOP is obsessed with debunking PIED because the porn industry would suffer if PIED became recognized.

It’s important to note that Nicole Prause has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. Finally, it’s important to note that author Nicole Prause has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

————————

Biased, factually innacurate, poorly referenced paper in a non-PubMed indexed journal, written by the “Center of Positive Sexuality”.

The authors are the same as wrote the Center of Positive Sexuality 2017 “group position paper” opposing porn addiction. It was joke. I critiqued it in 2017: Dismantling the “group position” paper opposing porn and sex addiction (November, 2017)

Another article in the same journal, by the same group who published an earlier paper on “Porn superfans” attending the AVN Adult Entertainment Expo, where they discovered that the porn fans were OK with women working outside the home (this was reframed as porn superfans having more egalitarian views towards women).This time they “researchers” report that superfans don’t rape anyone while attending AVN. This is reframed as debunking “anti-porn claims”. Say what?

RealYBOP shilling for shilling researchers.

——————————–

RealYBOP tweeting kinsey Institute paper on the so-called “positives” of using cam sites:

Shilling for the porn industry, just as RealYBOP member David Ley regularly does: David Ley is compensated by porn industry giant xHamster to promote its websites and convince users that porn addiction and sex addiction are myths!

————————–

The “benefits” of camming sites! Sounds like a Kinsey study:

———————-

Promoting the porn industry combined with an incredibly stupid claim: researchers must talk to porn producers to understand the effects of porn on the user. Huh?

——————

David Ley and RealYBOP team up to defame and cyberstalk Alex Rhodes of Nofap (tweeting an untruthful article featuring Nicole Prause, who is being sued for defamation by Rhodes).

In a legally perilous move RealYBOP retweets the defamatory SCRAM article:

Two days after this tweet Alex Rhodes filed his amended complaint against Nicole Prause. In his new complaint the ScramNews article was added as a new incident of defamation:

It is now an exhibit: Exhibit #14: Factually-inaccurate, defamatory SCRAM hit-piece, allegedly placed by Prause (3 pages)

———————-

RealYBOP retweets Silva Neves slide from a presentation (Silva Neves stole the slide from RealYBOP):

Prause excerpted a few lines from the ICD-11 comments section. The comment was by MSAC (it was not an official WHO statement) and was in a comment rejecting Prause’s request to “delete CSBD”. A key excerpt conveniently omitted by Neves:

“The ICD-11 approach is consistent with the findings of a recent review of the neurobiology of compulsive sexual behaviour (CSB), which concluded that growing evidence suggested that CSB shared many similarities with addiction but more work was to elucidate specific mechanisms. However, the authors supported its inclusion in ICD-11 because this provides a framework for further study and ultimately refinement of the diagnostic classification for CSBD.”

RealYBOP retweets slide from the same conference: the presenter tells us that porn is all good

Sure it is.

———————-

1/26/20: RealYBOP promoting this porn studio’s pornography: https://twitter.com/adulttimecom

1/26/20: RealYBOP congratulating “Wicked Pictures” on its AVN awards:

——————–

Always tweeting about those evil anti-porn activits:

——————-

Again, tweets Staley TEDx talk.

RE: Cameron Staley’s TEDx Talk. He was a grad student of Prause when he gathered data for Steele et al. 2013. Just a few his falsehoods in his TEDx talk where he cited zero studies to support his propaganda:

  1. Staley says his “mentor was a renowned sex researcher!” What? No one had heard of Prause before Steele et al. was published in July of 2013 (Prause misrepresented its findings).
  2. Staley lies about about the actual results of Steele et al, 2013. He states that “the subjects brains didn’t look like brains of addicts” – but he never tells us how their brains differed from addicts (because they did not). 8 peer-reviewed papers disagree with Staley, and point out that the subjects brains looked exactly like an addict- Peer-reviewed critiques of Steele et al., 2013 (greater cue reactivity correlated with less desire for sex with a partner). Note: Steele et al., did NOT have a control group!
  3. Staley gets into Grubbs “perceived porn addiction” study, falsely stating that Grubbs assessed belief in addiction.
  4. Staley says porn related problems do not constituean epidemic: nly our belief that viewing porn is a problem, is a problem.
  5. He says porn cannot cause PIED, even though 7 peer-reviewed papers report cases of men recovering by quitting porn. And 30 more studies link porn to sexual problems/lower arousal – including his own – Steele et al., 2013 (greater cue reactivity related to less desire to have sex with a partner).
  6. He says porn is not a problem for relationships, yet 75 studies link porn use to poorer sexual and relationship satisfaction.

Bottom line according to Staley – believe porn use is just fine and you will be just fine using porn. Unsupported propaganda refuted by hundreds of studies.

——————-

Propaganda involes misuse of language

———————

As with countless earlier tweets, RealYBOP wants to blame masturbation, not porn, for all the many studies correlating negative outcomes with porn use (perfect example of a shill)

The 2002 single case study on a Indian man with a mental health disorder had nothing to do with porn: Masturbatory Guilt Leading to Severe Depression and Erectile Dysfunction.

——————-

RealYBOP uses an irrelevant 20 year old study to attack “rebooting”- which means giving up porn.

—————–

Nope, religion is NOT associated with believing you are addicted to porn. See: Evaluating Pornography Problems Due to Moral Incongruence Model

———————-

RealYBOP calling strangulation during sex “breath-play”. Trying to convince the public that women being strangled in porn is just great. However, even Kinsey researcher Herbenick pints out she is misrepresenting the study:

Another account makes fun of the highly skewed “sample”:

——————

Celebrating the rise of kink, which appears to be fueled by widespread porn use:

—————–

RealYBOP claims of “falsification” are pure BS:

YBOP exposed and debunked RealYBOP’ “Body Image” section here: Body Image Section.

———————-

RealYBOP gaslighting women who don’t want their partners to watch porn. RealYBOP using shame to promote porn use.

——————–

More gaslighting of female partners via retweet of REALYBOP member Marty Klein (and promotion of porn-industry):

——————-

Direct promotion of porn industry: chummy with well known porn start and director Tommy Pistol

—————————–

Special section (January 30, 2020): RealYBOP Twitter defames Dr. Tarek Pacha (who presented on PIED), falsely stating he’s not a urologist and has conflict of interests

On January 30, Gabe Deem posted the following tweet with snippets from urologist Tarek Pacha’s Porn-Induced ED presention givenat the American Urologialc Association Conference, May 6-10, 2016 (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4)

Right after @gabedeem tweeted Dr. Tarek Pacha’s presentation on PIED, RealYBOP twitter (thought to be run by Prause) defamed Dr. Pacha by falsely stating he is NOT a urologist and that he is somehow profiting through suggesting guys quit porn. Reality:

  1. Tarek Pacha is a board-certified urologist, with several awards and a book. RealYBOP/Prause lied.
  2. Pacha received only free meals and some lodging from medical companies in an amount far below the average for physicians. More to the point, medical companies would prefer Pacha refrain from telling guys that to achieve sexual health all they have to do is quit porn. Can’t sell any medical devices that way!

RealYBOP begins by posting 4 malicious and defamtory tweets:

In reality, it is Prause who is apparently being paid to directly promote sex toys and the highly controversial “Orgasmic Meditation,” which was under investigaion by the FBI. (see Bloomberg.com expose,) Put simply, Prause was hired to bolster the commercial interests of that heavily tainted and very controversial company. For her Orgasmic Meditation study, Prause allegedly obtained porn performers as subjects through another porn industry interest group, the Free Speech Coalition. Consider the irony of RealYBOP/Prause falsely accusing others of what she herself is doing.

Here RealYBOP trolls Gabe Deem’s Twitter thread, even though RealYBOP has blocked Gabe from replying:

Next, RealYBOP trolls my thread, where I expose her as lying about Dr. Tarek Pacha. RealYBOP blocked me before it went live. I then blocked RealYBOP to prevent her trolling me, as I cannot respond (while Prause falsely accuses us of stalking, she chronically trolls our accounts).

No RealYBOP, your “critique” is defamatory, as you falsely stated that Tarek Pacha is not a urologist. You also falsely claim a conflict of interest when there was none: no medical supply company is buying Pacha lunch to encourage him to tell young men to eliminate porn to cure their ED.

RealYBOP then trolls therapist Staci Sprout with her misinformation. RealYBOP has blocked Staci Sprout (who was unaware of RealYBOP’s tweet). Important to note that Prause and RealYBOP chronically harass and defame Staci Sprout. Prause has maliciously reported Sprout to boards, defamed her, and sent her threatening letters.

See Sprout’s affidavit in Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit – Exhibit #10: Staci Sprout, LCSW affidavit (15 pages).

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

END OF TAREK PACHA SECTION.

—————————————-

RealYBOP promoting a strip club:

——————

Context: RealYBOP trolls yet another account it has blocked (Laila Mickelwait) to defend pornhub (Laila Mickelwait has also filed an affidavit in Rhodes v. Prause). Here’s Laila’s very popular tweet, posted 1/31/20:

Laila continues the next day with facts and concerns

Who would be against age verification? Who would be for porn vids featuring young females who look and act like they are 13-14? RealYBOP, it appears.

RealYBOP spends its Saturday night gathering “evidence” and tweeting a defense of Pornhub and other adult sites.

As always, RealYBOP misrepresents what we say, while evading key points. The point of the Tweet is Pornhub has no age verification. Which RealYBOP confirmed and then confirmed she also found the girls most viewed video. It is completely irrelevant that other sites might have some form of ID check (which is questionable). So everything is A-ok because you can hunt around the internet trying to find these thousands of underage appearing girls and try to verify their age that way?

RealYBOP follows up with a retweet of Playboy writer, and RealYBOP expert, Justin Lehmiller’s propaganda:

———————

RealYBOP retweeting article (i.e. propaganda) by XBIZ (calls everyone anti-porn extremists):

———————

RealYBOP promoting article by a porn star, who is upset about Tumblr removing porn. Disallowing porn on Tumblr is reframed as “suppressing and attacking marginalized people”. You can’t make this stuff up.

——————-

RealYBOP claims activists trying to “de-platform” Mark McCormick, the author of a horribly biased article in the Independent. RealYBOP appears to be referring to Laila Mickelwait and Gary Wilson (two of RealYBOP/Prause’s regular targets). Here’s RealYBOP’s tweet:

Here’s the reality. Laila Mickelwait posted a few tweets about Mark McCormick’s biased article. Laila did not tweet in his thread, she created her own. She did not ask for anyone to be de-platformed (whatever that means).

I also posted a few tweets in Laila’s thread, exposing the cherry-picked studies McCormick chose, and what he omitted. Neither of us tweeted in anyone else’s thread. An example:

As you can see RealYBOP is lying. Not only about our tweets, but also about her receiving death threats from Laila or myself (which RealYBOP appears to be implying). Such libelous statements are deemed “defamation per se” – which means we need not show any commercial damages in order to recover. Prause was named defendant in two ongoing defamation lawsuits (brought by Donald Hilton, MD and Nofap founder Alexander Rhodes, respectively). Is RealYBOP cruising for a 3rd defamation lawsuit?

———————–

RealYBOP calling out mythical extremists, while trying to paint itself as neutral.

——————

RealYBOP links to short commentaries, by RealYBOP members, calling these “scientific consensus”. Bad Joke. RealYBOP NEVER cites actual reviews of the literature or metanalyses (because none support its agenda)

————————

Even though Alex Rhodes’s amended complaint against Prause also names the RealYBOP twitter account (@BrainOnPorn)as defaming him, RealYBOP continues to target Alex Rhodes and NoFap (harassers can’t help harassing):

Note on study RealYBOP cited: The program was pretty much like most guys do on nofap – logs, meditation, weekly check-ins, and trying to quit. In fact, the study is on my porn and sexual problems list as:

Abstinence or Acceptance? A Case Series of Men’s Experiences With an Intervention Addressing Self-Perceived Problematic Pornography Use (2019) – The paper reports on six cases of men with porn addiction as they underwent a mindfulness-based intervention program (meditation, daily logs & weekly check-ins). All 6 subjects seemed to benefit from meditation. Relevant to this list of studies, 2 of 6 reported porn-induced ED. A few reported escalation of use (habituation). One describes withdrawal symptoms.

——————–

Even though RealYBOP has blocked me, she continues to enter any thread where YBOP or me are mentioned. Important to note that I have filed a sworn affidavit in Alex Rhodes’s defamation suit against Prause/RealYBOP (my affidavit also names RealYBOP as defaming and harassing me).

YBOP’s page with about 1,000 peer-reviewed papers has not been debunked. However, the link by RealYBOP certainly has.

———————–

Lies about Fight The New Drug, linking to AVN as its trusted source

Prause chronically defames and harasses FTND.

————————-

Blatant propaganda, and lying.

No evidence? What about this study – The post-orgasmic prolactin increase following intercourse is greater than following masturbation and suggests greater satiety (2006)

Research indicates that prolactin increases following orgasm are involved in a feedback loop that serves to decrease arousal through inhibitory central dopaminergic and probably peripheral processes. The magnitude of post-orgasmic prolactin increase is thus a neurohormonal index of sexual satiety. Using data from three studies of men and women engaging in masturbation or penile-vaginal intercourse to orgasm in the laboratory, we report that for both sexes (adjusted for prolactin changes in a non-sexual control condition), the magnitude of prolactin increase following intercourse is 400% greater than that following masturbation. The results are interpreted as an indication of intercourse being more physiologically satisfying than masturbation, and discussed in light of prior research reporting greater physiological and psychological benefits associated with coitus than with any other sexual activities.

———————

Direct support of former porn site owner, turned pro-porn activist Barnett:

——————-

Defending porn industry with irrelevant retweet:

——————

Retweeting unsupported propaganda from David Ley, who is currently collaborating with xHamster

———————-

As she has done in previous tweets, RealYBOP shifts blame from porn to the partner of the porn user.

Continues to blame-shift away from porn, while citing RealYBOP member Marty Klein. It appears to RealYB OP is blaming the women for not being desirable:

———————

WOW! RealYBOP and its “experts” seem OK with PornHub posting videos of sex trafficking victims being raped. More than OK, they are out on social media defending PornHub. Laila tweets about what PornHub has been up to:

And this tweet:

Tweets such as these resulted in this NY Post article featuring Laila’s work: THE WOMAN TAKING ON BIG PORN. The article brought out the defenders of PornHub’s practices, such as RealYBOP (retweeting Sprankle) and its members.

Then we have Dr. Victoria Hartmann. One of “Real Your Brain on Porn”‘s “experts” and somebody who consistently amplifies defamation about me and others supporting PornHub:

Another RealYBOP member (and xHamster collaborator) David Ley retweeting in defense of PornHub:

The RealYBOP crew seem very invested in protecting Pornhub – guess it makes sense given that Pornhub retweeted their launch announcement of the “real your brain on porn” website.

————————-

For the 10th time, RealYBOP tweets RealYBOP members’ outlier study employing unreliable data

After sophisticated statistical “modeling” the Samuel Perry (who is a RealYBOP expert) study proposed that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship problems. The gaping hole in Perry’s claim:

  1. Perry’s new analysis of his old data contains no specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency. Without that, his claim is little more than a hypothetical.
  2. Perry’s assertions are countered by over 75 studies linking porn use to lower sexual and relationship satisfaction (including 8 longitudinal studies). As far as we know all studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

See – Critique of Samuel Perry’s “Is the Link Between Pornography Use and Relational Happiness Really More About Masturbation? Results From Two National Surveys” (2019)

——————————————

New study really upset RealYBOP and its members (Ley, Grubbs). It found that although sexual frequency has declined in industrialized countries, the prevalence of “rough” sex is widespread and may actually have increased in recent decades. Porn seems to be the culprit as these excerpts put forth:

After adjusting for age, age at first porn exposure, and current relationship status, the associations between pornography use and sexual behaviors was statistically significant
We were struck that one-fifth of women with oral, vaginal, or anal sex experience reported having been choked as part of sex. As no previous population health studies have assessed the prevalence of choking as part of partnered sexual interactions, we cannot know to what extent this may represent a change in population level sexual repertoire. However, our experiences teaching undergraduate students suggest that more people may be engaging in choking behaviors as part of sex than in previous decades.

Belinda Luscombe tweeted about it:

RealYBOP members descended on Luscombe. I’ll omit Ley and Grubbs, and just provide RealYBOP’s 4 irrelevant tweets, with irrelevant citations. I espcially like RealYBOP’s 2nd tweet about women especially enjoying being choked.

More attempts at pro-porn spin

What a joke. RealYBOP tweeting Ley’s pornhub endosed book as a reply to peer-reviewed studies:

In the same thread, RealYBOP tweets the Samuel Perry (who is a RealYBOP expert) study asserting that masturbation, not porn use, is the real culprit in relationship problems. Hilarious that RealYBOP proclaims “Correlation is not cause“, while countering with a correlation study lacking data for its correlation (masturbation).

The gaping hole in Perry’s claim is his study had no specific, reliable data on masturbation frequency. That’s right, Perry had no idea how often the subjects’s masturbated. See – Critique of Samuel Perry’s “Is the Link Between Pornography Use and Relational Happiness Really More About Masturbation? Results From Two National Surveys” (2019)

——————

RealYBOP/Prause have falsely accused numerous induvial and organizations of harassment and stalking. Prause has never once provide any evidence of her claims, and now 2 people are suing her for these false accusations. Here, RealYBOP retweets RealYBOP member Dawson, who coincidently claims she is being harassed/trolled. No evidence provided.

Note: Prause and her cyberstalking allies recently let it slip that have a private group that appears to conspire to harass and defame. Hope the defamation lawsuits expose this.

———————-

Why is every single post tweet twisted into support for the porn industry agenda?

Study blames porn – Major Motivators and Sociodemographic Features of Women Undergoing Labiaplasty (2018)

————————–

Disturbing. Is RealYBOP advocating porn use for young people?

————————-

RealYBOP belittling woman who experience betrayal trauma. RealYBOP throwing women under the porn bus:

—————————–

Study had nothing do with porn, but RealYBOP used it spread propaganda in support of porn industry

————————

Parroting the porn industry talking about porn’s effects

Reality: For about 100 studies linking porn use to sexual aggression, coercion & violence, see this page for an extensive critique of the often-repeated assertion that an increased availability of porn has resulted in decreased rape rates.

———————

RealYBOP (Prause) retweeting the most prominent porn industry interest group, the Free Speech Coalition.

Prause has a cozy history with the FSC:

————————————–

Febuary 21, 2020: New article exposes recent hit-pieces targeting NoFap & alex Rhodes as nothing more than unsupported propaganda (articles often feature members of the porn industry and its allies, such as Prause and David Ley): NoFap won’t make you a Nazi: Why MSM can’t get a grip on internet’s anti-masturbation activists

Even though Alex Rhodes’s amended complaint against Prause also names the RealYBOP twitter account (@BrainOnPorn) as defaming him, RealYBOP continues to target Alex Rhodes and NoFap (harassers can’t help harassing). RealYBOP tweets 7 times under the author’s article, on a Friday night, no less:

Pathological liar RealYBOP ends her twitter tirade by defaming Gary Wilson, falsely claiming that this twitter account is actually Wilson. For example, 2 of the account’s tweets under the authors’ tweet:

3 days later RealYBOP tweets under RT’s tweet about the same article (what a cyberstalker);

RealYBOP provides no examples of “errors”. Being sued by Alex Rhodes doesn’t slow down her harassment.

————————–

RealYBOP claims serious safety threats for RealYBOP member Madita Oeming, linking to this article. It’s already established that RealYBOP/Prause chronically lies about her own fabricated victim-hood (one of the reasons she being sued for defamation).

Like Prause, Oeming provides no examples of any real threats. Like Prause she asks for security to protect her from all the evil anti-porn activists (clear a publicity stunt). No one’s buying this ruse anymore. Not surprisingly, the article reported that no one bothered to show up to Oemings talk (it was all twitter back and forth):

Yes, it was a shitstorm like the one in the book. Notifications pounded on me continuously for two days. A wave of strangers came over me and even spilled into the USA in the alt-right corner. Right-wing groups are unfortunately better at using the Internet than left-wing groups. Many attacks also came from the feminist side, which I find particularly bad because this is my own movement. Overall, a drastic experience. I have to admit, I totally underestimated that. Even if you know rationally that you are just a projection surface, it is difficult to convince yourself emotionally. Fortunately, it all happened digitally. My first two sessions were accompanied by the security guard because of the fear of interference. But then nobody dared to go to university. Sad enough that you have to think about it at all. I still get bad news and stupid comments online, but I try to turn it into motivation.

Note that Oeming admits it was all tweets, and many were feminists who challenge Oeming’s claims that porn use is mostly beneficial, and never causes addiction or sexual problems.

—————————-

RealYBOP takes a comment on the ICD-11 beta-draft page out of context (it was NOT an official WHO comment), omitting key parts.

Real Your Brain on Porn excerpted a few lines from The comment was by MSAC (it was not an official WHO statement) and was in a comment rejecting NICOLE PARUSE’S request to “delete CSBD”. First, we start with Prause’s original request to get rid of CSBD (from 2017):

Prause’s request to not have CSBD in the ICD-11 was rejected with this MSAC comment. RealYBOP carefully excerpts one paragraph from the MSAC comment, while not revealing all that MSAC said:

Again, it was MSAC (WHO) rejecting Nicole Prause’s request, not WHO rejecting sex or porn addiction (WHO doesn’t use addiction, only “disorder” for what the public calls addiction). RealYBOP tweeted only the last paragraph of WHO’s comment, falsely claiming it meant rejection of “addiction”:

Key excerpts conveniently omitted by Real Your Brain on Porn (Note the MSAC is calling Prause’s links “dated”):

The rationale for compulsive sexual behaviour disorder (CSBD) and its placement in the grouping of impulse control disorders was first described by the Working Group on Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders, reporting to the Mental Health TAG and consisting of global experts in the area:
Grant, J. E., Atmaca, M., Fineberg, N. A., Fontenelle, L. F., Matsunaga, H., Reddy, Y.C. J., Simpson, H. B., Thomsen, P. H., van den Heuvel, O. A., Veale, D., Woods, D. W., & Stein, D. J. (2014). Impulse control disorders and “behavioural addictions” in the ICD-11. Word Psychiatry, 13, 125-127. doi: 10.1002/wps.20115

A more explicit explanation of the rationale, placement, and definition for CSBD was recently provided by 11 leading global authors on the topic, consisting of scientists and practitioners with direct experience treating or studying compulsive sexual behaviour:
Kraus, S.W., Krueger, R.B., Briken, P., First, M.B., Stein, D.J., Kaplan, M.S., Voon, V., Abdo, C.H.N., Grant, J.E., Atalla, E., & Reed, G.M. (2018). Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder in the ICD-11. World Psychiatry, 17, 109-110.

These groups have both argued that CSBD identifies a clinically important population in need of health services and that the consequences of the condition can be severe—even sometimes fatal—if left untreated. Inclusion of CSBD allows for greater access to health care services for those affected by the condition and is also expected to de stigmatize help seeking for affected persons.

In terms of placement of the entity, although the term ‘sex addiction’ has been taken up by the popular media, the Working Group concluded that available evidence did not support this conceptualization. Instead, a more incremental approach was recommended, placing the category in the grouping of impulse control disorders, with repeated difficulties in repeated controlling one’s sexual impulses and behavior as the core diagnostic feature. In this regard, the proposal mischaracterizes the approach introduced in ICD-11.

The ICD-11 approach is consistent with the findings of a recent review of the neurobiology of compulsive sexual behaviour (CSB), which concluded that growing evidence suggested that CSB shared many similarities with addiction but more work was to elucidate specific mechanisms. However, the authors supported its inclusion in ICD-11 because this provides a framework for further study and ultimately refinement of the diagnostic classification for CSBD. See:

Kowalewska, E., Grubbs, J.B., Potenza, M.N., Gola, M., Draps, M., & Kraus, S.W. (2018) Neurocognitive mechanisms in compulsive sexual behavior disorder. Current Sexual Health Reports, 10, 255-264.

In terms of the expressed concern about misuse, the definition clearly states that ‘Distress that is entirely related to moral judgments and disapproval about sexual impulses, urges, or behaviours is not sufficient to meet this requirement.’

Overall, the links provided in this proposal are dated, and lead to material that was posted prior to the publication of the rationale and definition of ICD-11 CSBD in World Psychiatry. Most are discussions of “sexual addiction” or “pornography addiction.” As noted, materials related to the ICD-11 make very clear that CSBD is not intended to be interchangeable with sex addiction, but rather is a substantially different diagnostic framework.

RECOMMENDATION: MSAC recommends rejection of the proposal {to delete CSBD}

———————-

RealYBOP retweeting article by RealYBOP member Lehmiller, that features an outlier study by RealYBOP member Sam Perry:

Lehmiller omits over 75 studies linking porn use to less sexual and relationship satisfaction (including 8 longitudinal studies. Lehmiller an important fact – all studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

————————

RealYBOP retweets RealYBOP member Oeming’s attempt to vilify anyone who suggests porn might be a problem:

The above is bullshit as all the most popular porn recovery forums, blogs, and websites were founded by non-religious men. See this page for dozens of examples: External Rebooting Forums, Blogs & Threads.

—————————

We are used to RealYBOP misrepresenting studies, but this one really takes the cake. Study had nothing to with porn, sexual functioning or anything that could misconstrued as debunking Porn-induced ED, but RealYBOP falsely claims it somehow did.

The study tried condition sexual arousal to non-sexual pictures by vibrating genitals while showing the pictures to subjects. Conditioning to non-sexual pictures occured (subjects rating the pics as “more positive”), but not enough to induced a genital response. While the study has nothing to do with porn or sexual functioning, it findings support unconscious sexual conditioning in a simple lab experiment. Again, this tells us NOTHING about the effects of masturbating to porn for years, or porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. RealYBOP is just plain lying in its tweets.

RealYBOP is also lying when it claims that this the 10th replication of no PIED. YBOP exposed this falsehood in our critique of RealYBOP’s porn and sex section: Erectile And Other Sexual Dysfunctions Section.

————————–

On Feb, 21, 202o I exposed David Ley as lying about a study’s measures and findings (It did not assess sexual functioning)

3 days later RealYBOP post 4 tweets calling me a liar, and defaming me. She tweets a screenshot of questions, claiming the study assessed sexual functioning. But the table she tweets is NOT from that paper!

The table from the actual study with ALL the variables assessed in the study (nothing about sexual function):

Typical RealYBOP lies.

—————————–

A sex positive blogger tweets a short article about YBOP and Gabe Deem. RealYBOP enters the thread, defaming Gary Wilson. KalyM’s original tweet:

Cyberstalker Prause (realYBOP) posts two defamatory tweets:

While I cannot sue Prause for defamation (falsely saying I have stalked her) because of the statute of limitations – Alex Rhodes and Don Hilton didn’t wait. Both are suing Prause for falsely calling them stalkers (among other things).

———————

Why would she bring this up? Notice how she provides no examples of the claimed conspiracy.

Please note: There is unequivocal evidence that the porn industry funded the sexology profession for decades. Sexology’s agenda still appears to serve the porn industry. Thus, the evidence on this page should be viewed in a larger context. See Hugh Hefner, the International Academy of Sex Research, and Its Founding President to understand how porn-industry friendly sexologists influenced the Kinsey Institute. Prause is a Kinsey grad. While no one is caliming Prause has direct funding from the porn industry, adult performer Ruby the Big Rubousky, who is vice president of the Adult Performers Actors Guild, stated that Prause obtained porn performers as study subjects through the most prominent porn industry interest group, the Free Speech Coalition. A study later hailed as debunking porn addiction: The Free Speech Coalition allegedly provided subjects for a Prause study that “debunks” porn addiction. And there is – In 2015 the Free Speech Coalition offers Prause assistance: she accepts and immediately attacks Prop 60 (condoms in porn).

————————–

RealYBOP tweeting propagnada by RealYBOP member Madita Oeming:

Madita Oeming cited zero studies to support anything in her article. Oeming’s entire argument against the existence of porn addiction can be found in this excerpt:

It is pseudo-scientific.
Porn addiction is not a medically recognized diagnosis. Contrary to frequent claims, the science is NOT there. It is contested, contradictory, and complicated. Don’t be fooled by the brain scans, the medical language, and expressions such as “rewired brains.” They serve to present porn addiction as a matter of nothing but biological and chemical facts and thereby conceal the fact that even scientific research does not happen outside of ideology. May I remind you that homosexuality was officially considered a mental disorder until 1987?

First, the world’s most widely used medical diagnostic manual, The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), contains a new diagnosis suitable for porn addiction: “Compulsive Sexual Behavior Disorder.” Neither the ICD-11 nor the DSM5 ever use the word “addiction” to describe an addiction – whether it be gambling addiction, heroin addiction, cigarette addiction or you name it. Both diagnostic manuals use the word “disorder” instead of “addiction” (i.e. “gambling disorder” “nicotine use disorder”, and so on). Thus, “sex addiction” and “porn addiction” could never have been rejected, because they were never under formal consideration in the major in the major diagnostic manuals.

As for the reserach, Oeming purposely ignored it:

Important to note that in her very first article in a major outlet Madita Oeming admits she knows nothing about addiction, or neuroscience, or the neurological studies on porn users, but she is miraculously confident that porn addiction doesn’t exist. Her qualifying statement:

I am neither a neurobiologist nor a behavioral psychologist, so I have no expertise in judging whether pornography is actually physically addictive. But first, it will be discussed among those who have this expertise. Although the WHO has now decided to “obsessive-compulsive sexual behavior”, including apparently also “excessive consumption of porn” , from 2022 to include in their diagnostic catalog. And secondly, I’m dealing with something completely different. As a cultural scientist, er, poetry interpreter, I understand pornography primarily as a narrative.

A poetry student? OK.

—————————

Two tweets attacking a metaphor by sex addiction therapist Paula Hall.

Ley and RealYBOP again:

—————————-

RealYBOP trolls a writer, with spate of false claims

RealYBOP is lying. Truth? RealYBOP research page omitted every study on this list of over 35 studies linking porn use to “un-egalitarian attitudes” toward women and sexist views. They omitted this 2016 meta-analysis of 135 studies assessing the effects of porn & sexual media use on beliefs, attitudes and behaviors: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015. As of 2019, over 75 studies have linked porn use to poorer sexual and relationship satisfaction. While a few studies correlated greater porn use in females to better (or neutral) sexual satisfaction, most have not (see this list: Porn studies involving female subjects: Negative effects on arousal, sexual satisfaction, and relationships).

———————

RealYBOP retweeting RealYBOP member Josh Grubbs

Directly contradicting his claims, Grubbs and other researchers found that believing you are addicted to porn correlates most strongly with daily hours of porn use, not with religiousness. See: Evaluating Pornography Problems Due to Moral Incongruence Model (2019).

————————–

RealYBOP rewteeting PT article by RealYBOP member Joe Kort. Nothing in Kort’s article is supported as he cited nothing (he rarely does). Just the usual pronouncements that porn couldn’t possibly be related to the tremendous rise in youthful ED.

Propagandist Kort ignored over 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli.

—————————

RealYBOP member Sam Perry tortured his incomplete data to achieve an odd partial relationship.


It is well established that religious populations use less porn and that statewide data is pretty much worthless. See short article: Is Utah #1 in Porn Use?
But Perry did some fancy footwork to get an relationship here. Important to note that Perry did NOT have data for frequency of porn use, only the last time porn was viewed (“When did you last intentionally look at pornography?”). So the study has no idea how much porn was viewed or how often porn was viewed, for any of its subjects. Without assessing levels of porn use, it lacks validity.

———————-

Even though Gabe Deem has blocked RealYBOP, she trolls and defames Gabe. RealYBOP also lies about current state of research.

Disgusting lies by RealYBOP. Anything for the porn industry, right RealYBOP? Reality: This list contains over 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli. The first 7 studies in the list demonstrate causation, as participants eliminated porn use and healed chronic sexual dysfunctions. In addition to the studies, this page contains articles and videos by over 140 experts (urology professors, urologists, psychiatrists, psychologists, sexologists, MDs) who acknowledge and have successfully treated porn-induced ED and porn-induced loss of sexual desire.

————————–

Retweeting factually-innacurate hit-piece.

PornHelp.org 14-tweet debunking begins here:

———————————-

After disparaging Gwyneth Paltrow’s “Goop” as nothing but pseudoscience, RealYBOP turns her cheek:

——————

Upset that Alabama became the 16th state to declare pornography a public health crisis, RealYBOP tweets RealYBOP member Emily Rothman’s short opinion piece which cited nothing to support its dubious claims:

More propaganda, again tweeting RealYBOP member Emily Rothman’s opinion piece:

——————-

LOL. RealYBOP has never tweeted a negative effect of porn use or anything negative about the porn industry.

———————-

Retweets propaganda from Rebecca Sullivan:

Gabe Deem responds:

———————–

Retweets Lehmiller propaganda on the effects of porn on adolescents. Very important to note that Lehmiller is paid by Playboy, a member of RealYBOP (the group infringing on YBOP trademark), and on the board of the SHA – the group collaborating with xHamster to promote its websites.

Reality: Check out this list of over 260 adolescent studies, or these reviews of the literature: review#1, review2, review#3, review#4, review#5, review#6, review#7, review#8, review#9, review#10, review#11, review#12, review#13, review#14, review#15. None match Lehmiller’s cherry-picked propaganda.

———————-

Retweets RealYBOP member, and “poetry interpreter”, Madita Oeming (who promises us a critique of the movie “Shame”). All so RealYBOP can take a swipe at porn and sex addiction:

——————

Calling porn addiction “snake oil”, while promoting Cameron Staley’s money making programs he launched with his factually-inaccurate TEDx talk.

Staley says his “mentor was a renowned sex researcher!” What? No one had heard of Prause before Steele et al. was published in July of 2013 (Prause misrepresented its findings). Staley lies about about the actual results of Steele et al, 2013. He states that “the subjects brains didn’t look like brains of addicts” – but he never tells us how their brains differed from addicts (because they did not). 8 peer-reviewed papers disagree with Staley, and point out that the subjects brains looked exactly like an addict- Peer-reviewed critiques of Steele et al., 2013 (greater cue reactivity correlated with less desire for sex with a partner). Staley’s entire shtick is based on a lie. In addition to Staley’s study supporting the addiction model, another 44 neuroscience-based studies provide strong support for the addiction model as their findings mirror the neurological findings reported in substance addiction studies.

————————

My faithful cyberstalker RealYBOP (Nikky) goes after me again (about the 300th time using her alias @BrainOnPorn account), but makes a fool of herself. RealYBOP splices together two unrelated tweets for her “busted” tweet. Then lies about the existence of longitudinal studies on escalation (note – she didn’t link to her imaginary studies).

The first screenshot is my February 26, ten-tweet thread that was retweeted 50 times, liked over 100 times. The thread is nothing but excerpts, with a link to the study, so I don’t know how I was “busted”. LOL. See for yourself:

The second RealYBOP screenshot is to a totally unrelated thread criticizing an article that relied upon ONLY a single interview study to debunk porn’s harm to adolescent. The study interviewed 35 college men about how much they enjoyed porn. The study explicitly stated that it did NOT ask about porn’s negative effects! In sum, this solitary qualitative study was meant to counter hundreds of quantitative adolescent studies reporting myriad negative outcomes related to porn use. I called them out for their dishonesty. My 3 tweets:

RealYBOP is busted, and caught lying about the current state of the research: Over 45 studies reporting findings consistent with escalation of porn use (tolerance), habituation to porn, and even withdrawal symptoms (all signs and symptoms associated with addiction).

RealYBOP added this childish tweet.

RealYBOP is not one to talk about working “for profit”. Talk about shady, it is Prause who is apparently being paid to directly promote sex toys and the highly controversial “Orgasmic Meditation,” which was under investigaion by the FBI. (see Bloomberg.com expose,) Put simply, Prause was hired to bolster the commercial interests of that heavily tainted and very controversial company. For her Orgasmic Meditation study, Prause allegedly obtained porn performers as subjects through another porn industry interest group, the Free Speech Coalition. Consider the irony of RealYBOP/Prause falsely accusing others of what she herself is doing.

————————–

Ignores main findings of study, while seemingly promoting under-age porn use:

The main findings that RealYBOP omitted (link to study). Pretty shocking:

More frequent past-year pornography use and a greater lifetime range of pornography accessed were significantly associated with engaging in [rough sex behaviors, characterized as spanking, choking, name calling, performing aggressive fellatio, facial ejaculation, penile-anal penetration without first asking/discussing].

We were struck that one-fifth of women with oral, vaginal, or anal sex experience reported having been choked as part of sex. As no previous population health studies have assessed the prevalence of choking as part of partnered sexual interactions, we cannot know to what extent this may represent a change in population-level sexual repertoire. However, our experiences teaching undergraduate students suggest that more people may be engaging in choking behaviors as part of sex than in previous decades. [Earlier research supports this conclusion.] … Choking/strangulation has been reported as part of college sexual assaults41 and in other cases has resulted in death.

In addition, 27% of women and 31% of men who had sex with men reported that a male partner had tried to have anal sex with them without first asking or discussing. This has implications for sexual assault and coercion as well as risk of sexually transmitted infections,

These findings are mostly consistent with findings from convenience samples that have found a relationship between porn use and either engagement in or appeal of dominant sexual behaviors.

We believe that some of these sexual behaviors (eg, choking, aggressive fellatio) may have increased in prevalence over at least the past 10 to 15 years. This is supported by data showing that the greatest lifetime prevalence for most of the behaviors associated with the pornographic sexual script is reported by adults between 18 and 29 years. [The mean age for the sample was 42.4 years (SD ¼ 11.9).]

Given the dangers of asphyxiation, it is clinically relevant to understand to what extent their patients—and especially their adolescent and young adult patients—may be exploring choking or strangulation as part of sex, behaviors that have been characterized by some individuals as scary (both in being choked and in being asked to choke a partner).

3 times as many women (compared with men) reported experiencing sexual pressure (36.9% vs 12.0%).

——————–

RealYBOP rewteeting PT article by RealYBOP member Joe Kort. Nothing in Kort’s article is supported as he cited nothing (he rarely does). Just the usual pronouncements that porn couldn’t possibly be related to the tremendous rise in youthful ED.

Propagandist Kort ignored over 35 studies linking porn use/porn addiction to sexual problems and lower arousal to sexual stimuli.

——————-

Taking another shot at sex and porn addiction.

The claimed “expert” has no expertise in addiction.

———————–

Upset that Alabama became the 16th state to declare pornography a public health crisis, RealYBOP tweets RealYBOP member Emily Rothman’s short opinion piece which cited nothing to support its dubious claims.

Even more disturbing is RealYBOP citing The Prostasia Foundation, which has been accused of promoting the pedophile agenda rather than protecting children (RealYBOP often retweets Prostasia propaganda). See this expose’

https://www.thepostmillennial.com/the-bizarre-world-of-tax-exempt-pedophiles/

————————-

RealYBOP regularly disparages anecdotes. Not this one:

————————–

Cyberstalker RealYBOP has posted about 300 tweets about me. In this exmaple she lies about the Reward Foundation. Her defamatory tweet appears to be claiming that The Reward Foundation “paid” to have an article placed in The Sunday Times. That’s a lie. In reality, The Times paid TRF to write an article. TRF did not solicit The Times – The Times solicited TRF. I gues Nikky is mad because The Times isn’t interested in her opinions on porn.

I make no money from his website or the sales of his book. All of Wilson’s proceeds from his book go to a UK charity (The Reward Foundation). It promotes education and research on porn’s effects. Since 2015 Prause has been harassing The Reward Foundation as herself and as “Janey Wilson.” For details see – 2015 & 2016: Prause violates COPE’s code of conduct to harass Gary Wilson and a Scottish charity, and May – July, 2018: In emails, in the ICD-11 comments section, and on Wikipedia, Prause and her sockpuppets falsely claim that Wilson received 9,000 pounds from The Reward Foundation.

In my 2 sworn affidavits filed in federal defamation suits I chronicle Prause libelous claims and ongoing cyberstalking of The Reward Foundation, my publisher, the Scottish Charity register, and MDPI:

——————–

Porn industry shill RealYBOP tweeting propaganda by porn industry representative XBIZ (while attacking FTND):

Original news segment: https://wset.com/news/local/pornography-the-new-gateway-drug

Same day, targeting FTND again.

The FTND article:

https://fightthenewdrug.org/serial-killer-ted-bundy-last-interview/

————————-

The 3rd retweet of RealYBOP member Joe Kort’s propaganda:

——————————–

For the 4th time, attempting to disparage Alabama’s resolution

——————

Does RealYBOP have a job? Oh yeah, this is her job:

———————-

RealYBOP trolling a feminist, lecturing her about porn being empowering:

M.K.Fain replies to RealYBOP, thinking Nikky is a man. RealYBOP appears to block M.K. Fain, followed by defending the porn industry:

RealYBOP blocks M.K. Fain (as predicted), then trolls a bit more.

Wow, RealYBOP trolls her again:

———————

3/3/20 – RealYBOP trolling Alex Rhodes, tweeting under The Doctor’s tweet:

Being sued by Rhodes isn’t slowing RealYBOP down.

———————

Railing against porn addiction, linking to Cameron Staley, again.

Staley’s entire shtick is based on a lie: 8 peer-reviewed papers disagree with Staley, and point out that his subject’s brains looked exactly like an addict- Peer-reviewed critiques of Steele et al., 2013 (greater cue reactivity correlated with less desire for sex with a partner). In addition to Staley’s study supporting the addiction model, another 44 neuroscience-based studies provide strong support for the addiction model as their findings mirror the neurological findings reported in substance addiction studies.

———————–

Still going after NoFap (Alex Rhodes), even though she is being sued by Rhodes.

RealYBOP is lying about content of grad student Kris Taylor’s dissertation on 15 comments from reddit/nofap: I want that power back: Discourses of masculinity within an online pornography abstinence forum (2018). See this back and forth between Prause and bart concerning the Taylor joke of a paper.

—————————-

March 5, 2020: Implying the 2 defamation lawsuits against her are moving in a favorable direction:

———————–

March 7, 2020: Being sued, but still going after Nofap. The study she cited was NOT about NoFap. None of the participants came from NoFap. Excerpt:

The largest group of participants came from only one subreddit (“r/everymanshouldknow”), where it had been endorsed by the moderator.

She failed to excerpt the study, only mischaracterize it.

The participants were concerned with porn’s effects, yet the paper mischaracterized this as concerns with masturbation. Contrary to claims of conservatism, and religiosity being a significant factor, the demographics of their subjects tell a very different story: 70% atheists or agnostics – far higher rates than the general population. Very low rates on erectile dysfunction (3.48%), so not representative of the men quitting porn.

———————-

Disparaging, defaming therpist who recognise porn addiction

————————–

How mature. Could you imagine neuroscientist Valerie Voon tweeting this? Yet Prause just did:

——————–

PornHub has been under tremendous scrutiny in early March, with a petition gathering hundreds of thousands of signatures:

Looks like RealYBOP is tweeting in support of PornHub. However, RealYBOP misrepresents the study it cited, and the table tweeted is irrelevant to the study’s findings.

The abstract with the actual findings:

We found that the films either directly or indirectly supported several sexual scripts: Explicit Verbal Consent Isn’t Natural, Women are Indirect/Men are Direct, Sex Can Happen Without Ongoing Communication, Lower-Order Behaviors Don’t Need Explicit Consent, and People Receiving Sexual Behaviors Can Consent by Doing Nothing. Further research is needed to examine whether viewers are acquiring, activating, or applying these scripts. Sex education programs could benefit from acknowledging how consent communication is modeled in pornography and by teaching about pornography literacy.

In response to Laila’s efforts, RealYBOP tweets a Tracy Clark-Flory hit piece. Why is RealYBOP concerned with poor little ol’ Porn Hub and not with Pornhub posting videos of trafficking victims being raped and abused? Because RealYBOP is a shill for the porn industry. PornHub is involved with actual misogyny, not the fabricated misogyny conjured up by RealYBOP.

March 10: legislators from the US and Canada ask for an investigation of Pornhub

Gues who comes to PornHubs defense? RealYBOP twitter and RealYBOP members! First, RealYBOP member and close Prause ally, David Ley defends PornHub (even a sex worker castigates Ley – but he knows where is bread is buttered)

RealYBOP retweets another David Ley tweet in support of Pornhub:

RealYBOP tweets RealYBOP member Taylor Kohut’s support for Pornhub:

Here are some gems by Kohut from the CBC article:

I don’t believe there is any woman that would willingly expose herself to today’s pornography, which is very brutal,” said Walker.

“I want the government to indicate that there’s no difference between trafficking, prostitution and pornography. They’re all one and the same.”

That’s an idea that Taylor Kohut, a research associate in the Department of Psychology at Western University, calls “profoundly ridiculous.”

Kohut studied how pornography influences the way people feel, think and behave for more than a decade.

“I don’t think porn is inherently evil or exploitive or dehumanizing or degrading. I don’t think it must contribute to anti-woman attitudes and acts,” he explained.

“If the real goal is to reduce trafficking of women and children, I think focusing on pornography is rather naïve and misguided and erotophobic … There are definitely alternative ways to get at the issue.”

Though his own research doesn’t reveal a connection between porn use and anti-woman outcomes, Kohut said some correlations have been reported by others.

“The field lacks methodological rigour and there are clear political influences that have likely contributed to a degree of confirmation bias, on all sides,” he explained.

“Putting it all together, there is no clear evidence that pornography causes negative attitudes toward women or sexual violence. And my personal interpretation of the available evidence is that it does not.”

He suggests the solution to outlaw or extremely censor pornography would be unrealistic and a “tremendous loss.

He compares Pornhub’s struggle to the one Facebook has with disseminating false information.

“How do you control and regulate that when your customers are essentially building your content? It’s a difficult and technical social challenge.”

Kohut is dead wrong about porn use and negative attitudes about women. As mentioned numerous times, RealYBOP member Taylor Kohut’s paper contained some very creative methodology apparently employed to produce the desired results. In reality, Kohut’s findings are contradicted by nearly every other published study. See this 2016 review of the literature: Media and Sexualization: State of Empirical Research, 1995–2015. The abstract:

The goal of this review was to synthesize empirical investigations testing effects of media sexualization. The focus was on research published in peer-reviewed, English-language journals between 1995 and 2015. A total of 109 publications that contained 135 studies were reviewed. The findings provided consistent evidence that both laboratory exposure and regular, everyday exposure to this content are directly associated with a range of consequences, including higher levels of body dissatisfaction, greater self-objectification, greater support of sexist beliefs and of adversarial sexual beliefs, and greater tolerance of sexual violence toward women. Moreover, experimental exposure to this content leads both women and men to have a diminished view of women’s competence, morality, and humanity.

Real simple: RealYBOP and its “experts” are taking the side of Pornhub over sex-trafficking victims. RealYBOP’s true allegiance is not in doubt – the porn industry.

RealYBOP attacks Exodus Cry. Propaganda 101 – if you can’t defend your position, defame the messenger. RealYBOP calling anti-porn activists “hate groups” while supporting Pornhub’s disgusting practice of allowing videos of sex trafficking victims.

Note that Prause has defamed and harassed Exodus Cry and Laila Mickelwait in the past: February, 2019: Prause falsely accuses Exodus Cry of fraud. Asks Twitter followers to report the non-profit to the Missouri attorney general (for spurious reasons), Appears to have edited the CEO’s Wikipedia page.

RealYBOP propaganda in support of pornhub continues

——————————-

March 9, 2020: Even though she is being sued by Alex Rhodes of Nofap, RealYBOP tweets a random attack on NoFap and the concept of quitting porn (called rebooting). The paper cited has nothing to with Nofap, rebooting or quitting porn (it was a questionnaire study on only Jewish Israeli adolescents – and none were attempting to quit porn).

March 9, 2020: RealYBOP goes after Nofap again, disparaging the concept of rebooting (eliminating porn use), a term coined on porn recovery forums such as Nofap.

————————-

Cyberstalking FTND with her usual falsehoods and unsupported claims. First, RealYBOP has no idea who FTND “works with”. Second, strengthening pathways is called Sensitization (cue-reactivity & cravings). Sensitization alters numerous synapses connecting various aspects of the reward system, which results in increased “wanting” or craving while liking or pleasure diminishes. As of 2020 there 24 neuroscience-based studies reporting sensitization or cue-reactivity in porn users/sex addicts: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24.

RealYBOP doesn’t understand basic neuroscience.

———————–

March 12, 2020: Even though she is being sued by Alex Rhodes of NoFap, RealYBOP tweets under a 4-day old tweet of The Doctor’s segment featuring Alex Rhodes.

—————————-

RealYBOP captures a few seconds of a 19-minute Guardian report to misrepresent with a most outlandish pro-porn industry assertion:

RealYBOP purposely omits all the bits about how porn negatively affects the user, including Jon Ronson explaining that ED rates have skyrocketed in young men, with porn use being the likely cause. Jon Ronson conveys a very telling anecdote of a young male porn performer needing to watch videos on porn hub to obtain an erection. The Jon Ronson segment is cued up:

————————-

Using the covid-19 pandemic to take a bizarre swipe at people quitting porn, which she refers to as “abstinence-only programs”. She’s probably referring to Nofap, but it has no program, and there are no recovery programs that involve only abstinence, and nothing else.

—————————

Don’t be worried about your porn use. Instead, keep using porn, cause porn addiction doesn’t exist. Which means porn is great… for everybody (PornHub loves RealYBOP’s drivel):

Reality – Porn addiction model is fully supported by every neurological study ever published on porn users: 45 neuroscience-based studies (MRI, fMRI, EEG, neuropsychological, hormonal) provide strong support for the addiction model as their findings mirror the neurological findings reported in substance addiction studies.

———————-

LOL. Cites a one sentence excerpt from a 10 year old Bachelor’s degree thesis (not peer-reviewed).

Reality: As of 2019, over 75 studies have linked porn use to poorer sexual and relationship satisfaction. While a few studies correlated greater porn use in females to better (or neutral) sexual satisfaction, most have not (see this list: Porn studies involving female subjects: Negative effects on arousal, sexual satisfaction, and relationships). As far as we know all studies involving males have reported more porn use linked to poorer sexual or relationship satisfaction.

———————-

Apropos of nothing, RealYBOP Links to a 17-year old opinion paper by a RealYBOP “expert”. The paper is not about porn.

Note how RealYBOP sometimes blames masturbation for the correlations between porn use and poorer relationship & sexual satisfaction (or sexual problems). Yet, at other times RealYBOP purposely conflates masturbation with porn use. We see what you are trying to do.

Note2: health benefits claimed to be associated with orgasm or masturbation are often associated with close contact with another human being, not orgasm and not masturbation. More specifically, claimed correlations between a few isolated health indicators and orgasm (if true) are probably just correlations arising from healthier populations that naturally engage in more sex and masturbation. They are not causal. Reviews:

The Relative Health Benefits of Different Sexual Activities (2010) found that sexual intercourse was related to positive effects, while masturbation was not. In some cases masturbation was negatively related to health benefits – meaning that more masturbation correlated with poorer health indicators. The conclusion of the review:

“Based upon a broad range of methods, samples, and measures, the research findings are remarkably consistent in demonstrating that one sexual activity (Penile-Vaginal Intercourse and the orgasmic response to it) is associated with, and in some cases, causes processes associated with better psychological and physical functioning.”

“Other sexual behaviors (including when Penile-Vaginal Intercourse is impaired, as with condoms or distraction away from the penile–vaginal sensations) are unassociated, or in some cases (such as masturbation and anal intercourse) inversely associated with better psychological and physical functioning.”

“Sexual medicine, sex education, sex therapy, and sex research should disseminate details of the health benefits of specifically Penile-Vaginal Intercourse, and also become much more specific in their respective assessment and intervention practices.”

See this short review of masturbation and health indices: Masturbation is Related to Psychopathology and Prostate Dysfunction: Comment on Quinsey (2012)

“It is difficult to reconcile the view that masturbation improves mood with the findings in both sexes that greater masturbation frequency is associated with more depressive symptoms (Cyranowski et al., 2004; Frohlich & Meston, 2002; Husted & Edwards, 1976), less happiness (Das, 2007), and several other indicators of poorer physical and mental health, which include anxious attachment (Costa & Brody, 2011), immature psychological defense mechanisms, greater blood pressure reactivity to stress, and dissatisfaction with one’s mental health and life in general.”

————————-

Promoting porn use. Link goes to a 6-year old paper by the pro-porn PhD’s who sarted Porn Studies Journal.

————————

Cyberstalker RealYBOP playing the victim, when she is the perpetrator: page 1, page 2, page 3.

Tweet on same day. RealYBOP playing the victim, yet she is the one embroiled in two defamation lawsuits (Donald Hilton, MD & Nofap founder Alexander Rhodes), a trademark infringement case, and a trademark squatting case. She is the one who maliciously reported numerous innocent people and organizations to governing bodies and employers (which led to defamation lawsuits). See: Nicole Prause’s Malicious Reporting and Malicious Use of Process.

Reality:

——————————

RealYBOP’s favorite targets are porn-induced ED, and the young men who have recovered and are now helping other young men (RealYBOP incorrectly calls these men “life coaches”).

It’s important to note that RealYBOP has close relationships with the porn industry and is obsessed with debunking PIED, having waged a 3-year war against this academic paper, while simultaneously harassing & libeling young men who have recovered from porn-induced sexual dysfunctions. See documentation: Gabe Deem #1, Gabe Deem #2, Alexander Rhodes #1, Alexander Rhodes #2, Alexander Rhodes #3, Noah Church, Alexander Rhodes #4, Alexander Rhodes #5, Alexander Rhodes #6, Alexander Rhodes #7, Alexander Rhodes #8, Alexander Rhodes #9, Alexander Rhodes #10, Alex Rhodes #11, Gabe Deem & Alex Rhodes together #12, Alexander Rhodes #13, Alexander Rhodes #14, Gabe Deem #4, Alexander Rhodes #15.

Here we reproduce a Facebook comment responding to above RealYBOP tweet (it’s by a man who recoverd from porn-induced ED – by simply eliminating porn):

Ah… the snake oil that works, and is free. Interesting.

NP: “It’s like snake oil.”

Journalist: “What are they selling?”

NP: “They are selling.. well… they are *telling* young men to not watch porn!”

Journalist: “Why would they tell them that?”

NP: “Because they can only get an erection with porn”

Journalist: “Can they function again after they quit?”

NP: “Well, they say they can.”

Journalist: “So what part about that is like selling snake oil?”

NP: “Do you want to buy a butt plug?”

————————–

In a disgusting move RealYBOP coopts the Corona virus pandemic to disparage anyone who thinks porn might be a problem. What a shill.

Another repulsive tweet:

Follows it up with a tweet in support of porn site “YouPorn”:

Porn industry shill.

—————————-


FOR MUCH MORE SEE: Is Nicole Prause Influenced by the Porn Industry?

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply