No it is a paraphilia. That's a clever bit of word trickery you are trying to use, by insinuating that hentai is creating more paraphilias when the study says nothing of the such. Your own statement is false, as someone who consumes hentai already has a paraphilia and the study conducts zero effort on any other paraphilia.
there was no difference in addiction rates between hentai and non-hentai pornography, other than raised attachment anxiety. I didn't mention anything about differences in gender, this is something you drew up on your own.
Well yes, because you didn't actually read the study so you didn't note how it openly said only women had attachment anxiety issues after consuming hentai. Or you did, but deliberately left that schism out because it undermines your point because people would ask why women were like that instead of jumping to "porn bad!"
You made two points, both of which I'd probably agree with, and then linked a useless study that supports them in no way and even on the off chance it did would still prove nothing because of how poorly setup it was to begin with.
I don't care about your porn debate, just get better "studies" if you want to link some source to appeal to Science™.
as someone who consumes hentai already has a paraphilia and the study conducts zero effort on any other paraphilia.
This is literally semantics.
Well yes, because you didn't actually read the study so you didn't note how it openly said only women had attachment anxiety issues after consuming hentai. Or you did, but deliberately left that schism out because it undermines your point because people would ask why women were like that instead of jumping to "porn bad!"
I left out gender because porn is bad for men and women, period.
You seriously need to get your emotional irrationality under control. If you gleaned anything from my post other than "porn is bad" that is entirely a you problem.
EDIT: I should also point out that the study served the job well of pointing out hentai addiction is still an addiction-- even by your own admission a paraphilia -- which was the original point: AI or real life, porn addiction is bad.
If you gleaned anything from my post other than "porn is bad"
I don't give a shit about your post. I cared about the study you linked because I wanted to see the studies conducted to something I could agree with. The study ended up being retardedly bad to a point where it had nothing to do with what you were trying to say it did, and drew in the question of your own capability to make a statement on the matter if you think otherwise.
I got your point, its the same bargain bin "porn is bad!" that gets posted 20 times a day. You just tried to spice it up with an appeal to authority without reading it, then cried about semantics when you couldn't back it up.
Trying to convince people they are mad when your argument is failing won't help you win them or the spectators to your side. You need better studies and a better debate club.
I don't give a shit about your post. I cared about the study you linked because I wanted to see the studies conducted to something I could agree with.
Again, that's a you problem. Your emotional instability caused you go on a long rant about something that had nothing to do with my post. Check your insecurity.
The study ended up being retardedly bad to a point where it had nothing to do with what you were trying to say it did,
I literally didn't say it said anything other than porn is bad, regardless of it being hentai or real. YOU extrapolated an entire strawman to sate your own emotional attachment to the subject matter. Again, that's a YOU problem that had nothing to do with my post.
I got your point, its the same bargain bin "porn is bad!" that gets posted 20 times a day. You just tried to spice it up with an appeal to authority without reading it, then cried about semantics when you couldn't back it up.
The study did back it up. Try again.
Trying to convince people they are mad when your argument is failing won't help you win them or the spectators to your side. You need better studies and a better debate club.
It was a reply to the original post about hentai being a viable alternative to real porn, to which I responded it has the exact same pitfalls. Nothing you wrote in your screeds refute or even address my original point, which is a failing on your side to comprehend a simple two-sentence comment.
Ergo, there was no debate, just irrefutable facts: Porn is bad.
Dang homie, is all you got "u mad?" over and over? That's pretty weak. At least yelling "semantics!" is something. But let's go back to the start.
as hentai creates paraphilia addictions as well as much higher attachment anxiety rates compared to standard porn
Two points, one of which you conceded as saying "that's semantics" is acknowledging its right but you think it doesn't matter. But that's okay.
The second is purposefully lying because it leaves out importance distinctions, in that it only was the case (in this study) for females. Like saying the US has a low IQ and massive violent crime problem, but not mentioning its almost entirely centered around black populations driving it up. A lie by omission always found in people who can't back up their own narrative.
Which is why I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you just read the headline and hypothesis and rushed to link it. Because otherwise you are just lying about what it says. Again, I truly don't care about your porn debate. I only care about extremely bad studies and the retards who treat them as if they are worth their salt. That's why I didn't counter a thing you said in the initial comment and spent the entire time criticizing it.
Of which you haven't defended in the slightest all the giant failures it has, such as tiny sample size with arbitrary removals and being an online self report probably because you can't and its easier to just accuse me of being biased.
Here, I'll even help you out though. It being an online self report means the gender difference is probably meaningless, because women are much more likely to be open about victimizing traits like "anxiety" while men are not. Something they didn't account for whatsoever and would likely normalize the gender gap. There you go, I defeated one of my own points for you! It was just that easy when you actually engage with your own material.
No it is a paraphilia. That's a clever bit of word trickery you are trying to use, by insinuating that hentai is creating more paraphilias when the study says nothing of the such. Your own statement is false, as someone who consumes hentai already has a paraphilia and the study conducts zero effort on any other paraphilia.
Well yes, because you didn't actually read the study so you didn't note how it openly said only women had attachment anxiety issues after consuming hentai. Or you did, but deliberately left that schism out because it undermines your point because people would ask why women were like that instead of jumping to "porn bad!"
You made two points, both of which I'd probably agree with, and then linked a useless study that supports them in no way and even on the off chance it did would still prove nothing because of how poorly setup it was to begin with.
I don't care about your porn debate, just get better "studies" if you want to link some source to appeal to Science™.
This is literally semantics.
I left out gender because porn is bad for men and women, period.
You seriously need to get your emotional irrationality under control. If you gleaned anything from my post other than "porn is bad" that is entirely a you problem.
EDIT: I should also point out that the study served the job well of pointing out hentai addiction is still an addiction-- even by your own admission a paraphilia -- which was the original point: AI or real life, porn addiction is bad.
I don't give a shit about your post. I cared about the study you linked because I wanted to see the studies conducted to something I could agree with. The study ended up being retardedly bad to a point where it had nothing to do with what you were trying to say it did, and drew in the question of your own capability to make a statement on the matter if you think otherwise.
I got your point, its the same bargain bin "porn is bad!" that gets posted 20 times a day. You just tried to spice it up with an appeal to authority without reading it, then cried about semantics when you couldn't back it up.
Trying to convince people they are mad when your argument is failing won't help you win them or the spectators to your side. You need better studies and a better debate club.
Again, that's a you problem. Your emotional instability caused you go on a long rant about something that had nothing to do with my post. Check your insecurity.
I literally didn't say it said anything other than porn is bad, regardless of it being hentai or real. YOU extrapolated an entire strawman to sate your own emotional attachment to the subject matter. Again, that's a YOU problem that had nothing to do with my post.
The study did back it up. Try again.
It was a reply to the original post about hentai being a viable alternative to real porn, to which I responded it has the exact same pitfalls. Nothing you wrote in your screeds refute or even address my original point, which is a failing on your side to comprehend a simple two-sentence comment.
Ergo, there was no debate, just irrefutable facts: Porn is bad.
Dang homie, is all you got "u mad?" over and over? That's pretty weak. At least yelling "semantics!" is something. But let's go back to the start.
Two points, one of which you conceded as saying "that's semantics" is acknowledging its right but you think it doesn't matter. But that's okay.
The second is purposefully lying because it leaves out importance distinctions, in that it only was the case (in this study) for females. Like saying the US has a low IQ and massive violent crime problem, but not mentioning its almost entirely centered around black populations driving it up. A lie by omission always found in people who can't back up their own narrative.
Which is why I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you just read the headline and hypothesis and rushed to link it. Because otherwise you are just lying about what it says. Again, I truly don't care about your porn debate. I only care about extremely bad studies and the retards who treat them as if they are worth their salt. That's why I didn't counter a thing you said in the initial comment and spent the entire time criticizing it.
Of which you haven't defended in the slightest all the giant failures it has, such as tiny sample size with arbitrary removals and being an online self report probably because you can't and its easier to just accuse me of being biased.
Here, I'll even help you out though. It being an online self report means the gender difference is probably meaningless, because women are much more likely to be open about victimizing traits like "anxiety" while men are not. Something they didn't account for whatsoever and would likely normalize the gender gap. There you go, I defeated one of my own points for you! It was just that easy when you actually engage with your own material.