That's because like all science we learn new things all the time. That's what science is. You clearly don't buy that psychologists are scientists and maybe not even professionals and I wholeheartedly disagree (although Sheldon Cooper may agree - but he thinks MIT is a tech school and not an actual university). They spend years studying and practicing like other professionals. Where's your doctorate? What proof do you have other than your own anecdotal evidence? (And no, homophobia is not in the DSM and homosexuality has not been in there since 1973 - decades before the church gave up on "conversion therapy" and 5 years before the church ended the priesthood ban.)SamBee wrote: ↑29 Apr 2021, 07:25Psychologists go with prevailing trends, in this case sexual license. As I always remind people, they used to class being gay as a mental illness, now they class homophobia as one. All to do wth societal fashions. Promiscuity used to be classed as satyromania and nymphomania, now you're classed as abnormal if you don't lean in that direction, and marriage is almost seen as aberrant. Soap operas and music push that message too. So I don't even see their claims as very scientifically based.
Always a good defense when you can't argue with the truth, although I do agree the church (more specifically some church leaders and members) does apply the label too widely.I've seen and heard evidence that the Big P is indeed an addiction for some people. Even if we see it as a "compulsive behavior", that sounds like a bit of a euphemism for borderline addictive behavior in this case. The problem is that the LDS use the addiction label too widely.
It's OK to say the word here and anywhere else - they say pornography in General Conference. The amount of time one spends might be a sign of compulsion/compulsory behavior, but not necessarily an addiction. It doesn't take very long to shoot up with heroin which is an addiction and has little to do with time spent.Tobacco addicts do spend a fair amount of time smoking or chewing but often while doing other things and they can usually manage going several hours without a "fix." Again time has little to do with it. Alcohol is pretty similar to tobacco. In all of those cases, and others, there is a physical need for the substance - that's an addiction. Yes, there is a difference between someone who sometimes takes a peek at porn and someone who spends hours - but if you asked most active church members (especially women) in Utah if there was a difference you'd get a pretty resounding no and both would be addicts. The truth is, some people have the time and money to spend on it and it does no harm, much the same as gambling. I live close to a casino - close enough to walk if I wanted. There are people who can afford to go there and blow money and still pay all their bills and do other leisurely activities, and there are those who can't do that. It's only harmful to those who can't afford to do it (and either way it benefits me because my taxes have significantly decreased and services increased since the casino opened). If gambling or porn are not affecting one's means of living and general well being it makes little difference how much money or time they spend on it as indiviudals. We all waste time doing things like watching TV and posting on web forums but it doesn't matter as long as someone's not going to lose my job/livelihood or family because of it. In other words, if it affects your quality of life and health anything could be harmful (too much TV, too much sports, too much whatever) but otherwise it's likely not harmful.The wide free availability of the Big P online ensures that certain aspects are well hidden. Twenty years ago, some people spent serious money on it - that's a sign of addiction, as is the amount of time some people spend with it. (You're talking hours and hours here in some cases.) So there's a difference between someone who occasionally sneaks a peak at it, and someone who is spending thousands of dollars or hours on it. Lockdown isn't helping.
If you want to know why the church is struggling with keeping Millennials and Gen. Z, you don't have to look much farther than these issues. They're not interested in Kimball's Miracle of Forgiveness or Oaks' BYU shock therapy. It's not 1973, it's not 1983 (thank goodness in both cases), it's a whole new world. The church will catch up in 20-30 years.