Dear Hurting,

You had indicated you would be posting back to cwilden, 31110, under this category, I SCREWED UP...., but I don't see that you have, and he has posted further information in several posts. Sometimes I get confused when tehr is a second page, and I had schecked back, but it appeared no further posts had been made.

You mentioned to Raz, on a porno thred, that you felt taht the Bible explicitly warns against Errotic visons, pictures, videos and statues. If you have specific language in the Bible about that I would be intrerested in the references. Principles that are in the Bible can extended or extrapolated or esaggerated to inclue a warning against porn, but there are no direct warnings.

Dr. Harley speaks of pornography, but primarily in the context of the problem of a prudish wife, and the husband using porn secretly. Dr. Harley seems to say it is the husband who should change, but does not seem to exlude the wife from making better accommodations.

In Raz's Porno thread, JDNTX posted a problem that her husband left after an argument about voyereism, and apparently she was taking your advice, to encourage the husband to abstain. You, Takola and Raz seem to advocate abstinance from pornography. That did not work for JDNTX.

Further, Dean 790, pointed out taht his wife has a problem, taking your suggestion of a prudish stance, because he sneaks peaks at pornography, and lives a lie to his wife. What do you say to all the women who don't know that you are leading them into a big lie?

What is your personal use of porn? You say you split with your wife. What are you doing for sex? What is your sex drive? High, Medium Low?

Did you go to college or sieminary? What courses did you take?

You are making a pronuncement as a minister, that I am wrong. I would prefer that you say we have divergent points of view. By your assetion that poornography is bad, adn bvy your stature as a minister, you are creating less compromise, rather than happier marriage, and less divorces.

Are you a prudish advocacy poster?

I think that Song of Solomon needs to be read with the commanment against adultery. Ordinarily, teh male sex drive exceesds the woman's sex drive. Ordinarily, somethiong has to be worked out to accommodate these differences, and differences in schedules and timing or arrousals.

You are silent on suggestions for working out differences in needs for sexual visioning by husbands and wives. Because you have no suggestions of compromises for couples with disagreements on porn, I suggest that you are an irresonsible porn advocacy poster.

Raz wants to hear from women on porn. I posted what Ayeren had to say about porn. The Kosher Adultery book my have swiped the idea from a Thorned Rose post.

What I would apprecite is ideas of how to de-sensitize my wife about porn issues, as she gets into fits of anti porn persiod going a week or two. I suggested that my wife could get more naked more often, and I heard no suggestions.

Your taking a morally intolerant position that pornography is wrong is also rather inconsiderate to victims of sexual assault. When I was single, I used ponrongraphy most every morning to masaturbate and ejaculate. I kept my urges under control. I'll bet a lot of vitims of sexual assault, both men and women victims, would have preferred that the perpetrator had masturbated to porn, rather than subject a victim to an assault. Sexual assault vicctims would not appreciate you taking a moral highroad on an issue that is actually open for debate.

Quipper
Husband of 28 years, raised 2 challenging kids, still struggling

<small>[ November 12, 2003, 07:12 PM: Message edited by: Quipper ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Dr. Harley speaks of pornography, but primarily in the context of the problem of a prudish wife, and the husband using porn secretly. Dr. Harley seems to say it is the husband who should change, but does not seem to exlude the wife from making better accommodations.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Sorry Quipper....but this is so erroneous that I cannot fathom where you got this idea. You know the purpose of this site, is to help people apply Dr. Harley's concepts....not Dr. Quippers. Dr. Harley is VERY clear about how a wife should deal with pornography. Prudish is a very negative word....what if she is simply modest or chaste and doesn't feel as though viewing pornography is godly. What if she is loves sex, but not pornography?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Dear Dr. Harley,
I read in a book about marriage and sex that a study showed women became as sexually aroused as men when showed an explicit pornographic movie. The book also had some quotes from several wives saying that these movies got them "jump started" for lovemaking even if they weren't in the mood. Do you think pornography can be useful in a marriage, and if so, how much is too much?

W.C.


Dear W.C.,
Actually, explicit sexual movies or photographs rarely turn women on. That's why men are far and away the primary customers of pornography. Once in a while I come across a woman who finds them helpful sexually, but these women usually don't have much of a problem to begin with. And in many cases, it isn't the nude men they like, its the nude women.

To answer your question, most women who watch pornographic movies with their husbands do it because he wants them to. He seems to like it, so she goes along. Just sitting with him watching a movie, any movie, is often enough to turn her on, particularly if he is amorous while they are watching it.

Before you run out to buy pornographic videos, ask your wife how enthusiastic she is about the idea. Unless you have her enthusiastic agreement (Policy of Joint Agreement), I'd forget about it. Besides, springing it on her one night when you are alone together has all the makings of a gigantic blunder.

To test my theory, watch a romantic movie with your arm around your wife and see where it leads. Most women are much more comfortable with that approach to lovemaking than to watch naked actors doing their thing.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Introduction: The topic of this week's column, addiction to pornography, is very similar to alcohol addiction, a topic I covered two weeks ago. Both of them represent a condition that makes compliance with the Policy of Joint Agreement almost impossible. And for that reason alone, it ruins marriages.

There are as many forms of sexual addiction as there are ways to have sex. They range all the way from masturbating to pornographic magazines and videos to breaking into apartments and raping unsuspecting residents. But they all have one thing in common -- in each case, sex is more important than the feelings of others.

For a few years I treated some of the illegal but non-violent forms of sexual addiction, such as peeping toms, flashers (men who exposed their genitals in public) and those who made obscene telephone calls (several were women). It was not too difficult to prove that these forms of sexual pleasure were inappropriate, because the victims would come forward and have the perpetrators arrested.

But it's more difficult to demonstrate the inappropriateness of some of the private forms of sexual addiction, such as masturbating to pornography. After all, who could possibly be hurt by such a private and unobtrusive act? No one, if you're single. But if you're married, your spouse could be, and usually is, very offended by such behavior.

The first letter I've chosen to post is a good representative of scores of others I've received from women who want their husbands to stop masturbating to pornography. Then, I follow it up with a short Q&A on a related subject, pornography as an aid to marital sex.


Dear Dr. Harley,
I am 37 years old and my husband of six years is 45. We have two preschool children. This is my second marriage, his fourth.

Two days ago I came home to his surprise and discovered him watching a porn video. This is something he has engaged in from time to time since before our marriage. Historically I have encouraged him to share this facet of his sexual life with me but he has chosen not to.

Over the life of our marriage I have seen a steady decrease in the frequency of our sexual activity until now when we only make love once or twice a month. His enthusiasm for sex has decreased as well.

Although he always watches the movies in secrecy, I suspect he has been engaging in this activity at least once a week for the past year. I have discovered him a couple of times before and told him that it hurts my feelings for him to prefer this activity over taking an opportunity to make love with me. He assured me that watching the movies was no big deal to him and if it hurt my feelings he would stop, but he didn't. I have told him that I would like to have sex more often, and am willing to do just about anything but our sex life remains unchanged.

This last incident is "the straw that broke the camel's back" - I feel totally undesirable, depressed, and unwilling to share myself with him sexually and emotionally. I am sure he resents me infringing upon his "right to privacy," but it's something I cannot tolerate. His assurance of my attractiveness and his love for me mean nothing after he does these things.

He put the tapes in the attic and vowed again to make a change, but I do not trust him. I need a deeper explanation of what is going on and he cannot or will not provide one. It hurts that he would continue to engage in an activity that hurts me and detracts from our relationship and I can't help but wonder that if this outlet is taken away from him if he would resort to something more devastating like having an affair or start utilizing the Internet to meet his sexual needs.

By the way, out of curiosity I have seen some of the tapes he watches and I don't find anything perverse or unusual about them. It just seems that he needs something other than me. I would be most grateful for anything you could provide.

J.S.


Dear J.S.,
When you were first married, and before you had your children, sex was rather uncomplicated. You had privacy and a great deal more energy. It isn't surprising that you and your husband enjoyed a mutually enjoyable sexual relationship with each other.

But now that you have two children, sex probably requires more planning and more energy. Your husband's use of videos is his way to have his sexual need met while avoiding all the hassle. His strategy is somewhat effective, since it does lower his sex drive, and it is certainly more convenient. But it is at your expense.

There are two policies that I encourage couples to follow: The Policy of Radical Honesty and the Policy of Joint Agreement (they are both described in my Basic Concepts). If you follow them both, you can resolve almost every marital conflict known to man. But in your husband's effort to solve his sexual problem, he has not followed either of these rules, and that's why you are so upset with him.

Your husband has followed the Policy of Radical Honesty to a point. He has let you know about his interest in pornographic videos, and has shared them with you. But he has not let you know how much he uses them to fulfill his sexual need. You would not have known about it if you had not discovered his use by coming home unexpectedly. He has agreed not to use them in the future, but that's something he had agreed to do several times in the past. He has placed the pornographic videos in a convenient location -- in your attic. If he had no intention of using them again, he would have thrown them out.

He has been dishonest with you in the past regarding these videos, and he will probably continue to be dishonest with you. It's possible that he doesn't believe in the Policy of Radical Honesty. After four marriages, he may have decided that honesty has done nothing but get him into trouble.

He has also violated the Policy of Joint Agreement by watching the videos when he knows you are offended by them. From your description, he seems to agree with the policy when you confront him -- he agrees to not watch them in the future because it upsets you. But as soon as you leave the house, he doesn't follow through with his agreement. It could be that he tells you whatever you want to hear so he can get you off his back. He may not really feel that the Policy of Joint Agreement works in marriage, because it prevents him from doing what he wants to do.

But there's another explanation for all of this. It could be that he is addicted to pornographic videos.

If you have found that your husband follows the Policy of Radical Honesty and the Policy of Joint Agreement in every area of his life except sex, he probably has a sexual addiction. A test of this premise is to simply ask him how he feels about these two rules. If he knows that he should be completely honest with you, and wants to consider your feelings in every decision he makes, then he could have an addiction that overrides his willingness to follow these rules. In other words, he can't use the rules to guide his sexual conduct because he is addicted.

Quite frankly, if he doesn't believe in either the Policy of Radical Honesty or the Policy of Joint Agreement, there is no point in discovering whether or not his problem is addiction. If he will not be honest or take your feelings into account, your marriage will end up being his fourth in a long list of marriages. In that case, your only hope of saving your marriage is trying to convince him that both rules are essential to your future as husband and wife.

But I will assume that your husband really does want to be honest with you, and he does want to take your feelings into account when he makes decisions. He knows that his behavior upsets you, and wants to stop doing it, but can't, regardless of how unhappy it makes you feel. In other words, I will assume he is a sexual addict.

Let me review your situation once more, and consider some of your alternative solutions.

Your husband probably masturbates a lot more than you think. It may be several times a week. That would account for his decreasing sexual interest in you. If he were not to masturbate at all, I'm certain he would want to have sex with you more often. But he has become so addicted to pornographic videos, that he can't resist them. And he uses them whenever he gets a chance.

You are considering the possibility of trying to adjust to it because, if you don't, he may choose something even worse, like infidelity or cybersex.

And you also offer to do "just about anything" to motivate him to have sex exclusively with you. That probably means that you might be willing to engage in sex acts with him that would be unpleasant for you just to have him all to yourself.

Neither of those two alternatives will work. The alternative of adjustment won't work because his masturbating to videos has always upset you, and will continue to upset you. Do you really think that eventually you will get used to it? The truth is, you will continue to be upset until so many love units are withdrawn that you will not love him any more. It's already happening to you. You admit that you no longer feel like sharing yourself with him emotionally or physically. That's just the beginning.

Regarding your second alternative, giving him whatever he wants whenever he has sex with you, that won't work either. His sexual activity with you must meet your standards of enjoyment, or you won't want to make love to him for long. Suppose he confesses to you that the only way he could have enjoyable sex with you is anal penetration. If you're like most women, you'd regret the day you took him away from his videos.

The only reasonable solution to your problem is for your husband to abandon his offensive use of videos and any other forms of sex apart from you, and have sex with you in ways that are fulfilling for both of you.

The procedure to overcome an addiction begins when access to the addictive material becomes inaccessible. Those addicted to alcohol must be completely separated from alcohol. They must get it out of their houses, and they must avoid situations where alcoholic beverage is present. Sometimes they need to be hospitalized for a few weeks to be sure they are not tempted to drink.

The same principle applies to sexual addiction. All of his pornographic videos and any other sexual material he uses when he masturbates should be destroyed. While it's possible for him to purchase more, at least it would prevent renewal of his habit during a momentary lapse.

If your husband were to avoid masturbation for a week, he would find his normal sex drive returning and he would be more sexually attracted to you. The longer he would avoid the pornographic videos and any other sexual material, and limit all of his sexual options to having sex with you, the more your sexual relationship would return to the way it was when you were first married.

But it won't be easy for him to give up his tapes or whatever else he uses for sexual release. Over the years, his methods of self-arousal have probably become very sophisticated and work extremely well -- much better, in fact, than his sex with you.

Like any other addiction, at first, he will crave what he has left behind. He will go through the same withdrawal that alcoholics experience. He may become depressed and frustrated, and it will be quite an adjustment for both of you. But if he can do it, if he can stop having sex in any context that does not include you, he will eventually find complete sexual fulfillment in his relationship with you.

Don't forget that the way you make love together should be with your enthusiastic agreement. If he says that you must make love to him in a way that upsets you, or is at all uncomfortable, he's back to his sexual addiction again -- where having sex is more important to him than your feelings.

Sex should be exclusively reserved for the marital relationship for quite a few reasons. For one thing, sex is one of the easiest ways to deposit love units in marriage. To waste it's pleasure apart from each other is to miss an opportunity to build romantic love.

But another important reason to make sex exclusive is that when one spouse has sex outside of marriage, the other spouse is usually offended. And as you've seen, it isn't just your husband's sex with other women that would offend you. You are offended whenever he has sex that doesn't include you.

Your reaction is quite normal -- it's appropriate for you to want your husband's exclusive sexual interest. I encourage you to take the steps I recommend to resolve this conflict with your husband because once it's resolved, you will have learned the lessons that will make this marriage your best and last.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The advice here is meant to be concept-based....not opinion based. You say yourself that your wife is not always enthusiastic about pornography....sounds a bit like you are coercing her into doing exactly what the wife above was trying to do.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> When I first launched this web site in January 1996, I was able to personally answer all e-mail questions that were asked. Some of those questions and my answers appear in the Q&A Columns I've posted. But by the time they had grown to over 50 letters a day, I had to find another way to handle these very important questions.

The solution is our Marriage Builders? Forum. Here you have an opportunity to ask questions, and receive answers, not from me or my staff, but from other visitors who have learned my concepts and want to support you in your effort to improve your marriage. I am not able to review most of the questions and answers (some days there are over 1000), and so I cannot guarantee that I would give the same answer you might receive. But what I have seen has been very encouraging to me. And I've noticed that when someone gives advice that does not agree with my concepts, there are usually those who point out that fact in a string of letters that follow.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">So here is the first of perhaps more letters to say that your advice does NOT agree with his concepts.

<small>[ November 19, 2003, 06:38 PM: Message edited by: star*fish ]</small>

Actually, Quipper, far from preventing a man from forcing himself on a woman (as if self control isn't an option), pornography use has been documented to have a relationship to sex crimes. What does pornography teach? It certainly doesn't teach how to have sex, as I have yet to hear more than a handful of women that wouldn't smack a man for trying to have sex with her in that way. The next time you come across a couple who look like they may be headed off to have sex, follow them and try to join in. See what happens. In porn, women fake orgasms. The types of stimulation shown in most porn would not lead to orgasm in most women.

It shows that women are there to be naked and perfom on demand. It shows that you don't need to give back to the woman in order to receive. It shows that you can have any number and any variety of women, you don't have to stick to one. It prevents many from understanding that the woman's body is her own and under her control. After all, with porn utilization she does it however many times you want for as long as you want, and in the ways you desire.

I have trouble understanding how this could promote any type of healthy relationship.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> The federal government reports that over 300,000 rapes occur in our nation each year. Could there be a connection between the consumption of pornography and the rise in incidents of rape? Studies suggest just such a connection. By combining erotic images with violent images, pornography normalizes sexual assault and desensitizes men to rape.

A 1991 study found that "[college] men who had engaged in forced sex rated their enjoyment of Playboy magazine as significantly greater than men who indicated that they had not engaged in forced sex." This study also documented that college men who reported a greater inclination toward some kind for sexual coercion or aggression tended to come from homes where their fathers read magazines such as Playboy and Penthouse and talked about watching X-rated movies.

Another study looked at the rates of rape in the states that consumed the most pornography. States where the most pornography (Playboy, Hustler . . . etc.) is sold, like Nevada and Alaska, also lead the nation in rapes.

The FBI recognizes this correlation. One FBI report noted that an astounding 81 percent of the sex killers said their biggest sexual interest was in viewing pornography and in compulsive masturbation." Scientists at the FBI Academy in Quantico created the following psychological profile of a rapist: "He collected Playboy, then Penthouse magazines . . . and dreamed of rape. Then he slipped over the threshold of fantasy into the reality of sexual assault."
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

<small>[ November 19, 2003, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: *Takola* ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> In Raz's Porno thread, JDNTX posted a problem that her husband left after an argument about voyereism, and apparently she was taking your advice, to encourage the husband to abstain. You, Takola and Raz seem to advocate abstinance from pornography. That did not work for JDNTX.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">He doesn't have a porn problem....he is a voyeur. He is watching the girls next door shower. Do you think that might improve his sex life too?

This is JDNTX's ONLY post. No one every replied to her so she never came back.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think I may be dealing with a similar prob - about 6 years ago, I found my husband was frequenting our attic. When I questioned him, he would either deny it or tell me I was crazy and imagining things. After finding his coffee cup there one day, and realizing that if you peeked through a hole in the turbin vent on the roof, you could peer straight into the neighbor's bathroom and watch the young female neighbors shower, I confronted him again and he admitted it. I was devastated, confused and repulsed. I asked the neighbors to cover their window, plugged the hole, and monitored the attic door - (kinda sounds enabling, doesn't it?) They moved and that problem disappeared. Now we have new neighbors with young adult girls. I have been watchful and thought the problem was gone. Tonight I called on the way home from work as usual, but hubby was very eager to get off the phone. When I got home, the back gate was open allowing access to the side yard. I realized that the shower is once again viewable if he stands on the air conditioner. The window was freshly steamy. I confronted him calmly and told him I hoped the problem was not going to recur. He became extremely agitated, loud and aggressive, packed his clothes,handed me his wedding ring and left. He again told me how ridiculous I was (just like before). I feel caught with my armor down, I am confused (what if I was wrong). I am angry and hurt and don't feel like I am thinking proactively for my own protection. I don't know where to begin to deal with this or whether I should deal with anything but a separation. I feel very powerless and hopeless right now, but I don't feel like I should give into the tears I feel. Any suggestions/direction would be great right now.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">She never once mentions PORN...nor did ANYONE tell her he should abstain. But how much you want to bet that long before he became a pervert watching young girls in the shower....he was up there masturbating to porn? I bet his sexual addiction began early....exposure to porn, masturbating to porn....and escalating to peeping tom. His activities are ILLEGAL!!!

Dear Star and Other MB Debaters,

Hurting Promise Keeper is having a rough time right now. I have posted to him on his problems. I did not intend to bump this thread, because I did not relaize he was having the type of serious problems he is having when I started this thread.

Dr. Harley's comments on errotic material relate to the use of errotic material without POJA, and outside the marital bedroom. I can understand that some individuals would extend the principle to abstain from porn, into the marital bedroom. But Jesus did not say that, nor did Dr. Harley.

Many seem to be giving advice to abstain from pornography, altogether. Sometimes that is wise. For JDNTX, her expectations for her husband to abstain from voyerism were unfulfilled. I am not familiar with research done to show how pornography can work to fulfill sexual desires that otherwise would spill over to the illegal. I personally feel that my use of pornography has made me a more law abiding individual. Am I wrong? Am I unusual? Am I in the majority? How many individuals with illegal sexual desires cannot be satiated, or their crime rates reduced, by an increased use of pornography? How would you design a study to show the expected increase in crime, if pornography were effectively removed from the society? I don't see many victims of sexual assault coming forward and advocating the banishment of pornography.

If JDNTX is now giving POJA for using errotic videos in the marital bedroom, and her marriage is back together, is it possible that the increased fulfillment for the husband of JDNTX will be enough? Is it illegal to stand on your own property and look through the windows of neighbor's houses?

Many MB posters recommend absention form errotic videos, and I don't read Dr. Harley that way. I try to quote helpful MB aticles first, and recommendations by other posters, but I disagree that I am limited to Dr. Harley's principles, or even that that is the primary purpose of the board. I think the purpose of the board is to help people in the various stages of marriage and divorce, where support and ideas may be helpful. If someone wants advice form Dr. Harley, I understand he is available by phone, for a fee.

I try to make clear that my suggestions may not work.

I think we should do better in helping individuals who have become overly-dependent upon pronography, but in balance, I believe the greater harm would be the restriction of pornography from those who are attempting to be law abiding.

TAKOLA:

Please cite the articles which report the studies you cite. I would be interested to read them. Please re-read the studies yourself, to be sure that they support what you think they say.


Quipper

<small>[ November 19, 2003, 08:29 PM: Message edited by: Quipper ]</small>

Quipper,

The purpose of the board is clearly stated on the homesite....I have quoted Steve Harley for you in his discussion about why it was formed.

Here is what you say:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> I think the purpose of the board is to help people in the various stages of marriage and divorce, where support and ideas may be helpful.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Here is what Dr. Harley says:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> When I first launched this web site in January 1996, I was able to personally answer all e-mail questions that were asked. Some of those questions and my answers appear in the Q&A Columns I've posted. But by the time they had grown to over 50 letters a day, I had to find another way to handle these very important questions.

The solution is our Marriage Builders? Forum. Here you have an opportunity to ask questions, and receive answers, not from me or my staff, but from other visitors who have learned my concepts and want to support you in your effort to improve your marriage. I am not able to review most of the questions and answers (some days there are over 1000), and so I cannot guarantee that I would give the same answer you might receive. But what I have seen has been very encouraging to me. And I've noticed that when someone gives advice that does not agree with my concepts, there are usually those who point out that fact in a string of letters that follow.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am simply trying to follow his mandate...that I point to fact that your opinions are not in line with his concepts. I am not trying to offend you....but I think it's important for folks to understand the concepts that it took Dr. Harley a good deal of his life to design....and then....gave us this free site to help others understand them. It isn't a public site as so many like to imply....it costs plenty to run and it is offered free. I feel a responsibility to the people I post to here to make every effort to post as responsibly as possible.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Many seem to be giving advice to abstain from pornography. Sometimes that is wise. For JDNTX, her expectations for her husband to abstain from voyerism were unfulfilled. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Do you think pornography and voyeurism are the same?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> If JDNTX is now giving POJA for using errotic videos in the marital bedroom, and her marriage is back together, is it possible that the increased fulfillment for the husband of JDNTX will be enough? Is it illegal to stand on your own property and look through the windows of neighbor's houses?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">JDNTX is NOT giving the POJA for using erotic videos....here is her profile:

Profile for JDNTX
Member Status: Junior Member
Member Number: 18496
Registered: April 07, 2002
Posts: 1


She has one post...and one only....are you possibly confused? In the above quoted post....she says NOTHING about adding pornography to curb is voyeuristic appetite....I'm confused if there are other posts forgive....I cannot find them.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Is it illegal to stand on your own property and look through the windows of neighbor's houses?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Now you are scaring me. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" /> Are you THIS out of touch about what rights other people have to privacy.

Here is a copy of a the law from North Carolina....but it is pretty indicative of the other states as well:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of South Carolina:

SECTION 1. Chapter 17, Title 16 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 16-17-475. (A) A person commits the crime of voyeurism if, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of any person, he or she knowingly views, photographs, videotapes or films another person, without that person's knowledge and consent, while the person being viewed, photographed, videotaped or filmed is in a place where he or she would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

(B) Definitions:

(1) 'Place where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy' means:

(a) a place where a reasonable person would believe that he or she could disrobe in privacy, without being concerned that his or her undressing was being photographed, filmed or videotaped by another; or

(b) a place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from casual or hostile intrusion or surveillance.

(2) 'Surveillance' means secret observation of the activities of another person for the purpose of spying upon and invading the privacy of the person.

(3) 'Views' means the intentional looking upon of another person for more than a brief period of time, in other than a casual or cursory manner, with the unaided eye or with a device designed or intended to improve visual acuity.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">What her husband was doing was criminal....and you are still trying to argue that abstinance is bad advice?

Dear Star,

You have not answered my question. If all porn was effectively banned, what would happen to the sexual assualt crime rate? What studies do you base that on?

If a woman is in a bathroom with windows, without curtains pulled, is that a reasonable expectation of privacy under NC Case Law? Case Cite?

Quipper

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> You have not answered my question. If all porn was effectively banned, what would happen to the sexual assualt crime rate? What studies do you base that on?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You are purposely ignoring everything that has been said to you. But I will not be so rude. I have NOT said that anything would happen to the assault crime rate...so why should I have to cite a study? I did quote what Harley has to say on this topic, and what I observe on this board. We both know that the the studies are contradictory depending on which political group is funding them. I will say this....the studies that say porn is not harmful seem to be mainly from the 80s or earlier. Since it is actually YOU who is saying that porn is good beneficial while I am really more interested in the industry that produces it...perhaps you can find an unbiased study to cite....university or government research of course.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> If a woman is in a bathroom with windows, without curtains pulled, is that a reasonable expectation of privacy under NC Case Law? Case Cite?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Voyeurism at root of Peeping Tom incidents
CRIME: Cases uncommon on campus; recent arrest one of seven since 1997


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Linh Tat Daily Bruin Contributor Although everyone has heard the term "Peeping Tom" before, most people may still be in the dark when it comes to understanding the nature of this criminal offense. Many people may label a person who secretly observes another undressing or in the nude as a Peeping Tom, but they do not always consider that those who repeatedly commit this offense may suffer from a psychological disorder. Even though university police and various campus advocacy organizations all say that they do not see many cases of Peeping Toms, the phenomenon may be less rare than statistics suggest. "The percentage of cases discovered is probably a small percentage of cases that occur," said Clive Kennedy, a clinical psychologist with Student Psychological Services. Since 1997, university police have logged seven cases of peeping incidents, four of which were on campus, according to Nancy Greenstein, UCPD director for community services. The most recent reported peeping incident near campus occurred on Oct. 9 when 22-year-old Quoc Viet Hoang was arrested at 1:40 a.m. by a UCPD officer who alleged that he was on the top of Lot 2 with a video camera aimed at 646 Hilgard Ave., a house occupied by female residents. Hoang was arrested under state penal code 647(k), which applies to anyone who observes another person "with the intent to invade the privacy of a person or persons inside." Afterwards, police went around to the different houses on Hilgard Avenue to ask residents if they had seen anything. "The incident has definitely changed me," said Karen Baumgartner, a third-year mechanical engineering student who was in the house that night. She said that she did not realize anyone had been looking into her room until police showed up at her doorstep. "It made me very edgy the next day," she added. "I felt like I was being watched all the time." She plans to testify against him in court. The arraignment date for this case is scheduled for Nov. 10. Although this was an isolated incident and Peeping Tom cases seem to be uncommon at UCLA, the ramifications of invading another person's privacy are quite serious, said Amy Gershon, judicial coordinator for the Office of Residential Life. If the person is a student, he or she is referred to the Dean of Students for disciplinary action, Gershon said. "The person would likely be excluded from housing and possibly be suspended from school," Gershon added. Because some students disregard the same-sex bathroom policy in residence halls, there could be increased opportunities for a person to observe other individuals without consent. Earlier this calendar year, a male teenager who wasn't a UCLA student was caught in a Dykstra Hall bathroom after following a girl into the shower area, where she had taken off her robe. Gershon said that besides this one case, she knows of only one other peeping incident in on-campus housing, which took place five years ago. But some people are wondering whether other incidents have occurred but have gone unknown. Voyeurism, the medical term for repeated peeping, is under-reported, Kennedy said, because victims do not realize it is happening to them most of the time. "Concealment is an important aspect of voyeurism," he said. In a manual of mental disorders released by the American Psychiatric Association in 1994, the symptoms of voyeurism were said to last "over a period of at least six months, (with) recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving the act of observing an unsuspecting person who is naked, in the process of disrobing, or engaging in sexual activity." Kennedy said that for peeping acts to be considered voyeurism, the crime must be repeated over time. Even two incidents of peeping by the same person does not necessarily make that person a voyeur. "Voyeurism is a very chronic disease," Kennedy said. "It's like an addiction, and it's very difficult to treat." He said that a person diagnosed with voyeurism does not seek sexual activity but only wishes to look at another person, which is usually accompanied by masturbation. "The observing is the preferred sexual outlet," Kennedy said. "They just like the arousal." "They keep it voluntary in order to maintain exclusive control (of the situation)," he added. Kennedy said these type of sexual offenders may have weaker social skills, which render them incapable of having their sexual needs met any other way. In some instances, the person's failure to seek out a healthy relationship stems from traumatic events in the person's past, often of a sexual nature, such as child abuse, Kennedy said. Although arousal is an important element in voyeurism, the arousal which results from watching pornographic video tapes is a different experience because the actors and actresses in those movies are being observed willingly. "A true Peeping Tom likes the fantasy of how humiliating it would be for the person being observed (to find out)," Kennedy said. "The innocence of the observee is an important part of the process."
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Under Missouri's new statute, a person commits the crime of invasion of privacy if he "knowingly views, photographs or films another person, without that person's knowledge and consent, while the person being viewed, photographed or filmed is in a state of full or partial nudity and is in a place where he would have a reasonable expectation of privacy." "Views" is defined as "the looking upon of another person, with the unaided eye or with any device deigned or intended to improve visual acuity, for the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of any person." Thus, since a mental element of "purpose" is required, an accidental glimpse by the ice man or laundryman would not be criminal under the statute. In many cases, such as when the defendant was caught near a window or peephole, but claims he was not looking at the victim, intent may be proven by circumstantial evidence. The definition of "photographs or films" includes the "making of any photograph, motion picture film, videotape, or any other recording or transmission of the image of a person." The definition of "full or partial nudity" is specifically defined as "the showing of all or any part of the human genitals or pubic area or buttock, or any part of the nipple of the breast of any female person, with less than a fully opaque covering." A peeper caught spying upon a tanning booth victim before she removed any clothing could still be prosecuted for attempted invasion of privacy, even if he had not yet glimpsed any nudity. Although a "place" where a person would have "a reasonable expectation of privacy" is not defined, the words are of common usage. Private homes, dressing rooms, tanning booths, college dormitory rooms, and restrooms are the sorts of places protected. Public beaches, parks and swimming pools are not.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">These young girls were in their private homes. Perhaps this was a window high off the ground (since he had to be in the attic to see into it) where they could reasonably expect privacy. He did it without their knowledge. Surely you understand this.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Meverden case spurred push for new legislation

By Ben Jones
P-C Madison bureau chief

MADISON — Gov. Jim Doyle signed into law Wednesday a bill to strengthen state penalties against Peeping Toms.

The legislation got a new push after a 2002 string of Fox Cities sexual assaults by Todd Meverden, a Town of Neenah man whose first offenses were looking into women’s windows.

The new state law makes it a specific crime for someone to look into a house or any place else where a person might be naked in order to achieve sexual gratification. Window-peepers in the past had been charged with disorderly conduct, a vague crime that didn’t identify them as sex offenders.

“Unfortunately, window-peeping has too often escalated to more serious crimes, including home invasions, sexual assault and even murder,” Doyle said in a statement. “This bill will give our law enforcement officials the ability to track individuals who exhibit this dangerous behavior, address this behavior as a serious crime, and protect citizens throughout the state.”

The bill was authored by state Rep. Becky Weber, R-Green Bay, and state Sen. Carol Roessler, R-Oshkosh. Both cited the case of Meverden, who now is serving 120 years in prison for sexual assaults in Appleton, Neenah, Menasha and Town of Menasha, and one of his victims testified in favor of the legislation during hearings in Madison.

Roessler said the law has long been needed. “It is not a victimless crime. It is not a frivolous crime,” Roessler said. “It is dangerous and it escalates (to other crimes).”

John Manion, Kaukauna assistant police chief, worked with lawmakers on the bill even before Meverden’s 2002 arrest, however. He said a specific window-peeping crime on a person’s record rather than a disorderly conduct charge will help police and investigators.

“When an officer stops an individual now, he will know more about that individual and know he’s not, in fact, out looking for his dog,” Manion said.

The law carries penalties of up to nine months in jail and a $10,000 fine. It may also result in the offender having to register as a sex criminal.

Offenders also can get treatment now, though, something that was not available when offenders were charged with disorderly conduct.

“It really has toughness and compassion to it,” Weber said. “It should make a difference.”

Doyle signed four other bills in addition to the Peeping Tom legislation, including a bill creating a felony offense for correctional workers who have sexual contact with inmates.

Doyle thanked victims for their efforts to bring the bills to his desk.

“They came about because people were willing to step forward from their very difficult circumstances,” he said.

Other bills signed into law Wednesday include a measure that would prohibit convicted sexual offenders from changing their names, a measure that would increase penalties from a misdemeanor to felony level for sexual offenders who fail to register and another measure meant to decrease prescription drug costs in the prison system.






</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> In porn, women fake orgasms. The types of stimulation shown in most porn would not lead to orgasm in most women. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Exactly. And I have shouted that "phase" or variations of it, at the top of my lungs to every young girl I can.


</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">It shows that women are there to be naked and perfom on demand. It shows that you don't need to give back to the woman in order to receive. It shows that you can have any number and any variety of women, you don't have to stick to one. It prevents many from understanding that the woman's body is her own and under her control. After all, with porn utilization she does it however many times you want for as long as you want, and in the ways you desire. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Preach it honey!!

Something about the thought that my nieces, and my friends young daughters, or the babysitter, or the neighbor's kid grows up believing that,"that's the way it is", makes my blood boil!


If more women would rise up and tell the truth about our bodies. Tell it like it ....

Realistically, we aren't gonna change anyone's mind about this, but I certainly will tell every young gal that will listen to the truth about porn.

See, I LIKE sex. I REALLY like sex. Good sex, committed sex. REAL sex. And Quipper, I get pissed when someone messes with that.

There. I said my 2 cents worth. I will let myself out the cyber door now ..

DZZZ

*edited myself* I wasn't being very nice ..

<small>[ November 20, 2003, 06:00 AM: Message edited by: Diamonzzz ]</small>

Dear Diamond,

Thanks for the reply. I have posted to you on the Emotional Needs Category, on some threads in September or October.

What advice do you have for JDNTX? I suggested the book KOSHER ADULTERY as a gift to her husband. She never posted back. Did she find a way to adjust her strict prohibition against all pornography and voyerism, to accomodate her husband's unsatisfied sex drive?

What do you say to all the wives, like of Dean 790, who take a firm stance against pornography, but whose husbands sneak porn and topless bars on the sly? Is your answer the best answer?

What do you say to the victims of sexual assault, who might not have been victimized if pornography, masturbation and ejacualtion had been better utilized by their attacker?

I am not on a soap box. If someone has an emotional block to something that can help their marriage, and their partner, then I will carry on a thread to discuss their sensitization, and possible compromises.

If a poster does not mention that their husband's sex drive is a problem, then I don't bring up the issue.

DEAR STAR,

I try to be careful not to accuse someone of something that is false. Based on the information I know, and the information you have provided, I cannot say with certainty that the husband of JDNTX was committing a criminal offense. I made several suggestions to JDNTX. Apparently she worked something out, because she has not posted back. What additional suggestions would you have for JDNTX?


Quipper
Husband of 28 years, raised 2 challenging kids, still struggling

<small>[ November 20, 2003, 06:21 AM: Message edited by: Quipper ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Did she find a way to adjust her strict prohibition against all pornography and voyerism, to accomodate her husband's unsatisfied sex drive?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Quipper, you mention that you try not to make false accusations....which is why I simply don't understand the above statement. Yet again....here is JDNX's ONLY post:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think I may be dealing with a similar prob - about 6 years ago, I found my husband was frequenting our attic. When I questioned him, he would either deny it or tell me I was crazy and imagining things. After finding his coffee cup there one day, and realizing that if you peeked through a hole in the turbin vent on the roof, you could peer straight into the neighbor's bathroom and watch the young female neighbors shower, I confronted him again and he admitted it. I was devastated, confused and repulsed. I asked the neighbors to cover their window, plugged the hole, and monitored the attic door - (kinda sounds enabling, doesn't it?) They moved and that problem disappeared. Now we have new neighbors with young adult girls. I have been watchful and thought the problem was gone. Tonight I called on the way home from work as usual, but hubby was very eager to get off the phone. When I got home, the back gate was open allowing access to the side yard. I realized that the shower is once again viewable if he stands on the air conditioner. The window was freshly steamy. I confronted him calmly and told him I hoped the problem was not going to recur. He became extremely agitated, loud and aggressive, packed his clothes,handed me his wedding ring and left. He again told me how ridiculous I was (just like before). I feel caught with my armor down, I am confused (what if I was wrong). I am angry and hurt and don't feel like I am thinking proactively for my own protection. I don't know where to begin to deal with this or whether I should deal with anything but a separation. I feel very powerless and hopeless right now, but I don't feel like I should give into the tears I feel. Any suggestions/direction would be great right now. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Please read the above and answer these questions Quipper because I do NOT understand where you have made these assumptions:

WHERE...does JDNX EVER mention pornography?

Voyereurism is a against the law, why should she tolerate illegal activitity by her husband?

WHERE does she say anything about her husband's sex drive?

Where does she anything that would indicate she is prudish in anyway?

Where does it say she is unwilling to satisfy her husband's sex drive?

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> What do you say to all the wives, like of Dean 790, who take a firm stance against pornography, but whose husbands sneak porn and topless bars on the sly? Is your answer the best answer?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I would say that if their husbands cannot follow the POJA about these things....that what they are really saying is that their desire to watch porn, is more important to them than their wife's feelings about it.

"Those who say they cannot follow the Policy of Joint Agreement are really saying what they want to do is more important than how you (their spouse) feels."
....Willard F. Harley Jr. PhD.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> What do you say to the victims of sexual assault, who might not have been victimized if pornography, masturbation and ejacualtion had been better utilized by their attacker?
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is YOUR spin on things Quipper. And I find it very dangerous that you are presenting it as fact. There are studies out there that support and refute this idea and you know it. For every study that you can put up here to say that looking at pornography saves victimization...there are five that say it CAUSES it. So do not present this as fact....it simply is not.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> If a poster does not mention that their husband's sex drive is a problem, then I don't bring up the issue.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">JDNX never once said anything about her husband's sex drive....she was talking about his criminal activities. Voyeurism is considered an abnormal sexual proclivity. Please look through ANY psychology books and here is a typical definition of this term. Please pay special attention to the part I have highlighted for you because looking at pornographic images does not satisfy the interest of these people.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Voyeurism

A voyeur is a person who derives sexual pleasure from watching other people who are nude. Voyeurs are usually male and are commonly known as "Peeping Toms." The voyeur typically gets heightened excitement from the fact that the person being watched is not aware that she (or he) is being viewed. An example of a voyeur could be someone who spies on girls who are showering in the locker room. Some voyeurs scan many windows in hopes of seeing a person changing their clothes.

Many average people would derive some sexual pleasure from accidentally seeing an attractive person naked. However, peeping and watching become atypical when a person repeatedly seeks or resorts to peeping and eroticizes voyeuristic experiences by masturbating while peeping or later while reliving the voyeuristic experience in fantasy. Voyeurs are usually committing an illegal act by invading another person’s privacy, trespassing, or by breaking and entering to observe someone in the nude.

A slight variation of voyeurism is scoptophilia. A scoptophile derives sexual pleasure from viewing other people engaged in sexual acts and/or other people’s genitals. One might think that simply watching a pornographic movie or going to a strip club could satisfy a voyeur’s or a scoptophile’s urges; however, these somewhat acceptable activities lack the elements of risk and forbiddenness that scoptophiles and voyeurs find especially exciting.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I try to be careful not to accuse someone of something that is false. Based on the information I know, and the information you have provided, I cannot say with certainty that the husband of JDNTX was committing a criminal offense. I made several suggestions to JDNTX. Apparently she worked something out, because she has not posted back. What additional suggestions would you have for JDNTX?

If you cannot say with certainty with the information I have provided....I can only assume that you CHOOSE to continue to keep your head in the sand...and I don't know why unless perhaps you have a sexual addiction problem....do you? There is no question that the viewing of girls, without their knowledge, while they are naked....is a CRIMINAL offense. As far as what suggestions that I would make to JDNTX....here are some additional ones I think are appropriate:

Get this sick puppy some help!

If he won't get help, go straight to Plan B until he will.

He he still refuses....call the police and turn him in....you have a responsibility under the law not to aid and abet criminals or you can be prosecuted too.

<small>[ November 20, 2003, 08:12 AM: Message edited by: star*fish ]</small>

Quipper, Here are numerous links to Psychology publications that define "paraphelia"...voyeurism falls under that heading and is considered "deviant" "compulsive" and "criminal" sexual behavior. Please read....and STOP presenting the actions of JDNX's husband as acceptable, legal or the result of JDNX's desire to control her husband's use of pornography. It is dangerous and irresponsible to encourage anyone on this site to tolerate or support this kind of activity.

Psychology Today: Paraphelia

Compulsive Sexual Behavior

Paraphelias

Voyeurism: A Human Sexuality Project

What Scientists Know About Compulsive Sexual Behavior

<small>[ November 20, 2003, 08:57 AM: Message edited by: star*fish ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Your taking a morally intolerant position that pornography is wrong is also rather inconsiderate to victims of sexual assault. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think your stance advocating pornography is far more inconsiderate of sexual assault victims than is any stance against porn.

You speak of the Bible and insist that it doesn't mention porn. I think, from another post you have, that you agree that it mentions fornication as a sin?

So, your position is that God has no problem with you paying to support an industry that pays unmarried people to have sex with each other in front of a camera? He has no problem with you getting sexually excited by watching others' sin of fornication and you having sex or masturbating because of your excitement? These things would not be a sin? Supporting an industry that must, almost by definition, depend upon acts of fornication (a sin) in order to create the work? An industry in which the workers must have indiscriminate sex with multiple partners without benefit of a condom or other health protection?

You think God condones this? If so, please explain why in a way that addresses the points that I have made here.

<small>[ November 20, 2003, 09:49 AM: Message edited by: *Takola* ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">What do you say to the victims of sexual assault, who might not have been victimized if pornography, masturbation and ejacualtion had been better utilized by their attacker? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I was victimized at an age LESS THAN 6 years old and continuing until I was 16 by a man who used pornography all the time. The walls of his garage were papered in it - literally - and I'm not talking Playboy. Have you ever seen a magazine dedicated to "Pregnant Sluts"? I have, because he bought it for his enjoyment.

It completely desensitized him to the needs, feelings, or autonomy over their own bodies that women have. It put him in control. It also escalated to the point where he saw this stuff as so normal, he went and acted on it.

He never once hurt anybody prior to his porn use. There are thousands of documented cases of this, which you are cavalierly ignoring and even flaunting - without ever addressing or explaining.

I would also like to add that this position is not only insulting to women and sex assault victims, it is insulting to men. The underlying assumption of your argument is that men have so little control over their own desires and actions that they would force themselves on women if they didn't have an outlet. This is very insulting to the millions of decent men who would never ever consider such a heinous act under any circumstances. It also completely ignores the stats that the states with the highest porn sales also have the highest rates of sexual deviant behavior.

It is my opinion that you accuse others of being prudish and not open-minded, while you, yourself, display these traits in any discussion about this issue. Instead of trying to understand what the opposing side is saying, you label anyone disagreeing a "prude" or "frigid". It is almost as if you assume that there must be something wrong with us for not agreeing with you. Or does that help you explain it away and continue your own agenda? You have yet to post one single statistic supporting your position, or any authority on the matter.

You have mentioned a Rabbi with a book, and with your insistance that porn is not mentioned in the Bible, this is interesting. The passages that address the looking at women to lust after them as being adultry have a lot of basis in the New Testament, which is not, and never has been, a part of the Jewish Bible.

Perhaps it would be prudent to specify the Bible to which you are referring?

Quipper: "Dear Diamond"

Diamonzzz: My nick on MB is "Diamonzzz", not Diamond. I know it sounds petty, but what if I
posted to you as "Quippy" .. ? You did it back then too, if memory serves me correct. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />


Quipper: "Thanks for the reply. I have posted to you on the Emotional Needs Category, on some threads in September or October."

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> I think I had read some place before you saying that using porn and "lust" were different?? </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Diamonzzz: Yes and that's why I made the above statement from memory. I proposed it as a question for you to clarify. Which you did this time, thank you. You do not see looking at naked pixs while having sex with your wife as "looking upon a woman with lust". Did I get that correct?

This for me is the most significant part of all your posts to me, and vice versa.

Quipper, everyone has absolutes. Principles, and concepts that they believe it. Some people have a few, some a lot, but everyone has some. I call that my "moral compass". You might call it your conscience. Somebody else might call it that "thing" inside that just tells me what I can do, and what I can't. It's what guides my thoughts and actions.

I have said this on MB before, so this is not something I am only saying to you, as some
sort of preach. I have determined as a Christian that I will allow God and what the Bible says to "adjust" my moral compass.

Do I just follow the Bible blindly? No. I have my way of discovering and studying and coming to my own conclusions about what it says, and have taken great thought to what I believe, and why. I am not a follower just to follow. I have been convinced.

If the Bible teaches against it, I do not practice it. If I do, I call it sin. I try not to advocate to others, what I know myself is sin.

You have mentioned a few times that people on this board have come with "preconceived ideas". Well, of course they have! We all have.

And you too Quipper. Tell me you haven't come on this board ALREADY convinced of the merit of porn in the martial bedroom? Tell me you have not "adjusted" your moral compass to accommodate your experience? You are convinced of it's merit. You have made your mind up you like porn and you now adjust all that thinking to ccommodate
that one fact. You seem disinterested in the facts here.

I have been following the posts between you and Star, and Takola and rarely will you address the issues. You keep spouting off the same old same old. Anything to protect the view that you are gonna use porn in YOUR bedroom, period. Am I right? You seem totally unsympathic to the fact that people (mostly young women) are hurt
because of the porn industry.

Quipper, excuse me, but you sound no different to me than any other poster that comes
to MB in "fog". They are represented here by their mates, every day of the week.
They ALL think they are "in-love" with their OM/OW. They are in deep denial and deep
fog. They don't think clearly. They do and say things that are out of character.

I asked you back on the EN board once. How your wife feels about the fact that you use porn. I honestly don't remember, if you did answer.

I don't know why this never dawned on me before .......

You are in a fog, every bit as much as any poster that comes on this site in the middle of an affair.

You will hear various definitions of EA (emotional affairs) but here's mine:
"Any person, place, or thing, that your spouse must compete with for your time and or affection". (loosely translated here, I think I said it better a few months ago but I am not sure to know where to look).

My question to you in all honesty is: Are you being totally honest with us,and most of all, YOURSELF, about your pornography "addiction"? Yep, I said addiction. Because it has progressed now to the point that you NEED it in your bedroom. That to me defines an addiction.

like chocolate, I might eat too much sometimes, but I don't NEED it. You see the point I am making? I wonder now if you can make love WITHOUT it. If the answer
is "no". It has become an addiction, every bit as much as any other.

You keep keep making mention of it as "erotic pictures", and the like.
At first, even I did a double take, when I read those words. You have presented it as almost
"righteous". I got the impression at first that they were more in the realm of
fine art, than porn.

Well, this poster has finally woke up. No matter how you package this Quipper.
No matter how brightly papered with all the ribbons and bows you like, it comes
down to this.

You have trouble getting turned on with only your wife. You have resorted to
porn in your bedroom. Your object of affection is not your wife, but those "erotic
pixs." Do you think she doesn't know this? Do you honestly believe this woman
is not deeply hurt by this? Honestly?

I also have these questions for you? These are not questions you are to answer here.
These are for you only.

Do you know how a woman feels when her husband is not attracted to her?
Have you any idea the deep rejection she feels? Have you considered that perhaps
she only goes along with you, because she feels perhaps she has no choice?
Or that you might leave her if she doesn't? Has it occurred to you that she might
be in deep withdrawal herself because of it?

This is Marriage Builders Quipper, we ALL ask each other these questions.
We are mostly all here for the betterment of our marriages. I have seen a poster
torn up to ribbons when he or she was in denial.

I honestly don't know how you got this far on this board without someone addressing
this? Of course I haven't followed all your posts, perhaps someone has.

Just some things to think about. Your marriage and that wife is precious, maybe
it's YOU that needs to drop your preconceived ideas and take a good, long, look
in the mirror. What are you bringing to your marriage?

DZZZ

<small>[ November 20, 2003, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: Diamonzzz ]</small>

Dear DZZZ,

Is that OK? I really prefer to call you Diamond, because I think you have good value, but I will attempt to refrain.

I take two sides in posting. I recommended to JDNTX, directly, or at least in that thread, that she might try the Silva Method self-improvement course, which helps with self-discipline issues. Certainly counseling could help with self-discipline. What other options or programs come to mind to your for cutting back on a drive? Perhaps Hypno-therapy. I have heard adds on the radio, I beleive. There is a section in the yellow pages under Hypno-therpaists, Hypnotists.

It is true that I have found value in porn, and it has not gotten out of control in my life. I feel comfortable asking women to reconsider their objections to porn, in the interest of keeping their marriage strong, or making it sronger.

I understand what you mean by fog. You are free to dismiss my ideas for any reason you may choose. But I am mostly trying to offer ideas for solutions to apparently real problems on this board. If you have other options for me to consider presenting, on Porn or anything, I am intersted to read about it.

I often keep posting until the poster does not post back. I keep trying to ask questions and make suggestions. I am trying to be more considerate and concise. I have been asked of Raz's (<wife>) thread and one other thread. I feel that I was unclear, and still developing my way to present the ideas relating to theos threads. I feel that as I am able to present my ideas more clearly, and concisely, that I will be less burdensome on those trying to solve problems

Quipper

Dear Takola,

First let me express my sympathy for your having been abused.

I will give your ideas of the connection between starting oggling pornography, and starting child molestation, some thought, as a causal connection.

I post on both sides of the issue. I let posters know about the Silva Method, Counsleing, and Hypnotherapy, for self-discipline if the use of pornography has goten out of hand. What other treatment might you think of?

Quipper
Husband of 28 years, raised 2 challenging kids, still struggling

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> I take two sides in posting. I recommended to JDNTX, directly, or at least in that thread, that she might try the Silva Method self-improvement course, which helps with self-discipline issues. Certainly counseling could help with self-discipline. What other options or programs come to mind to your for cutting back on a drive? Perhaps Hypno-therapy. I have heard adds on the radio, I beleive. There is a section in the yellow pages under Hypno-therpaists, Hypnotists.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Quipper, I have no problem with the Silva Method for disciplining oneself. But you keep refering to JDNX's husband's problem as a "high sex drive".....it isn't. He is a peeping Tom....a voyeur...which is a crime and a deviant form of sexuality. You refuse to treat it as such preferring again and again to alluding to a difference in sexual drives. JDNX never said anything about either of their drives or any other problems in the bedroom. The information I gave to about paraphelia from the Pyschological publications offers various treatment options which include drugs, hypnosis and others:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Treatment approaches have included traditional psychoanalysis, hypnosis, and behavior therapy techniques. More recently, a class of drugs called antiandrogens that drastically lower testosterone levels temporarily have been used in conjunction with these forms of treatment. The drug lowers the sex drive in males and reduces the frequency of mental imagery of sexually arousing scenes. This allows concentration on counseling without as strong a distraction from the paraphiliac urges. Increasingly, the evidence suggests that combining drug therapy with cognitive behavior therapy can be effective.

Nathan et al. (1999) describe these treatment approaches further here. First, they provide the following explanations regarding medication as treatment for paraphilias. They point out that level of sex drive is not consistently related to the behavior of paraphiliacs and also high levels of circulating testosterone do not predispose a male to paraphilias. That said, hormones such as medroxyprogesterone acetate (Depo-Provera) and cyproterone acetate decrease the level of circulating testosterone thus reducing sex drive and aggression. These hormones result in reduction of frequency of erections, sexual fantasies and initiations of sexual behaviors including masturbation and intercourse. Hormones are typically used in tandem with behavioral and cognitive treatments. Antidepressants such as fluoxetine (Prozac) have also successfully decreased the sex drive but have not effectively targeted sexual fantasies.

The study also notes that research suggests that cognitive-behavioral models are effective in treating paraphiliacs. They provide the following explanation of different approaches. Aversive conditioning involves using negative stimuli to reduce or eliminate a behavior. Covert sensitization entails the patient relaxing, visualizing scenes of deviant behavior followed by a negative event such as getting his penis stuck in the zipper of his pants. Assisted aversive conditioning is similar to covert sensitization except the negative event is made real most likely in the form of a foul odor pumped in the air by the therapist. The goal is for the patient to associate the deviant behavior with the foul odor and take measures to avoid the odor by avoiding said behavior. Aversive behavioral reversal is commonly known as “shame therapy” as the goal is to shame the offender into stopping the deviant behavior. For example, the offender might be made to watch videotapes of their crime with the goal that the experience will be distasteful and offensive to the offender. Vicarious sensitization entails showing videotapes of deviant behaviors and their consequences such as victims describing desired revenge or perhaps even watching surgical castrations.

The study describes positive conditioning approaches that might center on social skills training and alternate behaviors the patient might take that are more appropriate. Reconditioning techniques center around providing immediate feedback to the patient so behavior will be changed right away. For example, a person might be connected to a plethysmographic biofeedback machine that is connected to a light and taught to keep the light within a specific range of color while the person is exposed to sexually stimulating material. Or masturbation training might focus on separating pleasure in masturbation and climax with the deviant behavior.

Cognitive therapies described include restructuring cognitive distortions and empathy training. Restructuring cognitive distortions involves correcting erroneous beliefs by the patient which may lead to errors in behavior such as seeing a victim and constructing erroneous logic that the victim deserves to be party to the deviant act. Empathy training involves helping the offender take on the perspective of the victim and in identification with the victim, understand the harm that has been done. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> While some disagreement exists about the nature of CSB, treatment professionals have generally found a combination of psychotherapy and prescription medications to be effective in treating CSB. While medications which suppress the production of male hormones (anti-androgens) have been used to treat a variety of paraphilic disorders, the newer anti-depressants such as ProzacÒ , ZoloftÒ , or PaxilÒ and others that selectively act on serotonin levels in the brain are usually very effective in reducing sexual obsessions and compulsions and their associated levels of anxiety and depression. These newer medications interrupt the obsessive-compulsive cycle of CSB and help patients use therapy more effectively. The advantages of these anti-depressants over older anti-depressants or anti-androgens are their broad efficacy and relatively few known side effects.

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Please comment on the section I've highlighted in the treatment....about how there is no correlation between high sex drive and these deviant behaviors.

Dear Star,

Thank you for the posted article.

I see the stated conclusion that there is no corrleation between higher sex drive and Voyerism. I see chemical studies.

To me, if a spouse has a husband who has a sexually deviant drive, and he goes out limp in the morning, then the wife has assisted in satisfying one part of the sex drive.

I don't see definitive studies to show that there is no diminuation in a deviant sexual impulse, if the range of marital sex options is maximized.

You seem to be saying that there is no point in incerasing marital frequency, optimizing timing, or expanding the range of visual and sensual fulfillment, because the deviant sex drive is independent of the satisfaction maximally possible in the marital bedroom.

I see a line of reasoning based on sex drive measures and testosterone levels that could lead to a no carry-over hypothesis. I don't see the testing of the no-carr-over hypothesis as having been tested.

I feel intuitively that the hypothesis is at least partly incorect, if not largely incorrect. What percentage of deviants could not benefit, to any degree, from any increased visual and sensual satisfaction in the marital bedroom? What about decreased marital bedroom options?

I see why you think I am wrong to suggest increasing marital sexual satisfction to JDNTX, as at least a partial answer to her husband's voyerism, whether strictly speaking his voyerism was technically a crime or not. I will give your ideas some thought. Thank you for brining that concept to my attention,

I don't see the JDNTX post on the board anymore. My mention of Silva Method as a means for Raz, <wife> to deal with her husband's problems was in the post just prior to JDNTX's post, so I presumed that she had read my self-discipline approach, and was looking for furhter ideas. So I suggested enhancing the marital bedroom.

Single men are prohibited from being shepherds in some places. The rationale is that married men won't bother the sheep. Single men are not to be trusted. Why? Because they do not have a maximized or minimized marital bedroom option.

Marrige helps. Better marriages help more.

Quipper

<small>[ November 20, 2003, 10:32 PM: Message edited by: Quipper ]</small>