Revision as of 10:03, 5 March 2023 editTgeorgescu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users55,170 edits →Anxiety rather than porn: I went for the most conservative conclusion← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 23:33, 28 December 2024 edit undoTgeorgescu (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users55,170 edits →Biased article: Taoist alchemy | ||
(95 intermediate revisions by 30 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B| | |||
{{Ds/talk notice|ps|long}} | |||
{{WikiProject Internet culture |importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Websites |importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality |importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Pornography|importance=Low}} | |||
}} | |||
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|ps|long}} | |||
{{Copied |from=NoFap |from_oldid=1090974213 |to=Gary Wilson (author) |date=7 June 2022 |afd= |merge= |diff=1092001054 |to_diff=1092001150 |to_oldid=1086657314 }} | {{Copied |from=NoFap |from_oldid=1090974213 |to=Gary Wilson (author) |date=7 June 2022 |afd= |merge= |diff=1092001054 |to_diff=1092001150 |to_oldid=1086657314 }} | ||
{{WikiProject banner shell|1= | |||
{{WikiProject Internet culture |class=B |importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Websites |class=B |importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Sexology and sexuality |class=B |importance=Low}} | |||
{{WikiProject Pornography|class=B|importance=Low}} | |||
}} | |||
{{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | ||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
{{archives|search=yes}} | {{archives|search=yes}} | ||
== |
== Biased article == | ||
About Prause's paper that anxiety rather than porn explains the failures attributed by nofappers to "porn addiction": I'm afraid such claim enters ] territory, which requires systematic reviews, preferably indexed for MEDLINE. That's why I chose not to cite Prause's paper. ] (]) 00:14, 23 October 2022 (UTC) | |||
I have cited another paper by Prause, but I'm not interested in her novel claims, which would need ] support. I went for the most conservative conclusion drawn from her study, namely that the medical orthodoxy does not attribute the sufferance of NoFap users to PMO. ] (]) 10:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC) | |||
== Semi-Protected edit request == | |||
{{Edit semi protected|NoFap|answered=yes}} | |||
In either Litigation or the subsection Research concerning NoFap forums and followers of the Reception section, please add the lawsuit against Nicole Prause. https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/ywa97m/nofap-founder-suing-a-neuroscientist-no-nut-november ] (]) 07:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
:{{done}} ] (]) 07:27, 21 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
::2600:100C:A206:278D:D074:8947:B731:EC92 appears created solely to insert a personal attack against an individual living person on this web page. The resolution of the case was never covered by any media because it is not newsworthy, failing . The law firm defaming their target in national news does not make the case newsworthy. Further, Dr. Prause is not as an individual scientist who admitted zero liability. The mere appearance of this case by a targeted edit from a new user appears to be NoFap members themselves trying to smear those who publish science on them. From the study "NP made reports to law enforcement due to threats of harassment and violence posted on Reboot forums that named her." The fact that the resolution was never covered makes clear wiki is being abused to include media sought by a for-profit group attacking the reputable sources and private individuals publishing science on them makes clear this was nuisance suit they want to misrepresent here again. ] (]) 02:27, 26 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
::The MAC address for the user was from a Wireshark server used to hide his identity identity. For this reason, I believe ] is actually a conflict of interest ] for NoFap hiding their identity to request inappropriate edits in Wikipeda. This was one of the online resources showing the address belongs to an IP bank used to elude identification https://maclookup.app/search/result?mac=2600%3A100C%3AA206%3A278D%3AD074%3A8947%3AB731%3AEC92 ] (]) 04:18, 26 November 2022 (UTC) | |||
== Pseudoscience == | |||
{{re|Fantboy3}} I know that many want to remove mentioning pseudoscience from this article, however that goes against the website policy ]. 'What Misplaced Pages won't do is pretend that the work of "lunatic charlatans", as they were described by ], is the equivalent of "true scientific discourse". It isn't.' ]. | |||
In respect to {{tqred|This article has a concerning agenda that does not take into account all perspectives and evidence.}}: you have been served with ] upon your talk page. Namely, ] (March 2022) gave the lie to Wilson's/YBOP's "preponderance of evidence" claim. After 20 years of broadband internet there wasn't any evidence that porn addiction even exists. ] (]) 13:38, 25 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
{{re|Fantboy3}} The place to discuss the article ] is ]. According to ], Misplaced Pages does not treat perspectives equally. The ] officially gave the lie to the existence of porn addiction in March 2022, and the existence of porn addiction is NoFap's primary claim. In respect to articles rendering the views of scientists see ]. Those who, verifiably, speak in the name of mainstream science and medical orthodoxy are given prominence in articles about ] topics. | |||
About {{tq|physical beliefs that are not supported by medicine}} see ]. | |||
NoFap believes that the stimulus porn + excessive masturbation is the ''cause'' of disease, instead of being just a ''symptom.'' By and large, psychiatrists and sexologists do not buy the into claims made by NoFap. So that makes NoFap ]. | |||
NoFap justifies itself through a paranoid worldview, wherein mainstream sexologists are shills of the porn industry, in a grandiose comparison with MDs who were shills of ]. ] (]) 15:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
---- | |||
(Moved here from my talk page. -Guy) | |||
I have a question regarding my edits on the NoFap page of Misplaced Pages. I respect your comment and understand the part regarding it being based on pseudoscience. That makes sense. However, I think that a lot of my edits were, outside of the removal of this term, fair and made the article more objective. NoFap has a lot of disinformation and unsubstantiated claims in its site, and it's okay to mention that, but there were also many unsubstantiated and un-cited claims ''against'' the site which should not have been removed. If I go back and edit the article to put back in that NoFap was a pseudoscience (as this is a very real error on my part), would it be acceptable for me to revert to the other changes I had made to the article? | |||
Thanks for your help, | |||
Fantboy3 ] (]) 14:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
:Wrong place, wrong user, wrong way to try to re-introduce your edits after they were reverted. | |||
:Instead of just re-adding the edits that were reverted, please read and follow the advice at ]. | |||
:Instead of posting to any user talk page you should discuss the article at Talk:NoFap. | |||
:And if you insist on commenting on a user talk page instead of the right place, instead of posting to my talk page saying "I respect your comment and understand the part regarding it being based on pseudoscience" you should post to the talk page of the person who actually made that comment, which is tgeorgescu, not me. | |||
:I have never edited the page in question before this comment, nor have I ever had any interactions with you, but now that I have checked your posting history, I will tell you that you need to change your ways. Let's look at one of your edits: | |||
:In that edit you removed " ... physical beliefs that are not supported by medicine." with the comment "Allegations that 'the claims of the community are not supported by medicine' are not supported by the citation cited." | |||
:You should not write things that you know are not true. In particular, The Psychology Today cite says: | |||
This article portrait nofap in negative light.this article uphold the feminist,pro porn and radical secularist view.be cautious this article and writer is not neutral on this topic ] (]) 09:03, 21 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
::"Unfortunately, the NoFap community seems filled with people who believe that the strength of their beliefs is equivalent to scientific evidence, and they fail to acknowledge the subjective weakness of their reliance on anecdotes... The press is part of the problem, by treating these issues as though the anecdotes and moral conviction are just as important as scientific evidence. That’s why we have the anti-vaccine crisis. Same dynamic here, thankfully with less critical results." | |||
:A simpler point is that the article has ] ], meaning ]. | |||
:Did you imaging that nobody would check the citations and see that your claim was false? | |||
:And "feminist" is close to meaningless, if you don't specify what kind of feminism it is (e.g. Marxist, liberal, conservative). | |||
:It's a simple point to understand that mainstream science and NoFap are at odds. ] (]) 13:53, 21 November 2023 (UTC) | |||
I think that this article MUST be biased. Firstly, the science simply doesn't say that regular masturbation has no impact on masculinity as this article implies it does. Secondly I believe in science - but you don't even need it for this topic: as a man, you can see for yourself that you get better numbers lifting in the gym and that women like you more when you haven't masturbated for a few weeks. I am genuinely confused that this article so strongly contradicts lived experience: it just doesn't make sense? --] (]) 22:13, 25 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
:At this point. I think you should propose whichever change you think is your best here on the article talk page and participate in the discussion. If it is good, others will agree and it will get into the article. Then move on to your second-best change, etc. --] (]) 23:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
:Misplaced Pages does not go by ]. It goes by mainstream ]. | |||
::{{re||Fantboy3}} You see, his response is even harsher than what I had to say. And I'm usually the party pooper in respect to porn addiction articles. ] (]) 12:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
:The idea that masturbation produces illness is itself a symptom of mental illness or religious fanaticism. | |||
:And no, masturbation does not deplete testosterone. If anything, it increases the level of testosterone. | |||
:A man urinates on average 374 nmol testosterone during 24 hours.<ref name="Bao Peng Sheng Lin 2008 pp. 403–408">{{cite journal | last1=Bao | first1=Shihua | last2=Peng | first2=Yifeng | last3=Sheng | first3=Shile | last4=Lin | first4=Qide | title=Assessment of urinary total testosterone production by a highly sensitive time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay | journal=Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis | publisher=Wiley | volume=22 | issue=6 | year=2008 | issn=0887-8013 | doi=10.1002/jcla.20283 | pages=403–408| pmid=19021270 | pmc=6649076 }}</ref> The average seminal testosterone level is 47 ng/100 mL.<ref name="Moreno-escallon Ridley Wu Blasco 1982 pp. 127–134">{{cite journal | last1=Moreno-escallon | first1=B. | last2=Ridley | first2=A. J. | last3=Wu | first3=Ch. H. | last4=Blasco | first4=L. | title=Hormones in Seminal Plasma | journal=Archives of Andrology | publisher=Informa UK Limited | volume=9 | issue=2 | year=1982 | issn=0148-5016 | doi=10.3109/01485018208990230 | pages=127–134| pmid=6890792 }}</ref> So during 24 hours an average man urinates the testosterone from 65653 ejaculations.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.google.com/search?q=108+microgram+/+((47+nanogram/100+milliliter)*3.5milliliter)|title=108 microgram / ((47 nanogram/100 milliliter)*3.5milliliter) - Google Search|website=www.google.com}}</ref> | |||
:https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/100318-men-sperm-1500-stem-cells-second-male-birth-control | |||
:Alchemical sublimation of unused sperm cells is mystical idiocy. It is literally mysticism (i.e. Taoist alchemy). And alchemy is a pseudoscience. | |||
:These are some of the reasons why real scientists don't take NoFap seriously. Psychiatrists don't deny that some people lack self-control when masturbating, but they don't think that masturbation or porn are causes of illnesses. They attribute such condition to preexisting mental illness. ] (]) 23:33, 28 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
{{reflist talk}} | |||
:::I thought about trying pornography, but I couldn't find anyone who would sell me a pornograph. --] (]) 16:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
== New content analysis == | |||
::::To be sure, accuses the DSM-5 team of having committed the egregious error of discarding porn addiction. What did DSM-5-TR had to say about porn addiction? The same thing as DSM-5, namely that there is not enough peer-reviewed evidence that porn addiction exists at all. ] (]) 18:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC) | |||
<s>"Masturbation abstinence practices have returned to the USA in the form of semen retention communities. Followers on one of these male, anti-masturbation forums, “NoFap,” on Reddit (denoted “r/NoFap”), have engaged in homicidal behaviors that appear to be linked to these sexual beliefs and practices. This study uses a systematic search on r/NoFap and two control forums (r/pornfree, and r/stopdrinking) to define a corpus of violent content. The study's goals were to describe the nature of threats on r/NoFap and suggest whether the violence might be attributable to sexual deprivation or false beliefs that non-sexual targets caused their violent urges. Of the 421 violent posts identified from September 2011 to September 2022, r/NoFap contained the majority (94.3%). Violent threats on r/NoFap mostly targeted pornographers, women, scientists, specific persons, or any person (i.e. homicidal “rage”). Violent threats against r/NoFap’s own followers were growing most quickly. Violent posts were well-supported with upvotes by other followers in r/NoFap. These data are important because NoFap may represent a growing threat for real-world violence." | |||
{{cite journal | vauthors=((Prause, N.)), ((Ley, D.)) | journal=Deviant Behavior | title=Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap | pages=1–17 | date=15 November 2023 | url=https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795 | doi=10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795}} ] (]) 23:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)</s> | |||
:Okay, agree. But I'm not performing the edit because there are ]. You are free to perform the edit yourself, or maybe another editor will do it. ] (]) 00:03, 1 December 2023 (UTC) | |||
== New Sexual Medicine Review == | |||
::<s>Specific suggested edits for other editors: | |||
::"NoFap was founded in June 2011 by Pittsburgh web developer Alexander Rhodes after reading a thread on Reddit about a 2003 study" | |||
::is not accurate. | |||
::"NoFap was started in 2004 on the BodyBuilding.com forum where men believed it would increase their testosterone <ref>{{cite journal | vauthors=((Prause, N.)), ((Ley, D.)) | journal=Deviant Behavior | title=Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap | pages=1–17 | date=15 November 2023 | url=https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795 | doi=10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795}}</ref> | |||
::In "Research concerning NoFap forums and followers" add: | |||
::A study of NoFap followers identified that the more involved these men were on the forums (e.g., posting more), the greater their depression, anxiety and erectile dysfunction symptoms. Importantly, this is the opposite of other online support forums. NoFap participants report, and appear, to be harmed by participating in the forums. <ref>{{cite journal | vauthors=((Prause, N.)), ((Binnie, J.)) | journal=Sexualities | title=Iatrogenic effects of Reboot/NoFap on public health: A preregistered survey study | pages=136346072311570 | date=22 February 2023 | url=https://doi.org/10.1177/13634607231157070 | doi=10.1177/13634607231157070}}</ref> | |||
::In "Research concerning NoFap forums and followers" add: | |||
::A 2023 study identified two mass murderers in the USA and UK as following NoFap, which precipitated a study of the violent posts in NoFap. In contrast to other forums on Reddit of comparable post numbers and content, NoFap posts were remarkably violent. The most frequent targets were other NoFap followers, whom they threatened to kill if they were to masturbate again. Other targets included pornographers, women, scientists, and specific persons. The authors attribute this to the forum founders, who they noted run Pick-Up-Artist forums and posted pictures of themselves with a lit "Molotov" cocktail on the same platform, which they suggested glorified violence and misogyny by the leadership.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors=((Prause, N.)), ((Ley, D.)) | journal=Deviant Behavior | title=Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap | pages=1–17 | date=15 November 2023 | url=https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795 | doi=10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795}}</ref> | |||
::In "Membership" add: | |||
::Clinicians have published advice for other clinicians who may be tasked with assisting men exiting NoFap, which they view as a violent misogynist group. <ref>{{cite journal | vauthors=((Frounfelker, R. L.)), ((Johnson‐Lafleur, J.)), ((Grenier, C.)), ((Duriesmith, D.)), ((Rousseau, C.)) | journal=Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression | title=“Between the self and the other”: clinical presentation of male supremacy in violent extremists | pages=1–21 | date=9 March 2023 | url=https://doi.org/10.1080/19434472.2023.2185277 | doi=10.1080/19434472.2023.2185277}}</ref> | |||
::In "Research concerning NoFap forums and followers" | |||
::The linguistic database Violent Extremism Risk Assessment identifies the term "NoFap" as a violent term "Driven by moral imperative, moral superiority" <ref>{{cite journal | vauthors=((Chan, E.)) | journal=Violence Against Women | title=Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence, Hate Speech, and Terrorism: A risk assessment on the rise of the Incel Rebellion in Canada | volume=29 | issue=9 | pages=1687–1718 | date=13 October 2022 | url=https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012221125495 | doi=10.1177/10778012221125495}}</ref> | |||
::In "Demographics" add: | |||
::Followers refer to themselves as the "NoFap Army" and hold regular "wars" online to determine who can abstain from masturbation the longest. <ref>{{cite journal | vauthors=((Prause, N.)), ((Ley, D.)) | journal=Deviant Behavior | title=Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap | pages=1–17 | date=15 November 2023 | url=https://doi.org/10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795 | doi=10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795}}</ref> ] (]) 17:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC)</s> | |||
{{reflist-talk}} | |||
A new paper describes that r/NoFap is leading men away from evidence-based care for depression, causing harm to public health. {{cite journal |last1= Shahinyan|first1= Gary K.|last2= Hu|first2= Ming-Yeah|date= 2023|title= Cannabis and male sexual health: contemporary qualitative review and insight into perspectives of young men on the internet|url= https://doi.org/10.1093/sxmrev/qeac010|journal= Sexual Medicine Reviews|pages= 1-12|doi= 10.1093/sxmrev/qeac010}} ] (]) 17:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC) | |||
:::Okay, coming back to this matter: the medical effects of NoFap cannot be discussed due to lacking ]-compliant sources to ] such claims. Same applies to antagonistic narcissism producing the belief one is addicted to porn (e.g. PubMed does not have many papers thereupon, so it's unlikely there will be a systematic review indexed for MEDLINE about that). The social-political effects of NoFap are not under such stringent sourcing requirements, so these can be discussed more easily, but I do not endorse repeating the same claims over and over (even if in different words). ] (]) 20:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
:Agree. Valid ]. ] (]) 17:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 23:33, 28 December 2024
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to pseudoscience and fringe science, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of NoFap was copied or moved into Gary Wilson (author) with on 7 June 2022. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Archives | ||||
|
||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Biased article
This article portrait nofap in negative light.this article uphold the feminist,pro porn and radical secularist view.be cautious this article and writer is not neutral on this topic 103.137.160.108 (talk) 09:03, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
- A simpler point is that the article has WP:MAINSTREAM WP:Academic bias, meaning WP:GOODBIAS.
- And "feminist" is close to meaningless, if you don't specify what kind of feminism it is (e.g. Marxist, liberal, conservative).
- It's a simple point to understand that mainstream science and NoFap are at odds. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:53, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
I think that this article MUST be biased. Firstly, the science simply doesn't say that regular masturbation has no impact on masculinity as this article implies it does. Secondly I believe in science - but you don't even need it for this topic: as a man, you can see for yourself that you get better numbers lifting in the gym and that women like you more when you haven't masturbated for a few weeks. I am genuinely confused that this article so strongly contradicts lived experience: it just doesn't make sense? --New Thought (talk) 22:13, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages does not go by lived experience. It goes by mainstream WP:RS.
- The idea that masturbation produces illness is itself a symptom of mental illness or religious fanaticism.
- And no, masturbation does not deplete testosterone. If anything, it increases the level of testosterone.
- A man urinates on average 374 nmol testosterone during 24 hours. The average seminal testosterone level is 47 ng/100 mL. So during 24 hours an average man urinates the testosterone from 65653 ejaculations.
- https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/100318-men-sperm-1500-stem-cells-second-male-birth-control
- Alchemical sublimation of unused sperm cells is mystical idiocy. It is literally mysticism (i.e. Taoist alchemy). And alchemy is a pseudoscience.
- These are some of the reasons why real scientists don't take NoFap seriously. Psychiatrists don't deny that some people lack self-control when masturbating, but they don't think that masturbation or porn are causes of illnesses. They attribute such condition to preexisting mental illness. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:33, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
References
- Bao, Shihua; Peng, Yifeng; Sheng, Shile; Lin, Qide (2008). "Assessment of urinary total testosterone production by a highly sensitive time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay". Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis. 22 (6). Wiley: 403–408. doi:10.1002/jcla.20283. ISSN 0887-8013. PMC 6649076. PMID 19021270.
- Moreno-escallon, B.; Ridley, A. J.; Wu, Ch. H.; Blasco, L. (1982). "Hormones in Seminal Plasma". Archives of Andrology. 9 (2). Informa UK Limited: 127–134. doi:10.3109/01485018208990230. ISSN 0148-5016. PMID 6890792.
- "108 microgram / ((47 nanogram/100 milliliter)*3.5milliliter) - Google Search". www.google.com.
New content analysis
"Masturbation abstinence practices have returned to the USA in the form of semen retention communities. Followers on one of these male, anti-masturbation forums, “NoFap,” on Reddit (denoted “r/NoFap”), have engaged in homicidal behaviors that appear to be linked to these sexual beliefs and practices. This study uses a systematic search on r/NoFap and two control forums (r/pornfree, and r/stopdrinking) to define a corpus of violent content. The study's goals were to describe the nature of threats on r/NoFap and suggest whether the violence might be attributable to sexual deprivation or false beliefs that non-sexual targets caused their violent urges. Of the 421 violent posts identified from September 2011 to September 2022, r/NoFap contained the majority (94.3%). Violent threats on r/NoFap mostly targeted pornographers, women, scientists, specific persons, or any person (i.e. homicidal “rage”). Violent threats against r/NoFap’s own followers were growing most quickly. Violent posts were well-supported with upvotes by other followers in r/NoFap. These data are important because NoFap may represent a growing threat for real-world violence."
Prause, N., Ley, D. (15 November 2023). "Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap". Deviant Behavior: 1–17. doi:10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795. IntroEggplant (talk) 23:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, agree. But I'm not performing the edit because there are WP:RULES. You are free to perform the edit yourself, or maybe another editor will do it. tgeorgescu (talk) 00:03, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Specific suggested edits for other editors:- "NoFap was founded in June 2011 by Pittsburgh web developer Alexander Rhodes after reading a thread on Reddit about a 2003 study"
- is not accurate.
- "NoFap was started in 2004 on the BodyBuilding.com forum where men believed it would increase their testosterone
- In "Research concerning NoFap forums and followers" add:
- A study of NoFap followers identified that the more involved these men were on the forums (e.g., posting more), the greater their depression, anxiety and erectile dysfunction symptoms. Importantly, this is the opposite of other online support forums. NoFap participants report, and appear, to be harmed by participating in the forums.
- In "Research concerning NoFap forums and followers" add:
- A 2023 study identified two mass murderers in the USA and UK as following NoFap, which precipitated a study of the violent posts in NoFap. In contrast to other forums on Reddit of comparable post numbers and content, NoFap posts were remarkably violent. The most frequent targets were other NoFap followers, whom they threatened to kill if they were to masturbate again. Other targets included pornographers, women, scientists, and specific persons. The authors attribute this to the forum founders, who they noted run Pick-Up-Artist forums and posted pictures of themselves with a lit "Molotov" cocktail on the same platform, which they suggested glorified violence and misogyny by the leadership.
- In "Membership" add:
- Clinicians have published advice for other clinicians who may be tasked with assisting men exiting NoFap, which they view as a violent misogynist group.
- In "Research concerning NoFap forums and followers"
- The linguistic database Violent Extremism Risk Assessment identifies the term "NoFap" as a violent term "Driven by moral imperative, moral superiority"
- In "Demographics" add:
Followers refer to themselves as the "NoFap Army" and hold regular "wars" online to determine who can abstain from masturbation the longest. Deliganist (talk) 17:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
References
- Prause, N., Ley, D. (15 November 2023). "Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap". Deviant Behavior: 1–17. doi:10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795.
- Prause, N., Binnie, J. (22 February 2023). "Iatrogenic effects of Reboot/NoFap on public health: A preregistered survey study". Sexualities: 136346072311570. doi:10.1177/13634607231157070.
- Prause, N., Ley, D. (15 November 2023). "Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap". Deviant Behavior: 1–17. doi:10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795.
- Frounfelker, R. L., Johnson‐Lafleur, J., Grenier, C., Duriesmith, D., Rousseau, C. (9 March 2023). ""Between the self and the other": clinical presentation of male supremacy in violent extremists". Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression: 1–21. doi:10.1080/19434472.2023.2185277.
- Chan, E. (13 October 2022). "Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence, Hate Speech, and Terrorism: A risk assessment on the rise of the Incel Rebellion in Canada". Violence Against Women. 29 (9): 1687–1718. doi:10.1177/10778012221125495.
- Prause, N., Ley, D. (15 November 2023). "Violence on Reddit Support Forums Unique to r/NoFap". Deviant Behavior: 1–17. doi:10.1080/01639625.2023.2280795.
- Okay, coming back to this matter: the medical effects of NoFap cannot be discussed due to lacking WP:MEDRS-compliant sources to WP:V such claims. Same applies to antagonistic narcissism producing the belief one is addicted to porn (e.g. PubMed does not have many papers thereupon, so it's unlikely there will be a systematic review indexed for MEDLINE about that). The social-political effects of NoFap are not under such stringent sourcing requirements, so these can be discussed more easily, but I do not endorse repeating the same claims over and over (even if in different words). tgeorgescu (talk) 20:55, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- B-Class Internet culture articles
- Low-importance Internet culture articles
- WikiProject Internet culture articles
- B-Class Websites articles
- Low-importance Websites articles
- B-Class Websites articles of Low-importance
- B-Class Computing articles
- Unknown-importance Computing articles
- All Computing articles
- All Websites articles
- B-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- Low-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- B-Class Pornography articles
- Low-importance Pornography articles
- B-Class Low-importance Pornography articles
- WikiProject Pornography articles