Misplaced Pages

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.

Yup, Misplaced Pages isn't a party to the scientific debate, therefore Misplaced Pages simply takes at face value the judgments upon pseudoscience made by the scientific authorities and by the recognized debunkers of pseudoscience. But Misplaced Pages is a hard-core encyclopedia like Britannica and Larousse, and mainly so through kowtowing to WP:SPOV and mainstream WP:SCHOLARSHIP. Otherwise, it isn't clear to me what you mean and how would you like this article to be changed.

And it is quite true that Misplaced Pages isn't the referee of the scientific consensus, but nothing prevents Misplaced Pages from learning what the scientific consensus is, from the proper scientific and medical authorities. So, yeah, we never WP:CITE our personal opinions in order to establish that, but Misplaced Pages holds the American Psychiatric Association in high respect, as a source which can clearly speak through its official channels upon the medical consensus in respect to pornography.

The resolutions of the 16 US states legislatures proclaiming pornography as a public health crisis are quite deluded, and politicians should not play doctor, it's not their job, as they are not qualified to decide upon what should be the medical consensus.

The US Congress already has a scientific advisor stipulated by law, namely the National Academy of Sciences. So Congressmen should drop their own personal views and follow its highly competent scientific advice. It's not the job of politicians to assess the validity of scientific claims, they should trust the experts instead. Conservative politicians would like to ban universities from teaching the theory of evolution, but as long as US remain a free country, they won't get away with that. It surely bothers them that their holy book is given the lie, and that's paid with taxpayers money.

Porn as a public health crisis? That's definitely not what the National Academy of Medicine is saying. At https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Anam.edu+pornography&newwindow=1&client=firefox-b-d there is almost nothing about porn. Also, at https://www.google.com/search?q=site:nationalacademies.org+porn+health+crisis&newwindow=1&client=firefox-b-d there is nothing which supports the claim of the 16 legislatures.

Quite clearly stated here: Nelson, Kimberly M.; Rothman, Emily F. (2020). "Should Public Health Professionals Consider Pornography a Public Health Crisis?". American journal of public health. 110 (2). American Public Health Association: 151–153. doi:10.2105/ajph.2019.305498. ISSN 0090-0036. PMC 6951382. PMID 31913670. Although research suggests that pornography use likely influences some people negatively, and it merits further research, pornography itself is not a crisis. The movement to declare pornography a public health crisis is rooted in an ideology that is antithetical to many core values of public health promotion and is a political stunt, not reflective of best available evidence.

If you wonder, Rothman published her own book about pornography as a public crisis at Oxford University Press, so she is quite reliable for the claim made.

The legislatures were also lambasted by McKay, Kimberley; Poulin, Christopher; Muñoz-Laboy, Miguel (30 November 2020). "Claiming Public Health Crisis to Regulate Sexual Outlets: A Critique of the State of Utah's Declaration on Pornography". Archives of sexual behavior. 50 (2). Springer Science and Business Media LLC: 401–405. doi:10.1007/s10508-020-01884-8. ISSN 0004-0002. PMC 7703733. PMID 33258005.

So, yeah, Misplaced Pages claims very decidedly that NoFap is pseudoscience, but that is not based upon my own musings, but it is simply rendering mainstream medical science for what it is. Of course, I agree with this judgment, but this is only because I generally seek to agree with mainstream science. One does not advance public health by embracing quacks and pseudoscience-peddling grifters.

It would be completely wrong if I were pushing my own POV in respect to what amounts to pseudoscience. But this is not the case, since such information is corroborated by multiple high-quality WP:RS.

Why does Misplaced Pages wage a war against pseudoscience while Britannica and Larousse apparently don't? Because the staff of Britannica and Larousse may throw any pseudoscience-peddling letter to the garbage bin, instead of rationally arguing with the peddlers in order to convince them to behave with some respect for mainstream science. And I can assure you that by throwing your letter to the garbage bin, Britannica and Larousse do not harm you in any way, nor is there any option for legal redress. At the end of the day, science has spoken. Of course scientific consensus could change in time, but that's already a truism to all educated people.

YBOP tweeted this strange idea that there is a war between me and NoFap. That I would have some agenda against NoFap. No, it is a war between mainstream psychiatry and NoFap. I only report such war, from the perspective of mainstream science and medical orthodoxy, otherwise I'm very much for get the popcorn. I'm not a party to this dispute, I'm not a party to the scientific debate, and if APA PLONKed NoFap it is not my own fault. I know very well that there is a difference between my own ideas and the scientific consensus. I know very well that Misplaced Pages isn't for pushing my own POV. I know very well that Misplaced Pages isn't based upon the personal opinions of its editors, but upon WP:RS.

I'm not even opposed to APA recognizing a diagnosis of porn addiction. Knowing what I know, I asses its likelihood as extremely unlikely, but I would not cry or waste tears if that would happen. I have no shares which would fall if such diagnosis would be recognized. I'm not a party to such dispute.

Many outsiders who saw my edits were firmly convinced that I am an enemy of Spiru Haret University and of the Romanian Constitutional Bar, while in reality I have no dog in such fights, and it is not me causing their legal problems. I was never harmed by NoFap, Spiru Haret University, or the Romanian Constitutional Bar, so I am not using Misplaced Pages for redressing my grievances. If the news are bad, blame the reality, don't shoot the messenger. Just because I don't dodge the bad news, it does not mean that I hate nofappers. My desire is to understand reality, and report it according to mainstream science. I am the bringer of bad news, but I am not myself the cause of bad news. I cultivate rational criticism, not hate speech. Really, there is no hate, more like pity.

Similarly to the above-mentioned study, I think that nofappers are concerned and compassionate, but scientifically misguided. The idea that sexual fasting heals a purported addiction is fanciful, to say the least.

So, I am not an "agenda-editor" and this article isn't "propaganda", unless you mean that I have an agenda for making propaganda for mainstream science, which is more commonly called educating. Misplaced Pages is heavily biased for mainstream science, and the claims of nofappers are, by and large, not recognized as science. The famous TEDx talk by Gary Wilson is crammed with pseudoscientific claims and suggestions to breach the ethics of psychotherapy. Coaches, unlike psychotherapists, acknowledge no professional ethics and aren't required to hold any accredited college degrees. That's why Wilson could present himself as coach, but never as psychotherapist. His TEDx speech is simply put a Gish gallop. Our article seems like heavy-handed propaganda, simply because of Brandolini's law. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:22, 25 July 2022 (UTC)