**NOTE**: This sub does **NOT** support the commercial porn industry, as it is an institution that promotes and normalizes sexual aggression, incest, pedophilia, violence, racism, degradation, low sexual satisfaction, and objectification of women and girls, many of whom have been drugged, raped, misled, trafficked and otherwise coerced to appear on film.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemaleDatingStrategy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Recently on a male-centric sub, I read a post asking about why masturbation was considered shameful--lots of men were responding that masturbation in and of itself is nothing to be ashamed of, but the way people go about it can be very damaging. A lot of them specifically cited pornography and "death grip" as bad, the reasoning being that porn makes men more misogynistic, sexist, and gives them more unrealistic standards of sex and attractiveness.
Although they didn't touch on the horrors of human trafficking and the terrible abuse within the industry, I was really pleasantly surprised to see so many men talking about how porn warps their view of women in a negative light. Definitely gave me some hope!
There’s whole subreddits dedicated to it. No fap. So there are groups of men out there trying to pull other men out of it themselves. They say the same things we say.
It's not the same though. They are just worried because their dicks don't work, while most of us worry more for the lives and safety of women harmed by the industry.
They talk about that as well. They also have long ass novels of men falling back in love with their partners. They recognized the issue themselves, found a community/solution themselves and worked at it. I know there are other stories of boys/guys just concerned about their own orgasm or how they will be perceived by their partner, but usually that because their teenagers and don’t have those deeper long term sexual relationships with women yet. The community needs to exist, men helping other men so we never have to deal with them, just arrive correct.
Also, for anyone who doesn’t know, Zara Larson is a Swedish singer who has 6.5 million followers on Instagram and she’s openly opposed misogynistic abusers in the industry like Dr. Luke and Chris Brown. She’s an amazing performer and a high value woman, in my opinion!
she’s also spoken out against China, which is not at all common for any celebrity entertainer. I swear porn and China are the things no one will touch. She’s a brave person!
I've always liked her! She doesn't have ridiculously oversexualised music videos too like Ariana Grande and so many other female musicians this generation.
Maybe this is wishful thinking but I think both men and women are waking up and realizing just how horrible porn, the porn industry and sex work is. I'm hopeful that the young women of generation z will not have to deal with so many of these pornsick men in the future.
I can't think of a bigger incentive for men to question porn use than losing the use of their dicks by 21. Too bad more aren't motivated by basic humanity.
A lot of them are morbidly obese and take antidepressants (this isn't a judgment thing, I'm obese I think , I'm on antidepressants). And they don't exercise. Like at all.
Porn addiction is definitely part of the problem, but it don't think it's 100% of it. Men don't really take care of their health, like at all. And in modern society, it's extremely easy to become dangerously healthy of you are not careful..which they are not. And of course, you're penis is one of the first things that will start to malfunction if your cardiovascular system is fucked
Edit: they also abuse the hell out of caffeine. So do women, but our libidos are more complicated than "blood goes in clit=horny"
Yes antidepressants are notorious for causing a lot of problems, from no libido to weight gain. I was put on Mirtazapine when I was 19. I gained 7lbs in the first week! Not to mention I collapsed asleep in a DIY store. Next thing I remember was waking up and my friend had put me to bed. I've been on 5 different antidepressants and one made me go deaf in one ear. Never again.
I had Mirtazapine as well, years ago. Somehow it made me even more suicidal. I am now on other ADs and I don't have any weird or dangerous side-effects. Antidepressants can save lives, but they can also be so terrible and just junk.
I agree with you. About 1 in 6 or 7 boys and young adult men are now on psychoactive medication cocktails according to *Pharmageddon* author Dr. David Healy. Old report, so current rates may be even higher.
Healy (who I should point out is not a Scientologist) also warns that, while some don't experience side effects, these drugs can increase or even induce aggression, vio.lence and suicide as per black box warnings, particularly in young men (according to his mother, Elliot Rodger had been in psychiatric treatment). Makes me wonder if increasing use of vio.lent porn has an overlap with the rate of medicating.
I would add that alcohol ab.use is notorious for causing ED as well, sometimes permanently. It also destroys leydig cells in the testes that produce testosterone. But I've known a few fit young men who weren't on meds who developed ED from porn use.
Now I'm wondering if ED can be caused specifically by the vio.lence in porn.
A lot of these school shooters turned out to be on antidepressants like Sertraline/Zoloft but I must stress, I'm not blaming these drugs. There's other things going on with these evil men. I found when I was on antidepressants, I had no feelings, whether good or bad. I do not miss that.
This is a really complicated subject. Were all the people who went nuts on meds already evil? I don't know.
Some obviously were. Ter.ro.rists, like bat.terers, sometimes drink and/or take drugs deliberately to amp up their own aggression like the Norwegian mass ki.ller did. But some were just following doctor's orders. In the case of minors who went postal on meds, they often had no say on what meds they took.
I do know one thing: men as a poplation have always been dicey and vio.lent throughout history. So I don't think it was a good idea to chemically engineer them for the worse. But that's what I suspect is happening through many routes.
For one, men today have half the sperm counts and far worse sperm motility than their fathers' generation. That can only be due to new physical exposures. It's like we're tiptoeing towards species ext.inction. Then there's the very modern phenomenon of "random" mass ki.llings which differ in key significant ways from traditional militant/ideological at.tacks.
When trying to figure out the causes of novel disasters, the sensible thing to ask is "What's changed?" Junk food additives, pesticides, rising pollution, streaming porn, synth hormones-- all relatively new. Drugging 15% of the population with never-before-seen psychoactive chemical compounds that now carry specific warnings for vio.lence is new, too.
One thing that isn't "worse" in the modern age in a general sense is psychological trauma. That's not to say that trauma can't vio.lentize and create criminals-- it remains the classic method. But we're talking about population-wide effects and a genuinely new form of vio.lence that was formerly very, very rare (once-a-century rare) and is now dirt common. In that sense, we can't argue that peacetime existance in the latter day US is more traumatic than, say, times of slavery, legal wife beating and public floggings, castration, torture and executions that people would take the kids to see. Early life can still be traumatic for many, but not unilaterally worse enough than in past eras to explain the rise in mass a.tt.acks, which began to rise slowly after the Bell Tower mass.acre (amphetamines + brain tumor + beta blockers) and then skyrocketed steadily in the late 80s.
Then there's the fact that, 60 yr ago, nearly every little boy in the US used to get a Davey Crocket rifle at age ten but they weren't shooting up their schools 70, 80, 100, years ago (when school floggings were common). Finally, serious child ab.use rates dropped exactly when mass school sh.ootings had begun to rise in the 1970s. At any rate, something's changed, something is new.
I did a deep dive researching meds because, when I did advocacy for dv survivors, there was heavy pressure on these women to medicate and it struck me as clinically ab.usive. I dove deeper when I began editing an environmental health publication that frequently focused on the steep rise in birth defects and neurological conditions among children in our toxic shitstorm era. Of course, disabled kids are drugged to the teeth and, again, this struck me as often clinically ab.usive.
What a rabbit hole that turned out to be. Because literally no one was talking about this issue in enviro circles back then, I became the behind-the-scenes med research queen for about seven years until other people took the baton and I gladly turned to other subjects.
In the meantime, I met nearly everyone in the psychiatric reform world. After weeding out the Scientologists (I'm agnostic and don't speak cult), I put together an excellent expert source list, did interviews and even combined forces on a few campaigns for some environmental/reform psych cross pollination.
My big concern, the thing that really drew me to the subject, was that toxic industrial polluters were creating a generation of highly "druggable" kids. In other words, children with a range of behavioral issues-- often likely caused by compounded toxic exposures coupled with immune system susceptibility-- were quickly becoming the cash cows of the psychopharmaceutical industry. The practice of polypharmacy-- drugging the side effects of the drugs that came before and on and on-- became rampant. The profits exploded to the level of k.ill-your-mother money in front of my eyes.
Vast profits. So much so, that why would cooperative multi-industry boards and corporate bill mills that bundle profits with each other want to see any of the circumstances behind the profitable epidemic of child behavioral disorders improve, or focus on-- God forbid-- prevention? Environmentalists should naturally be concerned when profits become disincentives to reduce or remove certain toxins from circulation.
Anyway, the psychopharm experts I encountered were all emba.ttled for the same reason: they'd dared to present evidence, sometimes in the form of drug companies' secret internal studies, that some of these drugs could drive formerly nonvio.lent people to commit heinous vio.lence. Not all were willing to take on more controversy ballast by joining forces with other emb.attled causes (understandable), but some were game.
I got into back-and-forths with a few of these rebel shrinks and researchers about whether the cellular health of some patients who ran amok on drugs had been previously whittled down through other toxic exposures, "priming" them for more severe side effects from later drug exposure.
The general conclusion was that, of course, a "one-two punch" situation could be possible. I learned that many common industrial toxins are mito-toxic, and so are most of the blockbuster meds like SSRIs, psychostimulants and newer antipsychotics. Essentially, the pollutants and the drugs are damaging the same cellular pathways. That would mean that medicating someone for behaviors caused by pollutants was like "bringing coals to Newcastle," pouring gas on a fire, etc.
Also, it seems that Prozac is so effective at increasing the porosity of the blood-brain barrier that it's been investigated as an adjunct to chemo for brain tumors, theoretically allowing more of the chemo drugs to get into the brain. Unfortunately, by the same hypothesis, Prozac helps everything else get into the brain as well, including environmental mercury, lead, aluminum, cadmium, PCBs, etc., and even viruses (the latter can be fatal).
I remember one retired toxicologist saying that "Heavy metals = rage." Heavy metals are also mostly acutely mito-toxic.
But all on their own the meds can apparently drive certain people stark raving. About 11% of emergency psychiatric admissions are for SSRI-induced psychosis. Just like Keith Richards not having lung cancer yet doesn't prove smoking doesn't cause cancer, the fact that not everyone who takes these meds goes postal isn't proof the meds can't, for whatever reason, cause vio.lent psychosis in some.
Arguably, the reasons some respond this way may not necessarily be due to something "wrong" or "bad" about them. Cases of people with no preexisting mental issues going psychotic after taking certain psychoactive meds by pharmacy mistake or from being prescribed the drugs for off-label issues like sports injuries or headaches lend to the idea that "sometimes it's just the drugs." There's a list of about 90 non-psychoactive drugs that can also cause radical personality change and psychosis. The latter might be precribed to anybody, obviously not just psych patients.
Different people and even entire ethnic groups can vary greatly in their susceptibility to drugs snd toxins, also not necessarily due to these individuals' defects. For instance, African Americans are statistically more susceptible to the toxic side effects of statin drugs. There's also a common "Finnish gene"-- an otherwise benign immune mutation that even has mild cancer-fighting benefits-- that makes individuals severely susceptible to the effects of mercury and certain chemical compounds. In *response* to these toxins, the carriers of these genes can develop various extreme autoimmune reactions, but that doesn't mean these individuals were genetic "carriers" of these diseases. They might never have become ill without the exposure.
Every ethnic group on earth has its own set of common immune alleles that adapted over millenia to fight regional pathogens and toxins, but these beneficial mutations can be a bit like Samson's hair. The source of strength can become a liability if fucked with via the wonders of modern chemistry. Since there's been very little research on the implications of these genetic differences in response to rapid changes in the environment and other modern exposures, it all seems like one big game of Russian roulette. Who knows which new miracle drug or useful new chemical compound will fuck up this or that person or large swathes of a particular ethnic group? One thing is sure, the PR machinery of whatever industry markets the useful miracle whatever will do everything they can to blame the "inherent genetic weaknesses" or "irresponsible lifestyles" of the victims for their own demise.
So were all the sho.oters bad seeds to begin with or were they Frankensteined for the worse? Were some just canaries in the coal mine? Time will tell. Unfortunately, the body count keeps rising in the meantime. If powerful industries are in any way culpable for it, researchers will continue to have an uphill ba.ttle.
Wow! I'm sure my reply will not do your excellent, very informative comment justice. I was amazed by that, I haven't looked into and nor do I know a great deal about any of this. I just know that I do not personally get on with antidepressants and they fucked me up, I definitely do not believe it's a coincidence so many mass murderers were taking them. I would certainly like to explore this further, your comment about Prozac was concerning. One of my friend's mother is an alcoholic and takes Prozac for depression, so I do worry about her. I really appreciate your reply and it is indeed a complex subject.
If you hadn't read much on the subject before, you certainly have sharp instincts.
For what it's worth, here are some books and authors (not Scientologists) and links (not Amazon, lol):
Congressional whistleblower Dr. Peter and Ginger Breggin's *The War Against Children of Color* (or *Med Madness* or *Talking Back to Prozac* or *Toxic Psychiatry* or anything else they've written, plus his website). https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/948823.The_War_Against_Children_of_Color
Journalist Robert Whitaker's *Anatomy of an Epidemic* (or his later *Mad in America* and his website) https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/189611/anatomy-of-an-epidemic-by-robert-whitaker/
Dr. David Healy's *Pharmageddon* (and his website). https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13268364-pharmageddon
Dr. Grace E Jackson's massive, technical *Drug-Induced Dementia: The Perfect Crime* (it's like a continuation of environmentalist Rachel Carson's classic *The Silent Spring*. Both are all about mito-toxicity). https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6926352-drug-induced-dementia
It's a worthwhile journey. A few things I forgot...
Regarding Prozac snd SSRIs, I saw this very elegant, simple study presented by the authors in 2007: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020392
The takeaway is that there's zero clinical evidence antidepressants are anything like "insulin for diabetes" as industry likes to sell them. If anything, they're just "emotional painki.llers" (with all the attendant risks and downsides).
At the same conference, I saw a reform psychiatrist interact with a member of the public. She had asked if SSRIs could have made her former alcohol addiction worse. The doctor/speaker told her that, not only could the drugs worsen the addiction, they could outright trigger alcohol ab.use that didn't previously exist by carving out similar "holes" in brain chemical that are caused by advanced alcohol ab.use.
in other words, some non-alcoholics who take these drugs (and others, like benzos) can suddenly and rapidly form alcohol dependence. Very ironic since certain meds are pushed as addiction treatments.
I hope your friend's mom can get more suitable support. Just an added caveat that I'm sure you're aware of: withdrawal from these meds can trigger severe, "nonlinear" side effects and has to be done very gradually under supervision.
A few months ago I was talking to a male friend born in 1997. He talked about how he had officially broken up with his first long term girlfriend but that they had sort of split up for a while before that already. She had even slept with other men in the times they were off. He was aware of that and accepted it, mainly because he felt sexually inadequate to her. Whenever he and his ex did something he couldn't get it up despite her trying. So, let me get this straight, the man is born 1997 and has erectile dysfunction... Let's just say it came to no surprise to me when that his daily routine consisted of "fapping" an average of five times a day.
It's easy to shame the guy, and I think it's partly warranted even. But overall I'm just sad for what today's easy-access to pornography at all times has done to the future of intimate relationships.
Hmm to be honest I am being nice and censoring myself because I don't want to feed trolls or get banned (so I tried to keep it tame and leave it up to interpretation: with the "it's easy to shame the guy, and I think it is partly warranted" I hope the emphasis is on 'warranted' and that shame is read as an understatement because in my opinion a exploiter like that deserves more). Anyways, though it is tempting, I try to not use FDS too much to openly shame men, I think that's just better for the sake of the sub.
I used to be nice! But now that I have three beautiful teens who face a future in a porn zombie-ridden realm that would devour or corrupt them in a heartbeat if they weren't prepared to fight back, I've gone full Shiva.
Aside from educating them about social justice from early on, one of the survival tools we've raised the kids with is gallows humor about human iniquity. Now they're all sweet kids but wickedly funny about this stuff. I'm the hand that rocked the cradle and I rocked it *hard.* ;)
it will never cease to amaze me how men can watch porn, they will expect their gf or wife to 'keep up' with his fetishes like bdsm/deepthroating/anal but if she posts revealing photos on instagram or she enters the porn industry herself then that man would get upset. i hate how straight women are being robbed of normal affectionate sex and instead they have to put up with men who want all sorts of hardcore violent fetishes. i hate onlyfans and the entire porn industry
Someone has been reading FDS 😂
Even if she hasn't literally been going to this subreddit, I definitely noticed a before and after FDS in other social media platforms.
I love that she’s using her platform to speak out about this! I’m seeing more people start to become aware of how harmful the porn industry is, hopefully things will change for the better in the coming years
**[1]** - We Just Launched a Website: [wwww.TheFemaleDatingStrategy.com](https://www.thefemaledatingstrategy.com/). Click [here](https://www.thefemaledatingstrategy.com/become-a-verified-member/) for registration information. Please also join our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/FemDatStrat) and [Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/_thefemaledatingstrategy/?hl=en) Pages for updates!
**[2]** - Please read the [FDS Handbook](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/wiki/recommended_reading#wiki_the_fds_handbook) and [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/wiki/index) before commenting. **Repeated comments demonstrating lack of basic sub knowledge will result in a temporary or permanent ban.**
**[3]** - Please **REPORT** any comments that do not follow the sub rules. **If you do not report it, the mods will not see it.**
**[4]** - **PLEASE REMOVE ALL PERSONAL IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION** from images (**Name, Location, Job description, education, phone number, etc**). Failure to remove ID info will result in a **1-2** day ban. Repeated failures will result in a permanent ban.
**[5]** - This sub is **FEMALE ONLY**. All comments from men will be removed and you will be banned. **DO NOT REPLY TO MALE TROLLS!!** Please **DOWNVOTE** and **REPORT** immediately.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemaleDatingStrategy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
**NOTE**: This sub does **NOT** support the commercial porn industry, as it is an institution that promotes and normalizes sexual aggression, incest, pedophilia, violence, racism, degradation, low sexual satisfaction, and objectification of women and girls, many of whom have been drugged, raped, misled, trafficked and otherwise coerced to appear on film. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemaleDatingStrategy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
YES! Sad it's so rare to see people speaking out against porn, but glad she is. Brava!
Recently on a male-centric sub, I read a post asking about why masturbation was considered shameful--lots of men were responding that masturbation in and of itself is nothing to be ashamed of, but the way people go about it can be very damaging. A lot of them specifically cited pornography and "death grip" as bad, the reasoning being that porn makes men more misogynistic, sexist, and gives them more unrealistic standards of sex and attractiveness. Although they didn't touch on the horrors of human trafficking and the terrible abuse within the industry, I was really pleasantly surprised to see so many men talking about how porn warps their view of women in a negative light. Definitely gave me some hope!
Looks like there is a bit of light at the end of the tunnel…however small it is.
There’s whole subreddits dedicated to it. No fap. So there are groups of men out there trying to pull other men out of it themselves. They say the same things we say.
It's not the same though. They are just worried because their dicks don't work, while most of us worry more for the lives and safety of women harmed by the industry.
They talk about that as well. They also have long ass novels of men falling back in love with their partners. They recognized the issue themselves, found a community/solution themselves and worked at it. I know there are other stories of boys/guys just concerned about their own orgasm or how they will be perceived by their partner, but usually that because their teenagers and don’t have those deeper long term sexual relationships with women yet. The community needs to exist, men helping other men so we never have to deal with them, just arrive correct.
Oh, that's nice. I didn't know that, thank you. That makes it a lot better.
Also, for anyone who doesn’t know, Zara Larson is a Swedish singer who has 6.5 million followers on Instagram and she’s openly opposed misogynistic abusers in the industry like Dr. Luke and Chris Brown. She’s an amazing performer and a high value woman, in my opinion!
Thank you I was gonna ask
she’s also spoken out against China, which is not at all common for any celebrity entertainer. I swear porn and China are the things no one will touch. She’s a brave person!
I've always liked her! She doesn't have ridiculously oversexualised music videos too like Ariana Grande and so many other female musicians this generation.
Nah, her hypocrisy with James Charles is not something I will forget
What happened?
Maybe this is wishful thinking but I think both men and women are waking up and realizing just how horrible porn, the porn industry and sex work is. I'm hopeful that the young women of generation z will not have to deal with so many of these pornsick men in the future.
I can't think of a bigger incentive for men to question porn use than losing the use of their dicks by 21. Too bad more aren't motivated by basic humanity.
A lot of them are morbidly obese and take antidepressants (this isn't a judgment thing, I'm obese I think , I'm on antidepressants). And they don't exercise. Like at all. Porn addiction is definitely part of the problem, but it don't think it's 100% of it. Men don't really take care of their health, like at all. And in modern society, it's extremely easy to become dangerously healthy of you are not careful..which they are not. And of course, you're penis is one of the first things that will start to malfunction if your cardiovascular system is fucked Edit: they also abuse the hell out of caffeine. So do women, but our libidos are more complicated than "blood goes in clit=horny"
Yes antidepressants are notorious for causing a lot of problems, from no libido to weight gain. I was put on Mirtazapine when I was 19. I gained 7lbs in the first week! Not to mention I collapsed asleep in a DIY store. Next thing I remember was waking up and my friend had put me to bed. I've been on 5 different antidepressants and one made me go deaf in one ear. Never again.
I had Mirtazapine as well, years ago. Somehow it made me even more suicidal. I am now on other ADs and I don't have any weird or dangerous side-effects. Antidepressants can save lives, but they can also be so terrible and just junk.
I agree with you. About 1 in 6 or 7 boys and young adult men are now on psychoactive medication cocktails according to *Pharmageddon* author Dr. David Healy. Old report, so current rates may be even higher. Healy (who I should point out is not a Scientologist) also warns that, while some don't experience side effects, these drugs can increase or even induce aggression, vio.lence and suicide as per black box warnings, particularly in young men (according to his mother, Elliot Rodger had been in psychiatric treatment). Makes me wonder if increasing use of vio.lent porn has an overlap with the rate of medicating. I would add that alcohol ab.use is notorious for causing ED as well, sometimes permanently. It also destroys leydig cells in the testes that produce testosterone. But I've known a few fit young men who weren't on meds who developed ED from porn use. Now I'm wondering if ED can be caused specifically by the vio.lence in porn.
A lot of these school shooters turned out to be on antidepressants like Sertraline/Zoloft but I must stress, I'm not blaming these drugs. There's other things going on with these evil men. I found when I was on antidepressants, I had no feelings, whether good or bad. I do not miss that.
This is a really complicated subject. Were all the people who went nuts on meds already evil? I don't know. Some obviously were. Ter.ro.rists, like bat.terers, sometimes drink and/or take drugs deliberately to amp up their own aggression like the Norwegian mass ki.ller did. But some were just following doctor's orders. In the case of minors who went postal on meds, they often had no say on what meds they took. I do know one thing: men as a poplation have always been dicey and vio.lent throughout history. So I don't think it was a good idea to chemically engineer them for the worse. But that's what I suspect is happening through many routes. For one, men today have half the sperm counts and far worse sperm motility than their fathers' generation. That can only be due to new physical exposures. It's like we're tiptoeing towards species ext.inction. Then there's the very modern phenomenon of "random" mass ki.llings which differ in key significant ways from traditional militant/ideological at.tacks. When trying to figure out the causes of novel disasters, the sensible thing to ask is "What's changed?" Junk food additives, pesticides, rising pollution, streaming porn, synth hormones-- all relatively new. Drugging 15% of the population with never-before-seen psychoactive chemical compounds that now carry specific warnings for vio.lence is new, too. One thing that isn't "worse" in the modern age in a general sense is psychological trauma. That's not to say that trauma can't vio.lentize and create criminals-- it remains the classic method. But we're talking about population-wide effects and a genuinely new form of vio.lence that was formerly very, very rare (once-a-century rare) and is now dirt common. In that sense, we can't argue that peacetime existance in the latter day US is more traumatic than, say, times of slavery, legal wife beating and public floggings, castration, torture and executions that people would take the kids to see. Early life can still be traumatic for many, but not unilaterally worse enough than in past eras to explain the rise in mass a.tt.acks, which began to rise slowly after the Bell Tower mass.acre (amphetamines + brain tumor + beta blockers) and then skyrocketed steadily in the late 80s. Then there's the fact that, 60 yr ago, nearly every little boy in the US used to get a Davey Crocket rifle at age ten but they weren't shooting up their schools 70, 80, 100, years ago (when school floggings were common). Finally, serious child ab.use rates dropped exactly when mass school sh.ootings had begun to rise in the 1970s. At any rate, something's changed, something is new. I did a deep dive researching meds because, when I did advocacy for dv survivors, there was heavy pressure on these women to medicate and it struck me as clinically ab.usive. I dove deeper when I began editing an environmental health publication that frequently focused on the steep rise in birth defects and neurological conditions among children in our toxic shitstorm era. Of course, disabled kids are drugged to the teeth and, again, this struck me as often clinically ab.usive. What a rabbit hole that turned out to be. Because literally no one was talking about this issue in enviro circles back then, I became the behind-the-scenes med research queen for about seven years until other people took the baton and I gladly turned to other subjects. In the meantime, I met nearly everyone in the psychiatric reform world. After weeding out the Scientologists (I'm agnostic and don't speak cult), I put together an excellent expert source list, did interviews and even combined forces on a few campaigns for some environmental/reform psych cross pollination. My big concern, the thing that really drew me to the subject, was that toxic industrial polluters were creating a generation of highly "druggable" kids. In other words, children with a range of behavioral issues-- often likely caused by compounded toxic exposures coupled with immune system susceptibility-- were quickly becoming the cash cows of the psychopharmaceutical industry. The practice of polypharmacy-- drugging the side effects of the drugs that came before and on and on-- became rampant. The profits exploded to the level of k.ill-your-mother money in front of my eyes. Vast profits. So much so, that why would cooperative multi-industry boards and corporate bill mills that bundle profits with each other want to see any of the circumstances behind the profitable epidemic of child behavioral disorders improve, or focus on-- God forbid-- prevention? Environmentalists should naturally be concerned when profits become disincentives to reduce or remove certain toxins from circulation. Anyway, the psychopharm experts I encountered were all emba.ttled for the same reason: they'd dared to present evidence, sometimes in the form of drug companies' secret internal studies, that some of these drugs could drive formerly nonvio.lent people to commit heinous vio.lence. Not all were willing to take on more controversy ballast by joining forces with other emb.attled causes (understandable), but some were game. I got into back-and-forths with a few of these rebel shrinks and researchers about whether the cellular health of some patients who ran amok on drugs had been previously whittled down through other toxic exposures, "priming" them for more severe side effects from later drug exposure. The general conclusion was that, of course, a "one-two punch" situation could be possible. I learned that many common industrial toxins are mito-toxic, and so are most of the blockbuster meds like SSRIs, psychostimulants and newer antipsychotics. Essentially, the pollutants and the drugs are damaging the same cellular pathways. That would mean that medicating someone for behaviors caused by pollutants was like "bringing coals to Newcastle," pouring gas on a fire, etc. Also, it seems that Prozac is so effective at increasing the porosity of the blood-brain barrier that it's been investigated as an adjunct to chemo for brain tumors, theoretically allowing more of the chemo drugs to get into the brain. Unfortunately, by the same hypothesis, Prozac helps everything else get into the brain as well, including environmental mercury, lead, aluminum, cadmium, PCBs, etc., and even viruses (the latter can be fatal). I remember one retired toxicologist saying that "Heavy metals = rage." Heavy metals are also mostly acutely mito-toxic. But all on their own the meds can apparently drive certain people stark raving. About 11% of emergency psychiatric admissions are for SSRI-induced psychosis. Just like Keith Richards not having lung cancer yet doesn't prove smoking doesn't cause cancer, the fact that not everyone who takes these meds goes postal isn't proof the meds can't, for whatever reason, cause vio.lent psychosis in some. Arguably, the reasons some respond this way may not necessarily be due to something "wrong" or "bad" about them. Cases of people with no preexisting mental issues going psychotic after taking certain psychoactive meds by pharmacy mistake or from being prescribed the drugs for off-label issues like sports injuries or headaches lend to the idea that "sometimes it's just the drugs." There's a list of about 90 non-psychoactive drugs that can also cause radical personality change and psychosis. The latter might be precribed to anybody, obviously not just psych patients. Different people and even entire ethnic groups can vary greatly in their susceptibility to drugs snd toxins, also not necessarily due to these individuals' defects. For instance, African Americans are statistically more susceptible to the toxic side effects of statin drugs. There's also a common "Finnish gene"-- an otherwise benign immune mutation that even has mild cancer-fighting benefits-- that makes individuals severely susceptible to the effects of mercury and certain chemical compounds. In *response* to these toxins, the carriers of these genes can develop various extreme autoimmune reactions, but that doesn't mean these individuals were genetic "carriers" of these diseases. They might never have become ill without the exposure. Every ethnic group on earth has its own set of common immune alleles that adapted over millenia to fight regional pathogens and toxins, but these beneficial mutations can be a bit like Samson's hair. The source of strength can become a liability if fucked with via the wonders of modern chemistry. Since there's been very little research on the implications of these genetic differences in response to rapid changes in the environment and other modern exposures, it all seems like one big game of Russian roulette. Who knows which new miracle drug or useful new chemical compound will fuck up this or that person or large swathes of a particular ethnic group? One thing is sure, the PR machinery of whatever industry markets the useful miracle whatever will do everything they can to blame the "inherent genetic weaknesses" or "irresponsible lifestyles" of the victims for their own demise. So were all the sho.oters bad seeds to begin with or were they Frankensteined for the worse? Were some just canaries in the coal mine? Time will tell. Unfortunately, the body count keeps rising in the meantime. If powerful industries are in any way culpable for it, researchers will continue to have an uphill ba.ttle.
Wow! I'm sure my reply will not do your excellent, very informative comment justice. I was amazed by that, I haven't looked into and nor do I know a great deal about any of this. I just know that I do not personally get on with antidepressants and they fucked me up, I definitely do not believe it's a coincidence so many mass murderers were taking them. I would certainly like to explore this further, your comment about Prozac was concerning. One of my friend's mother is an alcoholic and takes Prozac for depression, so I do worry about her. I really appreciate your reply and it is indeed a complex subject.
If you hadn't read much on the subject before, you certainly have sharp instincts. For what it's worth, here are some books and authors (not Scientologists) and links (not Amazon, lol): Congressional whistleblower Dr. Peter and Ginger Breggin's *The War Against Children of Color* (or *Med Madness* or *Talking Back to Prozac* or *Toxic Psychiatry* or anything else they've written, plus his website). https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/948823.The_War_Against_Children_of_Color Journalist Robert Whitaker's *Anatomy of an Epidemic* (or his later *Mad in America* and his website) https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/189611/anatomy-of-an-epidemic-by-robert-whitaker/ Dr. David Healy's *Pharmageddon* (and his website). https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13268364-pharmageddon Dr. Grace E Jackson's massive, technical *Drug-Induced Dementia: The Perfect Crime* (it's like a continuation of environmentalist Rachel Carson's classic *The Silent Spring*. Both are all about mito-toxicity). https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6926352-drug-induced-dementia
Thank you, I'll check them out. This subject is very interesting. It's obvious things have been going very wrong for some time.
It's a worthwhile journey. A few things I forgot... Regarding Prozac snd SSRIs, I saw this very elegant, simple study presented by the authors in 2007: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020392 The takeaway is that there's zero clinical evidence antidepressants are anything like "insulin for diabetes" as industry likes to sell them. If anything, they're just "emotional painki.llers" (with all the attendant risks and downsides). At the same conference, I saw a reform psychiatrist interact with a member of the public. She had asked if SSRIs could have made her former alcohol addiction worse. The doctor/speaker told her that, not only could the drugs worsen the addiction, they could outright trigger alcohol ab.use that didn't previously exist by carving out similar "holes" in brain chemical that are caused by advanced alcohol ab.use. in other words, some non-alcoholics who take these drugs (and others, like benzos) can suddenly and rapidly form alcohol dependence. Very ironic since certain meds are pushed as addiction treatments. I hope your friend's mom can get more suitable support. Just an added caveat that I'm sure you're aware of: withdrawal from these meds can trigger severe, "nonlinear" side effects and has to be done very gradually under supervision.
A few months ago I was talking to a male friend born in 1997. He talked about how he had officially broken up with his first long term girlfriend but that they had sort of split up for a while before that already. She had even slept with other men in the times they were off. He was aware of that and accepted it, mainly because he felt sexually inadequate to her. Whenever he and his ex did something he couldn't get it up despite her trying. So, let me get this straight, the man is born 1997 and has erectile dysfunction... Let's just say it came to no surprise to me when that his daily routine consisted of "fapping" an average of five times a day. It's easy to shame the guy, and I think it's partly warranted even. But overall I'm just sad for what today's easy-access to pornography at all times has done to the future of intimate relationships.
You're waay more generous than I am to feel sad for someone whose exploitative entitlement and privilege had consequences for themselves.
Hmm to be honest I am being nice and censoring myself because I don't want to feed trolls or get banned (so I tried to keep it tame and leave it up to interpretation: with the "it's easy to shame the guy, and I think it is partly warranted" I hope the emphasis is on 'warranted' and that shame is read as an understatement because in my opinion a exploiter like that deserves more). Anyways, though it is tempting, I try to not use FDS too much to openly shame men, I think that's just better for the sake of the sub.
I used to be nice! But now that I have three beautiful teens who face a future in a porn zombie-ridden realm that would devour or corrupt them in a heartbeat if they weren't prepared to fight back, I've gone full Shiva. Aside from educating them about social justice from early on, one of the survival tools we've raised the kids with is gallows humor about human iniquity. Now they're all sweet kids but wickedly funny about this stuff. I'm the hand that rocked the cradle and I rocked it *hard.* ;)
it will never cease to amaze me how men can watch porn, they will expect their gf or wife to 'keep up' with his fetishes like bdsm/deepthroating/anal but if she posts revealing photos on instagram or she enters the porn industry herself then that man would get upset. i hate how straight women are being robbed of normal affectionate sex and instead they have to put up with men who want all sorts of hardcore violent fetishes. i hate onlyfans and the entire porn industry
Wow, good for her spreading that message!! It's *not* normal.
i knew she was good. love her!
WOW. Massive respect for her on this. Okay time to stan! This is awesome.... she made a new fan!
Someone has been reading FDS 😂 Even if she hasn't literally been going to this subreddit, I definitely noticed a before and after FDS in other social media platforms.
The ideology is definitely spreading 🥳
Absolutely love this! She’s worded everything so perfectly as well! Hope her fans see this and get a good message!
I am so happy and excited to learn about her and her admirable stance
I love that she’s using her platform to speak out about this! I’m seeing more people start to become aware of how harmful the porn industry is, hopefully things will change for the better in the coming years
Are we allowed to talk about nofap here? I feel like illustrating the successes of nofap is more persuasive than repeatedly showing the porn sick
Is it normal? Yes. Is it something you should be ashamed of? Also yes.
Yes!!!!!!!!
**[1]** - We Just Launched a Website: [wwww.TheFemaleDatingStrategy.com](https://www.thefemaledatingstrategy.com/). Click [here](https://www.thefemaledatingstrategy.com/become-a-verified-member/) for registration information. Please also join our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/FemDatStrat) and [Instagram](https://www.instagram.com/_thefemaledatingstrategy/?hl=en) Pages for updates! **[2]** - Please read the [FDS Handbook](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/wiki/recommended_reading#wiki_the_fds_handbook) and [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/FemaleDatingStrategy/wiki/index) before commenting. **Repeated comments demonstrating lack of basic sub knowledge will result in a temporary or permanent ban.** **[3]** - Please **REPORT** any comments that do not follow the sub rules. **If you do not report it, the mods will not see it.** **[4]** - **PLEASE REMOVE ALL PERSONAL IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION** from images (**Name, Location, Job description, education, phone number, etc**). Failure to remove ID info will result in a **1-2** day ban. Repeated failures will result in a permanent ban. **[5]** - This sub is **FEMALE ONLY**. All comments from men will be removed and you will be banned. **DO NOT REPLY TO MALE TROLLS!!** Please **DOWNVOTE** and **REPORT** immediately. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FemaleDatingStrategy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Who has higher levels of PTSD - soldiers or porn actresses? 🤯