A sobering stat from a university study:

Researchers were conducting a study comparing the views of men in their 20s who had never been exposed to pornography with regular users.

But their project stumbled at the first hurdle when they failed to find a single man who had not been seen it.

“We started our research seeking men in their 20s who had never consumed pornography,” said Professor Simon Louis Lajeunesse. “We couldn’t find any.”

HT: Mike Anderson

Here are some free resources to consider using as we battle together for purity:

And here are a couple of books to consider purchasing:

Print Friendly
View Comments

Comments:


40 thoughts on “Porndemic”

  1. Brian Current says:

    30 page research article from Family Research Council on the Effects of Porn:

    http://takeyourvitaminz.blogspot.com/2009/12/effects-of-porn.html

  2. Brian Current says:

    i think this post is worth keeping alive as well, Randy Alcorn on the COST:

    “If we would rehearse in advance the ugly and overwhelming consequences of immorality, we would be far more prone to avoid it.”

    http://randyalcorn.blogspot.com/2009/06/counting-cost-of-sexual-immorality.html

  3. Reid says:

    Great links here…however, the researcher sadly claims his study found the following:

    Prof Lajeunesse said pornography did not have a negative effect on men’s sexuality. “Not one subject had a pathological sexuality,” he said. “In fact, all of their sexual practices were quite conventional. “Pornography hasn’t changed their perception of women or their relationship, which they all want to be as harmonious and fulfilling as possible,” he added.

    Sad…

  4. It’s news to the World what the Church has been preaching since Christ: we’re all sinners in need of Christ. I would suggest that they find men who have been blind since birth regarding for those who have never consumed pornography (not that they haven’t beheld the vision of a woman in their mind’s eye) or that they alter their study to observe men who typically have no compulsion, or have overcome their compulsion, to consume pornography against those who consume pornography on a regular basis.

  5. Reid says:

    Jim, this was not the news, “all are sinners in need of Christ,” reported. The news reported in the world was much more tragic. “Porn is no big deal and not harmful” was the news if you look at the study’s conclusion.

    Christians just seeing Justin’s brief quotation will see a tragedy in that all men lust…I see a bigger tragedy in that our culture calls sin “no big deal” and has a study that purportedly backs this up.

  6. Harry Schaumburg says:

    You missed a major long staying resource from a strong Reform perspective. Undefiled, http://www.restoringsexualpurity.org.

  7. Reid,
    I apologize for not being clear. I didn’t miss the point in the conclusion; I just didn’t address it. My purpose was to draw out observations from the initial premises of the study, which the researchers were ostensibly surprised to discover somewhat flawed, which seemed to be what JT was primarily addressing by his quote from the study.

  8. Israel says:

    Great resources.

  9. Tyler says:

    Not to undermine the harmfulness of pornography or even the epidemic that is resulting from its proliferation, but that sounds like shoddy research.

    Are we to seriously believe that ALL men in their 20s have looked at porn, simply because one group of Canadian academics couldn’t find someone outside this statistic?

    1. Justin Taylor says:

      Tyler: I don’t think the claim that none exist, just that they couldn’t locate them in their locale; therefore how could their research be “shoddy”?

  10. Tyler says:

    The headline says “all”, but I’m willing to admit that this is likely more of an editorial statement.

    Nevertheless, allow me to correct myself: the research itself may not be shoddy, but the conclusion that everyone in their 20s has looked at porn doesn’t necessarily follow. It’s shoddy reasoning, if that’s in fact what they’re suggesting.

  11. chris says:

    Questions:
    1. How many men did they ask? 10, 30, 70…?
    2. How do they define “porn”? A picture of a leg, a buttox, a film, a girly-poster? Their dad’s Playboy magazine?
    3. What does “consumed” mean in their vernacular? Are we talking portions here, or platefuls? Hours spent?

    Before we start making up words by conjoining Pandemic with Porn, it would be good to find out what in the world they are talking about. The next thing you know it will be “Swine-orn”.

    Again, the problem is the heart, and this was an issue before the internet. “If one lusas after a woman…” No need for “data” on that one.

  12. donsands says:

    As easy as it is to get porn on the internet, I believe most, if not all men at 20 have seen some porn.

    When I was 20, there was plenty of dirty mags and films about, but today the comparison would be like a Lake Superior porn compared to an Atlantic Ocean of porn.

    It is a Porndemic for sure. May the Holy Spirit fill us with His wisdom, power, self-control, and love for the good things of the Lord. Amen.

    Have a blessed weekend and Lord’s day.

  13. chris says:

    Frankly, I wonder where guys find the time. It’s like having a mistress.

    If you are working a full-time job, taking care of your family and talking with your wife, how do you fit it in? Besides having hobbies, hanging with the brothers or making something, like a garden or a piece of music is time consuming too. So, is this an issue of laziness as well as lust? I mean, don’t these guys work?

  14. Reid says:

    Chris,

    It is an issue of many sins. But brother, if you are going to help young men walk with Jesus, put to death sins of this nature, you need to engage this issue and not just dismiss it as “these guys” problem. I could miss your tone from the email, but you sound very smug and self-righteous about this issue. If there are young men in your church, if there are males period, there are people struggling with this issue around you.

    I have ministered with students and men under 25 (non Christian and Christian) for the last 13 years and I tell you this is not a small problem. Lost people accept porn as normative, Christians typically try and hide it. Either way, we have to engage this with honesty and the gospel and not dismiss it like you seem to be doing.

    Get on the wall and in the game for those guys who you see as just lazy and lustful. Speak grace, hope and tough truth to them – not just your judgment. I mean do this with real people, not hypothetical ones. Walk with them out of their shame into the light of Christ.

    Thanks man

    1. chris says:

      Reid,
      I think that lust is the way Jesus put it. You talk of a thing that exists “out there” but Jesus talked of a thing that exists in the heart — the darkest region of man. The sewer in us. The “out there” will never go away and there is nothing you can do about it. Even internet filters won’t keep a man away from what his heart wants.

      So, how do YOU change men’s hearts? Can you? All you can do is point the way to Christ, and when men find Him, they won’t care about the thing “out there”. The issue isn’t porn, it is the disposition of the heart — an absence of the fear of God, and a love of the flesh. Who can break a man of that? Only the Holy Spirit.

      I am not dismissing sin, I am only dismissing the approach and the way the problem is being framed — a way which does not seem to be solving the problem. “Bang head here.”

      1. chris says:

        PS- Some men thrive off of a therapeutic church. Maybe it is time to give them a taste of what it felt like when the disciples followed Him with great fear.

    2. Reid says:

      You are responding to something Chris, but not what I wrote here. I just exhort you to actually help these young men by pointing them to Jesus. I said nothing about “out there” – I mentioned putting to death sin. I said nothing of “therapeutic church” I mentioned grace, hope, tough truth and the gospel. I found your response a bit odd.

      I just want you to be helpful to the men around you in your church, the lost men in your neighborhood who need Jesus. That is all. We help others by pointing them to the cross…but we need a hearing with people to do this. I pray people are hearing the gospel from you, seeing the fruit of the gospel in you and living out the gospel with you.

      Blessings brother

      1. chris says:

        Reid,
        Actually, I was. You said I sounded smug because I used terms like “lust” and “laziness” to describe the problem. I was simply replying to your accusation and saying that these were the terms that Jesus used and the Bible uses to describe the problem being discussed. (Wasn’t David’s laziness — he should have been at war — one of the things that led him to see Bathsheba? You know the rest of the story. Hmmm).

        What I mean by “therapeutic church” is the notion that one man can help another man “put to death” the sin nature and the sins that flow from it. This is what you suggested in your opening note. But, if a man meets Christ, he does not need another mediator to help him out.

        1. Reid says:

          You sounded smug because you sounded smug…not for using terms like lust and laziness. You sounded self-righteous as if sinners who struggle were beneath you and you showed little understanding about this issue.

          Your understanding of sanctification is troubling Chris and leaves out the role of God’s people, the church. We are certainly called by our one mediator to help the weak, admonish the idle, bear each others burdens, restore those in sin with gentleness, encourage the fainthearted and be patient with all. We are to bring back wandering sinners to the truth.

          Some reading that may be helpful – Ecclesiastes 4:9-11, Proverbs 27:17, 1 Thessalonians 5, Galatians 6, James 5

          I’m done here

          1. chris says:

            Reid,
            Whoa bro, bring it down to frantic. My take on sanctification, justification etc. is best defined by the Westminster Confession of Faith. No, I don’t get rid of the role of the church; I am a crabby presbyterian mate.

            Sorry I don’t fit your pattern of thinking. All I suggested was that time spent on meaningful work does not allow for time spent on meaningless waste. If that is smug, well, I guess you have a different notion of what smug is than I do. I guess anyone who thinks differently than you might be smug. That’s one way to win people over.

            Dang.

  15. John says:

    Hey all, a resource you could add to this: a site helping tens of thousands be free of this sin: http://www.settingcaptivesfree.com — check it out.

  16. MJ says:

    Chris

    You have the time to comment on blog posts, so is it really that hard to comprehend where a guy finds time to get on his computer and look at porn?

  17. ptl00 says:

    Chris, your comment had me recall an article that Albert Mohler posted on the alarming statistic of porn being viewed during “work” hours in the day- http://www.albertmohler.com/2009/02/26/the-pornification-of-a-culture-whats-going-on-in-the-next-office/

    Regardless of how busy someone may be, if the heart issue of lust is not dealt with, busyness is an irrelevant matter.

    1. chris says:

      Busyness is not what I was suggesting. Being engaged because all of life is meaningful is.

  18. Rick says:

    Thanks for the links Justin.

    The Tim Challies article was great, it was exactly what i needed to hear.

  19. Luke says:

    I love the work of David Powlison. His talk at the 2004 DG conference hit the nail right on the head. Here’s a great excerpt:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kur8Q8qlahU

Comments are closed.

Justin Taylor


Justin Taylor is senior vice president and publisher for books at Crossway and blogs at Between Two Worlds. You can follow him on Twitter.

Justin Taylor's Books