/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10803209
>cure porn induced latent homosexuality at 20
a bullet is all you ever need for that

>>10803216
/thread

Imagine thinking that watching loads of porn can turn you gay, or even the degenerates that say 'I only used to watch X porn but now I can only jerk off if I watch [insert some atypical disturbing shit here]'. It's always the same with people like this, they can't take self responsibility for being a gaping homosexual in the first place, gotta blame the porn.

>>10803209
>What are the effects of this? Can it cure porn induced latent homosexuality at 20?
Why don't you try it and find out?

>>10803237
>Imagine thinking that watching loads of porn can turn you gay
But it does

>>10803237
Why did I never have a single homosexual thought or urge or attraction even in my dreams before the age of 20 after I isolated myself at 18 and was constantly masturbating to porn and not spending time around girls?

>>10803216
Been considering this brah. I would like to stop the gay and it seems there’s only two ways out. My current plan is to get castrated.

>>10803257
you should plan on getting a fucking hobby instead of worrying about inconsequential shit
can't believe I got a serious answer to that

>>10803254
Because you're a fucking faggot, that's why.

>>10803262
Stop being a nigger this shit, I mean my libido really gets in the way of things, and especially the gay stuff. I am pursuing my math hobby and I want out of the homo.

>>10803263
But I was infatuated with and wanted to fuck girls as a guy, I constantly masturbated thinking about girls grinding on my crotch even before porn I thought about girls in class using mental imagery to ejaculate not even closing my eyes

>>10803237
People can be conditioned to be aroused at the site of a penny jar. The theory that porn could do this makes sense to me. A porn company openly bragged about their users being statistically more homosexual, so they do this shit on purpose.

>>10803254
Why did you ever start watching gay porn if you're not a faggot?
/thread

>>10803269
69s of truth. ZOG wants to make men gay.

>>10803267
>Stop being a nigger this shit

>>10803271
I started self inserting as the girl in straight porn at 18 after I no longer felt like a man, then I felt sad because I would never look like a girl, then I self inserted as the trap/tranny/femboy if their face was off screen. Then pain/reward conditioning, hurting myself or stopping masturbation if I saw a solo girl or a vagina and masturbating if I was a man having sex with a girl. Then masturbating to femdom and girls calling me a homosexual, repeat after me, arousal training to associate pleasure with images of dicks etc

you were always gay op, deal with it

>>10803269
>People can be conditioned to be aroused at the site of a penny jar.
no they can't
just because fetishism exist doesn't mean you can make someone aroused to anything

Tried doing this for a few years to stop my loli addiction that /b/ imparted on me during my formative years, failed. Now I've full blown accepted my love for lolicon and toddlercon.

>>10803284
Can I at least try to become a passable woman through surgeries and hormones to make straight men orgasm?

>>10803269
>Make absurd claim
>Back up with more absurd 'fact'
>Forget links
Why would a porn company give a shit if they had homosexuals when they could just sell straight porn, fucking degenerate retards on this board.

so much misinformation itt
normally I'd say it's a troll, but any highly sophisticated troll is indistinguishable from usual /sci/ dwellers

>>10803290
>so much misinformation itt
Which is misinformation?

>>10803292
you're a misinformation

>>10803288
It's a well known fact here you fucking idiot.
Here is a copy paste from a thread just the other week (not mine, not going through the effort of unmobilizing the links).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/10224951/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/14739689/?i=2&from=/10224951/related

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21951361/?i=4&from=/10224951/related


It really makes you think. WHY would a honest to goodness pornography company possibly want to do anything like that? Geeeeee! I wonder!

>>10803209
>porn induced latent homosexuality
lol.

>>10803288
>Do you have a source on that?

>Source?

>A source. I need a source.

>Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.

>No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered. You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.

>Do you have a degree in that field? A college degree? In that field? Then your arguments are invalid. No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation.

>Correlation does not equal causation.

>CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION.

>You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.

>Nope, still haven't.

>>10803301
>27 posts
>12 posters
>post count didn't change when this guy posted
Man this one faggot is really doing damage control.

>people "asking" and "providing" sources in a fucking 4chan thread
You realize no one is going to critically examine those and that none of us have credentials (since we're anonymous, duh) to analyze them and put them in appropriate context? Because that's a shitton of labor and time and not just anyone can do it for it to have a significance.
Especially in order to make a point on some imageboard where a thread dies in an hour.
I can pull anything from my ass and call it a source and if that convinces you then you're an idiot.
Any substantial discussion in a place like this is pointless by definition. That goes for both of you.

>>10803321
Do you have a source on that?

Source?

A source. I need a source.

Sorry, I mean I need a source that explicitly states your argument. This is just tangential to the discussion.

No, you can't make inferences and observations from the sources you've gathered. Any additional comments from you MUST be a subset of the information from the sources you've gathered. You can't make normative statements from empirical evidence.

Do you have a degree in that field? A college degree? In that field? Then your arguments are invalid. No, it doesn't matter how close those data points are correlated. Correlation does not equal causation.

Correlation does not equal causation.

CORRELATION. DOES. NOT. EQUAL. CAUSATION.

You still haven't provided me a valid source yet.

Nope, still haven't.

You realize no one is going to critically examine those and that none of us have credentials (since we're anonymous, duh) to analyze them and put them in appropriate context? Because that's a shitton of labor and time and not just anyone can do it for it to have a significance.
Especially in order to make a point on some imageboard where a thread dies in an hour.
I can pull anything from my ass and call it a source and if that convinces you then you're an idiot.
Any substantial discussion in a place like this is pointless by definition. That goes for both of you.

>>10803324
this one is definitely going into my cringe collection

>>10803321
this one is definitely going into my cringe collection

at least I got some (you)s out of it

just start serotogenic antidepressants, i cant fap even if i wanted to

>>10803331
>>10803333
cringey quads

>>10803209

>>10803324
Oh my god, he nailed his impression of you. Holy shit kys.

>>10803298
>guy asks for links
>gets links
>he vanishes

every
fucking
time

>>10803267
We can't solve this mistery without your stockings photos.