Science Stopped Believing in Porn Addiction. You Should, Too

Honestly? As much as I hate the parent company, any recent studies you can find on Google Scholar. That's a great place to start. And don't just go with what the title of the paper says. Even if the title looks like it's pro- or anti-sex-addiction, the abstract usually gives a more nuanced perspective.

And as you look at the papers, just remember that religion would love to be right about how they personally interpret what their god says is "the right way to do it." If a paper ever makes claims that it's definitively proven that sex addiction is real, check the source; it's probably religious.

Porn, sex, and masturbation may accompany an addiction, but excessive activity is almost always a symptom of or in addition to other, deeper issues. In the papers you'll find from Scholar, you'll see a recurring theme: "it's complicated." To put it another way, someone who chronically masturbates is likely coping with a deeper trauma(s). When the trauma is dealt with, they may no longer compelled to masturbate, because masturbating does not itself appear to be addictive. Same with porn and sex.

The issue arises that when people engage in these activities more than their peers, they may assume they're behaving abnormally. Add on religion that has dogmatic rules about what is allowed, and that feeling of abnormality may be internalized as addiction, whereas a professional may find nothing unusual.

I came from a religion that promoted purity culture, and the idea that sex is addictive is simply a grotesque misrepresentation of the facts. If the science changes based on the facts and indicates that sex is addictive, I'll change my tune accordingly.

Until then, the "sex addict" proponents do not have a rigorous, data-backed leg to stand upon.