• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

On Sept. 21, 2012, Texas neurosurgeon Donald L. Hilton Jr., M.D., spoke on pornography addiction and sexual orientation, saying:

“Pornography is a visual pheromone, a powerful 100-billion-dollar per year brain drug that is changing sexuality even more rapidly through the cyber-acceleration of the Internet. It is ‘inhibiting orientation’ and ‘disrupting pre-mating communication between the sexes by permeating the atmosphere’ and Internet.” (emphasis added)

Hilton’s lecture, “Changing the Stamp of Nature: Pornography Addiction, Neuroplasticity, and the ASAM and DSM Perspectives,” put a hard neuroscience face on pornographic brain rewiring, implicating sex-education promotions of homosexuality as a normal genetic variation.

Dr. Hilton cited Shakespeare on “addiction” directing “Each man to what … his addiction leads him” (Othello in Act II, ii 6), and my personal favorite: lust as “perjured, murderous, bloody, full of blame. … Enjoyed no sooner but despised straight” etc. (Sonnet 129). Reread the Bard as wisdom literature.

Shakespeare studied and “employed Scripture teachings, facts, poetry, philosophy and language in his writings” (William Burgess, “The Bible in Shakespeare,” Author’s Preface, The Winona Publishing Company, 1903), so he understood well the harms of sexual addiction, seen in Proverbs 6:27 ESV: “Can a man carry fire next to his chest and his clothes not be burned?”

Hilton detailed myriad studies of addiction, the first medical use of the word appearing in a 1906 report on “opium addiction.” In 1983, roughly 300 years after Shakespeare and 3,500 years after the Bible, Dr. Patrick Carnes coined the term “sexual addiction.”

So, no, there IS nothing new under the sun.

We’ve just been educationally and morally dumbed down enough for deviance to really catch up.

In 2011 the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) added sex as biologically addictive. Via syringe or image, “altered biology affects subsequent behavior.” Widespread pornography consumption has largely crippled “prospective peer-reviewed studies on pornography or sexual addiction,” said Hilton. True. As principal investigator during President Reagan’s term, I piloted the largest unbiased U.S. Department of Justice study ever conducted on pornography. Big Pornography paid millions to taint our rock-solid findings. Our study was “burned” as science confirmed the 3,500-year-old biblical reality: Pornography would have to cause pornography/sex addiction.

Peek at the power in play at drjudithreisman.com.

In 2007 Science magazine quoted National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) director Dr. Nora Volkow saying “her institute’s name should encompass addictions such as pornography, gambling and food … the whole field” of addiction (emphasis added).

Columbia psychiatrist Dr. Norman Doidge reported, “The addictiveness of Internet pornography is not a metaphor … [but] long-term, sometimes lifelong, neuroplastic change in the brain.” By 2011 psychologist Dr. Philip Zimbardo described a “Demise of Guys,” via “arousal addiction” spawned chiefly by “pornography and video games.”

“Boys’ brains are being digitally rewired in a new way for change, novelty, excitement and constant arousal; that means they are totally out of sync [with] … romantic relationships, which build gradually and subtly.

Pornography, homosexuality and the gypsy moth

Hilton agrees, “Pornography is inducing a cultural pheromonic effect,” recording the mis-orientation of male gypsy moths.

In 1869 gypsy moths, imported to create an American silk industry, instead decimated our deciduous trees – oaks, maples and elms – and devastated our forests for the next 150 years. In the ’60s scientists found male moths mate with the female “by following her scent,” her “pheromone.”

A 1967 paper, “Insect population control by the use of sex pheromones to inhibit orientation between the sexes,” reported that scientists permeated the moth’s environment with strong, artificial female moth pheromone “This … scent overpowered the normal females ability to attract the male, and the confused males were unable to find the females.”

So, our trees got saved by what could be called olfactory moth pornography, a heavy-duty phony scent that unmanned male orientation to create an impotent moth population.

Hilton reports this abstract of the paper: “We have for the first time obtained experimental confirmation that pre-mating communication between the sexes can be disrupted by permeating the atmosphere with an insect pheromone.”

In 1972 another paper described mating disorientation as “preventing male gypsy moths from finding mates,” using pheromones. Called the confusion method:

“An airplane scatters … pellets imbedded with the scent of the pheromone … [that] overpower the male’s ability to find the female. He is thus desensitized to the natural scent of the female by this artificially produced pheromone. … The male either becomes confused and doesn’t know which direction to turn for the female, or he becomes desensitized to the lower levels of pheromones naturally given out by the female and has no incentive to mate with her.” (emphasis added)

Gypsy moth pornography? In the trapping method, male moths looking for the female, enter traps with no exit “only to find a fatal substitute.” As a neurosurgeon, Dr. Hilton concludes:

“Pornography is a visual pheromone, a powerful 100-billion-dollar per year brain drug that is changing sexuality. … It is ‘inhibiting orientation’ and ‘disrupting pre-mating communication between the sexes by permeating the atmosphere’ and Internet.”

So can Cynipidae desensitization tell us genius humanoids about pornographic mating desensitization, say, about pornography as Erototoxic, as the toxic form of Eros? Gosh.

See “Your Brain on Porn” for further links to Dr. Hilton’s address on pornography addiction.

The latest book from the foremost expert on how sexuality has been twisted in our day: “Sexual Sabotage: How One Mad Scientist Unleashed a Plague of Corruption and Contagion on America”

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.