TL;DR
YBOP, TGPE, and nofap are founded on the views of two people who are considered pariahs within the sex and relationship research and clinical communities. They present themselves as experts but aren’t. There’s no empirical research evidence to support any of the claims made by YBOP and TGPE. All the claims about negative effects of internet porn use can be better accounted for by other explanations. Watching internet porn (hopefully ethically produced!) and masturbating are not problematic for the vast majority of people. And for those people who do have a problem with internet porn, it’s almost always a sign of some other underlying problem (shame, anxiety, fear of rejection, relationship problems, boredom, low self-esteem, lack of good sex education, etc.). Addressing those underlying problems should be people’s focus, not abstaining from masturbation to internet porn.
LONG VERSION
Before I get into the problems with YBOP, TGPE, and nofap, a bit about my background to show that I have some expertise in the area. I have PhD in psychology and have studied human sexuality extensively. I’ve published several first-authour papers in reputable peer-reviewed academic journals such as the Archives of Sexual Behaviour and the Journal of Sex Research. I teach a class on human sexuality at one of Canada’s top-ranked universities. I’m also part of a global email listserve that’s populated by many of the best minds (i.e., researchers, theorists and clinicians) in the field of human sexuality. YBOP, TGPE, and nofap have all been discussed extensively on the listserve (well, mostly criticized and ridiculed, largely because Marnia Robinson takes every opportunity she can to spam the list with her claims). So I’m not just another internet hero who thinks he’s boss when he’s clearly not.
On to YBOP, TGPE, and nofap…
This whole movement stems entirely from the work of two people: Marnia Robinson and her partner Gary Wilson (R&W). They are on a crusade against internet pornography. Wilson is a high school science teacher and adjunct instructor at Southern Oregon University, and Robinson is an ex-lawyer who is now a sex and relationship therapist. Neither one of them have been formally educated in research or clinical psychology, and neither one of them have a PhD (i.e., they’re not Drs.). YourBrainOnPorn.com is a pet project of theirs, tied into talks, books, articles, and Ms. Robinson’s therapy practice (Reuniting.info). They run YourBrainOnPorn.com. Wilson is the presenter of the TEDx talk, “The Great Porn Experiment”. R&W regularly blog their work online at “Psychology Today,” which is a non-academic magazine, although I’ve heard rumblings that their gigue may be up. Robinson is also the co-authour of “Cupid’s Poison Arrow,” a non-academic book about her views on sex and relationships. Their website, the TEDx talk and their publications give them a veneer of scientific expertise.
If you do some digging, you’ll find that the links (not people’s personal blogs) in the reddit/r/nofap FAQs are all from the same source: the work of R&W. There’s a reason why there are no other sources – no experts have bought into their theories and viewpoints. R&W have a history of manipulating and/or misrepresenting research findings to support their ideology and claims, ignoring studies (and parts of studies) they’ve cited that contradict them, discussing indirect evidence as if it’s direct supporting evidence, and citing bad research.
R&W are pariahs within the world of sex research and clinical practice. I’m not being an intellectual snob (or at least, I hope I’m not); it’s just that what they’re claiming is completely unsupported by research. This is not to say that they’re trying to deceive people. They clearly believe the ideas they’re promoting, and that they’re making the world a better place. And who knows, perhaps future research will prove them to be correct (I doubt it).
R&W make a litany of claims about the harms of internet porn use. I’ll address a few of the most egregious ones in an effort to keep this short enough that people will hopefully read it. Keep in mind, though, that NONE of R&W’s theories and claims are supported by any peer-reviewed research. It’s all simply speculation presented as fact. They’ve also made what’s considered the gravest error in the research world – interpreting personal anecdotes as empirical evidence.