>>2347625

(((They))) attacked both sides. The damage done is more complex than most people think. Here are 2 interesting reads.

Revealed… how watching porn really affects your BRAIN

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3196809/It-induces-addiction-makes-men-hopeless-bed-discover-porn-affect-BRAIN.html

The scary effects of pornography: how the 21st century's acute addiction is rewiring our brains

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/scary-effects-pornography-21st-centurys-accute-addiction-rewiring/

Men's lives are being ruined by pornography,

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/mens-lives-ruined-pornography-arent-angry/

How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women

https://www.veteranstoday.com/2017/12/14/how-the-rockefellers-re-engineered-women/

>>2347690

>>2347663

>>2347638

Seen this exact same pattern happen several times since the beginning. I have never posted a nude, I think they are slides and should be categorized as such, but banning them will not last long, and bringing the topic is an even greater waste of bread, with the flux of people we see here (and the amount of shills) there's always recurrence I would advice to not waste too much bread and time complaining about some nudes. It always comes in waves.

This is an stupid topic either way, there's nothing wrong about nudity, is not part of Qresearch and people who wants nudes should go look elsewhere, porn is a different issue. The "it only attracts 8th graders" is a stupid argument, this is the web, they can search for it anywhere. Can we give this slide a rest?