Part 1:
So First the Argument from Utility:

“People tend to think that their way of doing things is the best way, without considering other ways of doing things. Why is that? Well, to start off, there must be some sort of recurring self-fulfilling prophecy that reinforces what a person does as the correct way. The error is that this person’s self-fulfilling prophecy is exclusive of the fact of whether or not there are other ways of doing things; the only important thing is that your subconscious believes “(a) can't be wrong because whenever (x) occurs, (y) always happens" (e.g. Whenever I do this thing, that thing always happens). One glaring issue of relying on a self-fulfilling prophecy is that it disregards the merits of the means for which something is achieved, a common mean involving mental taxation. Mental taxation, if anything, is often unnecessary, which is exactly the issue; you’re diminishing your human experience for the sake of your method when you could be counteracting this diminishment with thorough evaluation and a follow through on said evaluation. A common cure for dealing with these self-diminishing, self-fulfilling prophecies is the suspension of belief/subjective consideration."

This first step is often the reason why many people are still stagnant or without resolve, either because of two things:

• 1. They are unaware of the possibility of another method for accomplishing the exact same thing

• 2. Reconsideration/suspension of belief is seen as some sort of condescending rite of passage, because the authority they appeal to is either someone else or worse, themselves, wherein they do not adhere to “intellectual play” or generally entertaining opposing viewpoints; it’s too bothersome to reconsider for some.

A solution to this ignorance and a rebuttal to the above fallacy is the argument from utility, it goes like this:

"Reality is subjective, but what is truly objective is utility, how useful something is. Therefore, whatever has utility or is more useful is actually real. No matter how much you suspend your belief, what matters is the level of utility that suspension of a certain belief has. If the suspension of that belief is in fact useful, it will become your new, objective reality.”

Part 2:
Suspension of Belief/Subjective Consideration:

Let's focus on the route of subjectification. For addicts, the ritual of PMO isn't entirely pleasurable because they feel bad after the experience; therefore, this pleasure lays under the scrutiny of subjectivity for not objectively encompassing the point of PMO, wherein pleasure is diminished directly after PMO. If this pleasure has the capacity to be subjective of the experience, are you then experiencing truly authentic pleasure? In other words, if there is still room for subjectivity in terms of enjoyment, that would imply that this experience is not objectively pleasurable, isn't that so? If it isn't objectively pleasurable, unlike most things in life, you'd have no other choice but to suspend your belief, while relying on PMO's end-goal-result as a basis for whether or not there is any pleasure at all, which in this case is a really lackluster and meaningless end-goal you'll find out in the end. Just keep reading.

Considering the end-goal, is PMO actually pleasurable? If it was objectively pleasurable, you'd feel joy during and after every session, similar to how recreational activities work (after the session, you actually do not feel that so-called "joy"). If something that's perceived as joyful detracts from said joy, then are you really experiencing joy? Couldn't it be a form of stress*, for instance?

It also helps to know that we are talking about emotions, not preferences. People have preferences towards what they enjoy, which is fine. Enjoying PMO is a preference for some (somehow I have no clue how people enjoy that but they do I guess), but this preference of yours is not inherently enjoyable because the entire point is removed. Your enjoyment is detracted from what you're supposed to "enjoy"? (I'm assuming that you don't feel joy after the session, but do you?). Therefore, PMO being an acceptable preference is miscellaneous, and what we should really be focusing on is the subjectivity of emotion, not the subjectivity of interest. Porn as an expression of the human condition is interesting, but you indulging in it by PMO isn't inherently enjoyable if enjoyment is detracted after a session (and arguable during it, too!). That being said, you would eventually lead yourself to the conclusion of PMO not being interesting, since it isn't inherently enjoyable; the point of PMO becomes contradictory, in that the interest is derived from the so-called "pleasure" (Remember, it isn't actually pleasure).

My approach involved recognizing that I derived so-called pleasure from PMO being inherently interesting, when it clearly doesn't satiate a peak (it already has satiated just a peak, and therefore it can't be interesting anymore. It's the same, singular outcome over and over again, regardless of aesthetic or circumstance). I then realized that interest derived from the so-called gaining of "pleasure" could not exist due to the recognition that PMO's so-called gaining of "pleasure" for me was actually a form of stress, stress in the guise of a feeling similar to pleasure (it's not pleasure). Before, noticed how I literally did not say PMO is interesting. In your circumstance, PMO is a flawed method for engaging with porn. That's why people actually like creating porn as an art form. It's not "porn" to them, it's simply another category of creativity, hypothetically.

Part 3:
୧⍤⃝ Sampling the Moment of Revelation

This is where it gets mind blowing: If you're using the Easypeasymethod, its effectiveness comes from acknowledging that you feel pleasure before PMO (as a non-user), but not after PMO. Because you don't feel pleasure after PMO, you are actively detracting from pleasure <- (revelation?). Porn-users (addicts) seek PMO in the hopes of not feeling the stress, when it's simply the little monster who actively engages in the same mechanisms (stress guised as pleasure > the urge) as you do when PMOing! PMO-users (addicts) haven't acknowledged that PMO is actually the depletion of pleasure and actually entirely stress, and because they're unaware that they're physiologically forcing themselves to actively deplete pleasure <- (revelation?) they only double down on the belief that they gain "pleasure," when pleasure is actually sought outside of PMO all together, where it's not inauthentically stressed, but authentically experienced through any other activity but PMO. As technological innovation would follow, we've created an extraordinary vice.

The little monsters dies as you die, so when you catch the little monster dying, (you've already experienced PMO…)

^ This bubble right here, might just be the silver-lining that your moment of revelation would follow if you were to continue on your journey, convincingly so. Arguably, two people come to this conclusion:

• Those who've spent years addicted and are now of old age

• Those who follow the utility of their insights through enough obsession. <- This was me right here

The easypeasymethod is a form of this obsession, and there's many more (e.g. The Freedom Model) heck you might already be half-way there, but all you need is an individual's substantial experience. Journaling for an audience, you guys specifically, helped a lot. But, I think this is the secret code, a giant facade! Non-users either haven't endured the stress-gauntlet of PMO or they've acknowledged it! Are you willing to acknowledge that you're already a happy non-user?