Prior to the advent of the internet, free pornography was relatively difficult to come by. You had to know someone who could provide access or hope for the proverbial nudie mag in a ditch. But the world wide web brought with it both cheap and relatively anonymous mass access to pornography and headaches for the church. It turns out it was only easy to avoid the temptation of pornography when it was hard to find.
I asked friend of the blog, Ziff, to run a quick and dirty analysis of the mentions of “pornography” in General Conference. He cautions that this is not entirely accurate, because it didn’t catch euphemisms like “filth.” But I still think the data is interesting. 
There are a couple of early jumps in the late 70s and early 80s, but the real growth of mentions of “pornography” starts in the mid-nineties and climbs to a peak in the mid-aughts. The period from 2004 to 2006 is peak “pornography,” with the number of mentions those three years far exceeding all trackable years before and since. Not coincidentally, it was in 2005 that the church released its Addiction Recovery Program manual, which has been the basis for the church’s battle with pornography ever since.
The ARP manual is based on the 12 steps, a program first conceived by a group of alcoholics who were facing death and destitution during the Great Depression. It teaches management of one’s alcoholism, treating it as a disease with physical effects, rather than a compulsion that can be overcome merely by an application of will. And, as a part of the process, alcoholics are encouraged to rely on a higher power, which can be understood as God or as the combined goodwill of the AA group you are attending or both, really. But the key thing about a program like Alcoholics Anonymous, or its cousin Narcotics Anonymous, is that if the participants don’t quit their addiction, they will die.
You’ll note, though, that the ARP manual came out in the midst of an epidemic of a different nature. It appears to have been the church’s primary attempt to counter the spread and effects of pornography consumption. And since the era of peak pornography, the mentions in General Conference have diminished. It almost appears like the Brethren feel that the 12-step approach is a strong enough foundation to support its campaign against pornography. But that may very well be a mistake.
And, recent studies seem to show that treating pornography as an addiction is very likely counter-productive. There are several reasons for this. First of all, there is nothing to indicate that the availability of pornography increases the likelihood of becoming addicted to it. In other words, access to pornography does not, in and of itself, make people want to consume it more. Rather, the biggest factor in whether or not someone starts to compulsively consume pornography is religiosity; If you are religious, consuming pornography might make you feel guilty and isolated, which negative feelings one then turns to pornography to alleviate. Rinse and repeat.
Noone likes the cone of shame.
You can’t turn to your family or your bishop for help, because you are effectively admitting to having the sin next to murder in your heart. There are real-world consequences for that. So you are driven into a shame spiral that results in you consuming more and more pornography in order to cope. This can become a compulsive behavior, which can destroy relationships, cost jobs, and generally make you miserable. What it can’t do is kill you, which is why this isn’t an addiction. Which is also why it shouldn’t be treated as one.
As Rebekah Crawford recently reminded us, the language we use can affect how we understand ourselves. There does not appear to be a good reason to use the language of addiction to describe compulsive pornography consumption. There is a difference between a drug or alcohol addiction and the compulsive checking of the phone or of gambling. I’m not denying (or interested in denying) the negative effects of the latter, but there are physical changes in the body that the former undergo that put it in a separate category. And we already have the language to accomplish that difference by labeling physical chemical dependency addiction and other compulsive behaviors compulsive behaviors.
Of course, the language and metaphor of addiction can be helpful for people suffering from other compulsive behaviors, but I attended meetings mostly in Utah County, where the porn addiction was thick on the ground. I sometimes felt like my fellow 12-steppers were using the language of addiction as a justification of their behavior or, more frequently, that they were treating this system as something it wasn’t. One thing about being around a table with alcoholics and drug addicts, they know that everyone relapses and, when someone does, it can get bad (life-threateningly bad). Relapse was something that the Utah County porn addict either believed they would never do (naively, I’d say) or that they had done so much that attending meetings wasn’t so much about working the steps as about simply mitigating guilt. The 12-steps exist to help folks manage a disease that will kill them eventually, but the dudes around the table in Utah County were just looking for a means to keep their ego afloat. What they need is counseling with a responsible counselor. Taking the language of addiction away is a means to get folks heading in the right direction.
Don’t misunderstand me; the time I’ve spent in 12-step meetings has done more to help me understand repentance and grace that all the time I’ve spent in priesthood meetings combined. It’s just the addiction model doesn’t help people compulsively consuming pornography. It pathologizes a perfectly normal, healthy desire for sex and sexual release. There is nothing wrong about those emotions unless you’ve been taught that they are the gateway drug to a half-life of misery. It makes you think any consumption of pornography is pathological; the reality is that, on average, “porn addicts” don’t consume more porn than non-addicts, they just feel guiltier about it. It leads you to believe that your desires are so shameful that they can only really be shared with fellow degenerates; cutting you off from necessary interactions with your loved ones. There is very little upside to this approach that couldn’t be alternatively gained from seeing a good counselor and having a patient, understanding bishop.
So, while it appears that the Brethren may have adopted the 12 steps as their primary means of helping congregants overcome their compulsive consumption of pornography, it may well be that they could better help the members by trying a different approach. The 12 steps, though positive, shouldn’t be the final word. Rather, it may well be that the Brethren could better help the members by trying a different approach. Perhaps a new approach would be truly sex-positive. To encourage discussion of human desires, physical libido, emotional intimacy, couples’ communication, and consent. That sunlight and conversation, rather than shame and compulsive silence, is the best disinfectant. There are a multitude of Mormon therapists, including sex therapists, who could shed light on healthier models of discussion; lets listen to them.