Olives @olives@qoto.org

There was also someone who expected me to read his mind, uh, I can't answer questions which haven't been asked, lol. It's also probably not possible / practical to pre-answer every question which could be asked.

I'm willing to experiment with a new style but I'm not going to write ten lengthy pieces of the same thing for social media, lol.

The reason I'm experimenting with a new style is that I keep thinking "maybe, it would be useful to add this bit of context, or to add that bit of context" and it gets tacked onto the end and the text becomes harder to maintain.

I think something like that might be easier to follow than a numerical citation format on here, particularly as you can't really hover over the numbers to get more context. The downside is that it's a bit more wordy.

The links are a bit less accessible (they're at the end which someone needs to scroll to) but there is also a bit more context there than a lone link can provide and it avoids littering the text with a lot of links.

To give you a draft excerpt, I'm going for something like this:

"There are quite a few pieces of science which call online porn being spooky into question.

A Canadian study showed more gender egalitarian attitudes among users of porn (Kohut et al., 2015). A German study failed to find a link between porn use and sexism or "social dominance orientation" (Von Andrian-Werburg et al., 2023)."

"Kohut, T., Baer, J. L., & Watts, B. (2015). Is Pornography Really about “Making Hate to Women”? Pornography Users Hold More Gender Egalitarian Attitudes Than Nonusers in a Representative American Sample. The Journal of Sex Research, 53(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2015.1023427

Von Andrian-Werburg, M. T. P., Siegers, P., & Breuer, J. (2023). A Re-evaluation of Online Pornography Use in Germany: A Combination of Web Tracking and Survey Data Analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 52(8), 3491–3503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02666-8"

While trying out a new citation style (this is going to take a while for me to write, I'm not just copy-pasting older posts of mine), I'm also doing a spot of double-checking of links / sources.

Since it's been published, I'll make a post about it.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-023-02666-8
"A Re-evaluation of Online Pornography Use in Germany: A Combination of Web Tracking and Survey Data Analysis"

"Our analyses were based on data from a large-scale German online web tracking panel (N = 3018) gathered from June 2018 to June 2019. The study we present here has two parts: In the first part, we looked at group differences (gender and age) in tracked OPU."

"while relationship status, sexist attitudes, and social dominance orientation were not associated with OPU"
#sexology #Germany

Speaking of which, I might have to update one of the links in one of my science posts, although that is more to do with using a preprint until the paper got published. I didn't notice that got published until I reviewed the links.

I might try a new citation style in a few posts to make it easier to visually tell which map to which links.

Should I use a link to the publisher or the DOI URL in posts? The DOI URL might be more resilient to URL changes, although the link to the publisher is usually a bit more informative.

It might be a bit long though, and you will see why I sometimes like to stick to a bullet point style.

Working on a new post to see if a new style is better.

Generally, I'm avoiding linking to third party opinions here (other than avoiding bad takes, I'd like something more concrete), and instead focusing on actual scientific studies.

I added Dr. Lehmiller in as he did a relevant study (and he added useful context). I linked directly to an article written by him on his column in Psychology Today.

I'm aware that third party opinions can attract more interest though, and I've linked to a few of those before. I'm trying to avoid complicating things in this one.

On second thought, I changed the question mark as someone might not get the rhetorical question.

"upload moderation". New euphemism for mass-surveillance. #chatcontrol #privacy

Be careful with criticizing Big Tech lobbying against State "#privacy law" proposals as a few of these have similarities to #KOSA (censorship bills).

I wish we could collectively stop referring to someone's (tiny) blog where they post hot takes about current affairs as "news media". While I think people have the right to comment on current affairs, there is hardly even an editorial process.

If you have some thoughts on this, I'd be happy to hear them. I considered posting this more widely but I don't really want to make a loud statement about this matter in particular.

https://www.salon.com/2024/05/31/madonna-sued-for-pornography-without-warning-and-for-deceptively-marketing-her-world-tour/ Frivolous lawsuits.