Anonymous (ID: 9d564d) No.352328
File: 1578347601328.png (110.25 KB, 500x585, 1529602345190.png)
I did always think it was weird that people will half-jokingly express an understanding that "too much porn will make you desensitized to normal stuff and make you acquire new fetishes" once you've built up a tolerance to the vanilla, but the "coomer" meme simultaneously acts like pleasuring oneself too much will increase your sensitivity and give you a boner the instant you see a boob.
Obviously it's well known that stuff like gay conversion never worked to expunge a previous sexual orientation, but I wonder whether or not it might apply to adding an artificial pleasure-source in.
You do see bizarre things like those "female separatists" who allegedly "choose" to only ever screw other girls as an act of secession from males.
If it really did turn out to be true that you could just give yourself a kink from overexposure - then, for these specific purposes only, there would be no compelling reason for a hard-line between an orientation and a paraphilia, other than the obvious problem of the term "paraphilia" being used in political contexts to delegitimize an orientation by equating it to a disorder in diagnostic books. But there's no reason to classify a paraphilia as a disorder either, unless it's obviously having seriously deleterious social consequences. And on the point of "impairing an individual's ability to function" as determinant for whether something's a disorder, an individual could just as easily claim that their own orientation was causing them serious distress as they could a paraphilia. They're just quirks, with varying degrees of impact on the person's life.
So there's definitely a social reason to draw a hard line between the two, for sure, but I'm not convinced we have a mechanistic one. If your lust is the typical object-oriented kind cismales have, then, say, intangible characteristics of the target might be only as relevant to the attraction as it is to a fetish. I think it's commonly understood that in females, who often report their own attraction is a lot less object-oriented, also tend to have fewer paraphilias than males, so there might actually be a harder line between gender-dimorphic attraction than between a sex-orientation and a paraphilia in male lust. This could also explain the perception that there's a larger pool of bisexual females than males.
It might help OP if they could find a kink they had that doesn't specifically deal with sexually dimorphic features, then only pleasure themselves to porn featuring that kink being done to their desired target gender, rather than their typical favored one. Don't know how solid it is but it's the most obvious apparent Pavlovian route.