He doesn't explicitly present the evolutionary argument as compelling evidence that we're helpless against pornography. In context, it can just as easily be re

He doesn't explicitly present the evolutionary argument as compelling evidence that we're helpless against pornography. In context, it can just as easily be read as an explanation for why it is plausible. If you don't buy it as evidence, you don't have to read it that way. A few paragraphs later, he appeals to experience, saying: "It is perhaps only people who haven’t felt the full power of sex over their logical selves who can remain uncensorious and liberally 'modern' on the subject. Philosophies of sexual liberation appeal mostly to people who don’t have anything too destructive or weird that that they wish to do once they have been liberated. "However, anyone who has experienced the power of sex in general and internet pornography in particular to reroute our priorities is unlikely to be so sanguine about liberty." I don't want to keep quoting passages, so I encourage you to read the whole thing.