I would partially disagree with the notion that pornography addiction is a symptom, not a cause.
I didn't say that. I pointed out that it is possible to become addicted to things that are crucial to our survival like food in a very small minority of cases. You eat to the point of compulsive obsession. The sex drive seems like no exception. This small proportion of people who become addicted to food or pornography is hardly at a crisis point like Stick's speaker suggested though or above any kind of normal level, porn is no heroin.
What i was trying to say was that many people who are supposed "addicted" or "overuse" pornography might be doing so because of other conditions they previously had, much in the same way depressed people are more likely to abuse alcohol.
Dependence is where going without it is almost maddening. I'm convinced almost everyone who watches it could go a few days or a week and not be a total wreck.
-------------------
This is a brief, but referenced article
I looked it up in Ulrich and it's
not a peer reviewed journal, you can publish pretty much whatever you like without anyone checking out whether its scientifically true or accurate (eg. not total bullshit).

Despite the URL, this is a reasonable approach (and is rather short).
The other article doesn't even appear to have been published
at all. Indeed, all the citations i could find point back to that website it was uploaded on, the social costs of pornography, so it appears it originated on that website and perhaps was even written for that website (they obviously have an agenda to push as well).
If the history of dodgy science has taught us anything, its that publication and peer review are
crucial to science as we know it. There's no reason we should accept these articles are
worth anything, they haven't been published in peer reviewed journals and checked by experts who do understand these things.
None of us here are experts in this field so we lack the knowledge to comprehensively evaluate them properly.
You seemed to be firmly convinced that it causes harm, so, where are the proper articles that convinced you? Unless you just thought it was reasonable or it fitted your view and just ran with it. I got no problem if you want to do that but it clearly ain't science