E
edwest2
Guest
If you feel comforted by that statement, that’s up to you.
catholic.org/ae/celebrity/story.php?id=36579
Peace,
Ed
- Status
catholic.org/ae/celebrity/story.php?id=36579
Peace,
Ed
J
Jerry_Parker
Guest
Scameter wrote: What about nude photography/modeling? And how can one discern what the intention of the artist is, whether sexual or artistic?
Good question! I think that most people understand that painting and statuary often require live nude models for the artist to rely on in carrying out his work. Well, even more obviously, nude photography requires nude models. I suspect that the slippery edge into pornography is more of a problem for photography than it is for the visual arts that sculptors and painters carry out.When I was young and foolish and a reasonably good-looking undergraduate male university student (at the University of Massachusetts, Boston), as well as temporarily lapsed in faith at that time, I once posed nude, anonymously for a professional artist and friendly professor whom I had met and who asked me to pose as a favour; he was preparing an art exhibition of nude male photoportraits for an art museum that is part of Harvard University. I never found out what the photograph of me was like, if the photographer did with the photo what he said that he would be doing, or how exactly the photographer really did end up using it in his art project. I
ve always wondered about that or even if the professor used the photo in his exhibit at all; the museum on the very complex Harvard campus was just too difficult to locate. The last time that I saw this professor was on another occasion before the Harvard exhibit took place. I should have made more certain of the photographers artistic intention; anyway, this was a one-time occurrence in my life and I confessed this to a priest long ago. The problem with this sort of situation has not changed and probably is even more relevant with the standards prevalent nowadays.
B
bbentrup
Guest
Your link, which concerns the Miss America pageant, is not really apposite. There, it is broadcast to a wide t.v. audience, and one of the main dangers is quite different compared to nude modeling. A bikini/lingerie shoot is open to the power of suggestion. The idea of the forbidden fruit can be quite alluring. Camera focus is often on the certain parts and the body is perfectly toned.
Nude modelling, as generally conceived in this thread, is for a limited audience, perhaps even a private one. Easily accessible mass media has not been suggested in this thread. The artistic nude model is not trying to play seduction games with the viewer, unlike the other. Her (or his) body is there in its full glory, imperfections (the norm) and all. The mind doesn’t have to fight against forbidden fruit ideas, it can simply and readily soak in the beauty and personhood.
Obviously both have their dangers; but the second, far more than the first, has plenty of goodness that makes the dangers worthwhile under certain circumstances. It’s almost apples and oranges. The first does not negate the second, as your posting of that link would seem to imply.
E
edwest2
Guest
B
bbentrup
Guest
Non sequitur.
T
thunderboom
Guest
So you are against the use of beauty for God’s glory?
Ed…in case you forget, nude art just as often involves men. In fact, in my experience, you often begin life drawing classes with the male figure as.
You cannot contend that nude art is the exploitation of women for money as it equally involves male models.
F
feed_me
Guest
It’s not you who flips the OFF switch, it is God who does that. When God does that flip, which is forgive you and removes the poison from you, you have a peace and refocus on life, where nothing bothers you, including women nude or not. What is flipping the ON switch is the demons who want you back in that sin, so they are constantly flipping the ON switch with whatever tactics they can to make sure that you go back to that sin.
Does that make some since now?
J
Jerry_Parker
Guest
Feed wrote: It’s not you who flips the OFF switch, it is God who does that. When God does that flip, which is forgive you and removes the poison from you, you have a peace and refocus on life, where nothing bothers you, including women nude or not. What is flipping the ON switch is the demons who want you back in that sin, so they are constantly flipping the ON switch with whatever tactics they can to make sure that you go back to that sin.
I needed to read that this evening. Earlier, around noon, I read a report (in French, on Yahoo-France) that researchers have discovered that one can enhance, if one seeks such thrills, the frequency of sexually charged dreams by sleeping on the tummy. Alas, as well as upping the frequency of sexually alluring dreams, it also ups the rate of nightmares
of all kinds!Well, it surely is good to know that there is a divinely palliative spiritual medicine for that!
R
rebeccanew
Guest
This topic reminds me of what I read about St Teresa, The Little Flower. A Sister in the convent was afraid to go to the art museum because of the nude statues and asked St Teresa what she should do. Her response was “Grow up!”
Priceless…wisdom right here…This topic reminds me of what I read about St Teresa, The Little Flower. A Sister in the convent was afraid to go to the art museum because of the nude statues and asked St Teresa what she should do. Her response was “Grow up!”
B
bbentrup
Guest
LikePriceless…wisdom right here…
D
Debora123
Guest
Yup, basically.This topic reminds me of what I read about St Teresa, The Little Flower. A Sister in the convent was afraid to go to the art museum because of the nude statues and asked St Teresa what she should do. Her response was “Grow up!”
D
Debora123
Guest
Sooooo you’re basically saying that “lust” is not a choice.
WRONG.
Dead wrong. Lust is a sin, and like all sins, lust is a choice.
Lust is NOT an involuntary sexual arousal. That is normal. Lust is NOT sexual attraction to another person. That too, is normal.
LUST is when you make the choice to degrade another person’s humanity down to an object served to satisfy your own selfish desires.
F
feed_me
Guest
S
SerraSemper
Guest
My feed back is that millions of people provide -]free /-] photographic nude modeling- no, they pay for the privilege- and in a percentage of cases accept groping as well for the titillation of certain minions in the name of safety. What happens to those digital photos is up to anyone’s guess. Just as the weakest link to a safe can be the human being, so can the weakest link to deleting those photos taken of travelers be a human or government exposed to many temptations. The models in this case feel quite comfortable (except for raising their hands like prisoners), and do not sense any privacy loss since they don’t see the exposure. My take on it is that given the circumstances and questionable destinations of the images, this kind of nude modeling is sinful.
B
bbentrup
Guest
This is really a garbled post. It sounds like there is a point, but I don’t know what it is. Your tone is obviously against nude modeling, but you cite “a percentage of cases” which suggests that you believe its not intrinsically immoral. But the main question is what “circumstances” are you talking about “in this case”? Notice the main question to which you replied was general, and devoid of circumstances, so if you are arguing against a given scenario, please spell it out first.
- Status