B
Bookcat
Guest
YES but not via such publications.
jimmyakin.com/2009/01/appreciating-beauty-vs-concupiscence.html (JA of CA)
- Status
jimmyakin.com/2009/01/appreciating-beauty-vs-concupiscence.html (JA of CA)
B
Burdensome1
Guest
Touche, but I’m speaking to a person (the OP) who apparently has no connection to a culture war and is not fit to judge the players in one, so I’m treating the publication as in a vacuum to make a point about temptation and changeable cultural standards of modesty. Next time I’ll send a memo.
C
clem456
Guest
The immorality of an image does not lie solely in the eye of the beholder.
Some expressions of “art” are intrinsically immoral, due to the producers’ intent, or the intent of the art, the way a woman is presented. Women are not sex objects and should not be presented as such.
That being said, a piece of art produced in a moral way can be twisted into immorality in heart of the viewer. For some men, simply dwelling on modest beauty can be an occasion for sin (that’s me).
Some expressions of “art” are intrinsically immoral, due to the producers’ intent, or the intent of the art, the way a woman is presented. Women are not sex objects and should not be presented as such.
That being said, a piece of art produced in a moral way can be twisted into immorality in heart of the viewer. For some men, simply dwelling on modest beauty can be an occasion for sin (that’s me).
C
clem456
Guest
No such thing exists.
L
Lost_Sheep
Guest
Oh, it’s still immoral. But my point is, if it doesn’t get me excited and I’m like “Big Whoop” when I see it, I don’t see how I have committed the sin of lust.
B
Burdensome1
Guest
That’s correct, lust requires that you actually be lusting after someone.
There are other sins, as others are furiously pointing out, but if we’re talking about lust, you’d be aware if you were experiencing it.
A
Armor_of_Light
Guest
You haven’t…
The sin is in the either explicit or implicit approval of such things.
Hooters cannot get my business no matter how great the food is.
Playboy cannot get me to buy it no matter how great the articles are.
Strip clubs cannot get my business no matter how hard those girls work to put themselves through college.
B
Burdensome1
Guest
Agreed, but we’re not talking about a strip club. We’re talking about, for instance, a workout magazine or Sports Illustrated. I’m sure someone will make the argument that Sports Illustrated is trying to destroy the culture, and this may be true for all I know, but lots of people still think of it as a sports publication.
A
Armor_of_Light
Guest
Oh yah…I know we are not talking about a strip club. That is exit #94 on this highway…we are at exit #15!
If you put up a girly calendar, in effect you are saying “This is what I think of women”. You wouldn’t do it if it was your mom on there. You wouldn’t do it if it was your daughter, sister, etc… You especially wouldn’t do it if it was the blessed mother represented that way.
I just re-read the OP, so sorry I’m actually kind of responding to a different problem. I see that the OP is not planning on displaying a girly calendar at all!
P
prodigalson2011
Guest
Maxim is not a workout magazine. It’s a sex and entertainment magazine whose chief selling point is in publishing racy photos of famous women.
B
Burdensome1
Guest
So let me get a ruling. Maxim is out, but SI is in?
A
Armor_of_Light
Guest
I agree.
I just picked up a copy of “The Ring” magazine and I see it has changed since I last saw it (10 years ago). They added a centerfold type thing featuring ‘ring girls’. I plan on tearing that part out altogether.
C
clem456
Guest
Let’s be specific. For what purpose is the SI swimsuit issue published?
T
The_Bucket
Guest
I mean, he doesn’t need to read that issue. I get Bloomberg magazine and one issue’s front cover and main story was the business of pornography. I obviously ditched that issue. Do I need to unsubscribe altogether? No.
Frankly I think ESPN’s “The Body” issue is far less objectionable than the SI swimsuit issue. Seems to be far more about the human form than anything else; they frequently have disabled athletes participate as well. If I didn’t think so low of ESPN in general for being hacktackular when it comes to its journalism, I’d say that The Body could qualify as high art.
E
Eufrosnia
Guest
I think my friend, all of this is because you have no standard to draw from as to what is inappropriate. To clarify, in the past, one would automatically say that both these magazines are inappropriate. Why? Because the women portrayed in these magazines are dressed inappropriately i.e. will cause temptation to the average viewer. Similarly, a woman will be more than hesitant to dress this way because they will feel “yucky” or “being used”.
This form of knowledge on what is tempting to the average individual as well as instilling a conscious attitude toward what is exposed in women is fostered by Culture. As Bl. JP II indicates in his Theology of the Body, such a fostering is indeed good and the personal sensitivity it instills in one regarding ones body and those of others is reflective of the truth of a human being.
Good news is that this is still the case in some parts of the world. Bad news is that the Western part of the world has more or less completely eradicated such a standard.
So if you asked my mother for an example, she will tell you that both these magazines are inappropriate though she might not be able to justify reasons for her intuition. But most who have grown up in this culture would have to start a whole discussion to analyze the situation using moral theology to try and determine if its good or bad. The problem for them is that the data required to judge if its good or bad (i.e. is it tempting to the average individual) is no longer known. Everyone just gives their opinion from their own experience. This too would be fine if the Culture had instilled a healthy personal sensitivity. BUT, as is stands, our current culture does not do that and instead is built around advocating one to dress as sexually attractive as possible.
Now the short answer to your question is that both the magazines you mentioned are not ok to be purchased for the following reasons.
- It portrays women wearing inappropriate attire
- Buying the magazine will promote the magazine and make it the popular standard for women to strive toward
- It causes temptation for the average man
- Even if it did not cause temptation to you, it will still cause temptation for the average man and you will be promoting the manufacture of such magazines.
B
Burdensome1
Guest
Waiting patiently while everyone argues enough to realize a totally subject criteria is no criteria at all…
B
Bookcat
Guest
Both out.
E
Eufrosnia
Guest
That is unfortunately a mistake. The issue here is not that there is a subjective criteria. There is a truly objective criteria to determine proper course of action i.e. What is tempting to the average person.
The problem here is that you and many others do not know how to answer that question because you live in this crazed culture that advocates one to tempt others and at the same time enjoy being tempted/ illicit sexual pleasure. So you have thought it to be subjective or perhaps that such a objective answer does not exist. Strictly logically speaking, as long as there is data, there will always be an average. This average is also not a subjective average. I am not even sure what it would mean to call something a “subjective average”. So your idea that such a thing is subject is purely an error on your part.
E
Eufrosnia
Guest
B
Bookcat
Guest
Catechism:
2523 There is a modesty of the feelings as well as of the body. It protests, for example, against the voyeuristic explorations of the human body in certain advertisements, or against the solicitations of certain media that go too far in the exhibition of intimate things. Modesty inspires a way of life which makes it possible to resist the allurements of fashion and the pressures of prevailing ideologies.
2525 Christian purity requires a purification of the social climate. It requires of the communications media that their presentations show concern for respect and restraint. Purity of heart brings freedom from widespread eroticism and avoids entertainment inclined to voyeurism and illusion.
2522 Modesty protects the mystery of persons and their love. It encourages patience and moderation in loving relationships; it requires that the conditions for the definitive giving and commitment of man and woman to one another be fulfilled. Modesty is decency. It inspires one’s choice of clothing. It keeps silence or reserve where there is evident risk of unhealthy curiosity. It is discreet.
- Status