Racy pics, within marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter sarahraegraham
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

sarahraegraham

Guest
Not sure if this has been addressed before, but what would the Church’s and all of your opinions be on a husband and wife engaging in a little “racy” but tame photography for their own private and temporary use. I’m not talking hardcore… What I mean is, maybe a kind of a playful playing around with a camera, not keeping images or videos for any later time or use… Just in the moment.

Thoughts, opinions, all are welcome! 🙂
 
Glad I never did that. Can’t imagine how I’d feel if someone who turned out to be untrustworthy and mean had pictures like that of me, or used my actions against me in court.

No, you don’t plan that way, or you don’t want to… but life happens sometimes. 😊
 
I’m not married, nor would personally be comfortable having pictures taken of me I don’t think even by husband…but I don’t see how there’s anything wrong with it. Its private and between the couple.
 
I (personally) see no problem with this.
Either delete the pics immediatly, or keep them,
and any videos, locked in a separate safe.

Yes, someone COULD someday break in and
take them, and they COULD wind up as some
sort of blackmail, or on the internet, but I refuse
to live my life by what MIGHT happen, esp something
so unlikely. How possible is this anyway? Anyone
got references/proof of this happening?
Anytime this question comes up, on any forum, the
old ‘they’ll get stolen and put on the internet’ argument
comes up, b/c no one can come up with a decent
argument against it, they just don’t feel comfy with it.

Take the pics/videos whatever, and enjoy them
between yourselves.
 
sarahraegraham said:
Not sure if this has been addressed before, but what would the Church’s and all of your opinions be on a husband and wife engaging in a little “racy” but tame photography for their own private and temporary use. I’m not talking hardcore… What I mean is, maybe a kind of a playful playing around with a camera, not keeping images or videos for any later time or use… Just in the moment.
Click to expand...
Pics you’ve taken of yourselves, by yourselves and not shown to anyone else are OK. If it means the partner can blackmail you at will then that’s probably a good thing.
However be extremely careful that they cannot get into the wrong hands. I’d really advise against it, but for prudence, not prudity.
 
Thanks for the responses so far. I’m not asking for myself but as to the principal, the Church’s teachings (if there are any) and the opinions of other Catholics. If you brought something like this up in a secular context I already know what that answer would be, so… Personally, I would feel uncomfortable with it on several levels. But that’s just me.
 
Each to their own, but I would feel very uncomfortable with anything like this. I can’t cite doctrine to back up my instinct, but my instinct is it interfers with the natural process of a marital relationship.
 
I fail to see how such pictures would be unitive and procreative.

I see it as lustful and degrading. It falls under the heading of pornography.

I agree with puzzleannie…sick
 
iamrefreshed said:
I fail to see how such pictures would be unitive and procreative.

I see it as lustful and degrading. It falls under the heading of pornography.

I agree with puzzleannie…sick
Click to expand...
I don’t see this as bad. Certainly not pornography IMO although I suppose like many actions between a couple, it could be lustful. Don’t see how it is degrading if it is an agreed action.

The OP states that the action at issue is “a kind of a playful playing around with a camera, not keeping images or videos for any later time or use… Just in the moment.”

This seems quite different to me than taking images for use later. How is this morally any different than the spouses taking a few minutes to look at each other directly?
 
I guess I don’t get the question…

What would be the purpose in taking a picture, a printed image, if one is not intending to keep that image? What could the point possibly be?🤷 I mean are we talking something like…take a pic with a digital camera then immediately delete it? What is the sense in that?

I think honestly, that if someone is going to take a picture, it’s because they want to capture a moment, or an image, and keep that image. If a man is asking a woman to take such pictures under the guise of ‘oh I’m not going to look at these again ever’ well, I think that is a bit naive
 
iamrefreshed said:
I fail to see how such pictures would be unitive and procreative.

I see it as lustful and degrading. It falls under the heading of pornography.

I agree with puzzleannie…sick
Click to expand...
Of course it’s not unitive and procreative, but it doesn’t have to be either. It’s not a sexual act.

As long as this is something done chastely by the husband and wife, it is morally permissible.
 
I’d never take a picture that I do not want to see on YouTube.
 
kage_ar said:
I’d never take a picture that I do not want to see on YouTube.
Click to expand...
I think that this is good advice. If you wouldn’t be embarrased if your kids found the pictures then go ahead and take them.

My mother took racy pictures to send to my father in Vietnam. How do I know? Because after her death, I found them in a box beneath her bed. Not something I wanted to view.:eek:

I don’t think that any sin was committed on the part of my parents but it certainly wasn’t prudent.
 
Sure said:
Of course it’s not unitive and procreative, but it doesn’t have to be either. It’s not a sexual act.

As long as this is something done chastely by the husband and wife, it is morally permissible.
Click to expand...
Now I am confused. Can someone give an example of a type of pictures. The word chaste sounds like the type of pictures a mom would take holding her children. I was thinking more along the lines of wearing slinky undergarments in the photo. We might all need some clarification as to what we are referring to.
 
deb1 said:
Now I am confused. Can someone give an example of a type of pictures. The word chaste sounds like the type of pictures a mom would take holding her children. I was thinking more along the lines of wearing slinky undergarments in the photo. We might all need some clarification as to what we are referring to.
Click to expand...
Ouch…did you stab your eyes…I would have.
 
My opinion is formed by Church teaching on this. Be careful! I am not going to say that it is sick. What I am going to say is that it may lead to objectification of one by the other. In and of itself, husband and wife and no others, it is just something. But, it is very possible that one person can start seeing the other as an object to grant arousal. Just be careful. I would say to avoid it.
 
deb1 said:
Now I am confused. Can someone give an example of a type of pictures. The word chaste sounds like the type of pictures a mom would take holding her children. I was thinking more along the lines of wearing slinky undergarments in the photo. We might all need some clarification as to what we are referring to.
Click to expand...
I used chaste because all marital actions ought to be chaste. Married people are called to live chastity. Chaste does not mean what we would commonly refer to as “modest” it means virtuous or pure. In the context of married people in their bedroom, chaste could refer to very revealing lingerie and other erotic behaviors…things that if done or worn publically would be decidedly unchaste.
 
Sure said:
I used chaste because all marital actions ought to be chaste. Married people are called to live chastity. Chaste does not mean what we would commonly refer to as “modest” it means virtuous or pure. In the context of married people in their bedroom, chaste could refer to very revealing lingerie and other erotic behaviors…things that if done or worn publically would be decidedly unchaste.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I see that my definition was confused.🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top