Sin of the mind and heart?

[bluezone7]

I have an argument I am trying to develop for this forum. Are sexually explicit pictures/videos that are marketed more towards men the same as trashy romance novels and soap opera magazines that are marketed more towards women? My point is that men by nature are more stimulated by what they see (visually) while women by nature are more stimulated by what they read and hear. This is my assumption based on all the biological and psychological data I have read throughout my lifetime. Since both trashy romance novels and sexually explicit pictures lead to lust and promote illegitimate sex. Do they both qualify as pornography? Opinions please.

 

[Mad_Amos]

I think at issue is not the question of whether it constitutes pornography per se, but rather does it stimulate feelings of lust within an individual. In matters of conscience it is invariably our intent that determines our disposition toward sin. An otherwise harmless lingere advertisement in a women’s fashions catalogue might represent the near occasion of sin for someone who finds themselves stimulated by such things. In this regard virtually anything could be considered pornographic.

If we’re simply looking for clinical distinction, however, then I would venture to state that we can subject questionable material to the following scrutiny:

Is the ultimate purpose to stimulate arousal in the recipent?

If the answer is yes, then I think we can safely consider it pornography.
It’s a case of “one man’s treasure is another man’s trash.”

 

[Little_Flower]

I would agree with the above post. I think sexuallity belongs between husband and wife, and it has no place in photo, trashy novels, magazines, movies etc. So yes, I would call it porn I guess! Very interesting post!

 

[Little_Flower]

I would agree with the above post. I think sexuallity belongs between husband and wife, and it has no place in photos, trashy novels, magazines, movies etc. So yes, I would call it porn I guess! Very interesting post!