What is bad, exactly with pornography?

[tbcrawford]

Exactly

My husband has and does use pornography I can say as a wife the pain in your heart is immense. Adultery isn’t ‘just’ a sexual act performed outside marriage, it is viewing a woman to lust after her via pornography. This pornography allows a man to commit adultery in his heart and this is equally as painful and damaging as a sexual affair to a marriage.

 

[jonathan_hili]

But objectification is simply the use of a thing as a means (in itself, morally neutral). Whether or not one also does not believe at the same time, that that thing is a human with dignity is more of a psychological question than a logical one -for it is totally possible to believe that a human has some dignity but nonetheless must serve as a means towards something which is higher. Man is not the good of man but rather happiness is even higher than the goods of some men (hence, the use of servants, families, power, and penal laws). Yet even with servants and subjects (means) a ruler doesn’t think that suddenly these things are not humans anymore and w/o dignity. It just so happens that 9/10 they must be considered not as humans but as objects which serve a specific purpose.

Sure, and 9/10 this would be highly immoral. A human being is not a thing, especially for a Christian who sees Man as made in God’s image and likeness. For anyone to use another person in such a way is always wrong, regardless of the perceived higher goods. Even if a great saint were to use someone to help feed the poor or relieve suffering, it would still be wrong.

God does love us, but if anything, that is what makes the objectification even higher in His case -for God’s love for us is totally divorced from our conception of our "subjective " worth. God can destroy us and still love us while we will protest against our own destruction 9/10.

I don’t get it. God’s love for us means we can’t be objectified in His eyes. He doesn’t see us as anything but His children. Who objectifies his own child? “God can destroy us and still love us”??? Huh???

It would be equally hard to care for someone’s dignity under other circumstances like if you get into an argument with them or a physical confrontation, or if you were performing surgery on them, or if you were having sex with them. The fact that these actions produce vivid emotions that intoxicate you and thereby keep you from actually visually imagining their human dignity doesn’t mean that you have said that do not think they have any at all. After all, we don’t often imagine the dignity of an angel and since they are beyond our experiences we perhaps are mistaken when we do imagine, however that doesn’t mean we cease to believe in their dignity.

I disagree. If you are having sex with someone, presumably you care about them - and aren’t just using them, like a prostitute - and therefore don’t want to deliberately demean them. Also, if you are performing surgery on someone, presumably you believe their health something to be valued and want to restore it to them because of what and who they are. Even while performing the surgery, while the surgeon may be focused on the task at hand, he still has the person’s good at the back of his mind.

It’s not a matter of “imagining” dignity but treating someone as if they have dignity. When you save someone’s limb, make love to them out of love’s sake, or do something for their good, you are respecting their dignity. When your action is motivated by your own desires and not towards their good, you are not respecting their dignity.

I think that the difference here lies in my contention that the disconnect between porn and dignity is merely contingent and not necessary. After all, seeing porn might make you say “perhaps that person is on the wrong path and should be helped” and this is to affirm the porn star’s dignity. Either this or you are destined to react in a bad way to porn, in which case, I ask are you going to react the same if you accidentally saw a married couple having sex? If not, then why? For they are both nude, they (let us assume) are both in good physical condition, they are both doing something that (were we in their position) we would enjoy -so why are we helpless in one situation but not in the other? The reason I believe, has more to do with ourselves than what we see. As such the intrinsic nature of porn’s evil continues to allude me. But this talk about objectivization is food for thought.

If you watch porn to motivate you to help the person, then there is some good coming out of it. However, who watches porn for this reason?

Well, if you “accidentally” saw a couple having sex, that’s accidental. Very different from (i) deliberately watching strangers who are (ii) paid by a parasitic industry to (iii) perform acts intended to be an expression of love and towards procreation for money and disassociated from their real selves for (iv) one’s own sexual gratification.

Can’t you see the difference? Regardless of whether their is a viewer or not, the production of porn is bad in itself because of what it does with people, a far cry from a loving married couple.

Let me ask another question that would clear the fog: in what sense is a person dignified?

I think the dignity of a person lies in who and what a person is, primarily as a child of God and made in His image and likeness, but also a subject, a centre of consciousness. As such, a person is to be respected for his or her own sake.

 

[gam197]

originally posted by
I think porn is wrong because it objectifies women. That’s not a faith thing, just a personal moral view.

It not only objectifies but many think it is related to violence against women. If you can demean a person by making them a non-person, then you can kill them. The military does that for a purpose but humans do it their own lives, too. I am concerned about women’s usage, in that does it encourage them to objectify their children? What about the effect on 13 year old girls who are over-sexualized and see them themselves only in regard to their looks.

A study done by Benjamin Edelman, Harvard professor gives us statistics. Is his study bias and bogus, probably as he tries to pin it on the red conservative states that they are the major consumers. Still some of his facts seem correct. it is the 18 to 30 males who is the main consumers of porn.

According to a 2009 study on Internet pornography by Jerry Ropelato, there are approximately 400 million pornographic websites. The study said there were only 1.3 million websites in 2003…
White and Khym said one major reason pornography is so rampant is because of the three ‘A’s’: availability, anonymity, and affordability.

bcc.rcav.org/component/content/article/1-latest-news/2345-pornography-wounds-human-dignity

It is linked to masturbation - both are addictive.

Studies on masturbation often give us figures for time to time use or occasional use and can make us see the world in a twisted way like everyone is doing it regularly so why not.

marriage.about.com/cs/masturbation/f/masturbatfaq3.htm

 

[gam197]

orignally posted by fakename
For instance, we know that human nature is neither naturally good or evil but we also know that human nature is a “good” (in some sense). So what does this imply for action? If we know something is good then it should be wrong to disregard it, and yet if that is true regarding humanity, then humanness becomes what we assumed it was not -inherently good. Very confusing.

Human nature in neither good or evil in regard to actions, we can choose either to do good or to do evil.

Life is a good.

 

[clem456]

.

It seems you are willing to jump through a lot of convoluted hoops logically to argue against the immorality of pornography.
So if you are not able to comprehend the Christian position on the morality of it, maybe you can work backwards and take a look at the obvious consequences of pornography. (This would be the “child’s finger on a hot stove approach”).
Find us a person who has viewed pornography for say 10, 20 years, and tell us what sort of person you run into. Is that a person full of peace and joy and healthy relationships?

Find us a person who is addicted to porn and tell us about the destruction he/she has done to his family…wife, kids, parents, workplace.
Perhaps child molestation, adulterous affairs, abortions, diseases, drugs, murder of children or disposable women? Prison maybe? Did you know that one thing almost all serial murderers have in common is an addiction to pornography?

How about the production of it. If you cannot comprehend what objectification is, look at the women who “star” in these movies. Find us one and tell us how fulfilling this work is for her. How much her family supports her and loved her. Is she a runaway? Is porn good for her self esteem? Does she have to take amphetamines to get ready for a movie? How about heroin to kill the pain at night? Alcohol? Cocaine? Diseases? Beatings? Maybe she’s an undocumented immigrant held captive, who will be murdered when the men who hold her are done objectifying her. (sorry for the big word). If you snicker because you think this example is over the top, laugh at yourself. This happens all the time, maybe not in your neighborhood, but it happens. The squeaky clean image you see of a woman “enjoying” sex, may be the image of a woman whose throat was slit the next day. The men who produce this can do this without an afterthought, because these women are objects, not human beings. An object is disposable.

So if the terms that are being used here are too complex and are incomprehensible, perhaps your burnt hand and common sense will tell you something is not quite right with pornography.
?

 

[Edward_H]

Others have said it very well in other ways…

But porn…making it, selling it, using it…is bad because it’s using our faculties…not just our sexual faculties…in ways counter to their purpose. Our sex organs, our imagination, our memory, our will…our heart…are all corrupted and used in a distorted way when we mingle with porn. Even if we take your example of looking at it as art…is selfish…it ignores the corruption created up the value chain…it ignores the potential scandal of someone else thinking you’re using in ways that you’re not really. In this sense it can contribute to a general lowering of tone in society. We all have our part in maintaining a wholesome tone in our home, neighborhood, society.

The proper purpose of our mind, memory, imagination, body is to love and serve God. Properly and substantially understood sex itself is an act of love for God. We are seeking to make our spouse KNOW and feel as loved as she can feel, as unified, as happy as possible, even if it takes great patience and sacrifice on our part.

 

[fakename]

It seems you are willing to jump through a lot of convoluted hoops logically to argue against the immorality of pornography.
So if you are not able to comprehend the Christian position on the morality of it, maybe you can work backwards and take a look at the obvious consequences of pornography. (This would be the “child’s finger on a hot stove approach”).
Find us a person who has viewed pornography for say 10, 20 years, and tell us what sort of person you run into. Is that a person full of peace and joy and healthy relationships?

Find us a person who is addicted to porn and tell us about the destruction he/she has done to his family…wife, kids, parents, workplace.
Perhaps child molestation, adulterous affairs, abortions, diseases, drugs, murder of children or disposable women? Prison maybe? Did you know that one thing almost all serial murderers have in common is an addiction to pornography?

How about the production of it. If you cannot comprehend what objectification is, look at the women who “star” in these movies. Find us one and tell us how fulfilling this work is for her. How much her family supports her and loved her. Is she a runaway? Is porn good for her self esteem? Does she have to take amphetamines to get ready for a movie? How about heroin to kill the pain at night? Alcohol? Cocaine? Diseases? Beatings? Maybe she’s an undocumented immigrant held captive, who will be murdered when the men who hold her are done objectifying her. (sorry for the big word). If you snicker because you think this example is over the top, laugh at yourself. This happens all the time, maybe not in your neighborhood, but it happens. The squeaky clean image you see of a woman “enjoying” sex, may be the image of a woman whose throat was slit the next day. The men who produce this can do this without an afterthought, because these women are objects, not human beings. An object is disposable.

So if the terms that are being used here are too complex and are incomprehensible, perhaps your burnt hand and common sense will tell you something is not quite right with pornography.
?

I could just as easily say that you do not jump through enough hoops. All your examples ultimately show that pornography is bad for exterior reasons -that is, for reasons outside of seeing people have sex. If seeing people have sex automatically makes one lustful (because the nude body is supposedly so beautiful ) then perhaps one gets turned on by seeing any random stranger having sex, which is crazy.

Your example of objectification is also an equivocation of my examples. It’s true that both are instances of objectification but mine were instances where people were used for goods that didn’t involve their own destruction or the the destruction of a greater good, whereas yours are instances where people are killed for the pleasure of others. In my scenarios people were used for the rational pleasure of others.

 

[Debora123]

I agree with fakename.

Seeing someone have sex is not inherently sinful in and of itself.

Examples could be law enforcement going through a suspect’s computer for information, and coming across some incriminating pictures/videos.

Another example could be accidentally catching a glimpse of it due to pop up ads.

Also, forgive me if I’m wrong… but in the early Church days, didn’t a priest or someone need to witness a couple consummate their marriage on their wedding night to make sure the wedding was valid?

Purposely seeking out pornography for gratification though, IS inherently sinful.

 

[hank3fan]

There are plenty of reasons as to why it is wrong in and of itself but it is also wrong because of the harm it does. I used to be into porn and it really ruined my experience of sex and love with my wife. It completely took away the beauty, mystery and intimacy of the whole experience and it raised the bar so much that I ceased to have pleasure with my wife. Now eventually I quit and things returned to normal but I never want to go there again. I know it is fun in the short term but in the long term it is just a burden, a barrier to love, and a curse. The more I think about my religion, the more I see that what I once thought of as lame moralizing in my youth was actually wise advice designed to protect us from ourselves and our own excesses.

 

[aemcpa]

All your examples ultimately show that pornography is bad for exterior reasons -that is, for reasons outside of seeing people have sex.

You don’t seem to be considering that it is evil to create and distribute pornography.

 

[Debora123]

You don’t seem to be considering that it is evil to create and distribute pornography.

I think he is specifically referring to the act of witnessing someone else having sex.

 

[Edward_H]

I think he is specifically referring to the act of witnessing someone else having sex.

Apart from the odd/rare “police” type example…it’s hard to see how this isn’t a grave sin. To VOLUNTARILY visually participate/“witness” a marital act, or worse, just sex, is an unnatural act of unity. It’s a violation of privacy…and about 10 other wrongs…near occasion of sin, courting/nursing lust, raising scandal - if the “witnesser” is witnessed by a 3rd party.

 

[Debora123]

Apart from the odd/rare “police” type example…it’s hard to see how this isn’t a grave sin. To VOLUNTARILY visually participate/“witness” a marital act, or worse, just sex, is an unnatural act of unity. It’s a violation of privacy…and about 10 other wrongs…near occasion of sin, courting/nursing lust, raising scandal - if the “witnesser” is witnessed by a 3rd party.

I think we all know that.

All I’m saying here is that it doesn’t seem to be inherently sinful to see someone having sex. And given your claim regarding the police example, it sounds like you agree.

Edit to add… the police example is really not that rare at all. One of the first things they do in a case of murder or child abuse of some sort, is look through the suspect’s computer.

 

[Sister_Terese]

Is pornography inherently wrong to look at?

I’ve always believed that it was, but I don’t have many reasons.

If it is inherently wrong, I think that God would be sinning because he can see all people having sex.

Yet God does not sin, so I think that is proof enough that it is not inherently wrong.

But perhaps I don’t have the right definition of porn.

Again, can anyone help on the question?

Just an interesting observation: I looked at all of your posts and it seems there are only three topics you’re interested in: sex, pornography, and more sex.

Seems you’ve been here for awhile, too. So, my question to you is: Why the obsessions? Maybe you need to go to confession or find yourself a solid, orthodox priest to discuss these obsessions.

 

[jonathan_hili]

I agree with fakename.

Seeing someone have sex is not inherently sinful in and of itself.

Examples could be law enforcement going through a suspect’s computer for information, and coming across some incriminating pictures/videos.

Another example could be accidentally catching a glimpse of it due to pop up ads.

Also, forgive me if I’m wrong… but in the early Church days, didn’t a priest or someone need to witness a couple consummate their marriage on their wedding night to make sure the wedding was valid?

Purposely seeking out pornography for gratification though, IS inherently sinful.

Agreed, Debora, but pornography isn’t just watching someone have sex: it is a deliberately manufactured sexual encounter designed to stimulate people (often men and for self-gratification purposes, i.e. masturbation) where two people have no feelings for one another, use contraception, and perform the act in front of a whole camera crew and director, often in exploitative conditions, to sell a final product. Sorry, but that’s not the same as walking into your parents’ bedroom while they’re doin’ the dirty.

Ummm I think there were other methods of testing the bride’s virginity, such as examining the bedsheets afterwards - they’d actually show them about to demonstrate that she was a virgin. Rather crude!

 

[clem456]

I could just as easily say that you do not jump through enough hoops. All your examples ultimately show that pornography is bad for exterior reasons -that is, for reasons outside of seeing people have sex. If seeing people have sex automatically makes one lustful (because the nude body is supposedly so beautiful ) then perhaps one gets turned on by seeing any random stranger having sex, which is crazy.

Your example of objectification is also an equivocation of my examples. It’s true that both are instances of objectification but mine were instances where people were used for goods that didn’t involve their own destruction or the the destruction of a greater good, whereas yours are instances where people are killed for the pleasure of others. In my scenarios people were used for the rational pleasure of others.

Oh, that makes it all better that people were used for rational pleasure.

Let’s ask an honest question. Do you truly believe that it is ok to use people?

 

[clem456]

I agree with fakename.

Seeing someone have sex is not inherently sinful in and of itself.

Examples could be law enforcement going through a suspect’s computer for information, and coming across some incriminating pictures/videos.

Another example could be accidentally catching a glimpse of it due to pop up ads.

Also, forgive me if I’m wrong… but in the early Church days, didn’t a priest or someone need to witness a couple consummate their marriage on their wedding night to make sure the wedding was valid?

Purposely seeking out pornography for gratification though, IS inherently sinful.

Ii can also agree that seeing someon have sex is not inherently sinful. But we are walking a very fine line here.
Seeing someone have sex accidentaly is not what we are talking about. Anytime sexuality is taken out of the real marital context and represented as an object for pleasure, that is sinful. That includes a couple making a video for their own use.

I know this seems harsh to a lot people but it is not. This teaching protects the sanctity of sexuality and the dignity of people. A representation of sexuality, used for pleasure, makes the participants, and the sex, an object. Sex is not an object, it is the fruit of the sacrificial love between two people. It is the fruit, or the fulfillment of, a spiritual and physical reality, not a representation of it.

The pleasure involved is a beautifl thing, but it is not an end. So anything that is done merely for pleasure is objectification. It is not foreplay. Foreplay is different. Foreplay is part of the act between two people that ends in mutual self donation. The Church does not prohibit foreplay, although certain acts are arguable.

But there is a difference between an object, or representation of something, and an act between two married people.

 

[fakename]

Just an interesting observation: I looked at all of your posts and it seems there are only three topics you’re interested in: sex, pornography, and more sex.

Seems you’ve been here for awhile, too. So, my question to you is: Why the obsessions? Maybe you need to go to confession or find yourself a solid, orthodox priest to discuss these obsessions.

really? Nonetheless I like to discuss this with the forum members since the anonymity of the forums makes answers more straightforward and it is easier to pick up conversations later.

The obsession with asking (again, I thought my obsession was mostly epistemology) is mostly due to the lack of decisive answers on the subject.

 

[fakename]

Oh, that makes it all better that people were used for rational pleasure.

Let’s ask an honest question. Do you truly believe that it is ok to use people?

Considering that I am literally using everyone here to get an answer, then yes I do think that it is sometimes okay to use people.

 

[clem456]

Considering that I am literally using everyone here to get an answer, then yes I do think that it is sometimes okay to use people.

You are not using people people in that case. You are asking for help, people are providing it. That’s a mutual thing, not usage.

On the other hand…if for instance you were initiating dialogue for the purpose of simply reinforcing your own point of view, and using all dissenting points of view as a punching bag, that would be usage. In that case you would not be engaging in mutual dialoge, but would be using the other posters as objects for your own edification. You would not be giving them or their opinions due respect or dignity.

It is never ok to use people. Utilitarianism is what it says, it makes tools out of people. People are not tools. Asking for help is not using someone as a tool. Asking someone appreciates their knowlege and humbly acknowleges that I do not know, and together we can both benefit in some way.