What is porn?

  • Thread starter Thread starter notreallysure
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

notreallysure

Guest
What is porn?

The CCC says:
2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.
Click to expand...
This seems a very narrow definition. Is this the realm of porn? If it is just “real or simulated sexual acts” then it would not seem to capture an “ordinary” nude for example.

Opinions?
 
If you let the Holy Spirit be your guide instead of a narrow definition, you’ll know porn when you see it. I’m not saying every painting of a bare-breasted woman is porn by any means (that would do away with a lot of religious art, wouldn’t it?). However, you can tell when something is made specifically for the purpose of sexual arousal and thus tempting one to fall into sin. You must HONESTLY look at what is the intent or motivation behind the image.

I see a lot of porn everyday with non-nude women. :hmmm:
 
40.png
IanS:
If you let the Holy Spirit be your guide instead of a narrow definition, you’ll know porn when you see it. I’m not saying every painting of a bare-breasted woman is porn by any means (that would do away with a lot of religious art, wouldn’t it?). However, you can tell when something is made specifically for the purpose of sexual arousal and thus tempting one to fall into sin. You must HONESTLY look at what is the intent or motivation behind the image.

I see a lot of porn everyday with non-nude women. :hmmm:
Click to expand...
What he said.

“It” (pics, vids, music, text, whatever) doesn’t have to be “hardcore” to be something that should be religiously (word choice intentional) avoided.

DaveBj
 
Interesting and perhaps accurate comments. But, how to square these with the explicit (no pun intended) definition in the CCC.
 
40.png
notreallysure:
What is porn?

The CCC says…Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts…
Click to expand...
Consider that the CCC definition may be more broad than you realize. It does not limit pornography to intercourse but all sexual acts. Consider also that simply disrobing for the purpose of causing arousal is in itself a sexual act.
 
any media that presents the human body and sexuality as objects for entertainment, arousal to sin, arousal of lust, violence and other vices, enticements and encouragement to sin, and for pleasure of third parties is pornographic. the derivation of the word is that which uncovers which should be decently hidden.

Until recently deriving sexual pleasure by watching the nudity or sexual activities of others was considered a grave psychological disorder (voyeurism). I am sure the same fine folks who changed the definition of homosexuality, which has at all times and places been recognized as disordered even where and when it was openly practiced, have changed this definition as well to “if it feels good, do it”.

by definition, the creation of pornographic media involves sin, even if the acts depicted are simulated, because it has removed sexual expression from marriage, privately experienced between spouses.
 
40.png
puzzleannie:
any media that presents the human body and sexuality as objects for entertainment, arousal to sin, arousal of lust, violence and other vices, enticements and encouragement to sin, and for pleasure of third parties is pornographic. the derivation of the word is that which uncovers which should be decently hidden.

Until recently deriving sexual pleasure by watching the nudity or sexual activities of others was considered a grave psychological disorder (voyeurism). I am sure the same fine folks who changed the definition of homosexuality, which has at all times and places been recognized as disordered even where and when it was openly practiced, have changed this definition as well to “if it feels good, do it”.

by definition, the creation of pornographic media involves sin, even if the acts depicted are simulated, because it has removed sexual expression from marriage, privately experienced between spouses.
Click to expand...
I am trying to understand your answer, but I cannot. How does what you say correspond with the CCC?
 
Dr. Colossus:
Consider that the CCC definition may be more broad than you realize. It does not limit pornography to intercourse but all sexual acts. Consider also that simply disrobing for the purpose of causing arousal is in itself a sexual act.
Click to expand...
I think that may be true, but in deciding what is a sexual act for purposes of applying the definition, whose intent is important? The photographer’s? The model’s? The viewer’s?
 
2354 Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties. It offends against chastity because it perverts the conjugal act, the intimate giving of spouses to each other. It does grave injury to the dignity of its participants (actors, vendors, the public), since each one becomes an object of base pleasure and illicit profit for others. It immerses all who are involved in the illusion of a fantasy world. It is a grave offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials
Click to expand...
.
Does the bolded part then mean that pictures of my spouse, or my spouse and myself, for viewing only by us are not pornography, no matter how graphic?
 
40.png
notreallysure:
.
Does the bolded part then mean that pictures of my spouse, or my spouse and myself, for viewing only by us are not pornography, no matter how graphic?
Click to expand...
That’s what it seems to be saying. And it makes sense anyway - if you’re allowed to see your spouse in real life in any sort of graphic position, then why shouldn’t you be allowed to look at a picture of it? (Btw I could be wrong about this).

(Not being so serious for a second…) A stereotypical old-Catholic-grandma answer to the question “What is porn?” would be, “Whatever it is, don’t look at it!” (-:
 
Flopfoot said:
(Not being so serious for a second…) A stereotypical old-Catholic-grandma answer to the question “What is porn?” would be, “Whatever it is, don’t look at it!” (-:
Click to expand...

lol–very good advice from grandma
 
40.png
notreallysure:
I think that may be true, but in deciding what is a sexual act for purposes of applying the definition, whose intent is important? The photographer’s? The model’s? The viewer’s?
Click to expand...
All three are important. If the photographer intends to make pornography then he is guilty of sin. If the model intends to make pornography then she is guilty of sin. If the viewer intends to take pleasure from viewing the image, even if it were not made for the purposes of pornography, they are guilty of sin. We must remember Christ’s words that anyone who looks at another woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
 
why do you solicit opinions if you don’t want them? If you are taking pictures of you and your wife, the only reason is to view them and if you are being aroused by the pictures instead of the real thing you are misusing marital sex and objectifying each other, both of which are clearly wrong in the CCC definition.
 
40.png
puzzleannie:
why do you solicit opinions if you don’t want them? If you are taking pictures of you and your wife, the only reason is to view them and if you are being aroused by the pictures instead of the real thing you are misusing marital sex and objectifying each other, both of which are clearly wrong in the CCC definition.
Click to expand...
annie
I think you may be misunderstanding a lot here or jumping to unfounded assumptions.
  1. When did I ever indicate that I didn’t want opinions? I do and that is why I posted.
If you are referring to my comments on your prior post, I will repeat myself, I do not understand what you wrote. Sorry about that, maybe I am just slow. Also, in explaining it (if you want to) please tell me if you think it is expanding or clarifying the CCC definition or if you are saying something else completely.
  1. My wife and I do not take such pictures, but in looking at the definition I wondered if it was saying that is ok. I now know your opinion that it is not. Thank you for that. However, I do not see that in the CCC definition. Again, I guess I am just being stupid here, but if you have the time and desire, could you try to explain it to me? Thanks and Merry Christmas.
 
40.png
notreallysure:
I think that may be true, but in deciding what is a sexual act for purposes of applying the definition, whose intent is important? The photographer’s? The model’s? The viewer’s?
Click to expand...
Read the first sentence of the CCC paragraph again closely:

Pornography consists in removing real or simulated sexual acts from the intimacy of the partners, in order to display them deliberately to third parties.
 
40.png
notreallysure:
.
Does the bolded part then mean that pictures of my spouse, or my spouse and myself, for viewing only by us are not pornography, no matter how graphic?
Click to expand...
Since you are not your image, you become a third party.
 
You are not your image on the screen, are you? That image is just a bunch of electrons representing you.

You are a person. And when you watch your image, you become a third party who is watching the act – precisely what the CCC talks about as wrong. I’m agreeing with the other poster who said it’s impermissible.
 
40.png
ThisOne:
You are not your image on the screen, are you? That image is just a bunch of electrons representing you.

You are a person. And when you watch your image, you become a third party who is watching the act – precisely what the CCC talks about as wrong. I’m agreeing with the other poster who said it’s impermissible.
Click to expand...
Ahh, ok. I was totally not getting that. I am not sure that I agree but at least now I understand your comment.
 
40.png
ThisOne:
You are not your image on the screen, are you? That image is just a bunch of electrons representing you.

You are a person. And when you watch your image, you become a third party who is watching the act – precisely what the CCC talks about as wrong. I’m agreeing with the other poster who said it’s impermissible.
Click to expand...
Ok… yeah you could stretch the definition of “third party” to mean this, but that is not the intended meaning written in the CCC. A third party… a group or person not within the original.

dictionary.reference.com/search?q=third%20party

What about a reflection!!!.. it is not you that you are seeing… it is photons being reflected back at your eye. Should any reflective surfaces be covered before the marriage act? 😃

In half, I jest… but it is a frustrating thing to read made up definitions of words to prove an argument. I do not mean to pick on you personally… I see it often on this forum. If you can find me a definition of “third party” that means what you say it is, I will humbly apologize.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top