What is the definition of pornography?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EphelDuath
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The OP’s second question was “What is the Church’s definition of Pornography”

Here’s the definition from the CCC:
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 offence. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.
Click to expand...
So, if I read this correctly, it states that any sex act, real or simulated being displayed to other people, in whatever form of media, qualities.

That’s Pornography.

That’s not doing anything to the issue of Lust and Immodesty.

I think that they are separated, as per Church’s definition.

The CCC speaks a lot of modesty and also lust. They really go hand in hand, as soon as you offend modesty, you run the risk of lust. Even though by Church’s definitions Playboy is not pornography, it certainly offends against modesty and opens the door widely for lust.

Also, be careful of the label “art”. I do agree that the human form is a beautiful creation to behold, but a lot of immodesty is done under the banner of art. I forget who said it, it may have been St Josemaria, but they basically said that immodesty hides behind Art’s label.

In all things we need to strive to be pure.

Here are some very helpful paragraphs out of the CCC:

CCC- Paragraph # 2521
Purity requires modesty, an integral part of temperance. Modesty protects the intimate center of the person. It means refusing to unveil what should remain hidden. It is ordered to chastity to whose sensitivity it bears witness. It guides how one looks at others and behaves toward them in conformity with the dignity of persons and their solidarity.

CCC- Paragraph # 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.

CCC- Paragraph # 2524
The forms taken by modesty vary from one culture to another. Everywhere, however, modesty exists as an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man. It is born with the awakening consciousness of being a subject. Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means awakening in them respect for the human person.

CCC- Paragraph # 2533
Purity of heart requires the modesty which is patience, decency, and discretion. Modesty protects the intimate center of the person.

Be careful in searching for the “line”
How far can I go in watching the female form without needing to go to confession. This is dangerous ground.

The line that should be sought, is when I look at someone, when do I offend against their modesty.

PM
 
not_a_theist said:
One man’s (or woman’s) porn is another one’s art. It’s all in the eye of the beholder…
Click to expand...
Congratulations! This is a classic post modern view. By the same logic, if one man’s (or woman’s) trash is another’s treasure, we should repeal all environmental laws? We just cannot define pollution.
 
Most movies that have nudity are not fit for ANYONE to watch, and yes, if it means I must turn my head, close my eyes, or even leave, I will. It isn’t morally right to be watching that stuff, I don’t know about you but when you do you feel pretty soiled after watching such things, and that definitely can’t be good.
 
BTW does the Church have son sort of outreach program to people in the pornographic industry who what to get out. The evangelicals have started several. Many persons what out but they cant because their addictions and pschological problems.
In other forum there was a girl who was raised catholic and she wanted out but she didnt want to go the evangelical way and I did not know of any outreach program.
 
gtdannemiller said:
Most movies that have nudity are not fit for ANYONE to watch, and yes, if it means I must turn my head, close my eyes, or even leave, I will. It isn’t morally right to be watching that stuff, I don’t know about you but when you do you feel pretty soiled after watching such things, and that definitely can’t be good.
Click to expand...
Nakedness in itself is not pornographic, I think you need to re-read PennitentMan’s post. There are some movies that have nudity in them which are not offensive IMO, yet there are many a TV show with explicit similuted sex scenes performed by clothed actors that I do find very offensive and pornographic.
 
Pornography is the opposite of Jesus Christ, which makes it evil.
Christ is the Word made flesh. Pornography is the flesh made word.

In other words, pornography takes something that’s meant to be holy, and makes it unholy.
 
Go on Yahoo and put in Nudity and The Catholic Churches teaching on it.

Naturist Philosophy will come up. Click on that and you will get.
MODESTY, DECENCY, DIGNITY. CHASTITY & NUDITY.

By Shane Steincamp

IT tells you everything in detail.

Mayo
 
What if the picture censors out body parts? Does that still count?
 
EphelDuath said:
Alright, what is the Church’s definition, then?

Am I not allowed to watch a movie that has a sex scene in it?
Click to expand...
Depends on the reason for watching the sex scene. If it appears in a movie you’re watching…and you’re not getting “turned on”, OK. If you’re watching a movie *because *of a sex scene, gotta have questions with that.
EphelDuath said:
Would finding the naked human body beautiful, then, not be pornography?

Possibly.
That is, Playboy would be acceptable since they’re not engaged in sexual acts?
Click to expand...
Nope. Playboy is designed to arouse.
 
If the question is what is the definition, post 21 contains the quote from the CCC that defines it.
 
EphelDuath said:
Would seeing a naked woman in a painting be pornography? How about in a TV show or movie where there are sexual acts happening, but for an artistic/historic purpose (such as Rome: the Series or Enemy at the Gates), and not solely for sexual arousal?

Now, what if the woman is not necessarily naked or engaged in a sexual act, but the purpose of the image is still solely for sexual arousal? Such as the cover of a glamor magazine or something?
Click to expand...
There is no definition of pornography. To paraphrase Potter Stewart, “You just know it when you see it.”
 
ABiii said:
exploiting Lust.

If the seller/producer 's original intention is to exploit/get people to Lust, definitely pornography. Pornography producers want you to lust, that is what they exploit.

If for the sake of art / beauty, then the goal is not to make people Lust. People may still end up lusting, but the original intent was not for that. Some pictures can be taken artistically without lust as primary objective.
Click to expand...
You have to be careful with this type of definition. This was the same definition someone tried to use to claim his child porn was “art” and not child porn.
 
Lost_Sheep said:
There is no definition of pornography. To paraphrase Potter Stewart, “You just know it when you see it.”
Click to expand...
The CCC does have a definition. It is quoted in post 21.
And, Potter Stewart was referring to obscenity, not pornography.

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top