Would a bishop include this detail when he interpret this?

[Inquiringperson]

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 offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.

Would a bishop define seeking out immodestly dressed women as one way to watch pornography?

 

[svid2]

Ogling doesn’t seem to me to be pornographic per se, since it is not viewing sexual acts. It is certainly lustful, and therefore sinful.

 

[TEPO]

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 offense. Civil authorities should prevent the production and distribution of pornographic materials.

Would a bishop define seeking out immodestly dressed women as one way to watch pornography?

No way. There are no actors or vendors or profits.

But I would say that immodestly dressed women are selfish.

 

[Inquiringperson]

Ogling doesn’t seem to me to be pornographic per se, since it is not viewing sexual acts. It is certainly lustful, and therefore sinful.

How about naked ladies. Is that pornographic?