Is it a sin to read sex stories


#1

hello i am 18 and i want to know if reading sex stories is a sin


#2

Yeah, is the short answer. Remember the story of Fatima, when Lucia asked the Blessed Mother if a certain girl from her small village who had recently died was in heaven. The Blessed Mother replied that, “she will be in purgatory until the end of time,” just for reading bad books. There’s nothing that excites the senses like the sensual. So I’d kindly suggest that you stay away form that near occasion of sin. There’s a thousand other and better books to read! Try the lives of the Saints!


#3

I think it depends on what you mean by sex stories. Do the books primarily revolve around graphic descriptions of sex or are they stories that just have some risqué moments? I ask because if you read a book or watch a movie because it is interesting (like a good drama) and it happens to have a few risqué moments than I don't think that's a sin. But if the book or movie is primarily about sex (like pornography) then yes, that's a sin. You have to ask yourself what is the intent of the book/movie and what are your intentions in reading it.


#4

Although I think some books are unquestionably sinful, I think with other books your intentions while reading it are more a factor than the actual content. I read a book recently that, having already seen the movie, I knew would have at least some graphic content. To my surprise it was actually less graphic than the movie and not nearly as bad as I was expecting. I then read the sequels and, again to my surprise, the sex content was ramped way up, with each sex scene being more graphic than anything from the first book. My intention for reading the books was to continue what had started as a great story, not to read a bunch of poorly written sex scenes (a lot of which I ended up skimming through so I could get on with what passed for the story) strung together by a ridiculous, unbelievable plot. I had no sinful intent going in, nor while reading the book (and even if I had, it would have been difficult to maintain owing to how poorly written those parts were), so I can’t imagine that my reading them could be considered sinful by anyone.

On the other hand, I have friends who read them, if not specifically for the sexual content, then at least largely for that reason. I’d wager I’d have no problem finding plenty of people who believe that those folks’ reading of these books was absolutely sinful.


#5

I think it depends on WHO is reading them. Just like how there are two shower rooms at the gym. One could be an occasion of sin for me, and the other could be an occasion of sin for my wife but neither shower room is sinful in and of itself.


#6

Are you referring to a romance novel?


#7

If your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out....


#8

[quote="Gordon_Sims, post:4, topic:229716"]
Although I think some books are unquestionably sinful, I think with other books your intentions while reading it are more a factor than the actual content. I read a book recently that, having already seen the movie, I knew would have at least some graphic content. To my surprise it was actually less graphic than the movie and not nearly as bad as I was expecting. I then read the sequels and, again to my surprise, the sex content was ramped way up, with each sex scene being more graphic than anything from the first book. My intention for reading the books was to continue what had started as a great story, not to read a bunch of poorly written sex scenes (a lot of which I ended up skimming through so I could get on with what passed for the story) strung together by a ridiculous, unbelievable plot. I had no sinful intent going in, nor while reading the book (and even if I had, it would have been difficult to maintain owing to how poorly written those parts were), so I can't imagine that my reading them could be considered sinful by anyone.

On the other hand, I have friends who read them, if not specifically for the sexual content, then at least largely for that reason. I'd wager I'd have no problem finding plenty of people who believe that those folks' reading of these books was absolutely sinful.

[/quote]

Even if you hadn't the evil intent of enjoying the sexual content going into reading the novels, and much less watching the movies, but by putting yourself in that near occasion of sin, was sinful in of itself. I'm also willing to bet the pension watch that even if the original intent wasn't there by reading, and especially by watching this stuff, it was there in the end whether you wanted it to be or not. Saint Alphonsus Ligouri once said concerning sexual sin that it is the cowards who are the victors. If you turn away from the thoughts or images when they first arrive, victory comes easiest. If however you invite them to linger in the imagination by reading, or in front of your eyes by watching, chances are you already committed the sin. Saint Alphonsus goes onto to explain that for other kinds of vice, one must form sinful habits that work against human nature to some degree. But in the area of sexual sin, the sin itself works with human nature--which is why the pull is so much greater--and makes the commision of it as easy as falling out of your car. Forgive me when i say this, but by your saying that it wasn't your intent to enjoy them simply isn't a very responsible answer.


#9

I read romance novels. I enjoy them. But lately I find myself skipping over the sex scenes. It’s more interesting following the relationship that develops between the characters.


#10

Well in my opinion, no. But probably everyone on here will disagree with me. :stuck_out_tongue:


#11

[quote="jbecknell, post:8, topic:229716"]
Even if you hadn't the evil intent of enjoying the sexual content going into reading the novels, and much less watching the movies, but by putting yourself in that near occasion of sin, was sinful in of itself. I'm also willing to bet the pension watch that even if the original intent wasn't there by reading, and especially by watching this stuff, it was there in the end whether you wanted it to be or not. Saint Alphonsus Ligouri once said concerning sexual sin that it is the cowards who are the victors. If you turn away from the thoughts or images when they first arrive, victory comes easiest. If however you invite them to linger in the imagination by reading, or in front of your eyes by watching, chances are you already committed the sin. Saint Alphonsus goes onto to explain that for other kinds of vice, one must form sinful habits that work against human nature to some degree. But in the area of sexual sin, the sin itself works with human nature--which is why the pull is so much greater--and makes the commision of it as easy as falling out of your car. Forgive me when i say this, but by your saying that it wasn't your intent to enjoy them simply isn't a very responsible answer.

[/quote]

I guess I get the pension fund because at not time while reading the books or watching the movies was I stirred to sin by them. The books in particular (since reading is the topic here), not only because I had no sinful intent the entire time I read any of the books, but also because I've never been a big fan of sex scenes in novels and I'm completely put off by poor writing.

As far as me saying I had no intent of enjoying a book's sexual content going into it, I'm still not sure why you're saying that's not a responsible answer. I've read plenty of books whose sexual content I was utterly unaware of in advance (it's not something that's always covered in reviews). I read them with no awareness that they had sexual content and had no way of having any sinful intent going in because that aspect of the books' content was completely unknown to me. When I got to that portion of the book, if it actually moved the story forward in a meaningful way and was well-written then I was able to admire it in an academic sense. If it was gratuitous and/or poorly written then it annoyed me at best or made me feel uncomfortable and lowered my opinion of the author at worst. As I said, I've never been one who gets turned on by the written word (excluding the mental or emotional stimulation I can get from well-written works, but that's not the sort of stimulation we're discussing here).


#12

[quote="avemaria2010, post:1, topic:229716"]
hello i am 18 and i want to know if reading sex stories is a sin

[/quote]

I would think so. :cool:


#13

I'm a writer and I have to say it really depends on what you define as "sex stories". I recently attended a really major writer's festival here. One of the lectures dealt with the difference between erotica (which uses sex as merely an element or a plot device) and pointless smut (in which the sex is purely written for the sake of it).

I have to say this though. Sex has a really, really limited use as a plot device. Of the many mature-rated works (from fan fiction to original stories) more than 50% had really cheap plots that focused too much on the sex. Any person who reads such things for the sake of titillation is more shallow than a guy who watches bad action movies purely for the action.


#14

I think it is safe to assume that in this context "sex stories" refers to written pronography...Penthouse Letters style. I don't think this post is about a Romance Novel.

The short answer is YES it is sinful because it arouses feelings of lust and most likely 1) objectifies the human body and the sexual act and 2) is likely to lead to masturbation. I have struggle with pornography addictions and this is a type of material I would not touch with a 10' pole any longer.

However, you have to believe that pornography is sinful; that lust is sinful; that masturbation is sinful......in order for a sex story to be sinful.


#15

[quote="Gordon_Sims, post:11, topic:229716"]
I guess I get the pension fund because at not time while reading the books or watching the movies was I stirred to sin by them. The books in particular (since reading is the topic here), not only because I had no sinful intent the entire time I read any of the books, but also because I've never been a big fan of sex scenes in novels and I'm completely put off by poor writing.

As far as me saying I had no intent of enjoying a book's sexual content going into it, I'm still not sure why you're saying that's not a responsible answer. I've read plenty of books whose sexual content I was utterly unaware of in advance (it's not something that's always covered in reviews). I read them with no awareness that they had sexual content and had no way of having any sinful intent going in because that aspect of the books' content was completely unknown to me. When I got to that portion of the book, if it actually moved the story forward in a meaningful way and was well-written then I was able to admire it in an academic sense. If it was gratuitous and/or poorly written then it annoyed me at best or made me feel uncomfortable and lowered my opinion of the author at worst. As I said, I've never been one who gets turned on by the written word (excluding the mental or emotional stimulation I can get from well-written works, but that's not the sort of stimulation we're discussing here).

[/quote]

I think you're missing my point. My point is that it is not a good idea to councel a young kid of 18 that reading imprudent books might be ok even if the stories are passable. Back when Steinbeck first published his hefty novel East of Eden, I'm sure it was considered a scandal to the sensibilities of the day. And when my father-in-law saw Gone with the Wind in the theatres during it's first-run, he remembers quite well the audible gasp that swept through the audience when Rhett Butler uttered his famous line, "frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn," to Scarlett. But in 1985, when I was in high school, I was assigned Steinbeck's novel in English class as just another ho-hum bit of classic literature, and that Gone with the Wind line today wouldn't offend anyone even at a Raffi concert. So in 1917, when Lucia asked the Blessed Mother at Fatima about a young girl who had died recently, she was told the girl would be in Purgatory until the end of time for reading bad books. Bad books. In 1917. A bad book then would be positively inert by today's standards. But there she sits, simmering to a golden brown until the sun dims because of a book some guy probably suggested to her as being no big deal.

I just don't want you to be that guy.


#16

[quote="jbecknell, post:15, topic:229716"]
I think you're missing my point. My point is that it is not a good idea to councel a young kid of 18 that reading imprudent books might be ok even if the stories are passable.

[/quote]

You're reply seemed to specifically refer to me (you, your, etc.) so I responded from my own perspective. As far as counseling an 18-year-old, I think it all depends on the 18-year-old. I started reading Stephen King and similar authors when I was 11-12 years old. I had no issues with it, but I didn't let my son read anything similar until he was 13-14. I'd hope someone would be able to make such decisions on their own by 18.


#17

[quote="Gordon_Sims, post:16, topic:229716"]
You're reply seemed to specifically refer to me (you, your, etc.) so I responded from my own perspective. As far as counseling an 18-year-old, I think it all depends on the 18-year-old. I started reading Stephen King and similar authors when I was 11-12 years old. I had no issues with it, but I didn't let my son read anything similar until he was 13-14. I'd hope someone would be able to make such decisions on their own by 18.

[/quote]

Then why comment on this thread?


#18

Apparently because I have the notion of these forums all wrong. I thought one of the main points was for people to post questions seeking advice, and I tried to comply with that. I’ll know better next time.


#19

[quote="Gordon_Sims, post:18, topic:229716"]
Apparently because I have the notion of these forums all wrong. I thought one of the main points was for people to post questions seeking advice, and I tried to comply with that. I'll know better next time.

[/quote]

Gordon, forgive me. I'm not trying to be offensive. The reason why I asked the question why you were commenting on this particular thread was because you had just replied that an 18 year old should know better. I was replying that it was an 18 year old that asked the question.


#20

[quote="jbecknell, post:19, topic:229716"]
Gordon, forgive me. I'm not trying to be offensive. The reason why I asked the question why you were commenting on this particular thread was because you had just replied that an 18 year old should know better. I was replying that it was an 18 year old that asked the question.

[/quote]

Not a problem, and I apologize for taking it wrong (long week on this end). The OP had asked advice and I wanted to weigh in. I was pretty well-grounded by the time I was 18, but my own son is about the same age and he has difficulty making the same judgment calls I had no problem making at when I was the same age (or even several years younger). That being said, I guess the best advice I could give would be to say, if the OP really has to ask then they probably don't need to be reading those sorts of stories.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.