When does it become pornography?


#1

is looking at pictures of women in Bikinis porn? Is it wrong to look at a friend’s holiday snaps if you know there are pictures of them so attired?

God bless.


#2

no, it is not, I think… but try not to think “how much can I get away with before it becomes pornography”… rather, seek to do everything that is pleasing to God. If you look at a woman in a bikini, ask yourself, why are you doing so. If it’s for an impure reason, or if it causes you to sin, try to avoid it. Whether it’s pornography or not. If you were just looking at your friend’s holiday pictures, then probably your intention wasn’t bad and so don’t worry.


#3

Is looking at Michelangelo’s David pornography…how about the Sistine Chapel. Is looking at a classic nude painting? Porn is not a picture of someone on the beach in a bikini.


#4

As the word is generally accepted, I would not normally consider bikini shots to be “pornography.” That being said, it is immoral to look at images in order to deliberately arouse oneself sexually. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says “…everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Even something that is decidedly not pornographic in nature can be sinful to look at it done so for sexual pleasure.

Looking at vacation pictures sounds like an innocent enough activity. However, if such pictures put you in a “near occasion of sin,” where there is a significant chance that you will entertain lustful thoughts, it may be advisable to avoid such images.


#5

The simple answer is, if it causes you to lust, it is pornography. Yes, you can envision a naked person of the opposite gender and if it moves you to lust it could be pornography. On the other hand you can see with your own two eyes a naked person of the opposite gender and not be moved to lust.

It all deals with the constant battle of the spirit versus the body. The spirit looks upon a naked body and sees it as God’s creation, neither ugly nor beautiful. The body looks upon a naked body and sees it as an object of ugliness or beauty. The spirit and body present their cases to the mind. This is where your free will comes in. You must make a decision to follow the will of the body or the will of the mind.


#6

That being said, it is immoral to look at images in order to deliberately arouse oneself sexually

.

I agree with this.


#7

I think the question here is “at what point does scantily clad (or unclad) people constitute pornography or become a cause for concern.”

The problem with the analogies you provided is that it could just as easily be used as an argument for public nudity or ‘personal expression’ as it is more popularly called which is not what I believe you were intending to do. I think that maybe a little clarification is probably needed here.

When Michelangelo was asked about his sculpture of David, he remarked that he wanted to see man as God saw man. Truly there was something ‘higher’ behind this work than just a mere exposition of the human body.

The real difference between classical art and scantily clad women of today (or we could even go so far to say what is nowadays called ‘soft-porn’) is this: where is the focus of attention being directed? Does it elevate our thoughts and bring us closer to a knowledge and appreciation of God? Or does it merely pique our physical desires and pander to our baser propensities?

The Sun’s beauty and grandeur is best appreciated when our attention is focused on what it illuminates. However, look upon the Sun itself for too long, and your sight will slowly fade into darkness. This is always the case whenever the created becomes the focus and the Creator is dismissed.


#8

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.