DiscussMormonism.com

The results of the poll in which the question asked was, "In general, do you support, or disapprove of, the production and consumption of pornographic media?" were:


Approve completely and without reservation 3% [ 1 ]
Approve, but with provisos 42% [ 11 ]
Approve, but only certain forms/genres/styles 19% [ 5 ]
Disapprove full without exception 23% [ 6 ]
Disapprove, but with certain exceptions 3% [ 1 ]
Neutral, have no opinion on the matter 7% [ 2 ]


What I'm really interested in here is the second, in which a clear majority disapprove of pornography, but with provisos. My question here is, what provisos?

What pornography is acceptable, and what forms are not? Why?

Alternatively, 3% disapprove, but with "certain exceptions." What are those exceptions (and how are the exceptions of those who approve and those who disapprove different? Do they overlap at any points?)

Nearly 20% approve of certain forms, or styles of pornography? Which kinds of sexual entertainment are acceptable, and which are not, and upon what criteria?

What I'm really interested in here is the second, in which a clear majority disapprove of pornography, but with provisos. My question here is, what provisos?

You mean a clear majority approve? Consider the composition of board.....

Alternatively, 3% disapprove, but with "certain exceptions." What are those exceptions (and how are the exceptions of those who approve and those who disapprove different? Do they overlap at any points?)

That may have been my vote. I'm thinking certain sections of clothing catalogs (which my mom considers to be "soft porn"), and statue of David type stuff. I don't consider them porn, but since others do, these are the types of exceptions which don't bother me and I don't think should bother anyone in general.

You mean a clear majority approve? Consider the composition of board.....

Yes, I rather expected that the more extreme social liberal/libertine wing here would be somewhat of a minority, and the bulk would take exception to at least some forms of the public display of sexual activity for the purpose of entertainment. Without knowing precisely just what those exceptions/provisos are, however, and, perhaps, more importantly, what constitutes acceptable pornography, the answers provide little except a sense of general tendencies.

That may have been my vote. I'm thinking certain sections of clothing catalogs (which my mom considers to be "soft porn"), and statue of David type stuff. I don't consider them porn, but since others do, these are the types of exceptions which don't bother me and I don't think should bother anyone in general.

Quite honestly, while some clothing magazines do push the envelope a bit, the concept of "prurience" is central to my understanding of just what constitutes "pornography." What does a picture, scene in a movie, or song elicit as a psychological/emotional response? What kind of ideation is encouraged? How are perceptions changed/manipulated?

Droopy wrote:
What kind of ideation is encouraged?

Ideation about sex.
Sexy sex. Rough sex. Partially dressed sex. Leather sex. Latex sex. Sex in the bed. Sex on the floor. Sex on the dance floor! Sex on the roof. Sooty sex in the chimney. Fricking fracking funky sex.


What's not to like?

Oh, and sporty mud sex too:

Droopy wrote:Approve completely and without reservation 3% [ 1 ]
Approve, but with provisos 42% [ 11 ]
Approve, but only certain forms/genres/styles 19% [ 5 ]
Disapprove full without exception 23% [ 6 ]
Disapprove, but with certain exceptions 3% [ 1 ]
Neutral, have no opinion on the matter 7% [ 2 ]


What I'm really interested in here is the second, in which a clear majority disapprove of pornography, but with provisos. My question here is, what provisos?

You're misquoting your own question. The second choice says "APPROVE, but with provisos". Not disapprove.

I voted for the second choice. My "provisos" were that I don't approve of forcing or manipulating people into the porn industry.

This obviously happens with child pornography were the participants are not mature enough to make that decision for themselves and with young adults who are being taken advantage of. The result of organized crime elements having a large involvement in the porn industry.

If the subjects of pornography have no problem with it, I have no problem. I don't care at all who chooses to view it.

Naked people have been around a lot longer than clothes. If God had wanted us to be dressed, we should have all been born sporting formal attire.

Pornography is in the eye of the beholder, which makes me curious why you're so fascinated with it.

Quite honestly, while some clothing magazines do push the envelope a bit, the concept of "prurience" is central to my understanding of just what constitutes "pornography." What does a picture, scene in a movie, or song elicit as a psychological/emotional response? What kind of ideation is encouraged? How are perceptions changed/manipulated?

Depends on the person and how they deal with such things. There are images most certainly meant to entice to wickedness. But where one draws the line between appreciation of beauty, acceptance of desire, and outright sinful lust is probably different for each individual.

The whole of the gospel is based on tension. For example, there is the basic fundamental tension between God enticing us to good and Satan enticing us to evil. Then there are more complex tensions of say between God, Self, and Family. Where one finds proper balance between the three is going to be different for each person. There are obvious signs that tell us our balance is outside the bounds the Lord has set and those are often the same for all people (the commandments).

And so it is with graphic images or words etc. I think the tension here is at least three way (pun intended) if not more. We have the commandment; no adultery, fornication, or lusting after a woman (or man). But we also have the built in physical reactions to stimuli that are there for a reason. We have the need for there to be sexual attraction in a relationship, both before and after marriage, etc. etc.

If dark thoughts cross your mind and you don't act on them, then I think that is a good sign you are in proper balance. If you seek out the company of dark thoughts, then I think it likely you're not in proper balance. If you constantly lust after your wife and are constantly trying to get her in the mood and are also mindful of her desires and wishes, then I think you are in proper balance. If you lust after your girlfriend and don't act on those desires and want to marry her for more than just that reason, then I think you are in proper balance.

Now I'm going to get into trouble for the use of the word "lust" in that last paragraph, but I do believe there is (another tension) good and proper lust (as per the Song of Solomon) as well as bad and sinful lust.

So another question. Is the Song of Solomon an example of "good porn"? The proper way married people should treat each other sexually? As one may already know, I disagree with the notion that the SS is not scripture or at least should not be included in our study regime.

You're misquoting your own question. The second choice says "APPROVE, but with provisos". Not disapprove.

Yeah, I meant the 5th.

I voted for the second choice. My "provisos" were that I don't approve of forcing or manipulating people into the porn industry.

This obviously happens with child pornography were the participants are not mature enough to make that decision for themselves and with young adults who are being taken advantage of. The result of organized crime elements having a large involvement in the porn industry.

1. Which is to say, you have no particular philosophical/moral problem with pornography qua pornography, is that correct?

2. Organized crime, from roughly the early seventies onward, came to control (by the early eighties at the latest) upwards of 90% of all pornography produced in the United States for distribution here and around much of the world, particularly in the West.

Deep Throat was an Italian mafia production (financed by Anthony Periano and his son Louis and brother Joseph Periano, of the Colombo crime family,) and became one of the biggest grossing films of all time, making pornography a mainstay business concern of the American Mafia. By the end of the seventies, at least 90% of all pornography distributed (though not by any means always produced) was under the control of one of the major American Italian crime families. This included pornographic magazines, books, films, sex toys, strip clubs, "dirty" book stores and sex shops, and X-rated theaters. The Pussycat Theater chain (of which we had two in San Diego, one downtown, and another in El Cajon) was a mafia run operation, from stem to stern.

Nowadays, the Russian and East European mafias, of course, control and great deal of pornography produced and distributed world wide. I suspect that the percentage of pornography actually seen and consumed by its fans is probably in the same 905 range, regarding mafia to non-mafia involvement, as it has historically been.

Child porn is in no sense unique to mafia association with the genre and business.

Pornography is in the eye of the beholder,

How do you know this?

which makes me curious why you're so fascinated with it

It would be better to say that I am interested in why so many are fascinated by it. I'm also intersted in, if pornography is in the "eye of the beholder," what this implies for other salient aspects of the human condition, not the least of which is what this implies for our understanding of the fundamental meaning and purpose of human sexuality itself.

Ideation about sex.
Sexy sex. Rough sex. Partially dressed sex. Leather sex. Latex sex. Sex in the bed. Sex on the floor. Sex on the dance floor! Sex on the roof. Sooty sex in the chimney. Fricking fracking funky sex.


What's not to like?

Oh, and sporty mud sex too:

Even though this is the Celestial room, I knew that for a number of others here, including you, lowering yourself to serious, philosohcal discourse and critical argument would be far, far too much to ask.

I stand vindicated.

Celestial sex.

Droopy wrote:
Even though this is the Celestial room, I knew that for a number of others here, including you, lowering yourself to serious, philosohcal discourse and critical argument would be far, far too much to ask.

I stand vindicated.

Hopefully this was not a self-fulfilling vindication based on making a sex poll.