Romance Novels = Porn?

[dinonum]

I agree with you Cons.

I think it's ridiculous to compare romance novels to other books and movies. I'm sure there are some movies and books that would compare, but generally movies and books don't glamorize faults of the characters like romance novels do. Besides, most movies have other points to it besides just getting two characters to sleep together. Romance novels revolve around the main female character and the main male character, and getting them to sleep together. I only ever read one romance novel where that wasn't the point of it, and it was the only romance novel I read where the couple was married before they had sex.

THAT is why I am against romance novels. The point of them, is getting the main characters to have sex, and then fix all the drama they have afterwords, whilst glamorizing the guy's faults, and making him irresistible to her, regardless of how dangerous the guy might be. In one novel I read, a guy kidnaps a girl for his own gain, she falls in love with his dark personality(and the fact that he does everything perfect at the perfect time), they have sex, she loves him more, and he continues on with the kidnapping; FOUR others I read involved women daring the main male character to try and seduce them, for some gain the woman needed; by the end of the novel, they'd already had sex, despite the fact that there was no love between them-NOT good message to women. And that's only two examples.

Yes, some movies do similar things, but usually there are consequences to those actions, and the faults aren't NEARLY as glamorized. Not to mention the very drastic sex scenes that induce very strong, sexual stimuli in the person reading.

I think it's important to say that more than a handful of times have the posters against RM's said they aren't talking about those which contain sex. They are specifically just talking about novels with characters who fall in love.

 

[JanniGirl]

Cons or whomever else wants to take up the flag for porn not being bad . . . . just explain HOW it has any redeeming moral or social value.

I've already explained how some (obviously not all) romance novels can contain identifyable "good" components that actually contain Biblical marriage scenarios.

Please, please, please, compare those to porn. If romance novels = porn then you'd think you'd be able to equate all porn to all romance novels.

For the life of me, I cannot comprehend why a christian (male or female) would be defending porn.

We've already heard LOTS of both men and women state that romance novels can be very sinful. We've also put forth the fact that porn involves REAL people who are sinning.

The gender war is something you made up because . . . . ? What's your agenda?

 

[dallasapple]

Well, and I'm not sure if I ever said it, but my husband and I go through this a lot. I don't want to talk too much about my marriage because we've dealt a lot with hearing my cousin tell her husband "Why can't you treat me like Andrew treats Liz?" We are far from perfect, but a LOT of people look up to us because we've been through quite a bit in a short time and are still going strong and happy and in love and act like newlyweds.

My brothers girlfriend DINO..(they live together and been together 10 years)..

She has said in front of my brother..and to me.."oh did you see that D(my brother)...did you see that???I WISH YOU would do that for me!!! I WISH you would just come up and hug me in front of people..I WISH<>>>>

Love

Dallas

(hey and P.S I think we both have husbands name Andrew..LOL..I call mine Andy tee hee)

 

[Created2Write]

Cons or whomever else wants to take up the flag for porn not being bad . . . . just explain HOW it has any redeeming moral or social value.

Who has advocated porn? Accept for maybe one or two radicals, I don't see anyone saying porn is good at all.

I've already explained how some (obviously not all) romance novels can contain identifyable "good" components that actually contain Biblical marriage scenarios.

I'm not saying they don't exist(apparently they do, if you have read them) but NONE of the many romance novels I have read, have had anything good in them whatsoever.

Please, please, please, compare those to porn. If romance novels = porn then you'd think you'd be able to equate all porn to all romance novels.

Uh, no. Firstly, what some people classify as a romance novel may not be a romance novel to others. My husband thinks Charles Dickens novels are romance novels, when they are nothing of the sort. However, novels that are clearly labeled "Romance Novels" in the book section, CAN be equal to porn in the responses they induce in the reader.

For the life of me, I cannot comprehend why a christian (male or female) would be defending porn.

Who's defending porn? Janman? Yeah, we know he watches it, and no one takes him seriously in the first place. Who else is defending porn?

We've already heard LOTS of both men and women state that romance novels can be very sinful. We've also put forth the fact that porn involves REAL people who are sinning.

The gender war is something you made up because . . . . ? What's your agenda?

Just because romance novels involve people who don't exist, doesn't mean it's entirely different than porn. Romance novels CAN induce the same sexual stimuli as porn, and maybe even more so as it involves imaging the sex scenes being played out. How is that pure or right?

Just so ya know, I say the same thing about sex/nude scenes in movies.

In the circumstance of the novels who don't involve sex scenes, they still can cause damage in the emotional side of the reader, as well as project impossible ideals that seem realistic. The men have almost no faults, or the faults they do have are exactly the right ones to fascinate the female character. The circumstances are played out perfectly to entice the woman's affections, love ensues, and it's all a bunch of happiness and passion.

It can become highly addictive(which isn't healthy), and cause the readers to compare reality with fiction.

 

[Created2Write]

SOME of the women of the church.

The problem is though that when men try to make this comparison and then repeatedly make points which rely solely on women HATING pornography and treating their husbands poorly over it.

Porn is disliked for more than just one reason, and if the ONLY reason is because of a husband who is comparing his wife to a porn star, the problem isn't with the porn it's with the husband. The same goes for those who read romance novels and start comparing their husband to the main character.

While I see your point, I would like to add that once the porn is removed from the equation(and the perfect, airburshed female figures are not being viewed by the husband) the healing process can then begin. Same with romance novels. Once the perfect, romantic scenarios are removed,(along with the perfect, mysterious, romantic men), the healing process can begin. So, yes, the porn and the romance novels ARE the problem in such cases, just that there are ALSO problems to be dealt with in the viewer/reader.

Yes, there are other reasons porn is wrong besides just that, however that is a huge part of porn addictions. Porn plays up to a man's visual nature by playing out sexual scenarios with gorgeous women. Romance novels play up to a woman's emotional nature, but playing out emotional scenarios with romantic men. BOTH play up to the fantasies of the people watching them, regardless of gender.

I don't see how either one is better or worse than the other. I honestly don't.

 

[chaz345]

Cons or whomever else wants to take up the flag for porn not being bad . . . . just explain HOW it has any redeeming moral or social value.

I've already explained how some (obviously not all) romance novels can contain identifyable "good" components that actually contain Biblical marriage scenarios.

Please, please, please, compare those to porn. If romance novels = porn then you'd think you'd be able to equate all porn to all romance novels.

For the life of me, I cannot comprehend why a christian (male or female) would be defending porn.

We've already heard LOTS of both men and women state that romance novels can be very sinful. We've also put forth the fact that porn involves REAL people who are sinning.

The gender war is something you made up because . . . . ? What's your agenda?

No one has said that porn isn't bad.

 

[chaz345]

I think it's important to say that more than a handful of times have the posters against RM's said they aren't talking about those which contain sex. They are specifically just talking about novels with characters who fall in love.

It's not about sex though. One of the most damaging aspects of porn is that it creates impossible expectations. Women who look like that and who are ready for sex at the drop of a hat 24/7 simply don't exist.

Just as the "lance romance" type of guy in the romance novel who automagically knows exactly what the girl want's, who knows exactly how hard to push and when to back off, who never forgets an anniversary or birthday doesn't exist either.

Yes the romance novels that contain explicit sex scenes are problematic in other ways, and in fact are even more similar to porn, but the real danger and the real similarity is more about the impossible expectations that it is about the sex.

TBH the sex is there because sexual arousal is addictive. You read the scene and become aroused so you want more so you go get more of the books.

 

[Romanseight2005]

It's not about sex though. One of the most damaging aspects of porn is that it creates impossible expectations. Women who look like that and who are ready for sex at the drop of a hat 24/7 simply don't exist.

Just as the "lance romance" type of guy in the romance novel who automagically knows exactly what the girl want's, who knows exactly how hard to push and when to back off, who never forgets an anniversary or birthday doesn't exist either.

Yes the romance novels that contain explicit sex scenes are problematic in other ways, and in fact are even more similar to porn, but the real danger and the real similarity is more about the impossible expectations that it is about the sex.

TBH the sex is there because sexual arousal is addictive. You read the scene and become aroused so you want more so you go get more of the books.

Here is a very important difference. I agree that true romans novels, harlequin, etc. are along the same libes as porn, but when you change that definition to one that simply says impossible standards, those things need to be clarified specifically. Here is why. Jesus is the only perfect man, and yet scripture tells us to look at His life and live like Him. So by your definition, it would be wrong to read about and admire Christ. See, character traits simply can't be compared to physical ones. Nowhere in scripture does it say for anyone to ever admire physical beauty, or to marry a person based on that. But it does say to marry based on character for both sexes. Furthermore, character traits can be cultivated, and can change and grow in a person. However no 50 year old can look like a 20 year old, nor should they. That standard of beauty isn't a right one, based on Scripture. Now, where anything can become bad, even if it in itself is godly, is if a person doesn't guard their heart and they become discontent with their spouse because they are not focusing on what is good about their spouse. But you absolutely can not say that comparing a spouse to an ungodly standard is at all the same as comparing them to a godly one. No you shouldn't compare your spouse to anyone, yet it would be right to pray for your spouse to be more Christlike. It would not be right to pray that your spouse becomes younger, more attractive, etc. Do you see the difference?

 

[dinonum]

It's not about sex though. One of the most damaging aspects of porn is that it creates impossible expectations. Women who look like that and who are ready for sex at the drop of a hat 24/7 simply don't exist.

Just as the "lance romance" type of guy in the romance novel who automagically knows exactly what the girl want's, who knows exactly how hard to push and when to back off, who never forgets an anniversary or birthday doesn't exist either.

Yes the romance novels that contain explicit sex scenes are problematic in other ways, and in fact are even more similar to porn, but the real danger and the real similarity is more about the impossible expectations that it is about the sex.

TBH the sex is there because sexual arousal is addictive. You read the scene and become aroused so you want more so you go get more of the books.

My point was simply that many romance novels do not contain sex.

 

[SionDS]

Do romance novels really have a lot of graphic sex? I never read one. I always laugh at the cheesy cover art and titles of them though.

 

[Conservativation]

Cons or whomever else wants to take up the flag for porn not being bad . . . . just explain HOW it has any redeeming moral or social value.

I've already explained how some (obviously not all) romance novels can contain identifyable "good" components that actually contain Biblical marriage scenarios.

Please, please, please, compare those to porn. If romance novels = porn then you'd think you'd be able to equate all porn to all romance novels.

For the life of me, I cannot comprehend why a christian (male or female) would be defending porn.

We've already heard LOTS of both men and women state that romance novels can be very sinful. We've also put forth the fact that porn involves REAL people who are sinning.

The gender war is something you made up because . . . . ? What's your agenda?

I didnt see anyone wanting to say porn isnt bad.

How do you create these points that you then argue against>

Porn is bad.....it has no redeeming value.....

You badly missed my point about that, I wont try and explain it, it doesnt matter.

I dont really thing a romance novel has redeeming value either. Its not INHERENTLY bad like porn, but it certainly has no value.

Dionum you are right it isnt about the sex. Its about the relational appeal growing vicarious.

This is a point. Why do we read fiction? I read 3-4 books a week, Im a HUGE reader. I can tell you exactly why. BECAUSE I get a vicarious kick out of being the protagonist in at least 80% of what I read. In the other stuff, maybe its intellectually stimulating or something. But anyone who says they do not experience things vicariously when they read cannot be telling the truth. That IS why we read fiction


So, if you vicariously experience the even innocent pursuit and verbal affections of another mate.....to me.....its wrong.

For you in particular....what if your husband said he was uncomfortable. Would you easily and willingly give it up? Or would you argue like you are here? because it seems in this dogged refusal to even acknowledge that there CAN be a problem......IS a problem in this case.....too attached to the reading of them it appears.

 

[Conservativation]

Who has advocated porn? Accept for maybe one or two radicals, I don't see anyone saying porn is good at all.



I'm not saying they don't exist(apparently they do, if you have read them) but NONE of the many romance novels I have read, have had anything good in them whatsoever.



Uh, no. Firstly, what some people classify as a romance novel may not be a romance novel to others. My husband thinks Charles Dickens novels are romance novels, when they are nothing of the sort. However, novels that are clearly labeled "Romance Novels" in the book section, CAN be equal to porn in the responses they induce in the reader.



Who's defending porn? Janman? Yeah, we know he watches it, and no one takes him seriously in the first place. Who else is defending porn?



Just because romance novels involve people who don't exist, doesn't mean it's entirely different than porn. Romance novels CAN induce the same sexual stimuli as porn, and maybe even more so as it involves imaging the sex scenes being played out. How is that pure or right?

Just so ya know, I say the same thing about sex/nude scenes in movies.

In the circumstance of the novels who don't involve sex scenes, they still can cause damage in the emotional side of the reader, as well as project impossible ideals that seem realistic. The men have almost no faults, or the faults they do have are exactly the right ones to fascinate the female character. The circumstances are played out perfectly to entice the woman's affections, love ensues, and it's all a bunch of happiness and passion.

It can become highly addictive(which isn't healthy), and cause the readers to compare reality with fiction.

This is exactly the point. The objections are usually along the lines of "I dont sit and fantasize about "Fabio". It paints the issue way too simplistically. No one said you DO sit and do that.

What happens is a subtle realization, even subliminal, that something is missing, that this "ideal man" exists. So, its not that you then sit on the couch thinking "just look at that loser, Fabio wouldnt do that".....

For all the depth women are possessed of relationally, empathetical, etc. why is it so hard to discuss things like this without the superficial responses like "I dont fantasize about the man in the books"...why cant you , even if you still say you dont do it, why cant you see that we arent silly or stupid or sophomoric in what we are saying. We are talking about emotional complexities, on which I as a man am supposedly dumb as a bag of hair about.

 

[Romanseight2005]

This is exactly the point. The objections are usually along the lines of "I dont sit and fantasize about "Fabio". It paints the issue way too simplistically. No one said you DO sit and do that.

What happens is a subtle realization, even subliminal, that something is missing, that this "ideal man" exists. So, its not that you then sit on the couch thinking "just look at that loser, Fabio wouldnt do that".....

For all the depth women are possessed of relationally, empathetical, etc. why is it so hard to discuss things like this without the superficial responses like "I dont fantasize about the man in the books"...why cant you , even if you still say you dont do it, why cant you see that we arent silly or stupid or sophomoric in what we are saying. We are talking about emotional complexities, on which I as a man am supposedly dumb as a bag of hair about.

But as I said before, couldn't we also do this by analyzing the life of Christ? Anytime we allow discontentment into our hearts, we aren't guarding it properly, and the danger of thinking less of our spouses is there. I agree 100 percent that we need to guard our hearts. There isn't a man around who holds a candle to my husband. On any level. But it is right for me to look at Christ, and anyone who shows Godly character, both male and female, and admire the Godly traits themselves. Then aspire to manifest those traits in myself, my husband, andanyone I love. When I say aspire those traits in others, I mean prayerfully, and for their sakes. That is the key. But there really is a huge difference between seeing a good, and noble trait in a person, and acknowledging that it is a good and godly trait, and seeing a 20 year old beauty, and saying in your heart, she is my ideal beauty. I wish my spouse would gain her breasts, etc. Godly character is being developed in each christian all the time. So seeing those traits, and recognizing that they should be in us, and our loved ones, is not bad. We should also be recognizing the Godly traits we see in our souses. This is the problem that I have with this comparison. Character traits that are good and Godly, are actually eternal, while physical traits, are temporary. That is what makes them incomparable.

 

[dinonum]

This is exactly the point. The objections are usually along the lines of "I dont sit and fantasize about "Fabio". It paints the issue way too simplistically. No one said you DO sit and do that.

What happens is a subtle realization, even subliminal, that something is missing, that this "ideal man" exists. So, its not that you then sit on the couch thinking "just look at that loser, Fabio wouldnt do that".....

For all the depth women are possessed of relationally, empathetical, etc. why is it so hard to discuss things like this without the superficial responses like "I dont fantasize about the man in the books"...why cant you , even if you still say you dont do it, why cant you see that we arent silly or stupid or sophomoric in what we are saying. We are talking about emotional complexities, on which I as a man am supposedly dumb as a bag of hair about.

We didn't say you were dumb as a bad of hair . I don't think you are, I just think that there is a desire to make romance novels inherently evil by using porn as an example.

We can talk about romance novels completely separate from pornography, TBH. If a totally different thread was created that actually discussed just the issues with romantic novels, I'd probably be on your side.

In this sense, I strongly believe it matters the context of the thread and the discussion.

 

[jham123]

^^The context is "connecting"

How do men connect with women.......Sex
How do women connect with men........emotionally

So.....the whole thing is about connecting....

Men see your connection to your RNs as a threat
Women see mens connection to porn as a threat

When you would like to accept what men are telling you about what bothers them......we'll continue with the discussion as rational

While you tell us......"Tell us" how we should feel.....

well......I can't go any further with people like that

 

[Romanseight2005]

But what are you classifying as emotions? This has always confused me a little with the whole women are emotional, etc. thing. I mean aren't emotions the make up of our thoughts, ideas, feelings, attitudes, etc. Where does an emotion end, and a character trait begin? It seems like emotions, covers nearly everything besides a physical action, and even physical actions are largely driven by emotions, so whatever is meant by emotions concerning this thing women are supposed to be driven by, needs to be defined clearly, and specifically.

 

[janman345]

What ever happened to thinking for yourself

 

[Key]

The dividing issue between a romance novel and porn, is as simple as "Want"

When a man views porn, he wants that actress, that woman in the video. He desires sex with that woman, not his wife, but that porn star.

When a Woman reads a romance novel, her emotions get charged and she wants to feel emotional outlet, in this case, her husband.

In today's world we need more people picking up a book about something other then self-help, and from something as simple as a fantasy story, increase their intimacy and lovemaking.

The Porn and Romance Novels are nothing alike.

Porn decreases a man's desire for intimacy, and he uses masturbation and porn as a substitute for his wife's touch.

Romance novels increase a woman's drive for intimacy with her husband, they don't go running off after stable boys, they expect their husbands to BE the stable boy, and lets be honest guys, some role-play in the bedroom is a GOOD thing.

Maybe if we stopped being prudes and sexually repressed, we might discover that after seven years of marriage our wife's can still be pretty hot and even a bit wild.

But that is just me talking.

 

[Romanseight2005]

The dividing issue between a romance novel and porn, is as simple as "Want"

When a man views porn, he wants that actress, that woman in the video. He desires sex with that woman, not his wife, but that porn star.

When a Woman reads a romance novel, her emotions get charged and she wants to feel emotional outlet, in this case, her husband.

In today's world we need more people picking up a book about something other then self-help, and from something as simple as a fantasy story, increase their intimacy and lovemaking.

The Porn and Romance Novels are nothing alike.

Porn decreases a man's desire for intimacy in a man, and he uses masturbation and porn as a substitute for his wife's touch.

Romance novels increase a woman's drive for intimacy with her husband, they don't go running off after stable boys, they expect their husbands to BE the stable boy, and lets be honest guys, some role-play in the bedroom is a GOOD thing.

Maybe if we stopped being prudes and sexually repressed, we might discover that after seven years of marriage our wife's can still be pretty hot and even a bit wild.

But that is just me talking.

It goes back to what I said about what it is they see in the stable boy or whatever that they like? Is it faithfulness? Is it self sacrificing? See here where there is a problem with comparing the two. If a woman lusts after another man, or starts dreaming of another man because she becomes discontent with her husband, then fine, that is bad just like porn. However, if she sees good and godly traits that should be cultivated in all of us as Christians, and she wants her husband to grow in that area, then it is right for her to pray to that end. She does still need to pray and focus on godly character in herself as well, which also means seeing the good and noble that is in her husband already, but the two aren't comparable.

 

[janman345]

The dividing issue between a romance novel and porn, is as simple as "Want"

When a man views porn, he wants that actress, that woman in the video. He desires sex with that woman, not his wife, but that porn star.

When a Woman reads a romance novel, her emotions get charged and she wants to feel emotional outlet, in this case, her husband.

In today's world we need more people picking up a book about something other then self-help, and from something as simple as a fantasy story, increase their intimacy and lovemaking.

The Porn and Romance Novels are nothing alike.

Porn decreases a man's desire for intimacy, and he uses masturbation and porn as a substitute for his wife's touch.

Romance novels increase a woman's drive for intimacy with her husband, they don't go running off after stable boys, they expect their husbands to BE the stable boy, and lets be honest guys, some role-play in the bedroom is a GOOD thing.

Maybe if we stopped being prudes and sexually repressed, we might discover that after seven years of marriage our wife's can still be pretty hot and even a bit wild.

But that is just me talking.

Thats hogwash (bolded in black) and thats the justification that some use to tie porn to lust. If you cant make that tie then porn is no longer sin but not everyone that views porn wants to leave his wife and go after the porn star or even want the porn star more than his wife. My wife also reads new moon or whatever and she does not have expectations of me turning into a warewolf or having vampire sex. Most people live in reality and can view thoes things as entertainment and nothing more.

I do agree with you on the red, if we did not have melodramatic women who were acting crazy (my ex) because her husband wants something kinky or wants to view porn while they are getting it on we would not have all these therpy sessions for sex/porn addicted men and books and seminars etc etc. If men stopped tolerating this behavior out of women we would not have all these issues, the problem is there are SOME (actually very few) cases where a man may have a lagitimate porn addiction where he masterbates instead of going to his very willing very kinky wife and looses his job over it things like that, thats not most people, most of the cases I have seen are women using that label because they dont want to do their part in the marriage and want to try to get away with being a prude.