Ethical inappropriate contentography

[Apex]

I'm afraid to post this in General Theology. My comments get reported too often. I'm fairly sure this is within CF rules to ask and discuss though.

For the purposes of this thread, I'm using a standard and common definition for inappropriate contentography found on Wikipedia.

inappropriate contentography - Wikipedia
"inappropriate contentography (often abbreviated inappropriate content) is the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual arousal. inappropriate contentography may be presented in a variety of media, including books, magazines, postcards, photographs, sculpture, drawing, painting, animation, sound recording, writing, film, video, and video games."

Is all inappropriate contentography unethical to view and enjoy?

I think we could all agree that there exists unethical forms of inappropriate contentography. Examples of this would be inappropriate contentographic material produced under coercion or with under aged participants.

However, one example used to defend a positive response to this question, is the inappropriate contentographic material created and exclusively used by a married couple. This would include them photographing or video recording themselves nude or engaged in sexual activity - and then using those photos or videos for their own enjoyment together.

Thoughts?

 

[Roseonathorn]

And so many times ( estimated 3 out of 5 people have had videotaped sex with their partner that was ment only for them two, but later on, one realised that the video was spread to others against their will) that homemade married couples inappropriate contentvideo has gone wrong when the couple end up arguing about something or when they get financial problems then one of the two decides to make money of the video without the other ones knowledge and suddenly it is a scandal and the other person is called a infidel. No, my advice is to never allow any video of sex no matter if You trust Your partner or not because things change over the years and some partners are simply better liars than other and some partners have decided to trust one another and that makes them vulnerable. Especially bad it is when only one in the marriage has decided to trust, be honest and obey 100% and the other is lying, dishonest and unfaithful. So I say, not in this world. Besides if there is such a video of You chances are that if You end up in an argument You will lay awake at night worry that the spouse will share the video with someone against Your will someday, and that is not good for Your sleep or mental health or for Your marriage.

 

[timewerx]

This would include them photographing or video recording themselves nude or engaged in sexual activity - and then using those photos or videos for their own enjoyment together.

Thoughts?

What if the VCR broke??

 

[Apex]

And so many times ( estimated 3 out of 5 people have had videotaped sex with their partner that was ment only for them two, but later on, one realised that the video was spread to others against their will) that homemade married couples inappropriate contentvideo has gone wrong when the couple end up arguing about something or when they get financial problems then one of the two decides to make money of the video without the other ones knowledge and suddenly it is a scandal and the other person is called a infidel. No, my advice is to never allow any video of sex no matter if You trust Your partner or not because things change over the years and some partners are simply better liars than other and some partners have decided to trust one another and that makes them vulnerable. Especially bad it is when only one in the marriage has decided to trust, be honest and obey 100% and the other is lying, dishonest and unfaithful. So I say, not in this world. Besides if there is such a video of You chances are that if You end up in an argument You will lay awake at night worry that the spouse will share the video with someone against Your will someday, and that is not good for Your sleep or mental health or for Your marriage.

You make an interesting point. Where did you get that statistic? I agree that trust is a vital part of a marriage. However, should we live out our marriages as if that trust could be broken at any moment? Also, your concern can be applied to almost anything that requires lasting trust a couple might do - buying a house, sharing a bank account, adopting a child, etc. I'm not so sure you can take an absolute stance on this.

 

[SnowyMacie]

I'm afraid to post this in General Theology. My comments get reported too often. I'm fairly sure this is within CF rules to ask and discuss though.

For the purposes of this thread, I'm using a standard and common definition for inappropriate contentography found on Wikipedia.

inappropriate contentography - Wikipedia
"inappropriate contentography (often abbreviated inappropriate content) is the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual arousal. inappropriate contentography may be presented in a variety of media, including books, magazines, postcards, photographs, sculpture, drawing, painting, animation, sound recording, writing, film, video, and video games."

Is all inappropriate contentography unethical to view and enjoy?

I think we could all agree that there exists unethical forms of inappropriate contentography. Examples of this would be inappropriate contentographic material produced under coercion or with under aged participants.

However, one example used to defend a positive response to this question, is the inappropriate contentographic material created and exclusively used by a married couple. This would include them photographing or video recording themselves nude or engaged in sexual activity - and then using those photos or videos for their own enjoyment together.

Thoughts?

I personally wouldn't consider a couple sharing photos or videos of themselves to be inappropriate contentography, but I'll go by your definition. Personally, no I don't think that a married couple sharing pictures or recording themselves having sex to potentially view later or whatever is unethical.

 

[Apex]

I personally wouldn't consider a couple sharing photos or videos of themselves to be inappropriate contentography, but I'll go by your definition. Personally, no I don't think that a married couple sharing pictures or recording themselves having sex to potentially view later or whatever is unethical.

How would you define "inappropriate contentography"? I personally prefer the term "erotica", but it is not as commonly used or always defined the same way.

 

[SnowyMacie]

How would you define "inappropriate contentography"? I personally prefer the term "erotica", but it is not as commonly used or always defined the same way.

I just have the connotation of inappropriate contentography being solely something that's produced for widespread consumption. The audience isn't the person's significant other or the people that produced it, but other people.

 

[Apex]

I just have the connotation of inappropriate contentography being solely something that's produced for widespread consumption. The audience isn't the person's significant other or the people that produced it, but other people.

I ran across an interesting website that hosts what they call "Christian inappropriate content". They define this type of inappropriate contentography as any erotic video or image that only includes verified married couples. These same couples submit and consent to their videos and images being viewed on this website.

I guess the idea is that this is a safe place for Christians to view inappropriate contentography that only depicts sexual acts of a "non-sinful" type - which they define as any consensual sex by a married, heterosexual, Christian couple.

 

[Roseonathorn]

You make an interesting point. Where did you get that statistic? I agree that trust is a vital part of a marriage. However, should we live out our marriages as if that trust could be broken at any moment? Also, your concern can be applied to almost anything that requires lasting trust a couple might do - buying a house, sharing a bank account, adopting a child, etc. I'm not so sure you can take an absolute stance on this.

There has been several cases up here in my country and elsewhere too I understand, articles in newspapers have been written. Statistics are based on interviews of victims and policereports according to those articles. I personnally find it quite high number that so many share intimate pictures on the net. People have been warned not to be videotaped or photoed during the act because it is almost too big of a problem to handle once it is already spread. But it is different with video and trust. Pictures become a manipulative weapon. For instance if one spouce does not get His or Her way or get upset on the other person He or She might show som nude video of the other person or them together to make Him or Her look like a person with bad morals.

 

[Apex]

There has been several cases up here in my country and elsewhere too I understand, articles in newspapers have been written. Statistics are based on interviews of victims and policereports according to those articles. I personnally find it quite high number that so many share intimate pictures on the net. People have been warned not to be videotaped or photoed during the act because it is almost too big of a problem to handle once it is already spread. But it is different with video and trust. Pictures become a manipulative weapon. For instance if one spouce does not get His or Her way or get upset on the other person He or She might show som nude video of the other person or them together to make Him or Her look like a person with bad morals.

This sounds like the immoral act isn't taking the video, but instead the violation of trust.

 

[Roseonathorn]

This sounds like the immoral act isn't taking the video, but instead the violation of trust.

Personnally I would not trust anyone with such pictures, not by free will. Not my husband, mother, sisters or children. Not if I have a choice.

 

[Apex]

Personnally I would not trust anyone with such pictures, not by free will. Not my husband, mother, sisters or children. Not if I have a choice.

That is truly understandable, but that is not the question being asked in this thread. Thanks for your comments.

 

[Roseonathorn]

Flowers are the reproduction organs of a plant. Those I stand to watch. These I have sown and grown myself and picked and if a bee comes pollinating it might be called flowerinappropriate content if You think about it. That is maybe acceptable in nature. But I do not go lusting or watching other people having sex or showing their genitals.

 

[Apex]

Recently, someone brought to my attention the ethical fashion movement. This movement focuses on how to reduce our consumption of unethically produce clothing - those textiles that were produced via a combination of sub-par working conditions, sub-par worker compensation, and child labor. It is similar to the "fair trade" movement where those who produce products, such as coffee, cocoa, sugar, and even gold, are fairly compensated for their labor.

What I found interesting is that one method to achieve this is by producing, buying, and using more sustainable clothing. On the consumer end, this can be achieved through buying from certified ethical companies, up-cycling old clothing, joining a clothing swap, or buying used clothing from second-hand stores - like Goodwill.

I found this interesting because clothing swaps and buying used clothes are being touted as ethical consumer choices regardless of how the clothing was produced. Sure, ethical production is important, but once the product is made it becomes unethical to waste it.

So there exists two sides of the sustainability coin: ethical production and ethical consumption. You can "ethically" consume "unethically" produced products. You can even "unethically" consume "ethically" produced products.

Can the same be said about inappropriate contentography?

 

[Roseonathorn]

Blow up a Humansize Barbie and Ken doll and there You have it... Your own playmates. And the neighbours doubletake...suddenly Your windows are interesting.

 

[Aino]

Well I wouldn't think it was any more ethical to watch married couples have normal sex then non-married actors doing it. Maybe a lesser of two evils.

 

[Apex]

Well I wouldn't think it was any more ethical to watch married couples have normal sex then non-married actors doing it. Maybe a lesser of two evils.

Since this topic hasn't taken off, I'll add my personal conclusions to add kindling to the dying fire. I know my position is not the typical Christian position, but I'm not afraid to break ranks with tradition if I feel it contradicts Scripture.

1. I believe lusting (coveting) means desiring something that doesn't belong to you and intending to illicitly obtain it. Both elements have to be present for it to be true lust.
2. I believe not all inappropriate contentography is unethically produced.
3. Therefore, I must believe a person who is viewing ethically produced inappropriate contentography and not lusting (as defined above) is not doing something immoral.

Obviously, as with any enjoyable activity, moderation is key. Addiction is a real problem. I have meet people who are addicted to playing video games, however, this potential for addiction doesn't make video games immoral to play. The same goes for viewing inappropriate contentography.

 

[lismore]

I
Is all inappropriate contentography unethical to view and enjoy?

Strangely enough the Church I have been in most opposed to 'inappropriate contentography' has copious amounts of 'inappropriate contentography' decorating their HQ!

 

[gerbilwoman]

I'm on the fence about this one.

 

[Roseonathorn]

You make an interesting point. Where did you get that statistic? I agree that trust is a vital part of a marriage. However, should we live out our marriages as if that trust could be broken at any moment? Also, your concern can be applied to almost anything that requires lasting trust a couple might do - buying a house, sharing a bank account, adopting a child, etc. I'm not so sure you can take an absolute stance on this.

I read it in a newspaper in my country Finland since there was a scandal about a wellknown person. The subject is widespread problem among people so people do report it when it gets known.