Is looking at pornography on the same level as fornication as a sin?

[Fiannan]

It is also much easier to give in to pornography than it is to find someone willing to play hanky panky. Or, at least, I thought it was. But maybe that's not the case anymore.

I would encourage people to watch this video from at least the 16 minute point to the 19 minute mark. The sex educator notes some interesting insights into why men cheat and why women cheat and the differences may shock you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVgzOyHVcj4&t=935s

I speculate that a lot of men in Church turn to porn to preserve their marriages. And in reality there is quite often someone more than happy to take the place of a spouse. The more a catch the guy is the more someone else may want to catch him and I have known plenty of men who, even though they were not in a fantastic marriage, turned down advances by younger, prettier or more compatible women because they valued their marriage commitments.

[brianj]

I would encourage people to watch this video from at least the 16 minute point to the 19 minute mark. The sex educator notes some interesting insights into why men cheat and why women cheat and the differences may shock you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVgzOyHVcj4&t=935s

I speculate that a lot of men in Church turn to porn to preserve their marriages. And in reality there is quite often someone more than happy to take the place of a spouse. The more a catch the guy is the more someone else may want to catch him and I have known plenty of men who, even though they were not in a fantastic marriage, turned down advances by younger, prettier or more compatible women because they valued their marriage commitments.

I enjoyed the part about selfish and hateful women who don't have enough love in their hearts to express love to their husband physically (my description, not hers) complaining that she is blaming them for men cheating.

[Craig Johnson]

I have a question that I think deserves discussion. Why is it so much harder for men to avoid looking at pornography compared to women? What is it about men that makes them weaker in that regard?

Is that true? I have never heard that.

[larsenb]

I have a question that I think deserves discussion. Why is it so much harder for men to avoid looking at pornography compared to women? What is it about men that makes them weaker in that regard?

Is that true? I have never heard that.

I'm not sure about the 'difficulty of avoiding pornography', but I've heard all my life that men/boys are much more cued in to visual stimuli and the whole physical aspect of sex, than woman/girls are. It has more of an immediacy with men, than women; with the latter more preoccupied by aspects of men that make them appear to be good marriage prospects.

My experience has born this out.

[Craig Johnson]

I have a question that I think deserves discussion. Why is it so much harder for men to avoid looking at pornography compared to women? What is it about men that makes them weaker in that regard?

Is that true? I have never heard that.

I'm not sure about the 'difficulty of avoiding pornography', but I've heard all my life that men/boys are much more cued in to visual stimuli and the whole physical aspect of sex, than woman/girls are. It has more of an immediacy with men, than women; with the latter more preoccupied by aspects of men that make them appear to be good marriage prospects.

My experience has born this out.

I have to apologize, I read this really fast and got the genders backwards!

[natasha]

A few months ago we had a combined meeting on a 5th Sunday which also included 14 and older. A wonderful young couple who were married spoke to us. The husband bravely told all of us about his addiction to pornography and his journey to over come it. There wasn't a dry eye in the place. None of us chose to judge him as far as I could see. Instead, we were all touched by his willingness to share something so bad with the rest of us. He did talk about some of the scientific evidence about what it does to the brain and if I remember correctly he said that porn attacks the same part of the brain that cocaine does. He was"introduced" to porn when he was 8 or 9 by older brothers who didn't seem to care if he saw what they were looking at. It's grip is incredible. Why would anyone really want to even decide which is worse or even think about "trying porn" when it is so addictive. He claimed it literally takes over your life. And, anyone who has a cell phone has access to it anytime. But just so you'll know, his desire to overcome his addiction and the value he put on his church membership and priesthood got him to the point that he and his wife were recently married in the temple. I would recommend discussions such as this to any Ward. Our Bishop said he hears more on this subject than we know from people who come to him for help.

[Fiannan]

He did talk about some of the scientific evidence about what it does to the brain and if I remember correctly he said that porn attacks the same part of the brain that cocaine does.

Well....

Facebook addiction ‘activates same part of the brain as cocaine’

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/121614 ... caine.html

[David13]

He did talk about some of the scientific evidence about what it does to the brain and if I remember correctly he said that porn attacks the same part of the brain that cocaine does.

Well....

Facebook addiction ‘activates same part of the brain as cocaine’

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/121614 ... caine.html

Well, what about LDSFF addiction. We have some real forum junkies right here.
I know I start to itch all over if I haven't checked the latest posts on a given day.
dc

[illyume]

He did talk about some of the scientific evidence about what it does to the brain and if I remember correctly he said that porn attacks the same part of the brain that cocaine does.

Well....

Facebook addiction ‘activates same part of the brain as cocaine’

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/121614 ... caine.html

Well, what about LDSFF addiction. We have some real forum junkies right here.
I know I start to itch all over if I haven't checked the latest posts on a given day.
dc

Heh, pretty much anything a person finds enjoyable--pornography, music, even spiritual stuff--attacks' the same part of the brain that cocaine does. It's called Dopamine, and it's a naturally-occurring neurotransmitter the brain uses to reward itself for behavior it likes. Some substances like cocaine can be dangerous in part because they artificially flood the brain with dopamine, where normally dopamine should be produced by the brain itself in response to stimuli; that introduction of artificial dopamine can mess with the brain's ability to create its own.

So... that whole "affects the brain the same way drugs do" argument is really quite weak.

R.E. original topic though? I'd say (from a view outside the LDS church) it really depends on situation and circumstances of each.

Less sinful ->
[*] Viewing pornography where the creator of the pornography was fully consenting and willing to have the pornography used by whoever's viewing it.
[*] Fornication between two fully-consenting adults, who don't have someone else they're lying to about said fornication.

More sinful ->
[*] Viewing pornography where the creator of the pornography wasn't fully consenting, intended it for a more limited release, or similar issues with where the stuff came from.
[*] Fornication where one of the parties isn't fully consenting, or is also involved with some third party who's not aware of the others, is lying about their involvement, or similar.

[djinwa]

So our current church is fascinated with sexual sin. Many problems are blamed on porn. It is discussed constantly, including at this site.

So I point out that there are other sins, and many have worse consequences, and it is not received well. Told we need to get back to the subject, and that not all women are as I described. I just want to hear more talks about women who destroy families because of their lusts. But I'm told to not change the subject, even though Jesus did when they wanted to stone the adulteress.

Keep it on sex, sex, sex. The modern scribes and Pharisees need to keep the attention on porn to distract from their sins. And women need to maintain power and control.

Jesus would not be impressed with this whole war on porn. Would He make a big deal out of someone who occasionally looks at it? Would He take disciplinary action, and make them confess in front of the ward and humiliate them?

Sure doesn't seem like that's how He acted. He seemed more concerned with the motives of the hypocrites. He saw them as the greater evil.

John Ch. 8

1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

[Elizabeth]

I have to say that I would have zero respect or empathy for anyone whom I knew viewed pornography.

[Rand]

I have to wonder, is stealing alway stealing? If I steal from an elderly retired woman, to allow me to indulge in a wild lifestyle, is that the same as stealing a loaf of bread to feed my starving children?
Are there differing motivations in looking at pornography? If so, it is hard to justify it as a monolithic sin with all sinners being of the same degree of depravity.
I also wonder if judging and condemning another is a serious sin.
If we are condemning of another does that link to the idea that not forgiving the sin of another leaves you with the greater sin?

[illyume]

I have to say that I would have zero respect or emphathy for anyone whom I knew viewed pornography.

Hmm, that's a lot of people to have no respect or empathy for...

[captainfearnot]

I have to say that I would have zero respect or emphathy for anyone whom I knew viewed pornography.

Do you think Donald Trump has ever viewed pornography?

[brianj]

I have to say that I would have zero respect or empathy for anyone whom I knew viewed pornography.

Why? I know people who have committed much worse sins and I still have respect and empathy for the individual, just not the sin. One person I know had an affair with a married man after her divorce. I know others who became addicted to prescription drugs and people who have become addicted to illegal drugs. I can and do respect all of these people.

[Fiannan]

Speaking of empathy I have heard people deal with the men who look at it or the women who are offended by it, but I rarely hear anyone of any religion speak of the women who star in such movies. While dancing nude is not akin to staring in a porn movie I have spoken to both LDS and non-LDS women who have been employed as strippers. From their insights they have noted that some women do it for narcissistic thrill (i.e. women from wealthy homes who take a job just for fun), women who have no other way to pay for an education, single women who may have a child and find the hours conducive to being able to care for their child or women who are married with kids who, for one reason or another, need something that pays more than minimum wage. I would assume porn works the same way and as our economy has been gutted by the kind of people who favored "globalization" such as Bill Clinton, George Bush and Barack Obama many young women have a choice to do porn or join the military. I would guess porn is less morally objectionable than military. And so why no mention of the out-of-control capitalism that makes sex a consumer good? I have actually had success in getting people to question the morality of porn when presenting the issue in that context.

[Crackers]

I have actually had success in getting people to question the morality of porn when presenting the issue in that context.

And there you have it, folks! That's the end game here.

[Crackers]

So I point out that there are other sins, and many have worse consequences, and it is not received well. Told we need to get back to the subject, and that not all women are as I described. I just want to hear more talks about women who destroy families because of their lusts. But I'm told to not change the subject, even though Jesus did when they wanted to stone the adulteress.

Keep it on sex, sex, sex. The modern scribes and Pharisees need to keep the attention on porn to distract from their sins. And women need to maintain power and control.

Maybe you should start a women-bashing thread separate from this. I suspect it would get a lot a positive response. Sheesh, I am getting a little tired of the gratuitous women-bashing and sex talk on LDSFF. Might be time to find a new forum.

[Fiannan]

I have actually had success in getting people to question the morality of porn when presenting the issue in that context.

And there you have it, folks! That's the end game here.

Yes, you actually want people to see porn for what it really is, a system of economic exploitation of both the person in front of the cameras as well as the people paying money to watch them.

Then again we can continue bashing people with guilt for being tempted to use it and actually increase the temptation to use it as a means of guilt-reduction.

So I wonder, what is your solution?

[Fiannan]

So I point out that there are other sins, and many have worse consequences, and it is not received well. Told we need to get back to the subject, and that not all women are as I described. I just want to hear more talks about women who destroy families because of their lusts. But I'm told to not change the subject, even though Jesus did when they wanted to stone the adulteress.

Keep it on sex, sex, sex. The modern scribes and Pharisees need to keep the attention on porn to distract from their sins. And women need to maintain power and control.

Maybe you should start a women-bashing thread separate from this. I suspect it would get a lot a positive response. Sheesh, I am getting a little tired of the gratuitous women-bashing and sex talk on LDSFF. Might be time to find a new forum.

Is djinwa wrong about paying a bit more attention to women who break up families? Do you want the Church to have to support these single women with kids, or the state? Heck, there are people who believe that drinking green tea should keep one from getting into the temple yet we see many cases where a woman breaks up a family on selfish grounds and still gets to lead the choir in sacrament????

And while I do not believe that the leaders of the Church are knowledgeable enough on psychoanalytic thought to be employing sex and sexuality as a weapon of control, nor do I think they would intentionally do that, djinwa does present some valid points on what may be a side-effect of this issue.

[DesertWonderer2]

It wasn't that long ago that some mothers sent their daughters to etiquette school to help them learn to be a good spouse. Or that would caution their daughter if she started gaining weight because she won't land a good husband if she lets' herself go. Who set good examples of service to their husband.

These days, even in church, I come across wicked women mocking and scorning their husbands. Women who will do laundry for the rest of the family and cook for the kids, but will indignantly say their husband can cook his own food and do his own laundry.

Marriage needs to be a two way street of service. Too many people have forgotten this. Yes, there are guys who do little to nothing for their spouse, but most men and women would acknowledge these guys are jerks. However, in today's world, guys who expect anything from their wife or don't give her everything are increasingly viewed as jerks, users, misogynists, etc. Some here have accused me of hating women, but that's not it at all. I hate this great wickedness and I feel contempt for people who adopt and encourage this wickedness.

Every married man I know well enough for them to be completely honest would agree with you that marrige is a completely unequal relationship that they just suffer or endure through. I myself would NEVER re-marry if I were to be single again.

Sad.

[Crackers]

Fiannan,

I don’t propose to have a broad solution to this. To me, it seems intuitive that personal sin needs to be overcome on an individual level, using increased spirituality, an increased understanding of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, and outside help where needed.

A second thought is an increase in thoughtful attention by those in stewardship positions. My bishop takes a good approach to this problem with our youth: With careful wording, he politely assumes each youth he interviews has had some exposure to pornography. Now he might be told otherwise by a youth, and that’s wonderful, and I am sure he tells him as much. But for the others, it provides a non-judgmental place to begin a conversation and help someone get back on track.

I would also refer you to my previous comments about creating, maintaining or repairing a meaningful relationship in your life. A happy, satisfying marriage would also minimize the pornography problem.

I absolutely do not think a solution to the problem is to minimize its harm or to justify its use by deeming it a more “moderate” sin. I also don’t think we should seek to minimize an individual’s feeling of guilt for participating in such sin; I absolutely can’t agree that this would cause anyone to participate in it any less. Give me all the psychoanalytical thought you want (and I have studied psychology, so I am not ignorant of such ideas), but telling a person who views pornography that his behavior isn’t so bad will not cause him to give it up. Let’s be logical about that. A feeling of guilt is typically and ideally what compels an individual to repent. We should not be seeking to minimize those feelings.

In regard to your other comments, I think you underestimate our leaders. I also think you overestimate the value of psychoanalytical thought when compared to the teachings and the salvatory principles found in Gospel of Jesus Christ.

[Yappy Hopkins]

I have to say that I would have zero respect or empathy for anyone whom I knew viewed pornography.

This is horrifying. I don't agree with rationalizing porn use by saying it's a lesser sin or that it's done to keep oneself from committing a greater sin, but a pornography addiction is something that can happen to the best of us if we're caught at just the wrong vulnerable moment. I'm going to let fly with a real shocker here, but people don't just instantly lose their humanity the moment they make a mistake, even if an addiction takes hold and they end up continuously making that mistake. I prefer to believe in people, so just as a porn addiction doesn't make somebody instantly devoid of their humanity, I also hold out hope that your comment is not indicative of the general sentiment among the sisters of the church.

I absolutely do not think a solution to the problem is to minimize its harm or to justify its use by deeming it a more “moderate” sin. I also don’t think we should seek to minimize an individual’s feeling of guilt for participating in such sin; I absolutely can’t agree that this would cause anyone to participate in it any less. Give me all the psychoanalytical thought you want (and I have studied psychology, so I am not ignorant of such ideas), but telling a person who views pornography that his behavior isn’t so bad will not cause him to give it up. Let’s be logical about that. A feeling of guilt is typically and ideally what compels an individual to repent. We should not be seeking to minimize those feelings.

I think people in this thread are speaking of how the constant guilt trips are not helping, and often make things worse. That's the nature of addictions - guilt can drive a person to TRY to give up a habit, but guilt alone isn't enough, and too much of it can cause the addict to go "what's the use? I'm just a scumbag anyway" and relapse, and it becomes a vicious cycle or a self fulfilling prophecy.

Last year a discussion came up in Priesthood that completely boggled my mind. One guy said we need to lift the stigma a porn addict carries and stop treating them like the unclean lepers of the church (which I agree with). But then a member of the bishopric chimed in with his theory that porn makes rapists out of users(!) It wasn't meant to be a counterargument to the first guy's point, just his two cents... but then the first guy, the same one who said we need to lift the stigma, agreed!

I couldn't believe my ears. For one, it was doublethink. You can't hold both concepts in your head at the same time - that porn addicts are capable of something so monstrous as rape, but we need to break down the stigma? Didn't they realize how the human race reacts to news of a sexual predator (especially a male one), whether the accusation is true or not? That's how you create mindless mobs out for blood, the exact opposite of a lifting of a stigma. For another, I don't pretend to know any magical secret for getting an addict to put away his habit for good, but it is NOT to tell him he's a budding rapist! That's nothing short of an abusive scare tactic and can SERIOUSLY mess a person up.

[Crackers]

My responses in blue...

I have to say that I would have zero respect or empathy for anyone whom I knew viewed pornography.

This is horrifying. I don't agree with rationalizing porn use by saying it's a lesser sin or that it's done to keep oneself from committing a greater sin, but a pornography addiction is something that can happen to the best of us if we're caught at just the wrong vulnerable moment. I'm going to let fly with a real shocker here, but people don't just instantly lose their humanity the moment they make a mistake, even if an addiction takes hold and they end up continuously making that mistake. I prefer to believe in people, so just as a porn addiction doesn't make somebody instantly devoid of their humanity, I also hold out hope that your comment is not indicative of the general sentiment among the sisters of the church.

I absolutely do not think a solution to the problem is to minimize its harm or to justify its use by deeming it a more “moderate” sin. I also don’t think we should seek to minimize an individual’s feeling of guilt for participating in such sin; I absolutely can’t agree that this would cause anyone to participate in it any less. Give me all the psychoanalytical thought you want (and I have studied psychology, so I am not ignorant of such ideas), but telling a person who views pornography that his behavior isn’t so bad will not cause him to give it up. Let’s be logical about that. A feeling of guilt is typically and ideally what compels an individual to repent. We should not be seeking to minimize those feelings.

I think people in this thread are speaking of how the constant guilt trips are not helping, and often make things worse. That's the nature of addictions - guilt can drive a person to TRY to give up a habit, but guilt alone isn't enough, and too much of it can cause the addict to go "what's the use? I'm just a scumbag anyway" and relapse, and it becomes a vicious cycle or a self fulfilling prophecy. That is a very small part of what is being discussed here. I think the OP and the subsequent discussion are pretty clear on the main idea.

Last year a discussion came up in Priesthood that completely boggled my mind. One guy said we need to lift the stigma a porn addict carries and stop treating them like the unclean lepers of the church (which I agree with). But then a member of the bishopric chimed in with his theory that porn makes rapists out of users(!) It wasn't meant to be a counterargument to the first guy's point, just his two cents... but then the first guy, the same one who said we need to lift the stigma, agreed!

I couldn't believe my ears. For one, it was doublethink. You can't hold both concepts in your head at the same time - that porn addicts are capable of something so monstrous as rape, but we need to break down the stigma? Didn't they realize how the human race reacts to news of a sexual predator (especially a male one), whether the accusation is true or not? That's how you create mindless mobs out for blood, the exact opposite of a lifting of a stigma. For another, I don't pretend to know any magical secret for getting an addict to put away his habit for good, but it is NOT to tell him he's a budding rapist! That's nothing short of an abusive scare tactic and can SERIOUSLY mess a person up.

I hope you don't think I am supporting stoning or public humiliation. There is a big difference between deceitfully allowing someone to minimize their sin and simply allowing them to experience the natural consequences (guilt being one) of their sin. I don't advocate for bashing or guilt-tripping anyone. I

[brianj]

Maybe you should start a women-bashing thread separate from this. I suspect it would get a lot a positive response. Sheesh, I am getting a little tired of the gratuitous women-bashing and sex talk on LDSFF. Might be time to find a new forum.

Though it will probably be taken this way, I hope my words aren't interpreted as woman bashing because that's not my intent.

I am now wondering: if church leaders spoke out against sins women commit as strongly as they speak out against things men are doing, would a lot of women take it as woman bashing?

Ladies, please seriously think about the following and be honest if you choose to respond. We men have essentially been told that if our wives aren't happy, we are failures. Would you feel bashed if an Apostle of the Lord were to stand up in the Women's session of conference next October, or in a general session this month, and said that if your husband isn't happy at home you are a failure? If women in general were sharply reprimanded for spending too much money shopping? Or for accepting statements by fellow Relief Society members that they were forced to have an affair or file divorce because of abuse from their husband without seriously considering the truthfulness of those comments?

I feel that when those of use who have been seriously hurt by our ex wives complain about the constant shaming we receive from general authorities while those women who committed much more grievous sins are never called out, we are accused of woman bashing. I, and others who have been through the same thing, endure accusations of abuse and other sins while a great many people accept the words of our exes without question. If a man commits adultery, he did a very bad thing. So why is it that when a woman commits adultery, her husband did very bad things?