Is the SI Swimsuit Issue Pornographic?
Posted by truthtalklive on 2 March, 2009
Todays guest host is Dr. Michael Brown president of Fire School of Ministry and talk show host of The Line of Fire which can be heard on many of these same stations!
Today’s question: “Is the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue pornographic material?”
As always thanks for listening and we look foward to your comments!
24 Comments on “Is the SI Swimsuit Issue Pornographic?”
The question is not whether it is pornographic, but whether you are holy. The Lord has said, “Be ye holy, for I am holy.”
Define “pornographic”. There is a difference between looking at and admiring a piece of art, be it a painting, a statue, or whatever, of a nude image[like Michelangelo's statue of David, or "The Three Graces"] for the sake of admiring and respecting the natural form of humanity, and in looking and lusting after a nude image for the sake of sexual gratification, and involving an image that has been deliberately positioned in various ways to be seductive/sexually alluring[like the women in a Hustler magazine].
Are the women in Sports Illustrated magazine doing anything more sexually seductive than the women in a Victoria’s Secret magazine? If not, then whether or not it qualifies as “pornography” is all based upon the mind of the person looking at the images. If the viewer doing the judging is a prude or a sexual pervert, then of course it will be seen as pornographic[grin]!
I think it is degrading to women, and definitely obscene, and very close to pornographic.
That being said, I love it. I have a SI swimsuit calendar, and I’m proud of it.
Eeerggg, I tried to ignore this thread, but I guess its like looking when you drive by a traffic accident. Stanley, shame on you
IF you wouldn’t want your daughter, sister, wife, or mother doing it, you shouldn’t support it.
As I said in the last sentence of my post number 2 above[grin].
I’m pretty sure if it was my wife in those pictures, I’d be a happy man.
RIght, Stanley, you would want millions of men gawking at an air-brushed (well, nowadays computer enhanced) photo of your almost naked wife, thousands of them probably doing something unmentionable while looking at it. Sure.
If my wife was that attractive, I might not care.
This is a subject that renders even the most admirable of men back to a primitive archetype. It makes me glad to be a woman, since women are not so easily visually stimulated (we are more likely to be “turned on” by a photo of a fully clothed man cuddling a baby or at the worst riding a horse a la the Marlboro Man). And of course, let’s face it: even the most visually pleasing man looks ridiculous in a G string.
I’m pretty sure Hugh Jackman would still look good in a G string, and I’m a completely straight man.
You just proved my point. That’s disgusting on so many levels.
I’m going to have trouble sleeping tonight, especially since they played one of the X men movies on TV tonight so I now have a disturbing visual of Wolverine in a G string.
Hahah. I’m just kidding. Mostly…
That’s the wrong question. The question a Christian should ask is, “does it cause you to lust after her in your heart?”
Well, yes. But in that case most advertising is out, and not just Victoria’s Secret. Today’s topic addresses whether the SI Swimsuit issue is particularly risque.
So, Jason, should all Christian’s cancel their SI subscriptions because of the swimsuit issue?
Jason: Precisely! Is what your wearing causing someone else to sin? Is what you are wearing going to cause a brother in the Lord to stumble? Even Christian men can have a problem with pornography, so they don’t need to see women wearing something like that. There are women who wear scanty swimwear on the beach, and sometimes topless on some beaches….is that pornographic? By todays moral standards it wouldn’t be seen that way, but by Gods standards it is causing another to lust.
Kash,
No I wouldn’t say that anyone should cancel that subscription. I just repeated what Christ said, “27 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
Yes, I got the reference. And since many advertisements and the SI swimsuit issue seem designed to incite lust, one would think Christians would take steps to avoid them…
Sex drive is part of our human experience. We learn manners and etiquette in order to be civilized about it. We can pass by a magazine rack without lusting after the images on the covers. Our behavior with the opposite sex can be civilized. SI Swimsuit issues are pornographic. Life is pornographic. Be civilized.
Mother Nature herself is by all evidences, a roaring sex fanatic and exhibitionist[knowing smile].
But as members of an intelligent species, men have the ability to choose to see and think about this world with their big heads instead of their little ones. So just make a choice and stick with it, if it pleases you. As Fred said above….be civilized.
What we are missing here is that, not only are these women wearing NEXT to nothing. What the SI Swimsuit photos have been full of lately is women wearing LITERALLY nothing, except paint. Is paint enough to cover the body and be sold in a mainstream publication that anyone can buy? They are completely nude! It’s not just about being a civilized, prudish, or perverse MAN. My 10-year-old could buy this at the local convenience store, and despite what I show him about honoring women and thinking of them purely, he will start to objectify women. He will believe that women are to look this way and he will desire to see more and more.
In God’s economy, that woman was only to be seen in that way by only one man, ever, for her entire life. This is not a discussion for grown-ups to smile and wink about. This is about saving and protecting the purity of our boys and girls.
I agree whole heartedly. I do not want my daughter (currently 9 months old) ever thinking she has to be a sex object to have worth (which means MTV is definitely NOT in her future, as long as she lives in my house) and I do not want my son (currently 2 1/2 yo) thinking it is ok to treat women (even anonymous ones in a magazine) as sex objects (so MTV is not in his future, either!). I can control the images that come into our house, but the world is full of shockingly explicit images (and I’m not talking about nudity per se, I’m talking about the overtly sexual poses in clothing/car/perfume advertising). It will take constant vigilance on my part, not to mention talking to them about it much earlier than I’m going to be comfortable with, to explain why it is that those sorts of images are wrong, demeaning, perverting the profoundly holy nature of human sexuality. Of course, we live on a farm, so they will be familiar with the natural, amoral, animal side of sexuality. But that is no excuse for us to behave like animals on this issue, any more than it is an excuse for us to go around urinating on everything. If humanity is called to a greater purpose and moral responsibility (which I do believe, being a Chrisitan), we should be more circumspect in our flagrant use of sex to try and sell everything from sex itself to other products. Sex has consequences, emotional and physical. We are in danger of becoming a nation of sex addicts, and our ability to form lasting loving relationships seems to be suffering because of it.
I am a female, mother, and was a wife to a man that seemed to think porn and the swimsuit issue and the whole shebang was no problem. It hurts. It drives a wedge in between you and your wife, because it makes the wife feel like she’s not sexy enough to incite the man’s passion, that he has to go outside the bedroom to get “in the mood”. And, like a drug, the man needs more and more blatant and flagrant things to get “in the mood”, or get that feeling. And it is a feeling. Porn goes straight to the man’s ego and goes for his gut reaction lust. It’s all about him, she’s hot, and she wants to get it on, NOW. What man doesn’t want that? It’s fantasy. Women have it too, in the form of those smutty romance novels. Don’t deny it. I used to read plenty of them. The fact is, it focuses on fantasy instead of reality. You have to work at a relationship. Being sexy is not all about appearance, but how you interact as a couple. When a guy is looking at swimsuit models, or a woman looking at male models, it kills the relationship. It says to the other person “Ya, I think you’re ok, but this guy/girl is HOT! I would do them in a minute- if I wasn’t married to you…” People try to say differently, that they are just enjoying God’s creation, but God didn’t create women parading around naked and being lustfully posed so that a guy could get a woodie. Men and women did.
Snowballs: I know exactly how you feel. And I have felt those ‘romantic’ feelings…I use to write romantic stories and a couple of novels…..they never got printed because I destroyed them before they destroyed me!! I ended up in torment and was delivered one day miraculously by the Lord!! What a freedom that was….no more tormented by the need for a man, or feeding on romance!! (I was seperated from my acaholic husband at the time). Pornography and such-like enslaves us to our lustful passions, but real love can enjoy true and lasting joy…..one man for one woman. Ofcourse, these relationships are few and far between if they exist atall……we are all sinful until we come to Christ….but even then you can still get tempted and tried. People can fool themselves that it’s not hurting anyone……but it does….it hurts the one who is doing it…and then others in the process.