Religion, Faith, and Spirituality : Fifty Shades Darker

I went and saw Fifty Shades Darker this morning and I must admit I enjoyed it. Great chemistry by the leads, beautiful cinematography, and a good soundtrack. It wasn't as good as the first one, in my opinion, but it was still spankingly good fun. I rate it 7/10. Anyone here seen Fifty Shades Darker yet or plan to? Does watching Fifty Shades Darker make me a naughty, dirty pervert? Share your thoughts.

After reading the first two books I couldn't stomach the idea of reading the third, and certainly not of watching the movies.

---

Does watching Fifty Shades Darker make me a naughty, dirty pervert?

---

No. Enjoying it might. But then, what's wrong with being a naughty, dirty pervert? It's fun!



If I could stop a rapist from raping a child I would. That's the difference between me and god.

There are two occasions when a character kneels in front of another in a submissive gesture, with palms open in supination. What's the significance of that? Why palms in that position?

What the hell is this doing on the Religion forums?

It was a religious experience for me. Also, there was a moral question in there, in case you missed it.

You're freaking out the squares.


Life is pain, Highness.

What the hell is this doing on the Religion forums?




Because Steve thinks there's nothing wrong with pornography.





All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

1. There's nothing wrong with pornography.
2. 50 Shades isn't porn.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

If it contains nudity then it is porn. From a Christian perspective there is something wrong with it and you knew that's what I meant.










All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

If it contains nudity then it is porn.

---

So you consider Michaelangelo's David or Botticelli's The Birth of Venus porn?

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

What did you say I couldn't hear you? Fifty Shades is porn, it contains nudity and sexual acts.








All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

What did you say I couldn't hear you?

---

---

Fifty Shades is porn

---

Sure, in a world where words don't mean what they actually mean and you can classify stuff by your silly whims.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

Pornography

The representation in books, magazines, photographs, films, and other media of scenes of sexual behavior that are erotic or lewd and are designed to arouse sexual interest.






Boom! Fifty shades is porn.










All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

1. That definition doesn't match the first one you gave RE nudity.

2. No idea where you got that definition from, but this one is far better: "printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings."

The "explicit" element is pretty much how the actual distinction occurs in the world of film where there the world of porn "adult entertainment" is quite separate from mainstream films. The former aren't shown in major theaters unlike 50 Shades.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

Pornography:

movies, pictures, magazines, etc., that show or describe naked people or sex in a very open and direct way in order to cause sexual excitement





Here's another one.








All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

Right, it's the "open and direct" (ie, explicit) part that doesn't fit with 50 Shades and its ilk. I'd also argue that such films, unlike traditional porn, aim to do more than cause sexual excitement.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

Two people shown having sex is open and direct. It's also explicit.










All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

If you see a penis or other object going into a vagina then that's "open and direct." Less than that and you're imagining more than you're seeing. There is no such real sex being shown in 50 Shades, and this is how the distinction is made in the real world.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

There is no such real sex being shown in 50 Shades





Let's not start arguing against something I never said.









All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

What in the world do you think "open and direct" means? If you aren't seeing it, then it's being suggested. If it's being suggested it's not "open and direct."

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

The representation in books, magazines, photographs, films, and other media of scenes of sexual behavior that are erotic or lewd and are designed to arouse sexual interest.














All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

Your new strategy seems to be to throw out as many definitions as possible to distract from the idiocy of your first one. Nice try, but you can't make reality go a different way depending on how you define words. You'll never find 50 Shades for sale in a porn shop.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

The representation in books, magazines, photographs, films, and other media of scenes of sexual behavior that are erotic or lewd and are designed to arouse sexual interest.












All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

Your new strategy seems to be to throw out as many definitions as possible to distract from the idiocy of your first one. Nice try, but you can't make reality go a different way depending on how you define words. You'll never find 50 Shades for sale in a porn shop.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

The representation in books, magazines, photographs, films, and other media of scenes of sexual behavior that are erotic or lewd and are designed to arouse sexual interest.





That's the first official definition I threw out and you ignored it just like you're doing now.










All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

I said nothing about an "official" definition, I said YOUR first definition, which was: "If it contains nudity then it is porn."

The problem with many of your "official" definitions is that they are far too subjective to be of use. What's "lewd" is entirely subjective; we don't know the intention ("designed to arouse sexual interest") of those that made it. However, any definition that mentions "explicit" or "open and direct" depictions of sex is objective; they point to things in the work itself as a means of classifying it. Under your "first official definition," one could classify a horror film like Don't Look Now as porn merely because it contains one (rather famous) sex scene, while the rest of the film is a psychological horror, which is asinine.

The entire purpose of defining pornography is to distinguish between films that are explicitly sexual, whose only goal seems to be to "arouse sexual interest," and those where sex may play an important role, but which are not explicit and which are about more than just the sex. 50 Shades is really about the psychology behind the sexual relationship it depicts.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

There's nothing subjective about the definition I gave. 50 shades is showing nudity and sexual behavior. It's pornographic.






What's "lewd" is entirely subjective; we don't know the intention ("designed to arouse sexual interest") of those that made it.


Sure we don't. It's just so difficult to figure out.




All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

There's nothing subjective about the definition I gave.

---

How is "lewd" not subjective?

---

50 shades is showing nudity and sexual behavior. It's pornographic.

---

Yeah, so do a sh!t-ton of mainstream films that no sane person would label pornographic. Your definitions basically classify every single film with a sex scene as pornography, and that's stupid.

---

Sure we don't. It's just so difficult to figure out.

---

Yeah, it kinda is. There's a huge body of literature on this subject, especially in 20th century aesthetic philosophy.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

Yeah, so do a sh!t-ton of mainstream films that no sane person would label pornographic.


Nice try.



Your definitions basically classify every single film with a sex scene as pornography, and that's stupid.


As long as it has nudity and sex acts, it is.








All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

OK, Word Mangler, good luck trying to convince anyone else of that nonsense.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

I didn't mangle any words and nice try suggesting Christians are insane.









All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

You're mangling words when you think a sex scene with nudity makes a film pornographic. Nobody defines pornography that way.

---

nice try suggesting Christians are insane.

---

You and anyone who agrees with you is insane. This has nothing to do with being Christian. I could go wrangle up 100 Christians and I'd wager you wouldn't get 1/100 to agree that Terminator is porn because it contains nudity and a sex scene.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softcore_pornography





You lost again.






I could go wrangle up 100 Christians and I'd wager you wouldn't get 1/100 to agree that Terminator is porn because it contains nudity and a sex scene.



But if anyone of them were practicing Christians they would all recognize that 50 shades is pornography. Terminator isn't pornography but does contain a pornographic scene there is no getting around it.




All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

How did I "lose?" Your link has no relevance to anything I've been saying. Another word for "softcore pornography" is "erotica" and there's real debate as to whether it should even count as "pornography" for several reasons. It's closer to mainstream films in that many are shown in mainstream theaters, rented in mainstream stores (back when they were still around), on Netflix, often shown on cable TV, etc. Compare that to hardcore pornography that isn't. Something like Emmanuelle is still extremely different from Deep Throat, and both are extremely different to 50 Shades. There's a spectrum between them of sexual explicitness, how much sex is involved, and how much other considerations (characters, drama, themes, aesthetics, etc.) play a part. You think you can just erase all these differences because of how you define a word? Reality doesn't work like that, bub.

---

But if anyone of them were practicing Christians they would all recognize that 50 shades is pornography.

---

I'm sure some would, but hardly all.

---

Terminator isn't pornography but does contain a pornographic scene there is no getting around it.

---

So you think the only purpose of the sex scene in Terminator is to arouse sexual interest in the audience? It has no relevance to the plot or characters, no aesthetic consideration given to how it's filmed/presented? You watch it and all you think is "boner time?" No wonder you insist on such a juvenile label when your mind is that juvenile.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

How did I "lose?"


Right here.It typically contains nude or semi-nude actors involved in love scenes, and is intended to be sexually arousing and aesthetically beautiful.





I doubt it. Some might, but not all.



You don't know what a practicing Christian is?









All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

Right here.

---

Which has nothing to do with what I was saying. "Softcore porn/erotica" is the middle ground between mainstream films and hardcore porn. When most people today talk porn, the latter is what they mean; it's what I meant because there's a big difference between those films and everything else in how they're shot, shown, marketed, etc. You don't seem to comprehend this.

---

You don't know what a practicing Christian is?

---

You don't know that not all practicing Christians are as Puritanical as you? The Bible doesn't even say anything about pornography. Pretty much the only passage that's ever cited is the one about lusting after a woman in real life, which isn't what happens when you watch porn.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

Which has nothing to do with what I was saying.




It has to do with what I've been saying. Aren't you even paying attention?



The Bible doesn't even say anything about pornography.


But it denounces lust, sins of the flesh, fornication and uncovering someone's nakedness. Which would make watching porn sinful.







All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

It has to do with what I've been saying.

---

Yes but you're completely ignoring the context. "Softcore pornography" is really just "erotica," and the only reason the term "softcore porn" came to be is because the famous films of the late 70s came after the emergence of hardcore films in the mid 70s. Were it not for this relationship, the so-called "softcore porn" films would've clearly fallen under the more general label of erotica: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erotica "A key distinction (between erotica and porn) is that pornography's objective is the graphic depiction of sexually explicit scenes, while erotica "seeks to tell a story that involves sexual themes" that include a more plausible depiction of human sexuality than in pornography."

---

But it denounces lust, sins of the flesh, fornication and uncovering someone's nakedness.

---

All of this was related to lusting after/fornicating with real women, not images of them. The only "uncovering nakedness" "sin" I know of was when Adam and Eve recognized their own nakedness, which made them embarrassed; It was not the nudity itself that was embarrassing, but rather knowing of lust for the first time. That's the only way to explain why nudity wansn't a sin before eating the fruit.

Regardless of that, there's no reason that every depiction of nudity and sex should make you feel any kind of lust at all. In most films you're supposed to understand how events impact characters, their feelings/thoughts/actions, so you should be able to understand any sex from that perspective, rather than every example triggering lustful thoughts. Most artistic depictions of nudity and sex are meant to be aesthetic and beautiful, or have some relevance to the story and characters, not lustful.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

the only reason the term "softcore porn" came to be is because the famous films of the late 70s came after the emergence of hardcore films in the mid 70s


Which isn't what we are discussing but nice try.


pornography's objective is the graphic depiction of sexually explicit scenes


Supplying a different definition doesn't refute the definition I provided.






The only "uncovering nakedness" "sin" I know of was when Adam and Eve recognized their own nakedness,


Maybe you should try reading the bible before you declare yourself an authority on it.


All of this was related to lusting after/fornicating with real women, not images of them.

That is one of the weakest most pathetic arguments I've ever encountered. The film we're discussing has real naked women in it, pinhead.


That's the only way to explain why nudity wansn't a sin before eating the fruit.

I know you're arrogant but did you just speak for God.



Regardless of that, there's no reason that every depiction of nudity and sex should make you feel any kind of lust at all.


Stop trying to go off topic.








All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

Do you jerk off over documentaries showing topless African tribeswomen?

---

It is not enough that I succeed. Everyone else must fail.

---

---

Which isn't what we are discussing but nice try.

---

You're that one that brought "softcore" into this discussion, which I had already SAID we weren't discussing. So now you agree we weren't discussing "softcore" but rather "pornography" which is generally short for "hardcore pornography?" You clearly don't understand the difference or you wouldn't have linked to the Wiki article in the first place.

---

Supplying a different definition doesn't refute the definition I provided.

---

You've provided like 4 different definitions throughout this thread, including ones that make the distinction between "explicit" or "open and direct" depictions of sex, which is what I was making because that's the factor that determines how/where certain films can be shown and rented. None of the definitions you've provided align with your original "any film that contains sex and nudity."

---

Maybe you should try reading the bible before you declare yourself an authority on it.

---

Nowhere did I declare myself an authority on it, but you're not exactly proving me wrong.

---

The film we're discussing has real naked women in it, pinhead.

---

Uhhh, no, it has images of real, naked women in it. You think a photograph of a woman is the same thing as the woman herself?

---

Stop trying to go off topic.

---

How is it going off topic? Part of the issue is whether or not pornography is sinful. You've yet to show anything in The Bible that argues it is because The Bible doesn't address pornography. Prove me wrong.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

You're that one that brought "softcore" into this discussion



Yes and it doesn't matter how the term came about it's still irrelevant and It's still pornography.


You've provided like 4 different definitions throughout this thread



The number doesn't matter. You still haven't refuted the main one I listed.




The Bible doesn't address pornography


We've been over this. The bible denounces lust, sins of the flesh, fornication and uncovering someone's nakedness. Which would make watching porn sinful.







All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

Yes and it doesn't matter how the term came about it's still irrelevant and It's still pornography.

---

It's not irrelevant if the "porn" label is only in relation to the (actual) porn that came before it. "Softcore 'porn'" is just "erotica," not actual porn. To deny the difference is sheer ignorance. When people say "porn" they aren't referring to stuff like Emmanuelle, they're referring to stuff like Bang Bros. There's plenty that's been written on the erotica/porn distinction. For one example: http://www.sexualhealthsite.info/erotica-versus-pornography.php

---

You still haven't refuted the main one I listed.

---

Yes I have: it's entirely subjective. "Lewd" is subjective; figuring out what the makers intended is subjective (unless they've commented on it). If the makers of 50 Shades said they didn't intend for it to "arouse sexual interest" then that would make it not porn by your definition. The only objective definition you posted was the "open and direct" one, which is the same as the one I posted and the one I'd wager 99% of people mean when they say "porn."

---

The bible denounces lust, sins of the flesh, fornication and uncovering someone's nakedness.

---

The first three are in relation to real women, not images. You don't "fornicate" with anyone when you watch porn, and you certainly don't have to lust after anyone. You've yet to prove that "nakedness" itself is sinful.

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

"Softcore 'porn'"


is porn.


Yes I have:

No you haven't.



Lewd" is subjective


WHen did I say differently?


The first three are in relation to real women, not images.


one of the dumbest statements ever said on this board. That's Goz level stupidity right there.


You don't "fornicate" with anyone when you watch porn,


So fornication is denounced by God but watching it is ok.I'm going to start calling you Goz if you don't stop acting like her.


You've yet to prove that "nakedness" itself is sinful.


The bible says uncovering someone's nakedness is "wicked" Yes I know what your response will be "uncovering it is bad but looking at it is ok".




All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

The sooner people like you get shot, the safer humanity will be.

---

It is not enough that I succeed. Everyone else must fail.

---

---

is porn.

---

No.

---

No you haven't.

---

http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000108/nest/265968182?d=265985704#265985704

---

WHen did I say differently?

---

http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000108/nest/265968182?d=265994728#265994728

---

one of the dumbest statements ever said on this board.

---

Prove me wrong.

---

So fornication is denounced by God but watching it is ok.

---

I don't see why not. Murder is a sin but do you consider it immoral to watch murder mysteries? Lying is a sin, but do you consider it immoral to watch movies with lying characters?

---

The bible says uncovering someone's nakedness is "wicked"

---

Book/Chapter/Verse?

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

No

You just called it porn shall I quote you again?


No you haven't.


No you haven't refuted my definition.



If it's subjective then the definition does not aid you in classifying any given work as porn.

WHen did I give anything besides my opinion? Oh right I didn't.




Prove me wrong.


Prove me wrong. The bible denounces all forms of sexual immorality/fornication/lust.

I don't see why not.

This is about what the bible says. Not your opinion of the bible. Thanks though.

Book/Chapter/Verse?


Google it.






All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

You just called it porn shall I quote you again?

---

So we can add "scare quotes" to the list of things Blade doesn't understand.

---

No you haven't refuted my definition.

---

Once I point out it's subjective and doesn't allow you to objectively classify anything as porn, there's nothing more that needs to be done. You also claimed the definition wasn't subjective here: http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000108/nest/265968182?d=265994728#265994728

---

Prove me wrong.

---

To prove you wrong I'd have to cite the entire Bible since my claim is that it doesn't denounce pornography. For you to prove me wrong you merely have to cite a quote that does. Burden's on you.

---

This is about what the bible says.

---

Right, and the Bible says nothing about pornography. Doing X is a sin =/= Watching a depiction of X is a sin.

---

Google it.

---

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.

Pornography

The representation in books, magazines, photographs, films, and other media of scenes of sexual behavior that are erotic or lewd and are designed to arouse sexual interest.


Here's the definition again you haven't refuted it.


For you to prove me wrong you merely have to cite a quote that does. Burden's on you.

I've done that. All forms of fornication/lust/and nakedness[except spousal] is denounced. Don't keep asking for proof when you got it.



Right, and the Bible says nothing about pornography.


How many times do you think you've repeated that strawman argument? Hmm.





Doing X is a sin =/= Watching a depiction of X is a sin.



Again you don't decide what is sinful for Christians the bible does.













All fundies are nuts-Poisoned Dragon

---

Here's the definition again you haven't refuted it.

---

I've now linked you to my refutation twice: http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000108/nest/265968182?d=265985704#265985704

---

All forms of fornication/lust/and nakedness[except spousal] is denounced.

---

The fornication/lust are all in reference to real women in real life, not pornography. You've yet to provide the Bible quote against all nakedness.

---

Again you don't decide what is sinful for Christians the bible does.

---

And The Bible says nothing about watching depictions of sins being a sin. Is it also sinful to watch any film that shows a murder?

Rabbit: It's rare that stupid doesn't bring douchedom with it.