There is a multitude of misconceptions about erotic media, one being that anything subjectively perceived as sexy qualifies. Erotic media is not pictures of mere nudity, swimwear, and so on, things that are not sexual even if they can be deeply sensual. There must by necessity be a sexual component. The human body is not sexual; it can be perceived sexually (though this is feelings/perceptions rather than the nature of the body itself), used sexually, or displayed with sexual intentions, but it is not sexual. Even then, erotic media is not limited to videos or images of casual sex or the like. A married couple could post images or videos online, for instance, or a non-married couple that is engaging in other sexual behaviors together (or separately).
Because these acts are neither condemned by the Bible nor does it logically follow from any doctrine that they would be sinful, all of these could be featured in morally legitimate types of erotic media according to true Christian philosophy. No, the lust of Matthew 5:28 is coveting, which could not be done towards a single person anyway and is not the same as sexual attraction even if directed towards a married person. Sexuality itself is not sinful. No, sexuality could not be evil if God made it very good (Genesis 1:31). It has to be misdirected or misused to be tainted by evil.
Erotic media, given that it does not encourage or glorify the actual sexual sins like rape (Deuteronomy 22:25-27), adultery (Leviticus 20:10), homosexual intercourse (Leviticus 18:22), and so on, is utterly nonsinful (Deuteronomy 4:2). One can also create or consume this permissible kind of erotic media without treating or regarding anyone as only their sex appeal (sexual objectification), and since all personality traits have an individual basis or were shaped by social pressures, there is no such thing as men or women having a gender-specific affinity for erotic media on the creation or consumption side.
If dating, engaged, or married, using erotic material or nonsexual, sensual material as stimulation for masturbation certainly does not have to entail a lack of love for one's partner. It does not logically follow that there is no sexual devotion to one's partner either. In fact, since sexual attraction does not require that one want to have sex or perform any other sexual acts with someone, using erotic or sensual (which is, again, often objectively nonsexual) media to does not even necessitate that there is sexual attraction directed towards anyone being seen or imagined. As if erotic media could not be used as a general stimulus for impersonal arousal anyway, even a
Now, every woman and man that wants to view or masturbate to sensual or genuinely sexual imagery can ensure that it does not replace or interfere with having sex with their spouse, or, in the case of unmarried couples, lesser sexual interaction with their partner. They can always stop for a time if their mind or body gets rigidly used to having erotic media as a stimulus. If this does not happen, there is always the logical possibility of not doing it to a frequency or intensity that deprives someone of sexual energy or basic stamina to give to their significant other. However, couples can use erotic material together, encouraging their partner's nonsinful sexual expression and delighting in the chance to see or appreciate more of their full selves.
Since sexuality is so personal, so pleasurable (in many cases), and spans both the phenomenological (pertaining to consciousness) and physical aspects of human metaphysics, it is true that everything from sex with one's spouse to masturbation can be very existentially introspective. For masturbation, perhaps this does or does not involve any of the Biblically permissible forms of erotic media or just sensual imagery, and in either case it can be shared with a committed partner. A couple could masturbate together or use it, even if attraction to other people is celebrated, to initiate sexual enjoyment that will end with intimate sex.
A great deal of people I have interacted with do or would likely object to all of this, as if what they were told by legalistic Christians or insecure secular people nullifies logical necessities and the actual teachings of the Bible. Just being offended or insecure about any of this and giving into it on an ideological or relational level is irrationalistic, though simply experiencing this and not becoming emotionalistic or otherwise irrational is not erroneous. The truth is foreign or uncomfortable for people who are not used to it. Not everyone who is not asexual has any interest in using erotic media of any kind, but it has absolutely nothing to do with gender and people with subjective dislikes need to be silent or admit reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment