shannon & gary
We hung out with Shannon & Gary tonight. We actually had quite a bit of fun, in my opinion. We talked about our views on capital punishment, abortion, pornography, feminism in general, and religion. The religious discussions were predominantly based on the Christian faith. Kelly and I are Christian; Shannon & Gary are not.
I was happy that they didn't view us as preachy because I definitely don't want to be seen as preachy. I would like for people to understand that we believe in Christ, but that doesn't mean that they have to in order to be our friends. We would like for everyone to believe in Christ, granted, but there are days that even our faith, being believers, is not very strong. Faith is a funny thing, really. It can be so enormously large one day and then be extremely small the next. I'm sure that part of this has to do with immature faith, but I have talked with long time believers who have significant see-saw faith problems as well. We are taught that "seeing is believing", but this is not always necessarily so, even in science.
We knew that Shannon & Gary weren't against pornography, but it was very interesting to hear their exact views on the subject. Kelly and I are against pornography because we believe that it is degrading and objectifying. The porn industry, namely the predominant porn market, makes women objects for consumption. They use fake breasts, fake lips, tummy tucks, and enhanced posteriors to create an "ideal" sexual mate. Compare this practice to that of the meat industry, they feed the animals a chemical diet, inject them with hormones, and keep them from exercise in order to create an "ideal" cut of meat. The women featured in most pornography are objects to be consumed for the appeasement of the libido's appetite, whereas the cattle are meant to be consumed for the appeasement of the stomach's appetite. Most people would agree that meat, in society's view, is meant for consumption. I personally don't agree with that, but that is not the point. Women, in society's view, are not meant for consumption. Therefore, the conclusion is evident, pornography treats women like meat, not like people. I haven't read the book, but "The Sexual Politics of Meat" by Carol Adams probably makes similar conclusions.
Is there porn that is not objectifying? I'm not sure. Maybe someone can tell me. I just know that I don't like it, or at least, what I have seen I do not like.
I was happy that they didn't view us as preachy because I definitely don't want to be seen as preachy. I would like for people to understand that we believe in Christ, but that doesn't mean that they have to in order to be our friends. We would like for everyone to believe in Christ, granted, but there are days that even our faith, being believers, is not very strong. Faith is a funny thing, really. It can be so enormously large one day and then be extremely small the next. I'm sure that part of this has to do with immature faith, but I have talked with long time believers who have significant see-saw faith problems as well. We are taught that "seeing is believing", but this is not always necessarily so, even in science.
We knew that Shannon & Gary weren't against pornography, but it was very interesting to hear their exact views on the subject. Kelly and I are against pornography because we believe that it is degrading and objectifying. The porn industry, namely the predominant porn market, makes women objects for consumption. They use fake breasts, fake lips, tummy tucks, and enhanced posteriors to create an "ideal" sexual mate. Compare this practice to that of the meat industry, they feed the animals a chemical diet, inject them with hormones, and keep them from exercise in order to create an "ideal" cut of meat. The women featured in most pornography are objects to be consumed for the appeasement of the libido's appetite, whereas the cattle are meant to be consumed for the appeasement of the stomach's appetite. Most people would agree that meat, in society's view, is meant for consumption. I personally don't agree with that, but that is not the point. Women, in society's view, are not meant for consumption. Therefore, the conclusion is evident, pornography treats women like meat, not like people. I haven't read the book, but "The Sexual Politics of Meat" by Carol Adams probably makes similar conclusions.
Is there porn that is not objectifying? I'm not sure. Maybe someone can tell me. I just know that I don't like it, or at least, what I have seen I do not like.