Porn Addicts, Buyers, Writers--are you worried by this list?

[Pure]

Porn/erotica Buyers, Writers--are you worried by this list?

From the Concerned Women for America website. The results of three years of Bush/Ashcroft, for pornography/obscenity.

Does this list cause you concern? What does it portend, if anything? What are the dangers to free expression caused by the shut-down of girlspooping.com ?


http://www.cwfa.org/articledisplay.asp?id=5022&department=LEGAL&categoryid=pornography


DOJ Releases List of Obscenity Prosecutions During This Administration 12/18/2003

By Jan LaRue, Chief Counsel

{{sorry about the weird question marks which come in place of apostrophe's; can anyone diagnose the problem}}

Last year the adult industry churned out 11,000 titles despite threatened crackdown.

CWA has received a list of cases we requested from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) identifying the 21 obscenity convictions department officials have said they've achieved since the Bush/Ashcroft administration began enforcing federal obscenity laws. The list, dated November 12, provided by Mary Beth Buchanan, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, identifies 21 persons/entities thus far convicted on obscenity charges based upon the receipt, distribution or transfer of images of adult obscenity under 18 U.S.C. 1460-1470.

The report also lists a number of important pending indictments of very recent vintage. The president and attorney general have said that enforcing federal obscenity laws is a priority. CWA has been tracking the DOJ's progress and has published several articles, as we have become aware of obscenity indictments and convictions. While the DOJ list includes four cases involving individuals sending obscenity to a minor that are not included in CWA articles, CWA has written about four cases not included on the DOJ list, including U.S. v. Gravenhorst, U.S. v. Huggins, U.S. v. Klazura and U.S. v. Martino. The DOJ list identifies the following cases:

Convictions of Suppliers/Distributors/Producers:

1. U.S. v. Gary Farris, doing business as (d/b/a) ?taboomovies.net, offered videotapes some of which included bestiality, defecation, urination, vomit and mutilation. Farris forfeited his domain name and was sentenced on July 24, 2003, to five years probation, six months at a community confinement facility, and six months home incarceration.

2. U.S. v. Ragsdale. A former Dallas police officer and his wife were convicted by a jury on October 22, 2003, of operating an Internet Web site through which they distributed obscene videos ?depicting rape scenes. The investigation, according to the report, ?into other potential targets, continues.

3. U.S. v. Vetter, d/b/a blondestrippergirl.com. Christin Vetter ?ran a business which included fulfilling customers' fetishes, and mailing the end product, including used anal beads, dildos with menstrual blood, etc. No photographs or videos are involved.? Vetter?s plea agreement includes five years probation and participating ?in a mental health program.?

4. U.S. v. Wasserman and King. Convicted by a plea on December 3, 2001, on obscenity charges, Wasserman was sentenced to five years probation and a $490,000 fine, and King to two years probation and $10,000 fine. The defendants unknowingly sent porn via e-mail to a federal magistrate.

5. U.S. v. Corbett, d/b/a, girlspooping.com. Michael and Sharon Corbett, Joseph Tanner, and Randall Rogers all entered guilty pleas on August 25, 2003, to distributing obscene videotapes depicting graphic sexually explicit scenes of defecation.

Convictions of Individuals for distribution/receipt:

1. U.S. v. Cauble. Indicted October 9, 2002, on 13 counts of receiving and possessing child pornography and four counts of receiving obscenity, including images depicting bestiality, Cauble pleaded guilty to two counts of receipt of child porn, one count of possession of child porn, and one count of receipt of adult obscenity. His sentence includes 41 months imprisonment and three years of supervised release.

2. U.S. v. McClure. McClure uploaded approximately 300 images to an electronic photo album. ?The images selected for prosecution included both child pornography and adult obscenity.? After pleading guilty, McClure ?was sentenced on July 22, 2003, to 51 months imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release.?

3. U.S. v. Funderburk. On December 13, 2002, a judge sentenced Funderburk to 27 months imprisonment, three years of supervised release, and ordered to pay for his mental and drug counseling after pleading guilty of distributing ?an obscene video which depicted bondage and rape.?

onvictions of Individuals for Providing Obscenity to Children: 1. U.S. v. Obermaier. Obermaier, a New Jersey firefighter, was indicted on August 16, 2002, after he attempted to entice a person he believed to be a 13-year-old girl to engage in illegal sexual activity via an AOL chat room. He used the Internet ?to show the ?girl? a Web camera broadcast of himself performing a sexual act.? After pleading guilty, Cauble forfeited his computer hard drive and Web camera and was sentenced on January 7, 2003, to six months in prison with supervised release for two years.

2. U.S. v. Standley. Standley pleaded guilty on July 2, 2001, and was sentenced on October 1, 2001, to 40 months imprisonment and three years of supervised probation for sending obscenity via the Internet to a 13-year-old girl.

3. U.S. v. Gottschald. Gottschald, a practicing attorney, was indicted on August 14, 2002, for ?violation of the Mann Act, receipt and possession of child pornography, and four counts of transferring obscene matter to a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. ? 1470.? On February 3, 2203, ?the defendant plead guilty to one count of attempted coercion/enticement of a minor, two counts of transfer of obscene materials to a minor, and one count of travel to engage in sex with a minor.?

4. U.S. v. Foran. Indicted on two counts of attempted enticement of a minor and attempted distribution of obscene material to a minor, a jury convicted Foran on October 9, 2002, on both counts of the indictment. After fleeing to Canada and failing to appear at his sentencing hearing, the court ordered Foran to serve 65 months under counts one and two to run concurrently.

5. U.S. v. Beth Prince. Prince pled guilty on May 17, 2002, to mailing obscene material to a 14-year-old girl and was sentenced on August 19, 2002, to five years of probation and a $2,000 fine.

Indictments of Suppliers/Distributors/Producers:

1. U.S. v. Zicari (a/k/a Rob Black) and Janet Louise Romano (a/k/a Lizzy Borden) and Extreme Associates, a corporation. All three defendants were indicted on 10 counts of violating federal obscenity laws. The investigation began ?after a special report aired on PBS? Frontline, on February 7, 2002, entitled ?American Porn.? ? Extreme Associates is a significant producer and distributor of obscene material, including video tapes depicting the rape of women.?

2. U.S. v. Coil. This investigation began over five years ago under the Clinton/Reno administration. A federal grand jury indicted seven individuals on ?all or some of the following charges: racketeering, numerous obscenity offenses, fraud, and income tax evasion.? The charges stem from involvement in an organization established in 1981 that owns and operates numerous adult bookstores and arcades in seven states ?that sold obscene and pornographic materials.? The indictment includes ?a forfeiture charge seeking more than $9.7 million in proceeds from the racketeering enterprise.?

Indictments of Individuals:

1. U.S. v. Rice. ?While working as a contract employee for the IRS, Robert Rice downloaded numerous images of both child pornography and obscenity (bestiality and S & M) IMAGES onto his work computer. A federal grand jury indicted Rice on charges of possession and attempted possession of child pornography and transportation of obscene matter.

Indictments of Individuals (for Providing Obscene Materials to Minors):

1. U.S. v. Shrider. Shrider was indicted on October 9, 2002, based on his travel interstate to meet a person he believed to be a 15-year-old girl and sending ?her? via the Internet a sexually explicit photograph of himself.

Judging the progress: The bottom-line question after three years is, What effect has DOJ?s progress had on the hard-core porn industry? The summaries of the five cases listed under Convictions of Suppliers/Distributors/Producers reveal that the only convictions thus far have been of extremely deviant material depicting bestiality, excretory activities, rape and torture. A very small segment of the porn industry produces and distributes this deviant material. Until the DOJ vigorously and consistently targets the major hard-core porn producers and distributors of prosecutable but less deviant material, the industry will continue to make billions exploiting women, addicting men, exposing children, destroying marriages and polluting the culture while laughing all the way to the bank. 60 Minutes interviewed U.S. Attorney Buchanan for a program, ?Porn in the U.S.A.,? which aired November 12.

She said:

We're focusing our resources on the most egregious offenders. So, we're looking at the producers and distributors who are producing the worst material, the largest quantity of material, the largest area of distribution. ? t is not the Justice Department's intention to shut down the adult entertainment industry or eliminate all sexually explicit material, even if it could. The point is to enforce some standards. As for the big corporations that are now distributing pornography over cable, satellite, and the Internet, ? they need to exercise discretion. The Justice Department is currently investigating 50 cases across the country.

 

[bg23]

Erotica isn't porn.

 

[CrazyyAngel]

From the Concerned Women for America website. The results of three years of Bush/Ashcroft, for pornography/obscenity.

Does this list cause you concern? What are the dangers to free expression caused by the shut-down of girlspooping.com ?

No actually it doesnt cause me much concern. Especially those child pornography cases. The rest is ... well, not my cup of tea but also questionable in terms of should it be prosecuted. Some of it sounds too much like "He this is pervert (but not illegal), lets shut it down".

CA

 

[Boxlicker101]

Re: Re: Porn Addicts, Buyers, Writers--are you worried by this list?

No actually it doesnt cause me much concern. Especially those child pornography cases. The rest is ... well, not my cup of tea but also questionable in terms of should it be prosecuted. Some of it sounds too much like "He this is pervert (but not illegal), lets shut it down".

CA

I'm pretty much with the Angel on this. I have no use whatever for child pornographers but those who make movies, etc. using willing and well-paid adult participants should be left alone. I voted "Yes, somewhat," by the way.

I have no use for bestiality or feces or urine or torture or some of the other far out sites either but this personal preference. Some people like ths kind of stuff so they should have the right to read or watch it.

As Bad_Girl said, this is erotica. Mostly it is but some of the stories, especially mine, as well as some others, are strictly smut with no redeeming social qualities. Even so, I enjoy writing them and having people read them and enjoy them and tell me in graphic terms how much they enjoy them. As far as I can see, nobody is being hurt by anything on Lit. so we should be left alone but once fanatics get the taste of blood, there may be no stopping them.

 

[R. Richard]

There is no hard and fast answer. However, written works that do not violate written law are very hard to prosecute. We have first amendment rights and that is an area that even the government will find hard to attack.

A jury shown films involving child pornography might turn into a lynch mob, instead of just convicting. A jury shown flims involving beastiality, nasty urination/defication, rape, nasty BDSM, etc. might well convict. A jury shown a whole site of written work, including many well written works would probably not convict.

In my opinion there is not much for Literotica authors to worry about.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

It doesn't worry me terribly, because the definition of obscenity is pretty narrow. In the grand scheme of things, 21 convictions in the Bush Asscroft years, seems to indicate they are having very little success. I notice that several of their "convictions" disclose terms of a plea agreement, indicating to me they most likely only won those cases because the defendant couldn't afford to continue his defense or felt he was in a positin where he couldn't win.

The Meese man tried a crack down under Reagan, when the president absolutely did have a mandate from the people. He fared little better. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression generally trump moral outrage, with all but the most conservative or activistic Jurists.

If a man can write something like the turner Diaries, which basically advocate the violent over throw of the government and the author is still walking the streets, I think the written word would have to be exceptionally bad to even have a shot at being not protected by free speech.

my 2 cents worth.

 

[razor_nut]

I think we're reaching a consensus here. These cases are few in number, and prosecute very extreme content. This stuff isn't run-of-the-mill porn, it's the most intense taboo fetish product there is. Consumers of it represent tiniest insignificant percentage of the porn industry, but get much more focus.
So should we be worried? Not really. Like what's been said, with the standards required to post stories here, we're far from the content of these cases. I don't think we need to bust out the protest banners and take to the streets. One must always be vigilant to make sure the government doesn't push beyond it's bounds.

PS~ My 100th post! Yay! *runs off for an avatar*

 

[Boxlicker101]

It doesn't worry me terribly, because the definition of obscenity is pretty narrow. In the grand scheme of things, 21 convictions in the Bush Asscroft years, seems to indicate they are having very little success. I notice that several of their "convictions" disclose terms of a plea agreement, indicating to me they most likely only won those cases because the defendant couldn't afford to continue his defense or felt he was in a positin where he couldn't win.

The Meese man tried a crack down under Reagan, when the president absolutely did have a mandate from the people. He fared little better. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression generally trump moral outrage, with all but the most conservative or activistic Jurists.

If a man can write something like the turner Diaries, which basically advocate the violent over throw of the government and the author is still walking the streets, I think the written word would have to be exceptionally bad to even have a shot at being not protected by free speech.

my 2 cents worth.

Constitutional guarantees woudn't stop the government from prosecuting vindictively. Larry Flynt, for instance, won his case but it cost him a bundle. Some small operators wouldn't be able to afford that and would either cease and desist or go bankrupt defending themselves. Perhaps some kind of a defense pool could be formed for such operators to defend themselves. In a fair and honest court contest, Lit. would win easily, but it could be an expensive victory.

 

[smartnsassy]

why does it always seem that 'concerned' is a euphamism for nosy?

wouldn't it be nice if people would be concerned with there own business and not everybody elses?

If you're a good christian (or whatever) and you think that porn is abhorrent- what business do you have digging up the nastiest examples you can find and spending all your time preaching and talking and thinking about them.

Doesn't the bible say to focus on whatever is good and true and lovely? Why go out looking for something if you beileve it to be the opposite of these things? (YOu don't accidentally find scat movies- you gotta go out looking for 'perversions' to even knnow some of this stuff even exists.

It is my contention that those 'concerned' with so called smut are the most perverse of all.

 

[Pure]

Hi Colly, (note to Smartn)
Thanks for dropping by and confirming my impression. Also this tends to confirm a statement of yours a while back, that the basic sucky fucky stuff is not endangered. Remotely.

In fact, as you may have gathered, the website folks are complaining about too little. What think you of the theory that Bush is just doing token placation of these 'anti porn' folks.? More than a few of the RR feel that Bush's heart is just not in some of these campaigns.

Smartn, those are good points as far as they go.

I once went to an anti porn lecture, and a fellow from the FBI showed us some of the nastiest stuff they had (i.e., sex murderers' photos of their torture victims). That stuff is HARD to find. And the crusaders were loading up on it.

As to your general point, of focussing on the good, true, perfect, etc. Yes, provided there's no harm being done. That's the tough one.

I think Sher, for instance, as a liberal, is going to say, 'no harm in any of the adult stuff mentioned (so long as it's acted--i.e., not pictures of real rape crimes), made by adults, adult actors, and adult consumers.

Which pervs represent a danger? A small percentage, I think.

Where there is harm, I'm glad a section of the FBI doesn't focus only on the good and lovely--deals with child abuse in pictures, serial killing, etc. You do wonder what it does to a person though.

=======





Smartn,
If you're a good christian (or whatever) and you think that porn is abhorrent- what business do you have digging up the nastiest examples you can find and spending all your time preaching and talking and thinking about them.

Doesn't the bible say to focus on whatever is good and true and lovely? Why go out looking for something if you beileve it to be the opposite of these things? (YOu don't accidentally find scat movies- you gotta go out looking for 'perversions' to even knnow some of this stuff even exists.

It is my contention that those 'concerned' with so called smut are the most perverse of all.

 

[The_old_man]

For those who say that the First Amendment is Sacrosanct I would like to point out the continued erosion of another Amendment.

Many of the Anti-gun organizations have openly stated that repeal of the second amendment is the ultimate goal. There are more gun oner's than pornographers but we are slowly losing Right to Own certain classes of weapons.

If a very motivated, politically connected, well funded organization was willing to buck the ACLU hard enough it MIGHT be passable to start picking holes in the First.

 

[cantdog]

The holes in the First are about political speech. As with Debs's conviction.

Porn is a perennial thump-and-point topic for brimstone preachers. It draws 'em in and it makes you good money. So there will always be packs of aroused crusaders proclaiming the body made in God's image an obscene and disgusting sight. May they behold the Author of that image and tell Him He looks disgusting on their Judgement Day.

Fuck 'em. I got better things to worry about.

 

[Pure]

myself, i'm hoping to meet an 'aroused crusader.'

 

[cantdog]

They're not much fun at parties. You can find them in front of women's clinics, picketing.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Hi Colly, (note to Smartn)
Thanks for dropping by and confirming my impression. Also this tends to confirm a statement of yours a while back, that the basic sucky fucky stuff is not endangered. Remotely.

In fact, as you may have gathered, the website folks are complaining about too little. What think you of the theory that Bush is just doing token placation of these 'anti porn' folks.? More than a few of the RR feel that Bush's heart is just not in some of these campaigns.

Smartn, those are good points as far as they go.

I once went to an anti porn lecture, and a fellow from the FBI showed us some of the nastiest stuff they had (i.e., sex murderers' photos of their torture victims). That stuff is HARD to find. And the crusaders were loading up on it.

As to your general point, of focussing on the good, true, perfect, etc. Yes, provided there's no harm being done. That's the tough one.

I think Sher, for instance, as a liberal, is going to say, 'no harm in any of the adult stuff mentioned (so long as it's acted--i.e., not pictures of real rape crimes), made by adults, adult actors, and adult consumers.

Which pervs represent a danger? A small percentage, I think.

Where there is harm, I'm glad a section of the FBI doesn't focus only on the good and lovely--deals with child abuse in pictures, serial killing, etc. You do wonder what it does to a person though.

=======





Smartn,
If you're a good christian (or whatever) and you think that porn is abhorrent- what business do you have digging up the nastiest examples you can find and spending all your time preaching and talking and thinking about them.

Doesn't the bible say to focus on whatever is good and true and lovely? Why go out looking for something if you beileve it to be the opposite of these things? (YOu don't accidentally find scat movies- you gotta go out looking for 'perversions' to even knnow some of this stuff even exists.

It is my contention that those 'concerned' with so called smut are the most perverse of all.

I think the bottom line with the GWB administration is something along the lines of a mid range call girl. In other words they will roll over for bussiness interests first and if that dosen't cover expenses, she'll take a few RR clients to cover the gap.

Porn is a bussiness, a multimillion dollar bussiness and, the only bussiness that is steady no matter how other segments of the economy are going. A little crack down on the most extreme, particularly in cases like those above where the target is a one or two man small bussiness enterprise isn't going to hurt the mainstream of the industry. The far right will get to get thier anti porn nut, the business part of it won't sustain any negative effects and everyone on the GOP gravy train is happy.

GWB has to tread a fine line, but when push comes to shove, although the religious right got him there, it's the bussiness interests he will always answer to first.

-Colly

 

[Pure]

For Colly:

 

[Pure]

Can there be Christian erotica?

That's the question.

Can there be Christian Erotica: I mean approved, NOT just tolerated/unprosecuted.

I could find, sifting through the dozens of 'possibles' turned up by Google, only one purported example of a het. erotica story, see below.

I found one short lived attempt, described below, second item.

{STORY}

http://www.asstr.org/~Kristen/10/erotica.txt


God watches

by Roy Martin


{beginning excerpt, later excerpt}

We don't know what Adam and Eve looked like. We shouldn't really care, because they didn't. They probably didn't care about a lot of things. Like thebirds of the air, they didn't have to fret about food, because everything they could ever desire was theirs for the picking. Like the other animals, making love in the garden was a beautiful, natural, sacred, publicand shared event. They could no doubt see the animals practicing procreation, and their own lovemaking was plain for all to see. Maybe the animals didn't fully appreciate what they saw, but God did. You see, God could see everything. In fact, He invented it. Like everything God made, He looked down and "saw that it was good." An artist admiring His own excellent handiwork, I'm sure God delighted in every one of His children's loving trysts that He witnessed. God is a voyeur, the best possible kind. God likes to watch; He likes to see His children blessed. God loved Adam and Eve, Adam and Eve lovedGod, and Adam and Eve loved each other. And God watched. [...]


In the nearly-gone light of the sliver of moon, my wife's pale skin takes on the faintest glow of pearl. I reach under her, undo her bra clasps, and push up her bra, exposing her pink nipples. They are erect, but whether from cold or thrill I can't tell. I love to watch her. And I know God can watch, too, if He wants. Who wouldn't want to?

I cup one breast in one hand, and take her nubbin into my mouth; I'll make sure it's not cold. While alternately sucking and tonguing, alternately hard and gentle, my other hand completes one more journey down her soft skin, but not stopping like before. I cup her mound with my hand, pressing firmly on all her womanhood. She moans quietly, losing herself in all the sensations: The cool night air, the tickling grass on the back of her thighs, my hot mouth on her cold titty, my cool hand on her warm pussy. We're starting to make love like Adam and Eve, in the Garden where God can watch.


====
http://www.media.anglican.com.au/tma/1999/1999_08/erotica.html
Anglican publication in Melbourne, AU

A need for Christian erotica?

A Christian erotic Website which was visited by 3000 in four days was withdrawn from the Internet last month by its Baptist minister initiator, the Revd Mark Tronson. Dr Tronson said that colleagues had advised him of the need for theological evaluation of the most appropriate way to present his ideas. Dr Tronson wrote the five Christian erotica short stories which appeared on the Web site out of concern about "thousands of pornographic Web sites" and magazine material encouraging pre- marital sex.

The Bible gave a very different message, Dr Tronson said, "which sustains the most astonishing, miraculous and pleasurable physical and spiritual experiences within the marriage bed before God." He said that his stories contained "no pornographic terminology, nor abusive sexual descriptions, nor words of physical assault. However the reader is enthusiastically alerted to the erotic nature of the marriage bed for Bible believers." The response to the Web site had been "unbelievable," Dr Tronson said. "What we may be seeing is the urgent need for theologically sound Christian erotica." A national group is currently being formed to consider the issues of appropriate Christian response to pornography.

===
There is a site with Christianity and Sex, but somewhat critical, 'freethinking' and homoerotic.
Adult Christianity (TM) Christian Pornography and Christian Erotica

http://www.jesus21.com/portal/index.php?s=erotica

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Re: Can there be Christian erotica?

That's the question.

Can there be Christian Erotica: I mean approved, NOT just tolerated/unprosecuted.

I could find, sifting through the dozens of 'possibles' turned up by Google, only one purported example of a het. erotica story, see below.

I found one short lived attempt, described below, second item.

{STORY}

http://www.asstr.org/~Kristen/10/erotica.txt


God watches

by Roy Martin


{beginning excerpt, later excerpt}

We don't know what Adam and Eve looked like. We shouldn't really care, because they didn't. They probably didn't care about a lot of things. Like thebirds of the air, they didn't have to fret about food, because everything they could ever desire was theirs for the picking. Like the other animals, making love in the garden was a beautiful, natural, sacred, publicand shared event. They could no doubt see the animals practicing procreation, and their own lovemaking was plain for all to see. Maybe the animals didn't fully appreciate what they saw, but God did. You see, God could see everything. In fact, He invented it. Like everything God made, He looked down and "saw that it was good." An artist admiring His own excellent handiwork, I'm sure God delighted in every one of His children's loving trysts that He witnessed. God is a voyeur, the best possible kind. God likes to watch; He likes to see His children blessed. God loved Adam and Eve, Adam and Eve lovedGod, and Adam and Eve loved each other. And God watched. [...]


In the nearly-gone light of the sliver of moon, my wife's pale skin takes on the faintest glow of pearl. I reach under her, undo her bra clasps, and push up her bra, exposing her pink nipples. They are erect, but whether from cold or thrill I can't tell. I love to watch her. And I know God can watch, too, if He wants. Who wouldn't want to?

I cup one breast in one hand, and take her nubbin into my mouth; I'll make sure it's not cold. While alternately sucking and tonguing, alternately hard and gentle, my other hand completes one more journey down her soft skin, but not stopping like before. I cup her mound with my hand, pressing firmly on all her womanhood. She moans quietly, losing herself in all the sensations: The cool night air, the tickling grass on the back of her thighs, my hot mouth on her cold titty, my cool hand on her warm pussy. We're starting to make love like Adam and Eve, in the Garden where God can watch.


====
http://www.media.anglican.com.au/tma/1999/1999_08/erotica.html
Anglican publication in Melbourne, AU

A need for Christian erotica?

A Christian erotic Website which was visited by 3000 in four days was withdrawn from the Internet last month by its Baptist minister initiator, the Revd Mark Tronson. Dr Tronson said that colleagues had advised him of the need for theological evaluation of the most appropriate way to present his ideas. Dr Tronson wrote the five Christian erotica short stories which appeared on the Web site out of concern about "thousands of pornographic Web sites" and magazine material encouraging pre- marital sex.

The Bible gave a very different message, Dr Tronson said, "which sustains the most astonishing, miraculous and pleasurable physical and spiritual experiences within the marriage bed before God." He said that his stories contained "no pornographic terminology, nor abusive sexual descriptions, nor words of physical assault. However the reader is enthusiastically alerted to the erotic nature of the marriage bed for Bible believers." The response to the Web site had been "unbelievable," Dr Tronson said. "What we may be seeing is the urgent need for theologically sound Christian erotica." A national group is currently being formed to consider the issues of appropriate Christian response to pornography.

===
There is a site with Christianity and Sex, but somewhat critical, 'freethinking' and homoerotic.
Adult Christianity (TM) Christian Pornography and Christian Erotica

http://www.jesus21.com/portal/index.php?s=erotica

Read Song of Solomon.

 

[Pure]

Re: Re: Can there be Christian erotica?

Yeah, yeah. Though some of my Jewish friends may disagree.

(Anyway, my commentary says it's an allegory of Christ's love for His church.)

Read Song of Solomon.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Re: Can there be Christian erotica?

That's the question.

Can there be Christian Erotica: I mean approved, NOT just tolerated/unprosecuted.

I could find, sifting through the dozens of 'possibles' turned up by Google, only one purported example of a het. erotica story, see below.

I found one short lived attempt, described below, second item.

{STORY}

http://www.asstr.org/~Kristen/10/erotica.txt


God watches

by Roy Martin


{beginning excerpt, later excerpt}

We don't know what Adam and Eve looked like. We shouldn't really care, because they didn't. They probably didn't care about a lot of things. Like thebirds of the air, they didn't have to fret about food, because everything they could ever desire was theirs for the picking. Like the other animals, making love in the garden was a beautiful, natural, sacred, publicand shared event. They could no doubt see the animals practicing procreation, and their own lovemaking was plain for all to see. Maybe the animals didn't fully appreciate what they saw, but God did. You see, God could see everything. In fact, He invented it. Like everything God made, He looked down and "saw that it was good." An artist admiring His own excellent handiwork, I'm sure God delighted in every one of His children's loving trysts that He witnessed. God is a voyeur, the best possible kind. God likes to watch; He likes to see His children blessed. God loved Adam and Eve, Adam and Eve lovedGod, and Adam and Eve loved each other. And God watched. [...]


In the nearly-gone light of the sliver of moon, my wife's pale skin takes on the faintest glow of pearl. I reach under her, undo her bra clasps, and push up her bra, exposing her pink nipples. They are erect, but whether from cold or thrill I can't tell. I love to watch her. And I know God can watch, too, if He wants. Who wouldn't want to?

I cup one breast in one hand, and take her nubbin into my mouth; I'll make sure it's not cold. While alternately sucking and tonguing, alternately hard and gentle, my other hand completes one more journey down her soft skin, but not stopping like before. I cup her mound with my hand, pressing firmly on all her womanhood. She moans quietly, losing herself in all the sensations: The cool night air, the tickling grass on the back of her thighs, my hot mouth on her cold titty, my cool hand on her warm pussy. We're starting to make love like Adam and Eve, in the Garden where God can watch.


====
http://www.media.anglican.com.au/tma/1999/1999_08/erotica.html
Anglican publication in Melbourne, AU

A need for Christian erotica?

A Christian erotic Website which was visited by 3000 in four days was withdrawn from the Internet last month by its Baptist minister initiator, the Revd Mark Tronson. Dr Tronson said that colleagues had advised him of the need for theological evaluation of the most appropriate way to present his ideas. Dr Tronson wrote the five Christian erotica short stories which appeared on the Web site out of concern about "thousands of pornographic Web sites" and magazine material encouraging pre- marital sex.

The Bible gave a very different message, Dr Tronson said, "which sustains the most astonishing, miraculous and pleasurable physical and spiritual experiences within the marriage bed before God." He said that his stories contained "no pornographic terminology, nor abusive sexual descriptions, nor words of physical assault. However the reader is enthusiastically alerted to the erotic nature of the marriage bed for Bible believers." The response to the Web site had been "unbelievable," Dr Tronson said. "What we may be seeing is the urgent need for theologically sound Christian erotica." A national group is currently being formed to consider the issues of appropriate Christian response to pornography.

===
There is a site with Christianity and Sex, but somewhat critical, 'freethinking' and homoerotic.
Adult Christianity (TM) Christian Pornography and Christian Erotica

http://www.jesus21.com/portal/index.php?s=erotica

I am very glad to say that I have never written anything that the RR would find even remotely tolerable. I'm sure I never will.

RE: The paragraphs about Adam and Eve. I was always under the impression that, while in the garden, they were asexual and not until they were cast out were they commanded to be fruitful.

The problem that some would find with the second example is that the persons involved are enjoying themselves. Many of the most extreme RR feel that sex is intended for procreation only and should not give pleasure. This is a ridiculous idea but that's how some people think. Only one character in my stories thinks like that and he is portrayed in a very negative way.

There are some parts of the Bible that are quite erotic and I think the RR would have to approve of them, although they probably don't like the idea. "The Song of Solomon" comes to mind and I am sure I could find other parts.

 

[Pure]

Colly and Box,

You mean to tell me that as Christian Erotica all you can cite is a Hebrew poem of 500 BCE?

Box, as to your comments:

RE: The paragraphs about Adam and Eve. I was always under the impression that, while in the garden, they were asexual and not until they were cast out were they commanded to be fruitful.

That was not my impression. Humans are said to be the last created, so presumably males and females of all animals had been created. Gen 1:27 says, of Humans (Man) "male and female he created them.

What you're thinking of is the traditional belief that after exile the bringing forth of children would be 'sorrowful' (painful).



The problem that some would find with the second example is that the persons involved are enjoying themselves. Many of the most extreme RR feel that sex is intended for procreation only and should not give pleasure. This is a ridiculous idea but that's how some people think. Only one character in my stories thinks like that and he is portrayed in a very negative way.

I see this point. Oddly, there's no denigration of sexual pleasure in the OT, or among Jews.

Even the NT, seems at least neutral in parts, i.e., those commending marriage. But certainly the looking askance at pleasure came up as a Christian 'thing'-- not sure when--certainly by the middle ages.

The flip side of denigration of pleasure would be the 'procreation only' approach, and I don't see that clearly specified in the NT, though obviously Catholics and Puritans came up with it; along with some Anglicans (my grandfather) even up to this century. Again, it has a medieval air about it.

OF course, abstention, celibacy, asceticism probably has a very ancient history, around the world. (There were some in ancient Israel).

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colly and Box,

You mean to tell me that as Christian Erotica all you can cite is a Hebrew poem of 500 BCE?

Box, as to your comments:

RE: The paragraphs about Adam and Eve. I was always under the impression that, while in the garden, they were asexual and not until they were cast out were they commanded to be fruitful.

That was not my impression. Humans are said to be the last created, so presumably males and females of all animals had been created. Gen 1:27 says, of Humans (Man) "male and female he created them.

What you're thinking of is the traditional belief that after exile the bringing forth of children would be 'sorrowful' (painful).



The problem that some would find with the second example is that the persons involved are enjoying themselves. Many of the most extreme RR feel that sex is intended for procreation only and should not give pleasure. This is a ridiculous idea but that's how some people think. Only one character in my stories thinks like that and he is portrayed in a very negative way.

I see this point. Oddly, there's no denigration of sexual pleasure in the OT, or among Jews.

Even the NT, seems at least neutral in parts, i.e., those commending marriage. But certainly the looking askance at pleasure came up as a Christian 'thing'-- not sure when--certainly by the middle ages.

OF course, abstention, celibacy, asceticism probably has a very ancient history, around the world. (There were some in ancient Israel).

Christian Erotica seems an oxymoron to me. to the hard core, sex is not supposed to be fun, but is "for procreation only". For more moderates, it's fun, but still restricted to a man and his wife.

In theory you could write christian erotica, that is a story of some sexual nature between man and wife, possibly with the hope of a child resulting. So far so good. But by most denominations, reading it would be a sin, espcially if it caused you to long for one of the characters, even if they are totally fictional.

In any case, it seems to me the effort you would have to put into writing it would not be worth the return as most christians who look at porn don't want you to know they are doing so. Kudos would be rare indeed I think.

-Colly

 

[rgraham666]

Christ! No wonder the Religious Right is trying to wipe out porn.

Misery loves company.

 

[minsue]

For those who say that the First Amendment is Sacrosanct I would like to point out the continued erosion of another Amendment.

Many of the Anti-gun organizations have openly stated that repeal of the second amendment is the ultimate goal. There are more gun oner's than pornographers but we are slowly losing Right to Own certain classes of weapons.

If a very motivated, politically connected, well funded organization was willing to buck the ACLU hard enough it MIGHT be passable to start picking holes in the First.

Considering that the ACLU is considered by many to be an ultra-liberal organization (not by me, I've got my card , but by most conservatives and even moderates that I've known), I don't see how or why an organization looking to outlaw porn would feel any qualms about bucking them. It's generally the neo-cons looking pass obscenity laws and I don't think there's much question about their being 'willing' to buck the ACLU.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Considering that the ACLU is considered by many to be an ultra-liberal organization (not by me, I've got my card , but by most conservatives and even moderates that I've known), I don't see how or why an organization looking to outlaw porn would feel any qualms about bucking them. It's generally the neo-cons looking pass obscenity laws and I don't think there's much question about their being 'willing' to buck the ACLU.

The ACLU is an ultra liberal group. In fact, down south in many places they are considered a group that hates america and is working to destroy it. As to bucking them, their chief successes have been in the courts. If the neo cons can stack the supreme court as well as lower appeals courts with right wing fundamenatlists, they can safely consign the aclu to nussianse staus.

-Colly