Dreading 50 Shades of Grey: The Movie

Lovecraft, you took the words right outbof my mouth. The book is pure garbage, written by an illiterate sex starved housewife. I didn't make it past the middle.
 
And without BDSM he would have tried something else. Maybe something where he would have had more luck.

What makes you think he didn't try that "something else" anyway? The more mud they have to throw, the better the chance something will stick.

In any way, I believe 50 Shades of Grey, despite the stupid portrayal and the public spotlight, is doing the BDSM communities a favor. Because only when your next door girl masturbates to 50 Shades of Grey, BDSM will become publicly acceptable.

All BDSM? Not hardly. 50SoG still stigmatises a bunch of consensual BDSM activities. While romanticising abusive behaviour with very questionable consent. I don't want that becoming publicly acceptable, TYVM.
 
Primalex, it's not surprising that the ex was slinging mud. They do that. It's not that the social worker investigated. They do that.

What upsets me is that the social worker could get away with making recommendations that were explicitly based in part on her inferences about what my bedroom preferences mean about my history and my personality, which were in turn based on notions that sound suspiciously like they were pulled from the pages of 50 Shades of something. It was a complicated case, and she ignored a lot of relevant stuff on both sides in favour of discussing my kink and playing pop-psychologist. No, her opinion didn't matter in the end, but it wasn't always obvious that it was going to go that way.

Now imagine she decided I must be screwed up based on me being gay, because there are "studies" that say gay people are screwed up (probably their parents' fault somehow.) She'd be facing professional censure in a heartbeat, because there's now enough public awareness about actual facts when it comes to gay people. (And, in fact, she had nothing at all to say about me being bisexual. It was a total non-issue. But once upon a time, that would not have been the case.)

So I think we'd benefit from more awareness of facts, and maybe a reasonable portrayal or two. There's nothing to be gained at this point from more pop culture material that confuses people and gives them very weird ideas about us. People can write and read what they like, of course, but sometimes I think the world would be a better place if people had somewhat different taste in drivel.
 
Last edited:
For all I know, maybe.

What, you never heard of cops getting offended by cop portrayals in the media? I have friends who are burlesque dancers who were highly offended by the musical Burlesque. I have nurse friends who are offended by the portrayal of nurses and doctors in Grey's Anatomy. This is no different. Keep the snark to yourself.

My uncle is a physicist. Rumor has it it's a REALLY bad idea to watch sci fi with him.
 
I've been thinking about this for a while. 50SoG has managed to get BDSM into the media in a way I've never seen it. On one hand, this could be good, right? It seems like it could warm people up to the lifestyle. On the other hand, it's not well written and seems to promote BDSM, but not the way it's actually practiced.

We've seen music artists use it in videos and song lyrics for what seems like shock value. We've seen comedic movies use it for the purpose of a good laugh. We've even seen movies showing the BDSM lifestyle as a means to make a horror movie more horrible.


So, is it just that it's badly written and promotes abuse? Or are some people against it because it puts kink out there and "ruins" it for long time participants? Are there BDSM hipsters that just don't want other people to understand?

I'm not saying I think the book is good, and I'm not calling everyone a hipster. Just curious on thoughts and feeling about this. :)
 
Here is my point of view, if its worth anything:

- I DO NOT disapprove of the way the story is written, or that EL James decided to have a BDSM dom struggling with childhood issues.

- I DO dissaprove of the way some people that i meet on a daily basis may tarnish all who practice BDSM with a "mentally unstable" brush.

- I DO think that the overall spotlight on BDSM has been good, not bad. The average person reading the book will look at it more if they get turned on by it. Erotica sales have increased which helps authors like us no end.
 
It would be a favor if portrayed even remotely accurately.

Accurate? No, you don't want it accurate, you want it blurred like Bilitis.

All this book portrays is a wealthy sadistic stalker who takes advantage of (and has to pay on op of that) a naive girl and a virgin to boot. No responsible dom does that.

Ah. The "responsible" Dom. A mythical person, like the "true" sub. I guess it's something like the "responsible" husband, who talks with his wife about sexual problems instead of visiting Literotica, watching porn and cheating. I hate to disappoint you, but BDSM still consists of humans and you are not getting rid of all the displeasing stuff about humans just because you publish Disney BDSM movies.


So no favors are being done here. None at all. My wife works at a shelter for abused women and I volunteer there as well teaching a self defense course.

There are already too many "Christian Grays" in this world.

Always have been and always will be. And if we kill every human who has ever hurt emotionally or physically another human, then the fucking planet would be _empty_. THAT is accurate.


this man was a piece of shit sadist using his abusive childhood as an excuse to hurt women.

And this is worse than the sadist who uses no excuse? Or the sadist who says it gets him off to hurt women?


Want to be portrayed that way?

Pretty please.

You want a 9 1/2 weeks version of BDSM. This has nothing to do with accurate.

The girl that has the image of Marquis de Sade in her mind, when she meets a sadist, won't be in trouble. The girl that has Mickey Rourke in her mind, will be in trouble.


It is not even published as erotica. Erotica does not get sold at stop and shop in kiosks.

What kind of argument is this? Vegetables are not sold as erotica and still used by people to get off.


Tell you what, try this. Find someone you know has no lifestyle experience at all and has read Shades. Now link them to stories here you feel are good examples of BDSM

My money says those stories will not excite them in the least, they will be too much for them.

This proves what? That they are no "true" subs? That they will never ever engage in activities they consider too much now? That they will not and will never part of any BDSM community?

Shades is not opening the door to real BDSM its opening the door to even more sick sadists to lure women into it.

How can they be lured in if they are made believe that sadists are sick assholes with childhood problems?
 
Lovecraft worries that sick sadists (male) will lure innocent virgins (female) in under the pretext of being young wealthy handsome sadists boys-with-broken-wings. And a helicopter.
 
Ok, I'm probably going to regret throwing in my opinion, but here it is.

Haven't read 50 Shades of Grey, I don't plan on reading it. I've had enough badly written erotica to last me a lifetime. I also won't see the movie, because as far as I'm concerned it'll just be porn and I prefer my porn written.

That said, to assume that women are too stupid to understand the difference between fantasy and real life is ... well, sexist. I've read a crap ton of romance and crap ton of badly written erotica (most of it here on literotica) and rarely is any of it realistic and yet, somehow, I still don't think a man on a black horse is going to come save me from my life or drudgery - neither do I think I'd actually ENJOY some of the stuff I read that still gets me off in the privacy of my room. Hell, I LOVE fantasy and mythology, but so far I'm pretty sure that Zeus isn't gonna rape my pretty daughter.

Will some people be drawn in by posers? Likely - but then 'good girls' (and from experience, good boys, too) have been getting drawn in by assholes since the beginning of time, and they'll continue to be drawn in under the misapprehension that 's/he can be changed' or s/he just 'needs love' (excuse me while I gag). The truth is that people who are taken in by the 'bad boy' or 'wild child' don't need encouragement, and they will be warned off repeatedly - and they'll STILL believe that they can change the other person. They, and only they, are responsible for their naivety, not fantasy books. And men will continue to take advantage of women (and women of men), and they ALSO are the only ones responsible for their actions - not their own abusers and not this book.

So, no - I'm not looking forward to this movie coming out. But not because it's going to confuse the week minds of innocent women, but just cause I think it was a badly written book and will be badly acted porn.
 
But not because it's going to confuse the week minds of innocent women, but just cause I think it was a badly written book and will be badly acted porn.

Not to mention, I think there will be a few "wtf" moments in the movie. I mean, with scenes THAT unrealistic, you gonna wonder if some screenwriter will take liberties in bending the script just so people don't bore to the point of checking the run time on IMDB in the middle of a sex scene.
 
I've been thinking about this for a while. 50SoG has managed to get BDSM into the media in a way I've never seen it. On one hand, this could be good, right? It seems like it could warm people up to the lifestyle. On the other hand, it's not well written and seems to promote BDSM, but not the way it's actually practiced.

Yep. I think of it this way - if we declared football to be part of the "BDSM" spectrum (hey, consensual violence), then instantly there'd be a lot more "BDSM" in the media and "BDSM" would be a widespread hobby. Daily newspaper articles about "BDSM" stars. People in the office working out their fantasy "BDSM" leagues. Colleges paying millions for "BDSM" coaches. Everybody with an opinion on "BDSM".

But would that actually be helpful for those of us who like to tie people up/spank them/etc? Or would it just mean having to deal with people who still don't know much about what we do, but now think ESPN makes them an expert on the subject?

So, is it just that it's badly written and promotes abuse? Or are some people against it because it puts kink out there and "ruins" it for long time participants? Are there BDSM hipsters that just don't want other people to understand?

I'm not saying I think the book is good, and I'm not calling everyone a hipster. Just curious on thoughts and feeling about this. :)

There probably is a little bit of "I was into BDSM before it was cool" happening there, and maybe also some snobbishness towards women writing about relationships. But the "promotes abuse" (and also other dangerous misconceptions) is the part that bugs me.

I can think of a couple of TV shows that featured healthier portrayals of BDSM; while it's not directly comparable since it wasn't as big a story element, I think they got a much more positive reaction from BDSMers. 'CSI' had a professional dominatrix who got pretty sympathetic treatment. More recently, 'Castle' establishes both Castle and Beckett as BDSMers - I like that it actually shows Castle using his safeword - and again has some sympathetic pros.

(OTOH, Irene Adler from 'Sherlock' makes me angry - but I don't remember much of the BDSM angle from that story, because there was so much else to dislike about what they did to her. It's a sad state of affairs when every recent screen portrayal of IA is significantly less feminist than ACD's original story.)
 
Lovecraft, you took the words right outbof my mouth. The book is pure garbage, written by an illiterate sex starved housewife. I didn't make it past the middle.

I'm looking forward to that new cooking show though: 50 Shades of Gravy.
 
My biggest problem with the whole Fifty Shades thing is that it romanticises abuse.

It sets an abusive partner up as a romantic ideal, and then (my second biggest problem) it tells us that his abuse is the same as the fun consensual kink me and mine get up to, and, by the way, nobody does kink unless they have severe psychological problems, because in this reality kink is the exact same thing as abuse.

I hate Disney's "Beauty and the Beast" because it tells us the story of a very clearly abusive relationship and ends it with, well, if you just love your abuser enough (and fail to escape), guess what, he'll become a prince who doesn't have rage problems, and you'll be happy being trapped in his house!

This is worse, because it tells us that the abuse itself is not only excusable, but kind of hot, and predators are sexy even -- especially! -- when they're actively abusing you. Also, that kinky people are going round pressuring naive and uninformed partners into acts they haven't consented to, but it's excusable because we're somehow damaged.

People read all kinds of terrible shit, and it's not the first bestseller to sell a terrible, horrible, abusive relationship as some kind of romantic ideal. That doesn't make it okay, though. And I think it's great that the BDSM community is closing ranks on this one, because we really don't need more portrayals of fucked-up relationships shown as something to strive for. Especially when it can mean that the only exposure my next-door neighbours have to my lifestyle is a twisted portrayal that paints me as a predator.
 
Lovecraft worries that sick sadists (male) will lure innocent virgins (female) in under the pretext of being young wealthy handsome sadists boys-with-broken-wings. And a helicopter.

I don't think the threat is anything so absurd; rather, that people are embracing the idea that this is love, that you can slap the label "Dominant" on an abusive partner and suddenly it's good kinky fun. You don't need to be supermodel-gorgeous with a helicopter to be a creepy stalker who refuses to respect boundaries, but popular romance novels about such people does give your garden-variety creepy stalker a greater licence to operate. And the predator's licence to operate is something we should be wearing away at, not reinforcing.

I mentioned before that it's not new. We've all seen "dominants" who use the title as an excuse to treat their submissives like shit and violate boundaries and safewords and generally be terrible people, and the fact that they tend to prey on people new to the scene often gives new submissives a really warped idea of what consent is really necessary from a submissive. But here we have the hero of a popular romance novel playing this predatory role and being celebrated for it, and that's something I have a problem with, because it's spreading this terrible impression that if you call it BDSM, consent doesn't matter, and boundaries certainly don't.
 
I don't think the threat is anything so absurd; rather, that people are embracing the idea that this is love, that you can slap the label "Dominant" on an abusive partner and suddenly it's good kinky fun. You don't need to be supermodel-gorgeous with a helicopter to be a creepy stalker who refuses to respect boundaries, but popular romance novels about such people does give your garden-variety creepy stalker a greater licence to operate. And the predator's licence to operate is something we should be wearing away at, not reinforcing.


Let's say it this way:
Plato already wrote 4000 years ago that art (in any form) can be dangerous, because it acts as a kind of role model and that therefore art needs to be heavily censored, to prevent people from being led astray. There should only be "good" art.

And this repeats all the time with mediocre variations:
Letterpress printing is bad - everyone will be able to publish stuff without much effort, no matter how stupid and insane!
Blogs are bad - everyone will be able to publish stuff without much effort, no matter how stupid and insane!

I'm not saying you are wrong per se - or that Plato is wrong per se. I'm saying: This is not the culture we have created and this is not the culture we want to have.
 
that you can slap the label "Dominant" on an abusive partner and suddenly it's good kinky fun
There is a wildly popular male writer who has done more to promote that notion than any romance writer possibly could;
Oh John Ringo, No! You got pearls in need of clutching? Go after the John Ringo fans.

If you actually look at what women say, there is some sort of received wisdom thing that a REAL Dom is caring considerate and kind. I would bet you that, because of the community emphasis on communication and education, women leave abusive Doms faster than they leave abusive spouses.
 
Last edited:
I can't help but imagine groups standing outside of a 50SoG movie premier wearing leather and holding signs. They might have "S.S.C." and "submissive does not mean abuse me."

(^◇^; ) Enough of my silliness, I suppose.

I remember when the book came out and it was a big deal. I had already been reading BDSM themed stories for years and didn't see what everyone was so impressed with. Then I started seeing people liking it on Facebook. Phrases like, "yeah, I'm reading it." As if they had some edgy badge of honor. So then I became conflicted, here I was hiding my fantasies and desires and these other fucks were proudly stating they liked this! ( ̄^ ̄)ゞ

Ugh, and then I read some of it through an online source and find it's badly written and misleading! I don't feel as strongly about this as I think this post sounds, but I am a little upset that I find it necessary to hide my likes and interests. I think that unfortunately, it is now just one more thing women are chalking up to: "I'm a woman and I can be sexual, too."

As for what the book promotes, those who are in the know can clearly see this book for what it is. We can only hope that people are smart enough to do some research before they try to replicate what they have read. Even if they don't do the proper research, maybe they will see a reliable link to good information on their way to purchasing that pink ball gag and matching cuffs set.

Dreading the movie? Yes. (I never actually answered until now.)

Do I hope that people will be responsible? Yes.

I like to be optimistic in that maybe this could be good for the lifestyle, the realist in me says no.
 
Last edited:
Let's say it this way:
Plato already wrote 4000 years ago that art (in any form) can be dangerous, because it acts as a kind of role model and that therefore art needs to be heavily censored, to prevent people from being led astray. There should only be "good" art.

And this repeats all the time with mediocre variations:
Letterpress printing is bad - everyone will be able to publish stuff without much effort, no matter how stupid and insane!
Blogs are bad - everyone will be able to publish stuff without much effort, no matter how stupid and insane!

I'm not saying you are wrong per se - or that Plato is wrong per se. I'm saying: This is not the culture we have created and this is not the culture we want to have.

Oh, I agree that censoring it would be ridiculous. We have to let even some awful shit be spewed if we're going to have any measure of freedom of expression. But just because I don't want government censorship, etc., doesn't mean I don't think the book (and film) is problematic, and I do think there is value in looking critically at the art we consume and the kinds of messages it sends. If we don't, we as a culture as well as individuals run the risk of absorbing some of those messages without even realising what it is we're gradually accepting.
 
If you actually look at what women say, there is some sort of received wisdom thing that a REAL Dom is caring considerate and kind. I would bet you that, because of the community emphasis on communication and education, women leave abusive Doms faster than they leave abusive spouses.

I really hope this is true. I think the kink community in general, although we've had some problems with it, is consistently improving in terms of calling out the predators lurking in our spaces, possibly faster than the rest of the world. The stuff we do requires a greater attention to consent, and that can really be a force for good.

That said, we're now getting in a bunch of people suddenly interested in this warped, weird version of BDSM, and it's the newbies who generally suffer from the predators. So, again, I see the value in reinforcing consent culture within a kink context and disassociating ourselves from portrayals that treat it as unnecessary.

(Also, holy shit, that John Ringo thing you linked is... horrific.)
 
Last edited:
I've met the author at a con. He is profoundly embarrassed by the books and the fact that he let his id out for a rampage that way. He says; "Don't read this book!" and he really means it...

Meanwhile a certain number of them keep on selling. Amazon has more one star reviews than five, at least-- but not by much.
 
"Romantic" fiction has never been realistic. I don't see any reason that this one should be. Troubled bad boy changed by the love of a good virginal woman is the storyline in every single romance I've ever read. That's why I quit reading them.
 
Back
Top