"Fifty Shades Of Grey".its critics and the book burners/banners

Full disclosure: I have NOT read the book "Fifty Shades Of Grey" or seen or particualrly care to see the film based upon it( due to open tomorrow at London's Leicester Square cinema) any more than I have "American Sniper".

A group is due to demonstrate against the film, claiming that it glamorizes domestic violence and abuse of women.

I do not know if this really the case but it has recently occurred to me that there are too many people running around demanding that this, that or the other should be banned because they offend their political, religious or whatever sensibilities( shades of "Charlie Hebdo", "The Interview").

To quote a sadly overlooked speech by the late US President Dwight "Ike" Eisenhower at a commencement address in 1954 to Dartmouth College students, we really shouldn't "join the book burners and banners". If something offends your politico/religious/ or sexual sensibilities then don't buy or watch it period!

( This week I saw an account of British Muslims demonstrating against the sale of the French satirical magazine "Charlie Hebdo" with allegedly "blasphemous" cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed on the cover. Presumably they wish to have their desires to be given the force of law in banning the magazine. Ironically it was in the pages of the Morning Star, organ of the Communist Party of Great Britain , presumably not a paper with any known interest in religious faith.)

Anybody think as I do?

BESbswyBESbswyBESbswyBESbswyBESbswyBESbswyBESbswyBESbswy

Terry

Freedom of Expressions goes both ways

besbswy

As they say, those who burn books will eventually burn people...

That said, I don't really get what the big deal with 50 Shades of Grey is anyway.

Hey also can anyone see that weird glitchy thing in the OP? O_O

That's scary O_O

BESbv?

Isn't it? Unfortunately it's also very true, extremism has a tendency to escalate and feed upon itself, and what starts as censorship of unacceptable ideas often builds into extermination of unacceptable people.

Yeah O_o It popped up the other day in a PM I had with @theacidskull. No idea what's causing it.

@bumpyboo: Im pretty sure its just @paracelsus making a over sized signature via drag and drop

I'd very much like to know if this is case, would rather that than another dang bug >_<

@bumpyboo: I know if you post in desktop mode on a mobile device you can type out of the box so it will get cut off, so that could be it

People are always looking for new things to take their rage and fear out upon.

@bumpyboo: Typekit & "BESbswy" - Tom J Nowell

.................

@jonny_anonymous: Right...that actually clears things up nicely. Never came across it until this week :) Thanks!

The censorial coaltion between the(otherwise) atheistical far left and militant feminists on the one hand and radical Muslims on the other continues to worry me. I guess would be censors (irrespective of political or religious or even gender based reasons) have more in common with one another than the rest of us!

Terry

Is there is any actual domestic abuse in it? I thought it was just some rough kinky sh** involving ballgags and whips? Anyway it doesn't really matter, its a book/movie, its not real footage, its roles being played by an actor. The last House On The Left had a rape scene, how come nobody was boycotting that movie and saying it glamorizes rape?

Anyway (IMO) it should not be banned, its a book/movie with fictional characters and is for entertainment. if you don't like what its about don't read/watch it. It's not complicated.

The only thing I know about the book was that it wasn't that good in general. I've not read it myself and never will. I also have no interest in the movie either, looks boring.

The book is horribly overratted.

Sort of, but it's framed in this "I didn't know you were going to be that rough, it really hurt/I'll go easy on you in the future, stop crying and let's do it again" mold. It's more emotional abuse than anything, because the guy basically tells the girl her entire life is garbage, remakes it in his image and gets her so hooked on how he treats her that she has nervous breakdowns at the thought of him dumping her.

Although there is this one part where he basically rapes her, and her reaction is to feel jealous of the woman who molested him as a child. Remember: suburban soccer moms thought this was so good it outsold Harry Potter.

The last House On The Left had a rape scene, how come nobody was boycotting that movie and saying it glamorizes rape?

Because it didn't glamorize rape; The Last House on the Left is one of those rape revenge movies like I Spit On Your Grave and The Virgin Spring where the rapists eventually get brutally murdered by their victim and/or the victim's family. This is different.

@saren: Oh, God, that sounds like a crappy book... Why would anyone buy that?

Plenty of people have crappy taste, ergo plenty of people buy crappy books.

@saren:

O_O

That's actually pretty messed up.

Maybe its because I haven't read/seen it but based on what I have heard I don't see what separates it from other books and movies that depict horrible things in them. Its certainly not the first book/movie to depict rape, domestic and emotional abuse in it. I am guessing its popularity has something to do with it?

I just have a hard time believing that the story was meant to make people think rape and abuse is ok.

@saren: Did you read the book? If you don't mind me asking, why?

I don't really care for the book like at all and haven't read it. I know that my mom and aunt have read it which is weird. But I don't support censorship and the suppression of someone's freedom of speech.

I like to keep up with the zeitgeist. It took about one afternoon to read all three, they fly by quickly.

The thing is, it's only rape and abuse from an outside perspective, because within the story the girl doesn't think it's abuse at all and considers herself the luckiest woman in the world. Apparently millions of women agreed with that, because it has a fan following so ardent that women were throwing things at Jamie Dornan in the street and yelling at him that he wasn't hot enough to be Christian Grey and should give up the part so Matt Bomer could play it.

It was critically panned.

Burn almost all of them. You gotta keep at least ten copies of every book ever made. Because every book is useful.

Then ban republishing it.

If she woulda wrote something actually useful, I wouldn`t feel the need to write these words. Do they go against my beliefs? Apparently not.

Burn them.

I think they should only show it in California and set up a irrigation systems in the movie theaters floors that way we can solve the water crisis here.

Why did this book sell so well, porn exists!

It's not overrated by people, who know anything about literature. But we're talking about a book written far worse than Twilight, with an author that did zero research on the core topic and indeed portrays domestic abuse, while calling it BDSM and glorifying it, but apparently sold better than Harry Potter.

Further the author encourages her fans to criticize her critics, who are often victims of domestic abuse. One of the wonderful things her fans tell these critics is: "It is your own fault for not loving your man enough."

Fantasy

It catered to what a large number of people wanted to immerse themselves in as far as fiction goes.

True- but the book sold very well.

Like it or not, the book and film are art. Art has the right to exist, period. It shouldn't be banned.

I just wanna see the sex scenes in the film... who cares about the rest of the story.

:P

I'd just rather watch porn. At least I won't feel bad having a boner in public.

I like the people who are like "I'm boycotting fifty shades" mean while they see like 4 movies a year and weren't going to see it most likely anyway.

The book is terrible and messed up. I don't agree with all these extreme protests against the product and the movie but it's pretty sad that they're making a movie that's based on a book that was critically panned and made it just because it was popular.

@jedixman: It has the right to exist based on that yes, I actually agree, but objectively speaking it has as much to do with art as an four-year-olds crayon drawing. It is incredibly frustrating to see how popular a piece of garbage that sends dangerous messages to the readers is and how little thought and effort has been put into it. Recently I heard from an acquantance that her book got rejected and the publisher basically told her its too complex and she should rewrite it as a dark romance.

There will always be "a Fifty Shades of Grey" Movie/Book.

Just because someone doesn't think they are being abused, it doesn't mean it isn't abuse.

I'm not disputing that, I'm just saying that the books put readers in the perspective of the girl, and her perspective is that it's not abuse if she develops Stockholm Syndrome and eventually can't live without it. Hence why the abuse hadn't hindered its sales, the target audience wants to be Ana and will go along with anything she says because that alleviates that nagging feeling that it's abuse.

@saren:

The target audience doesn't really want to be Ana, nobody wants their phoned tapped and to be spied upon by a partner, nobody wants their partner to sell their only mode of transport so they are forced to rely on them, nobody wants to be raped, nobody wants to be abused and be emotional torn down. Women reading this book are just ignorant of the fact it's abuse, and it glorifies that. I hate this book heavily because of it's depiction of domestic abuse, it's a terrible book written horribly, and the entire premise of the book is shit too. People don't realize it's abusive because they aren't the one being abused, they are only reading a work of fiction. I don't believe for one minute they want to be Ana.

Fulfillment fantasies work by emphasizing the desirable aspects of the fantasy and ignoring the undesirable aspects. When people say a character like Batman is a power fantasy, they obviously don't mean Batman fans fantasize about watching their parents getting shot in front of them, or having those closest to them murdered and crippled by an insane clown, or getting their spines snapped by a luchador on steroids. By that understanding, absolutely no one wants to be Batman, but the wish fulfillment aspect of the character is still solid enough to be marketed to the point that Arkham Knight's slogan is literally "Be the Batman". People participating in the fantasy ignore the fact that Batman's life is living hell and focus on the fact that being a ninja genius who bangs Catwoman and can beat up Superman is cool.

Similarly, the wish fulfillment fantasy in FSoG is the idea of a mysterious, complicated billionaire who only has eyes for you, will get you anything you want, and is a sexual tyrannosaurus. The women reading the book want to be Ana for that aspect of it, and like all wish fulfillment fantasies they ignore the ugly part of it. The fact that the story places the reader in the perspective of Ana, who thinks she's the luckiest girl in the world despite everything that happens to her, simply makes it easier for them to ignore the ugly part and focus on the fantasy.

@saren: Just going out, but I'll reply when I get back.

whooo caresss

~MiB

@bumpyboo: Idk what's so hard about ignoring this movie hehe I'm not going to see it, at least I hope I'm not going to see it.

Really ? Wow, that´s just rude.

Peoples cant afford playboys or internet... This is their life economy right there.

Pilasy:La Voix d'un homme