Cool.

explains so much....

and exactly what I was thinking.

Wait, I did too...

why rain on that parade?

Better start a long list for folks not to read, if you do it right you can shame books into being banned without ever saying you want to ban them.

BTW, do you have any in context snippets of the rape scenes? People I know who have read it don't see consensual sex as rape.

I'd like your thoughts in this thread i started: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025298701

I don't like people promoting cannibalism like that. Oh, and Silence of the Lambs made it seem like it would be cool to wear someone else's skin too.

in making sure a book they've never read be exempt from criticism.

But some people sure do seem heavily invested in making sure a book they've never read is seen as a depiction of rape and domestic violence - when, in fact, it is a tale about mutually consenting adults engaging in sexual behaviour that some find uncomfortable, or even abhorrent.

I haven't seen anyone here stating that the book is "exempt from criticism". Perhaps you can educate us all by providing links to such statements.

... why you keep harping on this idea that "critics in the BDSM community" who are criticizing the book has any relevance to the discussion whatsoever.

The fact is that you keep insisting that the book is about rape, when it is clearly about consensual sex between two adults.

Have you found those links to people who are "making sure a book they've never read is exempt from criticism"? I'd be really interested to see them.

VERY well said ... thanks

Whereas you responded to a poster who demonstrated that the book was about rape and domestic abuse by rudely patronizing her and entirely avoding the subject matter. I'm not interesting in playing your games. You make perfectly clear in the other thread that you are not interested in discussion.

and dare to wonder what the popularity of the theme of female submission in pop literature signifies about our greater cultural ideology, then God help your soul because you are a member of the "morality police" and want to dictate what people do in their bedrooms. You might even need therapy.

What I've learned on DU today. You can think on here - just not too hard.

I'm a member of the "morality police" because I think "Shades" is about two consenting adults enjoying a shared pleasure and NOT about rape and abuse?

And that, in turn, means I want to dictate what people do in their bedrooms?

I am not getting you at all ...

to come with rape, in the military and of the women whose countries we invade. Those women have been begging for justice, but you'd never know it here.

Better to focus on a fantasy I suppose.

I am haunted by a woman named Noor, a 'detainee' in Abu Ghraib, raped and tortured in that hellhole. She wrote a note begging her 'brothers' to destroy the prison because the shame she felt, why should SHE have felt shame, made it necessary.

Some good journalists, Robert Fisk airc was one of them, learned about the note, we didn't believe that this would be allowed, even under the Bush/Cheney junta, but it did.

Efforts were made to find her, but they were in vain.

And that was just the beginning of how our foreign policies affect women, both in our own military and in the countries we invade.

Thankfully there are many organizations trying to end it and to get some justice for the victims. But here we obsess over movies.

Oh well, point made, fantasy is way more important I guess.

out of that hell hole we were running there, asking her 'brothers' to blow up the place, referencing what was going on there. Robert Fisk, airc, published it and several people tried to get information on her claims but could not.

Then the photos were released. She was not in the released photos. But there are OTHER photos, photos that depicted far worse crimes, crimes that Sy Hersch had alluded to earlier, rape of women, even murder of detainees.

They were NOT released although a court ruled that the public had the right to see them. To make a years long story short, a battle in the courts over these photos went on for years, may still be going on.

Members of Congress were permitted to view them so they could make an informed decision on what to do about them, Cheney was outraged, he admonished Congress for even talking about them. Lindsey Graham came out after viewing them and was obviously in shock. He was asked what he thought about Cheney's outrage. His response was 'Mr VP, Let us do our job, we are talking about RAPE here, TORTURE, MURDER'. Reports later stated that one of the women in those photos was Noor. Women's advocacy groups, lawyers etc tried to find her, but her family had left the neighborhood she came from. We do not know what happened to her. Children were sodomized, women raped, innocent people killed in that awful place, and NO ONE has been held accountable.

Other Iraqi women who were raped in our detention gulags HAVE been persuaded to speak about the crimes, some have tried to sue the US, but are always told they cannot 'due to National Security etc.

I remember her because she was the first woman of that war, our own female troops have also been raped, who was known to have been sexually abused in our gulags though definitely not the last.

Our foreign policies are so harmful to women that it should be a major target of Women's Rights Org. And it is of some, not necessarily here but definitely the Women of Afghanistan eg, have been addressing the issue for years.

My own opinion, we, the public, dont need to see the pictures. Just like I dont think we need to see the pictures of Osama.
But we should never forget Cheney's picture. I actually feel sorry for Bush. I think he knows Cheney set up everything for Iraq and he bought it, thinking he could trust him. Same for Colin Powell, etc. I always bring this up whenever someone points out how many Dems voted for the war; sure they did, they believed a bunch of lies.

After my warning to young males not to use it as a date movie, I was pretty much done.

That way you can still get to the people trying to ignore these threads by key word.

Shit, I had to type the word out, use the digits and use both spellings of gray to clean up the most of it. Still, too much remains.

And I applauded the book review in another thread, because not only was it hilarious but it saved me from ever ever having to open that book.

OTT, why would I want to discuss my sex life here? which is what a lot of participation in those threads amounts to.

I know, I've learned more than I ever wanted to know about some DUers who have "shared" their sex lives in these threads. That stopped me clicking on them pretty quickly.

Best to keep one's fingers well away from such articles.

i tired of even seeing the name.

We live in a trash can society were the trash can people want to obsess about stupid trash can things, instead of talking of the important events. There has been little talk of the strike at Market Garden--no one cares about the plight if the working class in the age if trash.

You are seeing America in a nutshell.

of 50 Shades of Earl Grey- with milk and sugar, of course.

under the guise of "protecting society".

SSDD. Pick your topic.

You know, putting pilgrims in public stocks for swearing, that kind of shit.

HOW - can you make all this judgment from basic ignorance of the material?
Can't you just find some other turd you can actually flush!

My story:
I don't know how, honestly, but the book showed up on my laptop in its entirety about 2 years or so ago.
I read it a chapter a day, shaking my head, saying to myself: What the EFF is this and where did it come from.
I must say I got intrigued, had not read such fascinating and riveting titillation since I was young and randy... and it was fun.

Then I smiled and let it go. Trash of a new kind - and useless just like all other trash.
A recommendation for you to follow my lead...

People wanna fight about it.

Best bet is just to trash the threads as they pop up, or put the keyword(s) in so you don't see it.

I'd recommend the TRASH method, because the title really isn't terribly unique--you'd lose lampshades and throwing some serious shade along with those Fifty Shades ... and you never know when there might be a hot DU thread about lamp shades happening!!!!

You have been warned.

Now even puppets have a more exciting sex life than I do.

Haven't read the book. But...

Teh internets delivered these delicious quotes when I typed it into google.

Such genius:

"My inner goddess is doing the merengue with some salsa moves."

"Christian squirts baby oil into his hand and then rubs my behind with careful tenderness—from makeup remover to soothing balm for a spanked ass, who would have thought it was such a versatile liquid.”

"I slip into a dazed and exhausted sleep, dreaming of a four-year-old gray-eyed boy in a dark, scary, miserable place."

a parody of a Penthouse Forum letter.

Yeah.

see why there was a freakout about the trailer for 50 Shades of Grey. The book is mediocre at best - I read it, and.....meh.

Besides, it's not like this movie is going to a 21st Century version of Salo, or The 120 Days of Sodom or anything like that. I can only presume that some of those who freaked out over the Shades trailer would die of instantaneous cardiac arrest if they ever saw Pasolini's take on de Sade as an allegory of fascism.

with leather and nipple clamps thrown in.

Actually, my first thought was it looked like a big budget retread of SECRETARY, for suburbanites instead of the art house crowd.

The High School Transcripts of a Revolutionary?

to try inject some danger and pain into pampered lives.

For middle class folks, it's just pre-school for serial killers.

Than I doubt you've known any one who practice BDSM or who are involved in committed M/s or D/s relationships. You can find people from all sorts of backrounds who have either a casual interest, are hardcore lifestylers, and everyone in between.

So no this stereotype is not based on reality. Anymore than the idea that people into it are somehow more psychologically damaged than the general population. All your doing is projecting a personal bias on to a subject that you are ignorant about, nothing more.

It's painful seeing people I respect say things I find so troubling, so I retreated to familiar territory. If that makes me guilty, so be it.

I suggest people employ trash by keyword. Grey, shades, Fifty, 50, and BDSM should take care of it. You could clear the list in a few days.

than "50 Shades of Gray" or the rest of what comes out of Hollywood for movies. Many of which are due for targeting because they are insidious in portraying "modern women" as ripe for abuse...but, it isn't as apparent because they aren't in bondage.

I think most movies suck these days...because I find the sterotypical portrayals of people as so disgusting and lacking nuance.

But, I gave my view about "50 Shades" below on thread...and I have no interest in it but believe those who want to see it will have enough sense to figure out whether it portrays women in an offensive way that we need to get our "hair on fire" about to try to set up protests outside theater about...when there's so much else going on that deserves protests ...including the treatment of our poor women and those being abused in relationships now...in shelters.

That movie isn't going to cause people who want to do bad things to do more bad things..if they aren't inclined to do so. And, those inclined don't need to see that movie to act out what they want to do because they are going to do it anyway, for whatever reason.

But...yes...I do believe in some "age appropriate restrictions" which doesn't go over well here on DU either.

Someone posted a thread insisting people critiquing the film were "trying to control the sex lives of consenting adults." Someone else posted something insisting the behavior in the book was all consensual, and used it as a defense of BDSM. I posted mine as a counterpoint. Yeah, it's stupid. I admit it. Mainly because very few of us have actually read the damn thing.

folks who just want to troll a bit for "me too" for laughs or distract from some other topic they don't want attention paid to.

Not saying at all that "Shades of Gray" shouldn't be discussed...but, in one serious thread and not the many that popped up that just seemed to be counter posts for the heck of it.

undercover with the Flash Light...if you were 13 or so years old.

I guess I feel that if people read the book or see the movie and find some outrage it will change their way of thinking...and those who find it boring will move along...and those who find it a way to Dominate Women with "S&M" and women who tolerate that type of stuff will deal with it....because they had experience with that or were inclined to like that kind of sex.

I know this sounds dismissive. And, frankly I think some video games suck and think there should be some "age appropriate" restrictions on some things...but, then how do we do that? I don't know a way to open that door without getting into Banning...

I did like the movie restrictions though.. If you take your 6 year old kid out to a horribly violent sexual orgy film or even one that has brutal killing and gore for gratuitous reasons not to do with plot...then I think parents need to know that. Would I ban some parent if they wanted to take their kid to that kind of movie. Probably.

So...you can see...I'm conflicted like many people might be. But, as long as under 13 aren't lining up to see "50 Shades of Gray" ...well....then why should it be banned or thought of as some movie that promotes "S&M" and Violence against Women when Women who see it might be more empowered to stop Violence against Women if they have a reaction to the movie that urges them to become activists in pointing out what is wrong with what was portrayed in the movie.

I can understand on one hand the outrage against the movie...but, on the other hand I think that banning it as Violence against Women when there are many movies that show violence against Women, is reaching too far. Better to get women involved in showing how the sex in the movie is not appropriate than to discourage those who want to from seeing it by portraying them as something wrong with their choices.

Edited much for typo's and such.

I haven't read the book, but that is because I heard it was "Twilight" fan fiction, aka, "Edward Spanks Bella". Allegedly this book is about two consenting adults doing BDSM the way a person who has never participated in BDSM and who is a major "Twilight" fan would imagine it. It sounds like drivel, but apparently many women like it. The movie looks pretty bad if the trailer is any indication.

Women are being horrifically raped in India, raped and mutilated in war zones, as well as being gang-raped and filmed right here in America, so I'm saving my outrage for real crimes against humanity, not a book that some find entertaining (almost every female I worked with read it and liked it). I mean, my God, if this low brown shite is what gets liberals panties in a bunch these days, then as usual, we're fucked.

to examine why women like Fifty Shades of Grey and if that is reason for concern? Nothing exists in a vacuum and pop culture is not insignificant. But evidently asking such questions and/or pointing out such things is for prudes.

...does this book's popularity in fact suggest there is more acceptance of abusive relationships?

But those raising these questions are compared to prohibitionists... or called prudes... or accused of only being into "vanilla" sex... (Basically labeled with whatever "anti-pleasure" accusation their critics can come up with...) Maybe they are more like abolitionists.. or suffragettes... or union organizers...raising questions about underlying and longstanding assumptions with the hope of a more just, egalitarian and humane world for all.

Yours being a perfect example I would suggest you do something but I do not want to be a hypocrite about it all.

Those would be a range of sepia brown to mustard.

But if I were to say Several nuances of not giving a fuck... they would be in rainbow colors, as well.

i don't know what it is. i gather it's a tv show or a book or a movie. is there a reason it's controversial?

what i intend to do. who's got the time

I found a copy on the ground beside a dumpster and wondered what all the fuss is about (true). Stood there and read a few pages, skimmed it. Threw it into the dumpster. No literary merit, no good story, never mind what you may think of the merits of the portrayal of sado-masochism, which many have criticized here. Basically it sucks.

What's a lot more interesting is the popularity and sociological reaction to such a terrible book. That much I can get interested in...

And loved it!

Why aren't we fighting about something more important like Game of Thrones?

As someone who has spent absolutely ridiculous amounts of time reading... there are thousands and thousands, even millions of examples of really bad shit going on in various books, particularly in the fantasy and sci-fi genre - many of which are based on real life events.

There is nothing that cannot be written about, or talked about, as American television goes about proving every single day. Molestation, rape, murder, slaughter, looting, the destruction of planets, flying spaghetti monsters, rings of invisibility, dolphins, Super heroes, ninja turtles, powerpuff girls, South Park, 16 and pregnant, sweet sixteen, sixteen and stupid, Honey Booboo, Beavis and Butthead... of all the ridiculous stuff to complain about, why fifty shades of grey?

The idea that, because a particular book or movie is popular the Author or the society in which they reside is attempting to promote something specific... is kind of silly. Is George Martin promoting incest because Jaime and Cersei have sex in Game of Thrones? Are the writers for the walking dead promoting a zombie apocalypse? Are they telling us we should eat people?

We can suggest particular meaning in any piece of writing we like, but there is something really funny about the controversy that revolves around the significance of a popular book. It's a book. A story. The purpose, generally speaking, is entertainment.

Up until now I never cared enough to read the book, but now I think I will. I will also see the movie. Somehow though, I don't think my feelings will change. Anyone who is familiar with the fantasy and science fiction genres knows how much ridiculous, or terrible, or terrifying, or hilarious, or wonderful stuff is written about every day. Stories are stories, not always intended as a moral lesson, or the promotion of a specific idea.

right now.

who gives a phuck. I know i don't!!!!!!!