Picky! But isn't it a good thing if a person's sex life improves regardless what prompted it... I mean, at least the novel isn't about a woman who wants to play a rape role play with her boyfriend. Now that shit weirds me right out, pardon my intolerance.
Really? Some version of non-consent/resistance is an extremely common kink for both sexes. Far more widespread and typical than being tied up and whipped, in fact.
I haven't heard of apples, or Gardell, and I'm not even sure why you brought it up. Though I can't name one, I'm sure YA novels have and will tackle drugs, sex, profanity and alcohol. After all, teenages have sex, take drugs, drink and swear. That is not the point though - Unlike movies and TV which have standards boards, and classifications; novels do not. They merely have a genre. You could pick up a fantasy book about knights, fit for a 10yr old, and it would sit on the shelf next to game of thrones with no way other than the blurb to tell whom it is suitable for.
It seems to me you and KaTrian are talking about different things. Her point was that when you go to a book store or library (irl or online), generally you won't find Gardell's or Milward's (the author of Apples) books in the YA section because although they are about teenagers, the explicit depictions of sex, violence, and alcohol and drug use make them unsuitable for younger crowds (according to the classification system bookstores and libraries use). That's why Brett Easton Ellis's book, The Rules of Attraction is usually NOT classified as a YA book even though it's about young adults. The difference is in the way the issues (drugs, alcohol, sex, violence etc) are tackled. Heck, Harry Potter discusses some of those issues, but in a very different way than Ellis, Milward etc. Hence you wouldn't find Harry Potter and Less Than Zero on the same bookshelf even if they fell under the same general genre (i.e. LTZ would take place in a wizard school or HP would take place in a non-magical, regular school).
Honestly Gigi hit the nail on the head for me. I know I haven't read it, Jazzabel, I've read enough excerpts to see it's not something I'd like. As I said before the woman doing this in depth chapter by chapter review includes things that are good as well. There are parts where it looks like the mc is going to stand up for herself or actually state what she wants. Unfortunately she consistently backs off of it. The entire book rubbed me the wrong way for that alone. Not to mention the writer's atrocious writing skills. Knowing it was a Twilight fanfic also put me off because I also really dislike Twilight and I read that entire series. I wanted to know what all the fuss was about then I read the rest of the series out of morbid curiosity. I wanted to see if it could possibly get worse and I was not disappointed in that regard. The same relationship dynamic was at play there as well. I wasn't looking at it from a standpoint of it's just a fantasy/wish fulfillment thing. I was looking at it from the angle of this is what we're putting out there. This is what we're normalizing and accepting. Media can have a big impact on society and it does bother me to see things like this out there. Their relationship hit many criteria for an abusive relationship and it was being marketed to young girls. It didn't sit well with me. Fifty shades is the same thing wrapped in a more mature package, imo. All that being said I think you can be critical of something and still enjoy it. There's a lot of video games that have some sexist crap in them and I still play and enjoy them while recognizing the issues with it. It really is impossible to totally avoid all media that has problematic things in it unless you want to become a hermit on a remote mountain top. I honestly would have no problem with Fifty Shades if the relationship was within the context of clear consent. I'm sure my own feelings also bleed into my perception of it as well. If a guy did even a quarter of that stuff to me I'd punch him into next week and send him packing. If you like it then good for you. I just don't and all of the above includes reasons why I feel how I do about it. I don't really have anything else to say about it. This is all I've got. I didn't quote because I was being lazy right now. Sorry.
You can 'deviate,' sure. I'm not saying that everyone has to follow the same methods or the same kinks. Far from it. But the one rule, the golden rule, is SSC, and if people are going without that, going without the communication or consent or any of it, it can get messy fast.
You're quite the expert on BDSM, considering you're all of 18, and believe most kinksters use "safe words"....
I do wonder how many girls or women even recognize anything like that in the novels or think about it too much -- if they don't, it probably won't harm them. It's like playing an action game with a scantily clad female warrior, we don't think about it too much, and common sense dictates that you don't wanna go to war in a bikini. Many women probably wouldn't even want to realize the type of fantasy James and Meyers offer. I'd imagine many readers get it they're reading something ridiculous and stupid, but sometimes we enjoy ridiculous and stupid things; guilty pleasures. Of course I'm just guessing here. There're people who enjoy (consent to) being dominated. And there're people whose natural instinct is to fight it. Both are ok. But I find it dubious when someone's abused (or, dominated without consent, however you wanna put it), but they still remain forgiving and in love with the abuser. Self-destructively obsessed, maybe, but actual care and love? And if that is offered to us as a sexy fantasy, consider me dry as sandpaper. Must be confusing to men too. "Oh this is how I satisfy my woman?" That's almost like women thinking the only way for them to make their man happy is go porcelain, mutilate your downstairs parts (while at the same time condemning female circumcision) and get bolted-on balloon boobs. How much these type of skewed ideals actually reach to the real world, I have no idea, but the message of 'what's hot' is, indeed, a little appalling. If or when 50 Shades is made into a movie, it will fit perfectly into a Clockwork Orange spoof in which Alex is forced to watch it. Oh the horror. I don't think Gigi was saying that at all...
Harry potter and game of thrones however - quite likely. Especially if the store had a smallish fantasy section only catering to very popular series.
[MENTION=12200]Terra[/MENTION]: It's difficult to dissuade someone who hasn't read something, that that something doesn't contain something they claim it contains. This is the problem Also, as I said before, this book is an easy target for the hypocritical variety of moral outrage. When some guy drives like a maniac to evade pursuit by bad guys, or is murdering three hundred guys an hour in an action book, then nobody cries outrage because some stupid person might go out and start driving like a maniac or shooting people. This book is not a sex-ed manual, or a marriage how-to manual, or a first sex manual, and it shouldn't need to live to these kinds of academic expectations. The book about sex is silly and unrealistic. Does it really need to be labelled as rape-encouraging porn, whilst Terminator or Die Hard aren't labelled as disgusting snuff films encouraging spree killers and what not. That's my only issue with this discussion, male fantasies are encouraged and tolerated while female ones are scorned for being 'immoral". However, if you are content creating strong opinions on books you haven't read, that's your prerogative. Like I already said, you read bits of the book on a blog that was explaining to everyone what annoyed them about the book, and then they quoted passages, with their commentary over it, to justify their attitudes. I can quote the Bible to support a view that we are ruled by a secret breed of aliens, so that illustrates the validity of such opinions. I only tried to make a general point, that even though this (or any other book) may not be your cup of tea, it features none of the horrific things you claimed. Those claims are simply erroneous. You may disagree, but you are disagreeing on faith, not on facts. To disagree on the facts, you'd have to read the book because it's easy to take passages out of context and ascribe them meaning they don't have. If you'd rather not check these things for yourself, then perhaps, you shouldn't have strong opinions about it? Because if you are claiming the book contains lots of abhorrent abuse, then that automatically makes everyone who read the book and disagreed with you, either a pervert or insensitive or stupid to have missed such a huge issue with it.
You'd be surprised, then, that the writer IS a female, thus the book outlines a female fantasy. I sure hope you aren't one of those people who goes around deciding what fantasies women are allowed to have Seriously, though, I don't know your background, but I am very liberal, and a feminist, and I think there's absolutely no evidence of the book being 'damaging', let alone 'massively' so. The mainstream critics, analysts and audience have all dismissed these claims (such as you make), so all this has been hotly debated before. However, if you'd mention some specific instances where you thought that occurred, perhaps we can discuss it?
I'll be looking forward to your piece, I also wrote one about this book, it's somewhere in Book Discussion thread I understand and agree with the issues you raised, but they are applicable to everything, from Barbie doll to pantyliners commercial, not to mention just about every single female image and the role in popular culture. But, if we take that as the norm, because, after all, the animalistic component of sexuality and attractiveness can't be ignored and perhaps some of the patriarchy is also instinctual, then this book is not the abomination, rather a rebellious expression, warts and all, of the modern female.
True. It's common enough. I live in a city full of people who are clearly made from 67% recyclable materials. That's actually a brilliant idea. By that logic I'm an astronaut because I know a lot about outer space... I never said that... I also said in an earlier reply that there's nothing wrong with enjoying something even if it has problematic themes if you have the understanding that it's a fantasy and not something that would work or be acceptable in reality. I even said there is media I enjoy that I know has some serious issues and that I can enjoy them just fine while having a critical eye. I also said that's fine if people like it. There was no sarcasm or condescension in my statement, I was being authentic. Never called anyone a pervert, insensitive, or stupid. I don't give a flying fig what people are into so long as it's consensual and all parties involved are happy. What people do in their bedrooms really is not my business. It's only the business of the parties involved. So it's not moral outrage. It's a genuine concern about people falling in with abusive people and thinking it's normal and it's their fault. There's already enough of that mentality with people on the receiving end of abuse as is. My intent was not to come across as though I was criticizing or looking down on anyone. I apologize if it came across that way.
Or more accurately, a virgin pontificating about sex. An 18 year-old presenting herself as an expert on BDSM is extraordinarily unlikely, but admittedly possible. However, when she thinks that kinksters use "safe words", that's a dead giveaway that she is simply talking out of her ass. Of course, that's common behavior on Internet, especially about sex...
You don't know me, darlin'. And safe words, despite your skeptical tone, are actually very good ideas. There are times when a partner wants to take something farther than the other is comfortable with, and those are good times to use those words. Although you seem to enjoy picking arguments with me on whatever I end up posting, so I guess in the end anything I say to you goes in one ear and out the other. And I never said I was an expert, either - however, there are several websites and books written on the subject (some of which I own), as well as gatherings and meetings to find like-minded people. And you implying anything about my sex life is pretty hilarious - being 18 doesn't bar me from a lot of experiences. It's a bit ironic that you snort at my knowledge and mock me for displaying it, and then turn around to do the same thing. But please tell me about your experiences and knowledge too, tell me why everything I say is wrong to you, I'm looking forward to it.
See, this right here tells me you don't know what you're talking about. No one uses "safe words". What they do use is "green", "yellow", and "red". Green means keep going/harder. Yellow means ease up/slow down. And red means stop right this fucking instant. However, "safe words" are a common element in the pop culture portrayal of BDSM; movies, television, and old books. Which is likely where you got it from. Ah! I didn't "imply" anything, only noted that it was extremely unlikely to find an 18 year-old experienced in BDSM. If you visit fetlife, for instance, almost no one there is 18, and those that are willingly admit they're brand-new to kink. This makes sense; usually, most teens are satisfied with more normal sex, and live with their parents, which doesn't allow much opportunity for experimentation. However, any chance that you were the 1 in 10,000 exception vanished with that nonsense about "safe words". (On a completely unrelated note, I don't think obtaining a lot of sexual experience in one's teens is a good or healthy thing for either guys or girls) Except I never called myself an expert, nor made far-reaching statements about what BDSM is. I'm not an expert. I don't tie girls up or attend events. And I think a lot of BDSM is stupid, silly shit. However, I am dominant and have dabbled a fair amount in certain kinks with girls that were really into it. So when even my limited knowledge and experience is enough to uncover a fraud playing make believe on the Internet, that's a bad sign.
R/Y/G IS a safe word system, though. You're communicating (through words or gestures) to stop or keep going. It's a safe word system. You seem to think that by safeword, I mean something really ridiculous or some hokey saying; what I mean is some sort of communication (which is often verbal) of making sure everyone can keep going or stop. We're actually saying the same thing for once here. But by all means, keep speculating as to my sex life and calling me names. Makes your argument stronger.
I don't think one has to be necessarily "experienced" in BDSM to have learned and gained knowledge in safety and caution. I've been to Fetlife before, didn't like it. However there's an IRC channel that I go to where people openly discuss BDSM issues and dynamics and safety. Most of these people are in fact experienced, and much older than I am. It is in fact possible to learn things about BDSM through means of communication before experience. Just because you don't take BDSM seriously, doesn't give you the right to call "a lot of BDSM" stupid or silly. I think the common PERCEPTION of BDSM is silly. But for those who live and breathe it, it is serious business. Not something outsiders really understand. And BTW - Safe words are a great idea. But all participants should take responsibility for keeping each-other safe. This goes beyond the use of words themselves and observing responses and stopping when appropriate even if the submissive hasn't said a safe word. A good dominant should KNOW his/her submissive well enough to stop before there is any danger. BDSM is a very serious lifestyle for a lot of people. There is a lot to think about and a lot to learn. BDSM relationships have the potential to make for a very rewarding and unique relationship because of its nature, and the experiences shared within the relationship. BDSM relationships require a lot of trust and communication, especially when engaging in certain activities. It's not something for everyone, but it certainly should be taken seriously for those who wish to have a BDSM relationship.
Shouldn't you ask me what parts of BDSM and/or its community I consider silly, stupid shit first? And only then get on your soapbox? I live in the Bay Area, which has a huge BDSM community. (Unlike Australia, for instance) A few of my friends have extensive dungeons in their house, and one couple even leads rope bondage seminars. Unlike you, they're not humorless, and can laugh at themselves. Moreover, there are aspects of BDSM that they think are retarded too, such as branding and cutting off fingers and toes. I guess that's "serious business" too, but strikes me as moronic nonetheless. Maybe we should re-title this topic "Internet experts wax poetic about bondage, gender roles, and sex fantasies"?
"Unlike you, they're not humorless" You don't know me and "Moreover, there are aspects of BDSM that they think are retarded too, such as branding and cutting off fingers and toes." Obviously that's retarded I wouldn't consider that laughing at themselves - just that some aspects of BDSM do go overboard - surely the people who cut off fingers and toes don't represent your friends now do they??? Maybe we should re-title this topic "Internet experts wax poetic about bondage, gender roles, and sex fantasies"? I've not seen a single person here claim to be experts
[MENTION=53403]KaTrian[/MENTION]: Lol, not in a classic sense. But I'm a fan of the subconscious and any story that sells almost 80 million copies, and especially if it deals with sexuality, has earned its place in the collective unconscious. That is a pretty massive achievement and it indicates that some important truth hides in the narrative. We can pontificate all we want about the form, snigger and laugh, but we'd be making a very big mistake to ignore the quality which is clearly there. Maybe not in words, but in concepts, but still. And perhaps if you consider how difficult it is to get recognition as a writer, EL James IS a genius, for becoming so successful with her first one. [MENTION=18047]TerraIncognita[/MENTION]: your first comment alleged some pretty abhorrent abuse was occurring, but it's true that you haven't used those words. I am glad you explained, I think I understand better now. In any case, I only wanted to make a point that we shouldn't form strong opinions about things we don't know much about. But that's just common sense
