It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"50 Shades of Grey" and it's Effects on Women.

page: 7
14
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
So you attempting to taunt me by threatening to be an abusive parent to your child? That says a lot about the mentality and conscience of people who are "fans" of this movie.

Sal

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon
I'm going to let my 3-year-old daughter watch it, and you can't do anything about it.



(post by LewsTherinThelamon removed for a manners violation)

posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

It's not about supporting the movie's contents.

I'll be quite honest, I'm a lesbian and I had rather my girlfriend drag me to see a "Nicholas Cage" marathon movie madness event than have to watch "Fifty Shades of Grey" even once.

Mind you, I generally think "Nicholas Cage" is a horrible actor and such an event might be akin to eating nails...but I digress.

But....

I support women being able to watch the movie and if they enjoy that type of fantasy dynamic then it's their business and their partners.

What usually happens with BDSM partners, is that the relationships are actually less likely to be abusive in every other facet of the relationship than normal ones. The reason for that is because those relationships have rules that each partner adhere to in regard to the "abuse" or the "play". That's why from the synopsis of "50 Shades" I wasn't too fond of the way they presented those types of relationships. It would have been cool if they would have done a mainstream film that really showed the dynamics of these rich/educated BDSM circles. That's why I recommended "Sunstone" because it's way more thought out.

Either way,

Like I said, it ain't my thing but honestly there are worse things happening to women all over the world and even in America than some fan-fic turned mega crapster blockbuster hit.

To me it's just a kinky romance novel adapted for the big screen aimed at women instead of men. It's erotic fantasy based on that genre with a cute male lead that "forces" this woman into a sex contract. I'm not saying cutesy playboys can't be abusive...but the audience of this film are probably fat housewives with equally fat husbands. What a fantasy that is, a cutesy little playboy "forcing" them against their will to do all those things(hey their fat unattractive husbands can't blame them for their transgressions if it wasn't consensual...right?).


Romance novels always have idiotic relationship dynamics and story lines.


This movie is just as roll eye worthy as the old fantasy men of yesteryear:




posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
a reply to: AgentSmith

You have no idea how many women have rape/sub fantasies. To explore those fantasies in a book is much safer, in my opinion.


Any woman with a rape fantasy has probably never been beaten in the face while being forcibly intercoursed, & should probably keep said fantasies to themselves.


originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: ghostrager

Women get horny too you know.

Lies!



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: TechniXcality


Yes reality t.v over sexualizes society(namely children who's parents allow to watch it)


You make it sound like humans would have no interest in sex if the media didn't make "sexual" content.

You fail to realize that sexual arousal is a bodily function that we have no control over. The media is not the cause of sexual arousal anymore than the media being the cause of hunger.

Your statement also fails to take into account that sexual attraction, or--content that a person would find sexual--is absolutely subjective.

Example: some people are sexually attracted to hands and feet, so mundane activities like writing a letter, typing on a keyboard, or walking barefooted through your house--could be sexually arousing to some people.

Your statement also assumes that being human is somehow "degrading to society."

So, uh, why is "sexualization" destroying society?



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 02:22 PM
link   
When the book series hit the best seller list, I happened to be in line for coffee at our local cafe/bookstore. The woman in front of me asked a passing bookseller if the series was appropriate for a 15 year old girl. The response was "Actually, it's intended for more mature readers".

The mother then assured the bookseller that her daughter was "very mature for her age" and bought all three books immediately. A "primer" for her daughters coming-of-age. If you knew how many baby-momma-dramas and unplanned pregnancies happen in my town to "mature teenagers" you'll understand why I facepalmed. Now they're teaching them the whips and chains route? Good lord.

If these kids start out with the heavy stuff, what the heck willl they have to look forward to later on?

But that's another conversation in and of itself.

Heck, I was "mature" for my age once as well. So it goes.

Please don't misunderstand -I'm no prude and I've been to a few BDSM clubs back in my college years. Most of them are nice and well managed. A few are sketchy and you don't want to walk home alone afterwards without a trusted escort, but hey - such is life. Others even require extensive paperwork and a waiting period for review before allowing admittance and membership. ( Card carrying members don't wish to be swamped with a bunch of neophyte curiosity seekers while they're in the middle of their performances and explorations.)

What two (or more) partners consent to do in their bedrooms and homes (or a themed club) is none of my business whatsoever. If you're into kink with a loving partner or a trusted confidant or confidants, have at it. Go wild. Enjoy yourselves.

But when this "exploratory lifestyle" starts bleeding over into casual nightclubs and bars (and it will) where young women are so enamored by the "rape fantasy" that they think every prospective guy out there willing to take them home and tie them up safely and stick to the erotica of this young woman's fantasy expectations is just complete folly and borderline stupidity.

I just hope these young women new to the scene use a bit of discretion and caution when picking their prospective candidates....the way I've watched youth sexuality play out in the headlines and firsthand locally, I haven't much hope for a good outcome. I just hope I'm wrong on this one.

That being said - I'm now going to go flog myself repeatedly to get my mind off this pop culture nightmare.

(*video contains mature language)



edit on 2/21/15 by GENERAL EYES because: formatting, additions, clarity



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

I heard an audio clip on NPR of a mommy book club reading their favorite scenes from the book out loud... I didn't see the movie but that was enough entertainment for me..I'll have to see if I can link it for you folks.



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 05:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: ghostrager


mah moral fabric hurt hurr.

people is havin sex and stuff in ways I don't like derp.


Kill yourself.



So since you don't like my opinion you turn to taunting and tell me to "kill myself".


Wow. That's a really telling and pathetic comment.

Certain porn, especially the kind you are defending(part of?), desensitizes people and is an outlet for deep rooted anger issues.

Good luck with that....



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 05:40 PM
link   
LewsTherinThelamon:
" I hate people like you, with every ounce of passion possible."
"You are not intelligent enough to deduce that your attitude ..."
"you have the self-righteous smugness that comes along with being an authoritarian..."
"Basically, you're nazi scum and I hate you. "

Wow...looks like I touched a very emotional nerve; sorry about that. The fact that you are making the above statements in response to my post tells me that you believe your stance is indefensible and your only alternative to attempting to defend it is to call me a "Nazi." Seems like all you want to do it shut down conversation.

LewsTherinThelamon:
"There is no rational reason for believing that watching sex scenes in a movie is damaging to a child..."

We aren't talking about watching sex scenes...we are talking about watching scenes of degrading sexual violence. And why would you even want to take the chance that your child MIGHT be damaged?

LewsTherinThelamon:
" The point of my post was to make sure that you know that you have no power over other human beings..."

The only power I have is the same power that we all have- to influence others with our opinions. Some people will be influenced by what I say, others will not.

Sal



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: SallieSunshine

I completely agree.

Media forms that promote sexual violence is not something that should be given mainstream attention, especially in such a way that kids are subjected to it.

My personal opinion is that the mothers that brought their children into the theater to watch this movie have committed child abuse and should be investigated.



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 05:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013
a reply to: ghostrager

Wow!
Enough of the puritan pearl clutching!

How do you function in 2015 without fainting whenever you see a bare ankle?

It must be horrific for you to live in such an enlightened age, what with all this perfectly natural sexual activity going on in peoples lives.

If anyone is "abnormal" in this entire scenario, I'm afraid it's you. Sex is natural, kink isn't new, people enjoy themselves and enjoy their bodies. The only person "wrong" in all of this is the puritan Bible thumper sitting in the corner denying nature in favor of condemnation and judgment.


Yeah, I'm not religious by any means. I'm more agnostic than anything. And I'd much rather live in a society where nudity isn't taboo. But that can't happen while distorted versions of our sexual nature are promoted in the main stream and endorse sexual violence.

And no, tying people up and gagging them while having sex is not natural by any means. It is a reflection of other issues that a person is dealing with.



posted on Feb, 21 2015 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager


Yeah, I'm not religious by any means. I'm more agnostic than anything. And I'd much rather live in a society where nudity isn't taboo. But that can't happen while distorted versions of our sexual nature are promoted in the main stream and endorse sexual violence.


Sexual violence is not being encouraged. The movie is entertainment and noone is being forced to watch it.

Sexual attraction and the factors that bring on arousal are absolutely subjective. Your premise implies that more people will become "violently" sexual because of this movie, and that simply is not true. That premise has been disproven so many times.

Violent entertainment does not make violent individuals. BDSM is already widespread and always has been. Seriously, this is nothing new.


And no, tying people up and gagging them while having sex is not natural by any means.


Yes it is. Your premise here implies that human beings exist as entities that are separate from the natural world--meaning that, human behavior and the products of human behavior are artificial.

If a beaver builds a dam, that dam is not perceived to be artificial or "beaver-made." The dam is seen as a natural part of the earth's ecosystem.

We are not disconnected from nature, human beings are animals just as utterly dependant upon the Earth as any other species that exists here. Our cities are also aspects of the natural habitats of our planet, just like a beaver's dam or fox's den--regardless as to whether our creations are destructive or beneficial. Nature can be destructive just as it can be beneficial.

On a higher level, something like BDSM can be categorized as one of the many natural courting rituals of human beings. Our courting rituals are more complex because human beings are more complex. Complexity does not equate to artificiallity.

Everything that we do is natural. We are nature at a higher level.

Just because something was or was not produced by mankind does not mean that said thing is more or less "natural" than anything else. It is an empty distinction.

We are the subjects of the National Geographic for organisms more evolved than us.

Your premise here also implies that "natural" things are automatically better than "artificial" or man-made things. This is purely a fallacy. There are many things not made by men that will kill you super fast (radiation is natural--according to the definition implied by you, and radiation is very destructive towards biological life).

What about all of the man-made things that are very beneficial?



It is a reflection of other issues that a person is dealing with.


This statement is completely invalid. You are making a sweeping generalization about a large group of people--many of whom are very well adjusted emotionally and super intelligent:

BDSM Correlated with Better Mental Health
edit on 21-2-2015 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 12:27 AM
link   
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Yes, I would agree with your view and definition of what "natural" is. I suppose I would support "classically natural" if you will. With that cleared, our primary debate will end up being how capable humans are to balance our constant sensory input of forever adapting social changes and their potential ramifications on society.

We are still in the youthful stages of the information/internet age. Whether kink has been around for ages isn't the point. We have very limited research on how it is directing culture and the outcome. This is why 50 shades is a major turning point. While it may be considered a tame form(from my understanding) it is a major gateway due to its popularity.



Sexual attraction and the factors that bring on arousal are absolutely subjective. Your premise implies that more people will become "violently" sexual because of this movie, and that simply is not true. That premise has been disproven so many times.



Agreed, attraction and factors involved are subjective to each individual. But where and how did these factors come into play? Aside from it's primary purpose for reproduction, most other forms of physical attraction are a learned behavior.

All entertainment affects an individual. To what extent is variable depending on one's susceptibility to suggestion among other factors. Media brings selective knowledge on a given topic, enabling one to act/explore on it if they so choose. What is frightening is many people lack a limit switch. Compulsive sex addicts brain scans are similar to drug addicts.




Sexual violence is not being encouraged.


No, just the fantasy of it whether directly or indirectly.

Regarding the site you linked, a voluntary sample of 900 people hardly represents the populace of the community as a whole. Also, if a similar study were put forth that used members who engaged by primarily ingesting bdsm through media (video/print) the results would be drastically different. There are far many more studies that show the negative aspects of porn than the positive. Studies on serial killers, rapists, and pedophiles all share a common ground. Not to say that all people who watch porn are predetermined, but for these instances correlation and causation parrellel.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

For the greater good I decided to let myself be talked into watching this movie ;-) .

First off the movie is a bad skinamax movie to the point its comical. I was told the book was much better?

Anyhow , the movie pretty much goes along the common cliché that women don't want the nice guy , they wan't to be dominated, they want the unattainable rich guy that all other women want and they can fix, and they want to be treated like a call girl.

IMO, If the main character on the movie was broke the plot could easily be part of a movie on lifetime about an abusive relationship.

I'm actually surprised women think so highly of this book/movie when society and even hollywood is trying to reverse this mentality by showcasing strong, smart , in control women who are powerful.

Not that guys are any better we just have a simpler cliche: We wan't the hot chick and only care about visual image.

The moral of the story for single guys out there: as Patrick Swayze said in road house "be nice until it's time to not be nice" .


edit on 50228America/ChicagoSun, 22 Feb 2015 07:50:34 -0600000000p2842 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: interupt42




First off the movie is a bad skinamax movie to the point its comical. I was told the book was much better?


Gawd than it's worse than I thought! Here are a couple of reviews I posted earlier in the thread, in case you missed them:

FSOG Book Review - One page HILARIOUS synopsis that shows the flaws in plot & writing skill within the book. *language warning* BUT Worth Reading!

50 Shades of Abuse - A more serious, indepth, chapter-by-chapter analysis uncovering clear examples of stalking, kidnapping, dubious consent of the victim, 'cycle of abuse,' etc.

So no, I'm pretty confident the book is NOT better than the movie. In the book, she NEVER signs the agreement/contract. Did she in the movie?



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: new_here




So no, I'm pretty confident the book is NOT better than the movie.


I'm with you on that.

Unlike books where your imagination allows you more creative freedom , I think the movie actually broke down how silly and pathetic the women role in the relationship was.



In the book, she NEVER signs the agreement/contract. Did she in the movie?


Spoiler alert, well actually the movie is a spoiler itself but ..

.
.
.
.
No, however, she goes along with it anyways.
edit on 00228America/ChicagoSun, 22 Feb 2015 09:00:55 -0600000000p2842 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)

edit on 09228America/ChicagoSun, 22 Feb 2015 10:09:59 -0600000000p2842 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: new_here




So no, I'm pretty confident the book is NOT better than the movie.


I'm with you on that.

Unlike books where your imagine allows you more creative freedom , I think the movie actually broke down how silly and pathetic the women role in the relationship was.



In the book, she NEVER signs the agreement/contract. Did she in the movie?


Spoiler alert, well actually the movie is a spoiler itself but ..

.
.
.
.
No, however, she goes along with it anyways.

And there it is.
That is why the BDSM community has come out against the book. The contract, ludicrously vague and one-sided, was never agreed to by the woman. In fact, she emails him "no" and he then breaks into her apartment, holds her down, blind folds her and has his way with her. Its not the kink they disapprove of, it's the "NO means YES" mentality. Totally sends the wrong message.



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: new_here




Its not the kink they disapprove of, it's the "NO means YES" mentality. Totally sends the wrong message.


Well to be fair the Movie paints the "NO means YES" mentality ONLY if you are a billionaire that can afford it.

The working stiff guy who tried to tell her that he liked her almost got pounced on for trying to kiss her. Yet, the guy with billions who tells her look "Come to my apartment for the weekend let me F u, beat you then leave by monday , is the catch. ON the good news he does allow her to redecorate his room if she likes, LOL .

Who would have thought that Male chauvinist was back in style with one caveat, if you can afford it.

Like I said if the guy was broke , then 50 shades of grey would be lifetime movie about an abusive screwed up relationship.

Nothing is more romantic or sexy than trying to get that special girl to sign a contract to allow you to @nal fist her at will. I can't wait till guys watch the movie and start to bring contracts like these on a date. If I was single I would do it just for a laugh or conversation piece.

edit on 48228America/ChicagoSun, 22 Feb 2015 09:48:14 -0600000000p2842 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2015 @ 11:40 PM
link   
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon The media isn't the cause of hunger, but it will manipulate you into buying food you wouldn't otherwise by advertising. They manipulate your natural desires. This is no different. And don't say advertising doesn't affect people, if that was the case hundreds of billions wouldn't be spent on it every year.


edit on 22-2-2015 by iNobody because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2015 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Haha...Home Depot's on it!





top topics



 
14
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join