veronica-rich:

norwegianpornfaerie:

veronica-rich:

norwegianpornfaerie:

aconissa:

50 Shades of Grey was originally fanfiction based on the Twilight series, which was then published as a novel (along with 2 subsequent books). It sold over 100 million copies around the world and topped best-seller lists everywhere. It’s about to be adapted into a film, set to come out early next year.

It follows a college student named Ana Steele, who enters a relationship with a man named Christian Grey and is then introduced to a bastardised and abusive parody of BDSM culture.

While the book is paraded as erotica, the relationship between Ana and Christian is far from healthy. The core mantra of the BDSM community is “safe, sane and consensual”, and 50 Shades is anything but. None of the rules of BDSM practices (which are put in place to protect those involved) are actually upheld. Christian is controlling, manipulative, abusive, takes complete advantage of Ana, ignores safe-words, ignores consent, keeps her uneducated about the sexual practices they’re taking part in, and a multitude of other terrible things. Their relationship is completely sickening and unhealthy.

Basically, “the book is a glaring glamorisation of violence against women,” as Amy Bonomi so perfectly put it. 

It’s terrible enough that a book like this has been absorbed by people worldwide. Now, we have a film that is expected to be a huge box-office success, and will likely convince countless more young women that it’s okay not to have any autonomy in a relationship, that a man is allowed to control them entirely. It will also show many young men that women are theirs to play with and dominate, thus contributing to antiquated patriarchal values and rape culture.

50 Shades of Grey is more than just a bad novel; it’s actively damaging on so many levels. Do not support this film, even just to see if it’s unintentionally funny. DO NOT SUPPORT IT.

I see your point, but I rather want to see the reviews and the discussion to stem from it. I want to see those people defending the guy’s behavior for real (not as a fantasy, which is perfectly valid for women to have in any form - right?) have to explain why it should be considered “acceptable” or “normal.” I doubt I’d watch it - I’m simply not interested - but as it has a screenwriter who isn’t its original low-talent fanfic author, I’m actually curious if she’s done a better job at all with the adaptation. “Twilight” sparked discussion of relationships for girls and pointed up abusive tropes, which I felt was a good side effect.

As for parodies, pastiches … I’ve read only one, and what I liked about it was the writer took James’s clueless naïf and transmuted her into someone with opinions and friends and a life and studies/ambitions outside the relationship. And who walked away from it until getting what he wanted out of it. (And made the BDSM consensual and sort of understandable to even me, LOL.)

You know, that’s the way I felt about the books, when they came out. I WANTED there to be reviews and critical discussions and inevitable ridicule, and there was… except it didn’t make any difference.

People still read, loved and thought the book was “hot” and “romantic” and even a lot of articles and discussion in the press was often lighthearted and normalizing. We don’t need any more of that shit. This thing should be silenced into obscurity; even ridicule just gives it more attention. No money should be thrown at this thing; I think, at this point, the best that can be hoped for is that no sequels are made. People who loved the books will see the films anyway, but if it doesn’t make enough money, there’s the off chance that… *sigh* I just really fucking hate this thing, you know? (Which is one of the many reasons why I get no enjoyment from parodies or references to it; it’s too unfunny to me.)

I guess I regard it like writing I see that I don’t agree with for whatever reasons - if it’s somebody’s fantasy, I’m not going to rain on that. As long as that’s how it’s regarded, and not as an instruction manual for male-female behavior, or actual BDSM. In that case, I agree with you that it’s shitty. *nod*

Not to beat a dead horse, but it’s important to me to underline that I don’t think this is a matter of “don’t like, don’t read” - 50 Shades is actively and directly damaging to young girls who read it and think what the book portrays is a healthy relationship, which is one of COUNTLESS reasons why it is destructive. I am passionately anti-censorship, and I don’t want this book off the shelves or this film off screens, I am just strongly encouragingly people not to consume this media. I am not shaming people who like it, but I would encourage anyone who does to look into the text a little more closely, and consider what it implies.

enerjax:

Just in case you didn’t know.. he likes to use his body (*u*)

(via cumberbuddy)

veronica-rich:

norwegianpornfaerie:

aconissa:

50 Shades of Grey was originally fanfiction based on the Twilight series, which was then published as a novel (along with 2 subsequent books). It sold over 100 million copies around the world and topped best-seller lists everywhere. It’s about to be adapted into a film, set to come out early next year.

It follows a college student named Ana Steele, who enters a relationship with a man named Christian Grey and is then introduced to a bastardised and abusive parody of BDSM culture.

While the book is paraded as erotica, the relationship between Ana and Christian is far from healthy. The core mantra of the BDSM community is “safe, sane and consensual”, and 50 Shades is anything but. None of the rules of BDSM practices (which are put in place to protect those involved) are actually upheld. Christian is controlling, manipulative, abusive, takes complete advantage of Ana, ignores safe-words, ignores consent, keeps her uneducated about the sexual practices they’re taking part in, and a multitude of other terrible things. Their relationship is completely sickening and unhealthy.

Basically, “the book is a glaring glamorisation of violence against women,” as Amy Bonomi so perfectly put it. 

It’s terrible enough that a book like this has been absorbed by people worldwide. Now, we have a film that is expected to be a huge box-office success, and will likely convince countless more young women that it’s okay not to have any autonomy in a relationship, that a man is allowed to control them entirely. It will also show many young men that women are theirs to play with and dominate, thus contributing to antiquated patriarchal values and rape culture.

50 Shades of Grey is more than just a bad novel; it’s actively damaging on so many levels. Do not support this film, even just to see if it’s unintentionally funny. DO NOT SUPPORT IT.

I see your point, but I rather want to see the reviews and the discussion to stem from it. I want to see those people defending the guy’s behavior for real (not as a fantasy, which is perfectly valid for women to have in any form - right?) have to explain why it should be considered “acceptable” or “normal.” I doubt I’d watch it - I’m simply not interested - but as it has a screenwriter who isn’t its original low-talent fanfic author, I’m actually curious if she’s done a better job at all with the adaptation. “Twilight” sparked discussion of relationships for girls and pointed up abusive tropes, which I felt was a good side effect.

As for parodies, pastiches … I’ve read only one, and what I liked about it was the writer took James’s clueless naïf and transmuted her into someone with opinions and friends and a life and studies/ambitions outside the relationship. And who walked away from it until getting what he wanted out of it. (And made the BDSM consensual and sort of understandable to even me, LOL.)

You know, that’s the way I felt about the books, when they came out. I WANTED there to be reviews and critical discussions and inevitable ridicule, and there was… except it didn’t make any difference.

People still read, loved and thought the book was “hot” and “romantic” and even a lot of articles and discussion in the press was often lighthearted and normalizing. We don’t need any more of that shit. This thing should be silenced into obscurity; even ridicule just gives it more attention. No money should be thrown at this thing; I think, at this point, the best that can be hoped for is that no sequels are made. People who loved the books will see the films anyway, but if it doesn’t make enough money, there’s the off chance that… *sigh* I just really fucking hate this thing, you know? (Which is one of the many reasons why I get no enjoyment from parodies or references to it; it’s too unfunny to me.)

The sudden realization that I’m very close to having Lister’s series VI haircut.

theo-doras:

confidenceandparanoia sent me an origami otter so I decided to paint said otter.

graceebooks:

maetaurus:

graceebooks:

we need to hate the 50 shades of gray movie as loudly and aggressively as possible on the internet

I will love the Fifty Shades of Grey book as loudly and nicely as possible on the internet! Can’t say anything about the movie since it doesn’t come out for another 6+ months and neither should you. Unless you’ve read the entire trilogy, don’t say anything about the book. Unless you’ve got a time machine and have seen the movie, don’t say anything about the movie.

i’ll say whatever the fuck i want about whatever the fuck i want

congratulations on supporting the continued cultural normalization of aggressive misogyny and romanticization of domestic abuse and coercion

feredir:

I HOPE WE WERE THINKING OF THE SAME INTERVIEW…. 

(via paulmcfruity)

aconissa:

50 Shades of Grey was originally fanfiction based on the Twilight series, which was then published as a novel (along with 2 subsequent books). It sold over 100 million copies around the world and topped best-seller lists everywhere. It’s about to be adapted into a film, set to come out early next year.

It follows a college student named Ana Steele, who enters a relationship with a man named Christian Grey and is then introduced to a bastardised and abusive parody of BDSM culture.

While the book is paraded as erotica, the relationship between Ana and Christian is far from healthy. The core mantra of the BDSM community is “safe, sane and consensual”, and 50 Shades is anything but. None of the rules of BDSM practices (which are put in place to protect those involved) are actually upheld. Christian is controlling, manipulative, abusive, takes complete advantage of Ana, ignores safe-words, ignores consent, keeps her uneducated about the sexual practices they’re taking part in, and a multitude of other terrible things. Their relationship is completely sickening and unhealthy.

Basically, “the book is a glaring glamorisation of violence against women,” as Amy Bonomi so perfectly put it. 

It’s terrible enough that a book like this has been absorbed by people worldwide. Now, we have a film that is expected to be a huge box-office success, and will likely convince countless more young women that it’s okay not to have any autonomy in a relationship, that a man is allowed to control them entirely. It will also show many young men that women are theirs to play with and dominate, thus contributing to antiquated patriarchal values and rape culture.

50 Shades of Grey is more than just a bad novel; it’s actively damaging on so many levels. Do not support this film, even just to see if it’s unintentionally funny. DO NOT SUPPORT IT.

enerjax:

"Sometimes it’s the people who no one imagines anything of.. who do the things that no one can imagine”

Outfit of the day - my new Desigual skirt and my very old top (and my grandma’s choker).

The Matter of Sherlock’s Engagement

Now, anyone familiar with ACD canon knows that Holmes gets engaged to a woman in order to gain access to Milverton, so it’s perfectly sensible that the writers would have Sherlock get engaged to someone in order to gain access to Magnussen. But let’s take a look at the timing and context:

Sherlock opts for this particular tactic shortly after John gets married. Certainly, the scene in which he practically parades Janine in front of John to show her off could be read as him trying to see if he can convince John that the relationship is real - as a test. But why would Sherlock need to check that the relationship appeared plausible? He’s trying to trick Janine, not anyone else, and she’s already on the hook. Why would it matter to Sherlock what John thinks about the relationship? There’s no question that his intention - regardless of the motivation behind it - is to get a reaction out of John. Equally, there is no question that Sherlock is conflicted about John’s relationship to Mary, or rather, how Sherlock fits into their relationship dynamics. His actions could all be for Janine’s benefits, but he could easily have found some context to throw John out, or otherwise make sure he never met her. It’s reasonable to assume Sherlock wanted to show Janine off to John for a reason.

Sherlock’s fake engagement occurs in the very same episode where John and Mary’s relationship suffers a crisis. In fact, it helps set in motion the chain of events which eventually leads to the exposure of Mary’s past. Janine berates Sherlock for the lack of trust he showed by not being honest with her about his true intentions, shortly before Mary tells Sherlock that John must never know the truth about her true identity. If you would have trusted me, Janine suggests, things could have worked out. Placing the fake engagement in an episode where the main themes are trust, relationships and loyalty is an interesting choice. Honesty, the writers seem to be saying, is imperative for any relationship to work out.

Where am I going with all this? Admittedly, nowhere in particular. Rather, I am making the point that it is doubtful that the writers chose to include the engagement in this particular context at random. Whatever Sherlock’s relationship to John is, it’s more complicated than the average friendship.

adventuretime-friends:

Check out all our Adventure Time Stuff @ http://bit.ly/adventure-time-friends

Question

veronica-rich:

allhailrimmer:

I’m fairly certain this question has been debated before, but…

What happened between Series VIII and Back to Earth, regarding Rimmer? Is he the old Rimmer, who became Ace, got tired and came back, or is he the nanobots resurrected Rimmer who ultimately died after kicking…

You know my opinion - that each episode takes place in a different dimension where events have run slightly different but largely parallel to the ones in the episodes preceding it. :-D

Hee, well, that undermines about 90% of my RD writing, most of which is concerned with making sense of plot inconsistencies. :p

On that note, I wrote a fic to explain which Rimmer this is:

Savior (5245 words) by Kahvi
Fandom: Red Dwarf
Rating: Teen And Up Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Relationships: Arnold Judas Rimmer/David Lister, David Lister/Kristine Kochanski

Summary: Just who is the Rimmer we see in Back to Earth? This story attempts to give some answers.

When returning after years of being Ace, Rimmer was prepared that there may be new additions to the crew. What he wasn’t quite prepared for was meeting himself.

Question

allhailrimmer:

I’m fairly certain this question has been debated before, but…

What happened between Series VIII and Back to Earth, regarding Rimmer? Is he the old Rimmer, who became Ace, got tired and came back, or is he the nanobots resurrected Rimmer who ultimately died after kicking Death’s nuts, and became a hologram?

What’s your take on it?

I think it’s pretty heavily implied that it’s the original hologram Rimmer from series I through VII. Red Dwarf has always had what I find a rather charming way of deliberately handwaving plot holes or retcons, by alluding to them but always falling short of completely explaining them. For example, the fact that Lister originally had never dated Kochanski, then suddenly dated her for a while before breaking up with her, the fact that Kochanski is suddenly played by a different actress, the differences in Red Dwarf over the course of the series, the way Starbug is suddenly implausibly bigger than it was originally, Lister having had his appendix out twice, etc. etc. So, the fact that they ALMOST start explaining who Rimer is in The End, then cut Rimmer’s dialog short because “there’s no time” - is their way of saying it will probably never be resolved.

That said, I think what Rimmer does say heavily indicates he’s a returning Ace: He takes credit for saving them from the ship-eating microbe. That cannot be the organic Rimmer (who literally cheats death), because he’s busy dying at the time.

…which is not to say there isn’t a way to plot around that. However, there’s also the fact that Chris Barrie plays this Rimmer like the old hologram Rimmer, and makes reference to incidents the organic Rimmer would not have experienced.