Tag Archives: i do politics
As promised: Rosie reviews Fifty Shades of Grey.
As promised: Rosie reviews Fifty Shades of Grey.
I walked into the premiere screening of Fifty Shades of Grey last night planning to walk out with a bunch of ridiculous and funny material that would lead to a hilarious recap. Instead, I walked out of the cinema on the verge of tears.
I’m really, really sorry you guys. I know I made a big deal yesterday about how I was going to write a ‘totes-hilare’ review. I obnoxiously posted pics from the red carpet and tweeted in all caps at the first sighting of pubes.
But I screwed up. I screwed up big time. I went into this film thinking it would be two hours of B-grade hilarity about bondage that I could make fun of. It was actually two hours of incredibly disturbing content about an emotionally abusive relationship that left me really, really shaken.
And now I’m embarrassed that I ever joked about it.
I haven’t read any of the Fifty Shades books, so I went into last night’s screening cold. I think that was the problem. The phenomenon has only ever been on the periphery of my care-factor zone. I honestly thought the story was just about a young, sexually inexperienced woman, who meets a slightly older, extremely sexually experienced man, and he teaches her everything she needs to know in three books of clit-tingling sex-scenes.
It was my understanding that the sex was BDSM-themed, which, with my limited knowledge of that stuff, I assumed included some tying up of hands and slapping on the bum and… I don’t know – blindfolds?
I thought the books were all about kinky, slightly naughty sex. Sex that mixed pleasure with a bit of pain and made housewives around the world read the book with one hand free. And I’m all about women pleasuring themselves, so other than thinking I was glad some sexually-repressed women were getting their rocks off, I didn’t really give it much more thought.
I had heard the rumblings from domestic violence groups wanting people to boycott the film, but with limited understanding of the story, I assumed that was because it involved a woman being physically harmed by a man during sex. And my opinion was, well, if they’re two consenting adults, and being tied up and slapped is their thing, then what’s the big deal?
But I had no idea that Fifty Shades of Grey isn’t just about the sex. It’s also about an incredibly disturbing and manipulative emotionally abusive relationship.
So, about half an hour into last night’s screening, I found myself doing a horrified double-take. I quite suddenly realised that I was watching a film that glorified domestic abuse.
The relationship between Christian Grey and Anastasia Steele is one of the most fucked up and upsetting I’ve ever seen portrayed on the big screen.
And let me be clear to the women who are incredibly defensive of the book that gave them a sexual awakening: When I talk about domestic abuse, I’m not talking about the sex.
In fact, I considered the sex to be the least offensive part of the movie. Christian’s ‘playroom’ was everything I had hoped for comedy-wise – it looked like the home you imagine the gimp from Pulp Fiction would go home to at the end of the day. He tied up Anastasia and they did lots of sexy things with whips and feathers and her pleasure seemed just as important as his, which is refreshing for a blockbuster film.
But let’s take the sex out of the equation for a minute. Because as I was sitting in that cinema last night, I was completely floored by what I was watching. And by what millions of women had accepted as a relationship to aspire to.
Christian meets Anna. He is immediately obsessed with her. He figures out where she works and turns up there unannounced. He tracks her phone one night and confronts her on the street. He even lets himself into her home, and shocks her by walking into her bedroom while she’s alone.
When they start dating, he immediately puts himself in a position of complete control. He plays with her emotions and confuses her by doing things like tenderly kissing her, then pushing her away. He refuses to share a bed with her after they sleep together. She is in tears about the way he treats her within a few days. She finds herself staring longingly at couples who seem to be happy and affectionate with one another.
He buys her a computer so he can contact her whenever he wants. He sells her car and provides her with one that he approves of, all without asking her. He tells her that she’s not allowed to tell anybody about what goes on between the two of them, or it’s over, essentially isolating her from friends and family.
He says that she must dress in clothes that he chooses. She must go to a doctor that he chooses, and take the contraceptive that he chooses. She must eat what he chooses. She’s not allowed to drink to excess. He tells her that it is her job to please him, and that if she doesn’t keep him happy to his exact specifications, it’s over.
When he finds out that she has scheduled a trip to her mother’s house in another state without asking him, he is furious. He throws her over his shoulder and screams, “YOU ARE MINE. ALL MINE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND?”
By this point, Christian has complete control of Anna. He dictates when they see each other, how affectionate they are with each other and who Anna is allowed to talk to and spend time with. Her friends and family can tell that she’s unhappy.
But above all, Anna is confused. Whenever she tries to reach out to Christian, she doesn’t know if he’s going to be receptive or ice-cold. He’s inconsistent, and, desperate to hang on to the few moments that he’s nice to her, that inconsistency keeps Anna under his control. She seems to think that if she stays, if she just keeps trying, she’ll figure out how to make him happy and he’ll stop treating her so badly.
Anna is smack-bang in the middle of an emotionally abusive relationship.
Now, take all of what I just described, and add some BDSM sex. Then, take all the conditions Christian placed on Anna, and frame them in the context of an ‘official BDSM contract’ that he made her sign.
That is how this movie makes domestic abuse seem okay. It’s emotional abuse disguised as a ‘naughty sex contract’. It’s domestic violence dressed up as sexy fantasy.
And it’s a genius, subtle move. Putting this kind of controlling, emotionally abusive relationship in the context of a sexy billionaire who just needs to be loved, makes it ridiculously easy to convince audiences the world over that this kind of behaviour is okay. He’s not some poor drunk with a mullet, hitting his wife for not doing the dishes. Christian is classy. Rich. Educated. He’s not what most women imagine an abuser to be, and his kind of abuse is not what most women would immediately recognise.
Not to mention, the combination of emotional abuse and sexual bondage means anybody who says they find the message in the story disturbing can be reduced to a ‘prude’, or accused of not understanding what BDSM involves. The blurred lines in this film mean any kind discussion about abuse can be easily shut down by those determined to be obtuse because they like the sexy blindfolds.
But there is no doubt in my mind that the film I watched last night was a disturbing and clear depiction of a controlling and emotionally abusive relationship. This was domestic violence. I don’t care how many women learned to embrace sex because of Fifty Shades of Grey. THIS WAS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
I was somewhat heartened when the film ended with Anna deciding her limits had been pushed too far. She leaves Christian and is clear that she doesn’t want him to follow. Then I found out that she goes back to him, and spends the next two books in the same emotional and manipulative turmoil. She spends the next two books clinging to the good moments they have together, hoping that eventually the good will outweigh the bad. Hoping that one day she’ll figure out how to make him happy, so he won’t need to keep treating her badly. Hoping that if she just… keeps… trying…
This was domestic abuse marketed as Valentine’s Day fun. That’s why I nearly cried. And that’s why I couldn’t write a funny recap.
I’m embarrassed that I ever thought I could.
*Fans consistently express desire for movies with more diverse leads*
Marvel: Well, you see, it’s not that we don’t want to, it’s just that we already laid out this plan that just happens to not include those, and everything is just so tightly woven together and carefully planned that we couldn’t possibly add anything or change anything without ruining the whole plan.
*Marvel unexpectedly acquires Spider-Man rights*
Marvel: Okay, we want to get him onscreen ASAP, but we didn’t plan for him to be in Phase 2. No biggie, we’ll just push all of these movies (including the only female-led and PoC-led movies we’ve announced) back several months, and he’ll fit in perfectly with no repercussions to the overall plan beyond changing release dates. In fact, we’re still early enough on that we can probably write in a role for him into the movie before his!
Me: ಠ_ಠ
TDS, February 10, 2015
Former Senior Advisor to PresidentObama, David Axelrod, on the government’s healthcare reforms
I am so going to miss my president. SO MUCH.
If my kid can’t bring peanut butter to school, yours shouldn’t be able to bring preventable diseases.
this is a real tweet made by a real human being in real life
What the…
I HONESTLY? I LOVE THIS
How does he walk around in public and not get repeatedly punched in the face?
Since 1980, guess how much of the growth in income the 90% got? Nothing. None. Zero. In fact, it’s worse than that. The average family not in the top 10% makes less money than a generation ago. So who got the increase in income over the last 32 years? One-hundred percent of it went to the top 10%. All of the new money earned in this economy over the past generation — all that growth in the GDP — went to the top. All of it.
universalequalityisinevitable:
Robert Sapolsky about his study of the Keekorok baboon troop from National Geographic’s Stress: Portrait of a Killer.
Thiiiiiiis, people, thiiiis!
1. Kill alpha male types
2. Achieve world peaceGot it.
I’ve actually read a lot of Sapolsky’s work. He’s one of my favorite scientists in the neuro/socio world.
I just watched the documentary and there is so much more about the troop that isn’t in this photoset—not only does the troop have a culture of little aggression and greater cooperation, but any incoming jerk baboons learned within a few months that their shitty behaviour was in no way acceptable, that the troop only rewarded sociability, and they changed accordingly.
#NotAllAgressiveAlphaMaleBaboonsWhoEatBabies
There’s this great myth out there that we call the “Over-consumption Myth,” which goes: If you earn a decent income, and you’re in trouble financially, it must be because you’re blowing all your money at the Gap, and TGIF. The myth is so powerful, it almost seems like heresy to question it. But when we actually looked into the data on what real families actually spend, it’s just not true. An average family of four actually spends less on clothing than their parents did a generation ago, adjusted for inflation. That includes all the Tommy Hilfiger sweatshirts and all the Nike sneakers. How does this work? Well we forget all the things we don’t spend money on anymore — how many kids have leather shoes for Sunday school anymore? How many people dress up in wool suits for work everyday?
The point is that families today are spending their money no more foolishly than their parents did. And yet they’re five times more likely to go bankrupt, and three times more likely to lose their homes. Families are going broke on the basics —housing, health insurance, and education. These are the kind of bills that you can’t just trim around the edges in the event of a downturn.
Amelia Tyagi (via moontyger)
Yes. This. I can’t tell you how many times I have been around and around and over and under our budget, and there’s nothing else left to cut. I shop carefully — my son’s summer clothes come from thrift stores because he grows so fast, his school clothes come from Old Navy, bought on sale a season ahead of time with coupons and during ‘clearance even on clearance.’
My groceries are healthy but careful.
My only indulgence is my tablet, and that’s $23 a month until it’s paid off. Hardly a bank-breaker.
(via vaspider)
A minimum of 50% of the expensive, nice, electronic things in our home have been gifts from one parent or another. Including one of his cars. We’re shaving so finely in the budget I’m nagging him about the $5 he spends on a drink and snack when he buys gas, and worried about the $5 I spend on lunch at work.