50 Shades of Abuse

Post Reply New Topic

Then why are you commenting. You obviously haven't clicked on the link I shared either because..


Yes the criticism is about the other content.

Just for other readers of this thread I will put this in bold and capitals before it gets derailed:


THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT BDSM

That's why people who have issues with the way Christian behaves from the beginning don't get heard, it's because the conversation quickly derails into, but it's BDSM.

What's wrong with the womankind? Seriously... such huge female base of fandom for those type of stories start to to make me think that a lot of women secretly crave for abuse and chauvinism.

Unfortunately, looks like the author of that site had to take it down. I hadn't had a chance to read all the way through it yet, but it looked like an excellent analysis of the book.

Thank you. It did appear that the link had expired or was removed.

A typical feature of such stories is not simply that there is abuse, but that the abuser is somehow redeemed or transformed by the love of a woman. 50 Shades is a story about redeeming an abuser.

The alternate story template is when a "knight in white armor" comes rushing in to save a woman from a rapist or abuser.

I think the fascination with these stories reflects an underlying belief that abuse and chauvinism are so pervasive, they might be inevitable. It's not that women secretly want it, it's that they secretly fear it.

But the hope that is given - however unrealistically it is drawn in such stories - is that circumstances may change for the better.

I think bdsm practitioners who are attacking the book/movie are in denial, BDSM altogether is an abuse and rape culture. Some of those are hating on the book/movies because it's exposing something they're involved in.

I still find it too weird for its dominantly-female fan base.

And btw, despite some bdsm people are writing articles against it, when I last time checked that erotic online community (won't name) it's clearly a favorite book by a lot of bdsm practitioners.

I think bdsm practitioners who are attacking the book/movie are in denial, BDSM altogether is an abuse and rape culture. Some of those are hating on the book/movies because it's exposing something they're involved in.

BDSM is often sexist, racist, homophobic, ableist, classist/capitalist, and any other form of oppression or bigotry that can be imagined. This is why it is so alarming and problematic that it is the norm in communities of progressives, even feminists, to be uncritical of BDSM, and often downright advocate it as liberating and transgressive.

Why is it that we condemn it when people express bigoted views – and yet we think it’s fine when the same bigotry is eroticized? Is sexism suddenly OK if it makes a guy’s cock get hard? Is racism suddenly OK when it makes a woman’s p**** wet? Is homophobia OK if it leads to orgasm?

Few BDSMers are into all of the things listed below, but most are into at least one.


BDSM and Sexism: Men dominating and controlling women is considered erotic. Men physically abusing women is considered erotic. Men raping women is considered erotic. Sometimes it is women dominating and abusing men, or men dominating and abusing other men, or women dominating and abusing other women. But even in these cases it is often still male dominance and abuse against females that is eroticized. The female dom/sadist degrades her male sub with gendered language, calling him a p****, slut, b***h, little girl. And it tends to be the macho male as the dom/sadist and the sissy ‘fag’ as the sub, or the butch dyke as the dom/sadist and the femme as the sub. Furthermore, it is a fact that amongst males and females into BDSM, females are much more likely than males to be subs, and males are much more likely than females to be doms/sadists.


BDSM and Racism: There is a category of BDSM called ‘race play’. Racial oppression is considered erotic. Violent hate crimes are considered erotic. Hateful, hurtful slurs like ‘n****r’, ‘k*e’, ‘spic’, ‘sand-nigger’, ‘chinc’, are considered erotic. A White master ruling over a Black slave is considered erotic. A nazi officer torturing a Jewish concentration camp prisoner is considered erotic. A border patrol cop catching a Mexican trying to cross the border illegally, and then raping them as payment for letting them cross, is considered erotic. The lesbian therapist, activist, and researcher Melissa Farley writes in her essay “10 Lies About Sadomasochism: “My silence about lesbian sadomasochism ended when I saw two anti Semitic sadomasochists at a women’s festival. One woman who wore a yarmulke was being walked like a dog with a chain around her neck by a woman in Nazi ‘leathers.’”


BDSM and Homophobia: Gay bashing is considered erotic. Homophobes raping gay men as punishment is considered erotic. Homophobes raping lesbian women to show them that ‘all they need is some good cock to go straight’ is considered erotic. Hateful, hurtful slurs like ‘fag’ and ‘dyke’ are considered erotic.


BDSM and Ableism: There is a big ‘demand’ amongst doms/sadists for disabled people. Amputee fetishism is huge. Wheelchair fetishism is also quite popular. What is considered erotic is the helplessness of the disabled person. Of course it is not at all sick or immoral to be sexually attracted to disabled people. But that’s when this is a true attraction based on the person’s humanity, and the disabled person’s helplessness is not eroticized. In fact, a respectful attraction recognizes that disabled people are not helpless. Fetishization of disability is very different from genuine, respectful sexual attraction. Fetishization objectifies the disabled person and enjoys thinking of them as helpless and perhaps even in pain.


BDSM and Classism/Capitalism: The boss sexually harassing an employee is erotic. The boss giving the employee an ultimatum: either I rape you or hire you, is erotic. The ‘man of the house’ verbally abusing and spanking the maid is considered erotic. The purchasing of sex, using money to rent the control and ownership of another human being, to turn a human being into a commodity, is considered erotic.


BDSM and Ageism: There is a category of BDSM called ‘age play’. The dom/sadist stays in the adult role and the sub pretends to be a child. Child molestation is considered erotic. Incest is considered erotic. Parents or adult authorities physically beating or verbally abusing their children is considered erotic. Parents dominating and controlling their children is considered erotic. The geriatric nurse assaulting or raping the elder is considered erotic.

*****************************************************************************


As mentioned, it tends to be the norm to approve of BDSM amongst progressives, feminists, hipsters, and those living in major urban centers in the ‘West’. Approval of BDSM sends the message that dominance is ok, that wanting to dominate and degrade others is ok. It validates the sick desires (if not the actions) of those interested in engaging in BDSM type acts without consent.

For example, think how much less ashamed wannabe child molesters would feel if they know that society approves of the BDSM scenario of "age play", where one adult pretends to be a child getting molested by the other adult. Is it not a mixed message to send that sexually abusing a child is wrong, but the fantasy and desire to do so is unproblematic? Wannabe child molesters are more likely to become real child molesters if they receive such mixed messages.

There are already many cultural forces influencing people to abuse others. Do we really need to add to this?

The desire of batterers to rule over their partners, and to subdue their partners with violence, is also validated. Again, they may not receive approval for their abusive actions, but the message is sent that the desire to rule over someone else, and to hurt them if they are disobedient, is unproblematic. We all know that the first step to overcoming a problem is to admit that we have one. How likely will batterers be to admit their desire to dominate is sick, if society is sending the message that it’s not?

And on the other side of things, batterers can tell themselves that their partners don’t mind being controlled and hurt: “She doesn’t mind it. I heard lots of women like being treated this way, anyways. It gets them off.”

Do we really need to be giving abusers any more ways to excuse their behaviour?

What I noticed in the book was the everyday banter between them seemed to be quite abusive. Even if you took the bdsm out of the book then you would still be left with an abusive relationship. I guess I wanted to warm women what signs to look for, the small things.