I Really Didn’t Want To Write About 50 Shades Of Grey
In May of 2012 I wrote a post about 50 Shades of Grey called 50 Shades of Agony. I admit to not finishing the book because, well, I couldn’t stand it. It was, without a doubt, the worst thing I’ve ever read. But I was clear that if the book “worked” for you, then enjoy. That’s the thing about fantasies, they’re personal and usually private.
I haven’t seen the movie, but will probably “hate watch” it once it lands on HBO. There’s simply too much talk for me not to watch it. My curiosity is probably due to the million or so articles written about the movie – and I don’t think that number is too far off the mark.
So what prompted me to finally write about 50 Shades of Grey? It began with a post over at Delaware Politics (Yes. I know.) by David Anderson titled: 50 Shades A Failure of Modern Feminism.
50 Shades just brought to light what in form or another is normal behavior for millions. What is more interesting to me is that it tears to shreds the emasculation of relationships by modern feminism. 50 Shades is not what I would call the road map to healthy relationships, yet it is popular to near record levels not scene since (ironically) the Passion of the Christ.
I found intriguing this article by frequent guest author, Jon Moseley. His premise is that 50 Shades are a perversion of the natural yearning of many women for real men. It speaks to the void in our society created in the last 70 years of the attempt to cleanse society of “a man’s strength and leadership”. He contends that it is a perversion of the healthy original filling the void left by remake of society by the left.
That’s quite a leap, and one not based in reality. And I find it interesting how we don’t apply these leaps to other movies. This is entertainment, fantasy (Hello? Every action/gangster/alien/war movie ever made) – granted, it’s not my idea of amusement, but to each their own. If this rocks your world, I’m A-okay with it. You go, girl/guy!
Before I continue let me share my thoughts on why I think 50 Shades of Grey became so popular. For those of you who don’t know, 50 Shades began as Twilight fan fiction, which means it started with a relatively large audience. (FYI: I didn’t like Twilight either, mainly due to its helpless heroine) Starting with an established readership is every author’s dream.
Since the book was released I’ve been in many (unexpected) conversations about it and the one thing that keeps coming up is that 50 Shades of Grey was most peoples first encounter with erotica. They simply didn’t know the genre existed. They know now. Add to that the ease of downloading books to your Kindle (and skipping the judgement and embarrassment of not purchasing “literature” in a very public bookstore) and you’ll understand why erotica is more popular than ever. In fact, after the release of 50 Shades sales of erotic novels increased by 30%. A 30% increase is the sound of discovery.
So… those are the reasons I think 50 Shades of Grey became so popular. True confession: I have turned many readers of 50 Shades of Grey onto better and more titillating erotica. Don’t judge me!
Now, let’s move onto how certain people have twisted fantasy into feminism’s failure. I’d venture to say that if David Anderson was asked to name feminists he would name me -which then makes me wonder why he would ignore my take on this book? He also ignored other feminists’ views. Here’s the deal with feminists and this book and movie. The majority of them think it’s a terrible book/movie, but won’t pass judgement on women who like it.
I’ll have to quote from the piece David Anderson links to. Brace yourselves for none other than Jonathon Moseley (yes, I say his name more than 3 times in this post, so brace yourselves!) and his titled post: 50 Shades of Wimpy Men Leave Women Longing
The feminists seeking to tear down traditional society by blaming all men for a mythical “rape culture” are now silent while Hollywood liberals simultaneously work hard to create one.
Love the word mythical and rape culture – put in scare quotes, btw. Had to include that quote because it’s so precious and tells you exactly what we’re in for. And here’s another man who hasn’t read feminist’s writings. The mocking of 50 Shades of Grey in feminists places has been deafening.
More importantly, in regards to the genre, someone (Jonathon Moseley) hasn’t been paying attention. In his attempt to explain the romance genre he links to a post on “bodice rippers” as a way to explain the formula But here’s the thing. He couldn’t have read the post he linked to. Hell, he couldn’t have even read the title, which is: Beyond Bodice-Rippers: How Romance Novels Came to Embrace Feminism.
If he had read his linked to article he would have read one of the most important statements, imo, regarding the appeal of romance novels: “romance is one of the few places where a woman is a subject in sex, rather than an object.” That is a powerful statement. I have watched porn, but be warned, I tend to ruin the experience (Don’t believe me? Ask Mr. Pandora!). I’m always asking him, “Why?” Why are they having sex? He just walked into the room and they started going at it? What is her motivation? She was just doing laundry, for god’s sake! He may as well be using a blow up doll, because there’s no way that woman is enjoying this. Yes, I’m missing the point of porn – which is, for the most part, about women being the object (vessel?) of sex. And if that’s your fantasy, have at it, because that’s the flippin’ point of fantasies.
I have to get back to Jonathon Moseley’s article. I’m not happy about that, but…
Well, what are women longing for? Are women fed up with modern men with the texture of boiled cauliflower? Do modern, feminized, metro-sexual wimps leave women hungering for something more? Would women be just as happy with a man’s man chopping firewood in a lumberjack shirt, who isn’t afraid to speak his mind even if he ticks people off, even if he doesn’t own any handcuffs?
First… LOL! Lumberjack shirt? I’m dying here. Personally, I find Mr. Moseley’s definition of masculinity rather limiting. He simply doesn’t see an equal partnership between the sexes. Don’t believe me? Read on.
There is an authentic original of which BSDM is a corrupt variation. There is the proper role of a strong but kind masculine man. And then there is the perversion. In order for one thing to be “twisted,” there must have been an original that was straight and true. A man’s strength and leadership is something for a woman to trust in and lean on. The perversion caused by sin turns what God created into male chauvinists degrading women as second class.
Power to the fallen mind is mean and demeaning. Fallen men seek power to be superior over others. To God, power is kind. Power shelters and protects, and even gently corrects. The proper role of strength is not to seek one’s own interests, at least not exclusively. A strong gentleman becomes twisted into a male chauvinistic pig through the sins of selfishness and pride, a cold heart, and an inability to empathize with others and care about them as real people.
See? To him people that engage in BSDM (or as most people refer to it, BDSM, but I’ll use his version because it’s the least of his problems – along with the fact that, I’d guess, he hasn’t read the book or seen the movie) are corrupt and perverted. There’s something wrong with these BSDM people! Me? I think it would take an enormous amount of trust between BDSM partners.
And notice how he states that male strength is something women should trust and lean on. What about a man leaning on a woman for support? I have been with my husband for 25 years. There have been plenty of times each of us has leaned on the other for strength and support. Is Mr. Moseley married or in a long term relationship? I ask because I can’t imagine a man in a long term, committed relationship painting the sexes in such a stereotypical fashion. Also, his repeated use of the term male chauvinist/male chauvinist pig is so… dated. This is a man who hasn’t left the 70’s.
But his main point seems to be… women like 50 Shades of Grey because they want to be dominated by men, and feminism has erased the manly-man from existence. That’s a very convenient spin for a misogynist. It’s an excuse for bad behavior. Sorta like Robin Thicke… “Hey, you know you want it.”
There are many problems with Mr. Moseley’s post, but the idea that women have defaulted to BDSM because of the emasculation of men is ridiculous, and, like I said, convenient because it justifies bad behavior. It’s like women’s choices are 1) being submissive and deferring to men to take care of them, lest we mess with god’s natural order and burn in hell, or 2) handcuffs. There doesn’t appear to be any middle ground in Mr. Moseley’s world view. In his world, if a woman is better at handling a crisis situation she should step back and let the man handle it – even if he messes it up. This is so about stroking the male ego for Mr. Moseley.
I’ll move onto this bit of silliness from Mr. Moseley:
Women love to go dancing much more than do men. Yet when a man and a woman go ballroom dancing, the man takes complete and total control. Every split second, the man decides what will happen, which way they will turn, and what the next dance step will be. But no one in their right mind would imagine that ballroom dancing is a man being inconsiderate to a woman. On the contrary, having a man lead allows the two to get closer to each other and to move as one. Nearly always the man is ballroom dancing to please the woman who likes dancing more than he does.
First, not all women love dancing.
Second, not all men dislike dancing.
Third, ballroom dancing doesn’t exist on a man’s whim. There are actual steps that a man follows. Yep, he’s taking direction. He doesn’t simply pull a women into his arms and wing it. So the man is not taking “complete control” he’s following orders.
Fourth, I know five couples who took ballroom dancing lessons. Three of those were initiated by the men.
We’ll end with his closing statement:
The more an anti-God feminism attacks and tears down God’s patterns in male-female relationships, the more the fallen human heart invents twisted alternatives to try to fill in the gaping hole. Women instinctively want a strong man. And some of them can even grow hungry enough to accept a perverted version of masculinity if they cannot find the authentic original of a kind but strong gentleman as God intended.
Anti-God? What he’s saying is that strong women in equal relationships go against god’s will. Or, more simply… Jonathon Moseley doesn’t seem to understand male/female relationships. He’s all, “God says so, so submit, women.” Trotting out god to get your way, your dominance and superiority, is lazy. It requires no thought, and it sure as hell doesn’t involve women being partners in a relationship. He basically claims that women into BDSM aren’t there because they like it. They are there because there are no lumberjack shirt wearing men, so they have to settle for whips and chains. In Mr. Moseley’s world women are still objects. Sex happens to them, not with them. That’s sad.
As to his claim that “Women instinctively want a strong man” I don’t disagree. Men instinctively want a strong women. I leaned heavily on my husband when my best friend was dying of cancer. I completely fell apart. For those of you not familiar, I wrote about my experience here. He was amazing, but not in Mr. Mosely’s way. My husband stepped up. He took care of our children (feeding, grocery shopping, pick ups and drop offs, cleaning, laundry etc. – you know, women’s work and hardly “masculine” endeavors) and took care of me. When my husband’s father fell and ended up in the hospital for weeks and had to eventually go into a nursing home, I lived at the hospital and met with doctors and social workers and called every nursing home in the area until I found a place we were comfortable with. I took care of my father-in-law’s belongings and handled the movers and hired the cleaning company so we could move him. That is what a marriage/committed relationship looks like. It’s about never letting your partner drown.
In closing, if you have to pimp out your god to make your case for superiority then you, and your god, are pretty weak… men.
Tags: 50 Shades of Grey, Featured, feminism
You know, there is alot you can tell about the threatened and fearful lives that conservative men lead by just how much work they put into managing women’s lives, setting standards for women they have no business being involved with, and undermining the lives of women by trying to justify some of our worst experiences (rape, domestic violence, work discrimination, etc.) almost all of it designed to make sure that everyone knows that he leads when they both dance. It is simply despicable (and they are sometimes joined by liberals who also work at defending rape and rape culture, which makes them just as despicable) and heaven help the daughters of men whose lives are so puny that all that is left to them is their crusade to establish their dominion over women.
You know… these men are the ones living a fantasy.
I wonder what Jon Moseley’s wife thinks of….oh, wait. I don’t think there is a Mrs. Moseley. I wonder why?
Meanwhile, the real reason to buy the ultra-large vat of popcorn before visiting DP is on the Netanyahu thread, where Moseley is attempting to defend Judaism against a pair of hardcore anti-Semites.
Moseley’s a lumberjack, and he’s okay.
He sleeps all night and he works all day.
Fat white conservative uneducated fearful men who listen to talk radio for their answers..
Amazing how many people were in line for 50 Shades when I went to The Sponge Bob movie
I guess my thought goes back to pandora’s observation regarding how many people discovered erotica due to 50 Shades …
The difference between porn and erotica (and both have their places) is that erotica actually requires motivation, character development etc. Porn is pretty much pure and simple a visual medium …
But that’s not my main point: the idea that Jon–or anyone–can draw huge cultural conclusions about a faddishly popular piece of fan fiction without having the slightest idea of the rest of the iceberg of alternative literature and alternative lifestyles and how mind-bending normal are the lives of the people who enjoy them is simply indicative of his intellectually vacuous disinterest in anything that doesn’t smell of dominationist Christianity.
50 Shades of Grey is amusing because it’s so vanilla and so non-representative of the varieties of human interest and entertainment. Some day I’d love to see what Jon makes of J. G. Ballard’s Crash or The Atrocity Exhibition or even Rosemary Daniell’s Sleeping with Soldiers. It’s actually kind of enlightening to learn exactly what are the boundaries of Jon’s very small, parochial world.
@Steve: He’s better traveled than the typical rah-America type. The smallness isn’t in his world, it’s in his head. And if you think they’re offensive talking about kink, you should see what they say about the transgendered.
Agree, his limitations are in his head which translate into self-limited life experience.
And this from Steve… “the idea that Jon–or anyone–can draw huge cultural conclusions about a faddishly popular piece of fan fiction without having the slightest idea of the rest of the iceberg of alternative literature and alternative lifestyles and how mind-bending normal are the lives of the people who enjoy them is simply indicative of his intellectually vacuous disinterest in anything that doesn’t smell of dominationist Christianity.” …is spot on. Chances are Jon knows BDSM people, he just doesn’t “know” what they do in their bedroom.
If you ventured over to his post you’ll see how the true hero in Pretty Woman was Jason Alexander’s character. You know the guy who called a whore a whore and hit her.
If anyone is interested (and I wouldn’t blame you if you weren’t), Jonathon Moseley responded to this post at DP… with 7 comments and the only thing I know for sure is that he took ballroom dance lessons – which, if I’m being honest, is pretty cool.
That was some word salad. The most pitiful part is that he seems to think that ’50 Shades’ is some kind of cultural marker that confirms his worldview. I guess starting with a fixed conclusion, and working everything into that conclusion passes for deep thinking in his circles.
“I guess starting with a fixed conclusion, and working everything into that conclusion passes for deep thinking in his circles.”
It’s the only thing that passes for thinking in Republican circles. These are people who believe in a whole set of economic theories that were developed not from an honest inquiry into economics, but from what was seen as a necessity for a fact-based, intellectual refutation of communism. Honest inquiry has never been a part of the conservative tool kit. And, lacking tool kits, they turned themselves into a bunch of tools.
Moseley has a peculiar mind. His synaptic pathways are truly randomized with little to no cohesive structure. Plus, he is an obsessive poster. Too much time on his hands, no real job any longer and the unrequited love of his life, Christine O’Donnell will have nothing to do with him. That experience coupled with his Old Testament world view, causes him to see women as beings to be conquered by lumberjacks and made to men’s bidding.
What he’s basically saying is:
1. Feminism has destroyed masculinity – men (other than him and those that agree with him) are wimpy
2. Women have turned to BDSM because there are no real men and BDSM gives women an outlet for their natural yearning for god-given submissiveness. Basically, if a women can’t find a “real” man to submit to then they’ll have to find another way to be naturally submissive. (Notice, also, how he doesn’t address male submissives in a BDSM relationship, but I’m sure he’d just view that as feminism’s end game.)
3. Today’s women “must” be in control, but being in control has resulted in some sort of sexual boredom that a “real” man could solve better than a pair of handcuffs.
4. Women don’t know what they really want
5. And, most importantly, the reason “real manly men” are alone is due to women denying their true nature and choosing “weak” men instead of manly men like them. (echoes of Elliot Rodgers)
Notice how everything he says relies on his not listening to what actual women say.
It is a long way to go to answer the question, “why don’t women want anything to do with me?”
The world is full of strong and forceful men. It’s just that most of them aren’t rich. That’s the real fantasy in 50 Shades – the 27-yo business magnate with his own helicopter. Readers have to ask themselves- “What would I be willing to do to take part in that lifestyle?” and the answer seems to be “Yeah, I would do that.” In fantasy of course.
I think Mosely’s view of strength is directly related to how submissive a woman is to him – and others that think like him. Which is interesting since, to him, the trait of strength doesn’t seem to come from within a person. It is bestowed by the behavior of those around you. If your women doesn’t listen to you or do what you say… you’re weak.
It’s almost like an adult claiming to be book smarter than every toddler in the room. While true, that claim won’t, most likely, hold up once that adult is moved into a room (world) of other adults.
Notice how everything he says relies on his not listening to what actual women say.
Well, hey. Is anyone surprised that Moseley wouldn’t know actual women to listen to?
Perhaps it would be ill-mannered to note that “50 Shades” is basically masturbatory fiction, just like most of what Jon Moseley writes?
Didn’t read the book, don’t care about the movie. But if you want a really awful read I suggest you try The Book Of Mormon, it defeated me even when I was a teen read-a-holic.
“masturbatory fiction”
Moseley apparently has no significant other and for him it’s like washing clothes. When you have a small load you do it by hand.
Oh my… that was really funny and clever.
I really don’t understand people like Moseley. His view of women is both ridiculous and scary – even more frightening, he’s not alone in his beliefs. MRAs are becoming more prevalent (so we’re going to have to address it head on) – even worse, people who aren’t MRAs are agreeing with them, maybe not entirely, but enough to fuel the movement – in a “I’d never go that far, but women are crazy” sort of way. That concerns me, and I’ll probably have to write a post on the fringe (yet not fringe, since the MRA message has become part of the conservative platform) group.
When you read what Moseley has written (link above to his comments at DP) you’ll see that he views women as children who need to be taken “care” of. His ballroom dancing comment about me is quite interesting.
Personally, I think the problem would be running into other dancers, but Moseley prefers a wall and my head. Fair enough. I obviously got under his skin and I’m sure he’d like to see my head slammed against the wall! 🙂
I finally got around to clicking on his link by a conservative woman – btw, even conservative women are a problem to Moseley, which goes a long way to explain his single state. Women are women to Moseley. Even conservative women don’t get a pass. Here’s what he says:
But if you click on the link you’ll read:
Yes, she does get divorced a few years later… BUT she never says why. Instead she makes it a point to say she’s not going to reveal the details and be disloyal to her husband. That’s classy.
So where is Moseley pulling his crap about the reason for her divorce? He has no idea why this couple was divorced. He simply made up a reason to suit his narrative.
Moseley and his MRA pals are dangerous. They hate women, which goes a long way in explaining their single state. They also view women as children or even people with mental disorders, which then begs the question: Can a child or a mentally impaired person ever consent? In Moseley’s world is consent even necessary? Seriously, think about what he’s saying – woman need a “strong” man to make decisions for them. It’s not a leap to apply that to sex. After all, only “adults” should make decisions, and if men are the only adults…
Keep in mind that all this is coming from a “man” publicly spurned by Christine O’Donnell. And while I don’t agree with her on much of anything (or anything!), she was wise in spurning this creepy guy.
The entire collection of DP posters and commenters is a bizarre menagerie of far-right types, the political equivalent of the Island of Misfit Toys.
Yeah, but on the other hand she never returned Mike Matthews’ devotion, so you have to balance the two out when you’re considering her man choices. 🙂
P, this hilarious bit of business should be the last word on 50 Shades of Grey.
“Honest inquiry has never been a part of the conservative tool kit. And, lacking tool kits, they turned themselves into a bunch of tools.”
That sums it up better than anything I have ever heard..
Glad I saw the Spong Bob Movie instead of that lol