They showed the 2016 movie “50 Shades of Gray” on the USA network last weekend. First time I watched it.
Their is this 19 year old woman who agrees to be this guys sex slave. She signs off to being spanked, whipped, tied up, and about anything else.
Ok, so why did millions (the movie grossed $571 million) of women flock to see this movie? I thought todays women are empowered and not under any man?
She agrees, you say. She signs off, you say.
The math looks like it checks out.
I asked this question before. No one had a truly good answer other than that many women prefer a type of written fantasy porn that most men don’t understand (the movie only did as well as it did because the book was so popular). They don’t actually want it in real life.
I find that odd. I really do want a sexy Hispanic housekeeper and a naughty nurse just like I look at on the web. My reaction to someone tying me up and beating me would be to hurt them back but not everyone feels that way. I don’t get it either but here is the supposed explanation.
It turns out that there was a big niche going unfilled, of women who like to fantasize about bondage but were embarrassed to admit it. Eventually, something came along that filled that niche and somehow (probably mostly just luck) became mainstream enough that women weren’t ashamed to admit to liking it any more, and so it just snowballed.
Sex is fantasy, you know that, right? No. Politics. In. The. Bedroom.
Ime - and as a general proposition - the more professional, the more senior, the more confident a younger woman is in her work life, the more relaxed she is to explore extremes of role playing.
By mid 30s, there really are few restrictions now. What was 10 years ago a club scene is now mainstream. If it’s all consensual it’s all good.
A lot of women went to see Deep Throat, too. Go figure. I don’t want to see it or read it. I did see Deep Throat, but only because I read Gloria Steinem’s essay, followed by Linda Lovelace’s book.
I think a lot of it is the “famous for being famous” factor-- the same thing that made Blue Velvet such a high-grossing film. It’s the Blue Velvet for the millennials.
There also may be an “Emperor’s New Clothes” factor. No one wants to denounce the film and be thought a prude. Or uncool. I mean, how many people proudly go around with “My favorite flavor is vanilla” T-shirts, even when it is.
For what it’s worth, my rape fantasy involves some guy trying to attack me, and I kick him in the balls and hog-tie him with his own belt, with maybe a few Judo moves, and a broken kneecap in between. I end up with a key to the city, a free lifetime membership to NOW, and subscription to Off Our Backs, which will resume publication just to cover my story. The Hernandez Bros. base a character on me, and there are TV movies about me.
Um, excuse me? Blue Velvet made a ton of change because David Lynch is a weird genius.
I don’t agree with any of you, men. Sorry. It isn’t any of the particulars in the film or book. It’s very simple really. We Women got off on the attention the desire the passion. Didn’t have a darn thing to do with whips & chains. That is why the book was so popular~~~We Woman could tap into that perverse attention or desire (he was grooming only her) and twist the spanking into hot passion! We Women are so much more craftier & creative in our minds than visually watching, which is why most of We Woman found the movie anti-climatic. No movie made by a man could come close to capturing what was lurking behind our eyes.~~Hope this clears it up for you fellas~It was my pleasure.
I suggest that this is vastly more simple to understand than anyone has said so far.
All you have to look at, is the star of the film. Jamie Dornan. Had the exact same film been made with the lead being played by the opposite of a RICH AND POWERFUL PHYSICALLY ATTRACTIVE MAN, the reaction to it would have been very VERY different.
There is complete consistency in (male and) female behaviors. They respond one way to people to whom they are attracted, and another way to people they are NOT attracted to. Most people, when asked to explain themselves, are neither self-knowledgeable enough to speak accurately, nor are they well enough educated to explain themselves accurately even if they DO know themselves well.
Basically I’m saying that a phenomenon like the flurry over a film about a guy tying a young girl up, and a lot of women getting het up over it, wont be meaningful at all until they make the same film with a poor fat short guy in the lead role. If the women respond to THAT the same way, THEN you can start wondering what’s up, and asking all the questions you have now.
You do have a point there. “Pretty Woman” (AKA, one of the worst movies ever made) followed a similar theme. Lots of women love a street whore that is “saved” at least for a while by a creepy but kind businessman with tons of money. The movie would not have worked at all if it featured Danny Devito and Snooky. Still, the message is horrible even though it is just a prostitution version of a Disney princess story. I think the money is the biggest attraction.
It is a bit harder to understand when women twist the same story to include torture porn. If I tied somebody up and beat them, it would be because I want them dead or permanently disabled for real. There wouldn’t be anything romantic about it. Then again, I don’t understand BDSM at all in any form.
I’ve no idea. I didn’t even make it a half-hour into the book. Gag. ETA: Not a weird sex gag, either.
I can’t speak to the movie, which I didn’t see, but the book reads like the first 50 pages of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo–more contract negotiation than sex. I admit to falling asleep reading it. It is the only book I’ve ever read where I wound up skipping the sex scenes because they were boring.
It has so little sex in it that I think it passes for Danielle Steele-type mommy titilation Fabio beach reading.
My 14 year old daughter tried to make me watch Twilight this past weekend. We have a lot in common and she thought I would like it for some unknown reason. I honestly tried to watch it out of respect for her to see what she liked about it. I kept falling asleep until I finally told her that I couldn’t finish it. It takes a lot of talent to create a story that is both insanely creepy and insufferably boring at the same time yet millions of females adore the storyline.
I have no idea what she, or anyone else, finds seductive about sun-deprived stalker vampires but it is a real thing. She has never even had a real boyfriend. Whatever causes that starts fairly young. That also helps explain a whole lot of bizarre news stories.
I think a large part of its success is due to the audiobook narrated in the dulcet voice of Gilbert Gottfried.
People are not sexually satisfied~~Male & Female`just another way of saying what I said earlier~
Partly voyerism. They may not like it themselves, but they want to watch others do it.
The appeal of 50 Shades isn’t about the slap-n-tickle “BDSM” that Christian engages in with Ana. In fact, after the visit to the playroom in the first book, there’s very little BDSM in the remainder of the series, and Christian’s need for it is portrayed as part of the damage inflicted on him by an older woman. By the end of the series they’re a totally vanilla couple with kids.
The appeal is the root of every story that appeals to a largely female audience- the appearance of a hot, smart, damaged bad boy (independently wealthy is optional) who is completely, totally into our Plain Jane heroine despite her Plainness, who pulls our heroine out of her not-deserving-of-her-hidden-awesomeness life, and who our heroine changes into a Not Damaged Good Guy through the power of her love (and her vagina). The sex is passionate, plentiful, and lacking all the weird things that happen in real life (someone’s not in the mood, someone farts, the kids walk in, that nifty position you read about ends up causing a muscle cramp). The heroine’s unique specialness is finally acknowledges, and she lives happily ever after.
It really is a Disney Princess story with a quick trip by Riding Crop Land. The use of “beat” in this thread completely overstates what happens in the book and, in most cases, what happens in RL BDSM situations.
For the friends of mine who enjoy the books/movies, this is similar to what they’ve stated. They also like Pretty Woman, which operates using a similar formula, meaning, it isn’t the BDSM that’s the main draw (though it’s the most “radical” part of the series, so it gets attention).
It’s not overly complicated, IMO, it’s just another take on romance or the princess story (if just outside the orthodox), as you’ve stated. I’ve watched both movies, and while I remained indifferent, I can see why others might appreciate them. I’ve certainly watched more head-scratchers, from my own genre of interests.
I worked in a public library when the book (and “controversy” about it) was just coming out. One of the biggest things that happened was that people who never would have read something like that came in and got it off the shelves. The funny thing was that they were always surprised we had it or that they could get it to read. In reality, we had so many patrons that were fans of the genre that said “Oh yeah, there’s a big kerfuffle about that book. I read it. It wasn’t that great. But here’s a really hot book that has even more sex -” and went on to recommend other books we had.
It may be me overthinking it, but I almost felt like there wasn’t a big controversy about the book until some PR company thought “Hey, if we want to promote this, we will say it’s being banned/challenged all over the country. People will feel like rebels.” Once the PR machine starts, it doesn’t seem to stop.
Brendon
I’m just amazed you didn’t toss in a Little Red Riding Crop turn of phrase.