Why is this 40 Shades thing such a big thing for the ladies ?

smash

Venus In Furs wrote: »

Dunno that liking the book always means actually wanting to live it.

Aye, drones of desperate housewives suddenly thinking their sex life is wild after reading it because they'll now do doggy style. But even take out a set of handcuffs and they'd probably tell you to fcuk off.

Venus In Furs

Bridesmaids isn't a good example as Annie doesn't treat Chris O'Dowd's character badly at all. She rejects him the night he wants to try and get closer to her, which is understandably humiliating for him - but then she feels terrible and spends the next good while running after him apologising... to which he is indifferent for a long time.
And then they end up together, and she tells the guy from Mad Men to **** off.

Really strange example to use.

strobe

There was a combination of things, e-readers meant you could read a naughty book and no one would be able to tell. That was a big thing. Naughty books across the board experienced hugely increased sales. Then Random house went into over drive with social media and Internet marketing, essentially making the book a meme, people took interest because other people took interest and eventually you hit a point where it becomes exponential. 'Women's media' took interest for clicks and that made it 'on trend' (*vomit*). Just a perfect storm kind of thing that happens every so often. Like pogs, remember pogs?

ash23

Vanillapod87 wrote: »

In what way was it not well written? I've heard that said quite a bit but having read bits of it I don't see how it is badly written.

The language used was so repetitive it was bordering on the absurd. The number of times she said "oh my" or "my inner goddess" was ridiculous. There wasn't really much fleshing out of the characters either in what I read. It all revolved around the present with no good build up or history.

As I mentioned the sub/dom thing was very skewed from what my understanding of an actual sub/dom relationship. I like submission but I also like to be in control of it. It's also something that tends to happen over time initially unless specifically a sub/dom relationships if that makes sense? Most women need and want to trust the man before they'll be submissive. In this case, before they had even slept together (from memory) he requested her to sign a contract about what she could eat and wear etc. ETA - she didn't actually sign it.

She was also supposedly a virgin. Not just any virgin but one who (again from memory) hadn't even kissed someone (I'm open to correction as it's been a while).
It made me fairly uncomfortable to be honest. As I said, it read to me to be more like grooming than a healthy consensual relationship. Even though she is 21, she is portrayed more like a very very young girl.

auldgranny

smash wrote: »

Aye, drones of desperate housewives suddenly thinking their sex life is wild after reading it because they'll now do doggy style. But even take out a set of handcuffs and they'd probably tell you to fcuk off.

pwurple

Vanillapod87 wrote: »

In what way was it not well written? I've heard that said quite a bit but having read bits of it I don't see how it is badly written.

Repetitive, use of cliches.

I read a small bit of it and thought it was consumerist junk, much like Sex in the City was. All oohing and aahing over expensive *things*. Zero substance.

Example A of poor writing:

"Pulsing" must be used 3 zillion times in the books.
"Icarus" is the cliche in this bit, but don't worry, there are LOADS.
"The grandiose foyer" is consumerist claptrap.

Christian nods as he turns and leads me through the double doors into the grandiose foyer. I revel in the feel of his large hand and his long, skilled fingers curled around mine. I feel the familiar pull—I am drawn, Icarus to his sun. I have been burned already, and yet here I am again.
Reaching the elevators, he presses the call button. I peek up at him, and he’s wearing his enigmatic half smile. As the doors open, he releases my hand and ushers me in.

Barf.

RDM_83 again

ash23 wrote: »

I read the first half of the first book but it enraged me and not in a good way. The main man was a total arsehole and the girl was a simpering moron.
If that actually happened you'd be getting her to call the guards while giving her a bit of a slap for being such an eejit.


I don't even think it really represents S&M or submissive and dominant relationships. The girl was initially meant to be so much younger and much more naive that to me it came across as grooming.

Really don't get the attraction to it at all. It wasn't even well written.

Going to get a hammering for this post but isn't the tendency in the "scene" for it too be an older man/ younger woman in real life*?

I do agree that he sounds like a massive asshole, I just find it funny how annoyed it makes BDSMers when there is clear issues in that subculture

*For people people that seek each other out not who get into as a couple

ash23

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Going to get a hammering for this post but isn't the tendency in the "scene" for it too be an older man/ younger woman in real life*?

I do agree that he sounds like a massive asshole, I just find it funny how annoyed it makes BDSMers when there is clear issues in that subculture

*For people people that seek each other out not who get into as a couple

Older man/younger woman is one thing. He's only meant to be mid to late 20s in the book so it's not so much about him as it is about the depiction of her. My 12 year old has more savvy than her character. She's really portrayed as being child like innocent.

I'd imagine that is why it annoyed people. Because it came across as being anything but two mature, consenting adults involved in the activity.

ash23

Here's an apt review in my opinion

http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/340987215

smash

ash23 wrote: »

Here's an apt review in my opinion

http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/340987215

I was looking for that one. It's brilliant

One eyed Jack

Saralee4 wrote: »

A woman would not turn around to her pal and say 'oh do you know any good porn sites?'. I think a man would feel comfortable saying this to his friend. Its kind of more accepted or believed that men like porn more than women but women do like porn.

I suppose 50 shades of gray is like something that women are not ashamed to admit they like maybe because its milder like a playboy for women?

You and your friends probably wouldn't, but I've been asked by plenty of my female friends do I know any good porn sites. They assume that because I'm a man that I spend all day looking for porn on the internet. I don't, haven't looked at porn on the internet in years, the existence of redtube and youporn are about the limits of my knowledge of internet porn.

I haven't met too many women though that aren't ashamed to admit they've read FSOG, not actually because they're worried about me knowing they like porn, but because it truly is written like Twilight aimed at a generation of middle aged women. As has been pointed out in the thread numerous times already, it's just so badly written that it's embarrassing to admit they've read such cringe worthy shìte that it wouldn't look out of place in the problem pages of Just 17 magazine.

ash23 wrote: »

The language used was so repetitive it was bordering on the absurd. The number of times she said "oh my" or "my inner goddess" was ridiculous. There wasn't really much fleshing out of the characters either in what I read. It all revolved around the present with no good build up or history.

As I mentioned the sub/dom thing was very skewed from what my understanding of an actual sub/dom relationship. I like submission but I also like to be in control of it. It's also something that tends to happen over time initially unless specifically a sub/dom relationships if that makes sense? Most women need and want to trust the man before they'll be submissive. In this case, before they had even slept together (from memory) he requested her to sign a contract about what she could eat and wear etc. ETA - she didn't actually sign it.

She was also supposedly a virgin. Not just any virgin but one who (again from memory) hadn't even kissed someone (I'm open to correction as it's been a while).
It made me fairly uncomfortable to be honest. As I said, it read to me to be more like grooming than a healthy consensual relationship. Even though she is 21, she is portrayed more like a very very young girl.

The whole premise of the books, the whole phenomenon, the whole trilogy, is a complete rip-off of "Secretary" (and James Spader again played pretty much the same character type in Boston Legal), but I wouldn't suggest it was skewed really, it's pretty accurate for some types of relationships (which don't necessarily or even always include elements of BDSM), but the reason why it's so successful is because it's a fantasy world that a lot of women can relate to.

I would try not to think too hard about whether the books themselves are a realistic reflection of reality or not though, for most people reading them, they really are just fantasy and an escape from reality for a bit, and were never really aiming for any literary critical acclaim. They were written to appeal to a mass market, and that's exactly what they do.

ash23

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I would try not to think too hard about whether the books themselves are a realistic reflection of reality or not though, for most people reading them, they really are just fantasy and an escape from reality for a bit, and were never really aiming for any literary critical acclaim. They were written to appeal to a mass market, and that's exactly what they do.

I do think though. That's probably why I hated them. I genuinely think that the people who loved them were people who don't really read for pleasure usually.
I'm an avid reader so that muck made me want to burn books. And I love books.

But I know many friends who did read and enjoy them. From my own experience, those friends would never read a book usually. I suppose if you've nothing to compare it to then you won't notice the terrible writing etc. It's candyfloss for the brain. Enjoyable but too much and watch the rot set in.

Earthhorse

strobe wrote: »

There was a combination of things, e-readers meant you could read a naughty book and no one would be able to tell. That was a big thing. Naughty books across the board experienced hugely increased sales. Then Random house went into over drive with social media and Internet marketing, essentially making the book a meme, people took interest because other people took interest and eventually you hit a point where it becomes exponential. 'Women's media' took interest for clicks and that made it 'on trend' (*vomit*). Just a perfect storm kind of thing that happens every so often. Like pogs, remember pogs?

Exactly. We could equally ask why was Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code popular? By all accounts it's poorly written and there are plenty of other thrillers out there but this one took off. X-Factor music is mostly paint by numbers but still dominates the charts. There's plenty of stuff in the world that's popular despite being arguably of low quality and 50 Shades is just one of them.

My name is URL

The people I know who read it and actually enjoyed it probably haven't looked at another book since 'The Secret', which is even worse than 50 Shades.

Wibbs

conorhal wrote: »

I suspect that there is a female equivelant, 'the soulful sexy bad-boy' who just needs the love of the right woman to make him whole.

One theory has it that women are the the domesticators of humanity, particularly the male side, so quite the number of women, particularly young women are more generally drawn to the so called "bad boy". The need to "change" him is for the betterment of wider society. More to be seen among young women as they're around young men hyped up on testosterone goofballs who left to their own devices could cause trouble for the wider society. Makes some sense I suppose. Just look at mass murderers in prisons around the world. They get more fan mail from women, even marriage proposals than your average dude in the street. That's the major extreme of the process mind you.

conorhal

Wibbs wrote: »

One theory has it that women are the the domesticators of humanity, particularly the male side, so quite the number of women, particularly young women are more generally drawn to the so called "bad boy". The need to "change" him is for the betterment of wider society. More to be seen among young women as they're around young men hyped up on testosterone goofballs who left to their own devices could cause trouble for the wider society. Makes some sense I suppose. Just look at mass murderers in prisons around the world. They get more fan mail from women, even marriage proposals than your average dude in the street. That's the major extreme of the process mind you.

I have to say that I loved Al Murray's take on the subject,
'Women! You had the chance to make equality mean something that made men and the world in general a better place, but when we reached out to you, instead of dragging us up out of the gutter, you staggered on your high heels after one too many bacardi breezers and instead tumbled right into the gutter beside us!'

RDM_83 again

ash23 wrote: »

Older man/younger woman is one thing. He's only meant to be mid to late 20s in the book so it's not so much about him as it is about the depiction of her. My 12 year old has more savvy than her character. She's really portrayed as being child like innocent.

But AFAIK thats exactly a whole sub-section of BDSM, the Daddy Dom's and Babygirls thing.

I'm not actually offended or anything by the book people can like what they like (and I can think its ****e) but I find the various responses interesting.

The BDSM people all apparently hate it because its "unrealistic" and makes them look bad, even though its clearly fiction and plays into some of exactly the same tropes they have.

Plenty of people hate it because its badly written (fair enough)

Others hate it because of the message it sends out, fair enough.

But the fact its written by a women, read mainly by women, and features the story from the womens point of view seems to make it a safe non-worrying thing.
Can you imagine the social response if it was written by a man, bought mainly by men (and read in public) and featured Anne as the object rather than the subject (actually we can see it in the dialogue about objectifying porn, its something that is apparently meant to concern us as a society).

smash

RDM_83 again wrote: »

The BDSM people all apparently hate it because its "unrealistic" and makes them look bad

I'm guessing it's kind of like how car enthusiasts hate boy racers. But the book wouldn't have been such a success if it contained proper BDMS scenes because while some women fantasise about being overpowered there's not a huge amount who fantasise about being ball gagged, hog tied, whipped and left covered in bruises.

One eyed Jack

smash wrote: »

I'm guessing it's kind of like how car enthusiasts hate boy racers. But the book wouldn't have been such a success if it contained proper BDMS scenes because while some women fantasise about being overpowered there's not a huge amount who fantasise about being ball gagged, hog tied, whipped and left covered in bruises.

Well that's why I said it was a pretty accurate picture of that type of relationship, because the vast majority of BDSM isn't half as exciting as being ball gagged, hog tied whipped and left covered in bruises either. The vast majority of it is about the sexual enjoyment of power play (Domination/Discipline, Submission/Sadism and Masochism through Bondage), and that's why I like a lot of people wouldn't particularly get the whole ball gagging, hog tying, etc. It just doesn't appeal to a massive audience.

The taboo element though of any idea that goes against mainstream social thinking is what makes it appealing, which is why such fantasies are so popular, because they're things which normal people "just wouldn't do".

That's what makes them, dare I say it, exciting, to an audience that has already romanticised notions about being dominated, but they'd never actually want to be dominated because they immediately think 'humiliation'. The books allow them to explore their fantasies safely, without any of the downsides to BDSM.

namloc1980

YbFocus wrote: »

Its the best thing ever, my ex read them and they always set her mad!
I'd never give out if he wrote a few more!
It gives the ladies ideas

He???

UCDVet

Wibbs wrote: »

One theory has it that women are the the domesticators of humanity, particularly the male side, so quite the number of women, particularly young women are more generally drawn to the so called "bad boy". The need to "change" him is for the betterment of wider society. More to be seen among young women as they're around young men hyped up on testosterone goofballs who left to their own devices could cause trouble for the wider society. Makes some sense I suppose. Just look at mass murderers in prisons around the world. They get more fan mail from women, even marriage proposals than your average dude in the street. That's the major extreme of the process mind you.

That's really interesting - I'm surprised I haven't heard of this before.

Saralee4

Wibbs wrote: »

One theory has it that women are the the domesticators of humanity, particularly the male side, so quite the number of women, particularly young women are more generally drawn to the so called "bad boy". The need to "change" him is for the betterment of wider society. More to be seen among young women as they're around young men hyped up on testosterone goofballs who left to their own devices could cause trouble for the wider society. Makes some sense I suppose. Just look at mass murderers in prisons around the world. They get more fan mail from women, even marriage proposals than your average dude in the street. That's the major extreme of the process mind you.

So we're not nags at all! We're kind of like superheros trying to do good for society

One eyed Jack

Wibbs wrote: »

Just look at mass murderers in prisons around the world. They get more fan mail from women, even marriage proposals than your average dude in the street. That's the major extreme of the process mind you.

In fairness it's not like these men are going anywhere for a while, they're a... ahem, captive audience for these women... :rolleyes:

/gets orange jumpsuit

Saralee4 wrote: »

So we're not nags at all! We're kind of like superheros trying to do good for society

That's one way of looking at it I suppose

AndonHandon

Venus In Furs wrote: »

Bridesmaids isn't a good example as Annie doesn't treat Chris O'Dowd's character badly at all. She rejects him the night he wants to try and get closer to her, which is understandably humiliating for him - but then she feels terrible and spends the next good while running after him apologising... to which he is indifferent for a long time.
And then they end up together, and she tells the guy from Mad Men to **** off.

Really strange example to use.

Well it is strange if you interpret it the way you have chosen to.

Chris' character only has one role which is essentially to act as therapist for Annie. His character is never developed so we don't see what he is actually like but that isn't the point of him, he is only there to fan the flame of the main female character. There's nothing wrong with it but male characters do exist in movies who serve no other purpose than to guide the female lead through her emotionally fragile state into some sort of epiphany.

We can add a new movie called Wild to the mix (apparently utter tripe) which has not one male character fulfilling the role of enabling an emotionally disrupted woman to find herself again but have a whole host of these manic pixie dream boys.

fatknacker

It seems more men are getting their knickers in a twist over this book, than women.

Personally, I couldn't get passed the "inner goddess" shoite and had to abandon it in the early stages.

Pwindedd

I actually read all 3 of the books, despite the piss-poor writing and constant repetition - and I'm not sure why. I didn't find it particularly titilating and there was no real storyline to speak of, I guess it was just the done thing at the time. Everyone was talking about it, reading it etc. Perhaps it was not wanting to be thought a prude or the hope that it would give some kind of insight into that scene. It was frankly quite dull, but it was definitely "of the moment". I very much doubt I'll pay to watch the film.

If you want erotic literature there's loads of genuinely horny stuff available free online - where nothing seems to be taboo.

Or for an insight into the psyche of fantasies pick up any of Nancy Friday's books. Heck just close your eyes, think sexy thoughts and let your mind wander where it will. You'll surprise yourself, especially if you don't let guilt or shame get in the way.

One eyed Jack

Pwindedd wrote: »

I actually read all 3 of the books, despite the piss-poor writing and constant repetition - and I'm not sure why. I didn't find it particularly titilating and there was no real storyline to speak of, I guess it was just the done thing at the time. Everyone was talking about it, reading it etc. Perhaps it was not wanting to be thought a prude or the hope that it would give some kind of insight into that scene. It was frankly quite dull, but it was definitely "of the moment". I very much doubt I'll pay to watch the film.

If you want erotic literature there's loads of genuinely horny stuff available free online - where nothing seems to be taboo.

Or for an insight into the psyche of fantasies pick up any of Nancy Friday's books. Heck just close your eyes, think sexy thoughts and let your mind wander where it will. You'll surprise yourself, especially if you don't let guilt or shame get in the way.

Anyone else fancy a pot noodle about now?

TheBeardedLady

Can't tolerate **** writing so didn't go near it...but I'd be curious to have a look after all the hullabaloo made about it; I suppose many women felt like I do and read it.

strobe

Pwindedd wrote: »

Heck just close your eyes, think sexy thoughts and let your mind wander where it will.

It's a nice thought. But we're all a little too internetized for that I'm afraid Pwindedd. When we close our eyes now the only image that appears is a little spinning wheel of light with the word 'buffering...' written under it. So we re-open the laptop and are soothed of the pain of this uncomfortable fact by it's loving, sterile whitish blue light and effortless, instantaneous, brain spoon feeding and the saccharine sweet imagination bypass we have grown to depend on. :pac:

...

Pwindedd

strobe wrote: »

It's a nice thought. But we're all a little too internetized for that I'm afraid Pwindedd. When we close our eyes now the only image that appears is a little spinning wheel of light with the word 'buffering...' written under it. So we re-open the laptop and are soothed of the pain of this uncomfortable fact by it's loving, sterile whitish blue light and effortless, instantaneous, brain spoon feeding and the saccharine sweet imagination bypass we have grown to depend on. :pac:

...

I won't believe it - my inner goddess won't let me.