Is there anyone here looking forward to seeing "50 Shades of Grey?"

1. 0

   Stevennix2001posted 9 years ago

   
   I know the film comes out next year, and I'm going to have to see it anyway, so i can review it on this site.  However, I want to know how many of you are  actually looking forward to seeing it?  And why are you so happy to see it?  That's what I'm curious about.

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Sed-meposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Just curious if you expect to have any response from males.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Stevennix2001posted 9 years agoin reply to this

         I'm expecting to see replies from both genders missy.  XD

         replyreport
         1. 79

            Sed-meposted 9 years agoin reply to this

            I will be monitoring. lol

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Stevennix2001posted 9 years agoin reply to this

               

               replyreport
      2. 89

         GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

         Here is a male response... I am surprised the the book's, (and soon the movie's) fame hasn't garnered more criticism. The books are just pulp porn.
         
         Folks can redefine normal all they want, and if they succeed, they are welcome to it. But this old curmudgeon sees the the concept as a negative reflection on both sides of the equation.
         
         Of course I understand there are kinks that get off on domination/submission, bondage, et al. but to glorify it...
         
         Nope, not my cup of tea, and folks who do like that flavor have some serious issues, (just as those that enjoy watching it) - in my book.
         
         Least you think I am a total prude... I will have you know I once had sex with the lights on!
         
         Just sayin'
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 63

            healinghands1668posted 9 years agoin reply to this

            I have no problem with anyone getting off on BDSM or anything like that. Not my cup of tea, but how other people like their sex is not my business. What I object to is how the BDSM lifestyle is portrayed in that book. It is not glorified. It is not even portrayed accurately. I once researched the lifestyle for a story I was writing, and the mantra that kept coming up was "safe, sane, and consensual." From what I understand of the book, it follows NONE of these BDSM rules. What 50 Shades actually glorifies is rape.

            replyreport
            1. 71

               Aime Fposted 9 years agoin reply to this

               I agree that it doesn't accurately portray BDSM but I'm not sure I'd say it glorifies rape, either. It's just sort of a weird and mixed up power thing that the author has imagined up. She also has Grey as a sadist which is totally facepalm worthy.

               replyreport
               1. 63

                  healinghands1668posted 9 years agoin reply to this

                  The passages I have read appear to remove consent. Sex without consent is rape.

                  replyreport
                  1. 71

                     Aime Fposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                     I can see how they might appear that way when taken out of context, but if you actually read the book from the beginning (not that I'm recommending it), she is consenting. There's this huge element of her being inexperienced and thus 'vulnerable' so a lot of the passages are written as though she was totally helpless, but that's down to the horrible writing.

                     replyreport
            2. 89

               GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

               It is obvious we have different perspectives. In my mind I can find no acceptance for the practice of domination or submission, or gratification from bondage. Sexual, or otherwise.
               
               I will refrain from going to the extreme comparisons that are vile to most normal people, and simply say that I find a deficit in a mind that requires either of the above for pleasure. To me the outlet may be sexual, but the feelings/needs are an indication of something wrong  much deeper.
               
               Do you really think the "BDSM" aspect is only in one's sexual preferences? Don't you think it says a little bit more about that person's life-view?
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 71

                  Aime Fposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                  That's a really outdated train of thought. Actual studies including people who take interest in BDSM show no notable difference in their mental health or 'normalcy'.
                  
                  And yes, I think fetishes are normal. They're pretty common. I would only call it abnormal if it interfered with general functioning or ability to maintain relationships.
                  
                  There are obviously fetishes that would be considered more normal than others. Sticking a bottle rocket up your butt while someone jerks you off probably isn't at the top of the list, but the psychology behind it (forming associations) sort of comes from the same place, so....

                  replyreport
                  1. 89

                     GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                     Did you miss the point that we obviously have different perspectives?
                     
                     My life perspective does not include what you intimate is "not a problem" behavior.
                     
                     I am perfectly happy with my perspective of normal. As you appear to be with yours. Your "acceptance" is not rational to me. My "degrees" aren't even on the scale of yours. Asphyxiation sex is a known practice. Is that OK with you too? Are we arguing over price because the determination of prostitution has already been agreed upon?
                     
                     [EDIT] Oops... I forgot to address your "outdated" point. So here is my answer... Outdated? Really? Right or wrong are no longer absolutes, but are instead defined by current circumstances? Nope. Not in my world. But that does not mean you are not welcome to yours. Just don't think your perspective is the reality of the rest of us.
                     
                     Beat a women, handcuff her, treat her as a victim... your world is so demeaning and the fact that you can see it as not affecting the rest of said person's life is just plain nuts.
                     
                     Macho man can do that stuff because that is how he gets off as a man is normal in your world - damn glad your world isn't mine.
                     
                     GA

                     replyreport
         2. 71

            Aime Fposted 9 years agoin reply to this

            Serious issues? Like what?
            
            BDSM is actually pretty 'normal' if you venture into the big wide world of fetishes...

            replyreport
            1. 89

               GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

               Holy Cow! You want to combine "normal" and "world of fetishes" in the same sentence?
               
               Are you trying to say fetishes are normal?
               
               Next you will say sticking a bottle rocket in my butt while a pretty girl strokes me is "just another way to get off" - no problem right?
               
               Boy, did I make a mistake bring my "normal" self into this thread.
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Stevennix2001posted 9 years agoin reply to this

                  It really depends on how you want to define fetish though.  Technically speaking almost everyone has a fetish.  Some guys might like girls with enormous breasts, and you could say they have a boob fetish.  If guys like women's butts, then you could say they have an a** fetish.  If guys find women's feet attractive, then you can say they have a foot fetish, and etc.  Anyway, you get my point.
                  
                  I tend to think everyone has a sexual fetish of some kind (even you), but some fetishes are just more kinkier than others.  Granted, I'm not a shrink or anything, but that's my opinion on this whole thing.

                  replyreport
                  1. 79

                     Sed-meposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                     I think preferences are different than fetishes. What do you think Steven?

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Stevennix2001posted 9 years agoin reply to this

                        Hmm, I guess I stand corrected then.  Although I still say that everyone has a fetish of some kind even if they're not aware of it consciously.  I just tend to think some fetishes are more kinkier than others.  Again, it's just my opinion.

                        replyreport
                  2. 71

                     Aime Fposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                     Generally speaking a fetish would be something that isn't usually regarded as being sexual, so I think I'd say boobs/ass would be a preference rather than a fetish.
                     
                     But, even still, I do agree that fetishes are more common than people seem to think.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Stevennix2001posted 9 years agoin reply to this

                        Really?  Then why do people say that whenever a guy finds a woman's feet the most attractive part of their body that they get labeled as having a foot fetish?  I'm only asking because I remember seeing that once in an episode of "King of the Hill", so that's why I thought that way.  However, it's shame on me though, as I of all people should know better than taking facts from a tv show and/or film.

                        replyreport
                        1. 79

                           Sed-meposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                           Haha. I remember that episode. Weird.

                           replyreport
                        2. 71

                           Aime Fposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                           Because feet aren't usually regarded as being sexual. Maybe if people were more accepting of fetishes, 80% of the population would come out and say they find feet sexy in some way... who knows! But for now I think the 'regular' sexual body parts are exclusive to penis, vagina, breasts, butt, mouth. Anything outside of those would probably be considered a fetish.
                           
                           And then there are a whole bunch of fetishes outside of body parts as well.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              Stevennix2001posted 9 years agoin reply to this

                              That's true.  I'm well aware that there are fetishes outside of body parts.  Granted, I'm not going to say that I've heard of all of them, but I have heard of quite a few in my life.  Some of which I can't mention on this site because I'll get banned for bringing them up.   
                              
                              To be honest, even if I wasn't planning on reviewing the film, I would still be curious to see see what the big deal is.  I've never read the book, but it sounds like one of those graphic erotic novels from what people have told me about it.  And if that being the case, then how the hell do you tone something like that down to "R-rating" because from what it sounds like, it sounds like a story that could easily be NC-17 instead.  I doubt it will be NC-17 though because that would be the kiss of death for the film itself, so I think more than likely it'll just get a hard "R" rating, and then get an unrated DVD/Blue Ray release later.  I could be wrong ,but that's just me.

                              replyreport
                  3. 89

                     GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

                     And I think you make a valid point. So, regarding this BDSM stuff, are we talking degrees of fetishes, or is it inaccurate to call it a fetish?
                     
                     I think I will go with a description of it as a fetish as being wrong.
                     
                     GA

                     replyreport
         3. 79

            Sed-meposted 9 years agoin reply to this

            You cad!

            replyreport
2. 78

   Kathryn L Hillposted 9 years ago

   Yes, I will see it. So I don't have to read the book. Very curious to see what the big deal is. I have no idea. I wouldn't be caught dead reading such a book. I will be in disguise going to the theater. Hope it's worth the effort.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Right! And what would you honestly if your friends weren't looking?
      .
      GA

      replyreport
   2. 85

      rebekahELLEposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      LOL, let us know if you watch the entire movie or walk out. 
      
      I only read part of the first book and put it down, (well, it's still on my Kindle).  The writing is so juvenile and repetitive that it lost my interest.  The movie sounds like it has a decent soundtrack.  Jamie Dornan is kind of hot..  but I probably won't go to the theater to see it.

      replyreport
3. 63

   healinghands1668posted 9 years ago

   I want to forget that book exists

   replyreport
4. 71

   Aime Fposted 9 years ago

   I pretty much just want to see if it manages to be worse than the book somehow.
   
   No idea what all the hype was about, it was not even remotely sexy. Which kind of leads me to believe that a lot of people are having pretty bland sex. Or I'm just a pervert. Either way, I ended up skipping the sex parts because it was repetitive and boring. Then again, that sort of describes the entire book.
   
   The guy is cute, though, so I'm slightly intrigued. Maybe things will be racier on screen.

   replyreport
5. 71

   Aime Fposted 9 years ago

   I said that train of thought was outdated because it used to be a common consensus that BDSM signified problems or maladjustment, but now that people are actually researching the psychology of it, they are coming to a totally different conclusion. I thought that perhaps you might be interested in hearing that but clearly you have made up your mind and no amount of pesky research is going to open it.
   
   That's okay. You are definitely entitled to your opinion. I thought we were having a discussion but clearly you're not interested in anything other than insulting people with sexual preferences that perplex you, so I guess we're done here.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Yep, we're done.
      
      GA

      replyreport
6. 79

   Sed-meposted 9 years ago

   I wondered what name she was gonna use.

   replyreport
7. 71

   Aime Fposted 9 years ago

   Want to talk about something else? I hate to leave on a bad note with someone that has a hub all about giraffes! I actually go through animal noises with my daughter all the time and she always asks what sound a giraffe makes and I have no idea. I think I'll go with the hissing.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      GA Andersonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks for your concern about our parting, and for taking the time to check out my profile and hubs. You need not be concerned. We simply have different perspectives and world views on this issue. We are not parting on bad terms, just agreeing that further discussion on this topic would be pointless for both of us.
      
      GA

      replyreport
8. 54

   Shinkickerposted 9 years ago

   'Secretary' has already done it.
   Maggie Gyllenhal & James Spader

   replyreport
9. 0

   Stevennix2001posted 9 years ago

   Only two weeks away from the release of fifty shades of grey people.  anyone here already pre ordering their tickets on fandango or something? 

   replyreport
10. 93

    FatFreddysCatposted 9 years ago

    I'm not particularly interested but my wife wants to see it... and hey, if it gets her motor runnin' then I'm all for it.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Stevennix2001posted 9 years agoin reply to this

       

       replyreport
11. 56

    Stormy-Weatherposted 9 years ago

    I thought the same thing, rebekahELLE! That author is SO repetitive that I could barely stand to read it. I had to finish the first, but I just couldn't continue. But. . .  you know .  .  . I'll maybe, probably, most definitely see the movie. Ha ha.

    replyreport
12. 56

    Stormy-Weatherposted 9 years ago

    It was a self published author, wasn't it? Good for them, geesh.

    replyreport