The hugely popular erotic novel “50 Shades of Grey” is quickly becoming universal water cooler conversation for women from all walks of life.
Everyone from so-called “mommy bloggers” to hardcore feminists is hailing the tome as a triumph for women, in spite of the book’s strong themes of female submission at the hands of a high-powered man.
They also say that men who feel differently should butt out.
Jill Filipovic, a blogger with Feministe.com and a contributor to the feminist anthology “Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and a World Without Rape,” told Fox411.com that because the book depicts a consensual relationship (Steele does sign that contract), she is unconcerned.
“I would say that there's nothing wrong with BDSM when it's fully consensual on both ends, both partners have relatively equal bargaining power, both partners feel comfortable setting boundaries, and boundaries are communicated and respected,” Filipovic wrote in an email. “I suspect it's getting extra press because of the BDSM angle (which freaks a lot of people out).”
While women are applauding the book, some men are expressing concern over whether women should be insulted by a plot dominated by a man who tells a woman when to sleep, eat, work out and even how to groom herself. Television host Dr. Drew Pinsky recently called the book a “rape fantasy” on his HLN show. Women writers laughed off Pinsky’s remarks, saying there is absolutely no reason for men to weigh in on this issue at all, and certainly no reason for them to use the term rape.
“Why is Dr. Drew speaking on behalf of the fantasies and desires of women, let alone women he hasn't even met?” Jessica Wakeman of the women’s blog The Frisky told Fox411.
“He and every other man should not be telling women what arousal is acceptable and what is not. That's pretty irresponsible. No one should be concerned about a consensual relationship between a submissive and a dominant. The realm of fantasy is just that — fantasy.
“In this book,” Wakeman continued, “the protagonist may be naive and young, but those qualities alone don't mean she isn't following her sexual desires in the bedroom. BDSM relationships could not be farther from domestic and sexual abuse: people who practice it follow the rules that everything they do will be safe, sane and consensual."
Journalist and author Paul LaRosa blogged that he thinks the success of the book proves that women want to be dominated by men.
“Is it possible that so many women dream of becoming the submissive partner of a dominant male partner which, after all, is the central plot of the book?” LaRosa posited.
Rachel Kramer Bussel, a former sex columnist and the editor of the Best Bondage Erotica 2012, explained to us that enjoying the fantasy of a dominant sexual relationship does not mean that a woman wants to be dominated by men in all aspects of her life.
“There's nothing wrong with a man being dominant and it doesn’t mean he's misogynist, any more than a woman wanting to be submissive in the bedroom means she wants to be submissive outside the bedroom. It's about consensually playing with power and eroticizing it in a safe environment,” Kramer Bussel told Fox411. “The success of ‘50 Shades’ shows that women are becoming more comfortable reading erotica and openly claiming that reading.”
Women across the country are quietly turning the independently-published, novel "Fifty Shades of Grey" into the next publishing sensation - with a little help from social media.
The novel by E.L. James is the first installment of an erotic trilogy about a woman named Anastasia Steele and her exploration of bondage, domination, sadism and masochism (BDSM) with billionaire Christian Grey.
What's remarkable about the book's popularity is its absence of a major publisher and marketing machine, not to mention a shortage of physical copies. The novel is published by Australian publishing house, The Writers Coffee Shop, and has mainly been consumed in digital form on e-book readers like the Kindle or Nook. "Fifty Shades of Grey" is currently No. 1 on the New York Times best-sellers list and No. 4 in the Kindle Store. According to the Toronto Star, the e-book sold 250,000 copies.
The Star also noted that Vintage Books, which is part of Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group and a subsidiary of Random House, won the publishing rights in a bidding war.
Vintage will run 750,000 paperback copies of the novel in coming weeks, according to the New York Times. If the buzz surrounding this book continues to swell, they may have to run additional copies.
"Initial buzz about 'Fifty Shades of Grey' started building on Goodreads as early as last summer and its phenomenally high average rating earned it a nomination for the Best Romance award in the 2011 Goodreads Choice Awards," Jessica Donaghy, features editor at Goodreads told CBS News via email. "The nomination in early November caused a spike in interest from members and the buzz kept growing as more people read the book and shared their reviews with their friends on Goodreads."
The author also helped kindle interest in the relatively unknown novel. ...
Do you have a dog-eared copy of Fifty Shades of Grey by your bedside?
If you are like thousands of other American women, you do. Fifty Shades of Grey is the first installment of a romantic trilogy penned by British author E.L. James. However, the book probably is unlike any other romantic novel you have ever read. Sure, there are sidelong glances, big muscles and tender kisses, but the book doesn’t only feature pleasure. It also features pain — that is, pain in the form of BDSM.
BDSM is short for sexual activities that include the combination of pain and pleasure. The acronym includes behavior such as bondage, discipline, domination, submission, and sadism and masochism. It has long been practiced in millions of bedrooms across the globe and the Kama Sutra even makes mention of erotic hitting, biting and pinching.
Despite this history, BDSM never has been a popular part of mainstream culture. So why has
Fifty Shades of Grey become a must-read for women everywhere? Consider the following:Women like being able to let go. The modern woman has a million things on her plate, and it can be incredibly hard for her to find time for sexual energy and sexual thoughts. Even when she is having sex, she might be thinking of work or errands. Enter
Fifty Shades of Grey. The heroine of the story is quite sexually inexperienced and even clumsy, but with her dominant lover, she has no choice but to lay back and submit to the ecstasy of pain. For most women, the idea of being swept away by a caring, dominant lover who knows exactly where to touch her can be very appealing. Essentially, he does all the work and she has all the fun!
Women still like being the “nice girl.” Even though it’s 2012 and we know that women have sexual needs and desires just like men do, we still live in a society that marginalizes women who enjoy sex. We shame women for being “whores” and “sluts” when they are open with their sexuality. Again, BDSM can help take away that shame and fear. If he is in charge and “making” her do all those taboo things, then she just gets swept away without having to take any responsibility. She still is a nice girl — just a nice girl with a very naughty lover. ...
A development in the ongoing story about PayPal and requirements it made on e-book distributors to remove certain kinds of erotica from their catalogs: there are signs the eBay-owned company could be preparing to reverse its position as early as this week, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
The digital rights group has been among those meeting with the payments company in recent weeks, as part of a process to get PayPal to reconsider its decision. The last meeting between the EFF and PayPal was on Friday, and its activism director, Rainey Reitman, told TechCrunch that she left with a “good feeling,” with PayPal’s general counsel indicating that they would be “discussing it internally and might even be able to make a public statement in the next week.”
The EFF, she notes, specifically has requested that PayPal “update their policy so that this type of legal fiction would not be affected.”
The news — or potential news — caps off a tumultuous few weeks for the payments company over its role in deciding what content is appropriate or not to sell via its payment system.
The story started in February, when PayPal issued a mandate to e-book distributors requiring them to remove from their catalogs erotica that contained references to bestiality, rape and incest — or else face a ban on doing business with PayPal. (I wrote about it early on here.)
Mark Coker, owner of one of the sites affected, Smashwords, disagreed with the mandate but also noted that his hands were tied with complying:
“It is with some reluctance that I have made the decision to prohibit incest-themed erotica at Smashwords,” he wrote at the time in an open letter to Smashwords’ partners.
That’s because PayPal plays such a big role in how the company is run: it’s used not only for book purchases, but it’s also how he pays authors, Coker told me today.
Coker also told me that in fact less than one percent, 1,000 books, of his company’s catalog were affected, but that such mandates on what is essentially legal fiction (even it’s not your own cup of tea) is a “slippery slope.”
And it turned out that the issue became a slippery slope in itself, with the news then getting picked up by Reuters, Forbes and a number of other blogs. The EFF, meanwhile, launched a letter-writing service to protest what it described as “holding free speech hostage by clamping down on sales of certain types of erotica.” ...
Apparently bereft over the season end of Downton Abbey, American women have set their sights on an erotic British novel, Fifty Shades of Grey, about a naive college student's seduction by a billionaire businessman and its accompanying graphic depictions of BDSM: "Uncoiling from the floor, rising lazily, like a jungle cat, he points the end of the riding crop at my navel, leisurely circling it — tantalizing me. At the touch of the leather, I quiver and gasp." But don't laugh—women are apparently excited enough to do it with their dudes after reading this!
While some women are raving about it (sample 5-star review on GoodReads: " Usually, I give 3 stars to all novels with erotic twist, but this one took me by suprise. First of all, all sex parts weren't pathetic with lots of dumb, sleazy words. And everything actually has a meaning and a story behind"), one Westchester woman told the Times, "What I found fascinating is that there are all these supermotivated, smart, educated women saying this was like the greatest thing they’ve ever read. I don’t get it. There’s a lot of violence, and this guy is abhorrent sometimes." Or as another GoodReads reviewer noted, "I don't know, this is like the BDSM version of Edward and Bella, and half of the time I don't know if I should be turned on or scared as hell. Probably both." And, yes, the book started as Twilight fan-fic.
The author, E.L. James, was unmasked by The Evening Standard as Erika Leonard, has referred to the book as her "mid-life crisis." Indeed: One UES mother of three told the Post, "It’s just a fun escape from the daily mundane of trudging kids around and, you know, marriage... The person who recommended it to me said, ‘It will make you want to have sex with your husband.’ And it did!"
It looks like U.S. District Judge Geoge H. King, who presided over the Ira Isaacs obscenity case in Los Angeles, may have been right to worry about jury nullification. "After less than three hours of deliberation" on Monday, AVN correspondent Mark Kernes reports, "one juror reportedly sent a note to Judge King charging that one of the other jurors had said that he/she did not believe in the obscenity laws." The judge then called the jurors into the courtroom, adminished them that "it was their sworn duty to follow the law as he had given it to them," and sent them back to deliberate some more. They adjourned at 2 p.m., and shortly after they resumed the next morning they sent King another note saying they could not reach a verdict, which was still the case even after King resorted to the "nearly unheard-of" measure of instructing the defense and prosecution to reprise their closing arguments. Convinced that the jurors had reached an irresolvable impasse, King dismissed them and declared a mistrial.
Isaacs, who said he had spoken to one of the jurors, told Kernes there were two holdouts, both women. "She basically said that her and another juror thought that this was art, serious art, and had artistic value, and should not be found obscene," the self-described "shock artist" said. At first, Isaacs said, 11 jurors were inclined to convict, but later one of them "changed her mind and said, 'You know, I do think it has artistic value, and there's reasonable doubt that they proved their case.'"
Those two jurors may very well have drawn that conclusion, but it is also the sort of thing you would say if you "did not believe in the obscenity laws" but wanted to avoid giving the impression that you were willfully ignoring the judge's instructions. Jurors, after all, are supposed to judge the facts, not the law (or so judges typically claim nowadays, ignoring a venerable tradition to the contrary). This case, however, did not really hinge on facts, since no one disputed Isaacs' involvement in producing or distributing the four films at issue (Mako's First Time Scat, Hollywood Scat Amateurs 7 and 10, and Japanese Doggie 3 Way). Instead, as the Supreme Court decreed in Miller v. California, it hinged on utterly subjective answers to these three questions:
a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Let's leave aside imponderables such as "the average person," "community standards," and patent offensiveness. Isaacs' movies, which feature scatology and bestiality, are—what's the legal term again? Oh yeah: really gross. They were so gross that the jurors had trouble watching them, which makes you wonder how they could assess them "taken as a whole." In any case, it seems fair to assume that Isaacs, who faced a possible sentence of 20 years, would have been a goner were it not for that third prong, which is what he and his lawyer emphasized: serious artistic value, a "fact" that supposedly can be determined by 12 randomly selected people. ...
A former sex slave turned the tables on her tormentor in a Brooklyn court Monday, delivering a verbal lashing before a judge sentenced him to eight years in prison.
“I walk around and carry the physical scars of the torture you put me through. The cigarette burns, the knife carvings, the piercings,” the woman, referred to in court simply as Jodi, told Glenn Marcus.
“How a human being can see humor in the torture, manipulation and brainwashing of another human being is beyond comprehension. You have given me a life sentence.”
Marcus, 58, had appealed his sex trafficking and forced labor conviction all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which sent the case back to Brooklyn for resentencing.
Facing more than 20 years for torturing Jodi after she tried to break off their master-slave relationship, Marcus asked for a nonjail sentence so he could care for his elderly mother in their suburban Long Island home.
Marcus appeared bored — and his adult daughter snickered audibly in the gallery — as Jodi described needing counseling for depression, panic attacks and posttraumatic stress disorder.
“I suffer from nightmares in which I wake up reliving the horror of what you did to me,” Jodi said through a speakerphone in Brooklyn Federal Judge Allyne Ross’ courtroom.
“You, Glenn Marcus, have single-handedly destroyed my life; your self-centeredness, your hatred and extreme violence toward women has impacted my life.”
Jodi later told the Daily News she had been eager to confront Marcus in person, but an ear infection barred her from flying in from her new home out of state.
“He has no remorse, no regret and no sympathy. That’s who he is,” she said. “I don’t think he’ll ever change.” Told that the Svengali she met on the Internet in 1998 wore a yarmulke to court for the first time Monday, Jodi chuckled. “That makes me laugh,” she said.
She used to call Marcus “God” — he called her “It” — but now, she says, she sees him as “evil personified.” After they met, they played consensual games until the summer of 2001, when she tried to leave and he unleashed horrible violence on her in the basement of a friend's house in Hewlett, L.I.
During the 2007 trial, Jodi testified he went medieval on her: he hogtied her and suspended her from a ceiling pipe, pierced her tongue with a surgical needle, whipped her and left her hanging for hours. ...
LOS ANGELES (AP) — The case of an adult film producer charged with violating federal obscenity laws by selling movies depicting bestiality and extreme fetishes ended in a mistrial Tuesday.
Jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict against Ira Isaacs, voting 10-2 in favor of a conviction on 10 counts, including production and transportation of obscene material for sale, said defense attorney Roger Diamond.
Laura Sweeney, a spokeswoman with the U.S. Department of Justice whose prosecutors handled the case in Los Angeles, declined comment.
If convicted of all counts, Isaacs could have faced up to 20 years in prison. A retrial was set for April 24.
Isaacs was indicted several years ago as part of an effort by a Bush administration task force to crack down on smut in the United States. The unit has since been disbanded.
Isaacs' 2008 trial was halted after the Los Angeles Times reported Alex Kozinski, chief judge of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals who oversaw the proceedings, had sexually explicit material on a personal website.
Kozinski recused himself and was admonished by a special committee of his colleagues for actions they deemed as poor judgment.
Kozinski was presiding in the criminal case under a program in which appellate judges are assigned federal trials.
At issue was whether the videos sold by Isaacs were obscene. The test still hinges on a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that held that a work is not legally obscene if it has "literary, artistic, political or scientific value."
Jurors also were asked to decide whether the videos, some of which depicted fetishes involving feces, violated standards of what is acceptable to the community at large.
Isaacs has maintained his work is an extreme but constitutionally protected form of art.
"This is a monumental waste of money," Diamond said of the court proceedings.
Prosecutors will keep seeking a conviction because "they are catering to the right wing that doesn't like gay rights or sexual freedoms," Diamond claimed. "We think this is a victory."