Katie Holmes and 50 Shades of Grey

 

Katie Holmes and E L James.

What do they have in common?

Both female, both in the news; although you may be forgiven for not knowing for certain, the gender of the latter.

It makes my blood boil that in 2012 women still feel it necessary to use initials. It’s okay, we have the vote!

Let us be clear. Non consensual sex has another name.

I don’t hold anything against S and M, bondage etc.  I read novels and non-fiction books about violence against women and men but does this latest fictional phenomenon blur the lines?

Pamela Stephenson-Connolly in The Guardian.

Fifty Shades of Grey is bad for bondage

These novels are wrong to demonise people whose erotic style embraces bondage, domination and sadomasochism

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/shortcuts/2012/jul/08/fifty-shades-grey-bad-bondage

I remember Mariella Fostrop refused to review Stieg Larsson’s books. I have only read the first one but I didn’t feel that by portraying the abuse handed out to the female protagonist, he actually endorsed the behaviour. Surely that’s the difference?

Mutually beneficial sex/role play? Yep, bring it on, but is 50 shades of Grey merely Mills and Boon with submissive sex?

Are we STILL stuck in the – you Tarzan, me Jane scenario? Or was it the other way round?

As much as I love living in France, as far as I am aware (please correct me, if you know different) there is still something known as, crime passionnel. In the UK we call it domestic violence/abuse.

I sometimes wonder which century we are living in.

Only recently, French women made a protest about inequality by wearing beards. Bizarrely, the word for beard is LA barbe.

So, am I missing the point with 50 shades? Is it just harmless titillation? Okay, I suppose I will have to read the damn thing. How I hate it when people copycat reviews, leaving the book in question blatantly unread.

I did read the free bit on Amazon and I was seriously bored.  The little I read was, in my opinion, definitely a Mills and Boon by a fourteen year old.

Apparently I write and think like a man so maybe this gives me a different perspective.

 

Katie Holmes, however, has freed herself from her restraints.

I still think of her as the sensitive, shy Joey, but that’s my problem. Life is not imitating art.

If the little facts we read -and I’m not being sarcastic here, a lot of it is repeated and speculation – are true then Katie has won, freedom for Suri and Scientology.

But let’s face it, with a choice between your six year old daughter, showing signs of great insecurity, (it’s not usual for a six year old to be carried is it?) or am I taking the media coverage out of context; and exploring an extremely powerful religion. What would you do?

Exactly

So Scientology remains behind closed doors or does it?

 

I have a choice of reading matter at the moment.

Dianetics by L. Ron Hubbard or Fifty shades of Grey by E L  James.

I remember being intrigued by Dianetics many years ago, hence I have a copy but I had to stop reading when I got to the chapter on blatant homophobia and I quote:

 

“One of the psychosomatic illnesses one would least expect to find as a psychosomatic affair is the illness of sexual perversion.

The sexual pervert (and by this term Dianetics, to be brief, include any and all forms of deviation in dynamic two such as homosexuality, lesbianism, sexual sadism, etc and all down the catalog of Ellis and Krafft-Ebing) is actually quite ill psychically.”

“….And the sum of it is that the pervert is always a very ill person in one way or another, whether he be conscious of it or not. He is very far from culpable for his condition, but he is also so far from normal and so extremely dangerous to society that the tolerance of perversion is as thoroughly bad for society as punishment for it.”

Pages 149-150 Dianetics. Ron L Hubbard. New Era publications 1997.*

 

So at least we know why Tom Cruise can never be gay, his religion would not allow it.

There is an awful lot about Tom Cruise’s childhood that explains his need for structure in his life.

You say structure, I say crutch.

 

Someone once asked me what my crutch was? I thought for a moment, glancing at my lap, but no, they were referring to the fact that I don’t smoke, drink, (once in a blue moon) or take drugs. Plus they knew I didn’t espouse to any form of religion.

So what do I lean on? Well, it has to be books and the constant desire to learn what the heck is the point of planet earth and humanoids etc? I guess once you realise we are all going to die someday…nothing matters! That certainly takes the pressure off.

Also I have looked after a lot of alcoholics. I know some people have a predisposition towards addiction but sometimes it’s too late when you find out. For me, being as self sufficient as possible gives me, almost, all I need.

 

Katie, however seems to have suffered from the hero/ine worship that so affects teenage girls and boys.

My bedroom wall when I was aged 15, was adorned with the Walker Brothers and Scott Engel to be precise, but I was never deluded (sorry Katie, I am on your side,) enough to want to marry my prince.

 

Scott Engel. His real name. Did I aspire to marry him one day?

Note to self: check diaries, I might be lying.

 

So I applaud Katie Holmes’ decision, the immaculate planning and execution and just hope one nanny and two bodyguards cannot be swayed when faced with Tom Cruise’s entourage when visiting with his daughter…

What a choice to have to make. Supervised visitation of your own child or succumbing to a religion that has more questions than answers and deems the likes of Stephen Fry, a danger to society?!

He is away in Uganda at the moment doing a documentary on…yes…

America, next, Stephen?

*Is there an updated version of Dianetics with a different standpoint? That would be good to know.

 

And if any of you think I have led a sheltered life; probably doesn’t have a good sex life etc. Think again. My current book has sex in it. The kind that is fun for all involved but my next book, Mature, educated, healing hands, can travel. (available soon) has lots of sex but all of it is consensual. You can have BDSM, safely.

 

There have been enough Katies and Anas in this world already.

Surely the 21st century can reflect that?

After writing this and about to post, I came across Sophie Hannah’s blog. I can see what she is saying. For example, Stephen King writes horror but he is not a horrible person and the majority of readers will not act on his scenarios.

But my point is this. Just what in the world do we aspire to, if we are still enthralled rather than appalled by control of one person over another, instead of finding equilibrium and pleasure.

 

I will have to read both books to the end before I can comment further.

Anyone know how to speed read?

3 Responses to “Katie Holmes and 50 Shades of Grey”

  1. JaneneReichertMurphy

    Sigh. I’m with you. I must admit, I don’t really have a desire to read 50 Shades of Grey. But most of my friends have read it. Most of their reviews are lukewarm, but they do say it has (ahem) opened their eyes. So I’ll probably read it just to see what it’s about. Still, I”m with you. Do we really need this to be the standout book read for women? I’ve read two of the Girl with a Dragon Tattoo books. They were both riveting, page turners. But there were times I just wanted to throw the book down because the sex just seemed so dang gratuitous. It’s not in there much but, quite frankly, it didn’t need to be there at all. I hate when you can tell that an author is purposely trying to titilate you.
     
    As for Katie Holmes — good for her! We all know that there’s something very fishy about Tom and Scientology. That whole religion is scary but, like you, I really feel I need to learn more about it to really make a better judgement call.
     
    Looks like I’ve got two books to read, as well. Thanks for adding to my ‘must-read’ list, Helen!! 🙂

    Reply
    • HelenDucal

      [email protected] Thanks for your comments, Janene. Oh and get the Dianetics book out of the library, don’t give ‘them’ anymore money!  It was the ‘all gays are psychically sick, oh and dangerous…’ that really got me. Grrr.
       

      Reply

Leave a Reply

*