hot take: if you criticize fifty shades of grey and don’t criticize mainstream video porn you probably need to think about why because a lot of the time the answer is MISOGYNY
“it depicts abuse and rape as sexy!” so does mainstream video porn
“it has crappy attitudes about women” so does mainstream video porn
“it spreads inaccurate information about BDSM” so does mainstream video porn
“people might take it as sex ed and have unsafe sex” they might do that about mainstream video porn too
But FSoG has bad writin… oh.
But FSoG is widely popula… hm.
The one defense I can make is that FSoG is far more popular and widely known than any one mainstream porn video.
Also, its writing is bad in a funny and sort of interesting way, whereas most porn only has like three lines of dialogue before they drop the “story” and just go into their routine. It’s harder to write commentary on that. There’s no “inner goddess,” no terrible Seattle geography, no excruciatingly awkward dinner parties.
Anyway, maybe I’ll do a shot-by-shot in-depth critique of “Redhead Has A BIG Surprise For Her NOT Brother!!!” one of these days. :p
Cliff, you are definitely not one of the people I’m annoyed at! You have written criticisms of mainstream porn! And also I’m pretty sure if someone was like “for some reason I just really get off on a personalityless character not enjoying BDSM done to her by a creepily abusive billionaire” you would be like “well, uh, your kink is not my kink but your kink is okay.”
*defensive shields retract*
And yeah, it’s true, I’d stand 100% behind anyone who spelled it out that frankly. My issue is when people say “I get off on how good he is to her” and then show me a book where that is plainly not what is happening.
I do kinda think it would be funny to produce one of those half-hour ultra-insightful film-analysis video essays about a porn video, but I’m not sure I want it enough to actually do all of the steps required to make that happen.
Published
We all are stardust 