A grayer shade of confusion

There seems to be some confusion about what is being criticized about the book and movie previously mentioned. Some people feel the criticism is aimed at the idea of sexual fantasy. I am not sure about all criticisms, but not mine. I will say there is a distinct concern about any sexual deviancy, but fantasy is something else.

I think clarifying a bit is important. And maybe I should stress it may take a bit of reading in between the lines to understand my points. The book glamorizes a rich person developing control over another person. Do we want to accept this concept as something we want to romanticize? We have enough issues about control in our world. Why should we accept and popularize this kind of dominance of one human over another?

I do not know what the author’s intent was in writing the book. Was it to play a sexual fantasy and created this situation to use as the vehicle? Did the author understand this manipulation is dangerous and that some people already struggle with self-esteem and this glamorization can only reinforce how others manipulate them?

As a society we want to move forward, but how do we define what is moving forward? If we think that stretching the bars of public acceptance of sexual fantasy is moving forward, what does that say about us? What is more important? I think it is how we treat ourselves and others. Some to many liberals or critics of the criticisms seem to think social acceptance is important to these types of issues. I can agree to the point that an evolved society can define what is acceptable in private moments. And we should bring forward these discussions so as a society we can define or explain what is fantasy versus what maybe sexual deviancy.

The more important issue to me is how this is presented. In the context of the book, and I agree it is subtle and some reading in between the lines needs to be done, I see some concern as to how this plays out in their relationship, or better yet lack of relationship. This control then leads to more frightening aspects of what might fall under this umbrella of thinking.

We have enough problems with domestic violence, human sex trafficking, and even political manipulation that we need to look at the underlying message, whether intended by the author or not, that just because someone is rich or good looking or has other aspects of power that we should not lose our dignity and let them use these superficial aspects to manipulate our lives. It is more important to spend time teaching our children about self-respect, than as adults accepting this into our popular culture.

Or to put this thought into a trite phrase:

It is not cool to lose our cool to someone we think is cool.