Fifty shades of what, exactly...?

Never before have I pushed the doors to exit the screen with such a sense of deflation.  I was not angry.  I hadn't taken any expectations in with me.  Other than to be entertained.

Seems reasonable; given the ticket price.  No one forced me to go.  And fewer still had encouraged me.  But go, I felt I must. So I went.  We couldn't get tickets for the 1:15pm showing at the most local Picturehouse.  So we went a little further afield...

...And took our seats in time for the numerous adverts, and then the trailers for The Duke of Burgundy (which, now, looks rather interesting), Still Alice (which I've been looking forward to seeing since I first learnt about it) and The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (which will, with that stellar cast, surely be brilliant).

Having been reminded that there are membership options more than once, the title and the BBFC's classification finally made an appearance.

'Strong sex and nudity' were promised.  

What followed can, at best, be described as a frankly rather dull film which lacked a script and included some scenes that were, at best, BDSM-inspired (rather than informed).

As a therapist with a special interest in working with clients who identify themselves as having preferences of a flavour other than vanilla, the film shocked me, but not in the way it sought to.

I left the auditorium disappointed by the woefully inadequate research which can only have been cursory, and the resultant messages which were so wildly inaccurate as to be misleading, and possibly very unhelpful.

That the film has outraged campaigners for victims of domestic abuse is a separate issue, worthy of comment, elsewhere.  My primary sensibility is that James' (likely blockbuster) movie (and, I can only assume, her written trilogy) sends out some powerful statements to an unsuspecting (and, I suspect not terribly kink-aware) audience as to what BDSM comprises and how it is practised which do not, I think, do justice to a variety of erotic practices the author clearly knows so little about.

‘Most people find it difficult to grasp that whatever they like to do sexually will be thoroughly repulsive to someone else, and that whatever repels them sexually will be the most treasured delight of someone, somewhere…  Most people mistake their sexual preferences for a universal system that will or should work for everyone.’ 

Gayle Rubin (author of Deviations)

BDSM has been described as one of the most demonised forms of consensual sexuality.  BDSM stands for bondage and discipline, domination and submission, and sadomasochism (something I would hazard was known to only a minority of those clutching their overpriced popcorn on St. Valentine's afternoon).

My profession gets it very wrong too often already, and not helped by the suggestion implicit within the Fifty Shades plot (which might be rather generous description of the meanderings that occurred for 125 minutes) - that those who practise BDSM do so because they are, in some way, not 'normal' and, more problematic still, the suggestion that this be due to some (childhood) trauma.  

Society finds BDSM troubling, and in some quarters, threatening.  In my experience of supporting queer identified clients, alternative sexualities trouble the binaries that society seeks to impose, rather than their practitioners.

To my mind, the danger this film presents is untold:  in an era where we are moving away from the pathologies of the paraphilia diagnoses, at something only a little quicker than the pace of a snail, Fifty Shades does nothing to enhance awareness - in fact, it runs the risk of cultivating yet more misconception and prejudice based on fearful ignorance.  

BDSM is a term used to encompass various activities. These generally involve the exchange of some form of power or pain, often, but not exclusively, in a sexual context.  It can be difficult for those unfamiliar with such practices to conceptualise what is meant by ‘power’ and ‘pain’ in this context and to understand how they might be experienced positively by anyone.  Herein lies a significant problem with the film...

What E. L. James sensationalist (rather than sensational) portrayal omits is the important truth that a degree of power or pain exchange is common in many people’s sexual practices.  Here, I could, (but won't) list a number of examples that many so-called 'normals' would, and do, engage in - because both parties find this desirable and exciting. 

BDSM codifies such practices more explicitly and uses terminology such as ‘power’ or ‘pain’ exchange in negotiation between partners, so that there is a shared understanding.  The film attempted to portray this in the (somewhat comically negotiated) 'Contract' that was, in fact, never signed.

Some people regard BDSM as an integral part of their sexual identity, whilst others view it more as an activity they practice.  This simply mirrors most sexual identities and means that, while it is possible to make some general comments, it is important to remain aware that BDSM is a wide, umbrella term for a type of dynamic and/or identity that is also subject to modification by the other groupings within which individuals find themselves (where identities intersect). 

Contrary to fears a movie such as this might conjure up, BDSM generally results in far less severe injuries than sports such as boxing and football, and BDSMers do not frequent A & E any more than anyone else.  However, whilst boxers are seen as ‘sane’ and consenting under the law, BDSMers are not. 

BDSM is also still pathologised in the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV-TR)iii, with sexual sadism and masochism being listed as ‘paraphilias’ (302.83, 302.84).  These definitions are inherently problematic because they equate BDSM with non-consensual ‘disorders’ (paedophilia, voyeurism) and suggest that BDSMers are more psychologically unhealthy than others, despite the absence of any empirical evidence to support this. 

So, my outrage on leaving the cinema was not that E. L. James had in any way shocked my senses.  My upset stems from the fact that she has (whilst making millions) done very little other than to reinforce the existing pathologising taboos.

The clients I see whose sexualities do not neatly fit within society's window of tolerance might best be classified (as Chess Denman has, in Sexuality: A Biopsychosocial Approach) as 'transgressive':  their practices fall outside out current cultural comfort zone.  They may well be accepted in other times and places, as there is nothing inherently harmful about them. Coercive sexualities are something else, and involve some degree of coercion or force: they are non-consensual.

No one has the right to pathologise transgressive sexualities from which people gain pleasure and happiness.  It is coercive sexuality that falls within the remit of the criminal-legal systems, along with other acts of violence and abuse.

50 Shades may have succeeded in bringing BDSM to a far larger audience, and to far greater popular attention, than any previous media product.  The token references to BDSM included a contract, safe-words, and a checklist of activities, together with several conversations between the lead characters which seemed to centre upon consent.

However, the portrayal of the communication that takes place between the characters about what Ana desires is not only lacking any merit from a script perspective, but generally poor, and Christian frequently violates arrangements within the relationship more broadly, by controlling Ana and her life, when she has explicitly asked him not to do so. 

And this is where the domestic abuse campaigners and I are in agreement:  the film is problematic.  It does a great disservice to the BDSM community by giving insufficient insight into the communication and consent central to BDSM relationships.

Were it not for the soundtrack and the airborne scenes, I would have been tempted to ask for my money back.  

Basic BDSM Glossary (by Wiseman, SM 101: A Realistic Introduction):

Aftercare – The period after a BDSM scene when the top looks after the bottom, bringing them up from any submissive headspace, and often praising them in general and in relation to the scene they have endured. For some this is almost more important than the scene itself. 

Bondage – Restraining/restricting someone.

Bottom – Slang term for a submissive/masochists, but generally meaning a person who enjoys being given various physical sensations as opposed to a ‘submissive’ who enjoys being controlled psychologically. 

Discipline – Training someone to behave in a certain way through punishment. 

Dominant (dom/domme/dominatrix/master/mistress) - Person who takes control over others.

Head space – State of mind somebody goes into during BDSM play (e.g. submissive/dominant headspace). Not all BDSMers talk in these terms. 

Kinky – General term for BDSM, fetish or non-vanilla sexual behaviour or people engaging in this. 

Play – Engaging in BDSM.

Safeword – A word that players can use to end the scene if it stops working for them. 

Scene – A BDSM encounter/session, sometimes divided into heavier/lighter scenes depending on physical and/or psychological intensity, although what constitutes this differs between people/occasions. 

Sensation Play – A term often used to describe play that involves physical stimulation, which may be pleasurable, painful or both. 

Submissive (sub/slave) – Person who gives control over to others.

Switch – Person who can enjoy both sub/dom or top/bottom roles. 

Top – Slang term for dominant/sadist, but generally meaning a person who inflicts various physical sensations as opposed to a ‘dominant’ who enjoys being in control psychologically. 

Torture – Administered erotic pain. 

Toys – Devices designed for BDSM or sex, or used for this purpose.

Vanilla – A term sometimes used to describe non-BDSM, non-kinky sex.