50 shades of grey is releasing a movie next valentine's day.
I did not read the book. I watched the trailer though.
From that lousy 2:26 video*, I have already built a... let's say "historically transmitted fury from genes carried since the beginning of times" on this book / movie.
Friend:
I couldn't hold myself and watched the trailer! It looks fantastic!
Me:
Hahahahahaha is it really THAT good? Let me check it out... But why coming out on Valentine's?
Friend:
Valentine's day is THE day
Me:
Does it have anything to do with love? XD i thought it was about LUST
Friend:
looool
Well of course! there is a bit of love in the story, I've read the whole book!
loool
Me:
ooooooh too bad
Friend:
Bad?
BAD GIRL!
Me:
Well yeah lol lust and love are different
Hahahahahaha is it really THAT good? Let me check it out... But why coming out on Valentine's?
Friend:
Valentine's day is THE day
Me:
Does it have anything to do with love? XD i thought it was about LUST
Friend:
looool
Well of course! there is a bit of love in the story, I've read the whole book!
loool
Me:
ooooooh too bad
Friend:
Bad?
BAD GIRL!
Me:
Well yeah lol lust and love are different
Friend:
Oh yeah?!
No, no, no...
Me:
And what I REALLY wanted to see, FOR ONCE! is that a book loved by women and FOR women's fantasies is FINALLY splitting the 2!
Friend:
I really disagree
Me:
Why can guys simply enjoy lust while we ALWAYS need to link it to love?
It's really pathetic! It's like a Cinderella story all over again, made modern by including some sex scenes! It's all about the poor girl who is not confident in herself and wait for a guy to make her feel sexy and confident... waits for that rich handsome (?) guy to show her how to be satisfied in bed... at the end of the day, it's still the pathetic girl fulfilling the whims of the guy... and falls in love with him... REALLY? and they marketed it as THE sensual book for women? The feminists of the 60s has really revolted for nothing! since women are still being used as sexual objects and their own satisfaction is always defined by what men want them to do... even in bed...
Friend:
Well that's reality sweetheart, for women, love and lust go hand in hand.
Me:
Nope, I disagree... it's not reality i bet that for us too, if we could actually act with as much sexual freedom as men do, then it will be very clear for us that lust and love are different things
Oh yeah?!
No, no, no...
Me:
And what I REALLY wanted to see, FOR ONCE! is that a book loved by women and FOR women's fantasies is FINALLY splitting the 2!
Friend:
I really disagree
Me:
Why can guys simply enjoy lust while we ALWAYS need to link it to love?
It's really pathetic! It's like a Cinderella story all over again, made modern by including some sex scenes! It's all about the poor girl who is not confident in herself and wait for a guy to make her feel sexy and confident... waits for that rich handsome (?) guy to show her how to be satisfied in bed... at the end of the day, it's still the pathetic girl fulfilling the whims of the guy... and falls in love with him... REALLY? and they marketed it as THE sensual book for women? The feminists of the 60s has really revolted for nothing! since women are still being used as sexual objects and their own satisfaction is always defined by what men want them to do... even in bed...
Friend:
Well that's reality sweetheart, for women, love and lust go hand in hand.
Me:
Nope, I disagree... it's not reality i bet that for us too, if we could actually act with as much sexual freedom as men do, then it will be very clear for us that lust and love are different things
Friend:
I don't think we understand each other on that point
Me:
And it is pathetic that at the end, it's him enjoying and not her... she is like a docile cat pet, he teaches her what she needs to do and she needs to like it... oh boy!
Friend:
Women can desire as well without love... But love cannot exist without desire.
Ideally, it should be both
Me:
This is idealistic thinking. love can exist without any real or strong lust (lust being way more powerful than desire)
Friend:
Well, love, lust, desire... what do I know really.
Just to be sure actually, here are the definitions of each:
- Love: a strong feeling of affection.
- Lust: strong sexual desire
- Desire: a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen
I don't think we understand each other on that point
Me:
And it is pathetic that at the end, it's him enjoying and not her... she is like a docile cat pet, he teaches her what she needs to do and she needs to like it... oh boy!
Friend:
Women can desire as well without love... But love cannot exist without desire.
Ideally, it should be both
Me:
This is idealistic thinking. love can exist without any real or strong lust (lust being way more powerful than desire)
Friend:
Well, love, lust, desire... what do I know really.
Just to be sure actually, here are the definitions of each:
- Love: a strong feeling of affection.
- Lust: strong sexual desire
- Desire: a strong feeling of wanting to have something or wishing for something to happen
"The desire of love is to give, the desire of lust is to take"
No comments:
Post a Comment