Saturday, September 20, 2014

And the cops said, "Sexual paraphernalia"

Big excitement in a little bitty place, it was. Twelve men arrested for soliciting prostitution, and one woman for being more than happy to oblige. The worst part?

I know one of these guys. From a religious organization of which I used to be a part. If that doesn't take the cake.

http://westkentuckystar.com/News/Local-Regional/McCracken-County/Several-Arrested-in-Prostitution-Operation.aspx

So I read it with interest to see what happened. The cops placed an ad, I'm guessing on Craigslist, and then sat back and waited for the calls to come in. And come in they did - so many, in fact, that they set up the whole scenario and waited for the johns to come.

And come they did. Some of them had weapons. I mean, if you were going to a strange hotel to meet a hooker, you'd take a gun, right? I think I would. That made sense to me. A couple of them had pot. Wow. What a horrible thing. Money was confiscated, as well as their cell phones. But here's the one that got me.

Sexual paraphernalia.



What exactly are they talking about?

I hope to god they're not talking about handcuffs, because every cop in the room had some of those. After all, I don't know if you've noticed, but every damn adult store in the world has handcuffs. Hell, one of the erotic romance writers who's also a police officer demonstrated her favorite ones last week at the convention I attended. She was pretty excited to do so, and so were some of the people who went up and let her cuff them. It was a hoot.

So they confiscated sexual paraphernalia. I started a thread on my Facebook page today, and it was telling. The question was, "So what constitutes a 'sexual implement?'" I got some interesting comments on that one, let me tell you.

I did wonder, however, why they would confiscate said "sexual paraphernalia." I mean, it's not illegal, right? At least not that I'm aware of. Otherwise, that privacy fence they have around Romantix here would be twice as high and you sure as shit wouldn't be able to see through it like you can now.



Was it proof that they came there to have sex? If so, every single woman who buys a cucumber at the grocery should be arrested, right? I mean, it's obvious they're going to have sex. Or make a salad. Either is apparently a crime . . . somehow. Because, quite frankly, the folks who responded to my question appeared to have no compunction in using anything and everything around the house that wasn't nailed down - except for a poopy diaper, one person pointed out, to which I reminded her that some people (weird people, but still) might actually find that arousing in a hideously uncomfortable way. Yeah, it is what it is, all right. But anyway, there you have it.

I have these cool swag bags. Everybody who's gotten one seems to love them. Inside the cute little cellophane bags with my street team labels on the front are bookmarks, postcards, a temporary tattoo, and a measuring spoon that says, "Deanndra Hall - erotic romance that measures up." (Yeah, I thought that up myself. Clever, huh?) But there's also a spatula. Okay, some people call it a scraper, but I call it a spatula. Anyway, in keeping with my construction theme, the handle is yellow and in stenciled letters, it says, "MULTI-PURPOSE TOOL - Let's 'whip up' some romance." Get it?

It wouldn't surprise me to have the McCracken County Sheriff's Department come rushing in just any day to confiscate my spatulas as "sexual paraphernalia." Maybe they'll take my clothespins and other things lying around because those automatically mean I'm going to have sex (god, I hope so). Of course, if they touch my Hitachi, they'll have to die. I won't stand for that. I'd rather go down in a blaze of glory than to lose that thing.

Is this what they mean by a "double dong?" I don't think so . . .

The lesson here is simple: If you have a socko paddle, hide it. Don't leave your gator clamps lying about, even if you've been using them to clamp two pieces of wood together. No, not that kind of wood. Real wood. Never mind. Make sure you bring in the laundry and hide the clothespins. Absolutely, positive hide all of the tape and string you have lying around. And whatever you do, get rid of any flavored lip gloss you might have. That'll get you hard time, my friend. And even though there was no pun intended on that one, it was still funny, don't you think? Hard time? Right.

I have this model of the Eiffel Tower. I suppose I should put that thing away. Because if they happened to see the takeover I did last night, well, you never know . . . orange doesn't look good on me at all.

Wednesday, September 17, 2014

My Reads: The Dieter's Guide to Weight Loss During Sex by Richard Smith

I've been wanting to bring something different to the table, so when I thought of this book, I naturally decided it was a perfect fit for this blog. I became acquainted with it at an early age; my mother won it as a gag gift at a store party when she worked for Sears. What was especially funny about this especially funny book is that if you knew my mother, you'd know that it was completely wasted on her. She wasn't going to have sex, so she'd just have to find another way to lose weight. What is this book, you ask? It's The Dieter's Guide to Weight Loss During Sex by Richard Smith.


If you're having trouble removing those last few stubborn pounds, this book just might be your answer. It starts off in the acknowledgements with the statement, "There are many to whom I am indebted but they wish, alas, to remain anonymous." And the hilarity only ramps up after that. Covering topics like "Getting Partner in Mood and Alerting Mutual Sensibilities" to "Rolling Over and Going to Sleep," all the bases are covered. There are chapters entitled "Getting Caught," "Almost Getting Caught," and "Fighting Off Pets."

And what will sex burn off exactly? Did you know that 62 minutes of chasing a partner around the room at a medium jog, or a two-hour pillow fight with 20-pound pillows, burns off one pint of ice cream. It's not specified if it's vanilla bean or rocky road, but I'm hoping it's rocky road just because I like that better.

In a chapter about becoming physically prepared for sex by conditioning, Smith says, "There are, of course, different methods of achieving erotic fitness. These include such vigorous exercise as tennis, skiing, bicycling, backgammon and sleeping on a cot." All through the book, there are tips for maximizing weight loss while still having smokin'-hot, backseat-rockin' sex you'd be proud to say you had if you were able to speak while panting from the sheer physical exertion.

All in all, the book is a veritable fount of information for the average person who simply isn't going to get out of bed to get a little exercise. It's all delivered with Smith's particular brand of humor, all tongue in cheek (no, that's not a weight loss method, although if it were glued there it would work), and just clever enough to make you ask yourself, "Hey, why didn't I think of that? Oh, yeah, there's that thing . . ." There's enough fun in this little volume to make you glad you read it, especially at the next party you attend when you get to say, "Did you know . , ."

Have fun. I'm headed in to lose 2.3 pounds.

Saturday, September 13, 2014

We're not dead yet

According to this Huffington Post article (http://tinyurl.com/lzmpvps), women over fifty are still vital sexual human beings.

No shit, Sherlock. Why do you think I write erotic romance with characters over fifty? Because they can be so damn sexy!



We've all heard about cougars, right? Those women who either go after younger men or who are pursued by younger men? They're whispered about. They're talked about.

What if they're not cougars? What if they're simply looking for a man in their own age range to help them enjoy their lives, more specifically, their sex lives? Is that even possible?

Seems the answer to that is a resounding yes, if they're willing to search high and low like a lousy sherpa on Mt. Everest. But here's a cold, hard fact: Most men, even older men, want young women. They're not interested in anyone their own age. Oh, sure, some are, or at least they're faithful to the women they have, even if those women are over fifty. But most of them want a younger woman, and it even appears that they don't care if the woman is attractive, just that she's younger. I'm not sure why, unless it's status. That's all I've ever figured out.



Most of them are, or have been, married. One of the things they complain about is their wives' lack of interest in sex. Most of these women will tell you that they would be interested in sex - if the man in their life was interesting during sex. Why would you want to be with a man whose only interest is in pleasing himself, and to hell with you? Kind of explains everything, doesn't it?

If they took the time to be interesting in the sack, to actually give instead of take, they'd make a huge discovery: Older women like sex. They're good at it too. They're experienced and aren't as self-conscious as their younger counterparts. But instead of taking advantage of that, older men leave them with the idea that they're less than desirable, aren't worth the trouble, or just can't cut it, all because they want younger women to sleep with.

I have a theory. I believe that younger woman are largely inexperienced, and older men can get by with being sloppy, greedy, self-centered, selfish lovers with them because, frankly, the cute little things don't know any better.

They also talk a great deal about how women over fifty "let themselves go." Often they're talking about their wives in that respect. Many times, these women have been left to wrangle pretty much every household aspect, especially kids, without any help. They haven't let themselves go - they haven't had TIME to take care of themselves! They've been running on empty for years. I can speak to this. I'd let myself go while I raised two kids, mostly by myself, and then I'd taken care of three of the four parents within my union until they died. Let myself go? I was lucky if I could get a shower every day, much less do anything constructive for myself. After the three of them were gone, I remade myself.

And a lot of women who've "let themselves go" will tell you that's it's been a long, long, very long time since the man in their life has actually complimented them in any way. What incentive does a woman have to keep herself attractive if the one person in the world who's supposed to be attracted to her doesn't seem to give a shit?

These men also often complain that sex with their significant other is "boring." And whose responsibility is it to spice things up? Well, at least fifty percent of that responsibility is theirs and theirs alone and, if they like to be "The Man" in the relationship, then they've automatically assumed more than fifty percent. Sounds to me like they need to get on the ball. But instead, they go looking for a younger woman because SHE'S not boring to THEM. I'm betting THEY'RE boring to HER, but if she told them they were boring, they wouldn't believe it anyway. They'd just go looking for another younger woman. The acquisition and use is what makes the younger women interesting. The older guy isn't in this for conversation.

I'm well into a new book I'm writing called The Call Girl's Guide to Great Sex. I won't tell you what happens in the book, but suffice it to say that the call girl reveals the secrets of the sexual universe to someone who needs to know. And you know what they say. The truth will set you free. So let me just say this to the older men out there.

We're hot and ready, so if we don't want sex, it's because we don't want sex with YOU. Some of us have taken pretty good care of ourselves. We actually spend time trying to find clothing that accentuates our natural endowments, not trying to wear something that shows most of our skin to set off the arousal alarms in every guy up to three counties away. No, our bodies aren't as firm and luscious as they used to be, but by damn, they work well and we know what to do with them. You might want to try complimenting us occasionally. You'd be surprised what the results could be. And as for boring, listening to you snore on the sofa with the Monday night game playing in the background makes us want to rip our clothes off (and I've got a great piece of resort property in North Dakota you'd just love too). What makes you think you're so damn interesting?

I've heard that affairs in the over-fifty crowd are at an all-time high, and I think I can see why. So let me tell you about my relationship.

Three years ago I was a wreck. I'd buried three family members in eighteen months. I was grossly overweight, hideously depressed, and tired all the time. And I was in a relationship I'd decided I'd give two more years to before I bailed. It wasn't bad; he wasn't bad. It was just that apathy had eaten us alive, and we didn't even realize it. So what happened?

I decided I had to get better or die. I started eating like I had a brain and got up off my ass. I started dropping the pounds and shaping up. I got to stop taking my blood pressure medication and antidepressant. In short, I was working hard at it, and it showed.

At some point in that process, Sir said, "Wow. You're serious this time."

"Yes," I replied, serious as hell. "I've got to get my shit together. I'm going to be a young widow." He gave me a very funny, possibly scared, stare. "You're going to drop dead, the shape you're in. I've got to be ready."

He bought a gym membership too. Aha! That shook him up.

And gradually, we both came back to life. It wasn't a sudden thing, more subtle, but it worked. And let me tell you what worked.

He grew up. He stopped acting like I owed him something. He started telling me how beautiful I am, holding my hand, hugging me without expecting sex in return. He started acting like I mattered to him. He told me repeatedly how much he appreciated everything I'd done for everyone in the family. He helped out more around the house. He understood that I need peace and quiet while I'm working, not him sitting there yakking about some sports figure or what he read in National Geographic.

In return, I started going to Victoria's Secret. I bought boots, pretty, expensive boots. I let my hair grow out. I started having my nails done and having pedicures too. I helped him learn how to cook and eat healthier. I started watching football and basketball and found out I still don't understand them that well but I love them (especially collegiate ball - GO RACERS!). I quit taking verbal pot-shots at him. I started telling him how much I appreciated everything he did, does, for me.

And a funny thing happened. When all of that was in play and established, know what we did?

We set the bedroom on fire.

If your man is older and decides he wants a younger woman, cut him loose. There will come a time when he's old enough that no younger woman is going to want him. By then, you will have found a new relationship with someone who appreciates you and he'll be alone.

Serves him right.

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

My Reads: My Body - His by Blakely Bennett

I read a lot of erotic romance and erotica because that's what I write, but I'm always looking for a twist on the genre. I don't know why, but I'd never read Blakely Bennett's trilogy, and I even had the first one. I was expecting your standard, run-of-the-mill erotic romance with BDSM thrown in.

Wrong. I was wrong. I was never so wrong in my life.

My Body - His was unlike anything else that I've read. I owe you an explanation, and the queen of "no spoiler land" is going to have a hard time with this, but here goes.


First off, let me just give you this disclaimer: There are lots of erotic romances out there that carry the admonishment of "for readers 18 or over only." Mine are some of those. But these? I can't imagine what would happen if a 15-year-old got hold of one of these. Not good - not at all. They'd be permanently sexually warped. Take that from someone who read The Happy Hooker and Deep Throat at the tender age of 14. No wonder I'm the kinky bitch I am.

What happens when a curious thirty-something woman goes to a party with a friend and finds out it's a free-for-all in terms of an orgy? Plenty. She wanders, dumbstruck, until she happens across "the artist." Jane is terrified by him - and intensely aroused. He gives her an immediate taste of what he expects, and that would be a warning for most people. But Jane is so turned on by Luke's control and sexual prowess that she lets herself fall into his trap. Thus begins their relationship, and what a convoluted, fucked-up mess it is. Instead of heeding warning signs that anyone else would've seen as big, bright, and flashing, Jane is mesmerized by Luke and believes she cannot live without him. He professes his love in similar fashion, but frankly, his actions don't match his words. Any more than that and you'll know more than you should but, trust me, you want to know.

I really didn't know what to expect, and this certainly wasn't it. While stories of BDSM relationships run rampant, and most of them are the loving, sweet, vanilla-scented things we love to read about, this one is anything but. It's raw, powerful, gritty, and a little frightening. It's a perfect example of what happens when someone who's lacking something important in their life meets up with a person who wants something they can't get without manipulating others, and someone winds up getting hurt. This book doesn't have a happily ever after; that comes in the third book, so keep reading. But it will twist your gut and heart until you don't think you can stand another minute, and suck you in so hard you won't be able to force yourself away. I started the first book, and I'll tell you a little secret: It was on Friday, and by Sunday afternoon, I'd bought the other two and devoured them.

Blakely is a talented writer, and her style is easy to read and comfortable, but the subject matter most definitely is not. If you've ever wanted to see the dark, scary, dangerous side of BDSM, take a trip into My Body - His. But be prepared. You'll never see the lifestyle the same way again.

I don't do reviews, and this isn't a review, but if it were, it would get 5+ stars.

Saturday, September 6, 2014

South Carolina - don't go there if you're different

This information was brought to me by, once again, my baby, who said something to the effect of, "You're not gonna believe this shit." Yes, dear, I do. Not a big surprise. I'd love to be able to show you the pic that accompanies the article, but it's an Reuters photo, so I don't dare. Instead, I'll give you a pic of Chaz Bono - not the same, but you get the picture (no pun intended). I can, however, give you the link and let you look for yourself.


South Carolina boy sues over makeup removal for driver's license photo

It seems this young man went to the local office of the Department of Motor Vehicles in Charleston, South Carolina, to get his first driver's license. That, of course, requires a photograph. And that's where the trouble started.

You see, Chase Culpepper is a transgendered individual. He regularly wears women's clothing and makeup, and if you'll take a look at the link above, you'll see why. If I hadn't known what the article was about and you'd shown me the photo, I would've said, "Oh, what a lovely young woman!" He says he identifies as a gender-nonconformist. So I guess you're wondering what all the fuss is about.

Let me ask you this: Ladies, if you went to the DMV to have your driver's license photo taken and they told you to take off your makeup because you were attempting to alter your appearance so as to make your identity more difficult to ascertain, what would you say? I don't know what you'd say, but I sure as hell know what I'd say, and it wouldn't be pretty. And I'm fairly certain I'd leave without a license, and most likely in handcuffs. Do they ask women to take theirs off? I'm guessing they don't or we'd already know about it. I don't know about anyone else, but if my makeup didn't alter my appearance, I'd throw it away and go get something else that worked better.

What happened next was predictable. In June, the Transgender Legal Defense and Education Fund sent a letter asking that Chase be allowed to do a retake in his makeup. Three months later, after getting no reply from the state, the organization filed suit. Thank goodness.

Something similar happened to my son years ago during his college days when he worked for Walmart. He had an earring. We're not talking a gauge here, or a hoop, or any of that stuff. We're talking about a simple stud. Management came around and told all of the guys that they had to take them out. And of course, being MY son, he asked a pointed question: What about the women? Shouldn't they have to take theirs out too? He was answered with a "well, that's different" kind of off-hand brush-off. His next question: How? How was it different? How does whether or not you have a penis or vagina determine what kind of jewelry you can wear, or where on your body, for that matter? Doesn't that qualify as sexual discrimination? (That's my boy. I was so proud.)

The issue was dropped. He got to keep the earring. But I'm disturbed that, based on this article, I'm assuming the state of South Carolina had encouraged discussions regarding this situation and those like it in advance so that employees were fully prepared to discriminate as soon as Chase walked through the door. And that bothers me. I'm a little shocked that they didn't make him go to a restroom with an employee and drop his pants so they could confirm that he should remove his makeup. We're not talking about clown makeup here. We're not discussing a mask so no one knew who he was. We're talking about the same makeup women all over America wear on a daily basis. I'm guessing if the kids at his school were shown a pic of him in the makeup, they'd know full well who he was because he wears it every damn day.

The biggest difference in these two situations is that one is a private employer and the other is a governmental agency. Big difference - huge, huge difference. While Walmart could have enforced the rule, let someone sue them, and had the court system hash it out, this is a governmental agency with an obligation to serve the taxpayers. There is little recourse without going to a state supreme court, because that's where it will go, and maybe to the U.S. Supreme Court. And I hope it does. If this isn't settled, here's what you can expect.

Do you have a penis? You can't wear makeup.
Do you have a penis? You can't wear a dress.
Do you have a vagina? You can't wear pants.
Do you have a vagina? You can't hold that job.
Do you have a penis? You can't wear that jewelry.
Do you have a vagina? You can't go to that club.
Do you have a vagina? You can't wear your hair that short.
Do you have a penis? You can't wear your hair that long.

Do you see where this is going? Do you see the precedent this would set? It would essentially open the door to everything we've fought against for years. It would set us back at least fifty years, maybe more. I won't even get into the racial inplications - horrendous.

Before you start spouting bible verses at me and telling me how perverse Chase is, let me remind you, the first time you go to a governmental body and they won't serve you because you don't look exactly as they'd like, hair color, cut, clothes, shoes, jewelry, etc., how will you feel? Don't come back here crying like a little bitch to me. I'll have no sympathy for your bigoted ass - none.

I think the most disturbing part of this, to me anyway, is that this rule was made in 2009, well after LGBTQ issues had come to the forefront and we were doing battle with those who require conformity in all things. Life isn't black and white, folks. If you want the leniency to be who you are, you have to let others be who they are too. It's a two-way street.

So remember: Don't color your hair. Leave your Revlon at home. Watch what you wear. Otherwise, in South Carolina, you may not be able to drive.

I have the solution: Let's all go apply for our driver's licenses naked. No hiding our identities that way, huh? Wonder what they'd say to that?

Wednesday, September 3, 2014

My Reads: One to Keep by Tia Louise

You just never know what I'm going to feature next, do you? I like to keep you guessing. This time I'm featuring a book from a series that I've grown to love. I featured the first book from this series back in July. This is the second, but definitely not the last. This week's read is Tia Louise's One to Keep.



The first book in this series and the namesake of the series, One to Hold, was told in Melissa's voice, and through it we learned how Melissa and Derek came to be together. One to Keep isn't a continuation - it's Patrick Knight's story, in his voice, as it runs somewhat concurrent to Melissa and Derek's story. Starting slightly before theirs, it continues on through theirs and quite a few twists and turns, including a plotline that, quite frankly, I don't think I've ever seen before. I was impressed with that. We see a whole bevy of interesting characters, including Kenny (not a guy), Star (use your imagination), and Elaine, Melissa's friend. You know I don't do spoilers, and I'm not going to make an exception.

Let me just say that Patrick is the quintessential player. Former National Guard, Patrick had come to Alexander-Knight, LLC, as his brother, Stuart, a retired Marine, had taken a job in Saudi Arabia and Stuart's partner, Derek Alexander, needed a new partner. From day one, Patrick's main focus is somewhere between the neck and knees of every attractive woman he comes across. He gets an immediate admonishment from Derek regarding their policy of keeping clients off-limits when it came to seduction. Patrick seemed to believe, however, that the admonishment wasn't extended to coworkers, and he makes a major misstep in that regard. While I followed the twists and turns of the plot in this book, I had to grin.

Because of Patrick. I wanted desperately to hate him, but I just couldn't. Along with his super-ego and cocky attitude, there was something charming, disarming, and childlike about Patrick that I just couldn't resist. There were more than a few times that I wanted to absolutely throttle him, shake him, slap him, or ask him what in the hell he was thinking or, even more telling, what he was thinking with (and I was pretty sure I knew the answer to that question). He's Tia's version of my Steve McCoy, that guy who's far more multi-layered than he first appears, and far more loving and tender than I thought possible.

I loved this book as much as the first one. Yes, I want to know more about Derek and Melissa, but I more than enjoyed watching Patrick and Elaine's relationship bobble around in the ebb and flow of Patrick's crazy, sometimes irresponsible, always touching self-awareness. Even though I didn't want to, I found myself cheering for him to get where he needed to be and be where he wanted to go. It was a crazy ride, but one that I hope continues in later books in the series.

Don't miss these. They're too much fun.



Saturday, August 30, 2014

Judgment day

Well, folks, Monday morning I got an email from my baby. Bless his heart, he passes enough stuff on to me to keep me busy for several months. This, however, was something he was pretty sure I'd be interested in and this time, he was more than right.

So here's my disclaimer: If you have a problem with "swear words," you might just want to back out of this right now because it's fixin' to get all crazy up in here. I read this "study" and just about shoved my fist through my computer screen.

I've debated whether to put the link in this post or actually dump the text. I've decided I'll give you the text because, quite frankly, I want to go back and reference comments from it.

So read this. Some of you will need inhalers. I know I almost did. The actual link is http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/281471.php. Oh, and note the graphic lurking over there to the right in my sidebar. Seems some other people found this to be useless too.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Women who read Fifty Shades 'more likely to have unhealthy behaviors'

Monday 25 August 2014 - 12am PST


MNT FeaturedAcademic Journal


"Mr. Grey will see you now." Just these words are likely to send many women into a frenzy. The Fifty Shades novels by British author E.L. James have been a global phenomenon, selling more than 100 million copies worldwide. But although reading a book may seem harmless, a new study suggests young adult women who read these erotic novels are more likely to engage in unhealthy behaviors that are risk factors for abusive relationships.

romantic novel
Women who read Fifty Shades are more likely to have unhealthy behaviors that are risk factors for abusive relationships, according to new research.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with Fifty Shades, the story revolves around the sexual endeavors of two characters: Anastasia Steele and Christian Grey.
In the first of the series - Fifty Shades of Grey - Steele, a literature student described as "unworldly" and "innocent," meets Grey, a man who is charming, intelligent, but who has a dark, controlling side.
They then embark in a "daring, passionately physical" affair, or as lead study author Amy Bonomi of Michigan State University deems it, an abusive relationship. This continues throughout the subsequent two novels - Fifty Shades Darker andFifty Shades Freed.
According to the researchers, the erotic series "depicts pervasive violence against women, perpetuating a broader social narrative that normalizes these types of risks and behaviors in women's lives."
Is there a relationship between reading these books and unhealthy behaviors in real life? Bonomi and colleagues from The Ohio State University wanted to find out.

Fifty Shades fans 'more likely to binge drink, have abusive partners and eating disorders'

For their study, recently published in the Journal of Women's Health, the team analyzed 655 women between the ages of 18 and 24 - a time in women's lives when they are most likely to explore greater sexual intimacy in relationships, according to Bonomi.
Of these women, 122 had read all three Fifty Shades novels, 97 had read at least the first novel but not all three, and 436 had not read any part of the novels.
The team found that, compared with women who had not read any of the books, the women who had read the first novel were 25% more likely to have a partner who verbally abused them, 34% more likely to have a partner who showed stalking tendencies, and 75% more likely to have starved themselves for more than 24 hours or to have used dieting aids.
Furthermore, women who had read all three books were 65% more likely to engage in binge drinking - defined as drinking five or more drinks in one sitting on 6 days or more every month - and were 63% more likely to have had five or more sexual partners in their lifetime, compared with those who had not read any of the books.
Bonomi admits that one limitation of this study is that they were not able to determine whether these behaviors were already pre-existing among the women. But she says that even if they were, reading the books may still pose problems.
She explains:
"If women experienced adverse health behaviors such as disordered eating first, reading Fifty Shades might reaffirm those experiences and potentially aggravate related trauma.
Likewise, if they read Fifty Shades before experiencing the health behaviors seen in our study, it's possible the books influenced the onset of these behaviors."

Unhealthy behaviors 'risk factors for abusive relationships'

Bonomi notes that she is not recommending that the book should be banned, nor is she trying to dictate what books women should or should not read.
But she says it is important that women understand that the unhealthy behaviors linked to reading Fifty Shades demonstrated in this study are risk factors for engaging in violent relationships.
In an attempt to reduce these risks, Bonomi says that parents and teachers should have conversations with children from a young age about sexuality and expectations of body image and gender roles.
In addition, she believes children and young adults should be taught to be critical when it comes to watching movies, reading books or consuming other media that demonstrates violence.
"We recognize that the depiction of violence against women in and of itself is not problematic, especially if the depiction attempts to shed serious light on the problem," Bonomi adds. "The problem comes when the depiction reinforces the acceptance of the status quo, rather than challenging it."
Last year, Medical News Today reported on a study published in the journal JAMA Pediatrics, revealing that almost 10% of youths under the age of 21 have instigated sexual violence.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I posed some interesting questions on Facebook this week in preparation for this post. One was how abuse is defined; another was how much countrol should the government have over what goes on in our bedrooms; from a male Dominant/female submissive standpoint, is BDSM degrading to women; and how much credence is given to research. I thought those were relevant to the article above, and I got some surprising answers.

Most of those who thought BDSM was degrading to women were abuse victims themselves. Pretty much no one thought the government had any business trying to regulate what happens in the privacy of a person's bedroom. Defining abuse was a little harder, and I, along with others, leaned toward the legal aspect, although what is illegal is often not truly abuse. As for the research, well, one only has to look above to see the flaws there.

The first thing I did when I read this was try to find out who funded this so-called research. The lead study author was from Michigan State University, with the balance from The Ohio State University. There was no indication regarding funding, so I'm left to guess that perhaps Bonomi is working on a thesis for some level of graduate degree. I also checked Medical News Today, the organization that published this, and found that it's independently funded. So my reasoning that perhaps it was funded by some über-conservative group fell flat.

Before I go any farther, let me explain to you that, regardless what you or I think, FSOG is indeed about a physically abusive relationship. The things depicted in those books are NOT what BDSM is about, not at all. In the books, we see a damaged, sexually abused man trying to transfer enough pain to get to a breakthrough, and a young woman who's determined to see him through. And let me tell you, if a guy with a multi-million-dollar corporation and a helicopter wanted to cane me, I'd probably let him. I can do anything if I know it will eventually come to an end.

In light of the knowledge that FSOG really is abusive, I also realize that a lot of readers are reading for the titillation and don't get the implications. They want the rumpus in the sack. Many of them started out with FSOG and then moved on to works like mine, Kallypso Master, Red Phoenix, Lexie Blake, Shayla Black, and many others too numerous to mention. The difference in our works is that the BDSM is far more true to life (although there is no real submissive training school, but I wish there were, Red). Sure, sometimes they supposedly occur in exotic locations, but the message is the same: Mutual satisfaction, a deep level of caring, and even love.

And there's the kicker. True BDSM is all about trust, respect, and communication. It's why I keep telling women that if they're married and find a Dom who'll work with them without their husband's knowledge or consent, they should RUN LIKE HELL! That's neither honorable nor trustworthy. And if they do not inform said Dom and he finds out, well, I wouldn't want to be her, no I would not. With that in mind, the BDSM depicted in FSOG is nowhere near the real thing, at least not as practiced by responsible individuals.

But knowing what I know, this article made me bristle big time. I was tee-totally fucking pissed that all BDSM works were lumped into the same category with FSOG. While I read and liked the books, they in no way represent the entire genre. With my pissed-offedness in mind, I started to parse out the article. And here's what I found.

They claim that the 219 out of 655 women in this study, ages 18-24, who read at least the first book, if not all three, were more likely to have partners who verbally abused them, stalked them, or they were more apt to use diet aids or starve themselves. So I have a question for them: Could it be that these young women were looking for a way to understand how they got themselves into that predicament? Or could they possibly just be more sexually open, and thereby attract the wrong men who would gravitate to women in that age group? Let me be clear here: Women ages 18-24 are higher on the risk-taking scale for EVERYTHING, not just behaviors that lead to abusive relationships. It's part of being young and seemingly invincible.

Nowhere in this study did it mention the socio-economic standings of the women in the study. Could that by any chance have an effect? It most certainly does. If the 219 women in the study were economically underprivileged, they would be more likely to engage in risky behavior in their search for some relief from their financial impoverishment. Didn't the researchers think that might be important?

As for the binge drinking data, we are talking about young women of college age. Ditto for the numerous sexual partners. It stands to reason that if they're reading books like FSOG, they're likely more sexually open and, therefore, have probably experimented sexually more than their counterparts. And at that age, that's all BDSM really is - sexual experimentation. Listen, if you haven't figured out that NO ONE in that age range is a sexual expert or BDSM master, then you've got a double load of shit for brains. The entire idea of someone below thirty being experienced enough to be a sexpert is ludicrous. There may be the one lone individual who's old beyond their years, but just one. Really. I'm not kidding. Otherwise, they aren't out there, folks.

And did it ever occur to these researchers that the ones who said they didn't drink or have multiple sex partners might be lying? I think that's entirely probable. I mean, if you ask females in that age range those kinds of questions, do you really think all of them are going to be truthful? Hey, I raised a girl. I know what they do and don't want people to know. Good luck with that.

The study goes on to state that if one had an eating disorder before, the books might glorify that, and even suggested that the books might be the cause of the onset of these behaviors. Really? Wow. Those are some pretty powerful books E.L.'s got there. They must be magic. I'll have to remember that. But toward the end of the article, they acquiesce in that books depicting violence against women aren't inherently bad if they're used to shed light on the problem, but are dangerous if they're to be taken as the norm. Again, I do believe most people, even younger people, know that the behaviors in FSOG are not considered normal in any context. Not only that, but I think most people know that the scenario in the books is totally fantasy. My baby has a helicopter too - he got it last year for the holidays from one of the kids, and it takes four AA batteries. He's run that thing into the curtains so many times that I want to snap it in half.

But here's the part I loved. Bonomi admits that the data leaves out whether or not these behaviors and problems existed before the women read the books.

Whoa. Here's my question: How the HELL can you make the correlation between the books and the aforementioned problems if you don't know whether or not these young women were partaking in these behaviors BEFORE the study? Listen, I don't know a lot about studies - didn't think I'd ever be doing one, so my brain kinda slipped into neutral during that part of statistics class - but even I know that studies must have controls, and that would definitely be one of the most important controls they could have. How can you infer a correlation between an increase in one thing juxtaposed with another if you have no idea of its levels beforehand? Without that simple information, how can you even call this research data?

In short, how irresponsible could they be for publishing this? Pretty damned irresponsible, I'd say. So irresponsible that it irked me right down to my pedicured toenails.

So I want to go on record as saying this:

I'm insulted. I'm insulted regarding the way this study was done and the assumption that my view of FSOG could be changed by incomplete data. I'm insulted for all of the responsible, safe, sane, consensual, and conscientious BDSM practitioners out there and what this study attempted to say about them, their kink, and their partners. I'm insulted that it's assumed that reading a book could cause a person to binge drink, starve themselves, and sleep around. Crapola, I say. This study smacks of bigotry, ignorance, and sexual frigidity. Matter of fact, I'm more than insulted - I'm downright incensed.

Let me do a study like this. I guaran-damn-tee you the results would be different, and I'd do it the right way, with the correct controls and all of the data. I'm tired of talking heads pontificating regarding things about which they know absolutely nothing. Stop picking on peoples' lifestyles. Stop trying to make sex the devil. Go to the adult store, get yourself a dildo, and get laid. Because with your attitudes about sex and kink, you're going to have a hard time finding a real person who'll want you. And leave the rest of us alone.

Damn it, break out the wrist restraints and my Lelo flogger. I feel a heavy-duty session coming on.