Me: I always find it hilarious when people try to conflate reality with art and entertainment. And I use the word 'art' to describe 50 Shades very loosely. Idiots going to idiot.

Her: Nice... Art is a product of the society we live in - the fact that a novel about a man abusing a naive woman has been so popular is a reflection of the trivialisation and romanticisation of the reality that many people actually face. Many people after reading the book or seeing the film will want to experiment with bdsm and its only fair that they're warned that how it is portrayed in the book is unhealthy and abusive.

Me: There's absolutely no evidence to suggest titillating or provocative art impacts people's behaviour. If people are into BDSM then they're into BDSM. A movie isn't going to suddenly realign their sexual orientation.

Her: As I said, I didn't even talk about the fact that its glamourising abuse, but that its portraying BDSM as a community to be that of an abusive one. Its saying that rape and drugging girls to do what you want is how BDSM, D/s relationships work and it isn't. People will read it and clearly enjoy it and will go attempt to get involved in a BDSM community only to fall prey to someone with bad intentions.

It is a terrible book in that it is portraying utter lies as facts and because people don't know any different they don't attempt to question it. One of my friends read the book and asked me if I liked to be drugged, used and abused and practically raped, saying that whatever I involve myself in is stupid, dangerous, rapey and totally ridiculous, that I was being used and they lectured me on something they know nothing about.

This book took popular media by storm and it is utter lies. That's what pisses me off. You don't watch a movie of people being murdered and think 'that looks great I want to murder people' but some people will read or watch this and see the abuse as BDSM, sexualised and may put themselves in a position to become used and hurt and will start accepting it where it is wrong.

It isn't boosting a signal on domestic violence.

Its sexualizing it, giving it a false name and making people like me who rely on trust and safety look reckless and like we are idiots allowing ourselves to be used by men. He made her sign a contract as a virgin, ignores her safe words, starts to fear him and hide things from him, he uses alcohol to sway her and rapes her.

... Then everyone says wow Omfg hot I love BDSM when it isn't fckn BDSM at all.

I'm done. Defend it all you want, its not calling a spade a spade and is setting a lot of curious innocent naive girls up for a downfall.

Me: I'd just like to remind you that the book was written by a woman, marketed towards women, and the majority of the reader base are also funnily enough, women. It's not some ethereal patriarchal conspiracy constructed by men so they can rape women more easily, or whatever kind of ludicrous narrative you're going for. Is it really indicative that these women are actively seeking to trivialize abuse against their gender by endorsing a sexually provocative book, or is more probable that they simply enjoy the art form and want to fully immerse themselves in their sexual desires? I think it's obvious the latter is more accurate, but whatever keeps the feminist delusional cogs whirring.

Also, the whole "if you watch/read/listen to this piece of art, you're more likely to commit X" is a fucking retarded argument. It's the exact same kind of argument that school gate mums use to try and get violent videogames banned. "GTA V makes my son want to kill prostitutes!" No, you're just a shitty parent that relies too much on appeal to emotions to get what you want instead of using actual Empirical evidence.