Haynes, a Rhodes College professor, highlights the segregation crisis of 1964-1965 in Protestant churches in the South by telling the story of the “Kneel-In” campaigns across the south, primarily composed of college age student protestors, particularly in Memphis and particularly at the Second Presbyterian Church in Memphis, a suburban wealthy white church, that actually started in downtown Memphis but as it grew, the church moved to the suburbs. I love this book for many reasons. Kneel-Ins were similar to the “Sit-Ins” of those days that happened at cafes and diners to protest segregation. Kneel-Ins were non-violent prayerful protests of segregated churches. Haynes says “Unusual features of the SPC Kneel-Ins were its duration, the prominent role played by white students, the low profile maintained by the church’s ministers during the crisis and the church schism that resulted.” The schism being the split that inevitably resulted when the church FINALLY welcomed desegregation which resulted in the hardliners (the elders and their followers) that had stood staunch against integration, moved out to start a new church, “Independent Presbyterian Church” also of Memphis. Both churches are still in Memphis today. Both are desegregated now, and both have a very active role in the local area in fighting poverty and reaching out to marginalized citizens of their city. Both have made some sort of public and/or private apology to kneel-in participants who back in ’64-’65 were not allowed in their churches, first at SPC and then later at IPC once SPC became integrated. BUT the road to this repentance (and very well to their redemption) was paved with unbelievable racist acts and eventual imploding of its members. So many things to say, but I shan’t make this review itself-a book. For ONE thing, it’s amazing to me that ANY church can allow men (or women, but in this case-men) to control the church with an iron fist, putting their own personal agendas above everyone and everything even when their agenda is downright sinful. It is amazing to me that pulpit ministers can actually be hired by churches with the singular purpose of keeping them in a puppet role. In the case of SPC in the 60’s, the pulpit ministers had absolutely no influence or override ability with the “session elders,” the latter of whom wielded their racist beliefs with vehemence and an intensity that was incredibly awful. And furthermore that those pulpit minister would be so very cowardly and perhaps so in fear of losing their jobs that they would do nothing to stand up to the tyranny of their elder pharisees, who in their case, were just plain wrong! Many of these elders were successful business men in the area and had lots of money, and with that money came social and political power. They exploited that shamelessly to achieve their ends and agendas both inside and outside the church. Mostly the white students that participated in the Kneel-Ins attended Southwestern University, the majority of funds of which came from parishioners at SPC. Southwestern is now Rhodes College in Memphis. Those students were threatened, and nasty letters full of lies were mailed to their parents by SPC elders about their “clandestine” activity in the Kneel-Ins and their shamelessness in standing alongside black students. The black participants of the kneel-ins were mostly from Memphis and attended black churches in the area. Many of them were also college students but not at Southwestern since it had yet to become an integrated college. I think one of the main themes this book highlights are Christian Casualties. Casualties of churches. This was surely ONE of the ways we Christians and our churches produced casualties. There are many others. But surely this was a big one. When the church which espouses Jesus love and the gospel as the way to eternal life and the blueprint for truth and justice, but yet doesn’t allow blacks to enter their church, yes, absolutely, many kids and young people are going to make the decision to leave the church. And in many cases, that is exactly what happened here. And one has to wonder what has been the ripple effect of this racist climate of churches (in the 50’s and 60’s) over the course of a century? How many lives have been shaped, lost or derailed because people who called themselves “Christians” looked very much like sinners. It’s one thing to be a sinner and act like a sinner. But when you are a Christian and act hatefully and selfishly, you, more than the sinner, will lead people away from God. Haynes wrote with regard to SPC and other churches like them: “As it became clear that segregation could not be sustained in the institutions that shaped their lives Monday through Saturday, they were determined to make Sunday worship in the South the last segregated hour.” Different questions the book asks US-the reader: 1 “Do I have the courage to stand up to blatant wrongs being committed by people who are supposedly a messenger of God? 2 If I CAN’T change that situation, and if it is one that consumes my place of worship, therefore hampering greatly the witness of that church to the community and the world, do I have the courage to leave and go somewhere else? 3 If I were in that wealthy white church in the 60’s would I have been a participant of the Kneel-Ins along side my black brothers and sisters or would I have been hiding under the tall steeple of that church, huddling inside the warm sanctuary with “my people,” while the elders of my church stood arm in arm on the front steps-guarding the entrance to keep black people out? Where would I have stood? 4 What about today in my church? Are there people of color there? What am I doing to be a light for Jesus in order to bring people toward Jesus (including my children) as opposed to away from Jesus? Does my life now model one for others that makes them wonder who is the God that she serves? I want to know Him. Or does my life model for others one that says “I want no part of that woman’s christianity?” Read the book. Learn. Grow. Change.
This is an unofficial review of the book “Fify Shades of Gray,” and so can be applied to same movie. Here are my disclaimers. I didn’t read the book or see the movie. Not my genre of course. But I did extensive reviews and read trailers so that I could formulate a response to many of the pervading questions and arguments about and in favor of the book with some measure of insight. If that obliterates my credibility for you, then don’t read the blog. That’s the advantage of living in an age of information. Like you, I get irritated when someone slams the book but doesn’t read it. Or when someone slams a church, but doesn’t visit it. But I can assure you that is not the story here. I just can’t bring myself to read it completely through. Sort of for the same reason I don’t feast on donuts and sausage biscuits every morning for breakfast. It’s not healthy. I didn’t read the book for the same reason I don’t binge on food or drugs or alcohol. It’s just not good for me. So I have heavily leaned on this age of information in which we live. Also if you are not a bible reader, don’t be put off by the references in this blog. They directly apply and respond to to some of the questions I am answering that have been proffered by others. The truth is you should read this if you are a mother of a son, a mother of a daughter or a mother-period. You should read it if you are in a sexual relationship or plan to be at some time in your life. Trust me. It applies.
Garbage in garbage out. And that’s not simply because of the sexually explicit material. One of the reasons I wouldn’t read this or allow my girls to read it, is the same reason I vetoed a lot of Nickelodeon TV when they were little, and that is: It dumbs us down. I want my girls to be smarter than all of that. The other reasons of course are explicit. And in 100% fairness to my three teenagers, they didn’t want to read the book either or see the movie.
So I have been privy to the observations of some who say this book (movie) is no different than the scenes depicted in the Song of Solomon in the bible. The book is nothing like Song of Songs in the bible-apples and oranges. Song of Songs is very erotic, but rated G compared to this, and it isn’t the erotica that is so repelling and appalling, but rather, the book is about dominance and S&M. (Sadism and Masochism) and BDSM (Bondage, Dominance, S&M) It is about a guy (very self controlling and neurotic man) who wants the girl (a virgin) to sign a contract before entering into a sexual relationship with him. And why? 1 So that she promises to not speak to anyone about what they do together, and 2 so that there can be no legal concerns for him. First she just has sex with him, then she gets “spanked,” and then she allows him to beat her with a belt. I am pretty sure the story goes down hill from there. Her “best friend” does nothing but encourage her to stay in the relationship. Remind me to dump a best friend like that!
So in other words, the same behavior which would land you in jail otherwise (physical assault) is okay when in the confines of a consensual relationship? And how does one determine when something is truly consensual? Is it only age, 18 and over, really? In this case, the girl was 20 or 21, a virgin, and the man older and obviously more sexually experienced and more worldly.
Here are some excerpts of critic reviews which I find compelling to the extent that I can’t believe how naive educated people can be:
A reviewer on the “feminist-friendly website Jezebel” wrote: “Our consensus: the book is pretty ridiculous — for every lashing there’s an ‘OMG!’ — but if it’s making more women feel comfortable discussing their sexuality, we’re all for it.”
Okay so let me understand this: it’s NOT okay for Ray Rice to slap his fiancée around in an elevator (and it is NOT okay) but IF he had slapped her around within the confounds of a “consensual” relationship, that exact same behavior would be okay? Beating another person, is never okay. We have a term for that! It’s called domestic abuse. I also love how we confuse consensual with complicit in this case. I don’t think the female character in the book was so much consensual as she was complicit in the acts committed against her. She was young naive and ignorant. In my book, that makes her far more complicit than it does consensual! Those are two words that we often confuse, one-complicit-which we almost completely ignore and two-consensual-which we abuse and exploit when it’s convenient to support our position on domestic abuse, or in the question of whether or not sex is consensual.
The New Zealand Herald: “But it was also an easy read and if you can suspend your disbelief and your desire to – if you’ll pardon the expression – slap the heroine for having so little self respect, you might enjoy it.” Unbelievably degrading. I hardly have anything to add to that highly NON-intelligent quote from such a profound journalist.
Would you want your daughter in a relationship like this? Would that be what you hope for her? Each time I see a statement like the former: “If you can suspend your disbelief and your desire to – if you’ll pardon the expression – slap the heroine for having so little self respect, you might enjoy it,” I think of my own daughters. Replace the word “heroine” in that sentence with your daughter’s name. Shelby, Halle, Katie! Now say that statement again-aloud substituting the word heroine with your own child’s name!
To be completely fair, there were as many negative reviews on the book as there were positive. But those negative reviews were split differently in their positions. Many of them objected on moral issues, while others objected solely on the literary issue that the book was poorly written, but didn’t necessarily take moral issue with the content.
Okay so for those of you who wrestled with a connection to “Song of “Solomon.” The latter book in the Old Testament is a story about love and erotica: “it makes a connection between conjugal love and sex, a very important and very biblical connection to make.” (The Message narrative)
1. The connection between love and erotica.Both are absolutely essential in a romantic relationship, particularly marriage. This connection is for all intents and purposes, absent in the book.
2. There is not one example of BDSM in the romantic relationship of Song of Solomon. It definitely has elements of submission, but by all accounts both people appear to be fully submitted to one another sexually and both smitten by the other. The only example of violence in the book is in chapter 5 verse 7. When she goes to look for her lover and is accosted by the guards of the watch tower, she is beaten by them. Scripture does not say why, but women in 900 something-BC when this book was written were not considered safe roaming the streets at night. They were extremely vulnerable. And if they were found alone roaming the streets as she was disoriented and searching frantically for her husband, then she would be considered, to say the least, vulnerable. There is absolutely No evidence whatsoever in this passage of BDSM or of her lover beating her. YET that is the entire premises of the book “50 Shades.”
3. Another interesting element: The male in the book requires the aforementioned contract from the girl-one agreeing to a consensual relationship of total submission and beatings. I love the contrast. Jesus invites us into a covenant relationship, one also of total submission to Him, but it is not one where we are to be bruised and battered physically and emotionally. It is one where we are loved (Matthew 11:28-30-and John 8) The John 8 Passage hits close to home-about the woman caught in adultery. The Pharisees wanted to stone her, (sounds like the book,) but Jesus loved her and you know what happened-He turned the finger back on her accusers. And His last words recorded to this woman were some of the most graceful in scripture “…then neither do I condemn you, go now and leave your life of sin.” What love and grace is that? And don’t forget the Samaritan woman in John chapter 4. No one else would talk to her but Jesus. He did, and told her “I am the living water. Drink from me and you will never thirst again.” This is the contractual covenant that Jesus invites us into; it is one that maintains our self-respect in spite of who we are. It is one that loves us and invites us to make intelligent decisions, be strong women, and to administer grace to others, but never at the expense of our self respect. And He does not expect us to be doormats in order to have the sexual relationship due us. He never ever expects us to be beaten, mistreated, or abused in exchange for HIS love. It does not in any way dumb us down or ask us to submit ourselves to gross perversity or disgrace or, God forbid, physical abuse.
4. Okay, the popularity of the book cannot be denied. Why do women love this? Let’s explore that question, for as it is with anything, we cannot hammer others with the truth. It is highly unlikely it will be received in the spirit that we want it to be, so we need to invest and go deeper, figuring out the FIRST problem that apparently distorts the truth for them so much that they have a desire for something as perverse and aberrant as the suggestions in this book (not just spiritually, but culturally perverse as well) and why does it seem “okay and normal” for them? Women who love this book may be trying to fill a huge void of some sort. Something from their upbringing, their marriage, or their life. The problem is they see the book as part of the remedy. I see it (like porn for men) as perpetuating and intensifying the first problem(s).
On that note, a LOT of the critics who praise this book, praise it saying that it finally helps women, (not just men) get what they want in their sexual relationships. (And I am thinking this is what they want, beatings, and physical/emotional battering?) BUT nevertheless, I suspect there is something to this. After all, I was raised by grandparents who not only did not discuss sex with me, but also taught me that sex was intended solely for reproducing offspring, not intended for enjoyment. (No I’m not kidding!) So had God not intervened, I may have entered into marriage never speaking my mind or saying what I want or enjoy. I suspect that 1000s of women who are reading these books have been sexually suppressed in one way, one form or another. My answer for them, is wake up! Ask questions! If you are married start by talking to your husband about how you feel about you sex life. Get counseling if necessary. Do that first before reading this ridiculously stupid book that teaches you little to nothing about a happy healthy sex life, but a LOT about how to NOT have a normal, happy, vibrant, reciprocal, passionate sex life.
And if you do choose to read the book or see the movie, please don’t let your kids (or teenagers) see it. They can make that decision when they are your age! Finally, and this is for all of the “experts, Christians, non-Christians, and anyone else who has the mind to consider this question: Is this where women’s rights and pursuing our equalities has led us? Really? To be objects of abuse and contempt? Is this what we have arrived at in the 21st century? Women have struggled for equality, for recognition in the corporate world, the church, the home? And after all of that, this is what we have to be thankful for? The liberty of joining in on a supposed consensual relationship of BDSM?? God help us if this is a measuring stick to redefine the relationship between lovers or the progress of women’s rights! I can’t believe that anyone with any sense would say that is progress.