"Conservative MP calls for Fifty Shades of Grey boycott"
The widely panned movie in question is based on a laughably craptastic novel that's hugely popular among women, having sold over 100 million copies worldwide.
It's not a politician's job to publicly campaign against a particular work of (highly) popular fiction, and I doubt that any woman who intends to see the film will be dissuaded from doing so just because a grey-haired 67-year-old Conservative MP suggests a boycott -- what's far more likely is that the talk of a boycott will boost ticket sales.
As an MP Joy Smith has advocated for some eminently just causes that fall very much within the purview of legislative government. Although she isn't calling for legislation to deal with the film, as an elected official her call for a boycott crosses into some slightly uncomfortable territory.
Creative expression in the non-publicly-funded marketplace of ideas -- as distinct from, say, government-funded advocacy-"art", or school curricula -- should be separate from politics, and Smith's boycott campaign has no upside for the Conservatives, IMO.
Your mileage may vary.
An unpopular opinion on an even more unpopular movie. It's this crap that makes more people curious to see the movie.
You are right, it has little benefit for the Conservatives.
The people happy someone took a stand are conservatives.
“is set to warp the minds of a new generation”
If she talking about the same generation that has been exposed to Gore's bullshit global warming video, I'd say her concerns about mind-warping are far, far too late.
Pity she hadn't spoke out about that.
Don't presume to speak for conservatives. Personally, I don't think politicians should involve themselves too much in what people read, or see, etc.
If you think that sort of thing should be a politician's purview you'd better be careful what you wish for, because there's an awful lot of people on the progressive side who feel the way you do, and they have a lot more "muscle" in terms of disruptive capability (they seem to have a lot more free time -- *cough cough*), an allied media, etc. They'd absolutely *love* to have their politicians "take a stand" on the "hateful" expressions of Christians, etc. --
heck, they're already doing that.
Censorious, finger-up-yo-ass thought-policing has become the almost exclusive purview of the left in the last ten or fifteen years. Let them keep it.
Doesn't the MP have better uses of her taxpayer-funded time?
When someone can do a couple clicks and be watching hard core stuff while posting on SDA, why would anyone object to someone paying for a ticket to watch bad soft core stuff? While I do object to bringing certain subject matter into my home that might be inappropriate for children, I can't object to someone going out of their way and spending a dime on anything as long as it isn't done in the streets and scares the animals.
Recently there was a popular survey that stated conservatives have the most satisfying sex lives. This old bird is obviously an exception.
Lots of free publicity, I wonder if he gets a kick-back?
Winnipeg must be over-run with racists & looney-tunes.
She is a conservative social engineer lost in space
I'm withholding my opinion until I've seen it for myself with my good friend, Mr Big Ears.
Which part of Mind Your Own Business don't these people understand?
A mistake for sure, she has a right to her opinion but that's where it ends.
I vote to send her up Shitt's Creek without a paddle.
Blue rinse syndrome...
So a person named Joy Smith who happens to be a Conservative MP is calling for a boycott of the movie.
I didn't read she was representing the government. I didn't read she was introducing a private members bill calling for censorship. I didn't read she is using tax dollars for an ad campaign. Seems its just her opinion.
Personally, I haven't witnessed social augmentation through the propagation of subservient sexual exploitation. But I'm just a back woods prairie boy. I suppose Toronto has entered into its utopia via such.
She's currently my MP.
Read her wiki page.
She's done some good in Parliament.
But, if she hadn't decided to retire she'd keep going past what I would consider reasonable.
For instance, working on legislation requiring all Canadians to be excluded from access to adult material on the internet unless they decided to opt in.
Well sure, that dog won't hunt but she only offered her opinion asking that people don't pay to see degraded sex. I like what she said about 'Pretty Woman', a movie that glorified prostitution and had the most unlikely 'happy ending'.
She won't be running again in 2015 so her opinions will no longer be a danger to public order.
"I didn't read she was representing the government"
an elected MP, and you say what???
I agree with you, nold (and with dance...dancetotheradio above you). Smith's assessment of Pretty Woman and "Fifty Shades" gibes pretty closely with mine; the point where I differ from her is that I think that movies/film etc. aren't really fit subjects for retail politics, at least not at the point where it involves any sort of social campaigning (as opposed to making observations, which everyone is entitled to do).
I haven't seen the film, but my ex-GF was given the book by her sister, and -- leaving aside the fact that it's almost shockingly badly-written -- it's just morally/spiritually septic; I don't know how else to put it. I know that women have been devouring books in the bodice ripper fantasy romance-genre for about fifty years, and you could argue that "Fifty Shades" is just a pruriently detailed extension of that (physically forceful man, monogamous love for the heroine), but it's just kinda...revolting, not because of its graphic s*xuality, but because it's so empty and dissolute.
It's hard to explain, but it's just knot-in-your-gut ugly. Its popularity is a sign of cultural sickness (IMO) - and semi-illiteracy, it's that poorly-written - but it's not really an "MP" kinda issue.
Given that the institutional left owns the culture, doesn't she know that it is imprudent to wander into their turf. This reminds me of Dan Quayle stepping into it over Murphy Brown. Conservatives are not allowed to opine on culture because they have all been tainted with the "Moral Majority" shtick even if they're atheists. This rule is thoroughly enforced by the Court Eunuch Media.
For conservatives to go along with it, it is a form of self censorship. If you don't know where your politician stands on cultural issues and what their plans are regarding legislation and voting, you shouldn't be voting for them. Having to hide one's morality in order to get elected is immoral. Without owning the culture, politics is irrelevant when it comes to changing it.
I assume she's a backbencher, so no, she doesn't.
Yet another example of the burden that Harper has to bear.
None of her business.
I may or maybe not a fan of 50 but I can make my own choices.
How could she not know that this would hurt "the brand"???
Article states she's not running in the next election so her boycott won't matter politically.
Regardless her statements
"“50 Shades of Grey will convey to countless women that abuse and coercion can be romantic, and to men that deep down women like to be controlled and assaulted,”
and
“However consent, under physical or psychological duress, is not consent.”
certainly creates a conundrum for the "progressive" mind to wrap themselves around. Kind of funny actually.
"Lady Chatterly's Lover" was banned at one time too, and not necessarily w/o reason. The times weren't ready for it, and some people today might not be either. (I never read it) but considering the author's skill, it is unlikely that this "Shades" thing will go down in literary history. (I haven't read it either). That said, the critic in question is entitled to her convictions and her critics here, are too. Move on - I won't be seeing the movie either.
If she was a Liberal, we wouldn't be having this commentary.
It's only wrong for conservatives to voice opinions on moral or immoral issues.
Yes, it is badly written for sure. I was curious about all the hype(this was even before talk of a movie) but I had to force myself to read it and I persisted to bitter end out of stubbornness. Personally I have no issues with the sexual kinks portrayed in the book, I have indulged in some of them myself) but again, it was so poorly written. I guess it's true, women have no taste for true literature. (:
If conservative politicians would just keep their mouths shut about books/films like '50 Shades', they'd crash and burn on their own craptacular merits.
But no, you've got to get on your high horse and bloviate. Now everyone is going to rush in to defend it as a daring masterpiece, and a martyr to freedom of speech and sexuality at the hands of the dastardly moral majority right wing boogeyman.
The left was waiting for this, they know they can spin this for weeks and drown out anything important (but inconvenient) that might get people's attention, and you delivered yourself to them on a silver platter.
it's conservative to allow people to be responsible for their actions. It's liberal/socialist to dictate!
Bang on, Frank Q.
A quick google search reveals a number of feminist and domestic violence groups that are campaigning for a boycott of the movie.
"...watching hard core stuff while posting on SDA."
Well... what else does one do with a Saturday night??? Besides that I scored 12 Rollies in 16 oz. cans for $10.00 at my local 7. Pretty much sums up a perfect evening. I used to go out and stuff; meet women, go to the movies etc. But now I realize there's simply too much expense in all that. I'd far rather spend my money on a bitch'n exhaust than an exhausting bitch.
Another much ado about nothing whine from a politician that wants to be your grandmother too. Personally, I might go and see it only to satisfy my curiosity but I already have an idea this is just a film adaptation of a Harlequin Romance novel. For the guys who have never read one of those books it is just fluff with themes that appeal to a lot of women. Actually pretty raunchy stuff at times. Kind of like a soap opera. There is always Lance the stable boy, or Julio the pool boy and some forbidden secret.
If a movie can brainwash the youth of today then ban The Interview like North Korea demanded or any of the multitude of cinematic crapola coming out of Hollywood. Ban dirty dancing too 'cause you know nothing good comes out of that hip gyrating devil stuff. /sarc eh
Being a woman as a political card......played badly.
Ban 50 Shades? Same mind set as that nut politician who wants to ban yoga pants. However if I had to make a choice, I would keep the yoga pants.
Oh, come on!
I'm down with Joy (Smith, M.P., that is), although she's being far too serious, of course.
Have a look at (linked at Instapundit):
http://thefederalist.com/2015/02/13/fifty-shades-a-cry-for-help-from-women-betrayed-by-feminism/
Which explains quite a few things, actually, including Mr. Trudeau, Jr.'s appeal to, um, "ladies of a certain age", the Liberal Party of Canada's searingly unsuccessful "child care" promises over the past 10 elections (or is it 29?) and, er, Mr. Harper and his success ("The Liberals want to turn the raising of your children over to the "experts"; well I know millions of experts and their names are...).
As it happens, I actually read the whole first book: apart from the facts of the matter (that it was written by a, you know, "lady (?) of a certain age", and that everything the "critics" have said about it is all demonstrably true), the most interesting part of my experience with that particular volume was how I happened to come into possession of it.
My good wife borrowed it from a co-worker of her's at a girls' co-worker X-Mas party hosted by the latter a few years ago, after the latter said about it, "I just can't get into it". I noticed it on the bed-side table one day, and asked about it. My wife said, "I just can't get into it".
So, on that sordid basis, and on account of all the hype, and on account of the two women involved being "modern-women" and mental health-care professionals, I thought I'd check it out.
Suffice to say that I'm definitely down with the boycott, which will be dutifully and categorically observed by me.
Besides which, as a semi-retired, very-happily-married early-middle-aged man, I can assure you that the only thing better for your s*x life than having a Dyson Digital Slim vacuum cleaner is...having two! We picked the second one up at Target the other day in Stratford ON (day one of the sale). As it happens, I have the 62 and 72, both called "Animal".
Eat your heart out, Justin.
Sigh... I'm going to have to be the dissenting voice here. Not that I'm for state censorship in any way, but I fail to see how this hurts conservatives when plenty of left-wing feminist groups are condemning the book for its glorification of violence against women. If anything this MP is jumping the bandwagon and forming common cause with liberals on this issue. Just point this fact out if anyone tries to paint conservatives as prudes because of this one politician's stance. Chill, people!
Boycott doesn't mean ban.
BTW, the liberal 24-hour CityTV news newscrawl didn't describe this as "Krazy Kristians Against Fun" but as (paraphrasing) 'MP says movie encourages violence against women'. That's not going to drive any LIVs into an anti-CPC frenzy as they read/hear statements like that every day in the MSM.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/envelope/cotown/la-et-ct-fifty-shades-of-grey-kingsman-box-office-record-20150215-story.html
The movie can hardly be called unpopular, it did $81 million on it's first weekend.
The MP shouldn't have bothered to make a public statement about this or any other movie. Maybe she's a liberal trying to make conservatives look more the Victorian fuddy-duddies the left already thinks we are.
I would rather ban politicians, but having said that, she is entitled to her opinion, and since she is asking for a boycott, which is voluntary, she is free to voice her opinion.
I won't be watching the movie, simply because I don't support anything Hollywierd puts out. I may steal it in time, don't ask how, but they won't get a dime from me, and since Canada freely dispenses my tax dollars to these "entertainment" industries, I do not feel guilty.
http://www.pwc.com/ca/en/entertainment-media/film-video-tax-incentives-canada.jhtml
I wonder how this all would have played out if it were a feminist who called for the boycott?