About Me | Writing My Wrongs

All posts in About Me

Never Let Me Go

by Suz on 2012/05/10 in About Me, Triggers with 4 Comments

The movie Never Let Me Go is a dystopian drama based on Kazuo Ishaiguro’s 2005 novel of the same name. The film stars actors Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley and Andrew Garfield playing the roles of Kathy, Ruth and Tommy, respectively.

On the surface the movie appears at first to be the story of a boarding school young love triangle between Kathy, Ruth and Tommy. As the film progresses, the viewer learns that all three characters are scientific specimens that have been created for the sole purpose of providing their organs to severely ill patients. The children are “born” and raised at a school named Hailsham. The students are called Donors and Carers. Technically all are Donors but until you are indeed donating you are caring for the Donors while they recover from their surgeries. You remain a Carer until you become a donor.

Ruth, the role played by Kiera Knightly, is consumed during the movie with finding her “double”. It is never stated yet can be easily assumed that her double is the person whom she was cloned after, the original owner of the DNA pumping through her Donor veins. Since the children of Hailsham are created in a laboratory and raised in the school, they technically have no parents yet they are somehow aware they come from somewhere. There is a touching scene where Kiera goes into town due to a reported sighting of her double. She is anxious and giddy and short of breath at the idea of seeing her double. She does not seem to be seeking the other version of herself but rather where she came from, a parent or family of origin. Disappointingly, she does not find her double rather she finds out she has been mislead.

I felt empathy for these characters. They were people, they loved, and they cried, they fought, and they deceived. They possessed, as we learn late in the movie, a soul, which we also learn is the criteria for being viewed as human (yet somehow, oddly, not guaranteed all the rights associated with non donor humans… sound familiar?).

The film critic Roger Ebert says in his review of the movie “Greater love hath no man, than he who gives me his kidney, especially his second one”. I wonder what he would say about a woman (Donor) that gives her child, especially her only one, to another woman dying for a child she cannot have on her own.

While I found a great deal of the film to parallel adoption, nothing touched me more than the title – Never Let Me Go. The title, along with the plot line, reminded me that I, and so many other mothers like me, should never have let go of our children. We should never have allowed them to be Donor children for those that could not conceive their own. We should have been their Carers.

Mommy Porn

by Suz on 2012/05/07 in About Me, Books with 2 Comments

I finally finished the final book in the Fifty Shades Trilogy. If you are not familiar with this book series, let me share that it is the #1 New York Times best selling erotic fiction noted for its particularly erotic scenes featuring BDSM. The plot traces the relationship between Ana Steele, a recent college graduate and Christian Grey, a manipulative, domineering, attractive millionaire that is into BDSM. Oh yeah, he is also an adoptee having been raised till he was four by his “crack whore birthmother”.

Female Sexual Deviants

My local TV station did a piece on the trilogy and called the book “mommy porn”. I laughed at the reference at the time but later wondered if I should be offended. Why is female sexuality, desire, and all related activities considered well, porn, meaning something that should not be discussed? Alternatively, why shouldn’t there be “mommy porn”? Are mothers supposed to drop their sexual desire the instant they give birth? Why is Ana assumed to have such low self esteem and that she should not tolerate (or enjoy) such sexual activities? The New Zealand Herald stated that the book “will win no prizes for its prose” and that “there are some exceedingly awful descriptions,” but that 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.

Slap the heroine for having so little self respect? Huh? Was it ever considered she might have LIKED the sexual activities? We need to keep in mind that the character was a virgin when she became involved with Christian. She had no other benchmark for what a “normal” sexual relationship might be. Clearly she was conflicted about his preference for BDSM and I believe she did a fairly good job of articulating that to him. She stated her hard limits, she left him when they were violated, and she continually discussed (with the reader and Christian) her conflict. By the end of the third book, it is fairly obvious that she has rubbed off on him and mellowed him just as much as he has influenced her.

Ana Steele had options. She had a place to live, an education, a job, a family. She was not a sexual slave. I did not feel sorry for her nor did I feel she was completely lacking in self respect. She was not a prisoner in her relationship with Christian. She CHOSE to be there. Furthermore, if she enjoyed that type of “kinky fuckery”, enjoyed being demeaned or submissive, why is that a bad thing? Is that sort of sexual deviancy (if you choose to use that word) something that is acceptable by men only? Important to note that prior to being a Dom, Christian was a submissive. I personally agreed with Dr. Flynn in this regard. Christian and Ana were consenting adults engaging in an alternative sexual lifestyle.

It is likely no surprise that I would take this position on Ana. I was (and technically still am) considered a sexual deviant. I had sex outside of marriage. I enjoyed it. Gasp! For shame! Get the holy water! I am a female that has had – and continues to have – a healthy sexual appetite. I am not ashamed to admit it and will fight anyone who suggests women like me are deviant.

The Adoption Angle

It is noted early in book one that Christian Grey is an adoptee. This fact surprised me more than the BDSM. It is suggested, overtly, that he is a deeply damaged individual and that damage was caused by the “crack whore birthmother” not the adoption. Adoption by very wealthy doctors and lawyers “saved him” (how boringly cliché). I won’t go into it much; I don’t want to spoil it for you if you wish to read it, but I will say in Christian’s case adoption did seem to be a good thing. His crack whore birthmother was dead and father and extended family unknown.

I did not mind the adoption theme. It was there, in the background, a sub plot, but it was not whacking you in the face on every page (unlike Christian is with his riding crops and floggers) Yes, some of it was cliché, but some of it was rather, well, not cliché. Ana insisted repeatedly to him that he loved his birthmother, he had to, all babies love their mothers, regardless of what they did or do to them. I liked where she went with that thought, several times. I will add that the fact that Christian preferred to engage in BDSM relationships with women that looked exactly like his crack whore birthmother was a bit, well, cliché once again. (Yet even as I say that I am reminded of the picture I once saw of my daughters’ first boyfriend. He bore an eerie resemblance to her natural father and she had never even seen him. It kinda freaked me out. Weird how that shit works, eh?)

The books were easy to read, engaging, I liked the characters (and their crazy sexual appetities). If I am accused of reading mommy porn, so be it. I am good with that.