Originally published at

March 12, 2015


“I know very well that these transgressions are not really transgressive, but are just artificial coloring serving to re-emphasize the grayness of social reality.”

Slavoj Zizek

I admit it, I caved. Curiosity peaked, and the phenomenon of “mommy porn” just would not go away, so I admit it: I watched Fifty Shades of Grey, and now I have to take a long, long shower, mostly for the tackiness and hammy acting, which I’m not sure will ever wash away.

I was not scandalized by the film; it was rather a tamed and unimaginative version of La Belle et la Bête. For the mature, emotionally stable adult, the film was a flop as a stimulant, neither appetizing sexually nor artistically; it was just a dud, hardly worthy of review. The dangerous and noteworthy thing about the film lies in its tipping point as a cultural phenomenon, and its influence on younger people or those with immature minds.

As a socio-cultural phenomenon it displays the Marquee de Sade’s fundamental lesson that the passions unleashed lead necessarily to increasing violence. A 19-year-old, Mohammad Hossain, used the film as inspiration for his own criminal reenactment. If it had not been the film, it would probably have been the Koran in his case.

Elsewhere, an 11-year-old British boy was sent home from school for dressing up as the male protagonist for world book day. The child and the mother in question defended the costume by comparing it with the level of violence that young children are exposed to, and the ubiquitous media exposure that Fifty Shades has garnished. They used the example that the child had earlier acted in a Lord of the Flies stage production, in which he dramatically beat another child, which is not an adequate defense of her confused parenting.

The latest generation is being raised on increasingly sexually explicit and violent media content, which has little or no redeeming social value – hardcore porn readily available online, realistic violence depicted in video games or graphic action and horror movies.

“We come to free you with our sexual organs.”

Instead of curbing the availability of such materials to malleable and under-prepared young minds, which would entail heavy regulation of multibillion dollar industries, the “solution” preferred is usually more “sexual education” through the public school system, aimed at younger and younger children. How ironic, then, that many of those who have pushed such “sexual education” on our youth often happen to be Jewish liberal perverts, like the former Ontario deputy minister of education Benjamin Levin, recently convicted on pedophile charges.

Levin was instrumental in shaping the new sexual education curriculum in Ontario, which was controversial for sexualizing very young children, even before the scandal broke. The Ontario Liberals, under the leadership of lesbian Premier Kathleen Wynne, hurled insults at those who questioned the new curriculum and Levin’s involvement in it. One Jewish article even argues that there is no conflict of interest between Levin’s peccadilloes and his crafting of the new curriculum.

This connection between Jews and sexual perversion is more than a mere coincidence, and can be related both to Jewish “sexual leftism” as well as the the Fifty Shades phenomenon, both of which have strongly Jewish characteristics.

In 1919, the Jewish-dominated Communist Party, led by Bela Kun, briefly seized power in Hungary. During its short life, the regime practiced “cultural terrorism” as well as normal terrorism. The former included “sexual bolshevism”:

“He launched an explosive sex education program. Special lectures were organized in Hungarian schools and literature printed and distributed to instruct children about free love, about the nature of sexual intercourse, about the archaic nature of the bourgeois family codes, about the outdatedness of monogamy, and the irrelevance of religion, which deprives man of all pleasures. Children urged thus to reject and deride paternal authority and the authority of the Church, and to ignore precepts of morality, easily and spontaneously turned into delinquents with whom only the police could cope. This call to rebellion addressed to Hungarian children was matched by a call to rebellion addressed to Hungarian women. This was a precursor to what Cultural Marxism would later bring into American schools.”
The Historical Roots of Political Correctness by Raymond V. Raehn

Similar notions would reappear shortly afterwards in neighbouring Austria in the “sexpol” theories put into practice by the Jewish psychologist Wilhem Reich. As the Hungarian Jewish writer Arthur Koestler remembered, Reich “expounded the theory that … only through a full, uninhibited release of the sexual urge could the working-class realise its revolutionary potentialities and historic mission.”

Bela Kun

Present day “sexual education” theories directly stem from these “pioneers,” with their characteristic left-wing, Jewish radicalism, so it should be no surprise that the Fifty Shades phenomenon also has pronounced Jewish characteristics.

The novel found its first champions and most ardent fans amongst middle-aged Jewess Hamptonites and New Yorkers. David Sax of the New York Times opined that Orthodox Jews were the first hardcore devotees of Fifty Shades. The book’s early success was basically a case of Jewish women “schvitzing” at a raunchy tale.

I have not, nor do I intend to read the critically lambasted, yet insanely popular, print trilogy, therefore this analysis will focus instead primarily on the film adaptation.

The author of the series is a British Jewess by the name of Erika Mitchell, who uses the pen-name E.L. James. That she made the male protagonist’s name “Christian” perhaps only makes sense as a degradation of Christianity itself, while his surname is an obvious allusion to the homosexual dandy novelist Oscar Wilde’s Dorian Grey character.

The film’s soundtrack consists of the latest primitive “negritudes”: Beyonce’s insistent groaning and the high pitched chanteusing of The Weekend’s black male – a clear attempt to androgynize the sexual scenes in order to make them hip and youthful.

It’s All Business

The story centers on the relationship between a virgin college student named Anastasia Steele and Christian Grey, a 27-year-old, self-made billionaire with a penchant for the “anti-vanilla.” Grey makes it clear that he is a self-centered business man, and rebukes Anastasia for suggesting that he has a heart due to his charity work in Africa. He reminds her that this is just good business. After Grey makes Anastasia sign a nondisclosure agreement he permits her first entrance into a hermetically sealed, fully stocked and furnished BDSM “playroom,” as he calls it.

The sealed room is essentially a symbol of the atomisation of the individual and the supposed desocialization and depoliticization of sex, which itself is the triumph of a particular ideological perspective. By successive waves of liberal ideology, sex has become divorced from the rest of human concerns. It is a thing-in-itself, independent of larger concerns or issues, something left to the discretion of consenting adults (at least until NAMBLA gets its way).

The de-politicization of sex has its contemporary roots in Enlightenment thought – Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative laid some of the important groundwork. The “playroom” also links to Hakim Bey’s concept of temporary autonomous zones (TAZ):

“The overall aim was to highlight indeterminate zones within late capitalism, everyday occurrences that refuse, whether by accident or design, to be incorporated into dominant narratives… Bey divines resistance as embodied in everyday instances or moments that refuse to engage directly with the Spectacle, that lie outside of simulation and recuperation, inhabiting ‘cracks and vacancies’ only to disappear and re-form elsewhere, thus avoiding detection and invasion. Such spaces he terms ‘temporary autonomous zones’ — an uprising which does not engage directly with the State, a guerrilla operation which liberates an area (of land, of time, of imagination) and then dissolves itself to re-form elsewhere/elsewhen, before the State can crush it.”
Simon Sellars, Hakim Bey, Repopulating the Temporary Autonomous Zone.

Hakim Bey, the chief theoretician of TAZs, is “coincidentally” also a member of NAMBLA. The desire to be “autonomous” in contemporary discourse does not mean the autarky of the state or the autonomy of the race. It essentially boils down to an offshore bank account or the traveling seraglio of the tag your sponsor crowd. Incidentally, this conforms to the dominant ethos – cash nexus and rootless power. Both these aspects, which define Christian Grey’s character, correlate closely with Jewish constructs. His “playroom” is nothing less than the confirmation of the prevailing power structure – the transgressive false transgression, like kiddy-fiddler Bey’s TAZ. In other words, the film virtually functions as a shiksas-in-training-guide.

Within the playroom, Christian and Anastasia proceed to have this revealing exchange:

Steele: You’re a sadist.
Grey: I’m a dominate.
Steele: What does that mean?
Grey: It means I want you to willingly surrender yourself to me.
Steele: Why would I do that?
Grey: To please me.
Steele: To please you, how?
Grey: I have rules if you follow them I’ll reward you, if you don’t I’ll punish you.

This in a nutshell is the basis of the operant conditioning, which was scientifically applied through the corporate model in the early 20th century; the model that punishes you for being against the liberal ethos, for having your own mind or will.

Suits you, sir!

It is significant that Christian only ever wears a business suit, and that he identifies himself as a businessman. He is the quintessential corporate sadist. His character is emotionless, or at least not in touch with his emotions or conscience. He is tactical and methodical, not only in his business, but also in his personal and sex life, where he utilizes the technical and mechanical capability to dominate. He seeks out those whom he hopes will come to enjoy their servitude.

This is perhaps why the anti-corporatist movie Fight Club is the product of a white male mind, albeit a homosexual one. While minorities and women especially jump at the chance to climb the social ladder and become subservient corporate drones, the white male remains able to see beyond the horseshit, beyond the “team building” exercises, the retreats, the sales quotas, and the workplace “safe zone” codes of conduct, to the system of control that lies beneath it all; a system whose essence is family corrosion and racial demise.

Following the exchange quoted above, Christian proceeds to tell Anastasia that he has a contract that is fairly detailed, which stipulates the things she would be willing to try. Later on, when Anastasia expresses reservations about the whole thing, he tells her to “try and have an open mind.” This, of course, reveals the truth behind the liberal slogan “keep an open mind,” which really means be open to perversity and control.

Some on the right or in the manosphere view the film as demonstrating and even venerating patriarchal values, given that it is the male who is dominant, and that under the visage of liberal equality or even radical feminism, the fairer sex really just wants to be dominated even to the point of rape and humiliation, thus invaliding decades of feminism. However, that interpretation is undermined when it is revealed that Christian got his start in the BDSM game by being the submissive to one of his mother’s female friends.

The issue here is not sex per se, but power and the sexualization of power and subsequently wealth. While a Jewish mentality might conflate sex and power as one aspect of the same thing, women seem to respond to the content of Fifty Shades precisely because it represents the overcoming of male physical dominance over the female. Sexuality, as both Delilah and Abraham knew, is a woman’s chief weapon. The latter traded his wife into Pharaoh’s harem for wealth – that is the Jewish way.

Romance is a uniquely Western phenomenon, derived from male longing for the object of desire. The real story of Fifty Shades is that Grey is transformed, defeated, and, in a sense, de-Jewed, by the deployment of female weaponry, namely sex. The story’s dynamic is the development of an inverse Stockholm syndrome, resulting in love.

While there is a fundamental difference between Right-wing and Left-wing sexuality, Fifty Shades seems to veer towards the Traditionalist Right through a leftist detour. Perhaps those Jewish women who heralded the book’s rise were just Sarahs wanting their Abrahams to make them feel special. Perhaps this is the significance of Grey’s Christian “christian name” – representing a non-Jewish ideal of love.

In the end, when the tally is totaled, love is a Right-wing phenomenon, because love is particular; it is a passionate and emotional attachment, formed in a mutually exclusive bond. The Left, by contrast, stands for universalism, commoditization, gay pride parades, exhibitionism, and promiscuous animal lust. The Left is Annie Sprinkle spreading her vaginal lips to a crowded bar in the name of feminism. The Left is Jewish-dominated pornography. The Left is militant miscegenation and shiksas under the heel and dick of money and power.

While Fifty Shades may have started as a Leftist exercise in false transgression, it ends up turning in on itself and reiterating the traditionalist view of sex and love. The Jewish women who first got behind the book were striving, I think, for the code of Western love that they wished their Jewish husbands were capable of – something that is just not in them, and never will be.

It’s a White thing. You wouldn’t understand.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s