Need more evidence that 50 Shades is about an abusive relationship?!

Okay everyone, so I currently look a bit like this:

But with frizzier hair.  You get the idea.

 

And why do I look so frustrated?  Because in the last 24 hours, I've had literally dozens of Fifty Shades fans contact me to tell me, amongst other things, that I:

• Am "retarded" for seeing abuse in the books.
• That EL James is on the side of abuse victims and I'm "trivialising" the subject.
• That I haven't experienced abuse if my ex was anything like Christian Grey.
• That I deserve physical violence for speaking out against the books.  And yes, that last person got her ass reported to Twitter.

Now okay, I realise that if I "refuse to shut up about it," as one person charmingly put it, then I'm bound to get some comeback from the people who think Christian Grey is like, OMG, the sexiest EVER!!!!1!!one!!! And I'm prepared for that.  I'm prepared to have strangers tell me they disagree with my opinion, because that's life.  I mean really, if I thought the world was a place where everyone agrees all the time and we're all the best of friends, I'd be as ridiculously naive as Anastasia Steele herself.

 

I searched Google for pictures of "Anastasia Steele" or "Inner Goddess" but the results annoyed me so much, I needed to put a picture of my dog here to calm me down, instead.  You're welcome.

 

But the one thing I will not ever tolerate is people who, without any knowledge to back up their claim, contact me in shouty capitals saying: "THERE IS NO ABUSE IN THIS BOOK."  So I'm writing this blog as a final word on the subject and I'm having to drag out yet more evidence, because apparently, my TWO previous attempts to explain just why the books do glorify abuse just don't provide enough already.

 

If you click here you will find a checklist of signs of abuse.  I've included a link, because I didn't want to be accused of making any of this up.  And if you've yet to shred, burn or wipe your backside on your copy of Fifty Shades, then you can also check what I'm about to say with that as well.

 

I  intend to make my way through this checklist and use evidence from the book to support my belief that the relationship portrayed in 50 Fifty Shades of Grey and the two subsequent sequels IS an abusive one.  And I can't quite believe I'm still having to go to these lengths, but hey. People apparently aren't seeing it for themselves.

 

 

So here we go.  These are some common indicators of abuse...

 

Jealousy

What the website says: The person who abuses may question the partner about social contact, makes accusations of flirting, or can be jealous of time spent with family, friends or children. He or she may call the partner frequently during the day or drop by unexpectedly. He or she may refuse to let the partner work or engage in behaviours such as checking car mileage, asking friends to watch the partner, or asking the children to report.

 

The evidence in 50 Shades: Christian hates the fact that Ana is still friends with Jose, who he knows has feelings for her and who once tried it on with her.  In spite of the fact that Ana says she has forgiven Jose and that they're just friends, Christian is firmly against her seeing him and when they visit his photographic show at the art gallery in book two, Christian makes a point of buying every single picture of Ana.  When she goes for a drink with Jose, Christian describes himself as "palm-twitchingly mad," meaning he wants to hit her as punishment, rather than purely as a sexual thing.  He also calls, texts and emails her constantly, even when she's at work.  He travels hundreds of miles to show up unexpectedly when Ana asks for some space to visit her mother.  He buys the company she works for and he has her frequently followed by his security, claiming it's for her own protection.

 

Controlling Behaviour

 

What the website says: The person who abuses may say that he or she is merely concerned for the partner's safety or need to use time well. He or she will be angry if the partner is late returning from an errand, will question the partner closely. He or she may not let the partner make personal decisions about the house, clothing, going to religious services or out with friends. He or she may keep all the money or even make the partner ask permission to leave the house.

 

The evidence in 50 Shades: Christian gets mad if Ana doesn't reply to his messages almost instantly.  He bombards her with questions as to where she is and who she's with.  He orders her food for her in restaurants and buys her a whole new wardrobe so that he can have control over what she wears.  When she goes out in an outfit he disapproves of, he sulks and gets angry.  When she sunbathes topless, he bruises her body so that she can't do it again.  He buys the company she works for so that he can have control over her whilst she's there, too.  Ana feels that she has to ask his permission to ride a jet ski on honeymoon.  He actually tells her he needs total control and blames his abusive childhood for this.  Ana refers to "his demands, his need to control, his scary vices."

 

Exert: “You sound like a control freak." The words are out of my mouth before I can stop them.

"Oh, I exercise control in all things, Miss Steele," he says without a trace of humour in his smile.” 

 

Is he making you aroused yet?  Christian Grey, that is, not the cat.  Although the cat would probably make a better partner, all things considered...

 

Quick Involvement

 

What the website says: Many abused persons dated or knew their abuser for less than six months before they were engaged or living together. The abuser comes on like a whirl-wind "you are the only person I could ever talk to", "I've never felt loved like this by anyone". He or she needs someone desperately and will pressure the partner to commit.

 

The evidence in 50 Shades: Christian and Ana are married within three months of meeting.  It only takes a month or so before Christian is begging her to move in with him, telling her he has never met anyone like her and she's the only woman he could ever love.

 

Unrealistic Expectations

 

What the website says: The person who abuses is very dependent on the partner to meet all of his or her needs. He or she expects the partner to be the perfect mate, parent, lover, and friend. He or she will say things like "if you love me, I am all you need—you are all I need".

 

The evidence in 50 Shades: Christian's control is centred around making Ana the perfect partner for him, regardless of his claims to love her as she is.  He knows she is inexperienced sexually and that she's too wilful to be a good submissive (he even goes as far as to admit that to her), but he continues manipulating and coercing her into agreeing to his needs anyway.  He tells her "I want you to willingly surrender yourself to me in all things" and "I want your world to begin and end with me,"  thus perpetuating the notion that anything else in her life should be secondary and is therefore unimportant.  These aren't realistic expectations, but Ana feels compelled to try to meet them.

 

I'm pretty sure her backstage dressing room demands are less ridiculous than Christian Grey's relationship ones.

 

Blames Others For Own Problems

 

What the website says: The person who abuses takes no responsibility for things that go wrong in his or her life. The abused person is somehow at fault even if not present, like a problem at work.

 

The evidence in 50 shades: Christian explains his entire personality as being a result of his abusive childhood, conveniently forgetting that as an adult, he has a choice about how he behaves.  If I sound angry, it's because I AM, seeing as my own emotionally abusive ex blamed his childhood for the atrocious way he treated me.  Oh and he also said things like "you make me feel violent, Emma."  But I digress...  Christian also tells Ana that her "stubbornness" is responsible for his "twitching palm."  He refers to his mother as "the crack whore" and makes no real effort to take ownership of his own behaviour.

 

Hypersensitivity

 

What the website says: The person who abuses is easily insulted. He or she claims hurt feelings or takes any set-back as a personal attack. He or she will rant about the injustice of things that are really just a part of living, like working overtime or getting a parking ticket.

 

The evidence in 50 Shades: Again, this is one I find hard, because my ex was prone to this.  Anyway, when Ana leaves Christian at the end of book 1, Christian reacts in the 2nd as though his entire world had been destroyed, in spite of the fact he'd only known her for a few weeks and she'd proved herself an unsuitable match for him. “I've never felt the way I felt when you left, Anastasia. I would move heaven and earth to avoid feeling like that again.”   Any tiny sign that Ana might have left, or might not succumb to his needs is met with an over dramatic response - sign of huge emotional immaturity on Grey's part.

 

Pictured: Christian Grey.

 

Cruelty to Animals or Children

 

What the website says: This person may be brutal to animals and insensitive to their pain or suffering. He or she may expect children to be capable of doing things far beyond their ability or may tease children until they cry. He or she may not want to eat at the table with children, or expect children to stay in their rooms all evening.

 

The evidence in 50 Shades: Okay, I'll admit defeat on this one.  I see no evidence of Christian Grey being cruel towards animals or children.  But then my ex wasn't either and that doesn't make him any less of an abusive bastard.  That said, the whole, sucking his son's fingers and suggesting his unborn daughter loves sex already thing at the end of the book is bloody disturbing.

 

"Playful" Use of Force in Sex

 

What the website says: This person may throw and hold the partner down during sex. He or she will be unconcerned about whether the partner wants sex and use sulking, anger, or guilt to manipulate the partner into compliance. He or she may begin sexual activity while the partner is still asleep, or demand sex even though the partner is tired or sick.

 

The evidence in 50 shades: We've all read it; we all know Christian's into BDSM.  That in itself isn't a problem, because BDSM in itself isn't abuse and to suggest as much is deeply offensive to anyone who practises it.  However, Ana is manipulated into agreeing to a sexual lifestyle she knows precisely nothing about and which she says - many times - she feels uncomfortable about.  She tells him: "I just want you, Christian.  Not all the add-ons," but he insists "they're part of who I am."  In spite of this enormous gulf between what they're looking for sexually, Christian doesn't give up.  Instead, he employs subtle mind games and manipulation to get what he wants, playing on the "fifty shades of fucked up" element of his nature and insisting he NEEDS her to agree to his sexual demands.  When Ana is confused about her relationship with Christian (I forget whether this happens in the 1st or 2nd book) and wants to talk, Christian begins trying to encourage her to have sex rather than talk about it.  When she protests that she doesn't want sex right now, he ignores her and continues until she is forced to "give in."  He also gets her drunk so that she agrees to his demands.  Coercion like that is only a step away from rape and I see no reason to romanticise it.  Then of course, there's the end of the first book, in which Christian beats Ana in an act I see as domestic abuse, not BDSM.  No, Ana doesn't use her safeword.  But that's because she can't, what with being in agony.  She's in tears and crying out in pain, but Christian doesn't stop.  Later, in the 3rd book of the series, Christian deliberately puts handcuffs too tightly around her wrists and ankles in order to leave "deep, red welts" on her body and he also deliberately bruises her chest in order to "punish" her for sunbathing topless.  Ana hasn't consented to having her body marked in such a way.  This is NOT BDSM. THIS IS DOMESTIC ABUSE.

 

Currently the only thing getting me through this blog.

 

Verbal Abuse

 

What the website says: In addition to saying things that are meant to be cruel and hurtful, the person who abuses degrades the partner, swears at the partner, and minimises the partner's accomplishments. He or she may say the partner is stupid, and unable to function alone. This will often take place in conjunction with sleep deprivation, where the abuser wakes the partner in the night to verbally assault or interrogate.

 

Evidence in 50 Shades: I constantly hear women telling me that Christian Grey is "a sweetheart," because he's "so complimentary" to Ana.  In actual fact, many of Grey's so called "compliments" are loaded with sarcasm or alternative meaning.  I know this from experience, so please don't tell me how very wrong I am - even if EL James never intended to write the character this way, that's what she has done.  He's a classic headworker; saying things intended to get into her brain and make her doubt herself.  He tells her she's very confident "except for when you blush, which is often," thus making her question the way she portrays herself to others.  Also, even the things he says that are supposedly nice are written as though he says them in a nasty manner.  Have a look at the book and count how many times he smiles menacingly, or whispers in a threatening manner.  I guarantee you'll be surprised at how frequently it happens.  The sleep deprivation thing does happen too, if you think about it, considering Christian has conveniently timed night-terrors (usually whenever Ana is doubting their relationship and he needs to manipulate her into staying with him).  If you're still thinking "Christian Grey is adorable and never verbally abusive, this is his reaction to finding out that Ana is pregnant:

“Christ, Ana!” He bangs his fist on the table, making me jump, and stands so abruptly he almost knocks the dining chair over. “You have one thing, one thing to remember. Shit! I don’t fucking believe it. How could you be so stupid?"

 

Oh he's so lovely.

 

Rigid Sex Roles

 

What the website says: The person who abuses expects to be served, expects the partner to stay home, and demands that the partner obey without question. The abuser will see the victim as inferior, stupid, and unable to be a whole person without the relationship.

 

The evidence in 50 Shades: Christian wants Ana not to work.  He arrogantly tells her she doesn't need to work, because he's rich.  He's also quite the misogynist, claiming that Ana needs his constant protection and frequently inferring that women are the weaker sex.  Early on in the first book, he mentions checking in on his company "to keep the wives in their place."

 

I'm starting to doubt that there's enough wine in the WORLD to get me through this...

 

Jekyll & Hyde

 

What the website says: Many people are confused by their partner's sudden changes in mood—one minute nice, and the next minute explosive. Such mood swings are typical of people who abuse their partners, and are related to other characteristics such as hypersensitivity.

 

Evidence in 50 Shades: This one should be pretty bloody obvious, even to the fans of the books.  Christian's notorious Jekyll & Hyde behaviour is referenced by Ana throughout. She says of him: "This man, whom I once thought of as a romantic hero, a brave shining white knight—or the dark knight, as he said... He’s not a hero; he’s a man with serious, deep emotional flaws, and he’s dragging me into the dark."  But without fail, always within a few pages of these moments in which Ana despairs at Christian's unreasonable demands or unacceptable behaviour, he does or says something to make her coo over him again and she's back to thinking of him as perfect.  Jekyll & Hyde.  Just like my abusive ex.  Although of course, according to EL James, pointing out all of this abuse is "doing a huge disservice to the women who actually go through it."  So I'm talking out of my arse, right?  NO.

 

Past Abuse

 

What the website says: The person who abuses may admit to hitting partners in the past, but they made him or her do it. He or she may have prior arrests or convictions for assault. The partner may hear of this abusiveness from relatives or ex-partners.

 

Evidence in 50 Shades: Okay, we know Christian is into "kinky fuckery" and he has hit all of his past partners.  In a normal, healthy BDSM relationship, that's fine, but considering this isn't a normal BDSM relationship and Christian is a lousy Dom (ask anyone from the BDSM community and they'll tell you), I do wonder whether he has crossed the line with others.  Take Leila, for example.  We're meant to believe she's as messed up as she is because she's just SO in love with Christian and he did nothing to her?  I'm not buying it.  Also, on a slightly different note, abuse in a person's past is sometimes more likely to make them abusive towards others.  It was the case for my ex.  It's the case for Christian, too.

 

Hook me up.  If this man is considered a romantic hero, I need to be drunk for the rest of my life.

 

Threats of Violence

 

What the website says: This would include any threat of physical force meant to control the partner, such as "I'll kill you" or "I'll break your neck". Most people do not threaten their partners, but a person who abuses will try to excuse it by saying "everyone talks that way in anger".

 

Evidence in 50 Shades: Christian refers to his "twitching palm" whenever Ana "disobeys" him.  We're supposed to see it as sexy and erotic, but seeing as Ana never signed a contract, tying herself to a BDSM relationship because she expressly said she couldn't and seeing as these comments come outside of the bedroom and relate to Ana doing things such as going for a drink with a friend, or wearing an outfit Christian disapproves of, I think we can call them what they are: THREATS OF PHYSICAL ASSAULT.  Christian also admits on more than one occasion that his wanting to hit Ana is borne out of a need to punish her ("if you disobey, I will punish you and it will hurt"), rather than sexual desire.

 

Breaking or Striking Objects

 

What the website says: This behaviour is used as a punishment (i.e., breaking loved possessions) but it is mostly used to terrorise the partner into submission. The person who abuses may beat on a table or throw objects around or near the partner.

 

Evidence in 50 Shades: We've already seen the excerpt in which Christian discovers Ana is pregnant and bangs his fist against the table so hard, he nearly knocks his chair over in his rage.  Christian is obsessed with controlling things (situations and people), but has very little self-control, as is evidenced at the end of the first book.  As an aside, I find this aspect of Christian's personality horribly triggering, as my ex threw things across the room more than once, telling me I MADE him do it, by "getting too close" to him and "making me feel violent."  But far be it for me to use my real life experiences in comparison with 50 Shades.  I'd hate to "freak out" EL James.

 

Any Force During An Argument

 

What the website says: The person who abuses may hold the partner down, physically restrain the partner from leaving the room, push, or shove. Or the abuser may hold the partner against the wall and say "you are going to listen to me".

 

Evidence in 50 Shades: Christian tends to use more manipulation in arguments than physical force, but he does grab her arm "menacingly" several times and makes threats (for example, at his parents' house, he threatens to take her to the boat house and beat her because he's angry with her) and he tells her before they're even an established couple: "If you were mine, you wouldn't be able to sit down for a week after the stunt you just pulled."

 





Not gonna lie, this is pretty much me, right now, realising women STILL think this man is someone to aspire to.

 

So there we have it.  An official page, with actual signs of abuse - a checklist that those trained in the subject look out for - and the evidence from the books themselves that prove that CHRISTIAN GREY IS AN ABUSER.

 

I'll just go and sober up now.  And await the tide of ignorance that will inevitably bring comments telling me I'm wrong.  And to those women who believe Christian Grey really IS a wonderful man, someone to aspire to... Imagine you have a daughter.  Imagine she gets with someone who treats her the way I've documented in this blog.  Tell me then that you wouldn't think it was abuse.  Because any mother worth her salt would be doing anything she could to protect her child from a bastard like that.  No woman deserves abuse.  And no book should be romanticising it, either.

 

 



 



 













 

 









50 Shades For Dummies

I'm aware that I've written about 50 Shades of Grey before.  If you follow me on Twitter (@EmmaTofi), you'll know I mention my hatred of the "romance" trilogy quite frequently and if you're a regular reader of this blog, you may very well have read the reasons why.  But recently, I've had a few things happen.  Firstly, I've had several different people tell me I'm being bitched about by former friends who ditched me shortly after I "came out" as a survivor of an emotionally abuse relationship.  I won't lie; that sort of thing gets to me more than it should.  Mainly because I make a point of just not mentioning those people who accused me of lying, or being selfish, or who got angry with me for being withdrawn, or for not confiding in them sooner.  To know they can't do the same about me is more irritating than a pair of sandpaper knickers.  I know it says far more about them than it does about me, but it's still upsetting.

Secondly, since I discovered a fantastic support network on Twitter, comprised of anti-abuse campaigners, abuse survivors and charities, etc, I've been a lot more vocal about the way 50 Shades glorifies abuse as romance.  And that has led to total and utter strangers contacting me to tell me that, in my ex, I had the PERFECT MAN and I was just too stupid to keep him, or that I simply wasn't good enough for someone as amazing as he was, if he was anything like Christian Grey.  Only a couple of days ago, a girl contacted me to tell me that Ana is extremely lucky and that I don't know what I'm talking about.  Tell that to my support worker...

Thirdly, I have discovered what EL James' personal method of dealing with criticism from abuse charities is, when contacted on Twitter by those who genuinely want to try to understand why she has dressed up an abusive man as a romantic hero and who have - in most cases VERY politely - asked her to speak out on the issue.  She simply blocks them.  And then presumably rolls around in a pile of cash, cackling...

It's not about the money, money, money, we don't need your... Oh no wait, of course it is.  Have you READ 50 Shades?!



Finally, I've had a few people telling me to stop talking about 50 Shades.  To stop saying how much I hate it, to stop getting so angry when people tell me they're "searching for a Christian Grey of my own..." and to just remember it's a fad and it'll pass. And these are people I love and whose opinions I respect, BUT...

 

...The trouble with that is that most fads aren't dangerous.  As much as I'm no fan of One Direction, aside from some of their fans being incredibly scary, they're not really dangerous.  Playing Live While We're Young isn't necessarily going to cause a whole generation of young girls to go rushing out to sleep with strangers.  The trend for "reality" TV shows like The Only Way Is Essex is only going to encourage the very dimmest members of society to decide they want to be orange and famous for absolutely no reason.

 

50 Shades appears to be having a very real effect.  The number of women writing on Twitter that they wanted their very own Christian Grey for Christmas is genuinely terrifying to me, having personal experience of being with a man who claimed to be "fifty shades of fucked up" and who used that excuse to behave like a manipulative, nasty, abusive prick.  Much like Grey himself.  Mmm, mind-games, a desperate need for attention that renders them incapable of empathy...  DAMN, THAT'S SO SEXY.

 

So no, I won't stop talking about it, because people are influenced by what they read.  And people can be so influenced by a badly written book about an abusive man, dressed up as a romance novel,  that they send women who've genuinely been through that sort of relationship, tweets calling them "nutbags" and refusing to listen to why those women - myself included - think the 50 Shades trilogy is so dangerous.

 

Also, I'm a writer.  I'm actually offended that a book so appallingly written, so completely plagiarised from another writer's work and so poorly researched can have been taken to the hearts of so many supposedly intelligent people.  Do we read so little in this country that this toilet paper is now considered to be the work of a literary genius?!

 

So in an effort to silence my critics, I'm writing my "50 Shades for Dummies" blog.  A handy, ten-point guide to why this book is a massive pile of poo and why the messages within it are dangerous to anyone who takes them seriously.  Let's begin...

 

 

1. Plagiarism is bad, kids!

 

Have you read Twilight?  EL James has.  EL James loved it.  She loved it so much, she wrote a fan fiction, called Master Of The Universe, which set Edward Cullen and Bella Swan in new roles: Edward was a rich, business man with a kinky secret, Bella was a shy, naive college student, about to graduate.  The characters were exactly the same as they were in the Twilight saga - Edward the over-protective, dominant one, Bella the girl "dazzled" by him.  Then publishers came sniffing and voila, EL James changed the names of the characters she'd stolen and a smash hit was born.  Because hey, who cares about good old fashioned creativity?  Why let a little thing like that get in the way of making money on the coat-tails of someone else's success?  Oh and Stephanie Meyers (the author of the Twilight saga) has this to say on the issue of fan fiction and 50 Shades of grey: "I have read some fan fiction... I felt it was a little bit sad that people were doing it in a way that (the original story) wasn't theirs... But they're practising.  They're going to write their books; they're going to come out eventually."  But EL James isn't just practising; her plagiarism is out there, outselling other books, touted as original fiction.  When pressed, Meyer has admitted that 50 shades "might not exist in the form it's in," were it not for the original fan fiction being based on the Twilight saga.  In other words: IT'S NOT ONLY SHIT, IT'S NOT EVEN ORIGINAL SHIT.

 

Good luck to her!  I mean seriously, please do plagiarise me.

 

2. The writing.  Oh dear GOD, the writing.

 

I mentioned this in my last 50 shades-related blog.  EL James is not a good writer.  If you've read 50 Shades of Grey and gasped at the excellent example of literature you hold in your hands, may I politely suggest that reading is not for you.  There are actual spelling mistakes in the text, not to mention the many, many grammatical errors, the use of ridiculously long, "fancy" words that nobody understands (someone clearly bought EL James a thesaurus for Christmas and she just had to get plenty of use out of it) and the strange decision that a book classed as "erotic fiction" should not use any erotic words during sex scenes.  Women so desperate for a Christian Grey of their own, might be interested to know that he doesn't have a cock, or a dick.  He has "an erection."  He has "manhood."  One suspects EL James, in her mission to make this book a "saucy" story that everyone can enjoy, decided to remove any sense of actual sauce from it.  Oh and if you're not convinced by that, Anastasia Steele, she who all women simply fail to match up to (if you believe this "book"), doesn't have anything beyond a "sex."  We're all adults, EL James.  Never, ever, ever in a sex scene, should the "heroine" refer to her sexual organs as "down there."  She's a WOMAN, not a five year old.

 

3. My subconscious thinks YOUR subconscious should SHUT UP.

 

Have you ever done something and then been surprised, because you don't remember doing it at all?  Either you were drunk, or you did something subconsciously, i.e. without thinking about it.  Would you like a dictionary definition of a subconscious?  Here you are: "The part of the mind of which one is not fully aware."  You see where I'm going with this?!  Anastasia Steele frequently not only refers to her subconscious as something she is very much aware of, but as something that has a personality separate to her own, which is, just in case you're wondering, impossible, unless Anastasia is suffering from a really sexy multiple personality disorder. In an hilarious case of getting the wrong word and running with it, Ana's "subconscious" is something that is capable of frequently influencing her thoughts and decisions. That, EL James, is called a "conscience."   TOTALLY DIFFERENT TO A SUBCONSCIOUS.



As if that wasn't enough to annoy the living daylights out of a reader that understands what a subconscious actually is, Ana has room in her unbelievably pretty and wonderful mind for yet another entirely fictional character: Her Inner Goddess.

 

Now yes, I agree, maybe all women have one of those.  Maybe when a shy woman meets a man she's incredibly attracted to and finds herself unable to resist making a move, that's her Inner Goddess doing the work.  The thing is, we don't refer to it, because most of us don't live our lives with a weird internal monologue running along, as though we're Carrie from Sex And The City, or JD from Scrubs.  Although, this book would be MUCH better if it were about JD falling in platonic love with a grouchy business man, whom he'd call Grey-Bear.  Just saying.

 

Guy Love.

 

4. Physically impossible actions...

 

Okay everyone, I want you to try something for me.  Try to look through your lashes.  Go on, give it your best... 

 

Just to save you time, it's pretty much impossible.  The only way to actually look through them is if you squint so much that you can see the eyelashes in your field of vision.  Your eyelashes are positioned above your eyes. You can look seductively at a person, whilst fluttering your lashes at them, but the only way to look through your lashes would be if they dangled down over your actual eyes. If that's what Anastasia Steele actually looks like, then... Wow.  And not in a good way.

 

5. Everyone has exactly the same taste in men.



When I was with my bastard ex, I thought he was gorgeous.  I knew a few other girls who also thought he was gorgeous.  However, I had friends who couldn't quite see the appeal, because we, as humans, are not all exactly the same.  In 50 Shades, EVERY woman fancies Christian Grey.  Is that realistic?  I mean, really?!  Okay, look up the page a little bit:  I fancy Zach Braff.  I think he's cute.  But I can lay money that there'll be people reading this blog, going: "Ew, really?!  I don't!"  Why?  Because we aren't all clones.  We all have our own thoughts and opinions and I can guarantee you, no matter how hard EL James tries to convince us all otherwise, that there is not a man who exists who is so unbelievably good looking that EVERY WOMAN WHO SEES HIM fancies him and is reduced to blushes and school-girl awkwardness.  Some of us like blondes, some of us like brunettes, some of us like a man with a bit of meat on his bones, some of us like them gym-fresh with abs that could break through windows.  WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT.

 

Just for evidence, that's my current #1 celebrity crush.

 

6. Way to piss off an entire culture, EL...

 

I make no claim to knowing much about BDSM.  I freely admit that my tastes are probably a little more vanilla than that.  A Red Room of Pain doesn't turn me on, so much as it strikes me as a bit of a wasted space, seeing as you can have sex literally anywhere and the idea of a room devoted to it seems to take some of the spontaneity out of it.  But I digress...  The point is, in 50 Shades, EL James portrays BDSM as an unhealthy lifestyle, caused by some kind of terrible occurrence in someone's past.  Christian was abused as a child and so he likes to beat women who look like his mother.  That's offensive on so many levels.  For a start, most people who live a BDSM lifestyle, do so because they want to, not because they're horribly damaged individuals who need to be "brought into the light" (actual quote).  Most people who do live that lifestyle, have a healthy respect for their partner and what happens between them is a pleasurable, sexual experience.  They don't use the threat of a beating to force a partner to do as they say.  They don't say things like "if you were mine, you wouldn't be able to sit down for a week after pulling a stunt like that" and they don't use phrases such as "my palm is twitching," when their partner has done absolutely nothing, besides go out with her friends, or get a job.  Threatening to beat someone because they've not done what you want them to do isn't "kinky" or "sexy."  It's domestic abuse.  Ask any person with experience of BDSM and almost exclusively, you'll find that they are hugely offended by the way their lifestyle is portrayed in 50 Shades.

 

7. Last time I checked, I belonged to ME...

 

Throughout all three novels in the 50 Shades trilogy, Christian refers to Anastasia as being exclusively his.  He takes an almost perverse delight in the knowledge that he took Anastasia's virginity, as that means that "nobody else has been there - only me." 

 

Now okay, when a man says "ooh, you're all mine!" now and again, it might be sexy, or even comforting.  But to say it constantly, to list body parts during sex and say "mine" after each one, or to become so utterly possessive that he can't stand his partner to see her friends, or to mix with men in a workplace environment, is not sexy.  Again, it's abuse.  It's a case of a man seeing a woman in terms of ownership and that isn't love.

 

MINE.

 

8. If it happened to me in the past, it's totally okay for me to do it to YOU.

 

Christian's behaviour is explained by the abuse he experienced as a child, at the hands of his mother and her various drug-addict boyfriends.  In a sensibly written, factually accurate account of an abusive relationship, I wouldn't find that in itself too much of a problem.  But EL James isn't touting this series as an account of an abusive relationship, in spite of the fact that that's clearly what it is.  Instead, she's selling us this shit as a romance novel and the abuse Christian suffered as a child is not simply given as an explanation for his behaviour, it's offered up to both Anastasia and the reader as an excuse.  This is not only wholly unacceptable in real life (and I say that as someone whose ex constantly reminded me that his behaviour was not his fault, but that of his own childhood abusers), but when used in a book such as this, it's actually dangerous.  Are we, as sensible, mature adults, supposed to say: "Oh right, so he's manipulating Ana, confusing her, making her do things she feels uncomfortable doing, isolating her from her friends, showing little to no empathy for her feelings and so on, but... He was abused as a kid, so it's okay.  He doesn't know any better?"  Because let me tell you now, that is not EVER okay.  With only a few exceptions, most adults know right from wrong.  Most adults are aware that their behaviour affects others.  Are we meant to believe that although he has built up an enormous empire, employs countless staff and has amassed a great fortune through his intelligent business decisions, Christian is so terribly damaged a person that he can't control his personal relationships beyond behaving abusively?  Worryingly, it seems that EL James would have the answer be a resounding yes.  And even in real-life cases where that situation is true, an abusive past is NEVER  an excuse for an abusive present.  By writing these books in a manner that suggests that Christian simply can't help the way he is and Anastasia must simply learn to love and accept his behaviour, EL James is casually suggesting that, because he was abused as a child, Christian should have a free pass to be abusive to others as an adult.  THERE IS NOTHING RIGHT ABOUT THAT AND THERE IS NEVER AN "EXCUSE" FOR ABUSE.

 

Which means it would be wrong to scream in this woman's abuse-apologist face.  Sadly.

 

9. If you don't fix your abuser, it's because you're not good enough.

 

Anyone who has walked away from an abusive relationship will go through a number of stages in the recovery process.  I know from personal experience, as well as from talking to other people in my position, that one of the hardest things to accept is that you're not to blame for the abuse you suffered, be it emotional, physical or sexual.  Nothing you did justified the end result and nothing you could have done would have changed things.  The fault lies entirely with your abuser and he/she has to get some serious help in order to break the abuse cycle.  They cannot be "magically fixed" by the love of one person alone.  In 50 Shades of Grey and the subsequent sequels, Anastasia is variously referred to as having "saved" Christian and worse, having "brought him into the light."  What EL James is helpfully telling women looking for their own Mr Grey (and believe me, it's depressing the number of women who now claim to be), is that if you're the perfect woman, just like we're supposed to believe Anastasia is, your love will cure your abusive prick of a partner. 

 

Except it won't.  You can love a man or woman with all of your heart - God knows, I loved my ex unconditionally - but you alone cannot stop someone from abusing you if that's what is in their psyche.  To anyone who has walked away from a relationship like the one I experienced, this book has one message: If you'd loved him more, if you'd been better, you would have cured him. 

 

I shouldn't even have to explain how utterly dangerous that total bullshit is.  You've walked away from an abusive relationship and you're already blaming yourself and feeling horribly depressed, then you read a book about a woman who is so utterly bloody wonderful that she magically fixes her own abusive partner and they live creepily ever after.  And all you can think is: "Well I obviously was't good enough."  Well done, EL James.  In fact, no, I can't even be bothered with sarcasm at this point: Go to Hell, EL.  That's a little poem for you.  I've no doubt you'll be plagiarising it, soon.

 

If you're half as stressed as me by now, you'll need a cute puppy to look at...

 

10. Me! Me! ME!

 

Christian talks as though Anastasia is the centre of his world and her well-being is his primary concern.  But if you're reading this book without rose-tinted glasses, you'll note that he frequently, if not constantly, puts his own needs, wants and desires ahead of hers.  In the first book, Anastasia asks Christian for space to think things through.  She flies hundreds of miles away to stay with her mother, whose address she hasn't given to Christian.  So he, in turn, uses stalking technology to find out where Anastasia's mother lives and follows her there, refusing to give her the space she needs, because he wants to see her (thus putting his needs firmly first).  As the series goes on, Christian displays more and more neediness and ignores Anastasia's wishes with a growing frequency.  Then, when he ceases to be the centre of attention, he begins using manipulation tactics to play on Anastasia's love for him and to ensure he stays at the forefront of her mind and that she always puts him first.  When, in the 2nd book, she has spoken - with perfect right - about her unhappiness at the way he has been treating her and her confusion as to where their relationship is headed, Christian distracts her with sex, then, having gone to sleep, he suddenly suffers a conveniently timed night-terror.  Bang on cue, Anastasia comforts him (naturally) and once he's calm again, she internally rationalises that she can't put pressure on him to discuss his behaviour, because he's "fifty shades of fucked up."

 

Later, when his psychotic ex has broken into Anastasia's apartment and threatened her with a gun, only for Christian to come hurtling in to save the day, Anastasia is hurt by the fact that Christian has felt the need to strip his ex and put her in a bath, where he bathes her to calm her down, before his psychiatrist arrives.  Understandably, this is a level of intimacy with his ex that Anastasia finds uncomfortable, regardless of the circumstances and so she tries to speak to him about it.  Christian's response is to drop to the floor, shaking, breathing heavily and refusing to speak (in the book, he's described as almost being in a coma), until Anastasia mutters that she no longer needs them to discuss the issue and that's she's sorry for upsetting him.  And then?  He magically snaps out of it.

 

Some readers of this book will not have seen these acts as abusive.  Perhaps they genuinely believe the "he's fifty shades of fucked up" line and think he can't help those acts.  Hell, perhaps even EL James genuinely thinks her beloved character can't help himself.  But I've been on the receiving end of those "comas" and now, after support from an abuse charity and months of counselling, I can see that each and every one happened conveniently after I had been upset because he'd slept with another girl, or he'd lashed out verbally at me and deeply hurt me, or when I'd tried to question the nature of our relationship, or walk away entirely.  And once I realised that, I also realised that he miraculously came out of those "comas" as soon as I turned my full attention back to him, said sorry (in spite of having done nothing wrong) and promised not to leave him.  It was sustained, calculated and frankly evil manipulation, designed to keep me exactly where he wanted me and I'm afraid I'm unable to see Christian's "turns" in the 50 shades trilogy as anything but the same thing.

 

Yeah, this one's just for me. I needed it.

 

Perhaps EL James didn't intend for her story to come out as the tale of an abusive man taking advantage of an inexperienced woman.  Perhaps she genuinely can't see that stalking, manipulation and threats of violence aren't sexy.  But if that's the case, then I pity her.  And if she can see those things and is simply letting the money roll in, then I probably shouldn't even write what I think of her.

 

It might be "just a book" or "nothing but a passing fad," but real women are reading this tripe and thinking that they'd like to be with a man just like Christian Grey.  Even if they were to think about it and decide that actually, someone like that wouldn't be good for them, the very fact that this book is being sold as a passionate romance is in itself, an insult to every person who has experienced abuse and lived to tell the tale.  Frankly, it's an even bigger insult to those who aren't here to tell their stories.

 

I said recently that if the trilogy ended with Anastasia realising that Christian will never truly change and that she can't continue to live in an abusive relationship, then I could defend it.  If the book then documented her struggle to leave, the process of grieving for the relationship that never truly was and her recovery process, then I would overlook the appallingly bad writing and I'd praise it for bringing such an important issue to wider attention.  But we all know that's not how the series ends.  EL James is still out there, telling people this is a perfect love story and as I said earlier, that, in my eyes, means the trilogy is unfinished.

 

For that reason, I've decided to write my own novel.  A semi-autobiographical tale about a women who meets a handsome, sexy and passionate man, who just happens to be "fucked up."  A story that features the same excitement, the same heady feelings of love and lust and the same internal struggles that Anastasia has.  But my novel, just like my own story, will not end in the heroine magically fixing her "Christian."  There'll be a happily ever after, but it'll be a realistic one.  I feel utterly compelled to right EL James' appalling wrongs.

 

Wish me luck.



 















Lest We Forget - Why wearing a poppy should never cause offence

In just under a fortnight, people will stop for two minutes at precisely eleven o'clock.  They will stop where they stand - in shops, in busy streets, or simply in their own homes.  These people will be of all ages.  These people may come from very different backgrounds.  Yet they will all stop and be silent as one, for the same reason: Respect and remembrance to those who gave their lives in war.  Many of those people will be wearing a symbol of that remembrance, pinned onto their coats, or tucked into the band of a hat worn to keep out the November chill.  A small, vivid red reminder of the sacrifices given so that we may live freely.  A poppy.

Yet every year, there is a small, but worryingly noisy chorus of people who feel that simple, red symbol, is somehow offensive.  That we shouldn't wear a poppy.  That to do so - and I find this possibly the most laughable thing I've ever heard in my life - is to "glorify war."

So I'm writing this not only to explain why I find that view not only wrong but deeply offensive, but also to try to give something of a background to the Poppy Appeal.  For a part of me can't help but wonder whether the cries of "wearing that shows you're pro-war!" are borne out of ignorance of what the symbol truly means.

One of the earliest mentions of a poppy in the context of war, comes from a poem called "In Flanders' Fields," written in 1915 by Lieutenant Colonel John Alexander McCrea.  McCrea was a Medical Officer from the 1st Canadian Contingent, who was in charge of a field hospital during the Second Battle of Ypres.  Far from "glorifying war," McCrea was devastated by the loss of life all around him during the bloody, seventeen day battle.  He wrote his now famous poem, following the death of one of his friends.  The opening lines speak of the red poppy being the first flower to grow out of the earth beneath which the dead lay, bringing with it hope and new life.  The final lines read:

"Take up our quarrel with the foe:

To You, from failing hands we throw

The torch; be yours to hold it high.

And if ye break faith with us who die

We shall not sleep, though poppies grow,

In Flanders' Fields."

 

McCrea's words were seen as a cry to men everywhere - do not let those killed in battle die in vain.  Continue to fight until the war is won.  This is where some poppy-opposers will immediately attempt to point-score by saying: "See!  It's a poem about wanting people to go to war!"  But ask yourself this question: If you have never lived through a battle, the likes of which were fought during WWI, can you really claim to understand the emotions of those who were there?  Many of those young men had been conscripted to fight.  We're not talking about lads who just fancied a bit of a scuffle, here.  We're talking about many who were barely out of boyhood and were thrown into the most frightening situation they had ever experienced.  They knew they could die and they didn't want to have lost their lives for nothing.  They wanted to ensure the war was won and freedom prevailed.

 

 

 

McCrea's poem was published in Punch magazine and received much critical acclaim.  Three years later, shortly after McCrae's death, a Miss Moina Bell Michael, secretary of the American YMCA, wrote a response to the poem in which she likened the red of the poppies in the field to the blood of men killed in battle.  She noted:

 

"...Blood of heroes never dies,

But lends a lustre to the red

Of the flower that blooms above the dead

In Flanders' \fields."

 

Miss Michael was so deeply affected by McCrae's words and by the idea of something so beautiful - the poppy - growing peacefully on the site of such horrors, that she resolved to wear a poppy in remembrance of the war dead.  Note: Not to glorify battle.  Not to revel in the blood of men lost.  But as a symbol of remembrance.  In her own words, Moina Bell Michael wanted to wear a poppy to "keep the faith with all who died."

 

Moina Bell Michael began selling silk poppies to raise money for the ex service community in November 1918. In 1920, the red poppy was, thanks to Miss Michael's tireless campaigning, unveiled at a conference as the official symbol of the National American Legion. Madame Anna Guerin, secretary of the French YMCA, was in attendance and was deeply impressed with the poppy being used in such a manner. When Madame Guerin returned to France, she put forward Miss Michael's idea of the poppy being used for remembrance of those lost in war.  The idea was quickly adopted not only in France, but by other Allied nations.  Madame Guerin also furthered the idea that the sale of poppies could help those devastated by WWI.  The proceeds from the sale of the artificial flowers went towards helping restoration projects, as well as providing food and shelter for children orphaned by the war.  In 1921, Madame Guerin introduced the symbol to the British Legion and the UK's first ever "Poppy Appeal" was held to coincide with Armistice Day.

 

The poppies for that very first appeal all came from France.  However, in 1922, a UK-based factory was opened, to produce poppies for future appeals and to provide employment for disabled former soldiers.  To this day, the workforce employed to make the poppies we wear for Remembrance Day is largely comprised of disabled former British military personnel and the money raised from the annual Poppy Appeal is spent on a variety of good causes.  Here are just a few:

• Personnel Recovery Centres, which help wounded or sick service personnel to recover and either return to service, or adjust to civilian life.
• Care homes for ex service personnel and their families.
• Break services for current military personnel as well as ex servicemen/women and their families, providing an opportunity to get away from the stress of military life and spend quality time together.
• Providing emotional support to service personnel as well as ex military personnel and their families.
• Offering legal assistance, financial support and advice on benefits etc for current and ex service personnel and their beneficiaries.

So the origin of the red poppy as a symbol of remembrance comes from the peaceful sight of the vivid red flowers growing in and around the battlefields during World War One and the reminder that they brought new life in a place of death.  The symbol itself represents remembrance of those who gave their lives not only in that war, but in every one since. And the money raised by people offering donations in return for these symbols, goes towards genuinely helping those injured in current wars, those still suffering the after-affects of past wars and those who are left behind when their loved ones are killed.  What on Earth is offensive about any of that?

Many who oppose the wearing of a poppy will tell you that they do so because they are vehemently anti-war.  Ask yourself a question:  Do you personally know anyone who is actively pro-war?!  I certainly don't!  I don't wear my poppy in November because gosh darn it, I just love a good war.  Dictators and violent lunatics aside, I can't think of anyone who could describe themselves as "pro-war," thus making the statement "anti-war" in itself, rather ludicrous.  Aren't we all anti war, deep down?  Wouldn't we all rather there was never a need for bloodshed, or for innocent lives to be lost?  The trouble is, to suggest that some day war will just end and all conflicts will be solved with a bit of a chit-chat is painfully naive, however nice a dream it may be.  You may call me negative for saying that, but I'm really not.  I would love to live in a world in which there is no more war.  I just recognise that it's highly unlikely ever to happen.  Saying that doesn't mean that I'm pro-war.  It means I acknowledge the sad fact that conflict can and does happen.

Another argument against wearing a poppy is that to do so suggests that you view the military as heroes and those who are pacifists (because as I said, I don't believe in the phrase "anti-war") refuse to acknowledge them as such.  Taking away the extreme potential offensiveness of that statement (and speaking as a member of a family with a long and proud military history, that's not exactly easy), ask yourself how wearing a poppy suggests you view everyone in the military as a hero.  The poppy, as we've discovered, is simply a symbol of remembrance.  Wearing it makes ONE statement and it's not "I love war" and it's not even "every person in the military is a hero."  It's "WE WILL REMEMBER THEM."



That said, those who gave their lives in the two World Wars were heroes.  I will argue this point until there is no breath left in my body.  Without the sacrifices they made, you - yes YOU reading this right now - might not be here to read this or anything else.  The freedom the vast majority of us have (and take for granted) to do as we please, love whoever we want and believe in whatever we choose, would more than likely not exist.  It would be an entirely different world and whatever we may think of our current government, or the current social climate, I certainly know which world I'd rather live in.

Those currently serving are performing incredibly brave - indeed, heroic - actions every day.  They're entering situations which you or I wouldn't dream of going anywhere near.  They're still risking - and all too often, giving - their lives in the eventual pursuit of PEACE and freedom.  It's not about mindless slaughter, or violence without meaning.  Anyone who knows about the science of war will tell you how much careful planning goes into every military manoeuvre.  Can you put your hand on your heart and say you'd happily walk into a situation where you could be seriously wounded or killed?  That's what our Armed Forces are doing out there in places like Afghanistan.  On a daily basis.

This is where pacifists will argue that a person who kills another can never be a hero.  And this is where I argue - what if nobody had fought back during either of the World Wars?  What if everyone had all sat back and announced: "I'm sorry, we can't fight against you; you'll have to just do whatever you want..." then even fewer of us would be alive now.  Mainly because so many of our ancestors would have been killed for their religious or political beliefs, if not for their sexual orientation.  Those who fought in those two wars, did so not because they wanted to kill (the infamous Christmas Day football match between the British and German troops during WWI shows that all the soldiers knew they were at heart, just people caught in an impossibly awful situation), but because they felt a duty to protect their country and the liberties they had.  I may not be around today if those people hadn't gone to fight.  I now live in a free country in which people of all sexualities, all religions and cultural backgrounds have rights.  Those soldiers helped to achieve that and they are heroes for that.  Our men and women out in Afghanistan and similar war-torn areas are fighting to provide those same freedoms for others.  That makes them heroes, too.



Modern battles are often cited as reasons for poppy-opposition.  But in truth, whether or not you agreed with the invasions of Iraq or Afghanistan is irrelevant when it comes to the subject of the poppy.  There is - and I'm getting bored of having to write this, so Heaven knows what those reading it are thinking - NO connection between wearing a poppy and being "pro-war."  There is no place for politics when it comes to remembering our war dead.  It's not about saying "yes, I agree with the war in Afghanistan," or "I'm so pleased World War 1 happened," it's about saying "people have died and I wish to pay my respects."

When you attend a funeral, you wear black.  Are you "glorifying" death?! 

When you wear a pink ribbon for breast cancer awareness, are you somehow "glorifying" cancer?!

Of course not.  You're paying respect and taking part in remembrance or the hope for a cure.  Why is it that wearing a symbol of respect and remembrance for our service personnel who've given their lives is seen as being so different? 

There are three colours of poppy, nowadays.  The red one, with a long history and a peaceful, respectful beginning which has been taken by some and twisted into something it is not.  Then there is a white poppy, used by pacifists.  I must admit to taking some offence at that.  There is no need for a poppy supposedly representing peace, when the red poppy already had roots in a hope for peace!  The money from white poppies does not go towards any of the great projects The British Legion is responsible for, which help our ex service personnel, as well as those still serving.  The sentiments of the white poppy are already encompassed by the red and many veterans feel that a white poppy seems to undermine what they went through and what their comrades died for.

The third is a purple poppy, representing the animals lost in war.  Again, I believe the red poppy can easily encompass that, although as an animal lover, I do understand the desire to ensure animals aren't forgotten in war.

I would never tell another person what they can and can't believe and my writing this is not an attempt to force those who don't wear poppies to do so, however much I may privately wish them to.  But to be told, by angry voices, that my poppy is offensive is genuinely disrespectful.  It comes from ignorance of the poppy's history, a total disregard for the horrors suffered by those who gave their lives so that we could live in freedom today and a lack of understanding of how deeply, deeply offensive their protestations are to those left behind.

When I put my poppy onto my coat, I do so out of respect for those serving in wars today, those killed in active service throughout the years and with the hope that peace will ensue someday, however vain a wish I know that may be.  I wear my poppy to show the immense pride I have in our Armed Forces, who protect this country, keep us secure and put their lives on the line so that I don't have to.  I have my poppy on because I want to remember all lives lost in war, whether service personnel or civilian, human or animal.  I wear it proudly, because I know that it doesn't make me pro-war or anything ludicrous like that.  It doesn't mean I enjoy violence or I'm proud that there are battles raging in the world right now.

Every life lost in conflict is a tragedy.  But it would be a greater tragedy if we were to listen to the voices of those suggesting that to wear a symbol of remembrance is somehow wrong.  So I urge you:  Wear your poppy with pride and remember all the peaceful, sincere reasons why it's there.

"At the going down of the sun and in the morning...

WE WILL REMEMBER THEM."

 

 

 









 



 

 

 



This is late, but.. I went to Alton Towers and it ROCKED!

Everyone has a place they've always wanted to go.  Maybe you dream of hot, tropical beaches.  Or perhaps you've always fancied the hustle and bustle of New York.  For me, my fantasy place was right here in the UK.  It was a theme park I had grown up reading about, seeing on TV and hearing about friends visiting.  It was a place called Alton Towers.

As most of you who read this blog will know, I turned 30 last month.  Yep, pretty big birthday.  Time to do something special, right?  How about making a dream come true?!

Surprisingly (or perhaps unsurprisingly, depending on the sort of person you think I am...), it wasn't me who suggested a trip to Alton Towers.  It was my lovely friend Lizzie who first suggested it - on my 29th birthday when discussions about the big 3-0 first began - backed up by the fabulous Lydia until we all decided: "YES!"

 

My face then looked like an older version of this. For a whole year.

 

There's excited and then there's me when it comes to this sort of thing.  Every time I went to the supermarket, I saw things I wanted to buy for our "hotel party" the night before we went to the theme park itself.  At the mere mention of the word "rollercoaster," I would instantly become 12 again and start getting nervous jitters.  I couldn't wait to fly on Air, I wanted to travel ridiculously fast on Rita and I wanted to stare at Oblivion and tell everyone there was no way I would be going on that.

 

A vertical drop?!  Into a BLACK HOLE?!  ARE YOU MAD?!

 

The days and weeks and months dragged until finally, the day arrived.  You know that feeling you get when you see a place on TV and think: "I would love  to go there?"  Well as I drove my car to Alton Towers that sunny, Saturday morning in September, all I could think was: "It's going to become a real place.  It's not going to be on my TV, or in a picture on my laptop.  I'm going to see that sign and it's actually going to be right there in front of me..."  The phrase "like a kid at Christmas" doesn't do it justice.

 

When we parked, I was overjoyed to see that my sister Michelle, another Alton Towers virgin amongst our group (Kirstie, Lizzie, possibly Kim, if I remember rightly and Lydia had all been before), was pretty much wanting to leg it all the way across the carpark to the monorail, shrieking as she went.  Getting over-excited at the thought of theme parks is obviously a Tofi trait...

 

Sitting on the monorail was almost excruciating; like standing at the entrance to a party filled with all your favourite celebrities, waiting to be handed your VIP access-all-areas badge.  As we trundled past Air and began seeing the park itself, I genuinely pondered whether crying might make me look a bit pathetic, such was my sheer excitement.  I'm not even sure the girls I was with that day know how much I was looking forward to it.  I'm not even sure I can convey it in words.  I was essentially about to experience the one place I'd dreamt of visiting since I was a child and I was beyond happy.  I was finally there.

 

That's me - the one struggling to contain ridiculous levels of SQUEEEEE!

 

Over the next few hours, I did almost all the things I'd spent the last year (and then some!) dreaming of.  I was swung all over the place on Nemesis (amazing fun, but made me really, really dizzy), I did roly poly flips and got soaking wet on Ripsaw (a ride I didn't expect to love as much as I did, but it was absolutely awesome!) and I flew on Air.  In fact, Air was the ride I was most excited about going on.  The ability to fly has always been the number one super power I'd like to have and experiencing it...  WOW.  I loved every second of it.  In fact when I disembarked at the end of the ride, for the second time that day, I felt bizarrely emotional.  When you've built something up in your head for ao long and it lives up to all of your expectations, it makes you happier than words can adequately describe.  The feeling was sensational and I adopted the "Superman" pose throughout my flight.  Flying along, suspended from the track, helped to dry me off, following my ride on ripsaw too!

 

Did I mention I got REALLY wet on Ripsaw?!

 

Queuing for Rita, having decided to use my Fast Track pass and ride alone, I was a bit miffed when it suddenly broke down.  WHAT THE...?!  Thankfully, since I'd used my Fast Track, I was handed a Priority Pass for later, which covered not only me, but one extra person, too.  It meant that, much later on in the day, I was able to go on with Lydia.  Travelling from 0-100kph in just 2.5 seconds with your best mate?  I'd definitely recommend it!

 

I rode on Th13teen with Kim, Michelle and a random guy who was at the park celebrating his birthday with his family.  He told me his wife had never been on a rollercoaster, so Th13teen was her first one.  She screamed.  A lot.

 

I experienced Willy Wonka's Chocolate Factory and I checked out the aquarium (nice, but by the time we left I was hankering for some serious rollercoaster action!) and then we rode on the Congo River Rapids and The Flume.

 

My sister and me... Prior to our second soaking of the day!



 

By the time we'd clambered out of our bath tubs at the end of The Flume, we knew we didn't have much time left at the park.  I'll be honest; I was probably more upset than I should have been.  I wanted to spend my life at that place and the fact that the day was drawing to a close when I just wanted to go from fast ride to fast ride, pushing myself to my limits, letting the adrenaline rush take over time and time again, was pretty devastating!  There was so much I still wanted to see and do.  I wanted to take a slow walk through the gloomy woods and see all the statues that talk to you.  I wanted to ride the SkyRide again.  I wanted to visit the towers themselves and wander round the gardens for a while.  I wanted to go on Blade with Lydia, as that's the ride she remembers with enormous fondness from her childhood visits.  But in a funny way, I'm slightly glad (as much as I wanted to do everything on the day and kept wishing time would stand still so that I could) that there are things I still haven't done, which I'd like to do.  It gives me more of an excuse to go back...

 

Even though I had no intention of going on it (I've mentioned the vertical drop into a black hole, right?!), I wanted to see Oblivion.  Michelle was adamant she wasn't going on it, either.  Kim was open-minded.  We dashed to X Sector and there, suddenly, seemingly growing out of the ground itself, was Oblivion.

 

It was very tall.  And very vertical. 

 

I don't know if it was just the culmination of a day of adrenaline, but something came over the three of us and the next thing we knew, we were in the queue for the one ride I had sworn I would not be going on.  With the rest of the girls waiting around the black hole, Michelle, Kim and I took our seats and began the agonisingly slow ascent to the top of the lifthill.  Slowly, slowly, we made our way around the bend until the track began to disappear before our eyes.  It looked like we were about to plunge off the edge of the Earth.  As we tilted over the edge, looking down at a terrifying, vertical drop, I somehow managed to shout (well, no, scream) "hello" to Lydia, waiting down at the bottom with her camera.

 

Yep.  One of those terrified people up there is me...

 

Then gravity took hold.  Over the top we went, plummeting towards the cavern below us, with me screaming all the way.  In fact, I was practically still screaming when we came to end of the ride.  It had been terrifying, but the sheer adrenaline rush made it worth the fright a million times over.  Facing what was one of my ultimate fears, with my sister and sister-in-law (to be!) beside me was amazing.  I don't see them often enough and if there's one thing that's bound to bond you together, it's screaming your head off as you rush towards the ground at breakneck speed... ;-)  I was determined not to go on Oblivion, but as it turns out... It's one ride I'm actually desperate to do battle with again...

 

Everyone rushed off in different directions once Michelle, Kim and I had made it safely back to the other girls (I may or may not have screamed: "I FUCKING DID IT!" at Lydia...).  There was perhaps time for one more ride, if we rushed.

 

That was when Lydia and I decided to go on Rita, using our Priority Pass.  I thought I knew what to expect.  I thought it would just be a case of "oh, that was quite fast..."  But seriously.  That initial acceleration is so fierce that it literally takes your breath away!  In spite of the ferocious speed, Lydia grabbed my hand and we rushed along the track, with our arms aloft.  Hand in hand with my best friend, travelling at goodness only knows how many miles an hour... What a way to end the day.

 

That building I'm obscuring?  That's Alton Towers... Honest.

 

Sometimes, you hype something up so much in your head that the real thing can never compare.  But Alton Towers was everything I thought it would be.  The rides were amazing; fast, scary, well themed and above all, fun!  There was something there for everyone; from the quiet, gentle rides that please kids of all ages, to the beautiful gardens and ancient ruins (they're on my "to do" list) and of course the rollercoasters - great metal monsters, sending adrenaline coarsing through your veins at every drop and turn.  There's always something to see, always a place to sit if you want to chill out and the SkyRide is a stunning way to travel. 

 

So would I recommend it?  You bet your ass.  I recommend spending that little bit extra and getting a Fast Track pass; who wants to go all the way to Alton Towers and spend the whole day queuing?!  And get Early Ride Time by booking online; you beat the queues that way, too. ;-)

 

Thank you so much Lizzie for suggesting it.  Thanks to everyone for agreeing to it!  Thanks to Alton Towers for making a 30 year old woman feel like a child again. 

 

I knew I would love that place, with its thrills, spills and excitement at every turn. 

 

And I'm definitely going back...