$1:
I actually don't know what the CDC is though or where you referenced that. The study numbers etc. Only CDC I know is the Centre for Disease Control.
Which is what I thought.
I don't do Wikipedia as a primary source. So much like my profs said. Citing Wiki is a good as no reference at all.
If you want to be silly about it and not actually post a link (which is what the presenter of 'evidence' should do as opposed to saying go find it yourself) I'll go find it myself. In future though if you cite a specific study and don't provide a link when asked I'll just assume you are making it up.
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/13 ... e-20130812$1:
“Consenting BDSM relationships are fine,” Bonomi (the psychologist) said. “But the relationship we see between Christian and Anastasia is different. What we see in them is a clear pattern of abuse.”
So the studies own authors agree with my first statement about consent.
It was also not a CDC study but a Michigan State University and Ohio State University which used the CDC definition of intimate partner abuse. (This is why citing Wikki sucks, you end up citing the wrong crap)
Further
$1:
The study authors don’t call for the novel to be banned
They also only studied women within a 6 year age range and within a certain demographic (those attending university) and there is no supporting study. IT also says people who read the book are only 25% more likely to suffer any of the things you mentioned. That's not a lot for such a narrow study group which never tested the women before hand to see if these problems were there before reading the book.
I'll still try to take a look at it though.
As far as defending the book I'll concede there considering I've never read it. Its just the first I've heard of it glorifying anything beyond a kinky relationship.
We should work on fighting the unconsensual misogyny in media before tackling a poorly written book which I suspect will also be a poor movie. Lets just say "my inner angel" is not exactly doing "flips" about seeing it.