Jeff’s review of Gerald's Game > Likes and Comments

24 likes · 
Comments (showing 1-34 of 34) (34 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by M (new)

M "The husband, righfully (sic) angry..."?? Jeff, doesn't no mean no?


message 2: by Jared (new)

Jared Why isn't this marked as having a spoiler? You don't know the guy who shows up in her bedroom is real until the very end. I thought he was a hallucination during the body of the story.


message 3: by Nikki (new)

Nikki Uh, dude. Rightfully angry? As M pointed out -- no means no. Nothing gives a guy a right to rape a woman.


message 4: by Greg (new)

Greg Yeah, bad choice of words. Angry, certainly.
Anyways, one of the worst Stephen King books; so I agree with the 1 star.


message 5: by Janis (new)

Janis No does mean no, but he did have a right to be angry. She did let it get that far before she decided that she was done with "his game." Although, his response was inexcusable.


message 6: by Richard (new)

Richard Rightfully disappointed maybe. But angry no.


message 7: by Jonathan (new)

Jonathan Rosas I agree with everyone else about the comment rightfully angry, and I loved the book myself. But if I haven't read it, and I read your description of the book which is spot on, it definitely would make me want to read it.


message 8: by Chris (new)

Chris well, you gave a wonderful SYNOPSIS of the novel, but no reason whatsoever why you would suggest not reading this. Poor review buddy, very poor indeed. Next time, try EXPLAINING why you didn't like said book.


message 9: by Amber (new)

Amber Eversole Bravo, Jeff, You've posted something that made me cringe more than YouTube comments.
An admirable accomplishment indeed.


message 10: by Paige (new)

Paige Fuckin' hell. You've the right to say 'no' whenever you damn well want to.


message 11: by Natalie (new)

Natalie Worst review ever. Gerald, is that you?


message 12: by Brock (new)

Brock Clearly, you haven't read this book. If you had, you would know that she did not decide to be handcuffed on a whim. It was his fetish that she begrudgingly went along with. Maybe do a little actual reading before writing a review. Dumbass.


message 13: by Yoana (new)

Yoana Agree with everyone else, anyone has the right to stop sex at any point they want. Proceeding beyond this point is rape and there's nothing "rightful" about it. I know I'm repeating a point that's already been made but this particular issue needs all the support it can get. Plus Jessie didn't just change her mind, she was triggered, powerfully so, about her childhood sexual abuse at the hands of her father. Just in case you missed that crucial detail.


message 14: by Cheryl (new)

Cheryl Rightfully angry??? Wow..


message 15: by Mike (new)

Mike Marsbergen Agreed, Cheryl. Sickening.


message 16: by Shelli (new)

Shelli Wow. How downright Byzantine your attitude on husbands' rights you are.


message 17: by Josh (new)

Josh Zeringue Since it's been five months since anyone chastised Jeff, I feel I must add: "Rightfully angry" . . . if all you care about is your own damn self. Clearly a wife's comfort and consent is irrelevant. Jesus wept.


message 18: by Janine (new)

Janine Mator Please god tell me he's being sarcastic.


message 19: by Chandler Pruett (new)

Chandler Pruett this was his worst book


message 20: by Chandler Pruett (new)

Chandler Pruett jeff you are an idiot! RIGHTFULLY ANGRY?!?!?!?!?


message 21: by Shelli (new)

Shelli Janine: Excellent point you bring up. So for the sake of our faith in humanity, let us hope that Jeff's comment about Gerald's "rightful" anger was just part of the contrarian sarcasm he used throughout his review.


message 22: by Lucy (new)

Lucy You are pond scum if you think he was "rightfully angry". No means no and marital rape is still rape. Also, these sorts of thoughts lead to victim blaming and slut shaming, both of which are wrong. A person is not "rightfully angry" if they rape their partner after their partner has said no. Being disappointed is fine, as long as you do not use it to guilt someone into having sex with you, but you should not be angry if a person decides they don't want to have sex with you.


message 23: by Katrina (new)

Katrina I need feminism because...


message 24: by Jeff (new)

Jeff Veesenmeyer lol...oh man. I wrote this blurb about 8 years ago and never bothered to look at the comments. I stand chastised folks, but some of you need to relax. I was sarcastically railing on a book I hated. It wasn't social commentary.


message 25: by Mohammad Ali (new)

Mohammad Ali Abedi Jeff, don't listen to them. The guy had talked about this with his wife before hand, they went to the cabin with the sex act in mind, she was okay with being tied naked, and as he wants to gets ready to start, she changes her mind, KICKS HIM IN THE BALLS AND KILLS HIM!!


message 26: by Yoana (new)

Yoana NO, Mohammad Ali. A person can change their mind and withdraw consent at any point. Any point. And if the other person has basic respect for them, they will respect their wish to stop. The opposite is rape. There's no ground for difference of opinion here. Rape is rape no matter when the "no" is said.


message 27: by Mohammad Ali (new)

Mohammad Ali Abedi So, murder is then justified, if the husband doesn't know exactly the clear-cut lines in a bondage sex game?


message 28: by Yoana (new)

Yoana It wasn't justified. It wasn't murder, either, it was an accident. She was heavily triggered by his saliva and suddenly was back in her childhood when her father molested her, so her reaction was instinctive, not premeditated and not malicious. Of course that doesn't make his death right, but it makes it an accident.

That's completely separate from the discussion of consent though. You said she went there with the intention to have sex and was ok being tied up - that's all fine, but once she changes her mind, he must stop. So that's no justification for his getting angry either.


message 29: by Katrina (new)

Katrina I'm with you Yoana.


message 30: by M (new)

M Imagine I invite you over to my house to play Parcheesi. We've played before, and you've had an okay time even though I am obviously way more into it than you are. But this time, right after we set up the pieces and taken a few moves, you're just not into it. You tell me that you don't want to play, and I ignore you and laugh it off. This happens repeatedly, and you start to feel really uncomfortable, unheard, and disrespected. Like, "listen, I already went through all the work of setting up this board and all, so I'm going to play some Parcheesi, and since I can't do it alone, and you're going to sit there and move your bits about the board, ka-freaking-peesh?" You don't think that maybe, some day, you might just flip the board off the table and walk out?

Now instead of Parcheesi, imagine sex. It sucks, doesn't it?


message 31: by Kendall (new)

Kendall "Decides to deny him access." "Rightfully angry." You, my friend, are exactly the kind of dirtball that King was making commentary about. A woman's vagina is not your territory, and it doesn't matter how far you go before she says "no." She will never owe you sex.


message 32: by Sofi (new)

Sofi Collodel rightfully angry? this comment is more disgusting than when the dog snacks on gerald. you are clearly an idiot


message 33: by Megan (new)

Megan Some of those comments are disgusting. There's is no and never will be any defense for rape. Those who think the husband was in the right should be ashamed.


message 34: by Christy (new)

Christy I'm a little lost....I just read this terrible review (and saying it was meant to be sarcastic? Really?) The long list of those who are incensed about this take on the review is spot on....I've NEVER done this before, but being so incredibly offended by this (and seeing everyone else was as well) I had to take a peak at who liked this review, thinking I'd have to find a lot of chauvinistic men into-I don't know-books with bondage and degrading situations with women. I guess I'm in shock at the large number of women I found....Can't get my head around this. Or the fact that she "murdered" him...her arms were useless obviously, no wasn't being honored, and to get him to stop his present actions she used what she had available to defend herself--her feet--with one purpose in mind--to get him off her. He was a big guy and she had to kick him off pretty hard. he dies from a totally unplanned, unexpected heart attack--leaving her is the worst situation possible. wow. To think that could be construed as murder is beyond me... I've rarely been shocked in this way by a review, so much so that for the first time on Goodreads I've left a comment under one that was not positive (or someone I didn't even know).


back to top