I’m trying to come up with a term to describe some fictional character who simply enjoys inflicting as much suffering and misery on others as possible, but the term “sadist” (the most dictionary definition of such a person) unfortunately is usually sexual in nature these days (BDSM.) This isn’t a sexual situation. What other term would work?
Personally I’d go with “bully”. Maybe I’m behind the times, but the word sadistic doesn’t feel sexual to me.
Narcissist might work as well.
Sadist is not sexual. Or at least not to the extent that it would take me out of a story should an author use that word in a non sexual context.
That said, I guess one could use sociopath or psychopath instead.
I’d stick with “sadist.” Maybe it’s just me, but it doesn’t automatically connote BDSM, and I use it and hear it outside that context all the time.
Personally: “sadistic” = nonsexual
“sadist” = probably nonsexual but could be sexual
“sadism” = maybe sexual
“sado-masochism” = definitely sexual
If you really need an alternative, how about “cruel”? Although one could be cruel without enjoying it.
Just go with “monster”.
I think cruel is the proper word to describe someone who enjoys inflicting hurt non-sexually.
Taking pleasure in seeing others suffer seems pretty synonymous with “evil” in my book.
I don’t think sadistic pleasure has to be sexual. It’s really the best word to describe someone who enjoys inflicting harm on others.
I’m going to agree that thanks to ‘50 Shades of Grey’ there is a stronger implication of sexuality to sadism, but it doesn’t exclude the plain reading either. For that matter, the character takes ‘pleasure’ in the torture per your original description - if it’s not a sexual pleasure, it’s probably adjacent, so again, the term stands.
If it’s something extreme, such as an alien aesthetic that glorifies torture (which I’ve seen in at least 2-3 novels including “Illegal Aliens”), then you’re better off describing it. The old adage show, don’t tell ya know.
I can’t think of another term which automatically implies deriving pleasure from inflicting misery on others.
“Cruel” is close, but people can be thoughtlessly cruel. Psychopaths lack empathy, but they aren’t necessarily sadistic any more than they’re necessarily murderers.
You could say a person is “gleefully cruel,” or something to that effect.
Sure, a sadist can be “evil,” but “evil” does not specifically denote sadism. You can be evil in many different ways. Sadism is specific (and does not in and of itself denote a morality judgment like “evil”). Like I said, I commonly enough hear the word used in that way, like “my boss is a sadistic son of a bitch for overworking his employees” or something of that nature. Just like I use and hear the word “masochist” free from any BDSM connotations regularly (though that one is perhaps a tad more common.)
There’s really no better word than sadistic. Especially in fiction. Any latent sexual connotations of the word just make the character seem more depraved. I write romantic thrillers, so my take is that there’s not much literary distance between sex and violence. Both get the blood pumping. So it’s not a bad thing to mess with your reader’s head a bit. I am 100% confident that “this guy is a sadist” will not automatically have a sexual meaning to the majority of readers. BUT the fact that sometimes it does have a sexual meaning will only benefit your story.
I hope that makes sense because it’s a subtle thing I’m trying to express.
It does make sense. Thanks!