No, I’m not sure what it stands for, but I know it when I see it.
I’m not so much looking for an IMHO – but I’m curious what people of various ideologies have to say about it. In a way, I feel it mirrors the beliefs about homosexuality.
For example, some people, let’s call them Darwinists, believe that people’s sexuality is inherently built in – not a factor in any way of environmental factors, leaving – in the realm of science anyway – only a genetic possibility.
Then there are the Marxists – who generally view the world as a power game anyway and believe man’s problems stem from flaws in societies institutions. So the Marxist view would presume that people who lack power in the world need to balance that lack of power with dominance in the bedroom; while the stereotypical powerful exec goes off at the end of the day to be whipped in a dungeon chamber.
In the third intellectual strain, and there may be a fourth, are the Freudians. of course, they believe that any sexuality which deviates from the norm is the result of some childhood trauma, probably sexual abuse. That seems to be the most common explanation for people engaging in BDSM.
So what do you all think?
Please save your rainbows and warm fuzzies and get we all just get alongs for another thread. I’m sort of not in the mood, and these don’t tend to add much to the debate. But if anyone wants to hijack into a debate as to whether these 3 worldviews are sufficient to explain most everything wrong with people, I’d be interested to hear about that too.
And then there are those who think that depending on the person, each view may be right.
My experience with it was #3. Now, does that mean it’s true of EVERYONE who’s ever engaged in BDSM? Hell no, and we have several people on this board who are proof of that, IMO.
So…I guess I have a fourth and fifth view: Fourth, a mixture of all the types, and fifth: some people just do it because they want to.
I think some people are just really, really perverted.
My sexual tastes? Let’s just say they go WAAAAAAAAAAY beyond S&M. Why? 'Cuz I get bored with “standard sex” really really quick. It’s not a sex-matter… it’s just I get bored really easily.
Well, I don’t think your three ideologies manifest so tidily in my view of BDSM. I think it’s probably a combination of genetics, environment and personal psychology, with varying weights given to each of of those reasons depending on the individual. Nor do I think the psychological/environmental reasons for preferring a certain type of sexual behavior must be solely either your “Marxist” or “Freudian” view; I’m sure there are more nongenetic reasons to prefer something besides childhood abuse and being a capitalist. There’s Spoofe’s genetic/psychological tendency towards boredom, as one example.
Add me to the just a little twisted with a short attention span pool. I need to play games, a lot. Not sexually abused, maybe a bit of your Darwin and Marxist idea, but basically I’m a playful person with a lot of creativity. Rope helps too. I just like the extra options.
As far as deviation…what is the norm? My personal opinions are that what happens between constenting adults and doesnt damage anything or anyone is all well and good. Life is fun, be happy, live and let live. That may be warm and fuzzy, but its what my ideology says about it. Why does it exist and people are interested…its fun for them and makes them happy.
It stands for Bondage and Discipline/Sadism and Masochism, just in case you honestly didn’t know.
From your OP, you seem to be looking for people who’ll say absolutely that BDSM behavior always falls into one of those three categories. That ain’t gonna happen. In fact, I doubt you could even find a Darwinist or Marxist whose beliefs are as pure as described in the OP. There are probably still a few Freudians, but they’re idiots anyway.
I lean toward the Darwinist viewpoint. If you’re cold to real women but turned on by Jessica Rabbit, if you can’t get a stiffy without first smacking your spouse a little, if you cut holes in the drywall to get your jollies, you’re not sick or bad or wrong, you’re just wired differently from most people.
But there’s more to it than just wiring. I can easily imagine someone genetically predestined to be a happy submissive, but who grew up in a genuinely abusive household and so was turned off to the allures of the game, regardless of his/her genes.
Firstly, I agree with everyone here who has said we’re all different. Unfortunately, I believe in terms of sexual preferences BDSM is actually still very much taboo. I’d probably be more comfortable telling my mom that I’m a Lesbian than telling her I’m into being treated like a dog.
The problem is that a lot of people on the outside of the situation look at ‘fetishism’ as part of 'normal’BDSM. IIRC, ‘Fetishism’, where you have to smack your wife around before you get an erection, or have to watch a Jessica Rabbit video before you do your lady is classified as a psychological disorder. It means you require some normally non-sexual stimulus to arouse you.
<end the little rant>
Anyhoo…I lean towards Darwinism for the OP. I like being submissive and I like German guys with green eyes. It’s all just my personal hardwiring.
bondage fetish, required for sexual pleasure-- possible problem, but more facts would be needed to make an ascertation. Not auomatically assumed to be a problem.
Domination-- see bondage
Sadism-- problem. The desire to cause pain in others, even if they “like it,” is a sign of objectification and emotional distance from one’s surroundings.
Masochism-- problem. The desire to cause pain in one’s self, even if one “likes it,” is a sign of objectification and emotional distance from one’s surroundings.
This assumes, as you might note, that a “good” person should be in a state of empathic correlation with surroundings and the people in those surroundings. This is a simplification of my beliefs, but hopefully this suffices for why I feel the way I do (as mentioned in another jmull thread about master/slave relationships).
Why, oh WHY do I prefer chocolate super-chunk ice cream over vanilla? Is it a product of my genetics? Or was I environmentally conditioned to enjoy it? Did someone inflict this chocolate super-chunk ice cream fetish upon me during my developing years.
That question can, of course, never really be answered. Because the minute I’m out of the womb, I’ve already been “conditioned.” However, I will defend to the death, my right to eat chocolate super-chunk ice cream.
I believe that attempting to find the origins of one’s taste can be a lose/lose situation. If we use homosexuals as an example, we can examine the arguments over whether they’re genetically pre-disposed, or whether they choose to be homosexual as a result of their enviroment.
It’s genetic you say? Well then it’s a disease! They need to be cured! Quick, someone find a pill or a vaccination before this horrible evil is passed on to more children!
It was inflicted upon them via their environment? Well then fix the damned environment!? They’ve been traumatized! They must be cured of their psychosis/neurosis. And furthermore, they’re choosing to continue to engage in SICK behavior, rather than get help. The shame.
The same difficulty is found in trying to locate the origins of other types of sexuality. The issue is not WHERE it came from but whether it’s okay or not. And of course, if everyone consents, within certain limits, it’s absolutely okay. Even better than okay, I’d say.
Lord knows I hate to nitpick…but Sadism is not simply the desire to cause pain in others. The philosophy of Sadism (if we’re to base it on de Sade’s writings) is to seek out pleasure for yourself alone, and the pleasure of others be damned. Whether that means I beat you with canes, chop you into 40,000 pieces or feed you orange slices…it’s still Sadism. In fact a lot of “sadists” or what de Sade himself called “libertines” enjoyed being flogged and tortured themselves.
And don’t get me wrong…true, 100% sadism is very MUCH a problem IMHO…but kind of rare to see in practice. A lot of people talk a big Sadism game…but don’t follow through thank God.
I do not feel that sex is necessarily a good analogy with eating.
Er. Who sets the limits, by what standard, and who are you to set limits on my quantity of chocolate super-chunk ice cream?!?! Oh, and how can one absolutely determine consent in a relationship where force and pain are requested? This gives much credence to fascism…“Well, they’re not revolting so it must be okay!” sigh Bad analogy…scratch that.
Anyway…
Clearly you disagree with my opinion, but only in degree, not in totality.
Hedonism: 1 : the doctrine that pleasure or happiness is the sole or chief good in life
2 : a way of life based on or suggesting the principles of hedonism
(Source: Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, Online Edition)
de Sade moved far past the idea of mere hedonism. The philosophy espoused seemed much more of a sociopathic pursuit of pleasure for one’s own sake. The pleasure of others was not only not a priority, but, as jarbabyj mentioned, not even a consideration. Hedonism doesn’t have any of those connotations in my mind, but perhaps that’s simply a personal viewpoint. As jarbabyj mentioned, pain doesn’t have to have anything to do with it, whether giving or receiving. It’s the act of obtaining pleasure without thought or consideration of your “partner”.
The modern use of the word to mean someone who enjoys inflicting pain (on some level) on another, is much more prevalent than the original definition. A philosophy based on not caring about the pleasure of your ‘partner’ (no matter what form that pleasure may take) is not exactly condusive to repeat performances, much less long-term relationships. It’s certainly not prevalent within the segments of the BDSM community with which I’m familiar.
Hmm…perhaps not. But the point I was trying to make was that it doesn’t matter what my preferences are, I have the right to exercise them. When I used the phrase “within certain limits” I intended to infer that a)everyone’s consenting, and b) everyone’s CAPABLE of consent, i.e., not underage, under mental duress, or otherwise incapable. That all parties involved are reasonably healthy individuals.
**
I certainly wouldn’t dare claim that I or anyone else should have the power to set those “certain limits.” However, like you, I reserve the right to my own particular beliefs about what edges into “unhealthy” behavior. That is not to say I wish to choose what is unhealthy for someone else. Just a judgement call…perhaps a poor one…on my part. But certainly not something I would expect to act on, in order to keep others from behaving within the confines of what THEY considered healthy.
**
I’m not sure that I understand the problem here. Are you suggesting that someone capable of asking for force and pain is CLEARLY not “healthy” enough to be making that decision for themselves and therefore, it doesn’t exactly count as “consent.” I agree…that’s possible. This possibility is not a reason to condone the behavior out of hand. And I ask you again, as I did before: When you have an itch, do you brush it with a feather, or scratch it good and hard? Even things like pain don’t feel the same to all people at all times. This is not necessarily an indication of their mental health.
**
Yes, we disagree slightly. But at risk of sounding like a butt kiss, I have to say, it’s sort of “fun” disagreeing with you. You’re a brilliant debater and I have to rack my brain to come up with an answer for you.
Plus, I don’t think our opinions are THAT far apart on this subject. Consider that for some, the act of being bound and completely helpless may be considered MORE of a pathology than being swatted on the ass with an open hand. It has potentially worse conotations about wanting to play “victim” or being used as an object than simply “scratching an itch good and hard” might.
-L
Who has completely forgotten what the original question was.
To just answer the original OP, I think it largely depends on the person. Most people’s predelictions are probably harmless fun, while some people use them to work out issues.
Being a male dom, I avoide female subs who I think “need” to be topped in order to work out issues. I prefer to think of the activity as sport.
And like sport, one can play very hard and become absorbed in it - but still understand at an underlying level that it’s just a game.
Others who see BDSM activities as more of a lifestyle may disagree with my viewpoint, but that is the point - we all do it differently.
As for the basis of these predelictions, I guess I’m mostly a Darwinist. But we, as big-brained humans, sometimes go about our business differently than old Charles envisioned, which for me explains other predelictions.
I’m a fairly vanilla guy, but my One True Love loved domination, bondage, and, yes, pain. Now since I wasn’t quite into that, we didn’t do it often, and he was fine with that, but the few times we did, I have to admit it was fireworks - not for me, but since he got off on it, it enhanced it for me. (Does that mean I’m really the submissive, since my pleasure was derived from his pleasure? Hmmm…)
But, as many have said, being one thing does not automatically mean you have the set of problems that might be inherent in someone who takes it to an extreme - all submissives do not have issues, etc.
ARL, I realize that the modern dictionary version of sadism is the simplified mutated definition that you provided. Just to clarify, I said in my post:
I was just providing further insight based on the extensive research and reading I’ve done on the subject. I have three pet peeves in my life…and the modern definition of Sadism is one of them
