Time Magazine article on BDSM

[BDSM_Tourguide]

Taken from the most recent issue of Time.


Click here for the complete article

[Yoda]

The general tone of the article seemed ok, but:

" Because of this concern, "sexual sadism" and "sexual masochism" are listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the psychiatry compendium."

Gives a slightly more negative impression than:

"The DSM-III, published in the late '80s, classified "sexual sadism" and "sexual masochism" as disorders for which treatment was recommended. The APA, in the DSM-IV, reclassified SM as _not_ necessarily a disorder, unless the practice of the SM produces clinically significant ongoing emotional trauma, or leads to death, serious injury, or disability."

http://www.fetishclub.com/exchange/taboo.shtml

PS.
Tourguide, you have a couple of errors in your sig
"From grace she will fall." and
"Prefers punishment"

[MrJerseyGuy]

Interesting article TG. Thanks for sharing. I'm going to pick up a copy of Time for my other half. That's an interesting site that Yoda contributed as well. I haven't seen it before

[AndrewBlack]

An interesting article that will no doubt raise the profile of BDSM in some small way. I find it annoying that often a piece like this is, no matter how objectively the reporter thinks they are covering it, still given a negative slant. I quote 'Surri's "biggest satisfaction in life" should probably be something other than "seeing [Doc's] approval' - in whose opinion ?! why include a negative statement in the conclusion of an otherwise OK piece ? I think the author gives his true opinion away here.

[Jones, Nikka]

The only way bdsm is going to be fairly portayed in the media is to have articles like this one written by actual practitioners of it. And by having everyone in the lifestyle accept that bdsm D/s can be practiced in a wide ranging array of forms and levels of intensity and commitment.

[Cleo671]

The article wasn't necessarily totally negative, or gung ho positive, it was in between.
Like many articles that are written about relationships it's largely neutral, and in most cases it's more appropriate to be neutral or have a neutral view in some things.
Honestly, most people would interpret many things in a different way if a similar article was written by 'practitioners' because all practitioners are really diverse, and the view that will be offered will always be controversial, which won't really work in favour of establishing anything, on the contrary it would create more division.

[AndrewBlack]

I just think that while the article was generally OK, the journalist portrayed to sub as being 'troubled' or 'not quite right' with their closing remarks. To me that does rather nail their colours to the mast. I'm only saying that without that, it would have been a more neutral, informative piece. To insinuate that the sub should seek her satisfactions elsewhere for a more full, satisfying life, dosen't acknowledge that what she is doing is fine; harms no-one; gives mutual pleasure to her and her man and is their way of expressing themselves to each other and enjoying each other. I'd have been happier with a more accepting conclusion.

[Curtis]

I think you've expressed it very well.

[rallan]

All in all I'd say it's pretty balanced, subconcious bias from the author or no. He seems to have a bit of trouble getting into the idea of just how consent works in a 24/7 relationship and what there is in it that could possibly make it appealing to a submissive like "Surri", but it also looks like he's genuinely trying to get his head around the concept and trying to give a fair look at things from the perspective of the couple.

And let's face it, it looks like this guy's done his research fairly well. He's gone out and talked to a lot of people in the lifestyle, he's gone for reputable psychological data, and he's generally done the legwork to make sure that he could get it right despite being an outsider. I mean can you imagine what a horrible piece this would've been if he'd just punched "bdsm" into Yahoo, taken some information from some bdsm lobby groups and balanced it out with some information from religious anti-bdsm groups, and called that a balanced article? We'd come out looking like a bunch of abusive borderline psychotics in denial.




rallan
- thank god for journalists who still do things the long way