Sadism

[ProjectEuropa]

Sadism is very rarely mentioned on these pages yet it seems an essential requirement to be a Dom in my eyes. Take away the sugar coating of adjectives such as consensual, loving, trusting, caring etc. whipping, caning, nipple torture and clit torture etc. is all violence, no matter how controlled and in my eyes one requires just a little sadism to meter out such violence. As with setting tasks for a sub who has made some minor transgression, well that has more than a little spite involved in it.

It took me awhile to accept I had this sadism in me and more than just a little time to appreciate its deliciousness. Once I understood and accepted this sadism was part of my psyche and enjoyment of being a Dom, I was able to focus and develop my appreciation and the arts of the role of being a Dom. To me it seems related to wanting to consume ones object of desire. Whether you are dishing out the punishment or on the receiving end of it, where does sadism fit into the scheme of things for you?

If you answer, there is no need to qualify your sadism as being part of loving relationship etc. I assume we all accept that qualification as part of a healthy BDSM relationship.

[Mobius]

The formula for a good dom would be in my opine

Sadisom+apathy+experiance=Dom

becouse sadisom with out apathy you get axe murderer

[LBoolean]

Of course sadism is vital... it would make very little sense if the enjoyment of our activities were one sided wouldn't it?
however I doubt that many dom's are true sadists, i.e just relishing the thought of making others suffer. Since we know that we are giving "pleasure" at the same time, its difficult to really separate the pure evil in our dark hearts from the pleasurable experience of our subs.
Admittedly, I look upon inflicted pain with a great deal of pride... watching a nice little mark building on freshly beaten flesh does excite me much more than what mother would approve of, so I guess yes... am definitely a sadist in that sense.... however I cannot stand by and watch innocents being treated badly, with that I mean unwilling subjects and outright meanness. In the lifestyle we chose its a fine line between pleasure and pain... for both the inflictor and his/her victim. It would be a darn shame if we did not all get our jollies from it.

If you did not like this post, I have just proven I am a sadist by making you read it... (insert evil laugh here)

[csr]

The formula for a good dom would be in my opine

Sadisom+apathy+experiance=Dom

becouse sadisom with out apathy you get axe murderer

Okay...I'm going to go out on a limb here... did you mean empathy--not apathy? Cause an apathetic Dom/Domme does not strike me as too appealing, lol.

[BDSM_Tourguide]

It's possible to be a dominant without also being a sadist. Rules can just as easily be enforced through disciplinary actions like standing in a corner, writing lines, or enforced domestic servitude.

The inflicting of pain is not a requirement for dominance. It just seems like many dominants are conditioned to believe that there must be some element of pain involved.

[Katmandu]

Lucky for us pain sluts there are enough Doms who like to inflict it! :spankme:

[ProjectEuropa]

The inflicting of pain is not a requirement for dominance. It just seems like many dominants are conditioned to believe that there must be some element of pain involved.[/COLOR][/FONT]

I have to agree. The one thing that made me confront and accept I enjoyed the delicious delights of a touch of sadism was purely a mental thing.

[Donatien]

[QUOTE=BDSM_Tourguide][FONT=Georgia][COLOR=DarkRed]It's possible to be a dominant without also being a sadist. Rules can just as easily be enforced through disciplinary actions like standing in a corner, writing lines, or enforced domestic servitude.[quote]

I totally agree TG, although I believe psychologists have slightly muddied the waters by making a distinction between sexual sadism ( sexual arousal through inflicting pain) and authoritarian sadism ( sexual arousal through the abuse of power); the later definition one that my name sake ( De Sade) would have abhorred as he detested all forms of authoritarian abuse,believing strongly and ahead of his time in the rights of the individual.. Dominance, sadism, humiliation, degradation, all are best understood as separate parameters, that may however co-exist within an individual to varying degrees.

[Wontworry]

When I first came to this forum I didn't really have a word for what I was. Through reading what is here I soon realised that I was a 'dominant', and then as time progressed I also realised I had more than a little sadism in me. In fact, parts of what I do with lucy could only (I think) be described as hardcore sadism (burning her with a cigar or naked flame, whipping her with a chain, etc).

The sadism doesnt have to be just (thinks of the right word) .. dramatic(?) pain in that way. For instance, I just cannot resist playing with her nipples when they are already tender and swollen from whatever was done to them in a scene. So, after a scene when we are dressed, chatting or just watching tv, my hands continually move to her nipples to continue to give her pain for no reason other than my wish to see her wince and whimper. This won't lead to another scene (ok, I lie ... sometimes it does ) but is more just an expression of how much I cannot resist touching her and giving her pain.

However, I have also realised that unless she 'wants' pain then it does nothing for me, to the extent that I just have no wish to continue. I am not sure if that is true sadism - only wishing to give pain when the recipient is grateful to receive it somehow seems to not quite fit with the definition of 'sadism' that I have in my head.

[slavelucy]

Sadism is very rarely mentioned on these pages yet it seems an essential requirement to be a Dom in my eyes. Take away the sugar coating of adjectives such as consensual, loving, trusting, caring etc. whipping, caning, nipple torture and clit torture etc. is all violence, no matter how controlled and in my eyes one requires just a little sadism to meter out such violence.

Well said. You're right, and i agree, it can be sugar coated to death, but the bottom line remains that sadism is, well, sadism.

i'm not entirely comfortable with the word violent though, it has very negative connotations (as does the word sadism itself, actually)...i can't ever really imagine anything consensual being violent, plus, sadism is frequently not overly violent at all.

i think it's a shame that societal associations with sadism are such that we hear the word and we immediately think of people like Ian Brady....sadistic, merciless, heartless, cruel....but sadism in the realm in which we all operate is not the same thing. i use WW as an example as it's the only one i have in a pure sadistic form..but i know for a fact that the thought of actually 'hurting' me, beyond what i wanted to do completely turns him off. Perhaps a 'true' sadist is beyond caring and mercy and any desire for it to be consensual, so perhaps none of us are sadistic at all, it's a pity we can't have a different word for it.

Having said all that, i still agree that it remains the case that most, if not all dominants have to have, at the very least, a sadistic streak. (i say ALL dominants because, i also agree that setting tasks, having a sub suffer humiliation etc is still sadism, just in a different form). It's channelled into a Ds relationship, but a desire to be mean it still remains. i think this is something we just have to come to terms with and accept, and as long as any dom still has their sub's welfare at heart, then it's under control and has become the ever delicious oxymoron that is 'loving sadism'.

sl

[Donatien]

.......... just an expression of how much I cannot resist touching her and giving her pain.

However, I have also realised that unless she 'wants' pain then it does nothing for me, to the extent that I just have no wish to continue. I am not sure if that is true sadism - only wishing to give pain when the recipient is grateful to receive it somehow seems to not quite fit with the definition of 'sadism' that I have in my head.

i think it's a shame that societal associations with sadism are such that we hear the word and we immediately think of people like Ian Brady....sadistic, merciless, heartless, cruel....but sadism in the realm in which we all operate is not the same thing .

i know for a fact that the thought of actually 'hurting' me, beyond what i wanted to do completely turns him(WW) off. Perhaps a 'true' sadist is beyond caring and mercy and any desire for it to be consensual, so perhaps none of us are sadistic at all, it's a pity we can't have a different word for it. [ How about ALGOLAGNIC? - Donatien]

....... i still agree that it remains the case that most, if not all dominants have to have, at the very least, a sadistic streak. (i say ALL dominants because, i also agree that setting tasks, having a sub suffer humiliation etc is still sadism, just in a different form). It's channelled into a Ds relationship, but a desire to be mean it still remains. i think this is something we just have to come to terms with and accept, and as long as any dom still has their sub's welfare at heart, then it's under control and has become the ever delicious oxymoron that is 'loving sadism'.

although I believe psychologists have slightly muddied the waters by making a distinction between sexual sadism ( sexual arousal through inflicting pain) and authoritarian sadism ( sexual arousal through the abuse of power); the later definition one that my name sake ( De Sade) would have abhorred as he detested all forms of authoritarian abuse,believing strongly and ahead of his time in the rights of the individual.. Dominance, sadism, humiliation, degradation, all are best understood as separate parameters, that may however co-exist within an individual to varying degrees.

Surely what 'explains' these seeming dilemmas as to the nature of 'our' BDSM and what distinguishes it from the abhorrent criminal “ sadistic” behaviour of a Brady , is not just the question of consent, and power balances, which have been discussed at length in another thread ( http://bdsmlibrary.com/forums/showth...ght=power+bdsm)
but also most importantly what has not been emphasized, namely the other “ vanilla” qualities that each one of us brings to any relationship.

Having lead a very vanilla public life, with bdsm a very secret sideline, I notice that members of this forum almost seem apologetic, when acknowledging a vanilla side to their relationship. Perhaps it because all of us (with the possible exception of ProjectEuropa ) get tremendously sexually high from fantasising, or actually inflicting or receiving pain in a sexual context, and in THAT context ' vanilla' is just that , lacking the spice and excitement of our style of sex.

I contend however that it is the very strong vanilla aspects of ourselves, that we take for granted and underestimate, that distinguish us from the Bradys of this world. Sexual Psychopaths, beneath a superficial charm, are emotionally shallow, narcissistic, caring only for themselves, and extremely manipulative, they are also frequently full of hate, and seeking revenge for all the hurts that have been dealt them by others( they of course are as white as the driven snow , having no concept of themselves as subject to any concepts such as right and wrong).

Most, (being realistic), of our community are apart from our sexual predilictions,loving, caring , honest, and responsible citizens, and it THESE “VANILLA”(be proud of them guys) QUALITIES, that prevent us from behaving towards our lovers, partners, slaves, children etc in the ways we may do in fantasy, where our sadistic leanings can be untrammeled by the strongly held beliefs of the rest of the committee that constitutes our mind.

Donatien

[ProjectEuropa]

I notice that members of this forum almost seem apologetic, when acknowledging a vanilla side to their relationship.
Donatien

I've never found a problem with accepting my vanilla side, it's my BDSM side I always had trouble with.

I found I had to accept a certain amount of sadism in me when I was very angry with someone I knew online (not in an active BDSM relationship) and I knowingly over stepped the mark. I got such an adrenilin rush it both scared me and excited me. The experience was so visceral I could no longer avoid accepting their was a part of my psyche I needed to investigate and took the experience as a good lesson to keep myself in check. It proved a turning point for me, for since, I've been investigating that side of me with some relish and I feel calmer and a more stable person in my pursuance of my ordinary everyday life. My only regret is that I alienated someone I held dear but I suppose we all have to pay a price in life.

Perhaps it because all of us (with the possible exception of ProjectEuropa ) get tremendously sexually high from fantasising, or actually inflicting or receiving pain in a sexual context, and in THAT context ' vanilla' is just that , lacking the spice and excitement of our style of sex. Donatien

Are you trying to coax the sadist out in me? :twak:

Interesting observations Donatien :hail:

[AndrewBlack]

I think Mobius was onto something with the 'sadism' + something idea. The word was around before the SSC caveat was attached. The 'something' in the case of people here is respect, an awareness of boundaries and a knowledge of when to practice that sadism and when to be restrained. I think you can have the sadism without those things which is why I am not 100% comfortable with the term 'sadism', it has different uses, some of which are negative. In spite of this I acknowledge it in myself. I've always done nasty things to people for my own pleasure; I did some very unpleasant things to my peers when I was growing up. I just learned to put a more socially acceptable edge on it as the '+ something'. It's something I denied to myself for a while but like all urges you need to have a healthy outlet. I don't think I could enjoy it non-consensually now.

[Donatien]

I've never found a problem with accepting my vanilla side, it's my BDSM side I always had trouble with. ...
......are you trying to coax the sadist out in me? :twak:

I know Europa, I know! and yes I was!

I was also hoping for a response from you so that I could share with you all a quote that I came across all of 30+ years ago :-

The Anglo-Saxon conscience does not prevent him from sinning, only from enjoying it .

In contrast, perhaps arising out of the insights given me by that very quote, I have noticed that with rare exceptions the only guilt I experience is a vaguely guilty feeling, that I don't seem to feel guilty about most of the things that others express guilt over; although on reflection it maybe that almost all my "sins" are those of a selfindulgent hedonistic epicurean, rather than the deadly ones, save for ( obviously) gluttony and sloth!

[AndrewBlack]

Maybe you're a psychopath? Please don't take that the wrong way!!! *Rabidly trying to think of a way it could be interpretted in a nice way!*

Seriously though has it ever crossed your mind, I've wondered it about myself before, unable to resist instant gratification, doesn't feel guilty about stuff, selfish...etc...

Statistically, some of us have to be psychopaths.

[ProjectEuropa]

The Anglo-Saxon conscience does not prevent him from sinning, only from enjoying it .

How very true!

Perhaps I need a little of your talent for self indulgence Donatien!

I am trying hard to correct my sense of guilt with the help of a couple of guilty collaborators. (I was going to add a smilie here masturbating but there isn't one! Now that is an oversight on the moderator's part)

[Donatien]

Maybe you're a psychopath? .........
Seriously though has it ever crossed your mind, I've wondered it about myself before, unable to resist instant gratification, doesn't feel guilty about stuff, selfish...etc......Statistically, some of us have to be psychopaths.

the answers are No, yes, I don't know about you, and yes some of us are!

As you can see from my thumbnail sketch of psychopathic traits in a previous post a little earlier in this thread, they don't have any angst , save only largely imagined wrongs done to them. They lie ,cheat , and abuse friendships in all ways possible, yet get incredibly angry when anyone rejects them. psychopathy is a spectrum trait, some of us with just the minimal soupson of it, giving in to a little selfish self grativication,say eating the last chocolate in the box rather than offering it to our mate, friend whatever, others with a major trait yet still capable of strategic thinking become captains of industry, politicians etc. Fully fledged psychopaths are so into their own fantasies, and so much at the mercy of them that , whilst they can lie through their teeh with such apparent sincerity as to convince the most experienced sceptic, they think only tactically, and never learn from experience , and so get found out eventually. So the most dangerous , are those with a strong trait but with a cabability for strategic thinking, who tend to gravitate to the top in such areas as politics, business and crime.

As for me, growing up as an insular only child, sorrounded by doting female relatives, but without a father until nearly six, I have some of the self centredness and complacency, but am otherwise caring and supportive of others; so no I am not a psychopath, just eccentric!

Finally my mentioning "gravitating to the top", puts me in mind of one the Rev. Sidney Smith's(1771-1847 english clergyman,essayist,and wit) best quotes:--

" You and I are the exceptions to the laws of nature; you have risen by your gravity, and I have sunk by my levity."

In fact he is such a hero of mine I think I will embellish all my future posts with more of his sayings, and will close with one that may appeal to you american cousins

"The further he went west, the more convinced he felt that the wise men came from the east."

[Katmandu]

Hmmm, curious that only the Dom's are getting off on this thread. Any subs out there with ideas on this?

[slavelucy]

Hmmm, curious that only the Dom's are getting off on this thread. Any subs out there with ideas on this?

Hey, missy, i replied and *i'm* a sub!

You're right though, as a general trend, doms seem more intent on analyzing the sadistic thing..maybe they somehow see it as 'their' issue, which i can see the logic of, although it is kind of something the whole BDSM world have to get their head round.

sl

[Katmandu]

My BAD. :kissass: And what a wonderful sub you are, too!

[slavelucy]

I contend however that it is the very strong vanilla aspects of ourselves, that we take for granted and underestimate, that distinguish us from the Bradys of this world.

Most, (being realistic), of our community are apart from our sexual predilictions,loving, caring , honest, and responsible citizens, and it THESE “VANILLA”(be proud of them guys) QUALITIES, that prevent us from behaving towards our lovers, partners, slaves, children etc in the ways we may do in fantasy, where our sadistic leanings can be untrammeled by the strongly held beliefs of the rest of the committee that constitutes our mind.

Very well said. :applaus: This is pretty much what i was trying to say, only you said it much better.

My BAD. And what a wonderful sub you are, too!

Awww, TY Kats! *blushes softly* You're forgiven!!

sl

[AndrewBlack]

As you can see from my thumbnail sketch of psychopathic traits in a previous post a little earlier in this thread, they don't have any angst , save only largely imagined wrongs done to them. They lie ,cheat , and abuse friendships in all ways possible, yet get incredibly angry when anyone rejects them. psychopathy is a spectrum trait, some of us with just the minimal soupson of it, giving in to a little selfish self grativication,say eating the last chocolate in the box rather than offering it to our mate, friend whatever, others with a major trait yet still capable of strategic thinking become captains of industry, politicians etc. Fully fledged psychopaths are so into their own fantasies, and so much at the mercy of them that , whilst they can lie through their teeh with such apparent sincerity as to convince the most experienced sceptic, they think only tactically, and never learn from experience , and so get found out eventually. So the most dangerous , are those with a strong trait but with a cabability for strategic thinking, who tend to gravitate to the top in such areas as politics, business and crime.

Yes it's an interesting one all right. It's supposed to be under-diagnosed. I would speculate though that psychopaths would be over-represented in BDSM circles, so if everyone would like to step forward and fill in a personality inventory....

[Spitman]

Sadism is very rarely mentioned on these pages yet it seems an essential requirement to be a Dom in my eyes.

I don't think it's necessary to be sadistic to enjoy the dominant role. There are dominant masochists who enjoy the experience of the sub vicariously, and are more interested in controlling the sensations of the sub than getting off on the infliction of pain. It might seem like a subtle difference, but to both protagonists it makes a sensational, delicious difference. A sub has nowhere to hide from a dominant but sensitive masochist, and nothing to fear from someone who sees the experience from the inside out.

[ProjectEuropa]

I don't think it's necessary to be sadistic to enjoy the dominant role. There are dominant masochists who enjoy the experience of the sub vicariously, and are more interested in controlling the sensations of the sub than getting off on the infliction of pain. It might seem like a subtle difference, but to both protagonists it makes a sensational, delicious difference. A sub has nowhere to hide from a dominant but sensitive masochist, and nothing to fear from someone who sees the experience from the inside out.

Hmm I think there is a whole spectrum that various people inhabit and some move along it with ease and some are happy in their own particular place. Domination is not a form of paternalism, it is what it says, domination. OK we are on the whole civilised people and confront our kinks usually and preferably in cooperation with a partner who has a complimenting kink. However if we take away the sugar coating of cooperatoin and domination has no sadism in its make up, what is the motivation behind the domination?

[csr]

There are dominant masochists who enjoy the experience of the sub vicariously, and are more interested in controlling the sensations of the sub than getting off on the infliction of pain.

Fascinating. I never thought of that angle. I wonder how many people who 'switch' are still enjoying the same element of the interaction, only vicariously.

Hmm I think there is a whole spectrum that various people inhabit and some move along it with ease and some are happy in their own particular place. Domination is not a form of paternalism, it is what it says, domination. OK we are on the whole civilised people and confront our kinks usually and preferably in cooperation with a partner who has a complimenting kink. However if we take away the sugar coating of cooperatoin and domination has no sadism in its make up, what is the motivation behind the domination?

Domination/submission comes in many, many flavours. Just like non-kink people can call themselves "breast-men" or "leg-men," people into D/s are getting off on different aspects of the relationship. Some people crave to humiliate or to be humiliated, and don't need a whip, cane, or clamp around to enjoy themselves. For those people... it's still called domination, because it involves control/giving up control. For a painslut like me, the sadistic streak my S.O. has is a must, but many people just don't need to go there. How about all the stories on this site where there is no infliction of pain at all? They're filled with domination--just of a different type. I think the only common denominator is the control part.

[Ranai]

what is the motivation behind the domination?

I think asking about a motivation is not adequate here. Motivation implies a choice.

Nobody decides to get sexually aroused by XY. It is a relation of cause and effect beyond our control. It's not a matter of choice.

For some people, domination is erotic. Being in control, calling the shots, being obeyed can work as a pleasure and a turn-on in its own right. Just as for the complement submissives, obedience to the other's instructions and submission to the other's actions causes an erotic charge, feelings of happiness, feelings of being fulfilled.

I have a motivation when I choose to do something. If people act according to their preferences, the motivation is to cause those feelings.

Some things we can influence to a degree. Among them are self-awareness, empathy and skill. (Everyone can probably add various other qualities.) I think it's a good idea to cultivate and practise them. Not least because it also has benefits for ourselves. And supports us in enjoying our many-flavoured kinks.