Science on BDSM

[damyanti]

Yep, my intellectual brain is at it again, ....I wanted to see what science has to say on BDSM and have decided to share some of the data I came across here....not that there is that much (easily) available, lol....I am interested to hear what do you think about the data presented.

Of all the paraphilias the least researched are sexual sadism and sexual masochism. Known collectively as "sadomasochism" to professionals, those who practice this alternative sexual lifestyle tend use the term bondage-domination-sadism-masochism, or BDSM.

Recently, BDSM has entered the plotline in episodes of several popular primetime television series, made-for-TV movies, and motion pictures. This increased focus on BDSM by the entertainment industry may have been sparked by the national news coverage surrounding the trial of the BTK serial killer in 2005, primed by the prior arrest and conviction of John Edward Robinson, the first known cyber serial murderer who attracted his victims through a shared interest in BDSM (Gross, 2005). The increased focus on BDSM may be the natural byproduct of increased prevalence in the general population, increased openness within the BDSM community, and/or increased societal curiosity regarding more extreme alternative sexual practices. The near absence of empirical research on BDSM makes it impossible to know the exact factor(s) underlying the thematic trend.

A key difficulty in researching BDSM is the lack of formalized, uniform definition of terms, agreed-upon by scholars and practitioners of this alternative form of sexual expression.

In the late 1890s, sexologists considered human sexual masochism a natural evolution of that evidenced in lower mammals. Over 40 mammalian species have been identified that bite while mating; among humans, approximately 25% of both men and women report having been sexually aroused by a partner's bite. Masochism became defined as sexual algophilia, or the "fondness or love of pain" during sex.

There is evidence of BDSM occurring across time and cultures, with perhaps the most widely known example being the Kama Sutra. As suggested by the Kama Sutra and as raised by Ellis in 1927, "pain" may not be an appropriate term or applied concept in the context of sadomasochism, in which (regardless of the underlying reason) pain is experienced as pleasure resulting in sexual gratification. This paradox led to a paradigmatic shift away from a singular focus on pain, as pain itself is not perceived as erotic for every practitioner of BDSM and may be included in only one of many BDSM rituals practiced by those who do. As BDSM includes the desire or need for submission, domination, and humiliation for sexual gratification (often without requiring pain), the definition of BDSM shifted to a focus on the construct of an erotic power exchange. (source)


Results from a research project by Dr. Pamela Connolly among a group with bondage and sadomasochistic interests (BDSM) showed that “no evidence was found to support the notion that major disorders -- including depression, anxiety, mania/bipolarity, and obsessive-compulsivity -- are more prevalent among members of the BDSM community than among members of the general population”.

“Indeed, if anything, our findings suggested that members of the BDSM community are less likely than others to present with major disorders.”

Moreover, BDSM players had no greater levels of psychological sadism or masochism, disorders in which the sufferer either derives pleasure out of genuine cruelty (not the play-acting kind) or compulsively seeks out harmful levels of pain.


A survey using computer-assisted telephone interviews with 20,000 Australian men and women presented at the World Association of Sexual Health congress in Sydney (2007), showed that BDSM may actually make men happier.

Men into BDSM scored significantly better on a scale of psychological wellbeing than other men. (I really want to hear what Doms here have to say about this theory. And I wonder, does this apply to male subs too?)

BDSM’ers were no more likely to have suffered sexual difficulties, sexual abuse or coercion or anxiety than other Australians.

"This seems to imply that these men are actually happier as a result of their behaviour, though we're not sure why," says Dr. Juliet Richters of the University of New South Wales. “It might just be that they're more in harmony with themselves because they're into something unusual and are comfortable with that. There's a lot to be said for accepting who you are.”

Researchers said the study helps break down the reigning stereotype that people into bondage and discipline were damaged as children, abused and were therefore “dysfunctional”. (This brings about question...where does the perception that BDSM practitioners (especially subs) were abused comes from then?....and I tend to think it has less to do with archaic psychiatric stand and more to do with the personal impression people get....I used to subscribe to that theory, but having surfed the net and the Library, I now wonder if its only PC feel good crap...because as someone who has never been abused, I do feel like the odd one out because the impression one gets is that almost all submissives have been abused.)



Statistics

The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, a national organization committed to supporting the equal rights of consenting adults who practice forms of alternative sexual expression, conducted an informal survey of SM practitioners in 1998-1999.

GENDER (Now this surprised me, because I always thought that there were more women into bdsm than men.)
Men 51%
Women 46%
Transgender 1%
Intersexual 2%

ORIENTATION
Heterosexual 40%
Homosexual 22%
Bisexual 36%
No Response 4%

AGE
18-22 3%
23-29 15%
30-44 49%
45-64 31%
Over 65 2%

EMPLOYMENT
Student 8%
Part time 5%
Full time 62%
Self employed 22%
Unemployed 1%
Retired 2%

INCOME (please remember this is 10 years old research)
Under $ 10K 7%
$10-24K 17%
$25-49K 37%
Over $50K 39%


5-10% of the U.S. engages in SM for sexual pleasure on at least an occasional basis (Lowe, 1983).

12% of females and 22% of males reported erotic response to a SM story (Kinsey, Martin, Gebhard, 1953).

55% of females and 50% of males reported having responded erotically to being bitten (Kinsey, Martin, Gebhard, 1953).

14% of men and 11% of women have had some sexual experience with sadomasochism (Janus & Janus, 1993).

11% of men and 17% of women reported trying bondage (Lowe, 1983).

[jeanne]

"This seems to imply that these men are actually happier as a result of their behaviour, though we're not sure why," says Dr. Juliet Richters of the University of New South Wales. “It might just be that they're more in harmony with themselves because they're into something unusual and are comfortable with that. There's a lot to be said for accepting who you are.”

I think she's exactly right.

Researchers said the study helps break down the reigning stereotype that people into bondage and discipline were damaged as children, abused and were therefore “dysfunctional”. (This brings about question...where does the perception that BDSM practitioners (especially subs) were abused comes from then?....and I tend to think it has less to do with archaic psychiatric stand and more to do with the personal impression people get....I used to subscribe to that theory, but having surfed the net and the Library, I now wonder if its only PC feel good crap...because as someone who has never been abused, I do feel like the odd one out because the impression one gets is that almost all submissives have been abused.)

In my opinion, I think it's just vanilla society's way of 'excusing' what submissives do. They simply cannot comprehend that someone would find this personally gratifying without some traumatic underlying reason.

Thanks for sharing this, damyanti! I'm sure it will provoke lots of interesting discussion.

[Daumon]

Yep, my intellectual brain is at it again, ....I wanted to see what science has to say on BDSM and have decided to share some of the data I came across here....not that there is that much (easily) available, lol....I am interested to hear what do you think about the data presented.

<< We enjoy the intellectual questions you raise. Its always good to have a better understanding of the interest we share here. >>

Results from a research project by Dr. Pamela Connolly among a group with bondage and sadomasochistic interests (BDSM) showed that “no evidence was found to support the notion that major disorders -- including depression, anxiety, mania/bipolarity, and obsessive-compulsivity -- are more prevalent among members of the BDSM community than among members of the general population”.

“Indeed, if anything, our findings suggested that members of the BDSM community are less likely than others to present with major disorders.”

Moreover, BDSM players had no greater levels of psychological sadism or masochism, disorders in which the sufferer either derives pleasure out of genuine cruelty (not the play-acting kind) or compulsively seeks out harmful levels of pain.

<<< The assumption made by most people is that since we enjoy things that 'normal people' would have no interest in there MUST be something wrong with us. If you enjoy Dominating others you must have some ego disorder or acting out revenge on being abused as a child. If you enjoy being submissive you are seeking escape from an over stressed life or an abused childhood. >>>


A survey using computer-assisted telephone interviews with 20,000 Australian men and women presented at the World Association of Sexual Health congress in Sydney (2007), showed that BDSM may actually make men happier.

Men into BDSM scored significantly better on a scale of psychological wellbeing than other men. (I really want to hear what Doms here have to say about this theory. And I wonder, does this apply to male subs too?)

<<< I think this has ALOT to do with accepting who you are and feeling relaxed and comfortable being able to enjoy what you like. People who have deep needs and have to repress them to conform to the expected social roles. Being able to freely accept yourself and not hide it allows you to pull all the losse ends of yourself into one harmonous person. >>>

"This seems to imply that these men are actually happier as a result of their behaviour, though we're not sure why," says Dr. Juliet Richters of the University of New South Wales. “It might just be that they're more in harmony with themselves because they're into something unusual and are comfortable with that. There's a lot to be said for accepting who you are.”

Researchers said the study helps break down the reigning stereotype that people into bondage and discipline were damaged as children, abused and were therefore “dysfunctional”. (This brings about question...where does the perception that BDSM practitioners (especially subs) were abused comes from then?....and I tend to think it has less to do with archaic psychiatric stand and more to do with the personal impression people get....I used to subscribe to that theory, but having surfed the net and the Library, I now wonder if its only PC feel good crap...because as someone who has never been abused, I do feel like the odd one out because the impression one gets is that almost all submissives have been abused.)

<<< Again people look at the idea of a person wishing to whip or cane another as abuse. To enjoy locking someone in tight bondage is too close to the idea of slavery to be comfortable for most people. The idea of humilating another and train them to serve is seen as horribly wrong and sick. So anyone who wishes to carry on such activities MUST be wrong some how. Either they are mentally ill or were victimized and really dont know any better. Trying to explain the you care for and respect the your partner. The same person you lead about on a lease or make dress up as a slutty little french maid is just to hard for others to accept. >>>



Statistics

The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, a national organization committed to supporting the equal rights of consenting adults who practice forms of alternative sexual expression, conducted an informal survey of SM practitioners in 1998-1999.

GENDER (Now this surprised me, because I always thought that there were more women into bdsm than men.)
Men 51%
Women 46%
Transgender 1%
Intersexual 2%

ORIENTATION
Heterosexual 40%
Homosexual 22%
Bisexual 36%
No Response 4%

AGE
18-22 3%
23-29 15%
30-44 49%
45-64 31%
Over 65 2%

EMPLOYMENT
Student 8%
Part time 5%
Full time 62%
Self employed 22%
Unemployed 1%
Retired 2%

INCOME (please remember this is 10 years old research)
Under $ 10K 7%
$10-24K 17%
$25-49K 37%
Over $50K 39%


5-10% of the U.S. engages in SM for sexual pleasure on at least an occasional basis (Lowe, 1983).

12% of females and 22% of males reported erotic response to a SM story (Kinsey, Martin, Gebhard, 1953).

55% of females and 50% of males reported having responded erotically to being bitten (Kinsey, Martin, Gebhard, 1953).

14% of men and 11% of women have had some sexual experience with sadomasochism (Janus & Janus, 1993).

11% of men and 17% of women reported trying bondage (Lowe, 1983).

<<< I think the reall numbers would be higher if people were completely honest and open in their feelings, interest and reactions. Some people could never accpet or admit that they reacted to such stimulus. Just my opinion >>

Daumon

[blythe spirit]

Interesting that just last night I was picking brains (well, there were only two sadists present) in a chat room. Interesting too, that research expounds on the "receiver" of pain (their motives, their emotional well-being, etc.) and has little information regarding the "giver."

I'm not at all surprised that the number of men into BDSM tops the percentage of women. Could be that you're surprised because there are definitely more submissive females/males than dominant female/males that practice the lifestyle.

[RickBulow74]

Yep, my intellectual brain is at it again, ....I wanted to see what science has to say on BDSM and have decided to share some of the data I came across here....not that there is that much (easily) available, lol....I am interested to hear what do you think about the data presented.

Of all the paraphilias the least researched are sexual sadism and sexual masochism. Known collectively as "sadomasochism" to professionals, those who practice this alternative sexual lifestyle tend use the term bondage-domination-sadism-masochism, or BDSM.

Recently, BDSM has entered the plotline in episodes of several popular primetime television series, made-for-TV movies, and motion pictures. This increased focus on BDSM by the entertainment industry may have been sparked by the national news coverage surrounding the trial of the BTK serial killer in 2005, primed by the prior arrest and conviction of John Edward Robinson, the first known cyber serial murderer who attracted his victims through a shared interest in BDSM (Gross, 2005). The increased focus on BDSM may be the natural byproduct of increased prevalence in the general population, increased openness within the BDSM community, and/or increased societal curiosity regarding more extreme alternative sexual practices. The near absence of empirical research on BDSM makes it impossible to know the exact factor(s) underlying the thematic trend.

A key difficulty in researching BDSM is the lack of formalized, uniform definition of terms, agreed-upon by scholars and practitioners of this alternative form of sexual expression.

In the late 1890s, sexologists considered human sexual masochism a natural evolution of that evidenced in lower mammals. Over 40 mammalian species have been identified that bite while mating; among humans, approximately 25% of both men and women report having been sexually aroused by a partner's bite. Masochism became defined as sexual algophilia, or the "fondness or love of pain" during sex.

There is evidence of BDSM occurring across time and cultures, with perhaps the most widely known example being the Kama Sutra. As suggested by the Kama Sutra and as raised by Ellis in 1927, "pain" may not be an appropriate term or applied concept in the context of sadomasochism, in which (regardless of the underlying reason) pain is experienced as pleasure resulting in sexual gratification. This paradox led to a paradigmatic shift away from a singular focus on pain, as pain itself is not perceived as erotic for every practitioner of BDSM and may be included in only one of many BDSM rituals practiced by those who do. As BDSM includes the desire or need for submission, domination, and humiliation for sexual gratification (often without requiring pain), the definition of BDSM shifted to a focus on the construct of an erotic power exchange. (source)


Results from a research project by Dr. Pamela Connolly among a group with bondage and sadomasochistic interests (BDSM) showed that “no evidence was found to support the notion that major disorders -- including depression, anxiety, mania/bipolarity, and obsessive-compulsivity -- are more prevalent among members of the BDSM community than among members of the general population”.

“Indeed, if anything, our findings suggested that members of the BDSM community are less likely than others to present with major disorders.”

Moreover, BDSM players had no greater levels of psychological sadism or masochism, disorders in which the sufferer either derives pleasure out of genuine cruelty (not the play-acting kind) or compulsively seeks out harmful levels of pain.


A survey using computer-assisted telephone interviews with 20,000 Australian men and women presented at the World Association of Sexual Health congress in Sydney (2007), showed that BDSM may actually make men happier.

Men into BDSM scored significantly better on a scale of psychological wellbeing than other men. (I really want to hear what Doms here have to say about this theory. And I wonder, does this apply to male subs too?)

BDSM’ers were no more likely to have suffered sexual difficulties, sexual abuse or coercion or anxiety than other Australians.

"This seems to imply that these men are actually happier as a result of their behaviour, though we're not sure why," says Dr. Juliet Richters of the University of New South Wales. “It might just be that they're more in harmony with themselves because they're into something unusual and are comfortable with that. There's a lot to be said for accepting who you are.”

Researchers said the study helps break down the reigning stereotype that people into bondage and discipline were damaged as children, abused and were therefore “dysfunctional”. (This brings about question...where does the perception that BDSM practitioners (especially subs) were abused comes from then?....and I tend to think it has less to do with archaic psychiatric stand and more to do with the personal impression people get....I used to subscribe to that theory, but having surfed the net and the Library, I now wonder if its only PC feel good crap...because as someone who has never been abused, I do feel like the odd one out because the impression one gets is that almost all submissives have been abused.)



Statistics

The National Coalition for Sexual Freedom, a national organization committed to supporting the equal rights of consenting adults who practice forms of alternative sexual expression, conducted an informal survey of SM practitioners in 1998-1999.

GENDER (Now this surprised me, because I always thought that there were more women into bdsm than men.)
Men 51%
Women 46%
Transgender 1%
Intersexual 2%

ORIENTATION
Heterosexual 40%
Homosexual 22%
Bisexual 36%
No Response 4%

AGE
18-22 3%
23-29 15%
30-44 49%
45-64 31%
Over 65 2%

EMPLOYMENT
Student 8%
Part time 5%
Full time 62%
Self employed 22%
Unemployed 1%
Retired 2%

INCOME (please remember this is 10 years old research)
Under $ 10K 7%
$10-24K 17%
$25-49K 37%
Over $50K 39%


5-10% of the U.S. engages in SM for sexual pleasure on at least an occasional basis (Lowe, 1983).

12% of females and 22% of males reported erotic response to a SM story (Kinsey, Martin, Gebhard, 1953).

55% of females and 50% of males reported having responded erotically to being bitten (Kinsey, Martin, Gebhard, 1953).

14% of men and 11% of women have had some sexual experience with sadomasochism (Janus & Janus, 1993).

11% of men and 17% of women reported trying bondage (Lowe, 1983).

I find this intriguing and informative. Would you object is I were to post this elsewhere and see what others say on this?

[damyanti]

I find this intriguing and informative. Would you object is I were to post this elsewhere and see what others say on this?

Not at all, ...but if they say something interesting, let me know,.

[damyanti]

Special thanks to blythespirit for making me think in this direction, but...frustratingly I couldn't find anything regarding the "giver"/sadist.


These are extracts from the ScienceForums.net thread titled BDSM and biochemistry


On this thread we have argued about the steps who can produce this pleasant sensation when the pain and humiliation are produced in certain situations from certain people to certain other people. For example the action of the endorphins could be stronger in masochist people (perhaps they have excess of certain receptors for these neurotransmitters); dopamine could act more in pleasure areas than in pain areas in submissive people…


Sex hormones like estrogen, and genes appear to play a big part in how individuals' bodies, and emotions, react to pain.

In fact, their newest preliminary data suggest that variations in women's estrogen levels -- like those that occur throughout the monthly menstrual cycle, or during pregnancy -- regulate the brain's natural ability to suppress pain.

When estrogen levels are high, the brain's natural painkiller system responds more potently when a painful experience occurs, releasing chemicals called endorphins or enkephalins that dampen the pain signals received by the brain. But when estrogen is low, the same system doesn't typically control pain nearly as effectively.

Pain has both physical and emotional components. If prolonged, it also becomes a stressor that influences our emotional states, and the interplay of gender, hormones, genetics and brain neurochemistry appears to induce our individual response to it.

When pain or other sources of stress become significant and threatening, groups of cells in the brain release chemicals called endogenous opioid chemicals, commonly known as endorphins or enkephalins. The endorphins bind to receptors on nearby brain cells and regulate how the brain interprets and regulates the pain-related signals those cells are sending to one another. The effect is called antinociception, because the neurotransmitters typically suppress the pain response, as opposed to nociception, which is the actual perception of pain.

Mu-opioid receptors are found throughout the brain, but are concentrated in areas that scientists know to be involved in our physical and emotional responses to stressors, including pain. Natural endorphins aren't the only thing that can bind to them; so can painkiller medications such as morphine, some anesthetics, and illegal drugs such as heroin. No matter what's binding to the receptors, the effect is a quelling of pain and our response to it.



I think that this tendency to BDSM it’s produced by the interneuron connexions that are formed during the very first years of life. And I am specially interested in the interaction of the feelings with the perception of the pain and humiliation. Because submissive and masochist people like being humiliated or produced pain by people that are attracted to, but we hate the same that other people having a toothache or being humiliated at work.


One area about which I am curious is the potential difference between enjoying physical pain versus enjoying psychological pain. Do those who like cutting themseleves also get some strange satisfaction out of grief or feelings of loss?


Well, in many respects, yes it is (hard-wired into your brain). Everything is. All experience alters our neurophysiology, including what activates our pleasure centers and what we crave. While it's all built on the substrate or foundation with which we were born, and is limited to our biology, the structure itself is generally a result of experience. It's not "hard" wired, per se, since new connections are continually formed and old connections continually trimmed, but it's definitely "wired" in a plastic sense.

Also, it's more than just the brain. It's the entire nervous system and many subsystems each playing their little part, like a single instrument helping contribute to the overall performance of a beautiful symphony.


Although our neural connexions are constantly changing because that is the way how learning and memory processes work, this are only little changes if we compare them with the high number of connexions in the brain. So, most of the connexions are already formed at three years old. When a baby has just born, any stimulus will produce big changes in synaptic connexions, but when we are adults we need very powerful stimuli to produce any notorious change.


There are people more submissive that get their pleasure mainly because the dominant get pleasure. The submissive is happy being humiliated by a dominant person who likes humiliating the first one, but that doesn’t mind that the submissive person like to be humiliated for anyone. When the dominant part produces physic pain on the submissive part, the submissive part gets pleasure because this pain made him/her feel subdued to the dominant one.

The masochist person obtains directly his/her pleasure through the pain. But I don’t know about any masochist person that gets pleasure when he hurts himself by accident and I don’t think that there are pure masochists or submissive persons. I think that each submissive person has more or less or masochist and vice verse.
When the painful stimulus is produced, first, the substance P prompts the physical sensation of pain, but the production of endorphins calm this physical sensation and even can produce a pleasant sensation. I suppose that a masochist produces great amounts of endorphins against the painful stimulus and so, pleasure can get not realizing of pain. The amount of pain for the threshold not being gone beyond would be different in each person.

But only in certain situations this pain is pleasurable: Feelings have to be implicated in order pleasure overcomes pain. The production of endorphin prompts the release of dopamine. Although dopamine is a “pleasure hormone”, main artist in the reward pathways, some works seem to indicate that it could be the cause of the psychological displeasing feeling of the pain.
D1 receptors seem to produce the displeasuring effect, while D2 would produce pleasure. So, my idea is that submissive people are prone to drive this dopamine to an area where there will be most of D2 receptors instead the area where the pain routes arrive with most of D1 in them. And this detour would be prompted by the nervous stimulation produced by the feelings. Perhaps submissive people have “pleasure areas” with D2 very near “displeasure areas” with D1, and that lead to “confusion”.


Extract from a paper about the capsaicin, the causing for the chilli peppers being spicy, which activate a pain pathway, causing in that way pleasure.

“So what is this addiction that chili eaters have with eating spicy food. If capsaicin initially induces powerful discharges of substance P in the pain pathway (and later reduces our sensitivity to pain), so much that many people hate to eat spicy food, then how is it that so many of us cannot eat without it in our foods? This is due to the fine line between pain and pleasure. When there is an increased concentration of B-endorphins (an opioid agonist), this stimulates the dopaminergic system to release more dopamine, which activates the reward circuit. This reward circuit is also known as the limbic system area, which runs in the brain from the ventral tegmentum, to the nucleus acumbens”

[blythe spirit]

Special thanks to blythespirit for making me think in this direction, but...frustratingly I couldn't find anything regarding the "giver"/sadist.

*laughing* Yeah, my point exactly!

btw, I didn't mean to sidetrack this interesting thread, but happy that I'm not alone in being unable to find info on "givers of pain." Anyway, I apologize.

[MoBigfoot]

The subject of possible child abuse was raised but what about early religious training or influence? In my own case, I was raised as a Catholic attending religious schools. The nuns and priests taught that sex was for procreation only. Yes, it could be enjoyable but that was to be considered a side effect. Should one find oneself enjoying sexual thoughts or "accidental" touching one was supposed to try not to enjoy it. BDSM fantasies were a way to "excuse" such pleasures. After all, if one was forced to enjoy it, then it wasn't a sin. Right? <grin>

I wonder how much such repressed urges enter into the development of BDSM practitioners.

[damyanti]

Masters & Johnson estimated that 10% of the American population practice some sort of BDSM play. Dr. Alfred Kinsey estimated that as many as 50 percent of all adults experiment with some type of rough or painful stimulation during sex.

Based on research by for example the Kinsey Institute, Cosmopolitan, Time Magazine and several European universities and other sources it is estimated that between 15 and 30 percent of the adult Western population nurtures some form of BDSM emotions.

And most contemporary sexologists agree that about 10 to 15 of the adult population regularly engages in kinky sex.

[lucy]

Men into BDSM scored significantly better on a scale of psychological wellbeing than other men. (I really want to hear what Doms here have to say about this theory. And I wonder, does this apply to male subs too?)

BDSM’ers were no more likely to have suffered sexual difficulties, sexual abuse or coercion or anxiety than other Australians.

"This seems to imply that these men are actually happier as a result of their behaviour, though we're not sure why," says Dr. Juliet Richters of the University of New South Wales. “It might just be that they're more in harmony with themselves because they're into something unusual and are comfortable with that. There's a lot to be said for accepting who you are.”

There's another possible explanation: Maybe they are not generally happier than the rest of the population, but the rest of the population (or a significant part of it) is unhappier because they're BDSMers too but are suppressing that part of their personality, thus being miserable...

And what about women? Are they happier too?

GENDER (Now this surprised me, because I always thought that there were more women into bdsm than men.)
Men 51%
Women 46%
Transgender 1%
Intersexual 2%

Maybe it's just that women are more "outgoing", at least on the internet.

[damyanti]

According to research presented earlier this year by Murray Straus, co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire, children who are spanked or victims of other corporal punishment are more likely to have sexual problems as a teen or adult

Widely considered the foremost researcher in his field, Straus analyzed the results of four studies and found that spanking and other corporal punishment by parents is associated with an increased probability of three sexual problems as a teen or adult:

1. Verbally and physically coercing a dating partner to have sex.
2. Risky sex such as premarital sex without a condom.
3. Masochistic sex such as being aroused by being spanked when having sex.

He concludes that these results, together with the results of more than 100 other studies, suggest that spanking is one of the roots of relationship violence and mental health problems.

Coerced Sex

A survey of more than 14,000 university students in 32 nations found that 29 percent of the male and 21 percent of the female students had verbally coerced sex from another person. Coerced sex involves insisting on sex when the partner does not want to, or threatening to end the relationship if the partner does not have sex.

The percentages of those who physically forced sex were much lower: 1.7 percent of the men and 1.2 percent of the women said they had used physical force, such as holding down the partner or hitting a partner to make them have sex.

“The most important finding of this study is that each increase of one step on a four-step measure of corporal punishment was associated with a 10 percent increase in the probability of verbal sexual coercion by men and a 12 percent increase in sexual coercion by women,” Straus says. “The relation of corporal punishment to physically forcing sex was even stronger. Each increase of one step in corporal punishment was associated with a 33 percent increase in the probability of men forcing sex and a 27 percent increase in the probability of women doing this.”


Risky Sex

In the second study, Straus analyzed the same sample of university students, but focused on whether they had insisted on sex without using a condom. Straus found that 15 percent of the men and 13 percent of the women had insisted on sex without a condom at least once in the past year.

Using the four-step corporal punishment scale, Straus found that of the group with the lowest score on the corporal punishment scale, 12.5 percent had insisted on unprotected sex. In contrast, 25 percent of students in the highest corporal punishment group engaged in this type of risky sex.

The third study analyzed data on 440 students in a New Hampshire high school. The students were divided into five groups, ranging from those who were never spanked to those whose parents used corporal punishment even when they were 13 years old and older. The study evaluated eight indicators of risky sex, such as more than one sex partner.

Straus found that students who had experienced corporal punishment had engaged in more risky sexual behavior than students who had not been spanked. From this study, Straus concludes that corporal punishment weakens the bond between the child and the parents. He believes that this alienation from parents may make teenagers less likely to avoid sex and less likely to follow safe sex practices.


Masochistic Sex

In the fourth study, Straus asked 207 students at three colleges about whether they had ever been sexually aroused by masochistic sex: imagining that they were being tied up when having sex, engaging in rough sex, or by spanking, and if they had been sexually aroused by actually doing these three things.

“The core idea of this study is that being spanked by loving parents confuses love with violence, which increases the probability that violence will be part of making love,” Straus says.

The study found that 75 percent of students who had been spanked a lot by their parents were sexually aroused by masochistic sex. In contrast, 40 percent of students who had never been spanked were interested in masochistic sex.

“What is new about this study is a scientific test of the idea that being spanked as a child inclines people to want to be spanked when having sex, and that this is especially likely to be true when there is a combination of lots of spanking and lots of love,” Straus says.

To reduce the use of corporal punishment, Straus recommends that the American Psychological Association, the U.S. Children’s Bureau, and other organizations publicize a recommendation that parents should never spank.



First let me state that I am categorically against the use of corporal punishment in any circumstance that doesn't involve consenting adults....but I do believe the good doctor is making much ado about nothing and trying to blow up an elephant out of a mouse here....still, if you ignore his conclusions the research numbers are rather interesting...and as a whole it shows we haven't come as far as we think we have in terms of general perception of the Lifestyle.

Second, “Masochistic sex such as being aroused by being spanked when having sex” is considered a “sexual problem??” It’s an interesting correlation to ponder to be sure, , but hardly something we need to worry about preventing, .

I mean, if over 60% of the college population admits to some form of ‘masochistic’ sex....Does a pathology exist if it is found in over half of your population? Please.

What it shows is a still lingering stigmatization of the eroticization of power during consensual, adult intimate exchange. This is an old, un-empirical conjecture indicative of unscientific, psychoanalytic thought that brought us such great hits as “penis envy”, “homosexual disturbance” and “insanity due to ejaculation outside the vagina”. What millennium are we in?

Working to stop the epidemic of domestic violence is a valid and commendable effort (and a cause close to my heart), but lambasting kink should not be a part of it.

Sorry, I simply cant stand when anyone presumes to order another person how to live their life, grrrrrrrrrr. I cant stand exclusivist fundamentalism of any kind. What works for one person may be completely wrong for another. We are all so different...we have different blood types, different brains, we differently percept things....so why should we all have to subscribe to the traditional marriage ideal of sex as a moment of brief and awkward fumbling in a darkened room?

[lucy]

Sorry, damyanti, maybe you should just accept the fact that you're a pervert

Oh, hell, no, that would mean i'm one too, so forgot about that.

I mean, if over 60% of the college population admits to some form of ‘masochistic’ sex....Does a pathology exist if it is found in over half of your population? Please.

Don't forget the economic side: A pathology found in more than half the population is great news for a lot of persons. Make that a pathology that needs to be treated, by, say, sexologists or any other shrink and you have a whole new industry.

What it shows is a still lingering stigmatization of the eroticization of power during consensual, adult intimate exchange. This is an old, un-empirical conjecture indicative of unscientific, psychoanalytic thought that brought us such great hits as “penis envy”, “homosexual disturbance” and “insanity due to ejaculation outside the vagina”. What millennium are we in?[/B]

Uh, what millennium we're in? Looking at the world i'd say that depends on where you are or with whom you talk.

As for the "penis envy": Freud was only half wrong (as usual) with his idea of penis envy. What he got wrong is that it's us women who suffer from penis envy when in fact it's guys which are suffering from that. In the form of "bigger, stronger, longer". Without that male penis envy i wouldn't have to delete all those spam mails in my (sic!) inbox.

[damyanti]

Sorry, damyanti, maybe you should just accept the fact that you're a pervert

I have accepted it...my point is...so what, there is nothing wrong with being a pervert. Kinky and proud of it (just don't tell my granny, lol).

Plus without exploring kinks, life would be boring...I mean, what do all those vanilla people do with their time, .

[lucy]

Plus without exploring kinks, life would be boring...I mean, what do all those vanilla people do with their time, .

Conducting scientifical research on BDSM and coming up with the conclusion that we're perverts. Whereas we perverts are too busy being flogged, tied up, waxed (or flogging, tying up, waxing) aso asf to do it ourselves.
But hey, we might be perverts, but at least we're happier than them

[AdrianaAurora]

Conducting scientifical research on BDSM and coming up with the conclusion that we're perverts. Whereas we perverts are too busy being flogged, tied up, waxed (or flogging, tying up, waxing) aso asf to do it ourselves.
But hey, we might be perverts, but at least we're happier than them

Actually, that is the prevalent theory of modern psychiatry – that kinky people are mentally healthier and more stable because they are more honest with themselves and accepting of who they are.

Its amazingly liberating to be who you are.


I will be sure to refer Tristan to this thread D, . I am sure He will find it fascinating, LOL.

[AdrianaAurora]

so why should we all have to subscribe to the traditional marriage ideal of sex as a moment of brief and awkward fumbling in a darkened room

ROTFLMAO

You are priceless, girlfriend!

[leo9]

I agree that the idea that BDSm is caused by abuse has some currency in the community as well as among vanillas, which is interesting since research consistently disagrees.

My own theory is that BDSMers tend to be more at home in their own sexuality than the majority, and that this includes being more than usually able to recognise and openly discuss their sexual traumas.

Therefore, even though the percentage of people with a background of abuse is probably the same as in the general population, the percentage reporting abuse is higher.

As for the question of what "givers" (tops/Doms) get out of it: speaking from my own self-analysis, I believe that the emotional reward of a BDSM scene (as distinct from physical rewards such as endorphin highs) is the security of having one partner in total control.

What I mean is that the average vanilla sexual encounter is a dance of negotiation where the participants are constantly subconsciously checking who is leading and who is following, and unless they are helped by shared social codes or excellent communication they are frequently at odds (either tugging for control, or adrift waiting for the other to give a lead), leading to low-level background stress which is too familiar to be noticed. A situation where one partner takes control and keeps it, is a relief all the more profound because one hadn't been aware of the stress till it is gone. It's no accident that the climax of almost every mass-produced romance novel is the moment when the hero takes command and the heroine happily submits.

And this relief applies whether one is the controller or the controlled, which is why I believe that the difference between Doms and subs, or between tops and bottoms, is a matter of taste rather than a fundamental divide.

In my opinion, things such as pain and humiliation come into this because, once one has discovered the joy of power exchange, one instinctively wants to enhance it by making the exchange more extreme and more obvious. And the more conventionally undesirable things the Dom/top/controler does to the sub/bottom/controlee, the more it reinforces both parties' awareness that power has been and remains exchanged. To put that in simpler language, the more I whip you, order you about, treat you as a naughty child, piss on you or whatever is meaningful for us, the more we both know that I'm in charge and you aren't. And speaking as a switch, that is the same thrill whichever end of the chain I'm on.

[HisKitty]

I think she's exactly right.



In my opinion, I think it's just vanilla society's way of 'excusing' what submissives do. They simply cannot comprehend that someone would find this personally gratifying without some traumatic underlying reason.

Thanks for sharing this, damyanti! I'm sure it will provoke lots of interesting discussion.

yeah xD I don't really get why I have to have suffered from something to be submissive xD I have never had any kind of trauma, I had a great childhood, I kissed a boy when I was 16, fooled around and knew I was into bondage when I was still young... but it was all very innocent, lol. Nothing wrong here!

[tessa]

Recently, BDSM has entered the plotline in episodes of several popular primetime television series, made-for-TV movies, and motion pictures.

About damn time.

This increased focus on BDSM by the entertainment industry may have been sparked by the national news coverage surrounding the trial of the BTK serial killer in 2005, primed by the prior arrest and conviction of John Edward Robinson, the first known cyber serial murderer who attracted his victims through a shared interest in BDSM (Gross, 2005).

That serial killers are linked and connected to "shared interest in BDSM" in this way says we still have a looooooooong way to go.

The near absence of empirical research on BDSM makes it impossible to know the exact factor(s) underlying the thematic trend.

I will gladly volunteer for the first case studies.

A key difficulty in researching BDSM is the lack of formalized, uniform definition of terms, agreed-upon by scholars and practitioners of this alternative form of sexual expression.

Exactly. We as a community can't agree on it all, so why should they do any better at it?

Over 40 mammalian species have been identified that bite while mating; among humans, approximately 25% of both men and women report having been sexually aroused by a partner's bite.

Hey, I resemble that remark.

As suggested by the Kama Sutra and as raised by Ellis in 1927, "pain" may not be an appropriate term or applied concept in the context of sadomasochism, in which (regardless of the underlying reason) pain is experienced as pleasure resulting in sexual gratification. This paradox led to a paradigmatic shift away from a singular focus on pain, as pain itself is not perceived as erotic for every practitioner of BDSM and may be included in only one of many BDSM rituals practiced by those who do. As BDSM includes the desire or need for submission, domination, and humiliation for sexual gratification (often without requiring pain), the definition of BDSM shifted to a focus on the construct of an erotic power exchange.

Somebody, at least, got a clue.

Results from a research project by Dr. Pamela Connolly among a group with bondage and sadomasochistic interests (BDSM) showed that “no evidence was found to support the notion that major disorders -- including depression, anxiety, mania/bipolarity, and obsessive-compulsivity -- are more prevalent among members of the BDSM community than among members of the general population”.

“Indeed, if anything, our findings suggested that members of the BDSM community are less likely than others to present with major disorders.”

Moreover, BDSM players had no greater levels of psychological sadism or masochism, disorders in which the sufferer either derives pleasure out of genuine cruelty (not the play-acting kind) or compulsively seeks out harmful levels of pain.

Loved every word of that!

Men into BDSM scored significantly better on a scale of psychological wellbeing than other men. (I really want to hear what Doms here have to say about this theory. And I wonder, does this apply to male subs too?)

If it does, it won't apply in the same ways. A dominant male brain is wired differently than a submissive male brain. There have been fascinating case studies done on that concept.

I do feel like the odd one out because the impression one gets is that almost all submissives have been abused.

I think it's just that abusive situations are highlighted as the what-not-to-do (rightly so), and those circumstances garner more attention when they're shared.

(Now this surprised me, because I always thought that there were more women into bdsm than men.)

Maybe because women verbalize (as well as type) more abundantly than men about such things? Just a guess. Although, I bet there's a study on it somewhere. And if not, again, I'll gladly volunteer.

Interesting stuff. Thanks.