Quote Originally Posted by thir View Post
Could be a matter of linguistics here, but a number of people actually define themselves as sadists, meaning they give pain. And there is nothing wrong with that.
There is, however, a difference between a 'sadist' and a 'bully'. A sadist is still in control of themselves when they inflict pain, they do not do it to vent some frustration.


Do you remember the old experiment in which a person tries to imprint learning on another person by giving them electric shocks? In reality the person being tested was the one giving the shocks, while the other was an actor simulating pain. But the point was that you could get normal people to keep giving these shocks - even to 'death', as long as it was an authority asking them to do it.
Milgram... of course the same experiment would probably be illegal now, just like the one that fed psychotropics to prison inmates to 'test what they did'. Migram's work is interesting in that it does cast doubt on the attitude to the 'standard Nurenberg defence' which is 'only following orders is no defence'.

Among others Joseph Conrad in 'Heart of 'Darkness' asked the question of how do we behave, if we can REALLY do what we want without anyone interfering?

The answer, as I see it, has to do with definitions of civilization..
Three meals away from barbarism?

I beg to defer here. Yes, in a bdsm relationship abuse is certainly possible, but I must protest against this picture. Subs are not helpless.
Maybe not helpless (protected in law if not by their own doing) but some are vulnerable. Most, however, are strong individuals who choose submission fully aware of what it means.