Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
First off I must say I struggle with the mindset of the sadist. The concept of getting pleasure from causing pain in others is something that goes against the values we are taught from childhood. Take out the consent and it is the mindset of the crazy serial murderer, the concentration camp guard, the boy plucking the wings off the butterfly.
But that's another topic. As regards the questions posed in this topic I believe sadism cannot be taught any more than homosexuality can be taught. It can be nurtured, a person can be brought up to behave like a sadist and even think they enjoy it but they are only mimicing it, True sadism must come from within.
The question though can be confusing. Is the question, can we teach somebody to be a sadist or can we teach a sadist new tricks. The first question I have answered, As for the second of course a sadist, like anybody, can be introduced to new tricks which may or may not interest them, This is what happens in just_ine example. She suggests a new technique and the sadist thinks it may be interestting. This is like the spanish inquisitor exchanging torture tecchniques with the Guantanamo camp interogators. Hey what do you think about waterboarding as opposed to the thumbscrew? Its information exchange, learning new techniques and even the psychology of pain and suffering. How to think like Hannibal Lecter.
But the question maybe should not be whether its possible to teach a sadist but is it right to teach a sadist. For me sex is about doinf whatever turns you on. Its a personal thing. What works for you may not work for another. One should not seek to copy others and do it like others do. But one should experiment to find out what one likes and doesn't. Its like food. Nobody can teach you to llke chinese or italian food but you should try everything because you wont know what you like unless you try it.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Thank You for Your response, Denzark. An interesting view. On some points I agree with You. Sadism being something inside of someone, is in line with how I see it. Also that it can be nurtured for a sadist to become more skilled.
I think Your mention of consent isn't to the forefront enough. If a Doctor simply starts cutting open patients because he wants to... that is craziness. But because the patient needs it(and yes... the masochist actually needs the pain) and the terms and conditions have been discussed and the patient understands and signs the consent... then the Dr is a genius. Mutual consent is the glue that holds it together.
As a masochist, I don't play with pain with a person who isn't a sadist. Giving me pain just because a Dom wants to give me pleasure, is a good enough reason not to engage in the scene. Those sadists I would consider doing a scene with are knowledgeable, ready and aware at all times.
Are Sadists mostly self-taught. If so... where did they get their information from? Does it also come from masochist subbies?
But being a sadist isnt Only about giving pain. That's only the one side of it. There is a mindset that reveals itself during talks and negotiations that curls a masochists toes in anticipation... who taught the sadist that mindset?
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
@just_ine - Many people confuse impact play with sadism. The key element of sadiism is as PurpleKnight outlined, obtaining pleasure from another persons suffering. If the masochist enjoys pain it is questionable if that is suffering. Your doctor analagy falls flat because the doctor does not get pleasure from the patient's suffering. Let's imagine he did. Would you be happy with a doctor who got (sexual) pleasure from the pain of patients. Would you allow him to treat children?
You stress consent but consent does not affect the definition of sadism. The sadist gets pleasure from another's suffering irrespective of consent. The only difference consent makes is it overcomes legal obstacles. Remove the legal obstacle and what do you have, a concentration camp guard. in fairness I suppose we could argue that without legal restraint all men would be rapists, but history shows us that most men can exert self restraint whereas that seems not to be the case for the sadist.
As to whether it can be taught, yes skills can be taught but not the pleasure. How does the sadist learn. He probably starts off tying tin cans to the dog's tail. It's a gradual process and he learns mostly from instinct and trial and error just as the school bully does. The screams of his victims is a learning aid for improvement.
I do not believe that bdsm should mean anything goes, there are some kinks that are indications a person should consider therapy. What does consent in the asylum mean? Nothing because the sanity is not there.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
As someone who has been on the receiving end of both the sadist consensually deriving sexual pleasure from giving pain to another, and the I-get-off-on-your-fear-sadist, I can assure You, Denzark, that consent doesn't merely:
Quote:
The only difference consent makes is it overcomes legal obstacles.
Ok. So perhaps part of this is that we have different definitions of what a sadist is? Am I talking about a Dom using sadism to teach and pleasure a submissive? (but doesn't that put him firmly in the definition of what a sexual sadist is?)
PurpleKnight said:
Quote:
I see a line between a Dominant delivering pain to the pleasure of the submissive and a sadist using disobedience as an opportunity to push the submissive through a truly unpleasant and testing experience. Real sadism can be viewed as an evil thing due to the degree with which a sadist enjoys other peoples' misfortunes and discomfort. It can be cultured, however, to be used as a tool.
I agree... this sadism... what You call real sadism, is a bad thing. But the sadism I am asking about is the one where it is used for the good of both.
I have an issue, though, with the underlined part.
Using disobedience.... does the fact that obedience is where my enjoyment lies and disobedience is the absolute exception make me unsuitable for a sadist? I would totally disagree...
Just one more observation:
Quote:
A true sadist wouldn't touch a masochist.
My experience was that being a masochist made me an ideal target for the bad kind of sadism. I was insecure, unsure of my own worth, emotionally needy. My need for pain was the gateway he used to get inside my head and see how far he could push me. When it breached consent, his true pleasure only started. Without a need for pain, I doubt I would have been such an easy target.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
0I agree, PurpleKnight, being a masochist doesn't automatically make one a target for the bad type of sadists. In my case, my emotional state made me one. Being a masochist simply made me an even easier target. I've since then worked through those insecurities and I'm not the same person or submissive (although certain types of pain still arouses me) as I was and I believe I am much less of an easy target.
Quote:
As a sadist myself, I use it as a way to strengthen the will of submissives and to help them overcome fears and obstacles.
^ this is exactly the type of sadism I am asking about... where did You learn this? How did You learn the mindset? Did it come naturally, through experience and confidence?
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
@just_ine - You may have misunderstood me, maybe not, your response is not clear. I said the only difference between bdsm sadist and the rvil sadist like the serial killers (example) is the consent. By that I meant both get pleasure from causing suffering. One restrains himself in the absence of consent the other doesn't. I'm not sure how you disagree with this.
As regards the definition of sadist. Here are definitions from 2 respected dictionaries. I'm sure other dictionaries would be similar,
a person who gets pleasure, sometimes sexual, by being cruel to or hurting another person - Merriam Webster Dictionary
someone who enjoys hurting other people or making them suffer - Longman Dictionary
I agree though that you and most in bdsm mean something different. As I said before I suspect many who call themselves sadists mean they like (heavy) impact or pain sensation play, which is not quite suffering or being cruel. The dom who likes to flog his sub hard maybe calls himself a sadist but I doubt he really is. Is this the source of our difference of opinion ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by just_ine
When it breached consent, his true pleasure only started.
Yep thats the sadist. If you consent it means you enjoy or at least dont mind it ie its not suffering. and without the suffering there is no pleasure for the sadist.
I'd have thought being a masochist makes you less of a target for the sadist. For the bdsm sadist you are a target because there can be consent and there is a common interest (kink). For the true sadist if you enjoy it there is less suffering and less pleasure for the sadist. It logic Captain Kirk.
@PurpleKnight - You describe yourself as a sadist. Do you meet the definitions I quoted above ?
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Quote:
I'd have thought being a masochist makes you less of a target for the sadist. For the bdsm sadist you are a target because there can be consent and there is a common interest (kink). For the true sadist if you enjoy it there is less suffering and less pleasure for the sadist. It logic Captain Kirk.
Interesting point, Denzark. The sadist I refer to approached me as a Dom. I wanted pain, he liked giving pain. It provided the 'in' he needed to get into my head. He wasn't exactly forthcoming on his enjoyment actually only starting when I was quite literally quacking with fear, Ya know what I mean?
And we spoke for 6 months before he showed his real colours. If, in that time of tease and light play and negotiations, he never gave me any pleasure, I'd have been long gone. So, giving pleasure isn't outside of the realm of the evil sadist. It also doesn't make them a "not real" if he was aroused by my pleasure. That is a very one-dimensional view of a very complex personality type, imo.
I remember my King would often tease me when I ask for pain, by not giving it to me. He loved the control of giving and not giving. He saw himself a sadist... (sexual..not evil- I hasten to add) He found the most pleasure when I was crying in physical pain that He gave me. He relished the hiss of my breath as I felt His pain or the deep breaths as I try to breathe through pain that made my body recoil. He growled in pleasure. And I felt pleasure in His growls and deep satisfaction.
Before a scene, He often asked me how I was feeling and more often that not, I would tell Him I am scared and wish we could skip the pain. He would have me kneel, and ask me to accept or reject His pain... always... always this ritual. And although I dreaded the pain itself, I would agree eagerly because I knew the deep pleasure I gave Him. In the end, the only person He trusted Himself to give pain to.
He gave me pain for His pleasure. My pleasure was the sensations...but only after the endorphines had started flooding my system. Before that, my pleasure came from His growls and hisses.
This is the play between a sadist and masochist.
If He gave me pain for my pleasure only... I would not have wanted it. That defeats the whole purpose, in my experience. YMMV.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Quote:
The first was I ended up ruining the scene because I was too afraid of going too far, but the second was that I discovered I enjoyed the feeling of overpowering her, controlling her and the thought of her suffering.
I have found this to be true for many a sexual sadist I have spoken to.
Denzard said:
Quote:
@just_ine - You may have misunderstood me, maybe not, your response is not clear. I said the only difference between bdsm sadist and the rvil sadist like the serial killers (example) is the consent. By that I meant both get pleasure from causing suffering. One restrains himself in the absence of consent the other doesn't. I'm not sure how you disagree with this.
Quoting from Your original post:
Quote:
The only difference consent makes is it overcomes legal obstacles.
I can see that You view it as a male Dominant and as such Your statement is not untrue at all.
It is simply not the only difference... the legal one. For the submissive/bottom/masochist on the receiving end there are many more clear differences. These are less clear cut and are more difficult to express and put a value on, but the difference remains.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by just_ine
So, giving pleasure isn't outside of the realm of the evil sadist.
The man presented himself as Dom. gave pleasure as Dom, then when he showed his "true colors" as sadist your pleasure stopped and his started. This is summary of what you said, correct? Yes a sadist can give pleasure just as a sadist can drive a car but when he is driving he is a motorist not a sadiist. By definition a sadist gives suffering not pleasure. If he gives pleasure he is not acting as sadist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleKnight
Denzark, I find it extremely offensive that you keep on injecting serial killers and concentration camp guards into your definitions because it only perpetuates the negative stigma that society has toward sadists.
The reason I do so is because in more than 2000 years of recorde history I struggle to name one benign sadist. Can you name me one. As I said before, I suspect the truth is that what bdsm calls a sadist is not really a sadist just as a bdsm slave is not really a slave. Your position is there are two types of sadist just as others would no doubt argue there are two types of slave. You say there are misconceptions about sadism just as the slave would argue there are about slavery.
I accept the bdsm sadist is not the same as the dictionary sadist, Can you define or describe what the bdsm sadist is then so there is no confusion or misconception,
If you want me to withdraw from this discussion you need only say so but please do not seek to silence a valid opinion by saying "I find it offensive". That is the ploy of right wing religous groups who use the claim of finding offensive against art, thought, free speech and bdsm itself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleKnight
It also isn't relevant, because just_ine never asked about those types of sadists.
Maybe I am misreading but just_ine never distinguished between types of sadists or did she ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleKnight
I don't need to be defined by dictionaries, either. The act of placing labels on people and their feelings is the very reason I felt so guilty about my desires when I was still coping with That
Like it or not dictionaries are the means by which we clarify words in order to communicate effectively. That you choose to attach a different meaning to a word is fair enough but to avoid confusuion and misconceptions please let your meaning be known, That was why I asked if you met the definition, it was chance for you to explain your meaning, your type.
As regards label, YOU attached the label sadist to yourself. Why did you do that if you dislike labels. You attach the label, then choose to attach a different meaning, then choose not to explain what that meaning is. And you wonder why there are misconceptions.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Enough!!!!!!!!!!!
Bring this back to the OP's question.
Denzark.... some of your references are seriously offensive
stop the back and forth or open your own thread
J D
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
I think part of the issue here is your definition of sadism. and I do think that in popular culture there is the 'sadist' who enjoys causing distress and harm to people, concent being irralivant and probably actively avoided. and the 'sexual sadist' or 'BDSM' sadist that enjoys the giving of pain in the context of a consent based relationship (which is what, correct me if I am wrong Justine) J was asking about. To add full to the fire it is still classified as a DSM criteria 'psychiatric disorder' but there is much debate about this amongst all involved and as it stands
Sadism is only considered pathological if it causes the person significant difficulties:
A. Over a period of at least 6months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies or sexual urges involving acts in which the psychological or physical suffering (including humiliation) of the victim is sexually exciting to the person.
B. The person has acted on these sexual urges with a nonconsenting person, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty
which I think sums it up quite nicely, yes it is pathological if it causes marked distress or interpersonal difficulty (the basic psychiatric talk for an 'addictive' activity which is out of control) OR is non consensual.
http://www.dsm5.org/Research/Documen...Feb%202011.pdf
The DSM Diagnostic Criteria for Sexual Sadism | PARAPHILIAS
so back to J's original question.
I suspect people who are sexual sadists (I mean in a healthy and no way pathological manner) are basically born that way, much in the same way that I think I was born with a 'subby' personality. yes I could be taught to Domme, and may even enjoy some aspects of it, but I would always know that inside I was subby......if that makes sense!?
Also I do think that when it comes to 'teaching' or 'training' it is a mine feild that has to be carefully negotiated as personally I can see how that sort of 'FWB' could easily become something more, which is fine if both want something more but could result in tears before bed time if one party is happy to keep it causal and the other falls more deeply than they expected or wanted. but I guess you could say that about any relationship.
finally, I would say the most important thing of all is safety. if you are engaging in any activity that is potentially harmful (particularly remotely) then you really really want the person who is in charge to be as experianced as is humanly possible, knowledgable and 'you focused at all times'.
Do I think that a subs opinion and experiance is valid and helpful and can ultimately make a sexual sadest a better sadest YES!!!!with bells on, and then more bells on top of those bells, but do I think that this 'training' should be in a 'FWB' relationship........that I am less sure of. but hay if it works for you it works!
(p.s lovely Justine, I adore you and your classy and helpful debates)
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
to clarify (and avoid any conflict around the concept of sadism as a phychiogical disorder). It is my personal opinion the sadism should NOT be included in the DSM criteria, or if it is that the tiny subset of 'sadists' who are pathological be clearly labeled as something else 'abusive personality disorder' or something similar, I think having it in the criteria muddies the waters for people who do not understand DBSM and adds to the confusion. And there is a growing school of thought that this should be the case amongst psychiatrists with many actively petitioning for the word 'sadist' to be changed to a different lable (for instance abusive personality disorder) and reserved for the very few where consent is not sought and infact actively discouraged) or when those traits are pathological/harmful to the person or others. The argument for keeping it in is that in forensic pathology is that there are (very few) cases where a pathological 'sadist' is responsible for the harm and that by including this subset of people in the criteria it allows for further research/funding into the issues around it. But once again, I don't consider the sane safe and consensual sadist to be 'damaged' or 'pathological' quite the opposite those I have met have been amongst the most psychologically healthy people I know. I think
of it like anything else food,sex,Alcohol all are normal and healthy aspects of life which most people enjoy with no adverse effects in a small minority these things can become harmful and taken to the extreme become addictions and damaging. My argument is that you wouldn't have 'social drinker' as a BDSM psychological disorder you have 'alcohol addiction' so I believe that 'sadism' has no place in the criteria but 'abusive disorder' or similar where there is a loss of control to the extent that Consent fails to be considered should. *takes deep breath.....* does that make sense?
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Thanks, issie. Your views and mine are pretty much on par.
Thus: BDSM Sadists are born not taught.
A more effective mindset can be taught.
Teaching can happen by self-exploration, being taught by another BDSM Sadist or by a knowledgeable subbie/masochist.
PurpleKnight mentioned experiencing the pain Himself...thus being masochist to a sadist for a time/scene. Have other sadists found this to be helpful?
How many sadists are willing to 'feel the burn' so to speak?
A long-time-ago-Dom assured me he had done all of the things he required of me on himself... (why I doubt that is another story) but surely this is also a valid way? Self-infliction of pain.
Thank you to all who are contributing.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
just_ine
Thanks, issie. Your views and mine are pretty much on par.
Thus: BDSM Sadists are born not taught.
A more effective mindset can be taught.
Teaching can happen by self-exploration, being taught by another BDSM Sadist or by a knowledgeable subbie/masochist.
PurpleKnight mentioned experiencing the pain Himself...thus being masochist to a sadist for a time/scene. Have other sadists found this to be helpful?
How many sadists are willing to 'feel the burn' so to speak?
A long-time-ago-Dom assured me he had done all of the things he required of me on himself... (why I doubt that is another story) but surely this is also a valid way? Self-infliction of pain.
Thank you to all who are contributing.
Dominants.. Sadists or not who recive Formal Training IE Old School/Guard spend time as a submissive in all ways but sexually. We learn to take orders and to understand just what We put a submissive through.. this does include "feeling the burn" as you speak of.. I was taught and s til try each and every new toy with the exception of insertion toys on myself again I need to know what I am dealing out.. what it feels like. the possible damages of it this has nothing to do with a masochistic streak it is simply being prudent.
This is the time during Training, a budding Sadist is given His parameters. What is acceptable. What is not. This process takes from 3 to 5 years depending on the Group at no time during Training does a Dominant play with a Sub unsupervised. After each session the Dominant is graded and critiqued by the instructor and marked in a book. This practice of formal training is not as common as it once was. The onset of the internet and the I want it now mentality of the so called doms coming in the life now make this a rarity. Formal training can still be found in Groups such as The Society of Janus or the like and in some larger clubs.
Self taught BDSM is dangerous to all involved and should be taken into account before thats before One is tied and gagged and He breaks out the chainsaw...
Be Well
J D
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
I had just read this thread and was working offline on a reply that read almost word for word what JD has posted. I found his reply when I returned so rather than duplicate a post that is so well written and so succinctly makes the points that I was about to make, I will simply add a couple of thoughts.
I believe I can teach the mechanics of BDSM to almost anyone. Take for example the bullwhip. In the hands of an inexperienced operator even a 6 foot leather bullwhip that one can buy at almost any of the curio shops scattered throughout the southwestern US can cause lasting damage, usually to the operator much less to an unsuspecting victim. I can teach someone how to handle that whip. I can teach them to do the movie crack. I can teach them how to accurately place that tip. I can teach them how to control the speed of the whip so that you get just the desired effect. What I can not teach them is how to get that surge of sexual energy when you stand behind a willing submissive, who has handed to you in trust their well being and safety, and you hold that leather in your hand. That is in the wiring, not the teaching.
I too was trained by an "Old Guard" community. I earned my leathers. I am now an old fat over the hill broken down retired dominant sadist. I have watched this community grow from a few relatively closed groups scattered around the country to a marketing phenomenon with dollars as the ultimate goal. What was once a confirmed life style choice has now become a fashion fad.
The bottom line is that, like JD, I have experienced everything that I ask a submissive to experience. My personal opinion is that a submissive should in all seriousness look at a Dominant/Sadist when negotiating any action or scene and ask the question; "Have you had this done to you? Have you experienced this first hand to the level you want to take me?" I would never expect a submissive to accept any thing that I have no experienced myself first hand.
My two cents worth and I will kick the soap box back under the table.
As a side note: Justine, thank you for your thoughtful and always educational posts. You are what these forums should be about and yours is an example that everyone who visits should seek to emulate.
iseult. Your post(s) are a joy to read. They are well written, informative, and you are one of the few people I have ever seen who documents and cites authoritative materials to support your statements and arguments. You are the epitome of the forum participants. Thank you for your contributions and for your knowledge and obvious education. Now I will troll a bit. You wouldn't be in need of an old, over the hill, broken down, fat, retired, Dominant/Sadist would you? Seriously though. You are an obvious treasure, as is justine and the two of you are to be commended for your contributions to these forums.
Nuff' Said.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Jaded Dominant { koral }
This practice of formal training is not as common as it once was.
I think this is such a pity. There is such a dignity attached to the method You describe, TJD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TheDeSade
As a side note: Justine, thank you for your thoughtful and always educational posts. You are what these forums should be about and yours is an example that everyone who visits should seek to emulate.
Your words are too kind, TDS. Thank You kindly. I think I am simply not shy in asking these questions that many of us wonder about.
What would us subbies do without the willingness of Domly Ones to answer our wonderings. :)
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
It feels like this conversation has come to a natural close, so I feel a little weird weighing in, but I guess I'm not going to let that stop me!
I'm not sure I entirely agree with the statement that "BDSM sadists are born not taught." Unless the meaning behind the statement can be broadened to, "Anything you will every learn/discover/become/etc. is innate in you from birth." If not, then I don't think I can agree. If so, then it would just be a disagreement of philosophy.
To make a somewhat more simplified analogy, I didn't like classic rock when I was younger. I found the sometimes crazy singing and week-long guitar riffs to be annoying. As I grew up and learned more about music and history, I gained an appreciation of classic rock and even came to love some of it. Now, was I born to a love of classic rock? I would argue no.
Moving back to this idea of gaining pleasure from another's pain... does that have to be an in-born trait, or is it something that can be learned? Can a person learn to love the sweet sound of agony? The look of anguish on someone's face as they endure pain for you? The tears you cause by pushing them over a line? I maintain that yes, just like a person can learn to love all manner of things, they can also learn to find pleasure in another's suffering.
What are other examples of things you didn't love and now do? Sexual or otherwise. Were they taught, or was it learned? Maybe it was something you were never exposed to... But, can it really be said that those passions are better/truer/more real than others? If a person, on first hearing [insert your favorite classic rock song here] -fell in love with the genre, can their appreciation for the music really be quantified as better or worse than someone else's? Changing analogies for a moment, a couple who falls in love at first sight knows in that instant it is meant to be. Compare that to an arranged marriage and the words of Golde in Fiddler on the Roof, "For twenty-five years, I've lived with him, Fought with him, starved with him. For twenty-five years, my bed is his. If that's not love, what is?" [lyrics by Sheldon Harnick]. Can those two loves be quantified and one found better or worse than the other?
Again, I maintain not.
Re: Who Teaches the Sadist?
Excellent points well made, lena. I would love to hear the sadist's reaction on it.
Perhaps it was phrased wrong? Would 'predisposed' to sadism be more accurate? Or is it truly a case of being trained or taught to want/love something?
