Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crushers Rose
The word Sadism was first introduced into the English language in 1888, as noted by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary. It is the word coined to give name to the psychological character make-up of the Marquis de Sade, and is the result of a vast number of investigations and conferences held among medical and psychological professionals, as well as philosophers, theologians, sociologists, and anthropologists. It is a strict reference to the psychological pleasure derived from inflicting pain.
Yes, good old Krafft-Ebbing, what do we not owe to him?
"Krafft-Ebing considered procreation the purpose of sexual desire and that any form of recreational sex was a perversion of the sex drive." Homo sexuality was a perversion, along with masturbation and sexually interested women, and a lot of other things.
A look at the norm-setters of that time and their influence would be an interesting thread but far from the topic of the OP.
Quote:
Sadism has nothing to do with the erotic, nor does it concern itself with inflicting “delight” of any kind.
Not true. bdsm sadists and masochists are definitely getting delight and sexual gratification from what they do. I know my partner gets a most definite erection and arousal from beating me, and I have personally seen masochists orgasm while being beaten.
Quote:
Sadism is strictly and specifically focused on administering pain to another being. Sadism does exist outside the realm of BDSM as well within.
True, and as the words are used both to mean disturbed psychopaths and responsible human beings, it is important to distinguish between them, not least in communication between bdsm people where some might be new comers.
Quote:
The difference between the two instances is consent.
Nope, there is a lot more difference than that, see above.
Quote:
In the realm of BDSM, sadism is ONLY defined by the enjoyment of inflicting pain upon another person, and is strictly and specifically focused on the PLEASURE and JOY found in inflicting such pain. Sadism is expressed as a power exchange between the Sadist and his/her partner through consensual activity that involves inflicting pain upon the recipient. The Sadist may revel in the struggle of his victim. The Sadist may savor the flavor of suffering endured by the other party. The Sadist may find some form of erotic pleasure or satisfaction or fulfillment in this activity, however that is not the objective or goal. Such erotic pleasure is simply a secondary by-product. The sole purpose and goal of sadistic activity to the Sadist is the pleasure received by inflicting pain. There are many times in which a Sadist may choose to inflict pain for the sheer enjoyment of doing so, and there is no erotic engagement whatsoever in that infliction. And still none of this means that a Dominant must also be a Sadist. There are many Dominants who derive no pleasure at all from inflicting pain of any kind.
It is hard to understand your definitions here, but I'll try to split them up like this:
Quote:
In the realm of BDSM, sadism is ONLY defined by the enjoyment of inflicting pain upon another person, and is strictly and specifically focused on the PLEASURE and JOY found in inflicting such pain.
No, as you said, one defining factor between bdsm sadism and 'classic' sadism is exactly that the person is also aware of the reactions of the partner. If the partner gets nothing from this activity, neither directly by being a masochist or indirectly by pleasing the Master/MIstress, the bdsm sadist will also get nothing from it.
Quote:
There are many times in which a Sadist may choose to inflict pain for the sheer enjoyment of doing so, and there is no erotic engagement whatsoever in that infliction.
I suppose you can distinguish the pleasure of power play from erotic pleasure, and so in some instances the inflicting of pain can be a power rush without erotic feelings.
Quote:
Sadism is expressed as a power exchange between the Sadist and his/her partner through consensual activity that involves inflicting pain upon the recipient.
I believe one should always be a bit careful with iron cast definitions with respect to something as organic, diverse and alive as bdsm. I have seen people whip each other simultaneously, there was zero power play involved, and I have seen people take turns beating each other or doing other things, purely as a give-and-take of pain/sensations, helping each other out in a friendly way.
Also, what about people who are sadomasochists? Liking it both ways? With or without powerplay?
Quote:
none of this means that a Dominant must also be a Sadist. There are many Dominants who derive no pleasure at all from inflicting pain of any kind
True. And a Sadist may not be a dominant either.
I do not quite understand what your point is with making such a distinction between erotic pain in sadism and other kinds of pleasure, but erotic pleasure is there for sure for many. Personally I find it more important to distinguish between those who cause harm and those who don't: non bdsm sadists are psychopaths and bdsm sadists are givers of pain in a consensual relationship with feelings and concern for the reactions of the partner. In communication this should be apparent.
And as for the power play: as I see in concerning the OPs question, the main thing is to say where you are with both power and sadism. Simply say it the way many bdsm people do, by negotiation before starting a relationship, and by getting to know each other. Few things are wrong here, the main thing is to make sure you have as good a match with each other as you can get, by way of completely open communication.