Is (an extreme?) interest in a BDSM lifestyle a psychological problem?

Do they? Do they really? Did/do you play devil's advocate in the inter-racial marriage or same-sex marriage debate? Because this is the same sort of thing. You may never understand why some people tick the way you do, but it's really unarguable that the practice of BDSM is within the spectrum of normal human sexuality/psychology. Some people are wired this way, some are not and whether they are or aren't isn't susceptible to judgement!

As for identifying "the other side," I sincerely doubt you have enough information and understanding to identify and articulate the concepts you are arguing against. I also doubt you will find much useful information on Lit. In my experience, very few members of this site are real-world practitioners of BDSM. As someone mentioned above, Fetlife is a much better resource. Ideally, you'll go to your local munch and meet real people who do this every day. You'll find the vast majority are as normal, or fucked up, as you or I.

Sorry, I don't have the time to address the rest of your interesting questions. It's 14:12 where I am and I simply don't have the time right now. I'll try to get back to this later, or feel free to shoot me a PM.


Concerning inter-racial marriage and same-sex marriage, no but there are plenty of people out there that do. Not that he was a devils advocate of any sort but Muhammed Ali made some interesting points that are somewhat invalid in retrospect but probably made some sense back then. He may have been hit on the head a few times but in no way was he a dumb man or someone scared of confrontation or scandal, yet he supported the white segregationalist line on this issue. Even today race-mixing is very much rare and shows that people aren't as open as they are just. And perhaps that's the point you're making in so far that everyone need not understand what everyone else are doing but that they should defend their right to do so. As a general principle there's no way I can even try to argue against that.

Well I had an account on here since long ago and thought I'd give it a shot. Seems Fetlife is some dating site type of thing but meh, maybe eh. Some other fellow also gave that tip earlier.

And you're right, I don't but neither seems the opposite side. So the arguments are all lay, really. They haven't really been that convincing, it's just that some things are so common sense that it's hard to argue against them. I tried to construct my later questions to you in such a way that my knowledge of the subject itself isn't that important. Besides as I said I'm not coming completely out of nowhere here so I get some basic aspects of it and as you can see I first got curious some 9 years ago!
 
Last edited:
2 cents here. My input may be a little shallow compared to some of the comments here, but we'll see.

I identify myself as a slave, (a very, very subjective term.) given to a dominant man by mutual consent. This relationship revolves around love for one another and acceptance that we are who we wish to be in the relationship. I know that "freedom," (another very subjective term) is available to me at any time, but I would not trade my position under the man I refer to as Master for anything. I find my life very fulfilling and I am deeply invested in personal growth.

I have also seen a psychologist for a period of time, partly because, my Master wants to be confident, and wants me to be confident that I am not accepting this role for unhealthy reasons. My psychologist has stated that she sees me as a healthy, productive member of society and through our sessions she has come to an understanding that our lifestyle can be as healthy as any lifestyle, provided that it is by true mutual consent and captivity or fear are not subduing the individual into consent. In other words, in the absense of criminality.

Now, none of that is particularly scientific conclusions, but for my part, the small selection of people I am involved with who are part of a BDSM, (also very subjective,) culture, quite frankly have their lives together better than a lot or "normal" (subjective again) people that I know.

Mental illness or dysfunction crosses over into every societal category. I don't see any way that BDSM can be segregated out as foundationaly a mental illness.

If I missed something here that leaves my comment somehow irrelevant, please forgive me. I read the majority of the thread and some of it was mind boggling in that it seems to overthink the question...either that or it just went over my head.


That's interesting.
Thanks for sharing!
 
"Devils advocate" is a term used to describe someone who is arguing on behalf of the other side regardless of or despire their own opinions. I'll give you a gold star for being educated enough to use google though and click on the first link you see to explain it.

Actually, given that my family is full to bursting with Catholics and lawyers, I was familiar with the idea long before Google ever existed. But I'm not sure why you think an accusation of using Google is supposed to be a put-down; this whole discussion could've been a lot more productive and way shorter if you'd been willing to JFGI from the start.

Have you stoped to think about the possibility of using the word as a neologism?

The evolution of the language is a wonderful thing, but if you're trying to tell me that "advocate" no longer means somebody who advocates, I'm afraid that's a bridge too far.

To actually say that I am advocating something you must find me doing so.

Dude. You do understand that the things you said earlier in this thread are still available for all to read, surely? Here's just one of the bits where you advocate the idea that certain forms of BDSM are inherently pathological.

People whose submission is brought about from depression, solitude, a position from which submission may be the only way out.

Generally the cuckhold-lifestyle. It mixes several aspects of this but the most puzzling part for me is the search of a so called "Bull" for the supposedly dominant female who then goes on to humiliate her.

24/7 relationships of strictly enforced rules. Why not submission or dominance when both feel like being in that mood? Slightly unhealthy. Nobody is something all the time.

Well those are the subjects I have now. I might add a few more later. Feel free to add yours. Both exceptions and examples.
It seems to me that all these types could have a proper diagonisis put on them. Control Freaks/Obsessive behavior on the 24/7 aspect and then worse and worse diagnosis as we move furhter up the subjects/examples.

If you want me to believe that you were lying when you presented yourself as an advocate - rather than lying now when you try to claim you weren't advocating anything - you're going to need to work much much harder.

Speaking of memory lapses, quoting your first post in this thread (emphasis added):

First time that I ever write something like this in a thread but since it is my sincere wish it stay open and that people discuss with an open mind I thought it would be a good idea!

This is bullshit. You've been banging away on this "your kink is sick and wrong" line (with bonus "I couldn't be arsed doing the research before diving in with my uninformed opinion") since at least 2005 - although back then you were more honest about acknowledging it as your personal opinion rather than hiding behind claims of being a devil's advocate who's not advocating. Let me refresh your memory:

I know I like sensual bondage and romantic settings and perhaps sometimes watching pictures about a level or two more unusuall things turns me on but there are a few things I <can't> understand.

Now why would anyone willingly like to submit themselfs to "financial domination" seriously... what is the point? If you want to waste your money, and submit yourself to a waste of your financial resources why not put your name on a Red Cross donation list with a 3-4 numbers high digit.

Why would anyone like to submit themselfs to fulltime slavery threw a contract.If she or he now wants to be dominate for a surtain amount of time (like lifetime) then they could just let their mistress or master dominate them as long as they wanted (and if they want, their whole life). Or maybe I've missed some paragraphs <Grins>... about what a slave contract is.(No I have not viewed one but I have read about them a litle).

[re corset training] I don't know much about this... But I've seen a couple of pictures and it just scares me. I think it's wrong. Wearing a corset and during a while training yourself to have it as it should be worn, sure. I love corsets and they are a turn on indeed but doing this, letting someone do this to you is like letting someone hit you so hard that your leg brakes or that you get permanent scars and not just small ones instead ones shown over your whole body, ones if you go to far, you can't escape from ever.

[re body modification] Wow...But you're so young. How come you've already started tormenting your body that badly? Already having permanent scars from self inflicted wounds and doing stretching, don't forget the stretching. Nevermind the violet wand though, that's nothing special I guess.

But still, you do intrigue me! Funny you like medieval roleplay aswell. Pitty I'm not into BDSM. Top and bottom roleplay and light bondage is how far I go.

Spare us the crap about how you're only being a non-advocating advocate for bigotry because nobody else is doing it, and at least have the cojones to take ownership of your prejudices like you used to do.

Also what is politicized is only a perspective. Politics IS perspective. So to say that holding an opinion that is for favorable and inclusive regulation concerning a practise is just as politicized as one holding the opposite.

Where on earth did anybody say otherwise?

Try to understand that it is only normal that people question you, especially since they are not familiar with all of it.

Uh-huh. Curiosity is a human trait and I have plenty of time for people who genuinely want to learn about BDSM or any of the other unconventional aspects of my life.

The way that they indicate that curiosity is by asking questions respectfully, looking things up for themselves, and doing their best to set aside prejudices so they can receive information with an open mind.

You've done exactly none of those things. You're not asking out of curiosity, in fact you're not really asking at all. You're the same guy who showed up in 2005 to tell other people that Your Kink Is Bad And Wrong and leading with your own uninformed prejudices, and you're still doing it, just that you're now trying to achieve plausible deniability.

It is even normal that people legislate against you. It's normal for you to react and to fight that. It will be many more spins around our fairly small star until we learn to live together with each other, that's to say if this is desirable at all.

Yep, it's normal for people to be prejudiced uninformed dickheads. But it's still wrong and I'm still going to call them on it, whether they're open about their prejudice or whether they try to pass it off as a debating exercise.
 
Is an (extreme) interest in telling people that their lifestyle is bad and wrong, a psychological problem?
 
Is an (extreme) interest in telling people that their lifestyle is bad and wrong, a psychological problem?

Is arrogance in the DSM? Pretty sure narcissism (thinking you're right and important enough for us to give a fuck about your opinion) is still in there...
 
This is bullshit. You've been banging away on this "your kink is sick and wrong" line (with bonus "I couldn't be arsed doing the research before diving in with my uninformed opinion") since at least 2005 - although back then you were more honest about acknowledging it as your personal opinion rather than hiding behind claims of being a devil's advocate who's not advocating. Let me refresh your memory:

You're not asking out of curiosity, in fact you're not really asking at all. You're the same guy who showed up in 2005 to tell other people that Your Kink Is Bad And Wrong and leading with your own uninformed prejudices, and you're still doing it, just that you're now trying to achieve plausible deniability.

Yep, it's normal for people to be prejudiced uninformed dickheads. But it's still wrong and I'm still going to call them on it, whether they're open about their prejudice or whether they try to pass it off as a debating exercise.

Hahahahaha... That's him busted! :D

Is an (extreme) interest in telling people that their lifestyle is bad and wrong, a psychological problem?

It is in my book!
 
"Even today race-mixing is very much rare "

TL/DR thread holy shit.

Facts are obviously not this person's forte. The speed with which this demographic is growing is only ignored by the ignorant. In fact, multiracial peeps are a faster growing demographic in the US than single-race peeps.

I love when people make insane pronouncements with total authority and think everyone else is too fact-stupid to notice.
 
Last edited:
http://www.academia.edu/2565558/Mixed_Marriages_in_Europe_1990-2010

1% of the population on average engages in Mixed Marriages in Europe and it has been falling for the last 10 years despite increased immigration from outside of Europe.

See Page 90.

Oh wait, you were thinking America was the world? In the US the statistics are obviously different since mixed racial children were first created by mass rape of indians and blacks and so there have been many people standing inbetween two cultures and peoples early on. But even in America it represents only about 10-15% of all marriages depending on if you look for current statistics or on past. Meaning that today 1/10 marriages are interracial in the US and 1/100 in Europe. (From what I get from reading that Europe report if one is to take in account the number of people from different races then the proportional rate is about 1/10 just like in the US).

(I bet I'm a racist now, suddenly facts won't matter).


Alright guys, obviously I am the same person I was 9 years ago. Don't have anything else to add I think, PM me if you want.
 
Last edited:
http://www.academia.edu/2565558/Mixed_Marriages_in_Europe_1990-2010

1% of the population on average engages in Mixed Marriages in Europe and it has been falling for the last 10 years despite increased immigration from outside of Europe.

See Page 90.

Oh wait, you were thinking America was the world? In the US the statistics are obviously different since mixed racial children were first created by mass rape of indians and blacks and so there have been many people standing inbetween two cultures and peoples early on. But even in America it represents only about 10-15% of all marriages depending on if you look for current statistics or on past. Meaning that today 1/10 marriages are interracial in the US and 1/100 in Europe.

(I bet I'm a racist now, suddenly facts won't matter).


Alright guys, obviously I am the same person I was 9 years ago. Don't have anything else to add I think, PM me if you want.

No.

You're thinking Europe is the part of the world that is not the US. Which makes you blissfully uninterested in reality as ever.

And that marriage is more important than birth and self-identification rates.
 
The topic concerned the damn marriage rates. You told me I was ignorant of facts. Just as when I provided them for CM you now ignore them.

Talk about expecting someone else to live up to standards you clearly ignore.

So 1 in 10 isn't rare if we take the US numbers?
So you want amount of babies instead? The total number of multiracial individuals in the US compromise 2.6% of the people living today* 5.6% of those born today. (Wiki). This is after 400 years of rape, slave imports and the civil rights movement. I'd say it's less progressive than Europe.

I don't even know why I am researching this for you. It's just something I knew insofar as to mention it in my post, it's you who's calling me a liar that should disprove me but obviously you lack such etiquette.
 
Last edited:
*yawn*

I'd tell seela to smoke 'em if she's got em on her balcony, but I don't think she's into that.
 
Show it up your ass.

(OP rules obviously don't apply anymore.. I think it's better that I just leave the forum before even more folks feel obliged to get insulted and then butthurt).
 
Last edited:
Mr Lanzieri, who works at Eurostat, the European Commission’s statistical body, is one of the most careful students of social trends around. He defines “mixed marriage” as one between a native-born person living in a country and someone born abroad. This definition is clear and means his figures are consistent and comparable from country to country. The drawback is that it makes them imperfect guides to integration. If a man born in France of Algerian parents marries a girl from his parent’s home town, that counts as a “mixed marriage” (he was born in France, she in Algeria). But it is the opposite of integration through marriage. If, on the other hand, a British man of Caribbean extraction marries a white British girl, that does not count as a mixed marriage, even though it is clearly an example of ethnical and racial integration.

First, mixed marriages are inching up almost everywhere. In 25 of the 30 countries, there were more mixed marriages in 2008-10 than there had been in 2005-07.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/feastandfamine/2012/07/mixed-marriages
 
You two don't even read the reports you post or imagine exist to support your pre-determined opinions:
He defines “mixed marriage” as one between a native-born person living in a country and someone born abroad

I'm done with you ignorant people. Keep on the a lay level next time, for your own sake.
Last post on the subject from me. This issue itself is a moot point which I would be happy to see disproven anyway.
 
http://www.academia.edu/2565558/Mixed_Marriages_in_Europe_1990-2010

1% of the population on average engages in Mixed Marriages in Europe and it has been falling for the last 10 years despite increased immigration from outside of Europe.

See Page 90.

Oh wait, you were thinking America was the world? In the US the statistics are obviously different since mixed racial children were first created by mass rape of indians and blacks and so there have been many people standing inbetween two cultures and peoples early on. But even in America it represents only about 10-15% of all marriages depending on if you look for current statistics or on past. Meaning that today 1/10 marriages are interracial in the US and 1/100 in Europe. (From what I get from reading that Europe report if one is to take in account the number of people from different races then the proportional rate is about 1/10 just like in the US).

(I bet I'm a racist now, suddenly facts won't matter).


Alright guys, obviously I am the same person I was 9 years ago. Don't have anything else to add I think, PM me if you want.

It's great that you've started Googling, but the next important step is to actually read the documents you're citing. Page 89 of the document you cite says that FIFTEEN PERCENT of marriages in Europe are mixed, not the "1/100" you're claiming.

I don't see a figure of "1/100" anywhere on page 90. It does mention rates of around 1/1000 but if you'd read the preceding bits you'd have understood that this is an annual rate: every year there's about one mixed marriage performed per 1000 people.

Reading further, I'm not sure where you're getting the info that mixed marriages are on the wane in Europe overall; it mentions falls in some countries, but rises in others.
 
You two don't even read the reports you post or imagine exist to support your pre-determined opinions:

I'm done with you ignorant people. Keep on the a lay level next time, for your own sake.
Last post on the subject from me. This issue itself is a moot point which I would be happy to see disproven anyway.

Is there someplace where these people go to take dipshit lessons?
 
Some people just have a need to be correct. They're good at manipulating words or phrases. They even disregard logical points, even when multiple people disagree with them.

I've been reading some of the posts in this thread. Everybody has their opinion and many are really doing their best to explain how they feel about BDSM, sadists and masochists, even down to sociopaths and narcissists. The conversation has delved into psychology, even to the point of referencing the text of so called specialists, respected to have a vast knowledge of the subject...as if they really know anything about something they've never personally participated in.

But, the title of this thread seems to ask a specific question. Is (an extreme) interest in a BDSM lifestyle a psychological problem? In all of the posts of this thread, doesn't one poster stand out as having the most extreme interest in a BDSM lifestyle? Who would create a thread, give it that title, then argue with people who have between 30 and 50 years of first hand experience on the subject? Isn't that an extreme interest?

If it were up to me, I think I'd listen to someone who has experienced something over someone who has just done a lot of reading about it. Isn't that like a 50 shades of grey versus a real BDSM lifestyle kind of thing?
 
Last edited:
You two don't even read the reports you post or imagine exist to support your pre-determined opinions:


I'm done with you ignorant people. Keep on the a lay level next time, for your own sake.
Last post on the subject from me. This issue itself is a moot point which I would be happy to see disproven anyway.


See ya in another 8-9 years! :D

Hopefully you'll have learned how to "research" properly by then. ;)
 
I'm done with you ignorant people. Keep on the a lay level next time, for your own sake.
Last post on the subject from me. This issue itself is a moot point which I would be happy to see disproven anyway.

And nothing of value was lost.
 
Back
Top