Delving the Psyche of Sadists

[Pure]

Hi Angelic,
Thank you for indicating that I've not misunderstood or misrepresented you. If effect there is some similarity of views--yours and mine-- on some of these issues. And yes I understand that you're quite different from someone who needs the 'other'/partner to die, to get aroused.

As to your question:

One tangent point, and i don't direct this at Pure alone. Do you think the punishment meted out by a kink aware jury would prove more, or less severe in the case of a PYL up on charges? i use PYL here for a reason ... to include the sadist with purpose, the Dom/mes that slipped, the Master/Mistress that went a little too far, and the Top that stretched the limits of both top and bottom.

I'm not sure I entirely understand the 'more or less severe' phrase, in terms of the comparison.

If you mean, say for the Brown case (which continues to be controversial, and protested)**

How, if at all, would(should) a kink aware jury have decided, in terms of severity, as compared with the House of Lords (which jailed some of the gay bdsm practicers)? OR

How, if at all, would a kink aware jury decide a case of, grave bodily injury, due to a dom/me's (PYL's) act or omission--*as compared to an ordinary jury.*

I don't know. But consider this. IF I were a kinky person on a jury with similar others, I might well look at the 'public policy' issue, *as well as the 'image' issue.* IF there is serious bodily harm, I'd be inclined to want to demonstrate to the public that, for an SM person of the kind I'd want to be, this is NOT acceptable. IOW, I'd tend to be just as severe or moreso in these instances. (Not unlike a respectable black jury might deal with a black criminal; harder, so as to show no bias.) Of course I recognize a difference between an intended, and an unintended consequence; but the latter may evidence 'criminal negligence causing grave bodily harm' as opposed to 'aggravated assault.'

How about you, Angelic?

**NOTES:

The Brown [UK]decision is at
http://www.swarb.co.uk/c/hl/1993r_brown.html

The ongoing protest and debate is at, for example:

http://www.revisef65.org/lawcomm3.html

An interesting, feminist paper in the area is

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/lwsch/journals/bclawr/42_2/01_TXT.htm

The paper lays out the Jovanovic case and decision, an American example highlighting the problems of bdsm and the law.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

How, if at all, would a kink aware jury decide a case of, grave bodily injury, due to a dom/me's (PYL's) act or omission--*as compared to an ordinary jury.*

I don't know. But consider this. IF I were a kinky person on a jury with similar others, I might well look at the 'public policy' issue, *as well as the 'image' issue.* IF there is serious bodily harm, I'd be inclined to want to demonstrate to the public that, for an SM person of the kind I'd want to be, this is NOT acceptable. IOW, I'd tend to be just as severe or moreso in these instances. (Not unlike a respectable black jury might deal with a black criminal; harder, so as to show no bias.) Of course I recognize a difference between an intended, and an unintended consequence; but the latter may evidence 'criminal negligence causing grave bodily harm' as opposed to 'aggravated assault.'

How about you, Angelic?

i agree with your quoted snip above. As for the reason, check my sig line. If you want to swim with the big ones, you better bring your "A" game and know what you're doing. High risks behavior has big payoffs, but you, everyone in general, better remember high risk swings both ways. If i, as a jury member, burn one kinkster at the stake, the next one that doesn't have their ducks in a row might think twice.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I missed that streetfight thing by betticus but I call barney badass and then some on him.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

I missed that streetfight thing by betticus but I call barney badass and then some on him.

Is this before, or after you delivered the bone to the chick's @ss in your current Av?

 

[catalina_francisco]

Only 2 years (1995) after the Brown case (1993) an independent officially appointed British Law Commission concluded that SM is not a disease and it is not illegal (short of causing serious or permanently disabling injury) and changes to the UK law have already been set in motion to make British law compliant to the rest of the European law.

http://www.revisef65.org/lawcomm1.html

The UK is part of the European community and they have to comply with European law. In the rest of Europe SM is not considered to be a crime.

In any case if you do not want to be convicted in the UK, just become a member of the church.

http://www.revisef65.org/lawcomm2.html

It is always good to start at page one of a paper instead of at page 3.

Francisco.

 

[Netzach]

We've all heard the following masochist/sadist gag:

Masochist: "Hurt me! Please hurt me!"

Sadist: "No."

Bearing this in mind, and not attempting to be funny at all, here's a serious question for any and all that care to respond.

As a sadist, dealing with a pyl with high pinging masochistic tendencies, would deliberately delving in the activity quoted above do anything for the sadist in you?

Nada.

Irony, I know.

I'm less about the actual suffering than about the physicality. Maybe we need a new term like, sado-fetishist?

 

[Pure]

Angelic's question and Netzach's answer point to a problem we just don't hear about; the one alluded to in that old joke.

If you start with a sadist, and consider his/her best (complementary) partner, it's not so clear as imagined.

It's particularly evident, that is you start with a masochist, like Masoch himelf, the 'best partner' does not look exactly like a sadist. "Wanda" in Venus in Furs is cold and cruel, but not all that interested in inflicting either pain or humiliation *as a way of getting off.* It's more like, "If he wants it, I'll experiment."
The contracts beloved of masochists (slave contracts) have a TWO way binding effect which is not exactly what Sade or a sadist is after.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Hmmmmm, we must be slipping.....we never bothered signing a contract, just decided to do it by initial mutual verbal agreement.

Catalina

 

[RJMasters]

Angelic's question and Netzach's answer point to a problem we just don't hear about; the one alluded to in that old joke.

If you start with a sadist, and consider his/her best (complementary) partner, it's not so clear as imagined.

It's particularly evident, that is you start with a masochist, like Masoch himelf, the 'best partner' does not look exactly like a sadist. "Wanda" in Venus in Furs is cold and cruel, but not all that interested in inflicting either pain or humiliation *as a way of getting off.* It's more like, "If he wants it, I'll experiment."
The contracts beloved of masochists (slave contracts) have a TWO way binding effect which is not exactly what Sade or a sadist is after.

Oh I think you got a two edge sword at work here as it cuts both ways. The unwilling who will press charges, but gives the purest taste of sadism, or the willing and consenting partner for various reasons that allow for release of sadistic tendencies.

I think also, you need to take into consideration that sadism is not the totality nor often the major driving force behind all thoughts or actions. Maybe for some it is, but I am not wired that way.

As with any relationship, there is excitement and pleasure to be had and experienced on the extreme end, though the over all relationship cannot be soley based in the extreme. It can find expression within the context of a relationship and the amount of expression will vary.

Unless your view of a sadist is that they do not desire a relationship at all, in which case the only semblence of a relationship would look something like - The maso-sub crawls and begs for pain and the sadist kicks the maso-sub away and says get away from me....then the maso-sub licks wounds and crawls back again begging again hoping to get another kick. Though I am sure some relationships are like this to some degree, I just don't see it as being realistic. Unless lonliness is something the sadist enjoys and looks forward to kicking away anyone who is stupid enough to try to get close to them.

I like a little tabassco sauce on my bacon and eggs. The bacon and eggs are the focus or the main part of the meal, the tabassco sauce just makes "what is" spicy hot at the time of my choosing and pleasure.

In answer to AA's question....yes it does do something for me to deny pain, and in doing so, I build the intensity of the need in both the maso-sub and in myself.

 

[Kajira Callista]

I don't think that Pure is entirely wrong here. Alot of sadists do not want the maso/sub, they are a nice snack or a temporary substitute but not what they really desire. Maybe the reason they don't want someone who is willing and able to endure whatever they desire is because even though they may be inflicting pain on the person, the person enjoys it and it is not a struggle for the maso/sub. So IMHO sadists dont want masochists, they only deal with them because its safer.
Before I get flamed, in this post I have separated the s/m from the D/s which I see as two separate parts of one relationship. When the D/s part gets mixed in, I see it as whole 'nother ball game. The down and dirty real needs of the sadist become sort of romantic for both PYL and pyl and there is not just sadism, there is a relationship based on s/m.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I don't think that Pure is entirely wrong here. Alot of sadists do not want the maso/sub, they are a nice snack or a temporary substitute but not what they really desire. Maybe the reason they don't want someone who is willing and able to endure whatever they desire is because even though they may be inflicting pain on the person, the person enjoys it and it is not a struggle for the maso/sub. So IMHO sadists dont want masochists, they only deal with them because its safer.
Before I get flamed, in this post I have separated the s/m from the D/s which I see as two separate parts of one relationship. When the D/s part gets mixed in, I see it as whole 'nother ball game. The down and dirty real needs of the sadist become sort of romantic for both PYL and pyl and there is not just sadism, there is a relationship based on s/m.

I think it depends on the sadist and the masochist. I know in our relationship he wants a masochist, but also not one he has to stay within the limits of....IOW, not only doing that which the masochist enjoys or can endure, but pushing those limits. I am also not sure it is easy to endure just because there is pleasure for the masochist at some level and point. Part of his reasoning for not favouring subspace is so he is assured the recipient feels each and every act, and that it is a matter more often than not of enduring rather than just feeling pure pleasure. Part of the pleasure for me is in the fact it is not guaranteed to be pleasant. Bit of a mindfuck on both sides but it works.

Catalina

 

[rosco rathbone]

Is this before, or after you delivered the bone to the chick's @ss in your current Av?

Is THAT what I am doing in that picture???

 

[RJMasters]

Is THAT what I am doing in that picture???

Ohhhhh I thought it was the heimlich maneuver.

The poor girl was choking...*puts hands behind back real quick

 

[Netzach]

I look for a partner that will keep me reasonably calm, socialized, and on-keel. So for me the ideal is indeed the fetishistic masochist who loves it and craves it. That doesn't mean they don't howl like a stuck pig, dance around, or beg me to stop in every possible way...in her book on caning Janet Hardy says something to the effect of "I've been in scenes where I would have done anything to make it stop...except safeword." I believe in the two way contract and in leaving the key to the scene just within reach of the masochist, letting them keep the power to stop what's going on, sure why not. They practically never *do* that's what's so hot, to me. I like them begging me to hit them again. Maybe this ideal is much more mutualistic than the ideal definitions would lead us to believe. A person I have a scene with, even if they are a slave, is a collaborator, in my mind, a co-conspirator on a huge project.

The self-control of the honest-to-God masochistic sub, the way that they make contracts with themselves in a scene that they are not willing to break, these things are all infinitely interresting to me. I'm not as interested in force or mowing over consent, I'm interested in seeing just how much fucked up shit a person will consent to.

 

[Kajira Callista]

* packs a bag and heads for netzachs house*

 

[Netzach]

yum

 

[Kajira Callista]

yum

 

[Pure]

Comments on the dynamics explained here and elsewhere. This is not a comment about the quality of relationship (of anyone, above), satisfactoriness of it by some standard, or the virtues of the people involved.

The problem pointed out by Deleuze, and implicit in Masoch can be called the "me" centeredness of the masochistic person. S/he requires a particular setup. It sounds odd, but the world is about their desires and pleasure.

The fly in the ointment: consider the partner's (partner-of-maso= pom) possible relations, especially intimate, with others. The maso is likely very upset by that, should it occur. The ideal pom then, is a committed monogamous person.

Venus in Furs shows the extremely disturbing nature of the partner's outside activities. Of course the maso said, "You may do as you will." But that's in the context of a 'special' --maybe imagined--love relationship of maso and pom.

Thus the maso actually meant, "I'm going to live with the [you] pom's style of fuck-whom-she-pleases style, because of my love for you and your deeper tie to me."

In the story, the proposed pom is at first reluctant, then ambivalent about the proposed tie (embodied in the contract), even though she's no sadist. She just wants to be a healthy independent female (though has a ravishment fantasy). She's far from the ideal pom, who would have to be fully committed.

In short, sexual independence, or love independence, prized by many sadists--not to say, independent women in general-- is going to be an issue when the sadist is pom. In fact, sadist =/= pom {that's 'not equal to'}.

 

[RJMasters]

Chess anyone?

Sometimes I like playing chess, all the stratgey...seeing several moves ahead, then adjusting mid-stream based on moves of your opponent. Love it when you have a well thoughtout victory...

Then other times...just knocking the table out of the way and send the board and peices flying as you jump on your opponent and start smacking them...ummm I mean congratulating them on a fine peice of chess playing for taking your queen till they can't play anymore...is another satisfying way to win too.

John madden rule of sports...(paraphrased)never do anything great unless you can handle the congratulations....(what movie is that from?)

 

[Guest]

Re: Chess anyone?

Sometimes I like playing chess, all the stratgey...seeing several moves ahead, then adjusting mid-stream based on moves of your opponent. Love it when you have a well thoughtout victory...

Then other times...just knocking the table out of the way and send the board and peices flying as you jump on your opponent and start smacking them...ummm I mean congratulating them on a fine peice of chess playing for taking your queen till they can't play anymore...is another satisfying way to win too.

John madden rule of sports...(paraphrased)never do anything great unless you can handle the congratulations....(what movie is that from?)

Just use the fewkin knife...trust me ..It will be more satisfying for all concerned...

Then again ..My frustration level may be building again.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Re: Chess anyone?

... for taking your queen till they can't play anymore...is another satisfying way to win too.

i'd rather do something else with that taken queen 'til they can't play anymore. Then again, a rook works well as does a bishop.

 

[RJMasters]

Re: Re: Chess anyone?

i'd rather do something else with that taken queen 'til they can't play anymore. Then again, a rook works well as does a bishop.

WB AA, Read the blurb thread, looks like you had a decent time all in all. Glad you made it back in one piece.

I knew when I lost that chess game something smelled fishy.

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Is THAT what I am doing in that picture???

Oh, i'm sorry.

i neglected to notice her mouth gaping open.

On second thought, she looks likes a stack of books needing another bookend ... one that will skullfuck her half-blind from the looks of it.

Thanks for the wb RJ.

Now, where were we in the intellectual discussion again?

 

[RJMasters]

Now, where were we in the intellectual discussion again?

Well, let's see...

We recently just dicussed certain "types" of sadist, which seem to stem from your question about deriving any pleasure from denying a masosub pain.

It would appear it has been suggested that for the very reason a maso-sub would appeal to one type of sadist, for other types they are simply not desirable, or not the best suited.

This kinda raises a question into my mind about the sadist's enjoyment of inflicting pain.


What's your cup of tea?
Pain delivered via unbridled violence or calculated pain? Neither, both?

I don't know if that is even the right way to ask that question. In the beginning of this thread Betticus mentioned about the rush and enjoyment which comes out in a street fight. He asked the question if I can relate via my martial art training.

In truth, I do not completely relate to inflicting pain in this way. What I mean by "in this way" is not associated sexually within the BDSM playground. Nor do I completely enjoy the rape stories I have recently read about. Staged, planned and agree to rape scenes....sure...I can relate to that, though I am not sure even that is really my cup of tea.

The pain I inflict during a fight is not arousing to me at all. It comes more out of an instinct of survial. Speaking from experience when I was jumped by three marines. I didn't take any pleasure in throwing one of them through a glass window or breaking the other guys ribs. Although I did get a kick at watching the thrid guy like like hell after watching what I did to his two friends. But this all happened way to fast, and I acted out of instinct, and though there was a rush of adreneline, I can safely say I didn't get hard during the fight or when it was over. I was more happy to be alive and not the one bleeding.

My cup of tea is sating certain sadistic needs within consent. Anything beyond consent is abuse, and I can't go there.

I am not going to short circuit my brain trying to figure out if by inflicting pain on someone, brings them pleasure, then I cannot truly enjoy inflictig the pain. I just thank gawd for maso-subs.

 

[Netzach]

I'm trying to relate this to my own bar-fight-less experience.

I feel a rush of adreniline when making a grown man cry.

If he doesn't want to be crying and has no idea that I'm trying to make him cry, if it's not spelled out in any fashion, if he's just genuinely hurt I have emotionally abused him and I feel like an asshole and I well should. And I have, more than I'd ever like to admit. Given no outlets no channel for my fetishes, in a quashed situation, I will become an emotional abuser, it's only a matter of when.

I am not a poster girl of mental health. DSMV style. I make it a point to let those who are falling in love with me know this. And I'm working on things and have made great progress. But I never want to be a total poster child of mental health, either.

I have moved deeper and deeper into a fetishization, if you will, around trust and consent, as I came to embrace SM. I realized I could have those feelings sate those urges, but in a joyous full way, without the guilt and self reproach and self hate, if I found someone to be a co-conspirator on the project and get into the pain. If I found someone who needed to hear those sweet four little words "you stupid fucking cunt." as much as I needed someone to say them to. Aw.

Even though some animal part of my pain is thinking "glee!" when I emotionally abuse the vanilla and well meaning party-- And it is, but that's kind of fucked up, and not in a fun or joyous way or even a productive way. I don't find real-world havoc arousing, I just don't. No more than I might sate my sadistic urges by slapping up little old ladies in public. You just can't go around using up the resuorces that didn't do anything to you.


If it's somehow agreed, if he's complicit, even in some tacit and murkier way based on shared understanding or prior relationship (high risk and very subjective, but high payoff) then I'm generally happy and aroused and I feel like a smashing success Then it's *perversion.* Perversion is self-aware, in my book, it's that delicious complicity with one's own abasement or humiliation or ass whopping....

I often use this line on clients...it's absurd to be a fetishist, it's absurd to be a masochist, do we not groove on that absurdity?

"not only do you want me to tell you you're a loser, you are PAYING me for the honor of my spit!"

That, and similar paradoxes, are what arouse me these days. It's not a contest or even survival of the fittest, it's a strange and edgy, brutal art, and everyone's creativity is getting tested.