Advanced Consent.

[The Roid Rage]

Hey SalvisWin, I can find information contradictory to your argument and information as well, from a better source, it's not hard, doesn't make you any brighter than I, and doesn't prove you any better the debating arena. My info perfectly counters anything you had to say on the matter, reinforcing everything I had to say.

This is what I found from a much more reliable source since Wikipedia wasn't good enough(I can understand that on more serious topics). This isn't just from one study a specific group of scientists performed or whatever, I find your research to be pretty weak considering it's not a body of knowledge derived from years of study, but an isolated experiment, and there was no real info on how they performed and monitored anything. What I have provided is the information highly regarded and accepted by the medical science community, if you care to argue with them, be my guest.

Sexual sadism

Definition

The essential feature of sexual sadism is a feeling of sexual excitement resulting from administering pain, suffering, or humiliation to another person. The pain, suffering, or humiliation inflicted on the other is real; it is not imagined and may be either physical or psychological in nature. A person with a diagnosis of sexual sadism is sometimes called a sadist. The name of the disorder is derived from the proper name of the Marquis Donatien de Sade (1740-1814), a French aristocrat who became notorious for writing novels around the theme of inflicting pain as a source of sexual pleasure.

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , also known as the DSM , is used by mental health professionals to give diagnoses of specific mental disorders. In the 2000 edition of this manual— the Fourth Edition, Text Revision, also known as DSM-IV-TR — sexual sadism is listed as one of several paraphilias . The paraphilias are a group of mental disorders characterized by obsession with unusual sexual practices or with sexual activity involving nonconsenting or inappropriate partners (such as children or animals). The paraphilias may include recurrent sexually arousing urges or fantasies as well as actual behaviors.
Description

In addition to the sexual pleasure or excitement derived from inflicting pain and humiliation on another, a person diagnosed with sexual sadism often experiences significant impairment or distress in functioning due to actual sadistic behaviors or sadistic fantasies.

With regard to actual sadistic behavior, the person receiving the pain, suffering, or humiliation may or may not be a willing partner. Whether or not the partner is consenting, it is the very real suffering they are experiencing that is arousing to the sadist. When the sexual activity is consensual, the behavior is sometimes referred to as sadomasochism. The consenting partner may be given a diagnosis of sexual masochism . Like sadism, masochism is a term derived from a proper name; in this instance, from Leopold von Sacher-Masoch (1836-1895), an Austrian novelist who described the disorder in his books.

The sadistic acts performed or fantasized by a person with sadism often reflect a desire for sexual or psychological domination of another person. These acts range from behavior that is not physically harmful although it may be humiliating to the other person (such as being urinated upon), to criminal and potentially deadly behavior. Acts of domination may include restraining or imprisoning the partner through the use of handcuffs, cages, chains, or ropes. Other acts and fantasies related to sexual sadism include paddling, spanking, whipping, burning, beating, administering electrical shocks, biting, urinating or defecating on the other person, cutting, rape, murder, and mutilation.

In extreme cases, sexual sadism can lead to serious injury or death for the other person. According to the DSM these catastrophic results are more likely when the paraphilia is diagnosed as severe, and when it is associated with antisocial personality disorder , a personality disorder that may include psychotic symptoms.
Causes and symptoms
Causes

There is no universally accepted cause or theory explaining the origin of sexual sadism, or of sadomasochism. Some researchers attempt to explain the presence of sexual paraphilias in general as the result of biological factors. Evidence for this viewpoint comes from abnormal findings from neuropsychological and neurological tests of sex offenders.

Some researchers believe that paraphilias are related to such other problems as brain injury, schizophrenia , or another mental disorder. Often, people with sexual disorders or symptoms of paraphilia are diagnosed with other mental disorders.

Another theory about paraphilias is derived from learning theory. It suggests that paraphilias develop because the person is required to suppress, or squelch, inappropriate sexual fantasies. Because the fantasies are not acted out initially, the urge to carry them out increases. When the person finally acts upon the fantasies, they are in a state of considerable distress and/or arousal. This theory is not accepted by forensic experts at the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and other researchers who study sexual offenses. Rather than suppressing fantasies, most people who are eventually arrested for crimes involving sexual sadism begin with milder forms of acting on them and progressing to more harmful ways of acting out. For example, the FBI's database indicates that these people— almost always males— start out by collecting pornographic materials that depict sadistic acts, or they may draw ropes and chains on the photographs of models in swimsuit or lingerie advertisements. They then typically progress to following women at a distance, to hiring a prostitute in order to act out the fantasy, and to asking a girlfriend or other willing partner to cooperate with their fantasy. In other words, the severity of sadistic acts tends to increase over time.
Symptoms

Individuals with sexual sadism derive sexual excitement from physically or psychologically administering pain, suffering, and/or humiliation to another person, who may or may not be a consenting partner.

They may experience distressed or impaired functioning because of the sadistic behaviors or fantasies. This distress or impairment may be due to the fact that the partner is not consenting.
Demographics

Although sadistic sexual fantasies often begin in the person's childhood, the onset of active sexual sadism typically occurs during early adult life. When actual sadistic behavior begins, it will often continue on a chronic course for people with this disorder, especially if they do not seek help.

Sexual sadism with consenting partners is much more common than with nonconsensual partners. When consenting partners are involved, the sadist and the masochist may be either male or female. When non-consenting partners are involved, the sadist is almost always a male.

Sadomasochism involving consenting partners is not considered rare or unusual in the United States. It often occurs outside of the realm of a mental disorder. Fewer people consider themselves sadistic than masochistic.
Diagnosis

The diagnosis of sexual sadism is complicated by several factors, beginning with the fact that most persons with the disorder do not enter therapy voluntarily. Some are referred to treatment by a court order. Some are motivated by fear of discovery by employers or family members, and a minority enter therapy because their wife or girl friend is distressed by the disorder. The diagnosis of sexual sadism is based on the results of a psychiatrist's interview with the patient. In some cases, a person with sexual sadism may be referred to a specialized clinic for the treatment of sexual disorders. In the clinic, he will be given questionnaires intended to measure the presence and extent of cognitive distortions regarding rape and other forms of coercion, aggression, and impulsivity.

DSM-IV-TR criteria for sexual sadism include recurrent intense sexual fantasies, urges, or behaviors involving real acts in which another person is suffering psychological or physical suffering, pain, and humiliation. The victim's suffering, pain, and humiliation cause the person with sexual sadism to become aroused. The fantasies, urges, or behaviors must be present for at least six months.

The diagnostic criteria also require either that the person has acted on these urges or fantasies with a nonconsenting person, or that the person has experienced noticeable distress or interpersonal problems because of these urges or fantasies.

Sexual sadism must be differentiated from normal sexual arousal, behavior, and experimentation. Some forms of mild aggression, such as "love bites" or scratching, are within the range of normal behavior during sexual intercourse. Sadism should also be differentiated from sadomasochistic behavior that involves only mild pain and/or the simulation of more dangerous pain. When these factors are present, a diagnosis of sexual sadism is not necessarily warranted.

Other mental disorders, such as the psychotic disorders, may include elements of sadism or other paraphilias. For example, patients with psychotic symptoms may perform sadistic acts for reasons other than sexual excitement. In these cases, an additional diagnosis of sexual sadism is not warranted.

Persons diagnosed with sexual sadism may have other sexual disorders or paraphilias. Some individuals, especially males, have diagnoses of both sexual sadism and sexual masochism.
Treatments

Behavior therapy is often used to treat paraphilias. This approach to treatment may include the management and conditioning of arousal patterns and *********ion. Therapies involving cognitive restructuring and social skills training are also often utilized.

Medication may be used to reduce fantasies and behavior relating to paraphilias. This form of treatment is especially recommended for people who exhibit sadistic behaviors that are dangerous to others. The medications that may be used include female hormones (most commonly medroxyprogesterone acetate, or MPA), which speed up the clearance of testosterone from the bloodstream; antiandrogen medications, which block the body's uptake of testosterone; and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs.

Nonconsensual sadistic behavior often leads to problems with the criminal justice system. Issues related to legal problems may impair or delay the patient's treatment. Persons with sexual sadism may be reluctant to seek or continue treatment because they fear being reported to the police or being named in a lawsuit by an unwilling partner.

Treatment of sexual sadism may also be complicated by health problems related to sexual behavior. Sexually transmitted diseases and other medical problems may be present, especially when the sadistic behavior involves the release of blood or other body fluids.
Prognosis

Because of the chronic course of sexual sadism and the uncertainty of its causes, treatment is often difficult. The fact that many sadistic fantasies are socially unacceptable or unusual leads many people who may have the disorder to avoid or drop out of treatment. Treating a paraphilia is often a sensitive subject for many mental health professionals. Severe or difficult cases of sexual sadism should be referred to a specialized clinic for the treatment of sexual disorders or to professionals with experience in treating such cases.

As was noted previously, acts of sexual sadism tend to grow more violent or bizarre over time. As males with the disorder grow older, however, their ability to commit such acts begins to decrease. Sexual sadism is rarely diagnosed in men over 50.
Prevention

Because it is sometimes unclear whether sadomasochistic behavior is within the realm of normal experimentation or indicative of a diagnosis of sexual sadism, prevention is a tricky issue. Often, prevention refers to managing sadistic behavior so it never involves non-consenting individuals and it primarily involves the simulation of pain and not real pain.

Also, because fantasies and urges originating in childhood or adolescence may form the basis for sadomasochistic behavior in adulthood, prevention is made difficult. People may be very unwilling to divulge their urges and discuss their sadistic fantasies.

See also Cognitive-behavioral therapy ; Sexual masochism ; Sexual Violence Risk-20
Resources
BOOKS

American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th edition, text revised. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association,2000.

Andreasen, Nancy C., M.D., Ph.D., and Donald W. Black, M.D. Introductory Textbook of Psychiatry. Third edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc.,2000.

Baxter, Lewis R., Jr., M.D. and Robert O. Friedel, M.D., eds. Current Psychiatric Diagnosis & Treatment. Philadelphia: Current Medicine, 1999.

Douglas, John, and Mark Olshaker. Mindhunter: Inside the FBI's Elite Serial Crime Unit. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1995.

Ebert, Michael H., Peter T. Loosen, and Barry Nurcombe, eds. Current Diagnosis & Treatment in Psychiatry. New York: Lange Medical Books, 2000.

Ali Fahmy, Ph.D.

Read more: Sexual sadism - children, causes, DSM, functioning, therapy, person, people, used, medication, brain, personality, skills, theory, women, health, Definition, Description, Causes and symptoms http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Sexual-sadism.html#ixzz0lr6QbzsQ

 

[SalvIsWin]

Hey SalvisWin, I can find information contradictory to your argument and information as well, from a better source, it's not hard, doesn't make you any brighter than I, and doesn't prove you any better the debating arena. My info perfectly counters anything you had to say on the matter, reinforcing everything I had to say.

This is what I found from a much more reliable source since Wikipedia wasn't good enough(I can understand that on more serious topics). This isn't just from one study a specific group of scientists performed or whatever, I find your research to be pretty weak considering it's not a body of knowledge derived from years of study, but an isolated experiment, and there was no real info on how they performed and monitored anything. What I have provided is the information highly regarded and accepted by the medical science community, if you care to argue with them, be my guest.

[http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Sexual-sadism.html#ixzz0lr6QbzsQ]

Overall:

• 1. Your quote of minddisorders.com does not counter what I had to say. I will explain why.
• 2. Your link actually supports what I had to say if you read carefully.
• 3. There are considerable flaws with the material itself, even though it supports my post, not yours.

The link you quoted describes sexual sadism as diagnosed by the DSM, which is the manual of mental disorders. There are two varieties of sadomasochism, there is SM that is enjoyed by the vast majority, and then there is a small proportion of SM that is diagnosed as a paraphilia. You're confusing the difference, and you're looking at this link as if it describes SM, which it doesn't, it describes sexual sadism, which is the same given when you are diagnosed as part of the small proportion of SM which makes it a paraphilia.

How is a person diagnosed?

The diagnostic criteria also require either that the person has acted on these urges or fantasies with a nonconsenting person, or that the person has experienced noticeable distress or interpersonal problems because of these urges or fantasies.

Sexual sadism must be differentiated from normal sexual arousal, behavior, and experimentation. Some forms of mild aggression, such as "love bites" or scratching, are within the range of normal behavior during sexual intercourse. Sadism should also be differentiated from sadomasochistic behavior that involves only mild pain and/or the simulation of more dangerous pain. When these factors are present, a diagnosis of sexual sadism is not necessarily warranted.

The link isn't about describing sadomasochistic behaviour overall, it's a mental disorder website, it's describing the behaviour that SM have when they are the point that it's considered an illness. It's the same with anxiety. There is a difference between an overally anxious person, an someone who has such distress and anxiety that it's a disorder, you couldn't quote the disorder information for someone who is just inherently anxious, but that's essentially what you've done.

To be considered a disorder, they must experience overall distress and/or perform the acts with a nonconsenting person. The vast majority of SM is the result of two consenting adults who both enjoy the behaviour, so there is no distress and they have consented, thus it's not a disorder, and if they aren't enjoying something, they say their safe-word and switch to something else, that behaviour is clearly not a disorder, and as such all of this information is not applicable.

There is most certainly SM that is so extreme, or that is performed under certain conditions (with a nonconsenting person or a minor) that makes it a disorder, my two studies that I used specifically mention that. The difference is that my studies reference SM behaviour that is used by the vast majority, and is thus not a mental illness and the information shows that's it's perfectly healthy. Your link describes SM as the mental disorder, and the reprucussions, potential causes, etc, etc.

The two links I quoted were recent studies, one that was an experimental study, and another which was a review of existing material, both from 2006. All of the cited research from your link is from 2000 or earlier, so in terms of what research is more applicable, mine is, not that it matters since I just explained how the material supports my view regardless.

You classified SM has sexually perverse behaviour that has no benefit and all sorts of pitfalls when that isn't the case. If you want to say that the mental disorder of sexual sadism has no benefit and all sorts of pitfalls be my guest, that is completely accurate, but to condemn the entire SM community isn't appropriate. There is nothing wrong with SM, and there are no issues until it's taken to the extreme.

 

[The Roid Rage]

That is very clever spin on what is otherwise very clear cut info. I am amused and mildly impressed by the balls it takes to try to do that, but I'm not buying.

The link you quoted describes sexual sadism as diagnosed by the DSM, which is the manual of mental disorders. There are two varieties of sadomasochism, there is SM that is enjoyed by the vast majority, and then there is a small proportion of SM that is diagnosed as a paraphilia. You're confusing the difference, and you're looking at this link as if it describes SM, which it doesn't, it describes sexual sadism, which is the same given when you are diagnosed as part of the small proportion of SM which makes it a paraphilia.

Really? Isn't this splitting hairs. The point is clear. SM is abnormal behavior, linked to mental illness and often a reflection of it, and as I said from the start, nothing good comes from sexual perversion. Did you read all of the info because it is quite clearly covering a broad area of sexual abnormalities under one term. Your really grabbing onto straws here as they say trying to spin the definitions and the information your way, but dude really, just read it. This isn't rocket science. Let's cut the bullshit and shoot straight man, use your common sense ok. You already admitted that you think it is weird, so how when it is proven can you argue that this kind of behavior is ok, or doesn't have the ties to mental illness that I clearly have proven it does? That was the argument, not so much whether being into it was a mental disorder, but that being into that kind of thing is a reflection of possibly a pre existing problem, or that it could lead to serious problems which my evidence clearly supports. I'm sorry man, but I got you.

The link isn't about describing sadomasochistic behaviour overall, it's a mental disorder website, it's describing the behaviour that SM have when they are the point that it's considered an illness. It's the same with anxiety. There is a difference between an overally anxious person, an someone who has such distress and anxiety that it's a disorder, you couldn't quote the disorder information for someone who is just inherently anxious, but that's essentially what you've done.

Look at the underlined emboldened part. It describes the behavior overall, enough said, because in describing it, it shows that it most definitely is a mental issue no matter what. Look at the definition of what I quoted again, like I said earlier it is a broad term that goes into covering masochism and sadomasochism. It's describing the behaviors themselves as mental disorders, how much clearer can that be. Like I said you do make a nice attempt at cleverly spinning it, but all one has to do is read it and the truth I am speaking of stands. There is no greater interpretation of what I quoted, it's made pretty clear and simple.

To be considered a disorder, they must experience overall distress and/or perform the acts with a non consenting person.

Individuals with sexual sadism derive sexual excitement from physically or psychologically administering pain, suffering, and/or humiliation to another person, who may or may not be a consenting partner.

Quoted right from the page. Doesn't have to be non consenting at all. It's the acts themselves that are a reflection of this kind of mental irregularity or whatever else you care to call it. You say to be a disorder the above quoted must be present, yet the very acts describe the disorder. You see the conundrum here? Distress as you used it is only one of the parameters to meet ALL the criteria, just because you don't score a 10 out of 10 on an "Am I Fucking Nutz" test doesn't mean that you don't fit the criteria or that you aren't fucking nuts if you only fit 9 out of the 10 characteristics. Your really pulling any technicality you can out of a hat here, but the facts are just too plain and too clear to refute or argue against. Is the behavior any less fucked up? No. Is it any less staunchly related and revolving around mental illness? No. No matter how you cut it, it's not normal, it is a reflection of mental issues diagnosed or undiagnosed as I said and my evidence supports, the behavior itself is the definition of the mental disorder.

The two links I quoted were recent studies, one that was an experimental study, and another which was a review of existing material, both from 2006. All of the cited research from your link is from 2000 or earlier, so in terms of what research is more applicable, mine is, not that it matters since I just explained how the material supports my view regardless

Recent but non conclusive in proving anything contrary to the older evidence I cited. You said yourself one was an experimental study, and nothing came from it besides someones assumptions of the matter, and as I stated last time your info is not a body of knowledge derived from years of study, but an isolated experiment, and there was no real info on how they performed and monitored anything. You just stating "I'm right, your wrong" doesn't work here and if the age of the information does not matter. If it did than we would pay no attention to the works from the renaissance for example.

You classified SM has sexually perverse behaviour that has no benefit and all sorts of pitfalls when that isn't the case.

That is your opinion and one not very well backed. Look at the stuff I cited again and you can clearly see that it does have all kinds of pitfalls, and it most certainly is a perverse behavior which is why it falls under a mental illnes, and how you could think there was any benefit is well beyond me. It most certainly is the case, you just won't admit as much when it is staring you right in the face.

If you want to say that the mental disorder of sexual sadism has no benefit and all sorts of pitfalls be my guest, that is completely accurate

Yes, it is. Thank you.

but to condemn the entire SM community isn'tappropriate. There is nothing wrong with SM, and there are no issues until it's taken to the extreme

.

I'm not trying to condemn anyone but the behavior whether behind closed doors or not is still really fucked up, there is nothing normal or mentally balanced about it. Wouldn't common sense alone tell you that a person who takes pleasure in inflicting pain on another person or performing humiliating sexual acts against someone has something wrong with them? Of course you would, and you'd be right. Where we will probably never agree and what truly appalls me is that you would say that there is nothing wrong with SM. Just read the description of what it is again, and in your right mind tell me again that there is nothing wrong with it? C'mon, dudr don't try to shit a shitter. You know. You just don't want to admit it.

 

[SalvIsWin]

Sadomasochism is not a disorder, sexual sadism is a mental disorder, there is a difference. I'm beginning to question whether you read everything I post, because you have quoted sections of my post, and then a quote with-in the article that would appear to show contradiction, when this isn't the case.

The diagnostic criteria also require either that the person has acted on these urges or fantasies with a nonconsenting person, or that the person has experienced noticeable distress or interpersonal problems because of these urges or fantasies.

For someones SM to be considered a disorder, they must perform their actions on a nonconsenting person (who someone who isn't legally able to give consent), or they must experience noticeable distress or have interpersonal problems because of their SM. Performing actions on another would constitute rape, and would therefore make them a rapist. Or Secondly, they would to experience interpersonal problems because of their SM or distress. To sum it up: Their SM must be forced upon others, or they must experience distress as a result; consenting adults with no distress does not make their SM a disorder.

The research I provided shows that the vast majority of sadomasochism is between consenting adults, and that they engage in mutally pleasurable acts. Furthermore, research shows that people are perfectly capable at containing their actions to themselves, and to the bedroom, which prevents anything from spilling over in to other aspects of them life. In this cases, which is the vast majority, there is no criteria met for their SM to be considered a mental disorder. The actions themselves are not the disorder, they have to either force them actions upon others, or have distress as a product of their actions.

Recent but non conclusive in proving anything contrary to the older evidence I cited. You said yourself one was an experimental study, and nothing came from it besides someones assumptions of the matter, and as I stated last time your info is not a body of knowledge derived from years of study, but an isolated experiment, and there was no real info on how they performed and monitored anything. You just stating "I'm right, your wrong" doesn't work here and if the age of the information does not matter. If it did than we would pay no attention to the works from the renaissance for example.

To respond to bold part: It is a conclusion, and it didn't counter what your link says because you haven't read your link carefully, because your link is in line with the research.

To respond to strikoutpart: Experiments were carried out to see if they would support earlier assumptions made about sadomasochisms. The assumptions that were found to have no evidence are the ones that you are making right now when you talk about 'common sense'. Also, it does explain how the tests were carried out and how they came to their conclusions, it's all within the paper.

To respond to the underlined part: Actually the one study is a literature review of experiments and results found about sadomasochism, and the conclusions reached is that consenting adults who perform SM safely are just as psychologically sound as any one else.

That is your opinion and one not very well backed. Look at the stuff I cited again and you can clearly see that it does have all kinds of pitfalls, and it most certainly is a perverse behavior which is why it falls under a mental illnes, and how you could think there was any benefit is well beyond me. It most certainly is the case, you just won't admit as much when it is staring you right in the face.

No, sexual sadism has pitfalls, no sadomasochism, they are different. Shown here:

Sadomasochism involving consenting partners is not considered rare or unusual in the United States. It often occurs outside of the realm of a mental disorder. Fewer people consider themselves sadistic than masochistic.

When sadomasochism fulfills the correct criteria, then it is peverse, unusual and within the realm of a mental disorder, but I clearly outlined why the vast majority of SM does not qualify as a disorder.

I'm not trying to condemn anyone but the behavior whether behind closed doors or not is still really fucked up, there is nothing normal or mentally balanced about it. Wouldn't common sense alone tell you that a person who takes pleasure in inflicting pain on another person or performing humiliating sexual acts against someone has something wrong with them? Of course you would, and you'd be right. Where we will probably never agree and what truly appalls me is that you would say that there is nothing wrong with SM. Just read the description of what it is again, and in your right mind tell me again that there is nothing wrong with it?

To the bold part: Research would disagree. Your own link disagrees, and the research I quoted disagrees.

To the underlined part: Experiments are done to confirm or deny what we think as a result of common sense. Regardless of what you think common sense tells you, the research shows that SM practioners are completely stabled and mentally sound, unless they fit the specific criteria, which the vast majority don't.

 

[The Roid Rage]

Sadomasochism is not a disorder, sexual sadism is a mental disorder, there is a difference.

Yet sexual sadism is described as the acts of sadism, masochism, and the combined effort know as sadomasochism. What a quandary? You're making this much more complex than it is, which is called puffery.

I'm beginning to question whether you read everything I post, because you have quoted sections of my post, and then a quote with-in the article that would appear to show contradiction, when this isn't the case.

Yeeeaaah about that, I only quote what I need to quote which isn't always every word and letter. It does not mean I didn't read it all. I just use that as a guide for you. I quote maybe the opening sentence or something, and that tells you what I am responding to as I proceed to cover the rest of the info beyond that opening sentence(s). Sorry you couldn't follow that. And yes, I displayed your words as quoted, and then displayed the information from the website I cited showing your quote to be wrong. You figured that out on your own? Yeah it was a counterpoint. Your getting the hang of this though.

For someones SM to be considered a disorder, they must perform their actions on a nonconsenting person (who someone who isn't legally able to give consent), or they must experience noticeable distress or have interpersonal problems because of their SM.

Helllooooo! Did it ever occur to you that maybe the person is into that because they have interpersonal problems, or because of great emotional distress? I'm point out the obvious here, no scientific study required. Weave a web of woes all you want man no "hypothesis" based on a review hold up to that. The flaw in your review is that their going off of a premise that there is any level of normalcy in those kind of actions which quite clearly there isn't which is also why it must be done in secrecy, behind closed doors.

The research I provided shows that the vast majority of sadomasochism is between consenting adults, and that they engage in mutally pleasurable acts. Furthermore, research shows that people are perfectly capable at containing their actions to themselves, and to the bedroom, which prevents anything from spilling over in to other aspects of them life.

Man your either just missing the point or blatantly ignoring it dragging this thing out to ridiculousness because you have a bone to pick. Deny Deny Deny all you want. What makes you think that because the two people enjoy the crazy shit they are doing that something is not wrong there? Really? Take your eye from the microscope and look up straight at the situation, that is all it requires. Those people are perfectly capable of containing their actions to themselves because they have to, or else it will make a lot of things spill over into their lives. Why? Because once anybody knew you were into that kind of thing, they would question your mental and emotional stability or sanity for that matter. That would be an indicator to another person that you've got some fucking problems. No review can say anything to that.

To respond to bold part: It is a conclusion, and it didn't counter what your link says because you haven't read your link carefully, because your link is in line with the research.

Can someone get an interpreter over here? WTF? Slow down chico. Accuse accuse accuse, nag nag nag, what else you got for me? Your review was someones opinion based on all the research, that's one opinion, opposed to the collected opinions of doctors and mental health experts that is backed by them enough to be apart of their textbooks. I read what I posted quite well, I just didn't try to spin what the plain black and white was saying into your agenda. Whether qualifying as a being on a dangerous just emotionally disturbed level, or being on the level of possibly turning into Buffalo Bill, there is clearly something deeply wrong with that person.

To respond to strikoutpart: Experiments were carried out to see if they would support earlier assumptions made about sadomasochisms. The assumptions that were found to have no evidence are the ones that you are making right now when you talk about 'common sense'.

And the point is that one researcher or one small likely bias group of researchers not agreeing with all the backed previous data does not outweigh the well backed previous data, it doesn't matter what they did. There isn't enough information as provided by you to really show how they came to their conclusions, the article basically said "We evaluated these people by our own standard and we don't think there is anything wrong with them" and that was it. No real look into how they tested anything they just say we used these tools and with them counldn't figure it out, that's it. I cited a encyclopedia for God sake, two of them since the first one wasn't good enough. Of course what you found says exactly the opposite of what I said, you could probably find research that supports just about anything because different researchers will come to their own conclusions. In this case I used the most widely accepted information on the topic that most certainly did show the link between S&M and mental and emotional illness.

Actually the one study is a literature review of experiments and results found about sadomasochism, and the conclusions reached is that consenting adults who perform SM safely are just as psychologically sound as any one else.

Oh, so because their "Safe" there's nothing odd or off about being driven to do those things? Ok, that's all I needed to hear. You've got to be kidding me? Safe? The whole idea is that it causes pain and humiliation. I realize you can do that without killing someone but obviously your not being safe about anything your having someone inflict pain upon you which is caused by hurting your body, how is that safe? In the information I provided it clearly talks about how often in starts as one thing and becomes another as their appetite for violence and pain grows the more they do it.

When sadomasochism fulfills the correct criteria, then it is peverse, unusual and within the realm of a mental disorder, but I clearly outlined why the vast majority of SM does not qualify as a disorder.

How about we meet ground here: It is perverse, it is unusual, and loosely withing the realm of mental disorder, but to be clinically certified as a mental disorder those acts must go to a greater extreme. I think that's pretty fair ground right there.

To the bold part: Research would disagree. Your own link disagrees, and the research I quoted disagrees.

No, Let's get it straight. SOME research would disagree. My own did not, and of course yours did because that was obviously the kind of thing you were looking for. It is clearly stated in the information I provided that

sexual sadism is listed as one of several paraphilias . The paraphilias are a group of mental disorders characterized by obsession with unusual sexual practices or with sexual activity involving nonconsenting or inappropriate partners (such as children or animals). The paraphilias may include recurrent sexually arousing urges or fantasies as well as actual behaviors.

Read more: Sexual sadism - children, causes, DSM, functioning, therapy, person, people, used, medication, brain, personality, skills, theory, women, health, Definition, Description, Causes and symptoms http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Sexual-sadism.html#ixzz0lwusxMnk

And S&M falls under sexual sadism. Case Closed.

 

[SalvIsWin]

Yet sexual sadism is described as the acts of sadism, masochism, and the combined effort know as sadomasochism. What a quandary? You're making this much more complex than it is, which is called puffery.

Because the sadomasochism must be performed on a nonconsenting adult, or it must cause noticeable distress. There is a specific criteria, the link doesn't say, "Sexual sadism is a sexual disorder, also known as sadomasochism", sexual sadism is sadomasochism that falls under specific criteria. The criteria is not met by the vast majority.

Helllooooo! Did it ever occur to you that maybe the person is into that because they have interpersonal problems, or because of great emotional distress? I'm point out the obvious here, no scientific study required. Weave a web of woes all you want man no "hypothesis" based on a review hold up to that. The flaw in your review is that their going off of a premise that there is any level of normalcy in those kind of actions which quite clearly there isn't which is also why it must be done in secrecy, behind closed doors.

That's a possibility, it's possible that distress of some kind lead to sadomasochism, but that wouldn't be sexual sadism, because the sadomasochism must lead to distress for it to be a disorder. There is no flaw in what I am saying:

Sadomasochism involving consenting partners is not considered rare or unusual in the United States. It often occurs outside of the realm of a mental disorder. Fewer people consider themselves sadistic than masochistic.

It's not rare or unusual, and it often occurs outside the realm of mental disorder.

Man your either just missing the point or blatantly ignoring it dragging this thing out to ridiculousness because you have a bone to pick. Deny Deny Deny all you want. What makes you think that because the two people enjoy the crazy shit they are doing that something is not wrong there? Really? Take your eye from the microscope and look up straight at the situation, that is all it requires. Those people are perfectly capable of containing their actions to themselves because they have to, or else it will make a lot of things spill over into their lives. Why? Because once anybody knew you were into that kind of thing, they would question your mental and emotional stability or sanity for that matter. That would be an indicator to another person that you've got some fucking problems. No review can say anything to that.

Whether or not they would have to hide their sexual practices from people like you is irrelevant. The publics opinion of what is morally wrong and what is right isn't what's being discussed, and even if it was, it wouldn't matter because it's studies and conclusions that matter. It doesn't matter if you think that they are mentally unbalanced, or that you think there is something wrong with them, what actually matters are studies, experiments and conclusions, and the research shows that these people, until specifically qualifying for sexual sadism, are mentally balanced.

Reviews can say something to that, they would say that you're wrong, and here is the evidence to show it. Whether or not you choose to accept it is something else entirely.

Can someone get an interpreter over here? WTF? Slow down chico. Accuse accuse accuse, nag nag nag, what else you got for me? Your review was someones opinion based on all the research, that's one opinion, opposed to the collected opinions of doctors and mental health experts that is backed by them enough to be apart of their textbooks. I read what I posted quite well, I just didn't try to spin what the plain black and white was saying into your agenda. Whether qualifying as a being on a dangerous just emotionally disturbed level, or being on the level of possibly turning into Buffalo Bill, there is clearly something deeply wrong with that person.

Research isn't concluded with opinions, it's concluded with evidence that shows one way or another. Any experiment paper has an introduction, a methods section, a results section, and a discussion. In experiments, they will measure two groups, a control group, and the group in question. So if they measure a control group on the basic criteria for determining mental stability, and they measure sadomasochists who don't qualfify for sexual sadism and get the exact same result, that means they are the same. There is no opinion to be based on that, it's a result from a measure.

If you want to question the nature of the study, or the way the measure was carried out, be my guest, read the articles and comment on it, but to dismiss the research as an opinion is ridiculous. Not to mention the fact that your research is about sexual sadism, which is not sadomasochism, your link even says this right here:

Sadomasochism involving consenting partners is not considered rare or unusual in the United States. It often occurs outside of the realm of a mental disorder.

And the point is that one researcher or one small likely bias group of researchers not agreeing with all the backed previous data does not outweigh the well backed previous data, it doesn't matter what they did. There isn't enough information as provided by you to really show how they came to their conclusions, the article basically said "We evaluated these people by our own standard and we don't think there is anything wrong with them" and that was it. No real look into how they tested anything they just say we used these tools and with them counldn't figure it out, that's it. I cited a encyclopedia for God sake, two of them since the first one wasn't good enough. Of course what you found says exactly the opposite of what I said, you could probably find research that supports just about anything because different researchers will come to their own conclusions. In this case I used the most widely accepted information on the topic that most certainly did show the link between S&M and mental and emotional illness.

Once again, your data doesn't support what you're saying. To reiterate this again, sexual sadism is sadomasochism that meets very specific qualifications, that is all your link talks about, it doesn't delve into sadomasochism overall, except to make specific mention that it isn't rare or unusual, and it often occurs outside the realm of what would be a mental disorder. To continually comment that your link provides basis to what you're saying is simply not true.

Secondly, your summarization of my paper is amusing but inaccurate. I don't for one that you even read it, because if you did, you wouldn't be making these comments. They specifically mention which measures they use, they didn't just sit people down and talk to them, then conclude they were fine, that's absolutely absurd. There are scientific measures that are used to assess mental stability, when applied to non-SM, they had a certain average score, when applied to SM, they had no significant difference in the score. How is that an opinion in any way, shape or form?

Oh, so because their "Safe" there's nothing odd or off about being driven to do those things? Ok, that's all I needed to hear. You've got to be kidding me? Safe? The whole idea is that it causes pain and humiliation. I realize you can do that without killing someone but obviously your not being safe about anything your having someone inflict pain upon you which is caused by hurting your body, how is that safe? In the information I provided it clearly talks about how often in starts as one thing and becomes another as their appetite for violence and pain grows the more they do it.

Like was said by an earlier poster, the question isn't whether the behaviour in question is deviant, because it certainly is, it's outside the norm when considering sexual behaviour, but that doesn't mean it's a mental disorder, and it doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with these people. You want to argue about 'common sense' and your opinion, but that doesn't matter, what matters is scientific evidence. It's irrelevant whether you think these people are wierd or sick.

In regards to safety: Your link talks about sexual sadism, not sadomasochism. Sexual sadism is a disorder and leads to violence, that's why it's a disorder. Sadomasochism doesn't lead to violence, it can only if they meet the criteria for sexual sadism. Secondly, safety doesn't mean the absence of pain. Consenting adults that like SM can be completely safe. Like the article mentions, a lot of adults like love-biting or spanking, that isn't SM by any means, but it's causing pain to a degree, is that un-safe? The point I'm making is that safety doesn't mean the absence of pain, and consenting adults who perform SM which doesn't meet the criteria for sexual sadism can do so while being completely safe.

How about we meet ground here: It is perverse, it is unusual, and loosely withing the realm of mental disorder, but to be clinically certified as a mental disorder those acts must go to a greater extreme. I think that's pretty fair ground right there.

No, Let's get it straight. SOME research would disagree. My own did not, and of course yours did because that was obviously the kind of thing you were looking for. It is clearly stated in the information I provided that

And S&M falls under sexual sadism. Case Closed.

Your middle ground is incorrect. In terms of comparison, SM is uncommon, but it isn't perverse, that would be your opinion. If you want to say that about sexual sadism, go ahead, as long as you can recognize where SM stops and sexual sadism begins, which so far you haven't been able to.

Your own research talks about sexual sadism, and the information it presents on sexual sadism is most likely entirely correct. It makes specific mention that SM is not unusual, and that it is often occuring outside the bounds of mental illness, it's not like it's not included via a loophole, it's specifically not included because there is nothing wrong with it. SM can fall under sexual sadism if it fulfills certain conditions, if all SM was sexual sadism, they wouldn't have two different names for it.

To go back to my original analogy, there are people with anxious personalities, and there are people with anxiety disorders. They are not the same thing, if we were to be arguing about anxiety disorders instead, your contention would be that all anxiety is a disorder, it's all the same thing, which would be absolutely incorrect. Maybe if you look at it this way you can see where your error in thinking is.

 

[The Roid Rage]

sadomasochism /sa·do·ma·so·chism/ (sa″do-mas´o-kizm) a state characterized by both sadistic and masochistic tendencies.sadomasochis´tic
Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers. © 2007 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.


sa·do·mas·o·chism (sd-ms-kzm, sd-)
n.
A psychosexual disorder in which sexual gratification is obtained by engaging in sadistic and masochistic interactions.
sado·maso·chist n.
sado·maso·chistic adj.
The American Heritage® Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2007, 2004 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


sadomasochism
[sā′dōmas′əkiz′əm]
Etymology: Marquis de Sade; Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, Austrian author, 1836-1895
a personality disorder characterized by traits of sadism and masochism. See also algolagnia, masochism, sadism.
Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition. © 2009, Elsevier.


sadomasochism

S/M Psychiatry A popular term for the coexistence of sadism and masochism either as 1 An integral part of sexuoeroticism. See Paraphilia, Sexual deviancy or 2 A component of a person's personality profile, where passive and submissive–masochistic attitudes coexist with aggressive and cruel–sadistic attitudes. See Passive-aggressive personality disorder.

McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc


Here, is this better? What can you say to that? You can kindly sit down and shut up now.

 

[SalvIsWin]

sadomasochism /sa·do·ma·so·chism/ (sa″do-mas´o-kizm) a state characterized by both sadistic and masochistic tendencies.sadomasochis´tic
Dorland's Medical Dictionary for Health Consumers. © 2007 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier, Inc. All rights reserved.


sa·do·mas·o·chism (sd-ms-kzm, sd-)
n.
A psychosexual disorder in which sexual gratification is obtained by engaging in sadistic and masochistic interactions.
sado·maso·chist n.
sado·maso·chistic adj.
The American Heritage® Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2007, 2004 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.


sadomasochism
[sā′dōmas′əkiz′əm]
Etymology: Marquis de Sade; Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, Austrian author, 1836-1895
a personality disorder characterized by traits of sadism and masochism. See also algolagnia, masochism, sadism.
Mosby's Medical Dictionary, 8th edition. © 2009, Elsevier.


sadomasochism

S/M Psychiatry A popular term for the coexistence of sadism and masochism either as 1 An integral part of sexuoeroticism. See Paraphilia, Sexual deviancy or 2 A component of a person's personality profile, where passive and submissive–masochistic attitudes coexist with aggressive and cruel–sadistic attitudes. See Passive-aggressive personality disorder.

McGraw-Hill Concise Dictionary of Modern Medicine. © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc


Here, is this better? What can you say to that? You can kindly sit down and shut up now.

Easily explainable. The medical terms and the psychologist terms for sadism and masochism are different. If you'll notice, the two definitions that describe SM as a psychosexual disorder, or a personality disorder are medical dictionaries; they are giving the medical definition. In other words, in medical terms, SM is referring to the same thing that sexual sadism would be referring to in Psychology. Not that this is evidence, but to maybe better explain what I mean:

This article focuses on the development of sadism and masochism as medical terms, leading to their current definitions as paraphilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). It does not cover sadomasochism as an erotic practice, discussions of the sadomasochistic subculture or other matters relating to consensual sadism and masochism. However, because this article touches the history of those terms, there are references to BDSM.

Link: http://www.wikidoc.org/index.php/Sadism_and_masochism_as_medical_terms

Notice how that is a link to Sadism and Masochism as medical terms? Very different in terms of definition.

In reference to the Psychiatric definition, nothing there is incorrect. It gives two possibilties, as sadism or masochism that is essential for sexuoeroticism (becoming aroused sexually), or, that it is a part of the paraphilia condition of sexual sadism. This is the same as defining anxiety, where it will also mention the extreme effects of anxiety, stating, 'See Anxiety Disorders'.

As a hypothetical situation, even supposing that your post was what you intended it to be, a checkmate of sorts (althought it isn't since the medical and psychological terms are different), what would that prove? You didn't address the fact your link clearly states the differences of SM and sexual sadism, and you wouldn't have addresssed the experimental research or the literature review.

At the very best, you can hope for concluding that there is inconclusive evidence on the matter, which I am not yet convinced of as all the evidence brought to this discussion has been in favour of what I am saying.