The Morality of Sexual Preference

I don't know any football players that enjoy any pain they suffer while playing football. They do everything they can to minimize pain and avoid it, like wearing padding and a helmet, running out of bounds to avoid a tackle, and they learn techniques on how to allow themselves getting tackled without getting hurt. Injuries occur obviously but they are not intentional.

Post 61

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 12:02pm

Bill:
- reasonable standards have to be set and enforced
what is reasonable? that's the whole debate about some sexual acts being moral and some immoral and some only becoming moral after some predefined age - if we are to enforce these standards by law and punishment we have to be very careful where we set them!

- balance the risk against the rewards
exactly - what if i like the rewards of sm or promiscuity or any other sexuality you might name?(btw: promiscuity is not harmful if done responsibly)

- It may depend on the player and his physical condition.
same goes for sm if you have a high threshhold for pain and high recuperating abilities (just one example)

- your judgment can't be mistaken or distorted by emotional bias
no one is free of that risk - not even straight couples - see 'serial monogamy' - one advantage of exotic sexuality: the world around you and your potential partners question your sexuality so often, so intensely, that it's almost impossible to consistently follow this sexuality without thinking it through - thoroughly

- a sexual practice can be neurotic or developmentally retarded
same goes for straight couples - look at the messes they constantly make of their 'monogamous' relationship with all kinds of affairs - i'd call that neurotic ;)

- moral behavior cannot, by definition, lead to more immorality
if i follow Teresa's example that lying is immoral, then it is also immoral to lie when you're hiding jews ... is it immoral if i lie when declaring my taxes because i think forced government taxing is theft and i'm entitled to 'cheat' them any way i can?

- the masochist seeks to be demeaned and humiliated; his participation is neurotic and is based on low self-esteem
how do you know? are you a masochist? have you investigated this issue among masochists?
know what i like in sm: a woman with such a strong personality she can force me do anything she likes (mentally, physically, emotionally) - and then being able to top this woman, break through her strength and make her do what i want - extremely gratifying in terms of physical pleasure (the fighting), emotional ego boosting ('i did it!') and mental development (i have to grow to be able to top her)
call that neurotic and low self-esteem - damn would some straight couples wish they had such a high esteem of their own values in their relationships ;)

- Are you saying that values are subjective and cannot be judged by an objective standard of morality?
i think in a way i am: but not by throwing out the baby with the water - i'm not abandoning all reason when i say that every person has her own values she deems valuable - straight monogamous relationships are of absolutely no value to me and i'd become neurotic within a month if i forced myself to live them - same the other way round if you tried to live my values - the objective point to measure the morality of ones values are: do they fit my premises? have they reached the goals i've set myself? are they in any way harmful to me or those i involved in obtaining them? if you can positively answer those questions to yourself, and maybe are even capable of explaining this objectively to others, then i think you have pursued moral values - and thus your sexuality is also moral

John:
thanx for the update on football players - as i've never even met one (it's not a very popular game here in germany) i won't argue for or against - still one point remains: just like football does not necessarily involve physical pain and injury, so does sm not involve these either and thus would both be equally moral by your book - i have not yet met any masochist who enjoys being crippled permanently - the pain and injury i've seen is definitely less than any sports-injuries i met with

one more point for all:
in the realm of physical 'pursuit of happiness' we are too concrete bound with the physical well-being or destruction of our bodies - however most socalled 'immoral' sexualities we discussed so far (sm, polygamy, homosexuality, incest, pedophilia) rarely involve any physical damage - what about the emotional and mental 'morality' of such relationships?

VSD

Post 62

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 12:14pm

But Vera the point is the football player does not play football to experience pain, that's not the desirable outcome, and I'm not just talking about crippling injuries but the whole point of the activity. The Masochist on the other hand is purposely trying to get hurt, that is the whole point of the activity they wish to engage in. It's a difference of intentional outcomes. One is trying to play a sport and takes precautions to avoid pain, the other is trying to get sexual gratification by seeking pain. Avoid, seek, two different things.

Post 63

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 12:49pm

not quite John: as i already said in my answer to Bill, few sm related activities are about seeking pain (the painful kind) for pain's sake - if you kick me in the teeth i won't say 'thank you', i'll kick you back and sue you on top of it :P
it's more the seeking of an intensity even into the extremes of pain that normal sexuality cannot offer me - if i allow a woman do dominate me so completely that we can both fight through any kind of pain it creates an intimacy that vanilla sex can very rarely offer me - i become completely free of all boundaries - pain, fear, humiliation don't even exist beyond those boundaries - and i feel worthy of every value i have reached - for myself
most athletes i've come to know over the years have described to me a similar intensity, the 'breaking through the pain' to gain their values - the intensity of pain, call it the endorphine rush if your medically inclined, is the actual turn-on, the exhilaration - at least for me - can't speak for every other sadomasochist ;)
VSD
ps: no offence to any really interested party willing to expand their horizons, but i'm getting rather tired of non-masochists trying to tell me what i seek or am in a masochistic relationship, just because they watched a documentary on cnn or read some depraved stories on the net
please get over the image that all masochists grovel in shit and seek pain and humiliation because they feel worthless - post your own experiences if you're willing to do so or listen to others' ...

Post 64

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 12:57pm

Yes - there seems to be a puritanical strain running thru this which, carried further, would use the DSM as the guide for so-called illnesses of the mind...

Post 65

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 1:14pm

Vera:

not quite John: as i already said in my answer to Bill, few sm related activities are about seeking pain (the painful kind) for pain's sake - if you kick me in the teeth i won't say 'thank you', i'll kick you back and sue you on top of it :P

Oh come on now Vera, the definition of masochism is receiving sexual gratification from pain. You are trying to equate that with football because both seek to avoid crippling injuries. But this is a non-essential. You're obfuscating the goals of each activity which are of course very different. I'm not trying to make any moral pronouncement on S&M activity because I just don't know enough about what the consequences are from these activities. But to try and drag other completely unrelated activities as being similar to S&M like sports is disingenuous.

most athletes i've come to know over the years have described to me a similar intensity, the 'breaking through the pain' to gain their values

As an amateur weight-lifter I can only surmise when an athlete says this he means the pain that one experiences from exhausting their muscles or cardio-vascular system, both worthwhile goals since they strengthen these bodily systems from injury. You put up with some temporary discomfort to avoid debilitating health issues later in life. But it's not exactly desirable pain. When I weightlift my muscles fill up with lactic acid, it's a burning feeling, but I know when I feel it I've worked my muscles hopefully to a point of hypertrophy. If I could turn off that pain from the lactic acid building up in my muscles I definitely would because my goal is not to experience the burning sensation of lactic acid buildup, my goal is muscle hypertrophy. If the goal is to strengthen your body and make it more healthy so that you can have a better quality of life and a longer one, you simply can't avoid temporary discomfort from exercise, it is unfortunately necessary to experience for the end goal. However S&M is not necessary for sexual gratification.

ps: no offence to any really interested party willing to expand their horizons, but i'm getting rather tired of non-masochists trying to tell me what i seek or am in a masochistic relationship, just because they watched a documentary on cnn or read some depraved stories on the net
please get over the image that all masochists grovel in shit and seek pain and humiliation because they feel worthless - post your own experiences if you're willing to do so or listen to others' ...

So you're saying unless one engages in S&M, one cannot come to any kind of value judgment about that? I'm sorry but I disagree. There are a lot of things that people experience in life that I haven't, yet I can still make a judgment about it because I can judge based on the observed outcomes. I've never been murdered, but I know it's wrong and I don't want it to happen. I've never been mugged, same thing there, I don't want it to happen. I also haven't been molested as a child, but I know child molestation is wrong.
(Edited by John Armaos on 7/31, 1:44pm)

Post 66

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 1:31pm

Yes - there seems to be a puritanical strain running thru this which, carried further, would use the DSM as the guide for so-called illnesses of the mind...

It's unfortunate you think that Robert. Considering Bill took great effort to divorce this discussion from any kind of religious or clinical perspective and is approaching it purely from a philosophical one.

Post 67

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 2:03pm

Lets get this straight first:

what is reasonable? that's the whole debate about some sexual acts being moral and some immoral and some only becoming moral after some predefined age - if we are to enforce these standards by law and punishment we have to be very careful where we set them!

This discussion has absolutely nothing to do with legal standards, or law, and never did have anything to do with them. I don't need a law to tell me not to eat rat poison.

if i follow Teresa's example that lying is immoral, then it is also immoral to lie when you're hiding jews ... is it immoral if i lie when declaring my taxes because i think forced government taxing is theft and i'm entitled to 'cheat' them any way i can?

I am dismayed and bewildered by this mis-characterization of my statement. Jim made the same mistake, but Jim is an anarchist and philosophically inept. Context matters, Vera. Truth is contextual. Lies are contextual as well. Ignoring the context is evasion, and is thus immoral. I won't hold it against you, however. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're making an honest mistake.

There is good, and there is evil. Making a distinction between the two is the subject at hand. Not everything you like may be "good."

it's more the seeking of an intensity even into the extremes of pain that normal sexuality cannot offer me - if i allow a woman do dominate me so completely that we can both fight through any kind of pain it creates an intimacy that vanilla sex can very rarely offer me - i become completely free of all boundaries - pain, fear, humiliation don't even exist beyond those boundaries - and i feel worthy of every value i have reached - for myself

How? Why? Because you lived through it?

most athletes i've come to know over the years have described to me a similar intensity, the 'breaking through the pain' to gain their values - the intensity of pain, call it the endorphine rush if your medically inclined, is the actual turn-on, the exhilaration - at least for me - can't speak for every other sadomasochist ;)

This translates in my mind to:
Lovers and partners are opponents. Enemies, really. The challenging "team." The relationship has to be adversarial to get any real value out of it. The football reference makes perfect sense now.

When it comes to sex, morality is subjective. That's the message, but is it true?

Post 68

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 2:21pm

- the definition of masochism is receiving sexual gratification from pain
oh i'm coming John ;) as i already said: i can only speak for myself and what it means for me - if i take your wiki definition of masochism i wouldn't even be a masochist :P
but the issue here is: 'is masochism moral'? if my premise is to experience an intense sexual pleasure, if physical pain can take me to this pleasure, if this pain is not permanently damaging my body, and if no one suffers by inflicting this pain on me, then how is it 'immoral' to get this intense pleasure? whether you approve of wanting that pain or not ...

- because my goal is not to experience the burning sensation
exactly John: you have an ulterior motive why you endure the pain - some even enjoy feeling the pain because of what it stands for: that goal achieved! but if it's not your cup-of-tea i won't persue this comparison any further ...

-because I can judge based on the observed outcomes. I've never been murdered, but I know it's wrong
aren't you getting 'disingenuous' now? how many masochists have you observed first-hand? discussed their experience with them? and you still compare it to murder, to prove that you can call it wrong because you know murder is wrong?
actually on SoloPassion we had a discussion recently whether it's wrong to 'murder' the murderer of your daughter ...

but we're getting swamped in physical dead-ends - let's put it to the vote: do you think sm is immoral, because seeking pain in your view is immoral?

and after all this hard physical labor lets continue on to the moral implications of 'deviant sexuality' like polygamy, homosexuality, incest or pedophilia - there's no physical body being harmed there ;)

VSD

Post 69

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 3:07pm

Vera:

the definition of masochism is receiving sexual gratification from pain
oh i'm coming John ;) as i already said: i can only speak for myself and what it means for me - if i take your wiki definition of masochism i wouldn't even be a masochist :P

Well ok then why are you making this discussion about yourself if you're not a masochist?

- because my goal is not to experience the burning sensation
exactly John: you have an ulterior motive why you endure the pain - some even enjoy feeling the pain because of what it stands for: that goal achieved! but if it's not your cup-of-tea i won't persue this comparison any further ...

The difference of course is exercise leads to a healthier body physically, and the temporary discomfort is unavoidable to achieve that goal. With present science there's no other way to make yourself physically stronger. But even still, you are trading some temporary discomfort in exchange of avoiding debilitating pain later in life from all sorts of diseases and conditions like diabetes, heart disease, or physical injuries due to a weak body. It's still all about minimizing pain in the long term. You can't say the same about S&M can you? Sexual encounters doesn't require it, it's not an essential. Morality is about choices, not about what you can't control.

because I can judge based on the observed outcomes. I've never been murdered, but I know it's wrong
aren't you getting 'disingenuous' now? how many masochists have you observed first-hand? discussed their experience with them? and you still compare it to murder, to prove that you can call it wrong because you know murder is wrong?

Comparing it to murder? Yeah that would be disingenuous if I actually did such a thing, but of course I never did. I'm very sorry you completely misunderstood the point of the argument I made. No it's not murder obviously, my point is I don't have to experience something first hand to make a value judgment about it. Which is what you seem to be arguing, if that is the case, and if you were consistent in that philosophical position that only first hand experiences should allow you to make moral judgments, then you can't say murder is wrong because you don't know what it's like to murder or be murdered.
(Edited by John Armaos on 7/31, 3:27pm)

Post 70

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 3:26pm

sorry Teresa about misquoting you - i went back and re-read your and Jim's postings - as i already said it was a long read-through and it got mixed up in my mind - my mistake

- Deliberately hurting oneself is immoral, even when it's done with willful consent. Evasion is always immoral.
you are however equating deliberate pain with evasion, thus making it immoral: if pleasure is the goal of that pain why is it more immoral than any other pain you willingly endure for the sake of your goals? because i enjoy it and you 'suffer through' it? what am i evading if i have examined my motives and my goals and decided that i want them because they are good for me?
however i do agree that any kind of relationship built on wrong, but unacknowledged or unidentified reasons (e.g. conforming to monogamouos heterosexuality even though you're a deviant), would be evasion and is immoral

- nothing to do with legal standards,
Bill brought up the enforcing of such morals, so maybe i jumped the gun to who is doing the enforcing - i also took him up on it because i also don't need a law to tell me how to achieve my orgasm - which is currently still the case because of morality - or so they say

- Not everything you like may be "good."
but everything that nourishes me, feeds my constant growth, makes me stronger to live my own life - that's "good"!

- How? Why? Because you lived through it?
:by pitting my physical, emotional and psychic strength against hers
:to learn from her strengths and thus grow stronger myself
:because it gives me pleasure - the experience and the accomplishment of such a woman (and the growing is just the bonus ;)

- Lovers and partners are opponents
afraid of competition? competition to me means: learning from my betters! what i described was one component only of many possibilities in an sm relationship - there's other's like mentor and student, parent and child, actually even equals as no such relationship would work if only one partner is always and everywhere 'on top'
there's a saying in the sm-community: 'there's no one more tender than a top after a scene'
it's the bottoms who are being taken care of - and if she's 'the opponent', then god and the morals help us cause no one else will :P
how about 'partner-in-immorality' ;)

the relationship has to be adversarial to get any real value out of it
now you are misrepresenting me - i take that as an exaggeration to make a point and not sth i really said or implied in my posting
otherwise i might feel tempted to point out that all heterosexual relationships are 'adverserial' by definition :P

- When it comes to sex, morality is subjective.
i already answered that in post 61 - what is your take? is sexuality the same for everybody, governed by the same morality? which is ... ?

i'm curious on your 'moral' take of the other sexualities - i'm off to bed now before i mis-construe more garbage here - it's way past midnight and i currently don't have a 'mommy-at-home' to send me to bed in time ;)

VSD

Post 71

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 3:37pm

last posting for today ...

- why are you making this discussion about yourself if you're not a masochist?
because that definition is way incomplete!

-You can't say the same about S&M can you?
yes i can - especially emotionally and psychically it has helped me a great deal to understand myself better, to grow - to become 'me, myself and i'

-Sexual encounters doesn't require it, it's not an essential.
of course not - just like straight sex does not require an orgasm either - but i enjoy it and i require enjoyment in my sex

- I don't have to experience something first hand to make a value judgment about it.
as long as you make that judgement for yourself only - based on your premises to fulfill your goals - if you make that value judgement for everybody else, too, then i (or any other sadomasochist) feel more competent to make such a judgement about sm than someone who has never experienced it

off to bed now ... night everybody
VSD

Post 72

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 4:04pm

Yeah, I know it's late there.

i'm curious on your 'moral' take of the other sexualities

Depends on the definition, if an objective definition can be found. Bill is sometimes at odds with the popular definitions, and I find myself becoming more and more impatient with them myself.

This made me laugh out loud, though:

afraid of competition?

I was thinking more of neurotic narcissism then playful "who's the best cook" contests. If the relationship is neurotic or narcissistic at it's base, then the competition isn't healthy. To view relationships as physical or emotional competitions between the parties involved seems neurotic and counter productive to achieving values.

now you are misrepresenting me - i take that as an exaggeration to make a point and not sth i really said or implied in my posting
otherwise i might feel tempted to point out that all heterosexual relationships are 'adverserial' by definition :P

Well, "adversarial is good" was certainly implied! Again, moral truths are the goal of this thread. I'm not interested in subjective "feelings." If all I get are emotional responses, I'm forced to define them myself, so don't be mad if I get it wrong!

Good night, Vera.

Post 73

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 5:10pm

So far as I am aware, there is no physically pleasurable aspect to actually being pregnant. From the morning sickness, to the kicks, to labor, it is all pain, discomfort and pain. But I understand that many women enjoy being pregnant. Not getting pregnant. Being pregnant.

Are they masochists? Are they sick? No, there is a distinction between pleasure and joy. Pleasure is a momentary sensation. Joy is conceptual - based upon judgment. People can and do engage in painful activities which bring them joy.

Post 74

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 6:05pm

There is NO JOY in the last month of pregnancy. None. Zip. Zero. Maybe for a few with oversized bladders, and smaller sized infants. But the rest of us? Horrible.
The first three months can suck too. They sure did for me.

The point is the value in the end. Tah dah! I got a pretty new baby! What did you get? Bruises and proclaimed self esteem? Oh...

Look! John got beautiful new muscles and added strength! What did you get? Reinforcement of an idea and emotion you can't really define, other than to claim it's awesome? Oh...

Post 75

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 6:43pm

The masochist derives sexual pleasure from being subjected to pain, humiliation and abuse. The question is: WHY? What is it about his psychology and view of himself that explains this? Is it that since he doesn't see himself as otherwise desirable, he feels the need to demean himself for the sadistic, domineering pleasure of his partner? Is it that he is so lacking in self-esteem that he doubts his value as a respectable human being and believes that he can only gain love and attention by allowing himself to be humiliated and abused? Whatever the reason, there is a psychological link between the pleasure he experiences and his feeling of being disrespected and degraded. It's an issue of motivation.

There is no comparable parallel between the psychology of a masochist and that of an athlete whose motto is "no pain, no gain." Nor is there a parallel between masochism and the enjoyment that a woman experiences from knowing that, despite the physical discomfort of pregnancy, she will be giving birth to another human being who is part of her own flesh and blood.

- Bill

Post 76

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 6:44pm

Now Ted, be fair. Some women enjoy the "getting" part of getting pregnant, too. :)

Post 77

Friday, July 31, 2009 - 9:38pm

Vera:

- why are you making this discussion about yourself if you're not a masochist?
because that definition is way incomplete!

Incomplete or not, is it or is it not essential to the definition of "masochist" that one enjoys receiving pain for sexual gratification? Yes or no?

-You can't say the same about S&M can you?
yes i can - especially emotionally and psychically it has helped me a great deal to understand myself better, to grow - to become 'me, myself and i'

How did S&M sex help you 'grow' and for it to allow you to become 'yourself'? What does that actually mean?

-Sexual encounters doesn't require it, it's not an essential.
of course not - just like straight sex does not require an orgasm either - but i enjoy it and i require enjoyment in my sex

Ok then, we agree that if you want a stronger and healthier body to avoid getting very painful diseases and injuries in old age, you have to put with some minor discomfort when exercising. Why? Because in the long-term this is an effort to actually minimize life's pains. But to have sex, it's not required you feel or inflict pain. So the end goal, sexual orgasm, does not require you engage in S&M, hence this is not at all like exercise. So now the question is why do some people enjoy S&M, and is it in their best long-term self-interests to engage in this activity or is it as Bill says something that may lead to or is a result of poor self-esteem issues?

I don't have to experience something first hand to make a value judgment about it.
as long as you make that judgement for yourself only - based on your premises to fulfill your goals - if you make that value judgement for everybody else, too, then i (or any other sadomasochist) feel more competent to make such a judgement about sm than someone who has never experienced it

So you're saying S&M is just a harmless sexual preference that is off limits to any kind of objective moral evaluation, and is rather up to the individual? If so then that would be at least a logically coherent disagreement to the position that S&M is immoral. If it's harmless, then it's fine, if however it's not, and if there's long-term negative consequences that affect self-esteem, then it's not harmless. That would be the essential contention you would have about this issue then, yes?

Post 78

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 1:10am

flies buzzing in and around (phyiscally) my head - so i'm up again early and back at it ...

this will be my last posting on sm-morality - i think we're turning in circles with the negative implications around the 'pain & humiliation' factors

Teresa:
- Depends on the definition
- polygamy: any relationship of three or more persons, in this case also limiting it to sexual relationships (we're trying to get to the morals of sexuality, not just extended families of support)
- homosexuality: any relationship that involves partners of the same sex (also with regards to procreation which we discussed on the ibm inheritance thread)
- incest: any relationship between first-degree relatives (parent, sibling, in any combination, but leaving out 'under-age' (which we still have not defined) relationships - see below)
- pedophilia: any relationship between an 'over-age' and an 'under-age' partner (again sexual connotation - or we'd have to discuss again why a mother lost her children because she photographed them (the children) playing naked in her bed)
would that do for starters or am i missing any 'moral' premisses that need to be defined first?

- playful "who's the best cook" contests
playful is the key-word here Teresa - and i'd even extend it to 'a safe environment where to live out domination and submission' - it's not being beaten to a pulp that's the turn-on (any thug in the street could do that and be glad to do so) - it's the power-exchange in such a 'play' whithout the fear of losing it - Pat Califia defined it rather well in 'Coming to Power' - it's not 'power-over' someone we seek, but 'power for': someones pleasure, growth, happiness - contrary to e.g. state-power we're not constantly afraid to lose that power and have to subjugate everyone around us to make ourselves feel powerful - we use our power to give pleasure to ourselves and our partners - and if this includes physical pain, then that too
the goal is the difference: we seek pleasure and happiness - if we were seeking gratification of our narcissistic power-neurosis we'd become politicians ;P

- I'm not interested in subjective "feelings."
then what are the words you are seeking that would make this more than just 'a feeling'?
pleasure and happiness is sth deeply personal, sth everyone has to define and find for themselves - no one can 'give' me happiness by defining a set of morals (do this, don't that) and if i follow them i'm pleasured and happy - what turns you on turns me off - so it has to be subjective - the only objectivity is in how thoroughly i evaluate my sexual cravings (to weed out the narcissistic, neurotic, evasive, etc.) and how consistently i apply my findings to pursue my sexual goals
i tried to show you my evaluation process - show me yours ;)

- don't be mad if I get it wrong!
i'm not mad at your getting it wrong - i'm miffed that you only focus on the (very possible) negative aspects of sm - there are also many positive and healthy ones (as i tried to show), just as there are negative aspects in vanilla sex - that's the objectivity i ask for - not omniscience in all matters sexual

Ted:
Teresa and John already answered the pregnancy point - for them it's all in the goal ... and Teresa: if my self-esteem is only 'proclaimed', then so is the pleasure in your baby - i know first-hand what brats they can turn out to be :P

Bill:
it's the pleasure - pure and simple - i know i can never actually show you how i feel during such an encounter, but the power-exchange, safe and clean, is more than worth the slander - no matter how often you focus on the negative aspects you overtly imply in every sadomasochistic relationship, in most it's not there - otherwise we'd have died out long ago ;)

- giving birth to another human being who is part of her own flesh and blood
why is that 'good' in itself? wouldn't the benefit of a child only show much later through growth into a rational being? what if it doesn't? would Teresa's 'sacrifice' have been in vain?
sorry if i'm digressing into child-morality - couldn't resist to pick holes into your arguments as you pick them into mine - no harm intended ;)

Ryan:
- Some women enjoy the "getting" part of getting pregnant, too. :)
and some don't, so they turn to turkey-basters because they only want the kid - fair is fair ;)

John:
- is it or is it not essential to the definition of "masochist" that one enjoys receiving pain for sexual gratification?
no - it's not - the core part in most sadomasochistic relationships is the exchange of power - if you go from there you'll find lot's of expressions of such exchanges, some involving pain and physical damage, some not - but without that power for my pleasure, any pain would be just that: pain - and i'd be the first to walk out

- How did S&M sex help you 'grow'
just one example of many: sm helped me understand the relationship of power in the world around me - initially at the receiving end only, i was always frustrated by the negativity of that power: by my parents, by society, by the state - yet the most frustrating part was not being forced into subjugation of total irrationality, but the nagging feeling that power does not have to be that way - that it could be great, wonderful, inspiring, and yes: pleasurable (and i'm not talking about my father spanking me :P)
sm taught me other ways to express power, to subjugate to it when it benefited me, to fight it when it did not - but basically to understand it in a way no parent, society or state could have done with authority, neurosis or the point of a gun

- have to put with some minor discomfort when exercising
so from pain to minor discomfort ;) you don't have to feel pain or discomfort at all to keep your physical body fit - moderate, yet consistent, excersise could do the same without pain or discomfort

- why do some people enjoy S&M, and is it in their best long-term self-interests
why do some people enjoy art? or food? or thinking?
i cannot tell you why i enjoy sm, the power, the strength, the 'aliveness' of it - pleasure and enjoyment are sensations, so i can only describe them - as i tried to do above - however i can tell you that i and those few sadomasochists i've known personally have all grown to strong, healthy, independant individuals - with a much stronger ego, self-esteem, value-concept, than most of my vanilla-friends - so yes: there's greater risk involved as it requires a much better knowledge of yourself, a ruthless honesty what you actually are, but the end-result is well worth the risk - and the pleasure i gain on the way
and no misinterpreting please: i'm not advocating sm as the road to a stronger self - i'm merely saying it was my road and all that harping about sicknes, self-esteem and evasion i left behind at the beginning of that road

- if however it's not, and if there's long-term negative consequences
yes - i'd go along with that interpretation of what i said - in a world of duality there's always another side of the same coind

all:
so - any takers on the other forms of sexuality and their morality?
as i already hinted i currently have no 'partner-in-crime' at home so please stop making me think (and write) about all the wonderful aspects of sm ;)

VSD

Post 79

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 1:16am