The Morality of Sexual Preference

I'm a little suprised by the views on BDSM I'm seeing here. Get comfortable with those arguements against those safe, coscensual private acts. You'll be hearing them coming back at you from the right to damn everything from homosexuality to use of birth control.

Post 81

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 3:39am

oh well - we've had this discussion here already when it was still SoloHQ - at least the arguments have remained consistent over time ;)
so let's continue on to more fun discussions about the morality of 'straight couples' - it's fun to poke holes the other way round for once (pun intended) ;)
VSD

Post 82

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 10:31am

Ryan:

I'm a little suprised by the views on BDSM I'm seeing here. Get comfortable with those arguements against those safe, coscensual private acts. You'll be hearing them coming back at you from the right to damn everything from homosexuality to use of birth control.

That's a ridiculous cheap shot Ryan. Do you think any kind of consensual act is in your self-interests? What about alcoholism Ryan? If you want to be an alcoholic, that's 100% consensual act between you and your bartender. What about eating tons of unhealthy food and gaining a ton of weight? You seem to think any consensual act must intrinsically be in your self-interests. Any kind of self-destructive behavior obviously even if its consensual is not in your self-interest. And no one is damning homosexuality or birth control, no one here is suggesting these things be outlawed, anything that is consensual ought to be legal, but you act as if any discussion on the morality of sexual preferences must be motivated by religious concerns.
(Edited by John Armaos on 8/01, 11:44am)

Post 83

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 11:32am

Vera:

- 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

Ok some involve pain, and some not, the ones that don't involve 'pain', what does this exchange of 'power' entail? Humiliation? Denigration? Is that better? It seems a little insincere Vera that at this point you want to abandon the 'pain' aspect of S&M in this discussion while previously appealing to athletes who express feeling pain in their exercising. Obviously when you made this appeal you accepted the premise that masochists enjoy receiving pain. So I don't know why you object to me discussing the aspect of 'pain' in S&M.

- 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,

I believe actually you can and did in your post. It seems you like S&M because you enjoy expressing the surrendering of your will to someone else or taking away someone else's will. But why do you enjoy this kind of play-acting of subjugating someone or being subjugated if you wouldn't want that in any other aspect in your life? According to Rand sex should be the deepest physical expression of your admiration and respect for someone, that admiration stemming from recognizing that individual holds your highest values. Maybe you disagree with that then? If so what prevents someone from engaging in any kind of anonymous sex, or is that fine as well? Is there any limit? Would you not be degrading the value of sex if there's no discrimination in its use?

People like art because it is a representation of their values. If you value freedom, you may enjoy for example a painting of Washington crossing the Potomac.

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

I find this interesting, that you refer to your friends that don't enjoy S&M as "vanilla". Why do you call them that? Is there supposed to be a negative connotation to that? Like you're putting them down because you regard their lack of interest in your sexual preferences as evidence of them being boring individuals?

Post 84

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 11:47am

Heh, heh - vanilla is the far and away favored flavor...

Post 85

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 11:52am

John:
you seem to know a lot about me and my motivations to indulge in sth you can only see as weak, depraved, sick, immoral ... keep posting about it - i'll sit back and try to learn from you ;)
VSD
ps: vanilla is nothing derogatory, though it seems to get up your heckles - care to explain why? it simply means all forms of sexuality not involving sm-aspects you so dislike - so vanilla should be the trademark for you ;)

Post 86

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 11:55am

Robert:
i favor raspberry and blueberry - but don't go interpreting all kinds of deviant acts into this ;)
VSD

Post 87

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 12:06pm

Vera I didn't call you sick or immoral. I'm just asking you to defend your philosophical positions. You obviously have no moral obligation to do so, so if you rather not then don't. As far as the use of 'vanilla' for people who don't enjoy your sexual preferences I ask if it's supposed to be a euphemism for 'boring' because that is the general colloquial use of that term. It would not be unreasonable for me to interpret it that way considering how it's popularly used as slang to mean boring. If that's not what you mean, why do you think the term 'vanilla' is used? Why don't you call them your Butterscotch friends?

Post 88

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 12:07pm

Only to say your acts are more colorful ;)

Post 89

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 12:51pm

Vera:

- 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

I don't know what kind of pain or discomfort you were referring to then when you brought up the athlete analogy. There's no way you can build larger muscles unless you experience that feeling of lactic acid building up in your muscles, you can't get a stronger cardio-vascular system unless you bring your heart-rate up. If exercise was comfortable and painless we wouldn't have an obesity epidemic. And if you're not bringing any intensity to your workout, you're not building a stronger body to shield yourself from the diseases and injuries that are common in people of old age who did not exercise.

Post 90

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 12:53pm

John, I've done my best to read back through and familiarize myself with everyone's views, but I'm not sure if the following has actually been stated. What is the nature of the "destructive" or "unhealthyness" of BDSM? You have mentioned alcoholism and poor eating habits as examples of similarly destructive, and presumably immoral, behaviors. Those are normal behaviors taken to an unhealthy extreme. A scientifically proveable unhealthy extreme. Do you possess similar data regarding BDSM? if so, where is the "healthy" range of BDSM activities? I'll agree that some that wants to spend every waking moment under the lash has problems, but where is the low end. If a person administers (or enjoys) a little tap on the rump, are they immoral?
An exchange of power is just that, and it is a secondary activity to a person's soverignty over themselves. The person on the bottom gives what they desire, the person on top exercises control within that framework.
As to the place of sex as reveling in someone representing ones highest values, or similar concepts. I agree. However, there is a place in human sexuality for sex as a healthy recognition and enjoyment of less earth shaking values. I am unsure if Rand ever made a statement to this effect, but the events of her life indicate she held a belief like this. I know subsequent Objectivist scholars have stated sex can be morally engaged in on the premis I stated. Promiscuity is an entirely seperate issue.
On a related note of values, the concept of attraction to reciprocal values. My wife directly values some things similar to what I value, that is part of our (and presumeably anyone's) dynamic. However, none of my attraction is because of her being "all man", precisely the opposite. My masculinety is entirely different than her femininity, and we value the counterpart in each other. Domination vs submission can be described in similar terms.

Post 91

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 1:15pm

Ryan:

What is the nature of the "destructive" or "unhealthyness" of BDSM? You have mentioned alcoholism and poor eating habits as examples of similarly destructive, and presumably immoral, behaviors. Those are normal behaviors taken to an unhealthy extreme. A scientifically proveable unhealthy extreme. Do you possess similar data regarding BDSM?

It doesn't just have to be physically damaging behavior that is not in your self-interests. Your self-esteem can be affected by what you do, or how much self-esteem you have can lead to certain behaviors that is simply an outward expression of that low self-esteem. A low self-esteem can motivate you to express that in any number of ways, such as anonymous sex.

However, there is a place in human sexuality for sex as a healthy recognition and enjoyment of less earth shaking values.

What would be those less earth shaking values?

Post 92

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 1:40pm

John, I agree with your assessment that self-esteem can motivate a variety of unhealthy behaviors. You seem to be asserting that poor self esteem is the only possible motivator for BDSM behavior. By what method have you ascertained that?

As to your other question. Two people meet. They have a certain amount of physical attraction. They begin to date and discover that they have similar interests, but they're certainly not at the level of love. They're attracted to each other, enjoy each other's company, and want to learn more about each other. They have sex. They value each other, but they certainly haven't built an intense love or found that their core values powerfully resonate. Is this immoral?

Post 93

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 1:42pm

John:
i said everything i wanted to say about the 'morality' of sm - you still choose to focus on the possible negative points which i'm getting tired of defending against - if you can only see your negaitve image and all my positive arguments are not valid in your perspective then let's agree to disagree: you call sm immoral and i call it moral and keep enjoying it
being asked to defend against constant negativity is not my idea of an objective discussion to reach a better understanding

Ryan:
thanx for keeping up a rational discussion

i'll keep reading quietly till we get to the other sexualities before i join in this again
VSD

Post 94

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 1:58pm

Dominance and submission are not sadism and masochism. The masculine role in sex is dominant, and the feminine, submissive, because due to their respective sexual responses, the man is typically the initiator and the woman, the receiver. In sexual intercourse, the man derives pleasure from what he does to the woman; the woman from what is done to her. In that respect, the man is an active initiator; the woman, a passive responder. Of course, these roles exist in homosexual relationships as well. In a relationship involving two men or two women, one partner can assume the masculine role; the other, the feminine role.

Sadism and masochism, however, involve not simply dominance and submission but pain, abuse or humiliation. The currency of the relationship is pain, either physical or psychological, which the giver as well as the receiver experiences as sexually exciting.

The question is WHY? Why do the participants find pain or humiliation sexually exciting? If the reason is that they enjoy demeaning and degrading another human being or being demeaned and degraded themselves, then what does that say about their psychology? What does it say about their self-esteem?

Not that the relationship is by itself immoral, but if pride and self-esteem are life serving values, then it does reflect a view of oneself that is not healthy psychologically.

Post 95

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 2:16pm

Ryan,

Post 90 was great.   I was thinking about this myself today:

What is the nature of the "destructive" or "unhealthyness" of BDSM? You have mentioned alcoholism and poor eating habits as examples of similarly destructive, and presumably immoral, behaviors. Those are normal behaviors taken to an unhealthy extreme. A scientifically proveable unhealthy extreme. Do you possess similar data regarding BDSM? if so, where is the "healthy" range of BDSM activities? I'll agree that some that wants to spend every waking moment under the lash has problems, but where is the low end. If a person administers (or enjoys) a little tap on the rump, are they immoral?

Aside from the evasion that almost always accompanies unhealthy behaviour (outside of true ignorance), is there any data which suggests purchasing a BDSM experience results in healthy values, as it does for bland, boring vanilla sex with a trusted and cherished partner?

If the "tap" requires the sacrifice of one to the other, then yeah, it's immoral.

I simply don't believe people who claim to get value out of this sort of thing. Maybe they do and I just can't relate to it.  If it's truly a value, why can't I relate to it vicariously? Is it me? Is it them?

I'll never jump out of an airplane, but I can at least relate to people who do get value out of that activity. I'm even impressed by it. I relate to it because it's something I'd love to aspire to. I see myself jumping out of an airplane, floating to earth under a giant splash of color, and enjoying a whole new perspective of myself against the wind, sky, trees, etc. It must feel like being a bird!

Not so much with getting spanked. What am I supposed to get out of it, again? Where's the value? This is supposed to feel good, right? So, why doesn't it feel good? This can't be right....

Lacking a good solid moral foundation, I can see how individuals with a weaker sense of self-value could get talked, or manipulated, into the idea of being dominated and all that. Top, bottom, who cares?? Sounds like a whole lot of rules and score keeping to me.

I just can't relate to it at all. It's difficult to relate to the idea of other people relating to it!

Post 96

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 2:25pm

Ryan:

John, I agree with your assessment that self-esteem can motivate a variety of unhealthy behaviors. You seem to be asserting that poor self esteem is the only possible motivator for BDSM behavior. By what method have you ascertained that?

Sure I think it's a possible motivator because of what the act entails. As Bill says it involves demeaning or degrading another human being because it involves the infliction of pain or inflicting psychological humiliation. By what other method do I need to identify what is demeaning or degrading? The act is proof itself.

As to your other question. Two people meet. They have a certain amount of physical attraction. They begin to date and discover that they have similar interests, but they're certainly not at the level of love. They're attracted to each other, enjoy each other's company, and want to learn more about each other. They have sex. They value each other, but they certainly haven't built an intense love or found that their core values powerfully resonate. Is this immoral?

It's hard to follow you on what kind of relationship this is. They have similar values but don't share each other's core values? What is your definition of love? And how should one decide when to give that love? Should that be tied to sex? Is sex an expression of love?

Post 97

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 2:31pm

If the relationship is not immoral in and of itself (like any relationship), then It is possible for the relationship to be moral. This has been my point the whole exchange. Bill, if a BDSM relationship is not inherently immoral, as you stated, the only possible answer to the other questions you raised is "We would have to judge every relationship based on it's own variables."

Post 98

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 3:20pm

"We would have to judge every relationship based on it's own variables."

But the variables Bill raises are the same for any S&M relationship because there are essential qualities to such a relationship that defines it as sadomasochism. Any other variable is a non-essential to that.

Post 99

Saturday, August 1, 2009 - 5:00pm