|
Noah -> RE: True Sadism vs. Masochistic Empathy (5/12/2007 8:20:50 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LuckyAlbatross
For me it's "fluffy sadist"- or someone who can only inflict "pain" on someone when the bottom directly enjoys it as a masochist. They like to talk a lot about the conversion of pain into pleasure thing.
And then there's "real sadist" who just gets off on actually hurting someone. It doesn't really matter if the person is liking it or not, sometimes it's even better if the bottoms don't like or want it at all.
An ethical sadist of course will be sure to get the informed consent of the other person, an unethical sadist...well that's not someone I ever want to be within 10 paces of.
And a person can be BOTH a fluffy sadist and a real sadist, no reason you can't have it all. :)
I appreciate the insight offered in the original post, the notion that one way to understand one's positive response to another's pain would be in terms of what the OP calls masochistic empathy. I even think that this expression is pretty well chosen as a way to refer to that potential experience. Thank you.
I don't much credit anyone's talk about "why" they prefer this or that. It is fine and in various ways useful to apply some sort of narrative, or even several of them, in the attempt to make/find meaning in life. When proceed beyond that to putatively factual claims about why someone feels the way they feel, I think it tends to be in vain.
I can't see any particularly powerful way to prove any such claim, for instance. It seems to me that range of stories can be told in any particular case. Many of them will be useful in this or that context, to this or that degree. Some will presumably be useless, or even bullshit.
After observing and taking part in very many discussion like this one I've come to think that it is very silly to describe one set of preferences/orientations/tastes/what-have-you as "real" or "true". I suspect that enjoying sadistic behavior in terms of what the OP calls masochistic empathy is no less real or true than enjoying sadistic behavior without a shred of masochistic empathy.
As for LA's comments, well fair enough, but I'm wary of categorizing people so broadly and baldly. " They like to talk a lot about ... " For heaven's sake, I find what we might call the non-duality of pain and pleasure an absorbing topic. Or is it the mutability of that duality? I don't know. But anyway I enjoy exploring that territory both in conversation and in practice. That makes me fluffy? Okay, I guess.
That masochist empathy thing doesn't seem to be a strong theme with me. I find the pain of others fascinating (and pleasureable/interesting/gratifying/etc.) in all sorts of contexts, with and without porous little bulwarks against danger like claims to adhere to "SSC"; with and without my participation, for that matter. Call that part vicarious sadism, if you like.
The suggestion that taking sadistic pleasure absent informed consent is categorically unethical strikes me as wrong-headed, though. If we're out on a hike and you trip and fall and are injured I might enjoy your pain even as I act to mitigate it. Do I have to ask for and receive your consent to enjoy relocating your shoulder before I perform the procedure (presuming I'm qualified for both the diagnosis and the treatment)?
I'm not talking about your permission to help you. I'm talking about your informed consent to me being little old sadistic me as I do the best thing I can do for you in the best way possible--which just happens to be painful for you and so potentially delightful for me.
Or how about the cleansing of a vanilla friend's wound? If my injured friend is clueless about S&M must I first undertake a thorough consciousness-raising program and secure her informed consent for the pleasure I will take before I get the crud out of the gash on her leg and apply the stingy anti-germ stuff and bandage her up? I think not.
I think I should adminster the first aid--including the pain--with no effort at all to secure informed consent for the pleasure I will take in her experience of pain at my hands, or at the hands of some fellow-hiker who may be better qualified than I am at first aid (because as I suggested above, I can take sadistic pleasure in your pain irrespective of whether I'm the one administering it.)
Can't your dentist be a sadist and take sadistic pleasure in your pain without securing informed consent for his sadism? I mean as long as he is utterly professional in every way including acting to minimize your pain to at the least degree that any non-sadistic dentist would? The fact may be in a certain case that it is still gonna hurt. Must he tie himself in some sort of knot to prevent himself from enjoying your pain or else be guilty of unethical behavior?
A long time ago I happened upon a drunken couple in a town square just after closing time. He was slapping her around in a way that didn't strike me as appropriate. Not that I couldn't appreciate her cringing and crying and begging insofar as that goes, but his behavior struck me as wrong. So I administered some pain to him ... without his informed consent. Not only did I get that righteous, white-knight glow but separately and apart from that, I enjoyed his pain. By your terms it would seem that I acted unethically in sadistically hurting this guy without his informed consent.
But then maybe you mean your claim as categorically as you stated it. Your comments are welcome.
I think informed consent is of towering importance in very many sorts of instances of sadism. I think it is also of towering importance in many sorts of instances of non-sadistic pain-administration. In fact, in many kinds of instances the lack of informed consent is enough for me to personally judge the sadistic behavior to be wrong.
All the same I can see very many other sorts of instances where the big black brush of "no informed consent for sadism = unethical" just gets in the way of appreciating what is going on and in fact could get in the way of doing the right thing.
Anyway, thanks once again to the original poster for showing me a new way to look at the non-duality of pain and pleasure, and to everyone taking part in the discussion (and especially to both of you who've read all the way down to here.)
|
|
|
|
