quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

We went from Sociopaths to Psychopaths?

Many experts (e.g. Hare: http://www.hare.org/), would argue that the only difference is in the origin of the disorder. I'm not nearly enough of an expert to pronounce myself on this, I just based myself on the premise of these experts.

- LA

1. failure to conform to social norms with respect to lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest;
   
2. deceitfulness, as indicated by repeatedly lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure;
   
3. impulsivity or failure to plan ahead;
   
4. irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults;
   
5. reckless disregard for safety of self or others;
   
6. consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations;
   
7. lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana

Whiplash,
You are missing a critical point
The sadist may get off on the dogs suffering
The sociopath is incapable of such an emotional response
Any joy/sensation they receive is based entirely on how things hit their own internal radar.
Matter of fact, the sociopath will kill the dog, not to see it suffer, but because it is inconvenient to him, or gets in the way, or a hundred other reasons, and when he does, it will almost assuredly be done with a cold blooded detachment that would horrify the majority of us
But the one thing it won't kill the dog for is to be able to see it suffer
Because by definition, a sociopath cannot empathize with any other living creatures pain/joy/love/hurt/remorse
The only feelings that are real and have validity are their own.

Kind of like swatting a fly, devoid of remorse, nor caring about the creature at all. It's life and suffering held in the same regard as opening and closing of a refrigerator door.

Perhaps killing a cat, not caring about the cat itself, but rather more concern with seeing what kind of interesting blood patterns that are made while it bleeds out.

Now you are on the right path.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MAMandSlave

It should be noted that diagnosis in the DSM are not relevant unless the issue is causing a problem in the life of the individual who meets criteria for a diagnosis. Most dominants, and submissives that I know, sadists and masochists do not suffer from thier interactions, and in fact revel and enjoy them. So application of antisocial personality disorder (what the OP referred to as sociopath) would not fit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

By the definition you put here, I would be a psychopath, which I can tell you with absolute certitude that I'm not. Let's see, point by point...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist
And to all, S&M is only about ONE TYPE of sadism, sexual sadism.

Yes. I'll add sensual sadism as well.

quote:

-=Differences between a Sadist and a Psychopath=-

- A psychopath will usually choose victims that are closer to them in terms of age, appearance, and occupation. They will then expect these people to love them, and a psychopath loves to hurt the ones who love him.

- A sadist, by contrast, typically chooses victims who are different from him in terms of age, appearance, and occupation. They want to symbolically destroy those groups of people, almost like a missionary serial killer.

Really? A distinction between the age, appearance and occupation of the person they choose? I'm not sure what this is based on but it doesn't seem very legitimate to me. I have a feeling that this is a very flawed attempt at psychological profiling.

I am a sadist and I love to hurt the ones who love me (and might I add that I love back) in the hottest, sexiest way possible. See how that really doesn't work with the definition above?

quote:

- It's sometimes said that a psychopath is both sadist and masochist. A sadist is never a masochist.

I am both a sadist and a masochist, though my sadistic urges are definitely stronger in this stage of my life. It wasn't like that about 10 years ago.

quote:

- Psychopaths ignore their victim's suffering. Sadists relish their victim's suffering.

On this I agree.

quote:

- People who experiment and go both ways with Bondage & Discipline (B&D) or Sado-Masochism (S&M) are not sadists, nor are they psychopaths.

I would hope that they weren't based on the principles of WIITWD about safe, sane and consensual, but I am sure some will infiltrate.

quote:

Ref: http://www.monstropedia.org/index.php?title=Sadism

Ah phew! I thought this was actually coming from a credible source! ;-)

- LA

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

2. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviours cause clinically significant stress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of function.

quote:

ORIGINAL: sodsta
That's where S&M comes in. It gives people (sadists) an opportunity to indulge those sociopathic tendencies and urges in an environment where you KNOW you are safe. There is consent, there is desire on the part of the masochist, and an understanding that it will stop if it becomes too much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomImus

quote:

ORIGINAL: sodsta
That's where S&M comes in. It gives people (sadists) an opportunity to indulge those sociopathic tendencies and urges in an environment where you KNOW you are safe. There is consent, there is desire on the part of the masochist, and an understanding that it will stop if it becomes too much.

I haven't read through the five pages of people trying to rip you a new asshole because they don't agree with you and haven't sufficiently dealt with their own anger issues. Having said that - your statement I quoted actually makes a great deal of sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

It’s really hard to talk about sadism because the medical community has only recently settled on the terms we are supposed to use, and even those meanings are in flux. Unless you are saying you have sadistic personality disorder and your contention is that the DSM indicators are wrong, I think you mistook terms in use to apply to sexual sadism not sadism.

quote:

-=Many types of sadism=-
From the kinky paraphilia to the personality disorder, they are all accurately called sadists and it all falls into the school of sadism. As I said before, S&M refers specifically to one type of sexual sadism.

quote:

Krafft-Ebing would have us subscribe to their 8 types of sexual sadism but insist on separating the 8 types into yet 2 more groups of Mild Sexual Sadism and Major Sexual Sadism. The Freudian school divides sadism into 3 groups complimentary to masochism, while going through all the Freudian oral and anal development stages of masculine, moral and erotogenic.

quote:

So it’s hard to use the word sadist or sadism and have its meaning fall in sync with the many definitions of a sadist.

quote:

That is why I specifically use the modern reference to sexual sadism as often as I can. That being said, and all ancient Fruendian and Krafft-Ebing era concepts behind us, below is what a modern sexual sadist is according to the latest DSM:

-=Official Criteria for Sexual Sadism=-
Current diagnostic criterion from the DSM-IV-TR requires the following criteria be met:
1. Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviours involving acts (real, not simulated) in which the psychological or physical suffering (including humiliation) of the victim is sexually exciting for the person, have been present for at least 6 months.
2. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviours cause clinically significant stress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of function.

quote:

-=No Gray Areas=-
It is the “real, not simulated” diagnostic criteria that has me at odds with your “gray areas” and the OPs “urges”. As I have said repeatedly, it is what we do that defines us, not what we desire or suppress.

quote:

Refs:
http://www.forensicpsychiatry.ca/paraphilia/sadism.htm
http://www.terrapsych.com/freud.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadism_and_masochism_as_medical_terms
http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/fromm.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kana

Whiplash,
You are missing a critical point
The sadist may get off on the dogs suffering
The sociopath is incapable of such an emotional response
Any joy/sensation they receive is based entirely on how things hit their own internal radar.
Matter of fact, the sociopath will kill the dog, not to see it suffer, but because it is inconvenient to him, or gets in the way, or a hundred other reasons, and when he does, it will almost assuredly be done with a cold blooded detachment that would horrify the majority of us
But the one thing it won't kill the dog for is to be able to see it suffer
Because by definition, a sociopath cannot empathize with any other living creatures pain/joy/love/hurt/remorse
The only feelings that are real and have validity are their own.

Kind of like swatting a fly, devoid of remorse, nor caring about the creature at all. It's life and suffering held in the same regard as opening and closing of a refrigerator door.

Perhaps killing a cat, not caring about the cat itself, but rather more concern with seeing what kind of interesting blood patterns that are made while it bleeds out.

Now you are on the right path.

quote:

ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth

But not quite there; lots of people swat flies without caring beyond that of having gotten rid of the fly which was annoying them, it doesn't make them sociopathic.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4
None the less, both these examples are rather stereotypcial examples, as with any stereotyping, it leads to generalized misconceptions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Whiplashsmile4

quote:

ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth

But not quite there; lots of people swat flies without caring beyond that of having gotten rid of the fly which was annoying them, it doesn't make them sociopathic.

I was not trying to imply that people that swat flies without emotion are sociopaths, but rather that sociopaths have the same regard. This is why I used the words "Kind of like..."

The second example I tossed out, is where harm is caused to an animal without sadistic intent but rather an interest in something else (watching blood patterns).

The first example I gave, was a comparitive.
The second example I gave was a none comparitive.

None the less, both these examples are rather stereotypcial examples, as with any stereotyping, it leads to generalized misconceptions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika
RS - Just a preface. This post is a reply to Whiplashsmile4 but has a quote of my post so I'm going to make the assumption that it was addressed in large part as a response to my post and to me (specifically later on in the post when you say "your").

quote:

ORIGINAL: ResidentSadist

It’s really hard to talk about sadism because the medical community has only recently settled on the terms we are supposed to use, and even those meanings are in flux. Unless you are saying you have sadistic personality disorder and your contention is that the DSM indicators are wrong, I think you mistook terms in use to apply to sexual sadism not sadism.

I know that I do not have a sadistic personality disorder, and so do you. But you put a general definition of sadism after having opened up a discussion on sexual sadism and that is what I based my response on. As you say further on in this post, there are different varieties of sadists. But the juxtaposition of your texts made the interpretation confusing, hence the reason why I "mistook" it. I appreciate you taking the time to now to clarify this. :-)

quote:

quote:

-=Many types of sadism=-
From the kinky paraphilia to the personality disorder, they are all accurately called sadists and it all falls into the school of sadism. As I said before, S&M refers specifically to one type of sexual sadism.

Of this, I'm very aware.

quote:

Krafft-Ebing would have us subscribe to their 8 types of sexual sadism but insist on separating the 8 types into yet 2 more groups of Mild Sexual Sadism and Major Sexual Sadism. The Freudian school divides sadism into 3 groups complimentary to masochism, while going through all the Freudian oral and anal development stages of masculine, moral and erotogenic.

I have not read Krafft-Ebing's original texts on sadism so I cannot comment to the source. However, in accounts of them, we are talking about male sadists hurting females and when they refer to hurting boys, they lump boys together with up with objects. Based on these reported facts, I feel that the findings aren't representative of all sexual sadists as they isolate a portion of the population. It is my experience in research that when you don't have the proper sample, many factors aren't taken into account and therefore any conclusions drawn might be skewed. It might be time for updated studies.

quote:

quote:

So it’s hard to use the word sadist or sadism and have its meaning fall in sync with the many definitions of a sadist.

Oh on this you and I agree 100%!

quote:

quote:

That is why I specifically use the modern reference to sexual sadism as often as I can. That being said, and all ancient Fruendian and Krafft-Ebing era concepts behind us, below is what a modern sexual sadist is according to the latest DSM:

-=Official Criteria for Sexual Sadism=-
Current diagnostic criterion from the DSM-IV-TR requires the following criteria be met:
1. Recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviours involving acts (real, not simulated) in which the psychological or physical suffering (including humiliation) of the victim is sexually exciting for the person, have been present for at least 6 months.
2. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviours cause clinically significant stress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of function.

I just read these 2 points over and over and over again, as I have many times.

I have no issues with #1 other than it's limited and clinical. I would never define my sexual/sensual sadism in such cold terms but I guess when you get right down to it, that's what the base is.

I have major issues with #2. First of all, how does this "significant stress" manifest itself? I would expect a lot less vagueness from scientific studies to be honest. My own thesis director would never let me get away with such a broad sweeping statement as point #2 as it can be interpreted in myriad ways. Personally I think that this line is set up as a catch all because they can't explain what it is. I have done quite a bit of self-exploration in what my sexual sadism is to me and I live very well with it. It does not impair me in social situations, nor occupational and I am functioning quite well. I am, as much as one can be, a very well adapted individual. Now I can see if someone doesn't have their sadism in balance and in perspective in their life how #2 would be true. The same could have been said of many homosexuals who are forced to live a closeted life. But now that it is more widely accepted, more homosexuals enjoy a well balanced and well adapted life. Methinks the DSM likes to project. It also explains why they are constantly revising their diagnoses in terms of sexual paraphilias as society becomes more accepting of certain practices.

quote:

quote:

-=No Gray Areas=-
It is the “real, not simulated” diagnostic criteria that has me at odds with your “gray areas” and the OPs “urges”. As I have said repeatedly, it is what we do that defines us, not what we desire or suppress.

What I meant by grey areas is that no one person fits into a perfect model. Do I believe that most sadists that I interact with on these boards are sociopaths? Nope. And I know I'm basing myself on just reading your texts, but no, I see enough here talking about genuine affection and lust that I am quite sure that most aren't. Does that mean that all self identified sexual sadists aren't sociopaths? No. And that is what I mean by grey areas. I think that some might have a foot in each. They are far from being the majority. And I realise that by simply suggesting that they might exist, I make a lot of people angry or uneasy. But that my observation and I'm going to stick by it based on what I have witnessed. You are more than welcome to disagree of course.

quote:

Refs:
http://www.forensicpsychiatry.ca/paraphilia/sadism.htm
http://www.terrapsych.com/freud.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadism_and_masochism_as_medical_terms
http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/fromm.html

Thank you for the 3 bolded references as I find them valuable. I will take the time to read through them.

- LA

quote:

ORIGINAL: zephyroftheNorth

Also the BDSM community is a very good place for a sociopath to hang out, such a good place to find victims and blend in.
[/font][/size]