Sadism vs. Violence

Sadism vs. Violence (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

EastbourneCouple -> Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 12:38:01 PM)
Hi - male (Master) half of the EastbourneCouple here. I am a sadist and enjoy inflicting pain on my slave, who also likes to receive it. Thing is, I am also a pacifist. I deplore violence in all its forms. I am dead against war and the glorification of war (I don't even wear a poppy and things like Trooping the Colour and the Edinburgh Military Tattoo deeply offend me). Many people can't understand how I can be a sadist AND a pacifist, as they see sadism as a form of violence, but to me violence is inflicting unwanted pain and suffering, sadism is inflicting wanted/needed pain. I'd be interested to hear others' opinions.

Whenready -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 12:48:33 PM)
I cannot agree with your definition. Because something is wanted by both parties does not make it nonviolent. I would therefore have to assume from my definition that there is a line in your mind - with consent or non consent either side - which makes that violence (My definition) either acceptable or unacceptable to you. If it works for both of you, fine, but I would define it a different way.

LaTigresse -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 12:58:37 PM)
I don't really think so much about the difference, if any. To me.....and just for me,violence seems so.....uncontrolled. Very, unleashed and without control. Example: someone has a violent temper. There is nothing about my sadism that is not controlled.

EastbourneCouple -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 12:59:08 PM)
The word "violence" comes from the same latin roots as the word "violate", which the dictionary defines as "To break, disregard, disagree or not act according to (rules, conventions, etc.)". If someone consents to having pain inflicted on them, the person inflicting the pain is not, therefore, violating them.

daddysliloneds -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 12:59:43 PM)
sadism is violent; consensual violence

Focus50 -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 1:23:35 PM)
For starters, it's not "glorification" of war to celebrate the considerable sacrifice of coming through a nation's darkest hour - that most armed forces are about defending their people and territory from tyranny and oppression etc. If you're the type to passively lay down and be walked on by those who feel entitled, then I'd wonder just how much your slave can count on your protection in a crunch. Or why she'd even wanna be a slave to a doormat.... I deplore violence, too! And one of the best deterrants is to show strength and determination in the face of it. But if that's how you rationalise sadism and masochism between consenting (and esp caring) adults, then you really are a misty-eyed conflicted screw-up. Fulfilling mutual needs is a world away from satiating personal issues at the expense of another's welfare. Lucky you (I s'pose) to live in such a sheltered ivory tower.... That would've come through the expense and sacrifice of others, too - those you dare to judge so harshly! Focus.

adx -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 1:30:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EastbourneCouple The word "violence" comes from the same latin roots as the word "violate", which the dictionary defines as "To break, disregard, disagree or not act according to (rules, conventions, etc.)". If someone consents to having pain inflicted on them, the person inflicting the pain is not, therefore, violating them. Here I would tell you to remember that English Is very much a living language so the roots mean very little in this case. Violence means something completely different in the modern word. By the way you shouldn't us an English dictionary to define the classical Latin meaning of the word it just wont work right. Violence is defined as rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment.

DemonKia -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 1:33:40 PM)
FR For me it works out like this: the only morally tenable violence is fully informed & consensual violence.

Wolf2Bear -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 1:44:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EastbourneCouple Hi - male (Master) half of the EastbourneCouple here. I am a sadist and enjoy inflicting pain on my slave, who also likes to receive it. Thing is, I am also a pacifist. I deplore violence in all its forms. I am dead against war and the glorification of war (I don't even wear a poppy and things like Trooping the Colour and the Edinburgh Military Tattoo deeply offend me). Many people can't understand how I can be a sadist AND a pacifist, as they see sadism as a form of violence, but to me violence is inflicting unwanted pain and suffering, sadism is inflicting wanted/needed pain. I'd be interested to hear others' opinions. What you need to consider is regarding violence, it is usually committed upon others non consensually and in a manner which ignores the boundaries of the victim. Violence is usually characterized as being out of control and in a mindless way; as I perceive it. I see sadism in a BDSM flavoured dynamic is one where the acts of sadistic actions are done to another with the other person's consent and agreement. These actions are usually done under controlled circumstances and which falls within the agreements laid out by both the sadist and the masochist. Overall I identify as a pacifist yet do have a sadistic streak, yet these aspects do not conflict with each other. In everyday life, if I was threatened or anyone whom I care about, I do have the ability and capability to retaliate if all else fails - that would include using violence as a last resort. My abhorrance of violence in mosdt forms remains within one aspect of my life, the sadism stays within the kinky aspect of who I am and neither interfere with the other.

EastbourneCouple -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 1:51:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Focus50 If you're the type to passively lay down and be walked on by those who feel entitled, then I'd wonder just how much your slave can count on your protection in a crunch. Or why she'd even wanna be a slave to a doormat.... For starters, I am not a doormat and just because I don't resort to violence if I am threatened does not mean I cannot protect myself or my loved ones. That attitude is precisely what I deplore. If you feel that resorting to violence is the best form of protection, then I know that you would certainly not earn the respect of my slave. quote: Fulfilling mutual needs is a world away from satiating personal issues at the expense of another's welfare. Precisely my point - sadism to me is a case of fulfilling mutual needs, whereas what I refer to as violence is not. I was not really wanting a discussion about the literal meaning of the word violence, but more the concept of aggression in a non-consensual way. People I have spoken with assume that because I enjoy inflicting pain for mutual pleasure, then I must surely also enjoy inflicting pain on anyone, regardless of consent, which simply isn't true. quote: Lucky you (I s'pose) to live in such a sheltered ivory tower.... That would've come through the expense and sacrifice of others, too - those you dare to judge so harshly! Who exactly am I judging? I have made no comment about anyone who has fought in a war or been in the armed forces. I just feel that parading up and down, proudly showing off weapons designed to kill other people is glorification of something the human race should be ashamed of, not proud.

Foxwell -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 2:06:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EastbourneCouple Hi - male (Master) half of the EastbourneCouple here. I am a sadist and enjoy inflicting pain on my slave, who also likes to receive it. Thing is, I am also a pacifist. I deplore violence in all its forms. I am dead against war and the glorification of war (I don't even wear a poppy and things like Trooping the Colour and the Edinburgh Military Tattoo deeply offend me). Many people can't understand how I can be a sadist AND a pacifist, as they see sadism as a form of violence, but to me violence is inflicting unwanted pain and suffering, sadism is inflicting wanted/needed pain. I'd be interested to hear others' opinions. It sounds like you and the people you mentioned are just misunderstanding the word violent. Violent has a bit of a tricky definition. If you hurt someone intentionally, this is considered an act of "violence", but if you don't intend to it is not. However in both occurrences the occurrence (not the act) is considered violent (not violence. Violent). For example: An accident causes a factory to explode, well damn that was a violent explosion, but it wasn't intentional and couldn't be defined as a violent act. In your case, yes your acts on you slave are an act of violence. You are aware of what your doing and you intend to create a violent impression upon your slave. However this is not bad, it is an exception to a distinction that would otherwise make it bad. There are almost always technicalities in the way we perceive things. The reason your confused about it is probably because your focusing so much on the action to understand if it's bad instead of looking at the results. Your slave enjoys it so no it isn't bad. If you take things to far then yes it becomes bad, but the point is you cant expect your pacifism to be a perfect disapproval for all violence. That would just be silly.

Aswad -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 2:09:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EastbourneCouple I'd be interested to hear others' opinions. The real question is: would you, on some level, enjoy inflicting it on someone who did not enjoy receiving it? If not, then you are into pain play, which has precisely nothing to do with either sadism or violence. And, as such, I can't see that pacifism has any bearing on your pain play activities, at all. In the opposite case, I would tend to see your pacifism as a mental deflection of the sort one often observes in humans who have not found a way to integrate their personality in areas which appear to be in conflict with the values they have been reared into. That isn't unusual, but developing the confidence to face and correctly integrate a discordant element is more useful in the long run. So, which would you say is the case? Health, al-Aswad.

EastbourneCouple -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 2:44:14 PM)
Aswad- a very intelligent and interesting response, thank you! I would say I am a sadist rather than just into pain play. Sadism is more than just infliction of pain - I will happily caused immense pain to consenting others, to the point where they cannot take any more but also verbally abuse them, degrade them and humiliate them. I have no limits other than those agreed between the consenting people. Your "alternative" option certainly intrigues me - my personality is certainly very different from my parents and even my sisters. I am very liberal whereas they are very conservative. I am not sure exactly why I have ended up so different from them, but always have been the black sheep of the family. Foxwell - as I said in previous post, I wasn't so much interested in defining "violence", but more making the point that people don't understand the fact that someone can be a pacifist but also enjoy being a sadist. Perhaps I made a poor choice in my use of language, for which I apologise.

aldompdx -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 2:48:07 PM)
Simply examine the etymology of the word "violence" and you have your answer. It is remarkable how much people debate words without considering their origin. E.g., "I consider blue to mean green, because I own a free slave, and a silly-hob dumpty-wig is always larger than a breadbox." It all sounds so reasonable when reading Alice In Wonderland. violence: late 13c., "physical force used to inflict injury or damage," from Anglo-Fr. and O.Fr. violence, from L. violentia "vehemence, impetuosity," from violentus "vehement, forcible," probably related to violare (see violate). Weakened sense of "improper treatment" is attested from 1590s. You are attempting not to distinguish your preferences from violence, but from tresspass, or violating the person, ex delicto. pacifism: 1902, from Fr. pacifisme, from pacifique (see pacific). pacific: 1540s, "tending to make peace," from M.Fr. pacifique, from L. pacificus "peaceful, peace-making," from pax (gen. pacis) "peace" + root of facere "to make" (see factitious). Meaning "peaceful, calm" is first recorded 1630s. Related: Pacifically. While you may find peace in violence, the general consensus is that violence is not peaceful.

Foxwell -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 3:14:20 PM)
quote: previous post, I wasn't so much interested in defining "violence", but more making the point that people don't understand the fact that someone can be a pacifist but also enjoy being a sadist. quote: ORIGINAL: EastbourneCouple Aswad- a very intelligent and interesting response, thank you! I would say I am a sadist rather than just into pain play. Sadism is more than just infliction of pain - I will happily caused immense pain to consenting others, to the point where they cannot take any more but also verbally abuse them, degrade them and humiliate them. I have no limits other than those agreed between the consenting people. Your "alternative" option certainly intrigues me - my personality is certainly very different from my parents and even my sisters. I am very liberal whereas they are very conservative. I am not sure exactly why I have ended up so different from them, but always have been the black sheep of the family. Foxwell - as I said in previous post, I wasn't so much interested in defining "violence", but more making the point that people don't understand the fact that someone can be a pacifist but also enjoy being a sadist. Perhaps I made a poor choice in my use of language, for which I apologise. No problem XD I guess I could have read it more carefully

Aileen1968 -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 3:14:45 PM)
Well let's see....he's inflicted a lot of pain on me in very slow, controlled, methodical ways. And he's inflicted a lot of pain on me in very fast and furious, some would even say violent, ways. Both methods of delivery, while extremely different, were done by the same man, sometimes within the same timeframe. Pain can be given in very violent ways and still be very wanted and craved. It ain't all lovey dovey.

DomImus -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 3:40:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EastbourneCouple Sadism is inflicting wanted/needed pain. That's my definition of a service top.

junecleaver -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 5:17:35 PM)
Most vague answer ever: it depends on why the person is perpetrating the act. I really can't consider a terrified 18 year old guy in Iraq randomly firing his weapon (and praying he doesn't hit anything) because that's what he's suppose to do as an 'act of violence.' It's not coming from a violent place. The same with BDSM...are you being violent with me or just trying to give me what I want? It depends on where it's all coming from and the measure of control is involves.

Twoshoes -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 5:28:17 PM)
Well when I read the header, I start thinking along the lines of control vs lack of control... Some pretty bad violence comes from places of fear and powerlessness.

marie2 -> RE: Sadism vs. Violence (8/27/2010 6:50:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EastbourneCouple Many people can't understand how I can be a sadist AND a pacifist, as they see sadism as a form of violence, but to me violence is inflicting unwanted pain and suffering, sadism is inflicting wanted/needed pain. Isn't that all the matters?? How you and your woman see it? Who are these "many people" you are refering to? And why does it matter how "they" see sadism? If I were you, I'd stop trying to square these two labels (pacifist/sadist) against each other. Looks like apples and oranges.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875