After reading this excellent piece by Jennifer Fitz, I did a very brief Google search on BDSM perfectly normal or something pretty close to that. First, a representative excerpt from Jennifer.
The difficulty is that if you are a person who experiences sexual arousal in some untoward context (whether BDSM or anything else), if the wider society is telling you that your feelings are entirely consistent with your highest good, and therefore you ought to feel free to act upon them, you are suddenly bereft of any moral safety-net to bring you back to reality.I've also been listening to Ben Shapiro's excellent analysis of Millennial morality, Porn Generation. Ben argues convincingly that the Millenials have no moral foundation at all and then gives reams of stats and anecdotes to show just how adrift they are. While listening to that and then reading Jennifer's post, I pondered the biological background to BDSM.
If our dogs, the Catican Guards, started injuring themselves on purpose, I would not conclude that they were engaging in a perfectly legitimate alternate lifestyle, but that there was something dreadfully wrong. Dogs that hurt themselves are exhibiting signs of high levels of stress. It's not good and if you care for the animal, you need to take decisive steps right away.
How is BDSM different? A quick perusal of my Google search hits yielded this piece by Laura Berman, PhD. Here's an excerpt.
BDSM is an acronym for sexual activity that incorporates bondage, discipline, domination, submission, sadism, and masochism — and it may be more common than you think. According to research from the Kinsey Institute, 55 percent of females and 50 percent of males derive sexual pleasure from pain (such as having lovers bite them). And, according to the Durex 2005 Global Sex Survey, 20 percent of people report engaging in “kinky play” with their partners, including the use of blindfolds, bondage, and masks.There's so much to work with here, but a couple of things jumped out at me immediately.
Many people find that BDSM is a normal and healthy way to explore their sexuality. In BDSM behaviors, the individual is deriving pleasure from pain, or pleasure from being completely dominated or completely dominant. The fact that people would enjoy these activities is easy to understand when you study how the brain works: The pain and pleasure centers of the brain are very closely related, and so there are times when it really does “hurt so good.”
The Kinsey Institute might not be the worst place to find research materials, but it's got to be pretty near the bottom. Kinsey himself was a monumental pervert whose equally perverted "research" was designed to do nothing more than validate his own mental health problems. It did this in spades as the popular media devoured it like so much arsenic-laced cotton candy. Anyone who refers to a Kinsey Institute study is instantly suspect.
To me that shouts that Laura Berman's research is probably weak. The next paragraph provides more data.
Saying that the pain and pleasure centers in the brain are "closely related" tells you nothing of value. Closely related how? I'm no expert, but I know from pain and anyone suggesting that pain and pleasure are closely related is deliberately obfuscating the issue so they can sell something else. Animals avoid pain. Animals seek pleasure. That's why our Maximum Leader hates baths, but loves getting a drink from the faucet. There's a significant difference between the two.
Laura is degreed and seems to have a lot of cache in the field. She's also got the feel of an evangelist, peddling a point of view instead of cold analysis. In reality, deriving pleasure from pain in animals is a sign of serious problems. For some reason, Laura's all sunshine and light when it comes to sadism and masochism.
So the question is: Why? What's the lure of BDSM to someone like Laura? To me, it's a religious status symbol. She's showing her colleagues just how orthodox she is. She's a secular postmodern and acceptance of every conceivable source of orgasm is an article of faith.
Laura Berman is a religious fundamentalist.
 |
| You know, it would make it a lot easier on the rest of us if orthodox secularist postmoderns would dress in a particular way so we could recognize them by sight. |
4 comments:
Good post. This is something that I had started to wonder about as is it REALLY something that should be normalized. It's as if the relativizers have relativized everything into a "personal choice." Nothing is "wrong," or "unhealthy" -- it's just a matter of "personal choice."
One thing I read recently that was disgusting on so many levels was about an incestuous relationship. The "dispassionate" writing almost seemed to underscore the idea that these were two "adults" making a"personal choice." And this, careening down the slippery slope at break neck speed.
Lee, thanks for the comment. I'm not sure how we'll tell the bottom of that slippery slope from where we are now. How much further do we have to go when sadism and masochism are considered healthy?
There's probably the worst film ever made. I don't know the title.I made the mistake of reading a plot summary when I came across an article mentioning it. But what had been read cannot be unread. So I suggest not looking for it. I think it was an Italian film. My point about it is that once it becomes really abalone on Netflix or something, we've genuinely hit the bottom of that slippery slope.
Not unrelated, but I do find the name of Christian Grey very offensive. And I'm Jewish. I refuse to read that book or see the movie.
Abolone? The dangers of the auto-finish function. "Readily available" is what I meant.
Post a Comment