Current Psychiatry Reports

, 15:392 | Cite as

Consensual Sadomasochistic Sex (BDSM): The Roots, the Risks, and the Distinctions Between BDSM and Violence

Sexual Disorders (JP Fedoroff, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Sexual Disorders

Abstract

When practiced consensually, sadomasochistic sex is being increasingly accepted as an alternative sexuality. Here I suggest the possible evolutionary roots of the preferences, draw distinctions between violent, abusive and “healthy” practitioners’ partnership, provide clear behavioural markers of the respective situations, and underline some specific problems connected to this sexual preference. Some of the problems are well-known in the community of its practitioners, although they have not yet been described in medical nor scientific sources.

Keywords

Consensual sadomasochistic sex BDSM Violence Domestic violence Abuse Sexual disorders Psychiatry Sadomasochism Sadism Masochism Sex Dominance Submission Submissiveness Bondage Intimate partner violence Evolutionary biology Psychology Social hierarchy Hierarchy Minority Sexual practices Paraphilia ICD DSM-5 

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    •• Revise F65. ICD revision available at White Paper. http://wwwrevisef65org/icd_whitepaper html. Accessed June 2013. The purpose of Revise F65 committee (a subsidiary of LLH, the Norwegian LGBT Association with a mandate from the international lesbian and gay movement [ILGA 1999], the European leather club confederation [ECMC 2000], and the federal German SM organization [BVSM e.V. 2004]) is to remove fetishism, transvestism, and sadomasochism as psychiatric diagnoses from the ICD (International Classification of Diseases). Revise F65 1) informed BDSMers and the general public about revision processes and 2) prepared White Paper for WHO (World Health Organization) to remove the diagnoses.
  2. 2.
    •• American Psychiatric Association. Paraphilic disorders DSM-5 fact sheet. Available at http://www.psychiatryorg/dsm5. Accessed June 2013. This webpage provides a fact sheet of the DSM-5 changes.
  3. 3.
    •• Moran M. DSM to distinguish paraphilias from paraphilic disorders. Psychiatric News. 2013;48:261. Moran explains why to distinguish paraphilias from paraphilic disorders.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Connolly PH, Haley H, Gendelman J, Miller J. Psychological functioning of bondage/domination/sado-masochism (BDSM) practitioners. J Psychol Hum Sex. 2006;18:79–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Richters J, de Visser R, Grulich A, Rissel C. Demographic and psychosocial features of participants in BDSM sex: data from a national survey. J Sex Res. 2008;45:98–9.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sandnabba NK, Santtila P, Alison L, Nordling N. Demographic, sexual behaviour, family background and abuse experiences of practitioners of sadomasochistic sex: a review of recent research. Sex Relatsh Ther. 2002;17:39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ernulf KE, Innala SM. Sexual bondage - a review and unobtrusive investigation. Arch Sex Behav. 1995;24:631–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cross PA, Matheson K. Understanding sadomasochism: an empirical examination of four perspectives. J Homosexual. 2006;50:133–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kolmes K, Stock W, Moser C. Investigating bias in psychotherapy with BDSM clients. J Homosexual. 2006;50:301–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Richters J, Grulich AE, de Vieser RO, et al. Sex in Australia: autoerotic, esoteric and other sexual practices engaged in by a representative sample of adults. Aust NZ J Pub Heal. 2003;27:180–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weinberg TS. Sadomasochism and the social sciences: a review of the sociological and social psychological literature. J Homosexual. 2006;50:17–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Newmahr S. Power struggles: pain and authenticity in SM play. Symb Interact. 2010;33:389–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Weinberg MS, Wiliams CJ, Moser C. The social constituents of sadomasochism. Soc Probl. 1984;31:379–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    •• Powls J, Davies J. A descriptive review of research relating to sadomasochism: considerations for clinical practice. Deviant Behav. 2012;33:223–34. This paper reviews the latest findings about BDSM.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henkin WA, Holiday S. Consensual sadomasochism. Los Angeles: Deadalus Publishing Company; 2003.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wright S. Second national survey of violence & discrimination against sexual minorities. Available at https://ncsfreedomorg/images/stories/pdfs/BDSM_Survey/2008_bdsm_survey_analysis_final pdf. Accessed June 2013.
  17. 17.
    •• Bezreh T, Weinberg TS, Eedgar T. BDSM disclosure and stigma management: identifying opportunities for sex education. American J of Sex Ed. 2012;7:37–61. Bezreh and colelagues analyzed risk factors involved with BDSM disclosure. They described risks of the dislosure and suggest ideas for education and stigma management.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sandnabba NK, Santtila P, Nordling N. Sexual behavior and social adaptation among sadomasochistically-oriented males. J Sex Res. 1999;36:273–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    •• Jozifkova E, Bartos L, Flegr J. Evolutional background of dominance/submissivity in sex and bondage: the two strategies? Neuroendocrinol Lett. 2012;33:636–42. Jozifkova and colleagues suggest that the BDSM behavior is derived from natural reproduction strategy.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    •• Jozifkova E, Konvicka M. Sexual arousal by higher- and lower-ranking partner: manifestation of a mating strategy? Sex Med. 2009;6:3327–34. The sexual arousal by overemphasized hierarchy may represent manifestation of natural human behavior.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jozifkova E. BDSM, SM, D/s v otazkach a odpovedich 2008. Available at http://www.en-knet/questions/. Accessed June 2013.
  22. 22.
    • Newmahr S. Rethinking kink: sadomasochism as serious leisure. Qual Sociol. 2010;33:313–31. Newmahr describes behavior and feelings of pratitioners participating in BDSM sex in the BDSM community semipublic clubs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dupanloup I, Pereira L, Bertorelle G, et al. A recent shift from polygyny to monogamy in humans is suggested by the analysis of worldwide Y-chromosome diversity. J Mol Evol. 2003;57:85–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gibson MA, Mace R. Polygyny, reproductive success and child health in rural Ethiopia: why marry a married man? J Biosoc Sci. 2007;39:287–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mealey L. The relationship between social status and biological success: a case study of the Mormon religious hierarchy. Ethol Sociobiol. 1985;6:249–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fieder M, Huber S, Bookstein FL, et al. Status and reproduction in humans: new evidence for the validity of evolutionary explanations on basis of a university sample. Ethology. 2005;111:940–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Perusse D. Cultural and reproductive success in industrial-societies - testing the relationship at the proximate and ultimate levels. Behav Brain Sci. 1993;16:267–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Buss DM, Shackelford TK. Attractive women want it all: good genes, economic investment, parenting proclivities, and emotional commitment. Evol Psychol-US. 2008;6:134–46.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lammers J, Stoker JI, Jordan J, et al. Power increases infidelity among men and women. Psychol Sci. 2011;22:1191–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Greitemeyer T. What do men and women want in a partner? Are educated partners always more desirable? J Exp Soc Psychol. 2007;43:180–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Taborsky M. Sneakers, satellites, and helpers - parasitic and cooperative behavior in fish reproduction. Adv Stud Behav. 1994;23:1–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Taborsky M. The evolution of bourgeois, parasitic, and cooperative reproductive behaviors in fishes. J Hered. 2001;92:100–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dominey WJ. Alternative mating tactics and evolutionarily stable strategies. Am Zool. 1984;24:385–96.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Healey MC, Prince A. Alternative tactics in the breeding behaviour of male coho salmon. Behaviour. 1998;135:1099–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Newmahr S. Playing on the sadomasochism, risk, and intimacy. Edge: Indiana University Press; 2012.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sagarin BJ, Cutler B, Cutler N, et al. Hormonal changes and couple bonding in consensual sadomasochistic activity. Arch Sex Behav. 2009;38:186–200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    • Moskowitz DA, Seal DW, Rintamaki L, Rieger G. HIV in the leather community: rates and risk-related behaviors. AIDS Behav. 2011;15:557–64. This paper focuses on leathermen HIV rates and sexual behaviour.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    •• Revise F65. SM versus abuse. Available at http://www.revisef65org/violence html. Accessed June 2013. Revise F65 compiled this “SM versus violence“web page. Because of Revise F65, “the biggest difference between a violent sadist and an SM master is that the former destroys the self-confidence”.
  39. 39.
    Nordling N, Sandnabba NK, Santilla PV. The prevalence and effects on self-reported childhood sexula abuse among sadomasochistically oriented males and females. J Child Sex Abus. 2000;9.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Neighbors CJ, O'Leary A, Labouvie E. Domestically violent and nonviolent male inmates' responses to their partners' requests for condom use: testing a social-information processing model. Health Psychol. 1999;18:427–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Allan S, Gilbert P. Submissive behaviour and psychopathology. Brit J Clin Psychol. 1997;36:467–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Klofstad CA, Anderson RC, Peters S. Sounds like a winner: voice pitch influences perception of leadership capacity in both men and women. P Roy Soc B-Biol Sci. 2012;279:2698–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Buss DM, Craik KH. The frequency concept of disposition - dominance and prototypically dominant. Acts J Pers. 1980;48:379–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Goldberg LR. A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In: Mervielde I, Deary I, De Fruyt F, Tilburg OF, editors. Personality psychology in Europe. Tilburg University Press; 1999:7–28.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dunbar NE, Abra G. Observations of dyadic power in interpersonal interaction. Commun Monogr. 2010;77:657–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Women's aid. Domestic violence: frequently asked quiestionsfactsheet 2009. Available at http://www.womensaidorguk/. Accessed June 2013.
  47. 47.
    Wikipedia. Dominance and submission. Safety. Available at http://enwikipediaorg/wiki/Domination_%26_submission_%28BDSM%29. Accessed June 2013.
  48. 48.
    Rohr HP: Narcismus - vnitrni zalar. Praha: Portal s.r.o.; 2001. From original Narzißmus. Das innere Gefängnis., Germany, Patmos Verlag GmbHCo&KG.co, Narzißmus. Das innere Gefängnis Patmos Verlag GmbHCo&KG.co, 1999. Translated to English: Narcisim. Escaping from the Inner Prison. Germany: Pamtos; 2012.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Carrington K, Phillips J. Domestic violence in Australia an overview of the issues. Available at http://www.aphgovau/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/archive/Domviolence. Accessed June 2013.
  50. 50.
    National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence. Power and control wheel. Available at http://www.ncdsvorg/images/Power_and_Control_wheel_NCDSVpdf. Accessed June 2013.
  51. 51.
    Krienert JL, Walsh JA, Matthews K, McConkey K. Examining the nexus between domestic violence and animal abuse in a national sample of service providers. Violence Vict. 2012;27:280–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Tiplady CM, Walsh DB, Phillips CJC. Intimate partner violence and companion animal welfare. Aust Vet J. 2012;90:48–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wikipedia. Cycle of abuse. Available at http://enwikipediaorg/wiki/Cycle_of_abuse#cite_ref-Walker_1-1. Accessed June 2013.
  54. 54.
    Dancer PL, Kleinplatz PJ, Moser C. 24/7 SM slavery. J Homosex. 2006;50:81–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Maner JK, Miller SL, Schmidt NB, Eckel LA. Submitting to defeat - social anxiety, dominance threat, and decrements in testosterone. Psychol Sci. 2008;19:764–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mehta PH, Josephs RA. Testosterone and cortisol jointly regulate dominance: evidence for a dual-hormone hypothesis. Horm Behav. 2010;58:898–906.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Timmer M, Cordero MI, Sevelinges Y, Sandi C. Evidence for a role of oxytocin receptors in the long-term establishment of dominance hierarchies. Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;36:2349–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Gilbert P, Miles JNV. Sensitivity to social put-down: it's relationship to perceptions of social rank, shame, social anxiety, depression, anger and self-other blame. Pers Indiv Differ. 2000;29:757–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Alison L, Santilla P, Sandnabba NK, Nordling N. Sadomasochistically oriented behavior: diversity in practice and meaning. Arch Sex Behav. 2001;30:1–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Leonard S, Steiger H, Kao A. Childhood and adulthood abuse in bulimic and nonbulimic women: prevalences and psychological correlates. Int J Eat Disorder. 2003;33:397–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Durkin KF. Show me the money: cybershrews and on-line money masochists. Deviant Behav. 2007;28:355–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Wikipedia. Risk-aware consensual kink. Available at http://enwikipediaorg/wiki/Risk-aware_consensual_kink. Accessed June 2013.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology, Faculty of ScienceJ.E. Purkynje University in Usti nad LabemUsti nad LabemCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations