Review of Philosophy and Psychology

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 41–55 | Cite as

The Penumbral Theory of Masochistic Pleasure

Article

Abstract

Being whipped, getting a deep-tissue massage, eating hot chili peppers, running marathons, and getting tattooed are all painful. Sometimes they are also pleasant—or so many people claim. Masochistic pleasure consists in finding such experiences pleasant in addition to, and because of, the pain. Masochistic pleasure presents a philosophical puzzle. Pains hurt, they feel bad, and are aversive. Pleasures do the opposite. Thus many assume that the idea of a pleasant pain is downright unintelligible. I disagree. I claim that cases of pleasant pains are more common than many philosophers suppose, and that they have no essential connection to either sex or psychopathology. I review several attempts to account for masochism that preserve the intuition that nothing can be both pleasant and painful at once. These account for some, but not all, cases of masochism. The stubborn remainder, I argue, are sensations that are genuinely pleasant and painful at once. I give an account of how that might be, focusing on boundary-pushing aspects of masochistic pleasure that have been largely overlooked in the literature. I show how, properly understood, pain and pleasure can coexist—and also why it is very rare for them to actually do so.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. 2013. Paraphilic disorders fact sheet.Google Scholar
  2. Barrett, L. 2006. Are emotions natural kinds? Perspectives on Psychological Science 1(1): 28–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baumeister, R.F. 1989. Masochism and the self. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  4. Bearn, G. 2013. Life Drawing: A Deleuzean Aesthetics of Existence. Fordham University Press Series. Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bentley, T. 2006. The Surrender. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, J.M. 1996. An Aristotleian theory of the emotions. In Essays on Aristotle’s rhetoric, ed. A. Rorty, 238–257. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Deleuze, G. 1991. Coldness and cruelty. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  8. Dutton, D., and A. Aron. 1974. Some evidence for heightened sexual attraction under conditions of high anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 30(4): 510–517.Google Scholar
  9. Feldman, F. 2004. Pleasure and the good life: Concerning the nature, Varieties and plausibility of hedonism. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hare, R.M. 1964. Symposium: Pain and evil. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes 38: 91–124.Google Scholar
  11. Helm, B. 2002. Felt evaluations: A theory of pleasure and pain. American Philosophical Quarterly 39(1): 13–30.Google Scholar
  12. Klein, C. 2007. An imperative theory of pain. Journal of Philosophy 104(10): 517–532.Google Scholar
  13. Redelmeier, D.A., J. Katz, and D. Kahneman. 2003. Memories of colonoscopy: a randomized trial. Pain 104(1): 187–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schachter, S., and J. Singer. 1962. Cognitive, social and physiological determinants of emotional state. Psychological Review 69(5): 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Stoller, R.J. 1991. Pain & passion: A psychoanalyst explores the world of S & M. New York: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Strohl, M. 2012. Horror and hedonic ambivalence. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 70(2): 203–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Taormino, T. ed. 2012. The ultimate guide to kink: BDSM, role play, and the erotic edge. Berkeley: Cleis Press.Google Scholar
  18. Thompson, S.C. 1981. Will it hurt less if I can control it? A complex answer to a simple question. Psychological Bulletin 90(1): 89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Vancleef, L.M., and M.L. Peters. 2011. The influence of perceived control and self-efficacy on the sensory evaluation of experimentally induced pain. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry 42(4): 511–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Australian National UniversityActonAustralia
  2. 2.University of Illinois at ChicagoChicagoUSA
  3. 3.School of PhilosophyActonAustralia

Personalised recommendations