I’ve listened with inner surprise as friends explained their preferences in bed.
You really do that? I want to say. We all have the capacity to surprise each other with what we do in private.
I’m not a sex therapist. I’m not a counselor.
But, as a philosopher I have some ideas. And with a bit of trepidation, I’m going to share them on the question on BDSM.
Photo credit: http://www.handcuffs.org/
BDSM is an acronym for bondage and discipline (BD), sadism and masochism (SM).The goal of BDSM relationships is to take on complementary but unequal roles (role-play like master/slave, pirate/captive, Nazi/Jew) in order to create a dominant/submissive situation. Men and women who practice BDSM often get kicks from pain and humiliation (both receiving and inflicting).
I had to rely on wikipedia for that. I have no experience with BDSM. And I realize reading E.L. James’ Fifty Shades of Gray makes me no expert.
I’ve already weighed in on the novel, for this post I want to zero in on the whips and punishment question.
Issue #1 – Masking Knowledge
Role-playing, as Phyllis from The Office says (yes, I’m quoting a fictional character for this one), can be “really fun.” We all have good, silly, and ultimately hot, God-given fantasies we ought to explore a bit more (in the playfulness and fun of our marriage). We also have fantasies that require corseting a person into a role that doesn’t fit them.
Which to choose?
Dominants (Dom) and Submissives (Sub) know all about role-playing. Their relationship depends on tipping the power ratio within love-making. As a believer in the essential equality of men and women I want to ask: How does playing at subjugation rather than equality in bed affect life beyond the bedroom?
In the recent bestseller, Fifty Shades of Gray, Ana doesn’t want to become a Sub because it means giving up her freedom to touch Christian when she wants, to sleep with him each night, to know him beyond his role as a Dom.
I think Ana’s reticence is spot-on.
Love-making, intimacy, fantasies are for the ultimate end of knowledge.
Role-playing comes at a pretty high cost. If a husband always wants to play pirate to his wife’s captive role, the wife only learns one slice of who he is in love-making. She doesn’t get to see him vulnerable.
Finally, a wife or husband may assume a role that might actually clash with who they are. I remember a story of a young woman who decided to play a genie during her honeymoon. Her husband was both baffled and seriously entertained. I don’t mean sexually. He was doubled over laughing because the costume masked who she was and replaced her with a laughable charade.
Role-play requires a suspension of knowledge about the other person. Masks… doesn’t that belong more in the espionage and superhero realm than in love-making?
Problem #2 – Re-enacting Punishment
In one of the sadder moments in Don Draper’s life (AMC’s drama Mad Men) he invites a prostitute to his home. As she begins her work, he demands she slap him across the face.
Don Draper
“Again,” he yells.
She backhands him again. Slap, slap, slap.
Draper looks relieved.
Does he thinks he deserves it? Followers of Mad Men know Draper’s self-loathing goes back decades. Don Draper isn’t even his real name.
BDSM bothers me because it offers a sexually arousing practice that re-enacts punishment. Hugo Schwyzer explains that BDSM offers some abused people “recovery through ritualized acts of domination and submission.” (which is also Christian’s explanation of his past initiation into BDSM in Fifty Shades). To read more about BDSM as recovery (viewer discretion advised) see Not Your Usual BDSM and Abuse Story.
I do not believe some people (the ones that get knocked around more often than not) are hard-wired as Submissives. Nor do I think a Dom’s commands to stop drinking or get a job is the best way to develop a sense of identity. The Sub is still playing a role.
Further, I believe arousal at someone else’s pain indicates something about pain in that person’s life. If Sue gets turned on by hurting her friends, even if her friends want to be hurt, we call this a problem. Even if it’s between two consenting adults.
If Sue gets turned on by hurting her husband, even if he wants it, we can also call this a problem. Even if it’s between consenting adults.
As someone who has experienced people in authority taking liberties over me that I did not grant, the power of BDSM to both unleash and arouse feels (in my untried and unprofessional opinion) like dousing fire with kerosene and then claiming control over the flames. As I’ve written previously (Sex, Food and Fifty Shades of Gray) just because something makes you feel powerful or turned on does not mean it is a power for good in your life.
Using pain, even willing pain (the BDSM code of ethics SCC—I know, more acronyms—means Safe, Sane and Consensual), to recover from worse memories says more about how bad life used to be. It doesn’t give BDSM a ringing endorsement.
Problem #3 – #FirstWorldProblem
BDSM often entails elaborate costumes, equipment and preparation. Like the twitter trend #FirstWorldProblem (e.g. Freaking out because you lost your Ray-bans) BDSM seems to be a first world problem.
When you’re working to keep your children fed and away from prostitution in order to feed your family, BDSM appears as a final ditch aphrodisiac for bored, but wealthy married couples. For some non-BDSM ideas of re-igniting your sex life please see my post Sex, Food and Fifty Shades of Gray.
I Can Imagine
Perhaps there are wives and husbands who can make love untinged by any sexual or emotional abuse, couples who role-play fantasies of authenticity. Perhaps they walk BDSM’s razor edge between pleasure and pain to successfully arouse each other without re-enacting or committing abuse.
I can imagine it, but I have yet to meet them.
While I’m sure you mean well, I’m really frustrated when people who know very little about BDSM feel the urge to weigh in like this. Perhaps the reason you “don’t know” anyone who has done BDSM in a positive way is that you’ve somehow made it obvious to BDSMers how many misconceptions you have, and they don’t feel safe telling you about their private lives as a result. Odds are that you know a lot more of us than you think.
For more on some of the misconceptions you raise in this post, here’s my most recent article: http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2012/05/07/the-psychology-of-sm/
Good job on a tough topic for a lot of people, Jonalyn. It’s not a tough one for me, though, because I have absolutely no interest personally.
When it comes to whether a Christian should partake of BDSM, I think of marriage passages like Ephesians 5:21 (“Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ”) and 1 Corinthian 7:4 (“The wife does not have authority over her own body but yields it to her husband. In the same way, the husband does not have authority over his own body but yields it to his wife”).
The only way anyone could say these support BDSM is to take them completely out of context, because we are also told that the marriage relationship is like the relationship between Christ and the Church (Ephesians 5:32). Not only did Jesus never engaged in BDSM (or a spiritual equivalent) with those who belong to him, there is no marriage anywhere in the Bible that suggests such a relationship is a model for pleasing God.
Thanks for giving me the opportunity to think through these things, Jonaly.
Tim
Hi Tim,
I’m grateful you brought 1 Cor 7 up. That passage has been used and abused so much and yet it’s one of my favorites in terms of mutuality and egalitarianism in marriage.
I’ve been pondering this question of Scriptural support for or against BDSM and have come up with a few thoughts.
For instance, there is a clear connection in the Bible between pain and reward (take up your cross and follow me in Luke 9:23, for example), even of accepting pain for greater things (for the joy set before him He endured the cross, despising it’s shame, Heb 12:2).
I think also of the childbirth pain that I’ve written at length about in other posts (Laboring God) that reflects God’s painful spiritual work in us.
Here’s the conclusion I’ve drawn tonight (pending more from Clarisse Thorn in these comments). God knows that there is a fellowship of suffering (Phil 3:10), that pain draws people together and bonds them (side note: I’ve read BDSMers who find S&M bringing more, not less intimacy).
However, pain is a mark of this fallen world, a sign that things are not as they ought to be (I think of how leprosy is actually a dulling of nerves which makes living intact impossible). Pain is also an accompaniment for doing the good, true and beautiful when the world’s system doesn’t get it. I think of the pain of social suicide when you stand up for a bullied friend, or the pain accompanying birth, or the pain of saving your fallen friend on a battlefield where you are wounded. Pain is a warning bell usually to stop. It takes tremendous courage to enter the pain.
But we admire those who seek out the greater good, even through the pain (Heb 12:2) because we know they have their sights on something greater. For Jesus this was the victory over death and pain for us. He took pain so we wouldn’t have to. He saw resurrected, new bodies and laid down on the cross.
But what if we seek pain out for the sole purpose of being sexually turned on? I can’t admire that like I admire a martyr. A BDSMer gets the benefits of intimacy from painful events and the rush of adrenalin that accompanies any painful encounter BUT without an ultimate telos (at least not currently clear to me) that accompanies other painful experiences. What is the pain for?
orgasm? Falls flat to me.
I’m searching for a telos of the BDSMers beyond getting turned on. What’s the ultimate purpose, of BDSM?
Thank you for sharing. As a Christian, I was somewhat disappointed that while you had several secular references, there were none to the Bible or Biblical teaching. I did appreciate Tim’s comment which specified BIBLE reasoning for his opinion. As Christians, the Bible is to be our standard. While Clarisse may be well-intentioned & knowledgeable, neither her comments her nor in the article she cited make any reference whatsoever to God. Thus, the natural conclusion would be that she believes God & anything spiritual is not relevant to her discussion.
Thus, the natural conclusion would be that she believes God & anything spiritual is not relevant to her discussion.
Not necessarily. Perhaps Clarisse was speaking on a broader spectrum that had more to do with other people’s perceptions, and wasn’t interested in addressing the theological aspects of BDSM. You could be right, too, of course. We just don’t know either from the info provided in her post.
It’s always wonderful to have Biblical backup to any article, but the fact that Jonalyn does not always outright provide Biblical resources is one of the reasons I come back to her blog.
If you look around her blog, or the Soulation website, it’s evident that what she writes is Scripturally sound, the Bible is not invisible here.
However, by not interjecting the Bible in every single thing she writes, whether she realizes it or not, she’s putting it on the reader to delve in themselves. Putting it on our shoulders to look further and crack open our own Bibles for more information. She’s giving her readers credit for being smart enough to either read it and walk away with some food for though, or if we choose, to be a part of the conversation and interact (like Tim who provided Bible references).
I don’t think secular resources are a bad thing, either. Just because it something isn’t directly a Christian resource does not make it false or negative. Secular information speaks to use about ourselves as much as Christian information does, as well as telling us about the rest of the world. All of that can be used to better understand each other and serve God.
I was raised Unitarian, and my faith is important to me, but I acknowledge that it’s often considered more secular than most. However, I will say that there are Christian sex bloggers who specifically cite me as welcoming to Christian readers. One example would be this Christian BDSM blog: http://bdsm-sexperts.blogspot.com/
Clarisse,
Appreciate hearing your background a little more. I see your hand of friendship offered to Christians. Just your comment on my post indicates that you want to share knowledge with anyone who will take the time to learn. I’m glad for your boldness and concern of my post. I welcome your challenge to be more open, more safe and more knowledgable.
That said, I have already been reading your writing in preparation of this article.
As I wrote “What’s Wrong with BDSM?” my two most pressing concerns were:
1- would a BDSMer feel condemned by my words? I attempted to avoid this.
2- have I been clear about the current concerns I have?
That said, I’m afraid I haven’t been as successful as I would have liked.
After reading the link you shared above and finding your S&M Coming Out story, I’m convinced I need your assistance.
Can you share with me how my post specifically indicates misconceptions I have about BDSM? I don’t believe I’ve assumed BDSMers are mentally ill, or aberrant. I am trying to make the jump from pain in other relationships as a bad thing and pain in a BDSM relationship as a good thing. As a philosopher and ethicist I’m not sure I see sufficient reasons for the exception of the general rule “pain means stop”.
I can imagine getting turned on at a variety of things, not all of which are healthy for me, my well-being or those around me.
How does the rush of being turned on sanction the pain of BDSM into a good thing? What makes BDSM good for you? If you have a post I should read on this, do let me and my readers know.
A note of clarity. I did not mean to say I have no BDSMers as friends, I meant to communicate that I have not met any monogamous, married BDSMers who also practice that fine line as I outlined in the final paragraph. I’d be interested and grateful if you could refer me to any monogamous, married BDSMers you know.
In the end, the best way I know to research and grow in knowledge is to offer what I currently have learned and then ask questions. This is where I am with BDSM.
Any help you can share would be appreciated.
Here are some specific frustrations I felt with the post:
If a husband always wants to play pirate to his wife’s captive role, the wife only learns one slice of who he is in love-making. She doesn’t get to see him vulnerable.
Not necessarily. S&Mers often connect strongly after the encounter is over, using the energy of the encounter. In the post I linked above, I mentioned a study that demonstrated this.
Ana doesn’t want to become a Sub because it means giving up her freedom to touch Christian when she wants, to sleep with him each night, to know him beyond his role as a Dom. I think Ana’s reticence is spot-on.
Why do you think Ana’s reticence is spot-on, and why is “50 Shades” a definitive source on the matter? For more on this, http://www.blogher.com/troubling-message-fifty-shades-grey
I do not believe some people (the ones that get knocked around more often than not) are hard-wired as Submissives.
Why?
Further, I believe arousal at someone else’s pain indicates something about pain in that person’s life.
Why?
You haven’t supported either of these statements. And both of them are contradicted by the research, which, again, I linked in the first post above.
As someone who has experienced people in authority taking liberties over me that I did not grant, the power of BDSM to both unleash and arouse feels (in my untried and unprofessional opinion) like dousing fire with kerosene and then claiming control over the flames.
So … you’re using your traumatic, non-consensual experiences to judge our non-traumatic and consensual experiences? That’s like saying “sex is bad” after a rape experience.
I want to make a couple notes about what I wrote above, because I was imprecise.
#1: If I thought Ana in “50 Shades” was correct about her read on what a BDSM relationship has to be, then I would understand her reticence too. But I don’t. And, again, “50 Shades” has been analyzed as highly problematic by lots of BDSM commentators, including the link I provide above.
And, #2: I wrote too hastily about the “hard-wired” thing. There’s no research on that. There’s just a lot of anecdotal evidence within the community. My other statements about the research still stand.
Clarisse,
I appreciate these points, thanks of the additional clarity in the addendum comment, too. Good to hear point by point where I have misconceptions.
I want to be careful of judging BDSM by an inaccurate source (and will look more into how 50 Shades wasn’t correct on what a BDSM relationship has to be–thank you for this link).
I want to zero in on the final point as I’ve likened my nonconsensual, traumatic experience to your consensual, non-traumatic point. I think an analogy would help me be more precise.
There are some activities that have inherent cultural meaning, for instance, giving someone a swirly in the toilet. This combines a place of defecation with someone’s head which seems (regardless of circumstances: bullying, hazing, practical jokstering) to be disrespectful to the value and sanctity (holiness – literally set apart) of a person’s head.
I believe some actions have meaning regardless of them being wanted or unwanted. You made a fantastic philosophical distinction that rape is not identical to sex, and to judge all sex by a rape experience would be to judge a thing by it’s abuse.
However, what if a woman wants to be raped and her guy wants to rape her? Then the exact same physical experience is happening, but the permissiveness changes everything?
Interesting idea. I’m not sure I agree because of the belief I have that actions have meaning in addition to intent (as in swirly example).
That said, I believe the actions involved in most BDSM relationships have inherent or intrinsic meaning. To bind up one person so another person can control them has meaning. Bondage, for instance, symbolizes distrust as it withholds movement of an adult. Straight jackets come to mind which were invented to hold someone who is a threat to themselves and others. Punishment means wrong-doing as well.
What I hear you saying is the BDSM changes all that. I hear you saying that as long as the activities are consensual the bondage or punishment loses its cultural symbol and can mean whatever the Dom and Sub want it to mean–they can mean pleasure, intimacy, joy, delight.
However, it seems that the bondage and punishment get their pleasurable fuel from their use as distrust or wrong-doing retribution in culture.
In other words, I think the bondage and punishment would not be so stimulating in BDSM UNLESS they were used for harming others in everyday life.
Isn’t this what humiliation in BDSM is all about? Please correct me if I’m off base here.
What I hear you saying is that BDSM removes the harm of harmful activities because bondage or punishment is wanted.
So far, I am maintaining that activities that cause bruises, scars, welts and blood are harmful regardless of consensual adults approval.
Bondage, for instance, symbolizes distrust as it withholds movement of an adult.
Or … it symbolizes trust, because one adult is allowing the other adult to restrict his movement.
Punishment means wrong-doing as well.
Or … it means growth, rehabilitation and healing.
These symbols mean different things to different people.
If you’re going to insist that any act that “looks like abuse” is bad, then we’re just going to disagree. I think that’s a terrible way to measure abuse, though. A person who has been raped or molested, or an asexual person, may not want to have any sex at all; if that person has sex that looks like whatever *you* have decided that loving sex looks like, then she may experience it as traumatic. Would you tell her that she ought to be experiencing it as joyous? Or would you respect her experience?
You have no experience with BDSM. It’s wrong for you to tell us what our experience means. End of story.
I will also add that even if you did have experience with BDSM, it would be wrong for you to tell other BDSMers that they literally can’t do BDSM consensually, joyfully and positively. It’s reasonable to be concerned about consent and communication, and I write about those topics all the time — that’s the productive way to go about it, because then people can actually take steps to figure out how to do it positively. It’s not reasonable or productive to tell people that they simply can’t do BDSM positively (and even if you do, those of us who want it will do BDSM anyway, but in secret and without social support; is that really what you want?).
“… it would be wrong for you to tell other BDSMers that they literally can’t do BDSM consensually, joyfully and positively.”
But my question is whether you can do it in a way that honors Christ. Is it possible to show us how the Bible supports that notion?
Thanks,
Tim
There are Christian BDSMers writing about this, and I’ve already linked to one of them. However, it’s not the question Jonalyn asked.
Hey Clarisse,
This is getting so tiny here on the right I’m going to start another thread below to respond.
Stephanie,
It may help in terms of specific Bible references for me to point to both Ephesian 5:21 (the passage on mutual submission in marriage) and Genesis 1-2 (the creation of humans made in God’s image) as the basis for this post.
I believe both passages offer specific challenges to BDSMers which I tried to flesh out here.
I believe that one of the major draws to Fifty Shades of Grey is the fact that it is centered around female pleasure. It’s about a woman finding out what she likes, and acting upon her new interests. It’s rare that I see magazine articles geared towards women’s sexual pleasure, they seem to stay centered around the male experience. In a way, it could be viewed as a message of empowerment for women: find out what you like and make it happen! There aren’t too many authors or journalists who seem interested in enhancing female pleasure, unless they work for a pharmaceutical company.
Katherine,
Very interesting point. I’m glad you wrote.
I’d say that the point was Christian’s power and Ana’s submission, not simply here female pleasure. Christian seemed to choose her and decide how much or how little pleasure Ana would receive.
This isn’t example female empowerment in my mind.
For a better novel on women’s sexual pleasure I’d turn to The Awakening by Kate Chopin where the woman is in much more control of her sexual partner and her liaisons. For a better outline of women’s sexual pleasure in a how-to book I highly recommend She Comes First by Ian Kerner.
I grew up going to church. A third child to divorced parents, raised by my dad. I grew up seeing my mom every other Christmas or Thanksgiving and all summer. She always had a new boyfriend. She finally met my first step-dad, got married and eventually had my younger “half” brother. Around this time she also discovered chat rooms. It opened up a realm of possibilities to her. She seemed to change so much. Then, she left again. Years and years have passed and she has come out as a full-fledged Dom. She even has won some pretty significant awards in that community. I’ve visited her in hopes to have any kind of normalcy through the pain she’d already caused me, but instead was subjected to constant references and secretive experiences being played out right in front of me with her new sub. She’s several relationships past that one now, and not any closer to me. It’s extremely embarrassing, painful, confusing, etc. that my mother leads this alternative lifestyle. I don’t think its better or worse than any other type of sin, but I do see it as a sinning behavior. We have roles in our life that have the opportunity to lift people up or push them down. I am baffled by someone feeling lead to cause hurt and pain in multiple facets of her life. It’s not a matter of not forgiving past…irregularities, but more like trying to have a relationship with a foreigner. One who has a completely different, frightening culture that you don’t really want to understand more. I know that especially in a bedroom it’s “To each his own”, but it doesn’t just affect one person when people choose to advance their interest in BDSM lifestyles. I can’t imagine isolating my own children from me so that I could fulfill a sexual hunger inside me. In fact, I didn’t even put my real name on this so it’s not searchable to my mother, or Heaven forbid my children someday.
BDSM’s Dom’s Daughter,
I value your story here. Thank you for your courage to talk about the familial dynamics affected when a mother puts her sexual desires above her desires to provide and protect, love and nurture her family.
You’ve made a significant point.
This is perhaps the most tragic part of BDSM, if it is such an enriching experience for so many (as Clarisse Thorn has explained in these comments) why have you felt like your Dom mother is a foreigner to you? I don’t see BDSM revealing the true person your mother is. I still see masking the real.
This concerns me, too.
I’m so sorry.
I honor your vulnerability and grief…. it sounds like you’ve lost and continue to lose a significant person in your life.
If you ever care to talk more about your experience, I’m available for more private one-on-one chatting on Ask LIVE! here at soulation. Wed evenings… email me to make an appointment.
I sympathize with the Dom’s Daughter experience as well. However:
1) Would any type of sexuality be appropriate to display in front of one’s child? If this parent was displaying whatever type of sex you think is appropriate in front of her daughter, then that would be a problem. So why does this say something about BDSM, specifically?
2) And, I don’t mean to discount the pain of Dom’s Daughter by saying this, but it sounds like this mother has become very invested in the BDSM community. She is even winning awards. But her daughter still describes her mom’s COMMUNITY as “sinful, embarrassing, painful” etc. I would be curious to hear the mother’s perspective here. Perhaps she has acted in really problematic ways … or perhaps there are two real sides to this story. Perhaps this is like a gay person who comes out to her children and tries to share the joy that the gay community has brought her, only to be confronted with disgust and fear.
Clarisse,
Picking up from your comments below that got really indented due to my current threading settings…
I’m glad you added that additional addendum.
I can’t see how my participation or lack of participation in an activity makes me unqualified to weigh in on it. There surely are some activities, like stealing, that I don’t have to participate in to weigh as wrong. Some Christians will say “you can’t judge Christianity unless you’re a Christian.” I heartily disagree with them and with anyone who says I have to participate to make a distinction.
Also, I am not trying to control BDSMers life. I’m not telling BDSM peeps what they can and cannot do. I’m approaching this issue as a philosopher and ethicist, not as a lawmaker or judge.
I’m attempting to decide if one can participate in BDSM while keeping the goals of equality, image bearing, sanctity of body and soul, and the purpose of sex and intimacy intact (this list is both inherently Jewish, Christian and depends on natural law theory for it’s justification).
So far, I think you’ve made some good points. My favorite so far is how you said bondage can be part of mistrust AND trust. I thought immediately of the harness in a skydive. This indicates trust. I will think about this more.
But the punishment explanation you offered “punishment can also mean growth, rehabilitation and healing” is still not convincing to me.
I agree that discipline can sometimes accompany growth when the discipline is a correct match for the crime.
Could you offer an example of a disciplinary action in a Dom/Sub relationships that offers growth, rehabilitation and healing?
I can’t see physical discipline working as an adult response for an adult misbehaving. Maybe for a child (though I’m not an advocate of corporeal punishment with children either). I know entire countries disagree with me (Singapore’s caning comes to mind, but I also disagree with Singapore’s policy here). An example might help me.
Finally, your point “These symbols mean different things to different people” concerns me most because it could enter us both into solipsism (the idea that only one’s own mind exists).
I know we don’t both subscribe to this because we’re both engaged in apologetics here, trying to persuade the other to our point of view. We both have reasons for what we do and what we believe.
Is there a standard to which you subscribe? As I said in another comment above “I’m searching for a telos of the BDSMers beyond getting turned on. What’s the ultimate purpose, of BDSM?
The only way we can continue to produce more light than heat it so keep trying. I hope you will.
I absolutely agree with Jonalyn that we do not have to participate in something in order to know it is wrong.
I never participated with the nazi regime but I still know it was wrong.
I never participated with the nazi regime but I still know it was wrong.
The Nazi regime wasn’t kept among consenting adults.
Clarisse,
The analogy is not that BDSM is the same as the Nazi regime.
The analogy is that you do not have to experience something (either Nazism or BDSM) to find reasons for it being unhealthy or wrong.
Okay, yes, you can judge some activities to be wrong without participating. But can you judge activities among CONSENTING ADULTS to be wrong without participating? Personally, my answer is “no.” If you think the answer is “yes,” then we have a fundamental philosophical disagreement.
I will note that there are many nuances to consent. For example, in the example of Dom’s Daughter above, it sounds like her mother MIGHT be non-consensually pressuring the daughter to participate in her sexuality by watching. (But she also may not. I’m not clear on whether the mother has actually done BDSM in front of the daughter, or just mentioned the community once or twice. There’s a world of difference.)
Could you offer an example of a disciplinary action in a Dom/Sub relationships that offers growth, rehabilitation and healing?
Firstly, who gets to define “disciplinary”? Caning may seem like it’s “disciplinary” to you, but a lot of BDSMers do it purely for the sensation. Secondly, some BDSMers enact scenarios specifically to deal with trauma or other problems, and report success. Here’s a scholarly paper on the topic: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16803770
I will gladly email you the full paper if you drop me a line — my name at gmail dot com
Is there a standard to which you subscribe? As I said in another comment above “I’m searching for a telos of the BDSMers beyond getting turned on. What’s the ultimate purpose, of BDSM?
Why does there have to be an ultimate purpose other than pleasure and intimacy? Depending on your beliefs, you may feel that sexually-tinged pleasure and intimacy ought to be kept among married adults. Okay, fine, I disagree, but fine. But I’m guessing you don’t have a problem with married adults engaging in, say, oral sex. (If I’m wrong, then we probably have such significant disagreements about sexual morality that we can just stop now.) So: why is BDSM different?
Some people find a non-sexual purpose to BDSM, including but not limited to: catharsis, healing (as in the scholarly link I indicated above), self-analysis, and pushing one’s limits. Why does BDSM have to be seen as so different from activities such as: skydiving, competitive sports, talk therapy, sex among consenting adults, roller coaster rides, or the intense culture shock experienced by a Peace Corps volunteer? All those activities can be difficult to handle in the moment, intense, or even painful.
Clarisse,
You raise some good questions. My favorite is “who gets to define ‘disciplinary’?”
I think we may have some essential differences here, but since you are a Unitarian I think we can agree that some Creative Source of all Good, Creativity and Love exists, one that we both honor.
I call this Creative Source of all Good the God of Israel. You may not agree here, but since you asked who decides I’m going to lay my cards down.
I believe this God of Israel is good and has loved me so well that I want to love him back. I believe this God is the source of all good in me, therefore, I also worship the God of Israel.
As far as I can make out from the Jewish Scriptures, the human body is something the God of Israel says is beautiful, good and holy. The Jewish writer Paul goes on to say “your body is a temple.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10).
Anything I do with my body is so important to God because he took on human body (e.g. the miracle of the incarnation of Jesus). That means that what I do with my body matters not just to me and my consenting partner, but to God.
I worship a God who created sex and play, exhilaration and rushes of endorphins. I also worship a God who tells me that to enjoy my body to the max I must know I’m dealing with something sacred.
The rules of body-use in the Bible are this “glorify God with your body.” As far as I can tell it’s difficult to practice BDSM and glorify God.
Why?
I believe every major religion teaches us that something has gone wrong with our world. Buddhism says it’s ignorance, Islam says it’s rebellion, the God of Israel says it’s, in my terms, when we lift our middle finger to him and tell him to buzz off. The formal term for this is sin.
I believe we are made to be near to God, to talk and create and love with God and to be like God. This is what I believe Genesis 1:27 means when Moses wrote “God made human beings in his image, male and female.”
But sin means we don’t want to be near God, we don’t want his ideas messing with ours. Our compass doesn’t easily point north any more. We’ve lost our way. This affects all of us, our bodies and our souls (minds, will, emotion, desire, spirit, etc)
Therefore, I cannot ONLY rely on my pleasurable desires to guide me. To be honest, there is much in BDSM that does not make me squeamish. I can see a thrill-seeker like myself who gladly enters pain finding a niche in this movement.
However, my desires for pleasure are not as great as my desires to be near the source of Love.
I’m at a loss at how using my body for role play where I am choosing to act as less volitional than another human, where I let or inflict physically harm is glorifying the sacredness of my body and of God.
My telos for my body is glorifying and honoring God, showing the world what God is like in human form.
I cannot see how God would practice BDSM. So I don’t practice it.
Now, to take each of your examples in turn, how is BDSM any different from
1- skydiving’s telos: a useful skill in military or bail-out operations. Has a purpose beyond the thrill. Skydiving for pleasure? I don’t see physical pain being sealed into this adventure. But BDSM requires pain and humiliation (am I wrong on this point?)
2- competitive sport’s telos: winning a game, sportsmanship, virtue, cooperation. I don’t see physical pain being the goal, rather it’s a by-product. Would you say BDSM is a by-product of intimacy and catharsis? I thought BDSMers are into it FOR the pain.
3- talk therapy’s telos is clarity and knowledge about one’s psyche, correct? Pain is a by-product of physiological health, it is not sought out for the pain.
4- sex among consenting adults’ telos is threefold: procreation, recreation and unity. Pain is not a goal of sex.
5- roller coaster rides’ telos is pleasure, new experiences… this is probably my favorite example for you case. However, if a roller coaster offered the same pain as BDSM I would not be supportive of it.
6- culture shock telos is learning to listen, love and experience another culture. If the goal was simply pain I would not support it.
BDSM’s telos: – you’e mentioned catharsis, healing, self-analysis and pushing one’s limits. I say all of these would be dropped if the sexual exhilaration were missing. My point being, all of the above examples you’ve given from skydiving to culture shock of Peace Corps volunteers have purpose beyond sexual exhilaration. People would gladly continue them without the pleasurable/exhilaration part. Even roller coasters, which provide a fun place to make-out and see high sites.
But would you say BDSM is something you would continue to practice even if it offered no pleasurable experience?
How do you know you’re not making your desire your God, rather than the God of Love?
A couple “wrenches” for the thread “gears.”
1. It is unnecessary to participate or belong to something in order to exercise judgment or critique of something (as evidenced by counter-examples above), contra popular culture and pseudo-Christian views of “judgment.”
2. What is the status of an individual’s pathologies vis a vis their sex life? That is, how do you KNOW that your bedroom preferences are not pathologically driven, and therefore properly the subject of therapeutic work?
3. It would seem that the discussion has threatened the identity of some. If so, does this mean that our preferences are being “worn” too closely to who we are? That is, has something that should be peripheral to our identity become central, and is therefore evidence of “disorder”?
4. Is our attachment to our preferences so rigid that we are unwilling to revise our own views? If we feel that it is a threat to our well-being and identity, does this not indicate a pathological attachment to such things? That is, if it is not unhealthy in its own right, could it be unhealthy with respect to our relationship to it?
1. See above
2. Why is the burden of proof on me to demonstrate that my entirely consensual sexuality is not pathological? Shouldn’t the burden of proof be on you to demonstrate that it is?
3. Sex is very close to identity. I acknowledge that this can be problem, as many forms of identity politics are a problem. I invite you to read further on my blog about it, as for example here: http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2012/04/09/classic-repost-bdsm-as-a-sexual-orientation-and-complications-of-the-orientation-model/
4. When does something stop being a preference and become a need? Why should I have to give up something that has been joyful, life-affirming, and has created intimacy in my relationships? If my attachment to it is becoming unhealthy, then might that be partly because other people are so invested in telling me that I shouldn’t do it, and I’m getting defensive?
1. Not sure what I’m suppose to see “above”, but it is simply a principal of practical reason. Otherwise, the whole notion of critique and moral and practical judgment is, at best, a fiction. Shut down the universities, if such is the case.
2. This is not a burden of proof challenge–only you can know if your “orientation” is pathological or not. This is an invitation to occupy “contemplative space” in order to be open to the real reasons “that reason knows not,” as it were.
3. With respect to the article, frequent reference is made to what “feels” right or good. The emotive domain is a poor indicator of truth. It cannot tell us what “is” or what is “right”, but only tells us what about our own inner states. That is, feeling something to be right is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for it “being” right. Moreover, in terms of seeing these patterns of desires over your past experiences as evidence of a consistent disposition through time requires that you possess the proper hermeneutic to interpret such a pattern. Any number of meanings could be ascribed to such experiences/past desire sets. Are the you the best judge of something as “deep” as you’ve placed this? Do you have such a well-developed and sophisticated self-awareness? This is why therapeutic work or contemplative space is needed to investigate these matters. Also, why is the connection between sexuality/preference and identity facilitated by emotion? Why should we ground identity in something as fickle as the emotive domain?
4. Joyfulness, life affirming…aren’t these arbitrary criteria for deciding moral truth? What justifies such a criteria? Never mind trying to define life-affirming in a non-circular way. Are we to accept these a priori, without any justification? Wouldn’t this be the same as telling an atheist “God exists, it requires no proof, so shut up and deal with it!”
Overall, the research is, by my lights, rather dubious. The very idea of empirical measures for the “healthiness” of actions is dubious, and whether or not one could operationalize a conceptual definition once agreed upon is another matter. Moreover, empirical studies must be used carefully in how they are applied to the ethical questions. Deriving an “ought” from an “is” is chief among the intellectual “sins” regarding issues of this sort.
One other note: because BDSM is a historical phenomena does not answer the question of the normativity of such behavior. This is known as the genetic fallacy.
regards
Last: *Naturalistic fallacy*
I work in a faith-based strongholds & addiction program & I see the distinction as being when the thing you desire has control over you rather than you controlling the thing you desire ~ it becomes an addiction. The first analogy that popped into my head was OCD. There’s nothing wrong with washing our hands. In fact, it’s a necessary thing. However, if I feel COMPELLED to wash my hands for purposes other than cleanliness…or even for cleanliness’ sake but to excess, particularly if I MUST wash my hands every X number of minutes, that is unhealthy. When the desire to do something is the sole, exclusive or determining factor, it goes beyond desire to “need”. I would compare this to any other addiction in that if BDSM is the ONLY way sex can be pleasurable, it indicates that BDSM is the goal, rather than the tool to achieving the goal, in much the same way that a stimulant goes from being the tool to achieving a “high” to becoming the “high” itself.
fascinating observation, Stephanie! I hope Clarisse will respond.
What is there to respond to? You folks continue to compare BDSM to an addiction, to a pathology, to a sin, etc. While I appreciate the apparent attempts to “be nice” about it, everything you’re saying is the same face of BDSM stigma that I’m already familiar with and I’ve written about countless times. I’m not going to defend BDSM when the people involved aren’t getting anything valuable out of it — the same way I wouldn’t defend sex, or a marriage, or a job, or whatever if the person involved wasn’t getting anything valuable out of it. Sometimes people can use sex, BDSM, work, or any other life activity in ways that are not positive for them.
The problem here is that so many of you are insisting that there CAN’T be anything valuable to BDSM. If it’s important to you to sit in judgment like that, then nothing I say is going to change your mind.
Again, I’ve given you all the information I can. Only you can educate yourselves from here.
OK. Put bluntly, your case is unconvincing.
The situation is thus: you have a powerful, felt, near-identity based need to participate in sexual acts based on fantasies of unequal power distribution and pain, such that were you to give up such a practice, you would not be a “whole” person(?)
A.T., I disagree. I personally found Clarisse quite compelling. She was trying to share. Trying. She wasn’t an argument to deconstruct. She was a person sharing her story, her thoughts, her experiences. Sometimes I really hate philosophy. It seems like it often makes the art of truly listening almost impossible.
Clarisse,
Just finished reading this helpful article distinguishing proper BDSM from Fifty Shades of Gray. http://www.blogher.com/troubling-message-fifty-shades-grey
So far I can’t see how it changes my perspective that BDSM still disrupts mutuality within marriage, that BDSM uses humiliation to get turned on and that BDSM is a upper-class “first world problem” as I wrote in this post.
However, the point that not all BDSMers are victims of abuse is something I want to learn more about. How can we know this? How do you go about finding this to be true?
It’s led me to want to ask you for another sort of article. Since Christian Gray proved to be a poor example of a good Dominant, could you reply to this comment with a few blogs or articles by good Dominants, ones who share how sexual abuse is not part of their past and how their desire to hurt or abuse women is not part of their fantasies?
I’d like to read this perspective.
Did you read the Psychology of S&M article that I linked at the top? Here’s the link again:
http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2012/05/07/the-psychology-of-sm/
I hope the question doesn’t come off as rude; I only ask because this is the second time you’ve asked a question that I answered there. Here’s a large, well-designed academic survey that gives evidence that BDSM desires do not correlate with abuse, and which I cited in the Psychology of S&M post:
http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/bondage-lovers-normal-maybe-even-happier/story-e6frfkp9-1111117296864
On your other question, here’s an article I wrote recently about male dominance:
http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2012/04/20/50-shades-of-grey-fight-club-and-the-complications-of-male-dominance/
This conversation is pushing a lot of my buttons, so one more thing, and then I’ll wait for some of my previous comments to come out of moderation:
You talked about “third world problems.” With respect, have you spent time in the third world? I spent a year in sub-Saharan Africa working on HIV, and my major conclusion was that sexual stigma is killing people there, the same way it’s killing people here, and people have plenty of “weird” sexuality going on. Africans aren’t that different from us. I wrote some articles about my experiences that are findable by Google.
Hello Clarisse,
I have spent time in developing countries, Mexico, Nicaragua. I’ve read extensively as well, especially about Africa.
What do you meant by sexual stigma is killing people? Do you mean lack of education? fear or sex? misinformation about sex?
or judgment that some sexual stuff is good and some is wrong?
I’d say that all those things can be factors, yes. Some sexual stuff IS definitely bad (nonconsensual tops my list) but I think that when some sexualities are assumed bad from the start, and the people who practice them are stigmatized, it’s a bad situation all around. Abuse and ill health thrives in secrecy, which is what stigmatized populations tend to create.
Glad you made this point. I could not agree more about secrecy being THE environment to produce shame and self hatred.
Yes, I did read it. So far I can’t see it helping me understand that BDSM is good.
You see, the existence of the Psychological practice that be citing a behavior as good or bad is not sufficient grounds for me to agree that it is good or bad. As you pointed out, the DSM is fickle. One decade they are against one thing and the next decade they find it to be good.
I’m not a fan of populism (if the majority agrees then it’s morally right) as I’m sure you’re not either. I tend to base my ethics on natural law, scripture, reason, logic and research.
The article pointed out that there is no correlation between BDSMers and anxiety or unhappiness. THat’s a great finding but it doesn’t mean BDSM is good, not in my mind. I need more than absence of anxiety and happiness to rubber stamp something as healthy.
For example, I might feel anxiety free and happy when I torture my cat, that doesn’t mean the activity is healthy.
Please do not make the jump from this analogy that I’m comparing BDSM to cat torture.
I will read up on this post on male dominance, too. Thank you!
Torturing your cat would also be nonconsensual!
So far you have testimonials from actual BDSMers saying that we find the activity joyful and intimate, as well as testimonials from actual BDSMers that it has helped them process and recover from and get away from an abusive history, as well as evidence that it doesn’t arise from abuse or correlate to abusive history or negative experiences. I’ve given you all the resources I can — if you go through my whole blog, and click every link and read every book, and still come up believing that BDSM ought to be condemned, then I just have nothing else to say to you. Good luck in your research.
Your dedication here to be clear and honest has been a gift, Clarisse. Thank you for sharing yourself.
And, in terms of “first world problems”: there’s plenty of evidence that people enjoy BDSM activities in sex in other parts of the world. Your experience of BDSM involves costumes etc, but most people’s doesn’t. It’s hard to come by documentation of sexual practices — but the Leather Archives & Museum, located in Chicago, notes historical evidence of BDSM that goes back to the time of cave paintings. Seriously. I also recommend the blog Kink Research Overviews. Incidentally, tons of references are available here, where I link Kink Research:
http://clarissethorn.com/blog/bdsm-resources/
As for mutuality within marriage, a lot of people find that BDSM increases mutuality within relationships because they get better at communicating when they find it. You yourself linked to a post called “Not Your Usual BDSM And Abuse Story.”
As for humiliation … you’ve already found several things that bother you to look at, and I’ve reframed those things. Why is it so hard to accept that things that look a certain way TO YOU may not be experienced that way by people who are using those tropes as part of BDSM?
Good to know more about the history of BDSM. I’ll refer to my longer comment involving who gets to decide to answer your latter question.
As far as mutuality being increased by BDSM I believe I’ve answered that above. If painful experiences bond people together (I’ve learned that in psychology) then it’s not a wonder to me that BDSM’s experiences do that. My question is if it’s the best, or a good way to bond people together.
Again I refer to how we decide what is good and true and beautiful by my earlier response which involves me talking about the God of Israel.
Thank you, Jonalyn…
“My question is if it’s the best, or a good way to bond people together.”
I think that is the crux of my thought, I was having trouble figuring out how to phrase it without sounding condescending or rude, particularly in text…the one thing I dislike about reading/writing is that inflection/tone/emphasis are sometimes difficult.
I agree, I do not want to be condescending or rude here. But I also want to seek the best, most thrilling, most fun, most unique to how we were designed to function in sex ways to make love with our spouse.
So far I cannot see how BDSM fulfills our unique function as image-beares reflecting God.
I think the best article that sums up how BDSMers can use physical pain and humiliation to foster intimacy is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UILg_iLHo68&feature=plcp
A lot of interesting perspectives here. I’ve always struggled with the word “submit” in the Bible especially as it refers to wives, and often when I hear a pastor or Sunday School teacher tell us gals to “submit” it brings up a mental image of being a Submissive. Two entirely different things! I give my take on what the Bible says about submitting here: http://nosleeptillkindergarten.blogspot.com/2012/05/godly-submission.html
Emily,
I liked reading your post. It’s true that “submit” has been hijacked and makes people (especially younger ones) think the gospel is telling women (and men in Eph 5:21) to act like beaten dogs. In fact some young folks in our house church said precisely that.
And then there’s the BDSM angle, where you imagine a naked, hand-cuffed woman. Both are not what God had in mind, which makes me wonder if a better word could be introduced?
Any ideas?
I wish I knew a different word. I like the Amplified Bible’s use of the word, “adapt”. I’ll willingly adapt to a loving, trusting, Christ-like man and come under the example of his strong leadership. I definitely won’t be bound, subdued, or beaten
I’d be curious to find an accurate (read: non-biased) source for the etymology of the original Greek.
I made the mistake of googling “original Greek words for submit” and found a very creepy Christian Domestic Discipline website which advocated “spanking if necessary, for a wife who refuses to obey.” Ick.
Emily,
I’ve heard ‘adapt’ too, but I don’t like it either. I actually think BDSMers get at one part of the meaning of submission – it’s to choose of your own accord, without coercion.
Submit in the Greek is in a verb form which indicates “to do it to yourself.” Not to force the wife to submit. Submit is something only you can do for yourself.
Of course, I also believe husbands are to submit themselves, to choose to submit to their wives.
But I think submit means more “ceding the right to be right” or “letting someone else win the argument” more than it means to roll over and put your paws in the air.
I’ve also heard of this icky spanking the wife idea for women who refuse to obey. Doesn’t it seem non-consenting?
But even if the wife did consent, I would say she has a low view of her own dignity.
However, here’s a question I believe Clarisse would ask, “What if the wife felt intimacy in the spanking?”
“What if the wife felt all this attention and happiness in the spanking?”
It’s the line I’m noticing BDSMers are using again and again, “If adults want it, who are you to say, NO!”
I want to hear what you think…
While I like the thought of adapting (to Christ, as in the example set by one’s husband, and to Christ directly as well), you’re right that it isn’t entirely an accurate translation. Unfortunately in English there isn’t a really great word that encompasses what that means. Without going into a tangent about the historical context, it’s important to remember that in the population to whom Paul was writing, women were not allowed to study religion along with the men. So, the only example they had of Christ WAS their husbands. I take that to mean that those of us who are less mature in the faith should heed the example of (submit to) those who are more mature, regardless of gender. In a marriage, submission totally has to be a willing/mutual thing. It’s interesting that you mentioned the husband also submitting to the wife-it’s noteworthy that the traditional wedding vows include “love, honor and OBEY” for BOTH spouses. In a perfect embodiment of the relationship between God and His Church, the husband would sacrificially love and lead his wife and she would sacrificially love and adapt to him. Being educated women who are offered a place at the table in the Church, it’s hard for us to imagine how this would play out if we fit into that ancient audience of Paul’s. Whether you call it submission or sacrifice, it is carried out in the same way. It’s the attitude, not the wording, that defines it. I really think it is less about a hierarchy between the two spouses, and more about the hierarchy between God and Humankind.
Emily,
That’s an interesting take (immature in learning need to listen to mature ones) on submit. I take a similar line for interpreting 1 Tim 2, that the attitude of a learning must be quietness and submission to those who know more, or else you’re not learning.
Here’s a challenge for you: how do you determine who is mature and who is immature in Christ? What measuring tools would you use?
And one more challenge, what verses do you lean on to find that the husband is supposed to lead his wife? I have not found enough scripture for this belief anymore in my theology, but I’m open to hearing some if you have one.
At the risk of articulating my thoughts very very poorly, here goes.
As to how spiritual maturity is determined, I think the easiest answer is the fruits of the spirit. That said, I’ve certainly gleaned much wisdom and insight from people who are brand-new in the faith, and those who aren’t even Christians. Personally, I’d choose my spiritual mentor/leader based on how the “fruits” are exemplified in that person’s life.
I also think we can’t write off intuition or “gut feelings”-sometimes you just connect with someone and can’t help but want to be like them, regardless of how many boxes they can check off the spiritual fruit list.
As to husbands being the leaders of the family: That is definitely something I wrestle with. Especially since spending so many, many years as a single mother and being both mom and dad to my daughters. I don’t find any Scripture (outside of the epistles which, again, are culturally and historically slanted) that points to the husband as qualified to be the head based on gender alone. However, I find a consistent pattern of the man being in a position of leadership, beginning in Genesis and throughout the OT. For me it’s not about value or hierarchy or authority. It’s about order. Jesus said there is no male or female under Him, that pretty much covers it. The Bible calls it sacrifice for husbands and submission for wives, but in execution don’t they both look remarkably the same? It’s an attitude-whatever you want to call it, it’s all about setting aside ourselves and coming under the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and loving one another as He did-giving completely of Himself. I’ll call it submission for the purposes of relating to those who adhere to a more conservative version of the faith, but in my own heart, mind, and marriage, it plays out very much the same way as does my husband’s sacrificial love.
Emily,
I love your points about looking to the fruits of the spirit to gauge maturity. I think that’s a lot more reliable than church attendance, for instance.
I think the most helpful idea about the husband is the head is to re-consider that this is a metaphor, not a role. In other words, just as “head” can mean authority in some passages, it can also mean source (headwaters of a river) in other passages. So it helps to consider that head may mean more of an organic dependence on the body (wife) than it means the boss or leader.
I’ve found that the man is not put over the woman until they sin in Gen 3. In fact the judgment “and he shall rule over you (woman)” seems to indicate that the woman was not under the man UNTIL they sinned. I wrote more about this in Ruby Slippers the book, last chapter.
Wondering what you do with Ephesians 5:21 where Paul says that all members are to submit to each other?
I agree with you that submission and sacrificial love are often the same thing. I’ve found the role reversal of Ruth proposing to Boaz a good example of that. Ruth sacrificially loving Boaz, and Boaz submitting to her idea.
Glad to hear you thoughts on this.
Jonalyn,
Interesting dialogue going on. I’ve been following it and have a few random thoughts.
While I can see a non-Christian participating in BDSM, I can’t see how a Christian can participate in this lifestyle. How can one submit fully to Jesus when their focus is either dominating a person or being a submissive to a person. Shouldn’t our focus be on becoming more like Jesus?
What about cutters? That’s an example of a “therapeutic” activity that causes pain. It’s done by a “consenting adult” and no one thinks that’s a good kind of pain. in fact many cutters seek help.
Didn’t Jesus die for, not just our sin, but to make us whole again? Doesn’t that include everything from personality traits that dont line up with his character to proclivities that aren’t beneficial for us? Aren’t we supposed to give up our desires in order to seek what he desires for us? I’m sure there are many things I could explore and find that I enjoy that may not be the best for me. As someone who wants to be more like Jesus my explorations have boundaries and BDSM pushes those boundaries.
Just some random thoughts.
Thanks Jonalyn!
Julia, I had the same thought. I draw a distinctive line between light role-play done in a fun spirit vs. a full-on BDSM lifestyle…the former could completely fit in to a solid, God-honoring marriage, IMO, while the latter would be impossible to mesh with a truly Christian lifestyle. It seems to me the argument isn’t whether or not BDSM is “OK”, which sounds judgemental and legalistic, but rather, does it fit into a Christian marriage? (Emphasis on Christian) It is not possible, IMO, to honor God while degrading and humiliating one made in His image. And I’d extend that statement to apply to the willing, consensual submissive as well as the dom, because if you truly love your neighbor as yourself that means you love yourself as your neighbor. Allowing oneself to be degraded is equivalent in God’s eyes to degrading another.
Jules,
I think your comparison to cutters is very apt. Cutters clearly “get” something from their activity, they feel release, they feel even adrenaline and peace. They’re consenting and if they’re adults the comparison seems a good one to BDSM.
I also think of the situation of anorexic and bulimic people, they are also often consenting and find anxiety reducing happiness in controlling all they eat, even to the damage of their bodies.
To use Clarisse’s argument, as long as consenting adults do it, as long as happiness and lowered anxiety levels can be reported it sounds like she does not want to hear the problems with the activity.
Currently the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Disorders) does not call BDSM a disorder, but I’m assuming it calls bulimia and anorexia a disorder.
What about cutting?
And, a further question for all you ethicists out there. Do we rely on the DSM to determine psychological health when their tools for judgement are happiness and anxiety reduction?
What if a bulimic felt most happy, less anxious and most in control of her life while she was starving herself to death? Who are we to speak against it, if it’s a consenting adult?
I believe there are other tools to judge an activity as good: virtue, for instance.
Do we rely on the DSM to determine psychological health when their tools for judgement are happiness and anxiety reduction?….
This year the DSM wanted to or did (can’t remember) add SHYNESS as a disorder. :O
They also wanted to do away with MUCH or ALL of the “Autism Spectrum Disorders”. As a parent of a child on the “Autism Spectrum” the BIGGEST reason I see for that is MONEY ~ federal money, state money, insurance money…MONEY, MONEY, MONEY! By eliminating ASD’s they’re eliminating BILLIONS in services to people who CAN’T afford them otherwise.
As a Christian, I’d have to say I’m more than a little skeptical about simply accepting as accurate statements & assertions that are made by people or organizations that are non-Christian and/or do not have/live by Biblical standards. We live in a society that has virtually eliminated absolute truth. It’s no wonder then, that there are now so many behaviors that must be absolved by calling them a disease or disorder so as to justify the behavior.
Some good points here, Stephanie. Thank you.
I would still like to meet a BDSMer who practices and still believes in absolute truth and the God of Israel as revealed in Scripture.
Agreed with the comparison to cutting and eating disorders. Being married to a recovered alcoholic, I draw some similarities there, too. My husband certainly felt anxiety release, even happiness, when he drank, and he was a consenting adult and he never endangered anyone else. However I think we can agree that that was not a God-honoring lifestyle. There was a comment above about BDSM’ers finding their identity on the lifestyle, and if we call it immoral that strips away their identity. Another comment about us judging morality based on our “framework”. To me, this isn’t about judging morality for others, it’s about finding one’s own identity in Christ and not in the world. Once that’s accomplished, there is no judgement or condemnation, and God will begin to reveal if one’s lifestyle is God-honoring or not. That being said, I CAN judge for myself and in my own life if something is in line with MY morals. BDSM is not.
Recently I learned that BDSM is so linked to people’s identity that to call it wrong feels erasing to them. While this concerns me, it doesn’t stop me from sharing if I think something is wrong. I still believe in objective morality for all times and all places and all people.
I think what’s at stake in this discussion is the freedom to call someone else’s choice wrong.
BDSMers in this post have called me wrong for calling them wrong.
We all have things we think are wrong. We all have morality we want others to agree with.
What we need is love and respect as we share what we think is right or wrong.
I think while you’ve stated the point is “finding one’s identity in Christ and not in the world”, this is the ultimate goal in your moral framework. I agree that we can ask God to guide us into what is God-honoring or not and he will help us.
However, I tend to also believe that God doesn’t command things as right or wrong willy-nilly, rather he gives us reasons for what is good or evil. He loves for us to love him with our minds enough to make sense of his commands.
That said, I think it would be very interesting to hear from a Christian BDSMer, to find out if they have some reasons we can listen in on for why S&M is good in their life.
p.s. Emily I think this comparison of BDSM with alcoholism is a worthy one to consider. Thanks for sharing.
Hi,
I’ve just read most of the above discussion. I’m not interested in S&M in my own personal life,
but it certainly appears compatible with an intense Christian religious life (as are many other complicated rituals of working with and through desire).
Let me make some general comments.
First and most basically, the discussion above seems, oddly enough, quite secular in its
insistence that the best and most Godly use of sexuality is as a kind of vanilla moment in
relationships, encouraging spousal bonding, encouraging a simple celebration of the body…
Surely that has its place, but when it comes to other appetites faith encourages us
to complicate the picture.
For instance we fast and we pay attention to the discomfort of fasting.
We might get up early to pray. Or give more than we can afford.
We might even allow others to help us set these boundaries and keep them —
Why necessarily assume sexuality is different?
Perhaps, to the contrary, it’s our sex obsessed culture whispering that sex is an original pleasure not to be missed, not to be trifled with, not to be used as an experimental way
of getting close to God.
…just as in our food obsessed culture, fewer and fewer people truly fast, and tell themselves the only healthy alternative is four to six small meals a day.
What about people who, in moments of intense prayer, feel something akin to the wounds of Christ? What about, say, St Teresa for the Catholics? St Francis and the stigmata?
What’s the nature of ecstasy and how is the erotic implicated here (as disinguished
from, say, the sexual)?
Why do you assume that people who are able to mix pain and pleasure, and ask another to help them in this endeavor, necessarily focus their attention on that other person, and not ultimately on God?
So pain is not an absolute evil, but a relative one? That is, pain is acceptable if it is in the context of pursuing a greater good? With this I agree…
The central question is whether or not sex via BDSM is a greater good.
Also, could having an “affair” be an experimental way of getting closer to God?
There is a great deal of ends/means material here, but it is too unclear at this point to comment further…
Andrea,
Very meaty discussion you’ve introduced. I’m thankful for these points.
Bringing faith, faith traditions and worship into this discussion requires we become clearer about which God we’re pursuing. If God is more like my Dom than like my Husband than the things I do to get close to God will be very different.
Paul talks about buffeting his body so he might finish the race, we read about fasts and vigils and wearing very impractical, uncomfortable clothing (sackcloth and ashes), all in the pursuit of
honoring God.
So we know some goods can be pursued even when pain is part and parcel of their goodness. But what of pursuing pain for pain’s sake?
What we do with our body tells us what we think of God’s ideas of pain.
Can you give some specific examples to BDSM in how, for instance, whipping a human body helps this person honor God?
Could you clarify a little bit…
1- Why is celebrating intimacy and a value of the body more secular than Christian? How is intimacy a secular goal rather than a religions one?
2- Are you thinking in Gnostic spiritual terms that the spirit is more important to God than the body? As far as I can see Christianity cannot demote the spirituality of the body due to the resurrection of the dead as an essential doctrine. If I’ve misunderstood your meaning of secular please clarify.
3- How is protecting sexuality from BDSM as an original pleasure hedging it from use as a means to know God? I believe making love can be the best way we experience God’s desire for pleasure in our lives. I believe we can enter sex knowing we are experiencing erotic and ecstatic union that God shares, that God knows even deeper. I do not see sex as a separate activity from knowing God.
What I see you suggesting is a potential for using sex as a spiritual discipline. Even the word “discipline” seems to work into BDSM perfectly.
But permission to use sex as a spiritual training for our souls doesn’t give us permission to treat another human being or request to be treated as less human (yes, I’m suggesting that the role-play of Dom and Sub are sub-human roles as they require one human to act less valuable, less knowledgeable, less powerful than God created them to be).
To use the example of fasting, I can illustrate my point perhaps more clearly. I can use food, for instance, to deny my body, but to use food to motivate or train another human, even with their position seems abusive. It crosses purposes of the ultimate design of Food, Human Power and God. To choose to deny food for my own fast is very different from an enforced fast by others. Even if requested by me. I think the enforced fast of someone else does different, and I’d say harming, work in my soul compared to a volitional fast.
A fascinating thought that sex is a way to get close to God especially when using another human to “keep us accountable”
I’ve never seen accountability structures as a good means of growing an adult soul, it appears in my experience and observation to be a crutch of fear, motivating someone rather than personal work to re-structure our desires, will and beliefs. I don’t see accountability models in Scripture, even though it’s replete in Christian culture.
The control in BDSM feels a lot more like a replacement model for God (human Dom becoming a demigod or parental figure) than a means to know God better.
Or maybe you’re suggesting the Dom as a surrogate for the Sub to learn trust? For example: a Sub cannot trust others. They find a Dom who teaches them to trust. They can thereby cultivate trust in God?
Am I picking up what you’re putting down?
Beautiful examples of St Teresa, St Francis, thank you for suggesting some models for mixing erotic and ecstasy. I’d love to get your working definition of erotic as distinguished from sexual.
Glad you commented.
It seems like there is the question, is the practice of bdsm best for me…and then there is the question, is it best for you? The one is asking something that is my business. The second question is not, unless I have been specifically asked or it is nonconsensual. The Christian practice of speaking freely about what other adults may or may not do with their sexuality has run its course in our culture, and produced nothing pretty. I think such topics are best handled w kid gloves, due to the climate.
Andrea raises excellent points. I do not practice bdsm, but I have seen the sub’s heart cry for pain many times over in Christian practices and thought. Its not being practicrd in the bedroom…its being practiced in the devotional life. How many people through the ages have known God as their dom?
Thinker,
What a mind-shattering thought–that many Christians have experienced God as their Dom…
When I read The Da Vinci code I knew I needed to do more reading on the use of pain for meditation and devotion, even more intentional pain.
Any recommendations?
As far as Scripture goes, I can see passages that connect pain with growth, even intentional discomfort with growth (fasting, Jesus’ disciples attempt at vigil all night before the crucifixion), but what about blending sex and pain?
If a Christian pursues pain to get close to God, does this make her more reverent or confused about God’s capacity to be approached?
If it is okay to blend pain with spirituality in order to experience more pleasure and more intensity, why is it not potentially okay to blend pain with sexuality in order to experience more pleasure and more intensity?
(Many consider BDSM to be much like being gay—as in, it is a sexual orientation that some people are just wired for. Therefore the vanilla person isn’t going to desire it or understand it, because it wouldn’t ever work for them. Hence it doesn’t make a lot of sense to say, “Well it would be awful for me so that makes it wrong,” because of course you wouldn’t like it if you aren’t wired in that way. Just some thoughts to add to the conversation).
If it is okay to have God for a Dom (or, is it?), why is it not okay to have a human for a Dom?
I knew a man who was heavily involved in the BDSM community and he said it was the most loving and accepting community he had ever experienced. We talked in detail and I really had my mind opened up to some things I had never considered possible. Contrast that with the community that many conservative Christians have…
He heard my story about growing up in hyper-fundamentalism and said it sounded a lot like BDSM…except without the fun and pleasure and the equality. He was outraged that anyone would force another human to obey or view them as being born into a sub/Dom position due to gender, etc.
Imagine my surprise…to have an active BDSM person morally outraged at the faith I grew up with. It was a bit mind-blowing.
I don’t know how much you have read of the Mystics, but many mystics have had a Dom relationship with God…and attempt to help others experience the same. Take Madame Guyon, for example.
I recently read about a brain imaging study (unfortunately, I don’t remember where) where they found that spiritual ecstasy and sexual ecstasy occur in the exact same brain location. It explains so much. How different are spiritual ecstasy and sexual ecstasy, really?
Should God be my Dom? Personally, I don’t think that would be healthy for me and I wasn’t intending to promote that idea. It was more a suggestion that we often have an easy time telling other people what to do with their sex lives, while being fairly blind to very similar practices in our own lives. It’s the old, “let’s remove the beam before we pick at the mote.”
When we applaud and desire spiritual BDSM in our faith heroes and in ourselves, when we have a faith that considers God-as-Dom-and-self-as-sub as a positive and worthy pursuit, isn’t that more worthy of our attention and reflection than telling consenting adults that they cannot be glorifying God when they have sex in ways that we personally wouldn’t choose for ourselves? That is what I thought when I read the initial post.
The “vanilla person”? I’m not sure if I’ve just been slammed.
Blessings,
Tim
No slam. Vanilla is a term that refers to conventional sex, no BDSM/kink.
Thinker,
I can’t speak for the other commentors, but I am not arguing that “BDSM would be awful for me” therefore it’s wrong. In fact, I am not turned off or disgusted by BDSM, I can very easily see the appeal (as I’ve shared above in my dialog with Clarisse).
Moral theory to be worth it’s salt cannot be reduced to wrong = ewww and right meaning applause. Moral or ethical theory must stand up beyond our emotional states, or else it gives us nothing to stand on save culturally conditioned eww-o-meter. Yes, I just coined that word. And as you’ve pointed out, we might feel eww for things that are not good to feel eww about.
The gay population has felt a lot of the “eww” response, but that doesn’t mean their lifestyle is wrong. There are other reasons for those who believe homoerotic behavior is wrong, reasons besides an emotional or visceral response. I am arguing against BDSM based on natural law, egalitarianism, feminism, and some scripture, not based on an “eww-factor.”
But back to BDSM.
Loved hearing the story of your friend who experienced love, sensitivity and trust in his BDSM community. That is significant, but his good experience and your awful experience in Christian culture does not prove one is good and the other is bad. I know really loving, sensitive atheists.
I still believe their reasons for not believing in God aren’t whole, true or beautiful pictures of this world and the workings in it.
I love and have read many mystics, but not read Madame Guyon, could you direct me to which work of hers represents God as Dom?
I’m saddened to hear that you think my concerns about BDSM are on par with the hypocrisy Jesus was speaking up against in Matt 7. I do not see myself believing in spiritual BDSM. How do you see my beliefs as hypocritical? Or perhaps you intended this comment in another way.
I don’t intend to tell consenting adults how to run their sex lives. I don’t want to change laws or shame people into feeling unworthy. But I do think God wants us to learn as best we can what is good, true, beautiful so we know best how to love and enjoy our lives and the men and women we meet on this earth.
I am still open to talking with and learning more about Christian ideas of BDSM.
Speaking of which, I think I’ve found the jackpot in terms of sources for Christian BDSM, aka Sexual Mastery http://www.christiansandbdsm.com/christian-bdsm/sexmastery.html
Jonalyn,
The comment about “if it’s awful for me, it must be awful for you” was not meant for you but was in reference to comments that said they would not feel a loving connection with their partner if BDSM activities were a part of their sex life. It was also not meant to be offensive. I was just trying to add some information to the conversation that they may not have been aware of.
“I am arguing against BDSM based on natural law, egalitarianism, feminism, and some scripture, not based on an “eww-factor.””
Some gentle push-back. In an egalitarian society, those who want to practice BDSM, of their own free will and based upon their status of equal, would be able to do so. BDSM does not presuppose innate inequality.
In a feminist society, those who wanted to practice BDSM would also be able to do so. Because feminism is about choice, at its heart. If a woman likes to be a Dom and has a partner who likes to be a sub in their sexual relationship…an egalitarian society and a feminist society would approve and allow such a thing.
Now, what exactly “natural law” (universal truths) is will not necessarily be agreed upon by all, but if natural law speaks to the implicit equality of humans and speaks to the freedom of choice each human is allowed (barring that freedom does not impinge upon another humans freedom of choice), then…it seems that natural law would also support BDSM as a valid sexual choice.
Scripture, on the other hand, is perhaps different. And we all know that we can use Scripture to support or decry almost anything that we want with. That said, BDSM seems like a fairly simple one to easily shoot to bits with Scripture. It’s especially easy because BDSM is something most of us really don’t like or understand how anyone else could like it. This makes it extra simple to find an audience that appreciates our “deft” use of Scripture to blow it to bits. (I speak as one who has many times used Scripture to do such things). Just some thoughts.
Madame Guyon’s autobiography would be a good choice. I think you will really enjoy it. I personally resonate with much of her passion for God. There is this “smell” to it, though, for lack of a better word, that I often find in many Christian works. It could easily be defined as a Dom/sub relationship with God. It involves self-abasement in ways that I personally do not think are healthy or good.
If we are made in the image of God, then we are beings with incredible innate power. The model that says, “I am Nothing and you are All,” denies the All who made us Something. How much better to say, “I would be Nothing but You who are All have breathed into me your All. Teach me how to use it.”
As for hypocrisy and the beam and mote comment, I was not intending that as a personal statement towards you. I truly apologize if it came out that way. I do think it is a very important piece of the puzzle, though. Beam-and-mote is probably a crucial verse for all apologetic actions. Shooting holes in other people’s stuff is one of the easiest things on the planet to do. Turning that same critical eye upon our own stuff is a whole different ball game, and I think that’s what the beam-and-mote passage points out so well. Apply the same standards to yourself that you do for others. If you are going to critique another in such-n-such area, first critique yourself in the same manner. I believe it is a very difficult but very important spiritual practice. I certainly have ample room for growth, but I’m working hard on it.
So in that line of thought, BDSM is easy to pick on. It’s strange, it’s outrageous, it is titillating and as a result, it is an easy target. The beam in our own eye is the way we so easily warp the concept of the sacrificial lamb into a BDSM-like relationship with God.
I used to have this up on my wall:
“Though He slay me I will trust,
Praise Him even from the dust,
Prove and tell it as I prove,
Thine unutterable love.”
I believe I used that line from Spurgeon in a spiritual-BSDM like way. My situation was so unpleasant that I couldn’t wait for heaven so that I could be done with this life…yet I stayed and I constantly sought to bring God glory in my suffering. I quoted those four lines often. I had them up on my wall. They held me up many days. I believed I was a worm in that dust, that my righteousness was as filthy rags, that my own paths and my own thoughts were not to be trusted, and that my role to bear the Cross gladly if that is what my Dom, I mean, my God, laid upon my back.
Those who gave me counsel affirmed and praised this attitude. Books that I went to for advice affirmed that attitude. When I began to make choices for myself and made steps to change my situation, they viewed it as shrugging off the bloody Cross that God wanted me to bear for Him. A good Christian accepts pain from God and finds pleasure in bearing it, because that is our place as lowly humans.
Madame Guyon provides an excellent living example of this, but I do not say that to pick on the mystics (who I love). It is a theme written through much of our Christian history and theology, something I believe we are so used to seeing that it is almost invisible. It blocks our vision, implanted snugly in our cornea like that, and is a faaaar bigger threat to spiritual development than the rare Christian couple who wonders about bringing sexual BDSM into their lives.
My thoughts, my opinions, likely going way off topic.
Thinker,
I appreciate you clarifying. In order to balance the intellectual pursuit of good ideas along with our own personal hurts, hungers and hopes I think it is quite difficult to know when to call people out on their judgmental attitudes in these comments.
My observation is that all of us are judgmental about something, it just depends on what. What is most indicative to me of a large soul plugged into deep wisdom is when I read a comment that admits error, that asks forgiveness, that attempts to try to re-explain.
You’ve done that here, thank you.
I’m still processing all that this BDSM conversation has unveiled.
Pushing gently again back again
- egalitarianism teaches essential equality. I agree that BDSM doesn’t teach inequality, but it practices it. I think my value of the body, the human body has grown to the point that I can no longer believe that “What I do with my body doesn’t affect my soul.” In fact I think that’s gnosticism and a de-valuing of my humanness. That said, playing at inequality especially when it involves tools that symbolize oppression and domination cannot, in my mind, have a egalitarian affect on our bodies (and souls.) Rather it will have the opposite affect. It would be much like a child playing a slave every time he came home. Wouldn’t this slave role end up molding his own beliefs and even his identity?
- feminism
- feminism in my understanding is not as much about choice as it is about equality. But we may simply disagree on this one. Again my point about acting in unequal roles for a sexual identity and for sexual union and how this affects our very beliefs about ourselves.
You’ve shared and so has Clarisse that consenting adults makes the unequal power roles of Sub Com permissible. Consenting adults isn’t enough for me to hold up and revere a practice as good.
Consider how consenting adults support each other in starving themselves (again I think of the mystics in this one). I think of cutting as another good example. The reason we think these consenting adults need help and therapy is because we judge what they’re doing as not good. They want to cut themselves, for instance, and we think this is actually a coping mechanism, a damaging mechanism. Do we go blasting in and take all their razor blades away? Do we lambast them as evil people.
That is not what I would advocate. However, I would still argue that we stand up for protecting their bodies, even if they don’t agree.
Great further thinking of how BDSM thinking is more pervasive and potentially more dangerous in Christian thought than in the BDSM community. I hope everyone will read your thoughts on how Christians often interact with God as their Dom.
Grateful you wrote in further,
Jonalyn
Very well said, Jonalyn.
In moderation, and in finding the motivation, we can find spiritual or temporal value in all things. Sex is designed not solely for procreation, but for recreation. Otherwise, it wouldn’t feel as awesome as it does. “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable for me” said the sage. Can we find a spiritual value in S&M? Yes, if it is used in a monogamous relationship to draw two lovers together, it is of value. If it is used solely to satisfy the lustful cravings of otherwise unconnected adults, then it is of disputable value. We are too quick to condemn that which we do not understand, or that which we are uninterested in, as Christians. Savannah, what about all the tens of thousands now, and millions in history, who have used whipping or denial of the physical as a means of spiritual enlightenment – and I speak of those in the Christian faith. There were uncountable thousands who, in our own church history, who used barbed wires, wrapped around the leg, or the penis, to distract from sinful thoughts. There were thousands of monks who whipped themselves to drive away sinful desires. Now, there are hundreds who are voluntarily crucified each year – not to the point of death, but in many cases close to it – and they do it for spiritual enlightenment and to feel closer to Christ. I cannot condemn something I do not understand. And I do not thing Christ does, unless the motivation is evil.
Mike,
What an interesting point: in moderation and in finding the motivation we can find spiritual value in all things.
I am wondering if this is true for all things? or did you mean this more narrowly?
What if I were to say to you I understand BDSM but I have not experienced it… am I permitted to weigh in on it?
Or is this speaking about something I cannot understand?
If so, then how can we stand to judge other things, things we all do judge as morally corrupt?
Glad you brought up these examples of Christians using pain for spiritual enlightenment. I have to admit I’ve always thought this was unhealthy and part of the practice of knowing the God of Israel in Scripture.
My personal thoughts on S&M: When I’m having sex, I like a joyful loving connection, and I can’t really go there if I’m being spanked, whipped, yelled at, or otherwise feeling objectified.
Note: I am talking of pain and spirituality – not commenting on the topic of BDSM as I feel too uninformed, just to be clear!
)
The topic of pain and spirituality is pretty fascinating. I admit I do not understand it and thought similar to you, Jonalyn, that it was an unhealthy practice. And I very much respect the mystics and have learned much from them but I don’t believe that necessarily means the self-inflicted pain some of them chose, was the best example.
I ABSOLUTELY understand that we can use the suffering and pain in our lives to better connect with ourselves, others and God but I tend to think we don’t need to enforce pain on ourselves if it’s not there already.
)
God is always present, I need simply be still and listen and the presence is undeniable. I feel like it defeats Jesus’ suffering to inflict it on ourselves again (i.e. stigmata). This happens in the practice of Lent too – I struggle with such disciplines. I can see the purpose of remembering, reorienting, reconnecting with Jesus story. On the other hand, Jesus said “it is finished”. We don’t have to keep enforcing His suffering on us – He took it away for us – that’s the beauty of the message! (Please don’t take offense here, I do see the purpose of Lent, this is just my own struggle with it, I realize it’s bene around much longer than me, and respect its practice but it has always been a question to me as well!
Of course, this is simply my own limited experience and perhaps some need this pain to grow or see God. It just seems sad to me that this is how people feel God is calling them, it seems to have a punishment vibe which doesn’t mesh with the gracious, merciful Christ I know.
On a funny note: The topic makes me think of the scene in Monty Python’s Holy Grail where a line of monks walk down a road chanting and thwacking themselves in the head with a piece of wood intermittently. It makes me laugh every time!! I wonder if Jesus shakes His head sometimes thinking “I gave you life and life abundantly! Quit reinflicting the suffering!” The scene just highlights in a funny way (in my opinion
) that confusing mix of I love God/God wants me to be punished.
I realize my comment is probably tangential and not related to the original post – don’t mean to take it a different direction – but this conversation has been most interesting and I love the chance to better flesh out my thinking around these things. Thx for good dialogue Jonalyn and all commenters
C.J.
I appreciate you wanting to talk more about spirituality and pain. I tend to agree that pain should not be sought out, but there are the examples of fasting to prove that’s not always the case. I’m curious to think more on the point you made that Jesus’ suffering should end the suffering we do volitionally FOR suffering, on our parts
I liked this line “I feel like it defeats Jesus’ suffering to inflict it on ourselves again (i.e. stigmata).” How do you understand the Philippians verse on “fellowship of suffering, being conformed to his death” in chapter 3 I believe?
I agree that there is a punishment vibe here we need to notice, as Thinker pointed above.
The scene from Monty Python’s Holy Grail is perfect to illustrate this. It does seem sad and funny.
I’d like to hear some Catholic peeps chime in on the purpose and goodness of volitional suffering. Maybe in an upcoming post!
Thanks for those questions – they helped me form my thoughts a bit more fully. I think my main issue is when practices are done to ACHIEVE/EARN God’s love/forgivness/grace – this is unnecessary. However, if they are done to better understand/connect with Jesus and His works, this I can understand. It’s a matter of intenion I guess.
There’s a moving scene in The Mission where DeNiro’s character feels such immense guilt for his sinful act that he carries this enormous bag of heavy rocks up a mountainside. I remember just aching for him because I get it – I get that desire to DO something, to EARN my way to grace, but there is nothing equal to it but Jesus’ death&life.
In relation to Phil 3:10…I think sharing in his sufferings – I would not take that literally. I, unless crucifism comes back in style, will likely not experience anything equal to Jesus’ suffering. Even then, even if I experience the worst physical pain/torture/death, I can’t share suffering because Jesus’ suffering was beyond just ‘physical’ it was taking on the weight of my sins, the world’s sins. I cannot do this.
I think I share in His sufferings in that – I caused them in a way! I am part of them because He TOOK my sufferings away. His suffering is my freedom. His suffering is my grace.
Perhaps the suffering is some separation from God too. He had to suffer the ache of loss, of disconnection with His Source when He was on the Cross. That longing (like a weaned child with its mother) is always with us, as humans, we ache to be with our source. Perhaps this is another way to interpret His suffering? Not sure, just thinking as I write here
I guess at heart – I would take Phillipians as non-literal – more as sharing in the MEANING of the suffering – that of, grace and mercy and peace and reconciliation wtih God than literally creating a feeling of suffering – I don’t think anything could compare really.
However, I do want to say, the last couple years I worked in a Catholic organization and really appreciated many of the practices. I do see the good in them and see they can have a place in spiritual life. Would love to hear more about volitional suffering as I admit I still struggle with that concept myself but would be very open to hearing more about it!
I get that feeling when watching The Mission. It’s so heart-wrenching watching him carry the load of weapons up the slippery waterfall.. and then when the priest prematurely cuts his burden and he descends to strap it to his chest again…
and then…
when the natives cut him free.
The music in that movie alone.
I agree that there is a non-literal aspect of entering Jesus’ suffering. I think of it as a pool, Jesus is neck deep in suffering on the cross. I often dip a toe in.
The question I’m still wrestling with, however, is how often ought we to intentionally enter the pool?
Fasting seems to indicate we do at some points.
S&M indicates that the pool can be also a pleasure.
Curiouser and curiouser.
We should enter that pool? Why, if as Jesus said “It is finished”?
Glad you asked, Tim.
I think verses such as Hebrews 11:35-40 “Women received back their dead by resurrection; and others were tortured, not accepting their release, so that they might obtain a better resurrection …” makes me think that we contribute to the sanctification being done in us.
We work out what God works within. Philippians 2: 12-13.
Entering the pool of suffering for the purpose of helping others, for learning patience, prayer (fasting), for saving lives (Corrie Ten Boom) seems like an important part of following Jesus.
Isn’t that what taking up our own cross and following him is about?
Hi, I’ve read/glanced through some of these comments… but I just figured I’d offer some words from a Christian who struggles with BDSM desires [I don't practice it, I just struggle with the lust for it]. I think you were spot on when you said that Don Draper might think he deserves the Sub-treatmant. I can’t assume that every person who practices BDSM feels that way, but I do think there is a psychological factor like that to it all. For me, I know that I’m very insecure and throughout my life I have looked for ways to turn that insecurity and inferiority-complex into pleasure, and it happened even before I knew what BDSM was. I was trying to turn the feeling of being “nothing” into something that at least felt good, and I eventually stumbled into looking at BDSM porn. Now the pathways are made in my brain that I struggle so fervently to change, the pathway that something like humiliation or punishment could lead to sexual pleasure— because I know and believe that that is wrong, at least, I mean, that’s not the way it should be. For me, BDSM just reinforces the lie I believe about myself that I am worthless or inferior, and I know that God doesn’t want me to believe that lie. That’s why I could never imagine practicing something like this in marriage [I'm single right now], because I don’t want this, I don’t want to play into the lie. I don’t want pleasure from being humiliated or dominated, I want to walk in the freedom of a child of God. Now, obviously, I have no experience with marriage or sex lives growing boring or whatever… but I know that when I have BDSM desires, they stem from a feeling of worthlessness, of feeling bad about myself, and BDSM is not a healthy way to deal with those insecurities because it only furthers and validates them. That is not what sex was designed to do.
Your words on “trying to turn an inferiority-complex into pleasure” resonated with me…
I appreciate how you’ve shared so vulnerably about what can motivate a person to be sexually incited by BDSM.
I know a BDSM advocate might say that you can always “switch roles”, but I still think the argument stands that regardless if you are receiving of infliction humiliation and punishment, and regardless of if both parties are consenting adults, you are acting out inferiority and superiority in sexual ways. I can’t see this as mirroring our image-bearing qualities, either.
As someone who struggles with mind-numbing physical pain on a moment-to-moment basis, day after week after month after year, I can’t imagine pursuing physical pain as pleasure, as much of my life seems to be in pursuit of minimizing my physical pain as much as possible. While that is just my personal experience informing my personal pleasure preferences, part of me thinks that might be a more correct way of thinking. I say this because it seems to me that since Christ died on the cross and took away my punishment (I.e. eternal pain in hell being separated from God) I think it might be wrong to pursue pain (punishment) since the whole point of Christ dying for us was so that we might avoid that eternal pain. I’m not saying I’m right, just asking if I might be on the right track or not.
Someone commented about the “fellowship of the suffering.” I’ve personally never taken it to mean that we should inflict additional suffering on ourselves in order to attain some higher state of fellowship. I say “additional” because it seems to me that due to sin, the Fall and the Curse, all humans, including Christians, will endure suffering in their lifetime to some degree or another and in the midst of this suffering we should be supported by others who have experienced suffering and support others who are suffering in their time of need. Just a thought.
A quick thank you to Soulation for all the good work they do. It is much appreciated. I pray that God will continue to use this organization in mighty ways and that Dale and Jonalyn and all the contributers will be blessed with the strength and peace that only He can give. God bless!
You comments are greatly appreciated.
I’m grateful to hear your courage to share your own suffering in light of BDSM. It does seem difficult to prove that pursuing physical pain is a godly pursuit.
Doesn’t life have enough pain and suffering. I realize a BDSMer would probably say they enjoy the pain, but that is to make personal desire the main legitimizer of action.
Your encouragement to us at Soulation was good to hear. We can always use support. Do email us of you’d like to join our support or prayer team!
There has been quite a firestorm around these books. And until I read this, I thought I was the only one who wrote about them from a negative perspective who had actually read it, or at least tried to read it. For me, the book was heart breaking and dragged my heart out once again to show me areas that still need to be healed.
You very beautifully gave legitimate reasons that this book is not the best thing on the planet as most women seem to feel. Your review was the first I have read that is gentle as well as accurate and also non-judgemental in your opinions. Thank you!
I wrote my hurts about the book here
http://myjourneythroughanorexia.blogspot.com/2012/06/fifty-shades-of-heartbreak.html
Dawn,
I appreciated your reading and also sharing your link to your heartbreak in reading this book. I agree that these books can trigger immense memories and fear. They can also be a path to heal if we face our memories.
I wrote more about how this book is a trigger here for Christianity Today’s blog for women Her-meneutics. I’m so thankful you found my review non-judgmental. That meant a lot to me.
Hope to read your thoughts here, again. You offer a vulnerability I admire!
Your assumptions about BDSM are completely inaccurate. You dismiss the biological causes of masochism and sadism by simply saying “I do not believe it.” That is the same approach the conservative right gives toward evolution: “I do not believe it, so it is not true.”
Do research on sexual psychology and you will find that every single one of your assumptions is wildly inaccurate.
Within the BDSM community, a Master may be dominant toward his Sub in bed, but rarely does that relationship ever leave the bedroom. And even when it does, that is only with the consent of both persons.
People rarely enter into BDSM relationships to relive or reenact previous abuse. That is not considered within the bounds of SSC.
You dismiss the biological causes of masochism and sadism by simply saying “I do not believe it.” When did she ever say anything so fatuous, Jake?
And as for conservatives – or anyone else, for that matter – ever saying something is not true because they don’t believe it, please give some concrete examples (person, date, location, etc.)of where this has been said.
It appears that you yourself are saying “It’s true that they say these things because I believe it to be true” but to take that kind of position is, as I said above, fatuous and I am sure you are not intending that!
Blessings,
Tim
“I do not believe some people (the ones that get knocked around more often than not) are hard-wired as Submissives”
If that right there is not her saying that people are not born that way, please explain what else she could mean by it.
http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/413074/april-23-2012/don-mcleroy?redirect=true
Just one of the many locations in which Don McElroy, former head of the Texas Board of Education (responsible for choosing the textbooks that public schools use), says that he disagrees with evolution because it doesn’t make sense to him. This man spearheaded the effort to keep evolution out of textbooks, regardless of scientific evidence.
If you have any other troubles understanding that which I am trying to say, do not assume it it unbased. Rather, go back and read the actual article.
Jake,
As the BDSM advocate I quoted from when I mentioned “hard-wired as submissives” agreed with me that there is not research to indicate that BDSM is something you’re born with, I’d be interested to hear some evidence from you.
What studies have you found that indicate that BDSM is how people are born (or made)? Any links would be helpful.
Thank you,
Jonalyn
I base my information off of what I have learned in sexual psychology courses in university, in addition to what I have learned from speaking with psychologists on the subject.
Can you recall any articles or sites that could give us something to read about the evidence for the case that people are born with a tendency toward vanilla or BDSM?
Another way to take that line is that it means some people who get knocked around are suffering oppression and bullying.
As for your characterization of McElroy’s position, it seems that he does not adopt evolution because he doesn’t understand it (“it doesn’t make sense to him”); an inability to understand is different from rejecting something in spite of the evidence.
Thanks for the dialog, Jake.
Tim
It’s good to see Jonalyn that you’re willing and open to engage the subject of BDSM from a biblical perspective, without an up-front moralistic assessment. I appreciate your sincere curiosity to engage the subject, even as you enter the conversation with your own lenses.
As I’ve read through the thread I was very interested to see the correlation some commentators made between spiritual pursuit, suffering and a BDSM-like image of God. That was rather fascinating.
Yet, I see a couple of short-comings in the discussion that stem particularly from the definition of BDSM that you assume. Perhaps I’m reading you wrong, but it seems that you assume that BDSM necessarily always involves pain, degrees of humiliation, and power differentials, that although consensual, still cement the inequality of participants – including monogamous participants. Based on that assumed definition you draw several conclusions that understandably conflict with a biblical view of the inherent dignity, equality and value we have as God’s image-bearers. I can fully follow your argument here. Just because participants consensually agree to being hurt, doesn’t necessarily make their being hurt right – since physical acts always leave residues and traces in our psycho-spiritual personas, unconscious residues that may affect and undermine our dignity.
Some thoughts as to your assumed definition of BDSM. The SM aspect of BDSM certainly involves pain and humiliation. The BD aspect doesn’t necessarily. (I will get back to that in a second) Having said that, one can find many different theories and interpretive preferences within the BDSM community itself. For some, the concept of ‘switch’ is an oxymoron. One either is a dominant or a sub. For others, less dogmatically inclined, the idea of ‘switching’ is an enrichment. In the same vain, the cliche of the leather-clad dominant who derives pleasure from inflicting pain on a consensual submissive who impersonates an inferior doormat, is not the only form of BDSM. There’s also the concept of sensual domination.
Imagine the following scenario – and I’ll be explicit since alot of BDSM works with imagination. In doing so I hope to draw out the telos of BDSM. A husband, who’s a confident and healthy alpha in real life, carrying many leadership responsibilities, comes home to his loving wife, who awaits him and self-assuredly demands him to submit to her lead and prowess and become her ‘obedient slave’. He willingly surrenders to her lead, obediently and excitedly following her instructions to please her in the ways she desires. That may include anything from a sensual backrub to oral sex to intercourse and she may playfully discipline him (which could include light pain) if he doesn’t fulfill her desires to her specifications and liking (This latter part in itself could become a delightful source of playfulness)… Among other things she later also shackles and puts him into bondage and now he is fully exposed, fully in her hands – his body no longer ‘belonging to him but to her’. As he lays there ‘helpless and surrendered’, he fully entrusts himself to her guidance and care and she honors that trust, as she carresses and uses his body, bringing pleasure not only to her, but also to him. To him (and this is not uncommon for many alphas in BDSM), he cherishes the ability to fully let go of control, to relax and to be hers as she pleases. It also signals to him, as he lays there fully exposed, that she really wants him, loves him, and cherishes him, including his body, his manhood, his masculinity.
The telos of this BD scenario? It not only creates a heightened sense of erotic chemistry and sexual extasy (which you already said earlier you can understand), it also cements the mental, emotional and spiritual bond between the two. There is mutuality in every bit of this scenario. There is give and take. There is surrender and acceptance. There is trust and care. There is loving submission and respectful leadership that honors. And in that interplay, a deeper spiritual connectedness can result between the two, as they allow themselves to ‘be more fully known’ – image-bearers of a playful, surrendered, loving, accepting, imaginative, creative, honoring, just, respectful and guiding/leading God.
You’re right to point out (and I’m deducing from a previous post of yours) that if this remains the one and only scenario the couple can engage in, they a) limit themselves in their sexual expressions and b) as another commentator stated, this scenario may come to unhealthily control and enslave them. If however, they both are open to many other scenarios – vanilla included – and possibily also open to switch their roles by being willing to serve the personal preferences of the other, I don’t see how sensual BD in such a form would run counter to any biblical injunctions. To the contrary, I would say it allows husband and wife to surrender to each other, give their bodies, minds and spirits even more fully to one another, as Christ did for his bride (1. Cor 7 and Ephesians 5).
Jean,
I loved your kindness and clarity in this comment. You’ve given me much to think about.
Can you help me understand what you mean by “light pain”?
Also, is ‘switch’ necessary to make this BD healthy? Or could you imagine a non-switching couple making this work within Scriptures commands?
Jonalyn,
Thanks for your response. Just a couple of thoughts to your questions:
What is “light pain”? That, of course, will depend on the partners. Some people are much more pain-averse than others and therefore the physicality of incorporating mild pain into a marital sexual relationship needs to be intimately discussed. In my opinion “light pain” could include light spanking, scratching and biting that won’t leave permanent marks. It could also include light pain from genital bondage (including bondage of breasts) or genital slapping. There are valid biological reasons why mild pain can be sexually arousing and thus welcomed by one or both partners. I don’t seem to find scriptural or scientific reason that would make such practices of mild pain degrading, so long as both partners agree to it. However, if the pain is more than mild, this moves into SM, and there I would agree with you: it has the potential to become degrading, if not humiliating. And humiliation, in my opinion, is indeed something that undermines the dignified equality of one of God’s image-bearers.
What about ‘switching’? I personally would say it adds spice, fun and playfulness into a marital sexual relationship and certainly emphasizes the equality of both marriage partners. But could a non-switching couple still make this work within Scripture’s commands? While I most definitively believe in the equality of both marriage partners (in other words, I don’t hold to a complementarian point of view) I’d like to address this more generally. My parents, for example, have had a successful marriage of 44 years so far, marked by deep mutual respect and love. They were missionaries and then my dad became a pastor. I would characterize their marriage more complementarian than egalitarian. That doesn’t mean my mother had no voice and say in the marriage. She most definitively did and her opinions were loudly expressed and heard. My parents had discussions and fights and talked things through at length. Yet, even while mutual respect and listening did guide them, my mother in numerous occasions handed the final decision on a range of issues to dad. Not bitterly, but at peace. Would I call their marriage outside the bounds of Scripture, because mom tended to submit to dad’s leadership more than vice-versa? No. Would it be my Scriptural ideal. No. Yet, it worked for them and 44 years later they love each other more deeply than ever. So applied to your question… If a couple feels it works best for them for one of the partners to take on the role of dom and the other the role of sub, instead of switching, and both feel very comfortable with that, I could not object scripturally to their decision.
As I mentioned in my previous post. If this becomes the only way for them to relate sexually, then the BD in their relationship is in danger of becoming a fetish… and that, doubtlessly, would go against Scriptural injunctions (1. Cor. 6:12), since they would allow themselves to be controlled by BD.
I’m not sure these comments are helpful. I’d be glad to continue the conversation, since I have wrestled myself to better understand and appreciate sensual domination within a Scriptural framework. I feel what I have written so far though, would not go in any way against Scriptural commands, but, in fact, enhance the sexual, spiritual, mental and emotional connection of a couple open and willing to engage in BD.
A couple more thoughts or images on ‘mild’ or ‘light’ pain:
Anyone involved in sports would agree that getting yourself physically into a better shape, will, at times, provoke physical pain. When you’re trying to hike a difficult mountain, you will go through moments of pain. In both cases, the reward of that pain will, in all likelihood, be worth the effort. In fact, not only the pleasure at having achieved a goal at the end of the day will leave you feeling good; at times even the mild pain you felt during the exercise routine or the hike, may leave you feeling in touch with your body in ways that you wouldn’t have felt otherwise.
Having a partner exercise or hike with you, will, in fact, spur you on in those moments of light pain, and add to your willingness to continue. In other words, exposing your body to light pain – as your partner spurs you on – may create a positive physical connection with your own body that you would perhaps not experience otherwise. All thanks to your partner who’s ‘inflicting’ that pain on you by not allowing you to give up.
I know this example may stretch a little bit, when applied to BD, yet, I’d be interested your thoughts on this.
Jean,
Your comments are very interesting. I think the parallels between physical activity (like a sport or hike) and light pain in BD are striking (no pun intended). And I appreciate your clear examples and opportunity to pursue this further as you seem to be someone who cares both about love, sex and scripture. It is exactly what I was hoping for when I originally wrote this post.
I’m having trouble with how BD seems to manufacture or artificially introduce pain. Though I like many of the similarities, BD appears different from a hike. But I may be wrong.
For example, hiking a mountain requires pain if you are going to climb and push yourself into high altitudes. Your partner spurs you on into the pain built into the work.
Is pain built into sex in the same way?
Lewis Smedes in Sex for Christians says that sometimes pleasure and pain are only separated by a knife’s edge. A lover’s bite or scratch, he says, are often like the physical jolt of an orgasm. He also likens a sneeze and an orgasm. Both relieve pressure and a type of pain. I get that.
What I’m interested in understanding, and what I think we are getting closer to in this dialog, is if introducing additional pain in sex is good. Is the light pain of some bondage simply a form of acceptable foreplay, open to any who freely choose to work harder at trust, surrender and pleasure? Can BD make us more aware of our bodies and more close to our spouse in a healthy God-delighting way? Or does bondage ipso facto create a power differential that mimics the fallen world of dominion-taking over a free creature?
Do the sex toys or handcuffs used matter? If a woman ties up her husband with a scarf does that mean less than leather cuffs?
I’ve read some on how BD creates so much trust and intimacy and while I can imagine that with not a little satisfaction, I’m not sure the trust and intimacy is legitimately bought. Parson the crass comparison but intimacy through BD reminds me if frat brothers intimacy through hazing.
Can we draw a line about what types of bondage are honoring to the human body and what are simply not? Is this line even possible to draw?
Would love any feedback you or others have to offer.
I know it’s tangentially-related, but as I read through these comments I couldn’t help but think about Fight Club—consensual yet brutal violence in the name of feeling more like a man. I see similar mentality from the little I’ve seen of UFC. Would you consider this healthy, God-glorifying behavior?
I appreciate your comments, Jonalyn. I’m out for almost a week as I’m leading a training and will be back. Will respond over the weekend.
Jonalyn,
I have never taken as much time to put all my thoughts together on this subject as I will do in this post. It will be a lengthy post, as I enter into dialog with your important and thought-provoking questions. I’ve had more free evening hours tonight than I first thought…. Once again, thanks a lot for allowing this opportunity to converse with you and others on this subject, which often is brand-marked, if not taboo, in Christian circles.
As I’m engaging you on your thoughts and questions, and responding with my own, please do correct me if I wrongly assume I have understood your questions and concerns.
To engage your first concern: Would you agree that if mild pain is not considered and experienced as ‘painful’ in the deep sense of the word by one of the marital partners, but instead as sexually arousing, that then the notion of ‘manufacturing’ or ‘artificially introducing pain’ would seem like an incorrect choice of words?
I’d love to use another example (aside from the sports or hiking analogy) to exemplify what I mean: I personally enjoy hot spicy food. To some of my friends, the degree of spiciness that I enjoy is intolerable. For them, eating that kind of food would indeed be ‘painful’ and cooking such food would seem like ‘manufacturing or artificially introducing pain’. No “telos” whatsoever in that kind of cooking for them. So would the fact, that I enjoy and delight in hot and spicy Thai, Mexican, Ivorian, Indian or Turkish food, make it seem like I am manufacturing and artificially introducing pain into my food choices? Not really, because the “telos” I derive from eating such food is that it brings me pleasure and makes me thankful for the many taste buds that God has given me and that I’m allowed to enjoy. Now, when I can eat such food with another connoisseur – I experience shared pleasure and thankfulness. That doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy a good and hearty non-spicy meal with friends who would never go down the road of eating a chile piquing or a chile de arbol.
In other words, I agree with Smedes – as you do – that pain and pleasure are only separated by a knife’s edge. What one person experiences as unpleasant pain, another may experience as sexually arousing. In that sense, it may be hard to come by a universally accepted definition of ‘pain’.
Before returning to your questions, I’d love to go a step deeper and present a few thoughts of a more general nature that may or may not contribute to this conversation. Please bear with me as I’m seeking to build my line of reasoning… My thoughts start with a question: Aren’t pain and love often more closely connected than we wished? C.S. Lewis in his reflections on his late marriage and the unexpected death of his wife came to the following important insight: If you want love, you will need to be willing to accept pain. You can’t have love without pain. While his initial reactions at the premature death of his wife were marked by understandable anger and hurt and a keen desire to have his pain removed, he later came to embrace the pain, work through it and find redemption. It was not the avoidance of pain that allowed him to heal and mature, but its embrace and working through it. So to him, love and pain somehow belong to one another. In my own relationships I have found that inevitable challenges arise when I stay in friendships, relationships or community long enough. But I have also found that when I embrace the pain of working through things, rather than using these inevitable challenges as reasons to leave, they sometimes become invitations to discover unexpected gifts of grace and beauty and love. Indeed, love and pain often are bedfellows (no pun intended). That’s part of the nature of human relationships. It’s also part of God’s relationship with creation. But what do these thoughts have to do with our conversation?
I do think there is a connection between these thoughts and our conversation, because it touches on your question: Is pain built into sex? To some extent I would say it is. Why? Since for Christians sex and love intrinsically belong to one another, I would deduce that in the same vein sex and pain belong to one another too, based on the fact that love and pain are connected, as I established above. That’s not because this was necessarily part of God’s original design for humanity, but because pain has become part of our fallen creation, in the same way that ‘working by the sweat of our brow’ has become part of our fallen creation and taken the place of ‘vocation’. That doesn’t mean that work is ipso facto bad and unredeemable. To the contrary! Work, in our fallen lives, still can become an important source of purpose and significance when we allow work to be redeemed and re-directed into a God-given vocation. When we don’t, it becomes a curse to us and others, and one we may not even be consciously aware of. In the same way, pain in our lives can become a source of healing and maturing if we allow pain to be redeemed and redirected into God-given freedom. When we don’t, it becomes a curse to us and others. So our goal in a sexual relationship should not necessarily be to avoid pain, but to embrace and gracefully work through it, believing that redeemed pain – including pain that was brought up through sex (particularly since intimate sex can and will uncover our most vulnerable places) – may allow us to discover unexpected gifts of grace and beauty and love that will bring healing, depth and maturity to our being.
Now, I can certainly see that using the aforementioned insights in the context of your questions may fall short on several levels: For one, Lewis didn’t intentionally go looking for pain and neither should we. Pain happened to him. And then he needed to deal with it, accepting that he was part of a fallen world, where pain was not avoidable, but could become redeemable.
This is undoubtedly different from a marital relationship where BD has been embraced by both partners. In such a relationship partners do not just have mild pain happen to them; they openly embrace and seek it. And that, indeed, would be quite different from simply responding to pain and allowing God to redeem it.
This, then, is where your other question comes in: Is introducing additional pain in sex good? particularly if we believe that pain was not part of God’s original design for humanity…
In order to respond to this question of yours, I’d first like to throw in a caveat. Do couples that have embraced BD really seek and introduce additional pain into sex, as you assume? Is it not rather that they embrace mild pain because it’s not really ‘painful pain’ to them, but ‘delightful pain’ instead – like in the example of eating spicy food? Could we even call it pain – as in the example you site from Smedes – since sexually arousing pain and sexually arousing pleasure often become indistinguishable? (Side note: This would, no doubt, be distinct if we were talking about SM, which is why I am intentionally leaving SM out of this conversation. I agree with you there that SM undercuts several scriptural injunctions regarding human dignity.)
In other words, if – for the sake of the argument – we assumed that what some couples considered ‘painful pain’ could indeed be ‘delightful pain/pleasure’ for others (in the same way that delighting in spicy food for some could be torture for others) – then I would say that your question should only be directed to those couples, that would never delight in ‘mild pain’. To them, introducing elements like light spanking, scratching, biting, bondage, genital bondage and genital slapping, would most certainly be synonymous with introducing additional pain into sex. To other couples, on the other hand, doing the same things would not necessarily mean introducing additional pain into sex, since they would not experience such sexual activities as ‘painful pain’, but as ‘sexually arousing pleasure’ instead. I’m not sure if I’m making sense, but I hope I do.
So going on to another set of questions you ask: Is the light pain of some bondage simply a form of acceptable foreplay, open to any who freely choose to work harder at trust, surrender and pleasure? Can BD make us more aware of our bodies and more close to our spouse in a healthy God-delighting way? Using a similar line of reasoning as above, I would say that for some couples, this certainly would be true, providing enrichment to their sexual relationship, while for others it wouldn’t.
Does bondage ipso facto create a power differential that mimics the fallen world of dominion-taking over a free creature? I would say that all depends on how you view and define power. If your view of power is like Lord Acton’s who says that ‘power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely’, and that exercising ‘power over’ unavoidably means ‘dominion-taking’, then I can easily follow your argument. If you think that God’s power phenomenologically represents the other side of the coin to God’s love, since in the end God’s justice and God’s love must be balanced, then too, I can understand why you reach the conclusion you reach. Why? Because power and love, in that case, always remain in a delicate tension with one another, a tension that we humans seldom know how to healthily navigate. If, however, you believe that love intrinsically is power, and power intrinsically is love, and that both are not just two distinct sides of the same coin, (using Martin Luther King’s analogy that ‘power without love is brutal, and love without power is sentimental’) but one and the same thing, then I would have a harder time following your argument. Why? Because then, the act of bondage – which would represent an ‘exercising power over a willing partner’ would not necessarily have to be seen as “dominion-taking’, since the one exercising ‘power over’ would not do so outside of the realm of love, but as part of a mutually empowering love. The powerful love expressing itself in the form of surrender and submission on the one hand, and care and leadership on the other hand, would mutually reinforce and deepen the strong bonds that exist between the marriage partners.
Is the trust and intimacy that results from BD not rather illegitimately bought, similar to frat brothers obtaining ’intimacy’ through hazing? Using the same line of reasoning as before, if you view love and power as intrinsically connected to one another, then I would have a hard time equating BD in a marital relationship with hazing and illegitimately buying intimacy. Why? BD would simply be an expression of the playfulness of a couple’s marital love – fully giving ones bodies to one another – the same way that engaging in mutual oral sex would be. Not more. Not less.
Do the sex toys or handcuffs used matter? If a woman ties up her husband with a scarf does that mean less than leather cuffs? Can we draw a line about what types of bondage are honoring to the human body and what are simply not? Is this line even possible to draw? Going along with what I shared above, I think this would be a typical Romans 14 scenario. For some, it is not wholesome and could even be spiritually damaging to eat food sacrificed to the gods. So they shouldn’t. For others, buying and eating meat dedicated to the gods, poses no stumbling block whatsoever. So they should feel free to do so, but within a framework of caring for their ‘weaker’ brother or sister. Translated: I do not think it is possible to draw a clear line here. This will be up to each couple to decide. Some shouldn’t even get a mile close to BD, since their past has shaped their experience of pain and understanding of power relations in such a way that engaging in BD would only trigger issues that would be unbecoming if not damaging to them. For other couples, however, BD could definitively become a source of enrichment, deepening trust and cementing of their marital bonds of love.
This leaves me with one big question? What if only one of the marital partners is interested in BD and the other is not? Then certainly the one desiring to incorporate BD into the sexual relationship shouldn’t push his/her agenda. At the same time, the other marital partner shouldn’t categorically reject the idea. Similar to Romans 14, once again, the ‘stronger’ partner should be willing to ‘submit’ to the ‘weaker’ partner – whoever that may be in this scenario.
Would love any feedback you or others have to offer.
Jean,
I’m really appreciating this, mulling over it. I’ll be getting a more substantial response to you in the coming days.
Anyone else feel free to jump in.
Jean,
Great answers and thoughts. Thank you.
Here are a few things that came to mind.
1 – If light pain (the kind that doesn’t leave any mark) is something we’re considering as part of BD, then I’m fairly sure most creative people engage in some form of BD in their lovemaking. Ear nibbling, holding arms down to kiss a beloved, tickling. However, is light pain really the same as BD? Part of me wants to say, if it is then it’s not that rare. But part of me wants to say that most people don’t think of their tickling, nibbling stuff as bondage or discipline. So maybe light pain doesn’t belong within the BD definition?
2- Whenever Bondage or Discipline keeps a lover from knowing his beloved, either through fear or blocking creativity or freedom, then I believe BD has become a substitute for a sexual relationship. This might be the line I’d recommend, is BD a substitute or a conduit to know your beloved? It also brings to mind the dilemma you raised about one partner wanting BD and the other not. I found a great question in, once again, Lewis Smedes’ Sex for Christians “Does the beating and binding give sexual satisfaction without a sexual relationship? . . . the sexual distortion in masochism lies in its bizarre and self-distinctive substitute of pain and humiliation for interpersonal relationships of love and commitment.” By what you’ve described, Jean, I don’t see this as anywhere near a like substitution. And I realize that your definitions of BD are not the same as masochism.
3 – Tickling came to mind as an example of light pain that can be both playful and involve bondage of a sort. However, I think calling something like tickling “bondage” or part of the BD practices seems like it may be stretching the word “bondage” beyond it’s bounds.
4 – I believe the word “playful” is fairly important to distinguishing BD that is harmful or BD that is helpful to the marital relationship. It is hard to be “playful” when one partner is genuinely scared, unwilling, unhappy or checked out. These can all take place outside of BD, too.
5 – Fascinating suggestion that power is love. I would not agree and thereby would disagree with someone as illustrious as Martin Luther King. I’d say that love uses my own power to bend all my resources for good toward the other person. But love doesn’t wield power over another. I’d also add Thomas Pieper’s definition of love “Love says that it is good that you exist and in so far as I am able and it is appropriate I will contribute to your finding your happiness/existence/flourishing.” So there are two questions at stake here: Is power over someone or under someone (in bondage) an appropriate demonstration of a love relationship (surrender and leading) between two equals who love one another? If so, does this appropriateness rest on your definition of love being the same as power?
I’m just not seeing how even an outcome of deeper trust after a bondage love-making session can justify the power differential.
All these wonderful comments from you, Jean, make me wonder if another post on this is due at RS.
Jonalyn
I appreciate you’re willingness to continue to engage the subject matter. Some answers to the points you are raising:
#1: I would respond that light pain will be defined differently by different people as alluded to in my previous post. For some, light pain will not go beyond ‘ear nibbling, tickling, holding arms down…’ There, I would agree with you that this is not the stuff BD is made of. However, for others ‘light pain’ may include spanking, bondage, genital slapping, tease and denial while under bondage (which won’t leave any PERMANENT marks but could leave marks during the act nonetheless). Yet, they may not register that as pain the way some others would, because to them this sort of pain would be sexually arousing instead. What’s more, such acts would most definitively enter into the terrain of BD. Once again – I’m using the spicy food analogy from last post to make that point. What’s torture for some can be delight for others. Consequently, it will be hard to come by a hard and fast rule to establish what ‘pain’ is ok and what is not, since ‘pain thresholds’ are different for different people. I’m sure one can come up with healthy guidelines that affirm the dignity and humanity of both sexual partners, but a hard and fast rule, no. Otherwise you may need to prohibit people from eating spicy food, under the argument that it is always damaging to one’s health to savor chili-enriched cuisine…
#2: Completely agree with you Jonalyn. BD has the potential to become distorted and a substitute for a wholesome sexual relationship, the same way ‘Victorian love-making which confines itself to the missionary position exercised in the dark’ has the potential to become distorted and a substitute for a wholesome sexual relationship. If that’s all there is to the sexual relationship (in either case), the couple cheats itself of a wide range of ways to build marital intimacy through physical love-making.
#3: Agreed… However, tickling bondage could be part of the realm of BD if one of the partners is bound with handcuffs or rope (wrists and ankles) and fully exposed and helplessly surrendered to the playful ‘tickling attacks’ of his/her partner.
#4:
#4: Precisely. To me sensual BD and D/s always is playful and consensual. Otherwise it becomes sadistic and masochistic and there I would, once again, agree that that oversteps scriptural injunctions.
#5: I fully understand that we’re getting into the philosophical realm here, and I don’t mind indulging the subject theologically and philosophically, since I think this has a lot to do with our conversation. Defining love and power is no easy thing indeed – even more so when we talk about BD. I do like Pieper’s definition of love which you cite. Interestingly, pertaining to our conversation, it leaves a lot of room for couples to engage in BD, since “insofar I am able and it is appropriate I will contribute to finding your happiness/flourishing” and vice-versa. This definition could very well include BD, if and when both partners are able to find happiness/flourishing/telos within BD. The questions once again becomes…is BD “appropriate”.
Before getting to that question head-on, I’d like to deviate a little and come back to the power vs. love discussion. Scripturally speaking, I would strongly suggest that both love and power proceed from God and are good in and of themselves. Therefore true power cannot exist outside the realm of love and true love cannot exist outside the realm of power (hence M.L. King’s insight). Of course, we see all kinds of distorted and perverted forms of power and love, forms that had their origin in God, but then became bad. In that sense I would love to press the argument as being scriptural, that true power and true love are inter-related since they both find their origin in our wholesome, undivided God. Particularly in Jesus life work, death and resurrection we can see how closely love and power are connected. His life, while showcasing God’s love through his healing and relational ministry, was powerful at the same time, since he challenged cultural, religious, economic and political norms, in ways that could be interpreted as aggressive if not verbally and behaviorally violent. Yet – even in one of his most powerful indictments of the leaders of his time in Matthew 23 – just a few days before his crucifixion – love shines through. While his words are devastating, it seems he is making a last-ditch effort to reach out to the leaders of his time and bring them to repentance in order to avert the self-inflicted judgment that will come upon Jerusalem. His death, while being a loving act, was also a powerful act – since it exposed the lies of the systems and powers that be. If one looks at the historical and not just the theological reasons for Jesus’ death, this becomes pretty obvious – although both point consistently in the direction that love and power are closely interrelated and not just two sides of the same coin – a widely circulated assumption in evangelical theology – i.e. that God’s power represents his justice while God’s love represents his mercy. Such a point of view would seem to me to counter Scripture and impose an overly penal retributive justice sort of thinking based in modernity on God’s actions. The recently released “Les Miserables” showcases this beautifully. Now, I’m not assuming you’re making such a point, but wanted to press the argument a little further… Open to your rebuttals though…
Having said the above, you ask whether power over someone or under someone (in bondage) is an appropriate demonstration of a love relationship (surrender and leading) between two equals who love one another? Just this past week I lead a conversation on leadership and followership with a multi-cultural team of Christians serving as change agents in a very difficult urban poor setting in the Two-Thirds world, where broken relationships and corrupt/abusive leadership abounds. The conversation I led had nothing whatsoever to do with BD but it was insightful in several ways that I think could inform the conversation you started on ySM. Simply raising the following questions concerning what constitutes “good leadership”, what constitutes “imposition in leadership” and what constitutes appropriate “followership” produced an array of different interpretations. After a vigorous debate of 2-3 hours we came away seeing that we can certainly find common ground on many scriptural injunctions and ways of interpreting good ‘leadership’ and ‘followership’, however that some important distinctions remained. We also came to see that some of those distinctions are deeply shaped by our culture, family of origin and past experiences/interpretations of those experiences. Our Swiss and US participants pressed much harder for a flat structure than our Latino and African participants. Submission to authority was a much more difficult concept to the former than to the latter. In fact, some of the former were VERY uncomfortable with the idea of submitting to leadership, had they not themselves actively participated in all steps of a decision making process. Doing so would have meant to them forfeiting their right to equality… While I understand the Westerners’ points of view AND angst related to this subject matter (being a European myself married to an American), I do think that any good leader must learn to be a good follower. If you haven’t learned to follow, submit to and trust authority, you will always be handicapped in your leadership. I truly believe this. In the end, when I have resisted trusting and submitting to God’s leadership in my life (and sometimes I have a very hard time doing so because MY way seems so much better), this has proven counterproductive in the long run. Unfortunately, I can cite too many examples to make this point. To put it differently, I am learning the hard way that I can’t love God fully if I have not learned to trust and submit to his loving will/power. And I simply don’t think it is honest to say that one can know how to submit to God, but has never learned to submit to and trust another human being’s leadership. So to me, leadership and followership, submission and trust, power and love are closely related and inseparable from each other.
Coming back to BD – after this somehow long excursion – if you approach relationships from a completely democratic-egalitarian point of view of power relations – I can understand while even consensual BD would seem “inappropriate” to you for love making, and therefore could not fall under Pieter’s definition of love. In that sense, I would venture to say that your conclusions regarding what sexual behaviors constitute an egalitarian relationship of equals strike me as the values of an educated Westerner.
However, if you’re open to embrace an equally egalitarian relationships along a slightly more organic continuum of love-power-submission-trust-leadership-followership, where marriage partners may take on different roles at different times and within different contexts of their marriage, then I would strongly argue that BD can be very appropriate in a marital relationship, IF both partners find that it enhances happiness between them and a flourishing of their intimacy.
Jonalyn… I understand that we may not find equal grounding on this subject matter… Yet, in the end – we’ll continue to pursue truth through Scripture, reason, experience, context. Thanks for having allowed me to put all these thoughts onto a computer screen…. I do look forward to a future post of yours on this subject matter.
Jean,
I know we’ve covered a lot of good ground in our discussion so far. Maybe we could talk more about doing a Q and A back and forth for a post? I can imagine bringing up some concerns and letting you run with some answers (you could copy and past from this comment thread).
Would you be up to do a blog post like this with me?
Let me know via an email Jonalyn at soulation dot org.
I’d be glad to.
I have finally read through this entire thread…finding it eye opening, indeed. My interest is more than mild curiosity, as I have a grown single son experimenting with a BD club. I had no idea what this was/is and therefore, stumbled over your blog in my searching for answers. Although, this thread does not answer my question it has at least helped me understand the draw to this behavior.
I really wonder what types of corporal discipline the advocates of this experienced as children. I have always thought that inflicting physical pain under the guise of (I’m doing this because I love you), mixes up pain and love in an impressionable young child in a very deep and unhealthy way. I even remember a Dr. Dobson show where they were talking about spanking and he said make sure you cuddle up your child afterwards and tell them you love them. So many of our desires have their genesis in long ago conscioulsy forgotten experiences….now relagated to the powerful sub conscious, they direct us into many behaviors!
Just something to think about.
Hi Pam — I’m responding directly to your comment even though I have some comments further up on the thread, because you are asking a question that I have a lot of resources for.
Here’s a large, well-designed academic survey that gives evidence that BDSM desires do not correlate with abuse:
http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/bondage-lovers-normal-maybe-even-happier/story-e6frfkp9-1111117296864
Did you see the Psychology of S&M article that I linked at the top? Here’s the link again:
http://clarissethorn.com/blog/2012/05/07/the-psychology-of-sm/
Best of luck in discussing these matters with your son, if you feel the need to do that.
Pam4Peace,
I’m grateful this post gave you more understanding of the draw of BD.
Clarisse has lots of resources to draw from as she’s written extensively as a BDSM advocate.
If you have any specific questions, feel free to ask them here. I cannot speak as an expert of BDSM, but I know several readers who are following along (Jean and Clarisse come to mind) would be helpful guides.
I found your connection between corporeal punishment and BD very interesting. I do think a mingling of love and pain through spanking could be buried in some of the BD desires. Fascinating observation.
Most people wouldn’t associate spanking with abuse so I’m not certain the study Clarisse sites below speaks to this.
Clarisee do you have anything on spanking in childhood and BD in adulthood?
Clarisse,
Thank you. I did read these links. Although, they both talk about the lifestyle; they still don’t talk about clubs that engage in this. I will search more for this.
Also, I was not speaking to a form of abuse in corporal punishment as being the beginning of this inclination, but rather just the mixing of physical pain and love in the name of discipline in children. I truly do think that this early co mingling of the two could really have a bearing on the sub conscious, even if we don’t remember it consciously as an adult.
Just my random thoughts……
Pam
Wow, what a debate. I have no comment, but for my own experience. The man in my life adores me. I can do no wrong. I am the best thing that has ever happened to him.
I also have a high powered job in a large corporate, mom to my two boys, dealing with divorce guilt and family fall-out, part of a family business,incorporating two (soon-to-be) step kids, bipolar and sometimes land in the psych ward. For me to hand over to my man, to play weak, to take instruction, to shed all responsibility and power for a few moments while making him happy, makes me happy and turns me on. It de-stresses me and with him, I can hand my vulnerability over on a plate.
Nik,
I’m so glad you shared this. Very good to hear your experience. Do you think this could show that women may need to have times to be both strong and weak to feel fully human?
My own advise would be, to be very careful who you listen to if you are unsure your bdsm desires?
I acted out on them and to be honest it totally messed me up and ruined me as a person, but some people would be angry about me saying that but it is generally how i feel, also its no good asking a religious person for advice if you are determiend to act out on them.
I would say go with your own gut feeling and intuition, not how you feel when yuou are getting an adrenaline rush from bdsm but perhaps when your mind is more calm, if you feel it’s not for you then do not do it, as it can have dramtic consequences
Lee,
I think your advice is both personally vulnerable and wise. Thank you for sharing!