Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 9:45 PM
>I think it would be interesting to see if BDSM activities are learnt or
>innate.
>
> The Governments proposals are in part based on a morality argument. If it
> is true that people did not "choose" BDSM but were either born with innate
> feelings towards it or learnt it at a very young age then the morality
> argument is seriously damaged because it would not be morally right to
> punish people for feelings that they have no control in instigating in the
> same way that it would not be right to judge people for liking / disliking
> certain types of food.
>
> There is a new poll in the vote section to investigate this. Please have a
> look.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1785
>
>
John Thow, 18 Oct 2005 23:32:23
zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk wrote:
> for their dietary preferences: it's wrong to judge people for their sexual
> preferences (no
> matter how peculiar, or how boring) as long as their behaviour doesn't
> directly impact on
> non-consenting others.
> Basically, it's none of the Government's business what turns a person on
> unless that
> person is attacking an unconsenting other.
>
Exactly, and it is worth remembering that for every 'active' BDSM
lifestyler there will be many, many others who simply enjoy some BDSM as
part of their sexual imagination whether via stories or images.
This is a brilliant article comparing sexual taste to 'food' taste, see:
"VISIONS OF SUGAR-PLUMS
Food is sex. Sex is food. Obviously they're not exactly the same. But,
equally obviously, the two are intimately intertwined, which is hardly
surprising since food and sex are, after all, our two most primal
physical needs.
Hunger, nourishment, satisfaction, craving, appetite, eating, nibbling,
licking, sucking, swallowing, biting, devouring, gobbling, stuffing,
feasting. Are these about Christmas dinner or a hot time in bed?..."
http://www.sexuality.org/authors/steinberg/cn117.html
Why do we get so worked up about sexual taste and even sexual
imaginings,to a degree that would seem absurd for any other human activity?
JT
Graham Marsden, 19 Oct 2005 01:51:22
admin@ofwatch.org.uk wrote:
> I think it would be interesting to see if BDSM activities are
> learnt or innate.
Thing is, how can you really tell?
When I was a kid (below 12) I know I had BDSM fantasies even though I
had no idea what BDSM was at the time (and I still have no idea where I
got the ideas from!) but they featured what I would now call submissive
women, yet, when I got into BDSM with a partner it was *me* who was 100%
submissive.
I had to learn how to dom (it's a bit difficult to play if you're both
sub!) but I don't think I got that from those early fantasies.
Cheers,
Graham.
rosalee, 19 Oct 2005 02:22:16
I was having SM fantasies from the age of 4. I didn't know what they were at the time but I don't think that invalidates them.
Ginny
----- Original Message -----
: graham, 19 Oct 2005 02:22:16
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 1:47 AM
Subject: Re: [backlash] BDSM innate or learnt behaviour?
admin@ofwatch.org.uk wrote:
> I think it would be interesting to see if BDSM activities are
> learnt or innate.
Thing is, how can you really tell?
When I was a kid (below 12) I know I had BDSM fantasies even though I
had no idea what BDSM was at the time (and I still have no idea where I
got the ideas from!) but they featured what I would now call submissive
women, yet, when I got into BDSM with a partner it was *me* who was 100%
submissive.
I had to learn how to dom (it's a bit difficult to play if you're both
sub!) but I don't think I got that from those early fantasies.
Cheers,
Graham.
--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1816
Attachment:.
message.html (text/html)
demolitionred, 19 Oct 2005 08:20:01
I think the argument here is is it a sexuality or a prefernce or abusive?
as the US and Denmark have accepted to some extent it is a sexuality, and SM Pride have just published and infotisement in the House ( MP's magazine) that it is a sexuality, we could do with gathering support from psychiatrists etc that this is indeed the case.
The fact that it is a sexuality means we should be given equal rights with other sexualities, be treated the same as others in the way that all races, creeds etc should be treated the same before the eyes of the law and then can argue that this law discriminates.
Only one of the arguments, but a strong one and one that lays the basis for future discussion with lawmakers....
backdooruk, 19 Oct 2005 15:02:12
Paul wrote:
> I think it would be interesting to see if BDSM activities are learnt or innate.
> The Governments proposals are in part based on a morality argument. If it is true that people did not "choose" BDSM but were either born with innate feelings towards it or learnt it at a very young age then the morality argument is seriously damaged because it would not be morally right to punish people for feelings that they have no control in instigating in the same way that it would not be right to judge people for liking / disliking certain types of food.
From a scientific point of view it isn’t important, though from a strategic point of view we may want to throw such questions in as a curve ball.
Behavioral psychology has been moving away from the 19th century idea of ‘nature vs. nurture’ for decades now, and much of the consensus is toward a position where even strongly genetically predisposed behaviors require an environment to manifest in. For example, some plants only produce coloured flowers if you put them in certain types of soil, but the genes to produce those colours are still there in any case. So it’s no longer an argument about ‘nature vs. nurture’ but rather of how much genetic predisposition there is to a behavior (even the most genetically predisposed only get scores of heritability of around 50% making the other 50% down to environment). Also, just because there is some genetic predisposition it doesn’t make that behavior ‘natural’ or inevitable - some people have a genetic predisposition to certain forms of disease and we certainly don’t consider those natural!
Regardless of how much genetic predisposition there is to a behavior it is almost *never* a matter of choice, and the age at which one recognizes a tendency tells us nothing about the genetic component of it because so much environmental influence happens in very early childhood (so your poll is meaningless). Besides, both sadists and masochists (the part of BDSM mostly relevant to this discussion) tend to talk about how their desire for pain has grown over time, something that tends to discount it as an orientation present at birth.
On a personal note I’d be surprised if anyone was able to mount much of an argument that there any significant predisposition to any of the behaviors collected under the umbrella term BDSM, with the exception of domination and submission, and even those would be linked to already establish research on personality.
- Chris
Amelie, 19 Oct 2005 16:40:59
I have posted a link about that
http://www.gloria-brame.com/therapy/bdsmsurvey.html
----- Original Message -----
, 19 Oct 2005 16:40:59
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 8:09 AM
>I think the argument here is is it a sexuality or a prefernce or abusive?
>
> as the US and Denmark have accepted to some extent it is a sexuality, and
> SM Pride have just published and infotisement in the House ( MP's
> magazine) that it is a sexuality, we could do with gathering support from
> psychiatrists etc that this is indeed the case.
>
> The fact that it is a sexuality means we should be given equal rights with
> other sexualities, be treated the same as others in the way that all
> races, creeds etc should be treated the same before the eyes of the law
> and then can argue that this law discriminates.
>
> Only one of the arguments, but a strong one and one that lays the basis
> for future discussion with lawmakers....
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1826
>
>
Paul Tavener, 19 Oct 2005 21:32:40
Author wrote:
> Paul wrote:
> > I think it would be interesting to see if BDSM activities are learnt or innate.
> From a scientific point of view it isn’t important, though from a strategic point of view we may want to throw such questions in as a curve ball.
> Behavioral psychology has been moving away from the 19th century idea of ‘nature vs. nurture’ for decades now, and much of the consensus is toward a position where even strongly genetically predisposed behaviors require an environment to manifest in. For example, some plants only produce coloured flowers if you put them in certain types of soil, but the genes to produce those colours are still there in any case. So it’s no longer an argument about ‘nature vs. nurture’ but rather of how much genetic predisposition there is to a behavior (even the most genetically predisposed only get scores of heritability of around 50% making the other 50% down to environment). Also, just because there is some genetic predisposition it doesn’t make that behavior ‘natural’ or inevitable - some people have a genetic predisposition to certain forms of disease and we certainly don’t consider those natural!
> Regardless of how much genetic predisposition there is to a behavior it is almost *never* a matter of choice, and the age at which one recognizes a tendency tells us nothing about the genetic component of it because so much environmental influence happens in very early childhood (so your poll is meaningless). Besides, both sadists and masochists (the part of BDSM mostly relevant to this discussion) tend to talk about how their desire for pain has grown over time, something that tends to discount it as an orientation present at birth.
> On a personal note I’d be surprised if anyone was able to mount much of an argument that there any significant predisposition to any of the behaviors collected under the umbrella term BDSM, with the exception of domination and submission, and even those would be linked to already establish research on personality.
> - Chris
>
>
Although important the scientific view point is not the whole story. Public perception is an incredibly powerful force and if there is even some truth in the genetic roots of S&M type behavior then it be shouted about as it would play well with the public. Similar arguments have been used with homosexuality with some success.
Another issue is the contention that violent porn is some sort of contagious affliction that exposure will somehow contaminate people who may then turn out to enjoy it. If it can be shown that the majority of BDSMer’s had their feelings at a very early age then it would surely indicate that violent porn was not the causative element.
As young children are very unlikely to come into contact with such violent material, any learnt proportion of behavior must originate from other sources. I would suggest that sexual repression of genetically predisposed people at a young age might well trigger the BDSM behavior. Adult onset might fit the corrupted by porn model, but if the onset is during childhood this is much less likely.
Thunder, 20 Oct 2005 11:14:44
In message
<8054084.1129753954320.JavaMail.root@thallium.smartgroups.com>,
admin@ofwatch.org.uk writes
>
>As young children are very unlikely to come into contact with such
>violent material, any learnt proportion of behavior must originate from
>other sources. I would suggest that sexual repression of genetically
>predisposed people at a young age might well trigger the BDSM behavior.
>Adult onset might fit the corrupted by porn model, but if the onset is
>during childhood this is much less likely.
>
>
I repost something I posted here on 6th September (before a number of
you joined the group)
*****************************************
From a very early age my friends have been mostly female (even today,
and I am not just talking about the "scene" as such)
I suppose (shock horror) my earliest (non-penetrative) sexual
experiences must have been about when I was about 6-7 or 8. I surely am
not the only person who at that age played "Doctors and Nurses" or
"Cowboys and Indians" and maybe undressed and explored the female. It to
me is a "natural part of growing up" - animal instinct , nothing to do
with seeing photos or the Internet (in fact at that time there was no
Internet and I certainly had seen no pornographic images).
Moving on a number of years, again before the Internet and without
seeing images (and before I knew about BDSM or safewords), in a sexual
situation I have (consensually) bound a female .
A few years ago I was driving to work and had the radio on - they had
been discussing (which surprised me as it was day time) on a phone-in
that a recent report had said that 80% (I think) of females had
experienced and enjoyed at some time or another being tied, spanked or
even being flogged.
On Saturday I took a sub friend for a walk in the park, at one time I
gave her a hug with one of her hands held behind her back - she told me
that that action alone "turned her on".
All of this is pure "animal instinct".
A few years ago a sub of mine, who was at that time a medical student,
sent me an essay she had recently submitted as part of her degree course
entitled "pain.doc" which, as it title suggests is about the chemical
etc. reactions to pain to which she annotated some notes to me about its
relevance to BDSM.
Whilst this might be a "personal ramble" of mine , perhaps one approach
to all this could be that BDSM and its imagery are in some ways purely
an extension of "animal instincts" mixed with consensual fantasies and
the release of certain chemicals into the bloodstream that harm no-one.
******************************************
--
^Thunder^
zak, 20 Oct 2005 14:33:27
Original Message:
-----------------
admin@ofwatch.org.uk, 20 Oct 2005 14:33:27
Author wrote:
Although important the scientific view point is not the whole story. Public
perception is
an incredibly powerful force and if there is even some truth in the genetic
roots of S&M
type behavior then it be shouted about as it would play well with the
public. Similar
arguments have been used with homosexuality with some success.
Another issue is the contention that violent porn is some sort of
contagious affliction
that exposure will somehow contaminate people who may then turn out to
enjoy it. If it can
be shown that the majority of BDSMer’s had their feelings at a very early
age then it
would surely indicate that violent porn was not the causative element.
As young children are very unlikely to come into contact with such violent
material, any
learnt proportion of behavior must originate from other sources. I would
suggest that
sexual repression of genetically predisposed people at a young age might
well trigger the
BDSM behavior. Adult onset might fit the corrupted by porn model, but if
the onset is
during childhood this is much less likely.
I don't quite know what you're trying to contend here: is it 'poor perverts
can't halp
themselves' (which, just FYI is not AT ALL the way a lot of people like to
think about
their sexual choices) or is it 'looking at porn makes you into a pervert' -
which is not
the case.
Again, the core issue is: images do no harm, and nobody has the right to
judge what images
are permissible for others to enjoy.
zjk
--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .
Paul Tavener, 20 Oct 2005 18:03:08
> I don't quite know what you're trying to contend here: is it 'poor perverts can't halp themselves' (which, just FYI is not AT ALL the way a lot of people like to think about their sexual choices) or is it 'looking at porn makes you into a pervert' -
> which is not the case.
> Again, the core issue is: images do no harm, and nobody has the right to judge what images are permissible for others to enjoy.
> zjk
The contention is that a *public perception* of 'poor perverts can't help themselves' would do us no harm and that it is at least true that people can't help the way they feel any more than they can make a cold and calcualted decision to like or dislike chocolate. The content is also that 'looking at porn makes you into a pervert' must be false.
Images do no harm, and nobody has the right to judge what images are permissible for others to enjoy. I would agreed totaly, but there are lots of secondary issues that are also worth exploring
zak, 21 Oct 2005 00:33:58
Original Message:
-----------------
admin@ofwatch.org.uk, 21 Oct 2005 00:33:58
> I don't quite know what you're trying to contend here: is it 'poor
perverts can't halp
themselves' (which, just FYI is not AT ALL the way a lot of people like to
think about
their sexual choices) or is it 'looking at porn makes you into a pervert' -
> which is not the case.
> Again, the core issue is: images do no harm, and nobody has the right to
judge what
images are permissible for others to enjoy.
> zjk
The contention is that a *public perception* of 'poor perverts can't help
themselves'
would do us no harm and that it is at least true that people can't help the
way they feel
any more than they can make a cold and calcualted decision to like or
dislike chocolate.
Hmm. The public might also percieve that these poor perverts who can't help
it should be
locked up forever just in case their urges might get all uncontrollable all
of a sudden.
Which makes about as much sense as locking people up because they might
either start
stealing chocolate or attacking people who like to eat it
--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .