On Sadism, Masochism, Masters and Slaves

 

The Interview with Eric Tide, which I posted on May 21st, elicited several interesting comments, including a very long and interesting essay by Dark Lord, which I post in its entirety below. I hope it in turn will inspire readers to send me their thoughts on the subject. 

 

First, thanks to you Bob, Eric, and previous commenters. Excellent and enlightening discussion. It reminded me of something I'd written many, many, many years ago when I was trying to figure this out in my own mind. It's based only on my own experiences, as both a top and bottom, playing with a multitude of other guys, and trying to distill that experience in a phenomenological manner. It sure as hell ain't dogma in which everyone must believe.

 

Here, for better or worse, is that discussion:

 

In my experience, the world of S&M is divided into two broad categories: the Master/Slave scene and the Sadist/Masochist scene. On the surface, both look very similar and can be easily confused with one another, yet on a deeper level, they are quite separate and distinct.

 

The basic dynamic of the Master/Slave scene is domination and submission. The scene is essentially a rough sex trip. The Slave is getting off on doing something for the Master, whether that’s servicing him sexually, obeying him, taking his punishment. The Slave is voluntarily, as completely as he can, submitting himself to the Master.

 

This kind of scene can be 75% psychological and 25% physical, in that it can be done perfectly well with little or no equipment or special setting. The submission of the Slave can be expressed verbally in verbal abuse by the Master or “Yes, Sir; Thank you, Sir; Sir, may I...” by the Slave; by posture, as in kneeling or standing with head bowed, eyes down, hands behind back; by dress, e.g., Leather vs. Levi or less; and so on.

 

The Slave is getting off on the Master, and the Master on the Slave, so there is a kind of sexual relationship going on. Usually, there is some form of overt sexual activity (e.g., sucking, fucking, body worship, the slave masturbating on—and only on—command, etc.) going on during the scene. It may be used to reward the Slave, or withholding it may be used to punish the Slave or reinforce his submission. But in any case, sex is certainly one of, if not the, central focus of the scene.

 

In most cases, both the Master and Slave have come to this scene later in life, only after becoming sexually active beings. In many cases, it was a kind of second “coming out.” After admitting they were gay, and after exploring the other realms of gay sex, they happened to have a rough sex encounter and found they enjoyed it.

 

If the Slave is asked to describe his fantasies about this scene (perhaps those he uses when jerking off) he tends to focus primarily on the Master: what the Master wears, what he looks like, how he sounds or smells, how he moves, etc. The Slave is often very deprecating about his own appearance, willing (at least in fantasy) to undergo signs of physical degradation or humiliation, such as being shaved, branded, tattooed, smeared with dirt, shit or pissed on, etc., or anything else reinforcing his subordinated, humiliated, degraded (or, on a higher level, “owned”) position in respect to the Master.

 

This scene may also take less severe forms, such as Daddy/Boy, DI/Recruit, Coach/Athlete. If there's a “hero figure” in this scene, it’s the Top, the embodiment of masculinity, dominance, power, experience, attitude, worthy of the lowly Bottom’s worship and obedience.

 

Now let’s look at the other type of scene. The underlying dynamic of the Sadist/Masochist scene is a battle of wills between two equals. The Bottom is just as strong, just as much to be admired and respected as the Top is. The Top is seeing how much he can dish out and the Bottom is seeing how much he can take. This can take an explicitly antagonistic form, as in scenarios where the Top is the captor, guard, or interrogator, while the Bottom is the captive, prisoner, or one being interrogated. Any cooperation from the Bottom has to be forced and will be resisted with all the Bottom’s energy.

 

Or the form may be more implicit, more laid back, with the Top’s role more like that of a coach or mentor, exposing the Bottom to experiences, situations, or sensations that the Bottom’s never experienced before, and helping the Bottom work through them, exploring and expanding his limits of endurance. But in neither case is the Bottom getting off on being voluntarily subordinate, inferior, or subservient to the Top.

 

Far from getting off on doing something for the Top, as the Slave would, the Bottom in this scene is getting off on what’s being done to him, by the Top. This scene is about 75% physical and 25% psychological, in that it does require lots of equipment (the more, the better), and, preferably, a proper ambiance; it works better in a well-equipped playroom than in a bedroom with only a few “toys.”

 

While it sounds very crass and cold to say this, the scene is not so much a relationship between two people as it is a masturbatory fantasy in which the other person is used as a prop. The Bottom in this scene is being turned on sexually, not by the Top, but narcissistically, in the most classical sense of the term. The Bottom is getting off not only on what’s being done to him, but even more on his mental image of himself in the bondage/torture scene. The Bottom is actually playing both roles, Top and Bottom; experiencing the Bottom role, but also fantasizing vicariously the viewpoint of the Top, both inflicting and observing the action. In the best of all possible worlds, and certainly in most jerk-off fantasies, the Bottom would be both the Top and Bottom, both the torturer and victim, simultaneously. There would be a big market among Bottoms for Disney audio-animatronic programmable robot Tops made in the image of the Bottom (or vice versa). I have never met a Bottom in this kind of scene who wasn't enormously turned on by seeing himself in mirrors, photos, or videos of the scene—often more so than by any pornography he’d ever seen. I’ve never met or interviewed identical twins who play mutually in this context, but would love to—for them it must be nearly perfect!

 

Something similar is going on for the Top. In a sense, the Bottom is a prop in a scene in which the Top is both participant and voyeur. If there’s a “hero figure” in this scene, it’s the Bottom, testing himself, proving his manhood and toughness by bravely standing up to torture, enduring abuse without breaking, daring his tormentor to do his worst, measuring his virility by how much he can take.

 

If you ask the Bottom in this kind of scene to describe his jerk-off fantasies, he concentrates on what’s being done to him: what bondage he’s in, what position he’s in, what he’s feeling, how he looks as he struggles and strains, what the equipment looks like, etc. If you probe about the Top, unlike the Slave, whose fantasy is focused almost exclusively on the Master, the Masochist tends to be rather uninterested in who's doing all this stuff to him. And it often doesn't matter. While it always helps if the Top is physically attractive, that is nowhere near as important in the Sadist/Masochist trip as it is in the Master/Slave trip, provided that the Top has the experience and the equipment to do to the Bottom things the Bottom finds exciting.

 

Another difference between this scene and the Master/Slave scene is the age at which the person became interested. Almost all the people into the Sadist/Masochist scene, on reflection, can identify an interest going back before puberty, often back to early childhood. Memories of pre-sexual fascination and excitement with stories, books, TV shows, movies in which the hero is captured, stripped, tied up, and tortured; of capture, cowboy and Indian kids’ games; of scout camp initiations; and of many similar early childhood experiences are often present.

 

So, unlike the Master/Slave, who often discovers S/M in the context of an already existing and active sexual life, the Sadist/Masochist usually discovers sex in the context of an already existing and active S/M life.

 

Moreover, if one probes deeply enough, one can often uncover in Sadist/Masochists a single “nuclear fantasy,” something early on that first triggered a strong response and influenced the subsequent tastes and turn-ons that the Sadist/Masochist may be trying to recapture or reflect to some degree, consciously or unconsciously. As a personal example, for me it was the original Flash Gordon serial starring Buster Crabbe. I saw it on TV when I was about 7. There are two scenes in particular: one of the blond, muscular Flash, condemned by King Vulcan to be a slave in the furnace room, bare-chested, stripped to just boots and tight Speedo-like shorts, sweat-sheened, shoveling “radium” into the fiery hot “atom furnaces” under the whips of the cruel “hawk men” guards. Then, after inciting a riot in the furnace room among the other slaves, Flash is condemned to the “static room” where he’s spread-eagled in a frame and tortured by shocks and sparks from a huge static generator, still sweating, struggling, grimacing in pain, and finally passing out. My reaction to that scene was a cross between pre-pubescent orgasm, terror, and excitement that physically hurt, it was so intense. Ever since, my major turn-ons tend to be hunky young blonds, guys wearing tight short shorts and sweating with exertion, forced physical labor in high heat environments, spread-eagle bondage positions, and watching guys in torture-induced agony.

 

For many Sadist/Masochists interested in crucifixion, the nuclear fantasy may have been seeing a crucifix in church or at home, and really looking at it hard for the first time. For some guys into Indian torture, perhaps it was a single scene in a cowboy movie, viewed at an early age, with the hero captured, stripped to the waist, and tied to the stake or torture-frame. Sometimes, though by no means always, there are also early experiences related to being abused as a child, which may form the nuclear fantasy for future scenes. But this isn’t always, or even often, the case (it isn’t in my case, for example).

 

Finally, the Sadist/Masochist scene is often devoid of overt sexual content or activity. Far from seeing this lack of sucking, fucking, etc., as punishment (as the Slave might), most Masochists (and Sadists) see it as a relief. Consequently, this scene works just as well with straight guys as it does with gays or bisexuals, since it doesn’t involve sex with someone else.

 

As mentioned before, the Bottom is getting off on himself, and the Top is getting satisfaction as a voyeur, watching the Bottom. Neither party may be interested in achieving orgasm during the scene. Instead, both parties may jerk-off ahead of time, anticipating the scene, and afterward, looking back on it, especially with the help of photos or videos of the scene. During the scene, the intense and strange sensations experienced by the Bottom on various parts of his body may make it impossible for the brain to focus attention on the genitals long enough to hold an erection and climax. Rather, the Bottom is experiencing a multi-level rush, in part sexual, but also due to elevated adrenaline levels, endorphin levels, blood pressure, increased respiratory rate, etc., caused by the physical exertion, mental excitement, pain, and, not infrequently, fear. Trying to cum under these conditions is analogous to trying to jerk-off while sky diving. You could probably do it, but does it really add anything substantive to the total experience?

 

Because the scene is often playing very close to the edge, where the Bottom could be in real danger of physical harm if the Top relaxed his vigilance, it may be impossible for the Top to relax enough, “disengage” enough from the scene, focus on his own cock and get off, without “abandoning” the Bottom to possible harm. (One way around this problem from the Top’s viewpoint is to do a scene with a “co-Top.” While one Top has the responsibility for the scene, the other can relax and jerk-off or otherwise relax his control. The two Tops can trade off for the duration of the scene.)

 

You can see how the scenes could get confused. You can watch a naked guy strung up and getting a whipping, after which, he kneels and kisses the boots of the whipper. Master/Slave or Sadist/Masochist? Hard to tell, until you get inside the Bottom's head. The Slave will put up with getting the whipping, which he probably doesn't enjoy in itself, in order to express his submission to the Master by kissing the Master’s boots, which is what he really wants. The Masochist is willing to put up with what he considers the uncomfortable nonsense of kissing the whipper’s boots, in order to get the whipping, which is what he really wants.

 

If one approaches a scene secure in one's own preferences for one or the other of these two categories, the scene can be much more rewarding, because it can focus on one category exclusively, and leave out all the elements of the other. It’s amazing how much more satisfying such a “pure” scene can be for both the Top and Bottom. If one doesn’t have his own preferences straight, both parties may go away from the scene (which seemed at the outset like it should have worked) with a sense of disappointment, of something missing. Most likely it was a case of the Top playing Master to the Bottom's Masochist, or the Top playing Sadist to the Bottom's Slave (I suppose Transactional Analysis fans could have a field day pointing out that S/M [Sadist/Masochist] or M/S [Master/Slave] scenes will succeed, while S/S [Sadist/Slave] or M/M [Master/Masochist] scenes are usually doomed).

 

That's it (finally!). Thanks for listening, if you made it this far.

Comments

[Leo Devin]

I must agree with the opening statement, as a Sadist, I will not even entertain the idea of dealing with a 'slave'. I don't care how much they say they will play the part of a captive, prisoner, abductee (my favorite) or any other masochistic role, they will always revert to the slave persona and try to follow orders.

I have the type of personality that I will always have to 'fight' to be 'mean'. I started out in my Sadist role as more of a mad scientist, experimenting on my victims. I even described myself as a mad scientist in the profiles I had at the time and some of those screen names had 'Doc' or 'Dr' in them. I was a kindly sadist. I was more concerned about what the captive wanted and doing it for them. I was happy as long as I got to tie them up and initially, hurt them just enough to slake my thirst. I got my photos too! That was difficult at first, thank goodness for polaroid, the only drawback, the noise. I just couldn’t go to the Fotomat with that type of photo, I don't think it was legal anyway.

Something changed in me when I had a major shakeup, my regular masochist moved, but recommended another. It took some time to hook up but his request was too good to let slip by, he wanted to be abducted. You can read that story on the B&G site. (Look under Kidnap Fantasies.) I became the no nonsense Sadist that had been lurking inside all these years.

Again, to reinforce the age reference, I began at age 8 (my foot fetish was firmly established by 2nd grade) and believe it or not, it was mostly due to an incident in the Boy Scouts. It was not sexual and I do not have sex during a scene, I wait until later. One reason for that is habit. Before, when I was the mild mannered Sadist, I never really got what I wanted from a session but my imagination made it so much better in reflection, the session was just one 'mind' picture in my library of experiences and fantasies.

My early TV stimulation show was "The Wild, Wild West" and until recently, I always thought of the title as referring to the area of the country that was considered the west, not Agent West as being the 'wild'.

To end, I have no idea what is truly going through a bottom's head other than hurt me but don't kill me. These days, I only care what is going through mine; safety factors taken into account. IF I were a real captor, I wouldn't give a flip about what the captive wanted or what I did to them, other than to keep them alive to keep up the torture. That was IF with a capitol I F. I try to make my sessions as real as possible, now, for both of us.

[Jamie]

You got me thinking back to 1961 or so. I was about 8 or 9. I used to read Jack and Jill Magazine. I can still picture in my mind the illustration of a story about the Revolutionary War. This American spy was tied in a high back chair with his arms crossed behind the chair-back. I was so turned on by that picture. I've actually tried to see if it is archived somewhere online with no success. I consider that my waking up moment to craving bondage...

[Eric Tide]

Dark Lord is right on the money! In fact, he has helped me understand my desires and feelings even better.

Definitely, I fall into the Sado/masochist category as he so well explains. He has described me to a tee (or T if you subscribe to the original usage of the term). My passion is to be taken prisoner or kidnapped, then bound, confined, chained, and tortured. Strong humiliation is great, too. I pride myself on seeing how much abuse I can take, all the while knowing that I am getting what I deserve. developed this passion early in life, even from the time I was a small child. I am not after sex when I do bondage, and in fact as Dark Lord so rightly says, I can certainly do without the sex. I am after something much more.

It is a difficult thing for a dominant to break me, but when he does, it can be euphoric. And I find it interesting that Dark Lord says that we like pictures of our scenes. So true! I usually get the dominants to take pictures of me tied up and abused, although they don't usually take nearly enough. I have bought a digital camcorder that I hope we can use to video some scenes in the future.

The problem is, it seems to me, that almost every dominant I have met wants the Master/slave scenario. I do it. I obey and let them do what they want, but I don't enjoy it unless while they are bossing me around they are also torturing me or whipping me in some way.

Thanks, Dark Lord. You have really helped me understand my feelings better.

eric tide

[Leo Devin]

I just thought of something dealing with two points. Age and The Sadist/masochist rolls

What if the age of the person isn't the cause for them becoming a Sadist-Master/masochist-slave.

What if, in the case of the Sadist/masochist, one of their fantasies, a TV show, awakened them at that age.

That would explain why we don't need the sex to satisfy us since it is highly unlikely that sex was involved at that young age. Oops, did I say "us"

[John]

Very interesting analysis. As someone who fantasizes about being in the role of the masochist (a masturbatory fantasy indeed), most of what was written about that viewpoint certainly rang true.

In my case (due in part to my own timidity and also to my lack of ever having a heroic build), I haven't been able to act out any of my fantasies with a partner. Plus, I recognize that the fantasy is a lot more fun (less pain) than the reality would be. Plus, as long as it stays a fantasy, I get to masturbate and achieve orgasm. That never happened in the handful of bondage and torment scenarios I've actually experienced, and that, for me, is a major disappointment. I've wanted my partner to take complete control over my body and force a load out of me no matter how hard I try to resist, and what I've found instead is that my partners get tired before they ever get close. In my fantasies I resist all manner of painful torture but shamefully can't hold back from cumming at the hands of my tormentor, whereas in actual bondage play it is just the opposite: I quickly reach my pain limits, but am never even close to cumming, despite whatever my partners do.

[Roughidea]

Dark Lord presents an insightful analysis here.

It is certainly consistent with my own experience as a sadist: I always tell potential partners that I'm not interested in costumes and ritual behaviour, such as calling me "Sir" or "Master", which I feel are distancing mechanisms that require me to be someone other than who I am. (That is also why I use my own name as a safe word.)

As Dark Lord notes, I see my scenes as contests and sometimes say so, telling bottoms that we are engaging in an endurance game in which they are the only player.

I also agree on the centrality of the bottom; I think of the bottom as the 'author' of the scene, a thought that I would never share with him; to bring that to his attention would spoil the experience for him. (Of course, it is the use of a safe word that makes this evident and I think that is why some bottoms want to go without one.) This is why a good sadist has to have intuition and insight; he has to guess what his bottom wants and how far he should be pushed.

Evidence for the centrality of the bottom in sadomasochistic encounters is the fact that nearly all SM porn stories are written in the first person by the bottom. As Dark Lord, says -- and I've often felt -- the top is a prop.

One final, possibly disturbing, thought: I sometimes suspect that there are no true sadists, only faint-hearted masochists; that is, the sadist is a masochist who for one reason or another, can't or won't act on his masochism, preferring to experience it second-hand and under his control.

[rubbearman]

Amazingly insightful and accurate. It was 'Truth Or Consequences' that impressed on my brain the joys of being put into various challenging scenarios for the pleasure of others. The non-violent, twisted humiliation the men (and their female partners) were forced to endure still makes me hard and happy. Though I've been practicing a long time ever since the early 1970's and have taken many advanced classes on 'technique', the basic turn-on is ever-present to endure whatever fun, torment I do to myself as a perverted soloist, or by the welcome challenge of my conspirator, coach, warden or 'host of the show'. May we now have our next contestant please?