AriesGoddess wrote:
Well are you? Who else can relate to me?
I mean I am still submissive in nature to the right man but I really only desire to be given pain. That is where I will be submissive, to get my pain.
I will still pop my mouth off and have little/middle tendencies sometimes but that is just so the beatings can be ten times worse.
Yes, I push buttons, roll my eyes, make snarky remarks and back talk, borderline disrespectful.... sometimes flat out disrespectful.
But its all for that one goal..... receive pain.
Knowing I will get it worse and without warning. Bring out that bloodthurst in his eyes that makes me weak, borderline fearful...
Sometimes I will play fearful (submissive me) so he can get what he needs too. It drives him to the point where that level of pain I need can be given.
Call me submissive too I guess, but not just for anything.
i don't think this question has a simple "true" or "false" answer? i don't consider myself a physical masochist at all, but when i read the definition for "masochist" i find "humiliation" included in at least one, and i definitely derive erotic gratification from some forms of humiliation/degradation, so a "spectrum" for measurement makes sense to me, i question the notion of absolutes. These are just my thoughts though, added to the discussion.
For starters, here's a couple of definitions of "masochist"copied and pasted from the Webster and Oxford dictionaries:
Webster:
"a person who derives sexual gratification from being subjected to physical pain or humiliation"
Oxford:
"a person who gets sexual pleasure from being hurt or controlled by somebody else"
Both 'authorities' on words appear to me to include D/s in the definition? "Sub[jected]," "controlled." To me, that reads like they include at least a component of domintiion/subjugation/submission?
Can either a Sadist or masochist derive "sexual gratification" or "sexual pleasure" on their own? i'm guessing a sadist might, sort of, if there was no consent, but that's still not really on their own, they still need a subject? Could a masochist achieve what they need without submitting to a sadist? As i think about it, what you describe about about how you "push buttons..." sounds like it borders on blurring consent? In either case though, doesn't each need a form of their opposite to meet their need? That S&M is relational?
sardonicus87 wrote: "S&M by itself, is only about pain. No pain? Not S&M. Pretty simple. It's not about "one true way", it's about that's literally what a sadist/masochist is: they "get off" (for lack of a better term) on inflicting/receiving pain. But also what distinguishes it is they get off on the pain itself."
It seems to me though that "...they get off on the pain itself," but not independent from the sadist? To me there seems to be a (neccesary?) relational connection happening, on some level, otherwise, couldn't a 'true' masochist get their needs met self inflicting? And if there is a necessary relational connection, how does one measure which carries more weight? (i.e., the relationship or the pain?). i don't see how "S&M by itself, is only about the pain"?
Re "spectrum," i don't see how one can 'truly' measure (anything other than arithmetic) otherwise? Especially something as fluid and multidimensional as human nature.
i'm a critical care nurse and part of my patient assessment on all patients (i've done thousands of these), is pain assessment. in medicine, we use a scale of 0-10, "0" being no pain at all and "!0" being the worst pain one can have. Invariably, there are patients who assert pain of "15." i also assess for a 'management' number or goal for chronic pain sufferers. Pain assessment is totally subjective and it's a tool used to help manage that particular patients pain. It has to be an individual assessment and personalized intervention to be effective, it isn't as simple as 'true' or 'false' pain, everyone is different, even though over time i've encountered patterns. One persons "3" is another persons "10."