Recent posts
Clarke. J, 2024, The State of Play in Sadomasochism: Harmless Fun or Trapping Procedure?, Reformulation 57, p.13-18
From the start of life, human relationships involve delicate negotiations between self-expression and concession to the needs of others, to remain acceptable to, and included in relationship. Construing this tension as a balancing of power, we see those with ‘good enough’ carers develop a relatively effective balance between meeting their own needs versus those of others. Where early efforts to exert self-agency fall on deaf ears, however, or are met with threat of exclusion or attack, procedures will develop to both avoid eliciting such responses, and to defend against unmanageable feelings. These procedures range from complete negation of individual needs & desires through prioritising the needs of others (‘false self’), to inflated preoccupation with personal needs & desires at the apparent dismissal of the needs of others (as in narcissistic constellations): the former renders the individual powerless and vulnerable to abuse, whereas the latter allows the individual to experience a sense of powerfulness - most fall somewhere between these two polarities. With maturation, sexual activity becomes an additional theatre for enactments of power.
Sociologists have posited sexual behaviour, since availability of contraception and freedom to divorce sex from its child-bearing function, as being a means of expressing individuality, and of expressing personal power through protestation and challenging of the status quo (Foucault, 1978; Giddens, 1992). Foucault states sexuality as “an especially dense transfer point for relations of power” (p.103): thus where clients present with difficulties evolving from early abuses of power, and with there being an inherent power imbalance in the therapy relationship, when sexuality enters therapy power dynamics may be amplified. My experience of working with masochistic clients, is that in each case this coincides with narcissistic styles of relating, and articulation of their sexual behaviour has felt as much a challenging of myself by clients, as the behaviour itself may be of society: with one client, this challenge seemed to manifest as contempt for what were assumed to be my conservative sexual choices, leaving me feeling mediocre and nondescript.
I regret my ignorance of BDSM when first encountering participants and wish to express my gratitude to them for both their trust, and the learning opportunities offered. Having worked with masochists only, my interest currently focuses on that experience: there is more to learn about the meanings to individuals of submissive roles generally, and of course regarding dominant ones also.
To remain in dialogue with clients who articulate sexual preferences, aside from exploring the meaning of their expressions within the therapy relationship itself, safe supervisory space is required to facilitate processing of potentially shaming feelings of disgust and/or arousal. Where sexual preferences are ‘transgressive’ (Denman, 2003), in order that neither party remain silenced and powerless, therapists will benefit from being conversant with BDSM terminology: without shared language, exploration of whether participation represents harmless fun enhancing wellbeing and intimacy, or the reverse will be difficult. Thus, a brief overview of BDSM practices follows.
A triple acronym, BDSM (bondage & discipline / domination & submission / sadism & masochism) implies, by definition, reciprocity: participants describe various reciprocal
roles and activities, each with subtle nuances and meanings for participants. Activities include bondage, spanking/whipping, body piercing, ‘rough sex’, and caretaking, all performed within role play settings, with partners assuming familial or non-familial relationships (e.g. father/son; teacher/student; master/dog). Each individual assumes a chosen age, gender or race, with submissive partners either subjugated or nurtured on the basis of these characteristics. Some routinely assume dominant (‘dom’ or ‘top’) or submissive (‘sub’ or ‘bottom’) roles, others alternate, or ‘switch’. ‘Play’ occurs within co-habiting relationships (on either an episodic or a 24/7 basis), within ‘parties’ where others engage alongside, or in private settings between non-co-habiting partners. Whilst sex may feature, it may be entirely absent: commonly, possibly because sex sells papers, media portrays the sexualised aspects, yet it is not necessarily about sexual gratification. Whilst some class themselves as sadists or masochists in the original sense of gaining sexual pleasure from infliction or receipt of pain (Von Krafft-Ebing’s definition, 1886) others experience physical, psychological and spiritual benefits (Taormino, 2012). Some support ‘risk-aware consensual kink’ – RACK – promoting core values of consent, communication and negotiation between partners regarding activities, plus commitment to safety, risk reduction, and aftercare; some operate outside this code, submissives passing complete authority to dominants - this is ‘consensual non-consent’, or ‘edge play’. Since edge play pushes limits of safety to the extreme – e.g. near suffocation or ligature – it’s agreed to be more dangerous. Non-participants may anticipate dominants as holding power, yet participants distinguish between ‘power’ and ‘control’, saying submissives hold power because they typically set the boundaries”; dominants, whilst playing at holding power, mostly exert control in maintaining those boundaries (Hebert & Weaver, 2015). Realistically, distinctions between upper and lower roles are perhaps illusory, since within most sexual encounters, there’s rapid cycling between both states, each imagining the others’ experience.
Clients I’ve worked with take masochistic roles, and it is descriptions of their experiences therein which raises my interest in exploring a possible relationship between masochism and attachment trauma. Sex is reported as peripheral, for them, and experiencing pain is not, per se, the end objective: rather, pain is a means to an end – or, in fact, to several consecutive states. The first clue indicating possible links to trauma, was one client’s statement that, regarding the second state induced, ‘I’m oxytocin high’. Oxytocin being ‘the bonding chemical’, I was struck by the stark contrast to the embodied sense of unending emptiness described in his early years. Before expanding on this, I’ll firstly review the initial state experienced by masochists.
The initial state, ‘sub-space’ occurs during flagellation, and is reported in BDSM literature to range from mild to more intense experiences. In a submissive’s words: “…the fear element gets the adrenal glands going, flooding the system with epinephrine, followed by endorphins. Epinephrine (also known as adrenaline) energizes us when we are in the thick of “danger.” Once we know that the danger is over, the endorphins kick in. These are the body’s natural painkillers, and they model opioids in how they make us feel, relaxing us, giving us a sense of calm and wellbeing” (LaMorgese, 2015). Full understanding of the neurochemical processes which are activated seems to be common in participants, as does manipulation of those processes in order to obtain the desired level of intoxication. Some seek more extreme experiences than described above, extending the duration of sessions so as to maximise effects: feeling out of body, detached from reality, or deeply spiritual, are commonly reported. By necessity though, since only finite doses of endorphins can physiologically be released at one go, consecutive episodes of pain are required to maximise impact: accumulated analgesic effects mean that exponentially greater inflictions of pain are required in order to prompt subsequent endorphin release – this results in substantial tissue injury. One client of mine favours the extreme experience on three counts: firstly, what others class as ‘pain’ he celebrates as ‘intensity’; secondly, exaggerated opiate effects relieve him of painful feelings experienced on a daily basis; thirdly, he relishes the soothing and reassurance which dominants offer routinely, in between bouts of flagellation – this reportedly activates release of oxytocin.
The following state, wherein the same client describes being ‘oxytocin high’, is experienced during ‘aftercare’ once flagellation ceases. Drops in adrenalin alongside the incapacitating effect of opiate intoxication, create inability to function: intensities vary, but with my above client seeking the extreme experience, his disability is such as to require total physical care, e.g. toileting, keeping warm, and offering fluids. On some occasions he’s not received aftercare, being left alone, cold and thirsty in the BDSM ‘chamber’: when tended to, in contrast, he’s felt ‘warm inside’, ‘glowing’, ‘like I’ve come home’. Against the backdrop of a chillingly desolate infancy and childhood, his descriptions greatly impacted on me.
The final state is ‘sub-drop’, a physiological consequence of the processes above, and described as akin to ‘come-down’ from amphetamine high: feelings of depression and aloneness last for hours or days after participation. Dominants ideally offer follow-up care via phone or visits during this period, but for some the feelings are unbearable, and they crave re-engagement in masochism. This has been the case for one of my clients, especially since his dominant is experienced as quite neglectful generally.
Having developed a common BDSM vocabulary, the next task of therapy is determining whether the activity is ‘expressive’ versus ‘defensive’ (Harding, 2001). Participants cite positive benefits (see Richters et al, 2008; Wismeijer & Van Assen, 2013; Hebert & Weaver, 2015). These expressions should not be dismissed, as BDSM may represent a harmless pastime: alternatively, there may be costs. The key to discovering which is the case is, as always, curiosity: where researchers claim to present the voice of participants, CAT therapists are curious regarding which voice is speaking.
The map below amalgamates several client maps, illustrating self-states and procedures held in common. Each had endured early pervasive neglect, interspersed with episodes of physical abuse: subjected to this lose/lose scenario, with no means of accessing a sense of safety, they’d created fantastical solutions. Throughout life, of course, re-enactment of trapping and snagging procedures has elicited responses resonant with early experiences, so reinforcing beliefs of self, other and world, and maintaining the scenario where ‘all roads lead to despair’. Using the split egg template facilitates mapping of all this (see figure 1).
Within therapy, compensatory styles of relating have manifested: my first client engaged well in mapping these, but we lacked opportunity to map masochistic states - taking each masochistic state in turn now, I’ll reflect on how each interfaces with the map above.
Firstly, seeking partners to inflict flagellation resonates with ‘compulsion to repeat’, yet here clients occupy a position of power in dictating specifics, a role reversal evidencing attempts to stay safe in relationship. Need for self-agency, mastery and power is noted by Kurt & Ronel (2017), who see this manifesting as proving superior ability to tolerate pain, as well as in dictating specifics – my experience as therapist is certainly of feeling dictated to, with attempts at expression of ‘self as therapist’ being met with superiority and contempt. Kurt & Ronel identify masochists as desperately seeking protection and security, with needs anticipated and gratified without need of articulation - ‘ideal care’. They also suggest that objectification of dominants equates with Winnicott’s transitional object, easing “transition from the child’s omnipotent world to the real uncontrollable world lying beyond the self”. In addition, and pertinent, given my clients’ early witnessing of murderous violence, they reference masochistic fantasies of sadists as omnipotent, indestructible, and immune to annihilation. All this has echoes of the imbalance of power and defensive compensatory states illustrated in the map above.
Reflecting next on the sub-space state experienced during flagellation, one client’s reference to ‘intensity’ is interesting: Kurt & Ronel (ibid) describe the allure of an experience of intense sensation otherwise lacking in those experiencing emotional blandness in childhood, pertinent given the ‘not existing’ state on the above map. Another client’s report of feeling connected to the ‘nucleus’ of himself saddens me, as I detect in his drugged state, a complete absence of ‘self’, as regards a continuous over-arching and integrated experience of his identity: again, there are resonances with the map above, especially with the ‘not existing’ state. The role of traumatic attachments such as underscore narcissistic styles of relating are particularly noted in relation to neurochemical processes in masochism by Berner & Briken (2012), who identify a ‘perfect storm’ wherein disregard for relational aspects of sexual encounters, alongside difficulties regulating urges to indulge, increase danger of succumbing to impulses and dependency - where such capitulation involves opiates, they name the neurochemical processes involved in dependency as ‘hijacking’ the healthy seeking-system, creating cravings. Kurt and Ronel (2017), note similar tensions, suggesting ‘behavioural spin’ emerges out of the whole process, wherein frequency and intensity of participation increases, gaining its own momentum. With this beyond the capacity of individuals to exit, they suggest sexual masochism might represent a severe level of substance dependency. This indicates not just enactment of already mapped trapping procedures, but activation of dependency mechanisms also.
Regarding aftercare as a means of accessing previously never experienced feelings of safety and contentment, I’ve mentioned one client’s experience of feeling warm and ‘at home’: he has made a link between this and early neglect, a hugely moving experience for us both, yet since accessing this experience is dependent on re-engagement in sadomasochism it becomes another trap leading to despair, further driven by the sub-drop experience. Furthermore, masochists are rendered powerless and vulnerable to inexperienced, cruel or neglectful partners, paralleling elicitations from the abused state mapped above.
Taking account of the particulars above, mapping of clients’ masochistic states has resulted in the hypothetical map below (fig. 2).
Returning to whether BDSM is harmless fun or a trapping procedure, this is a brief summary of core themes so far noted, yet it highlights that whilst activities may be harmless for some, for others, sexual masochism could, aside from incurring substantial physical trauma, reinforce and sustain existing states and beliefs which trap individuals in distress. Moreover, it’s sadly ironic that for already traumatised individuals participating in masochism, inventive attempts to achieve sexual intimacy whilst retaining power and safety within that connection, run the risk of backfiring, with the power divested of ‘others’ and brought back to ‘self’, paradoxically transmuting so as to turn against the self from within.
Jane Clarke is a CAT Psychotherapist and CAT Supervisor in training.
References:
Berner, W. and Briken, P. (2012). Pleasure Seeking and the Aspect of Longing for an Object In Perversion: A Neuropsychoanalytical Perspective. American Journal of Psychotherapy 66(2) pp.129-150.
Denman, C. (2003). Psychoanalytic Perspective on Perversion Reformulated, Reformulation Article.
Foucault, M. (1978). The History of Sexuality: volume 1 - The Will to Knowledge, Penguin Books Ltd.
Giddens, A. (1992). The Transformation of Intimacy: Sexuality, Love and Eroticism in Modern Societies. Polity.
Harding, C. (2001). Sexuality, Psychoanalytic Perspectives. Routledge.
Hebert, A. & Weaver, A. (2015.) Perks, problems, and the people who play: a qualitative exploration of dominant and submissive BDSM roles, The Canadian Journal of Sexuality 24 (1) pp.49-62.
Kurt, H. and Ronel, N. (2017). ‘Addicted to Pain: A Preliminary Model of Sexual Masochism as Addiction’. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 61 (15) pp.1760-1774.
LaMorgese, S. (2015). ‘How ‘Edge Play’ Can Spice Up A Monotonous Sex Life’. Available at
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/edge-play_b_9473490?guccounter=1 (accessed 28 March 2019)
Richters, J., De Visser, R.O., Rissel, C.E., Grulich, A.E., and Smith, A.M. (2008). Demographic and Psychosocial Features of Participants in Bondage and Discipline, “Sadomasochism”, or Dominance and Submission (BDSM): Data from a National Survey. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 5 (8) pp. 1660-1668.
Solms and Turnbull. (2002). Cited in Berner & Briken 2012. Pleasure Seeking and the Aspect of Longing for an Object In Perversion: A Neuropsychoanalytical Perspective. American Journal of Psychotherapy 66(2) pp.129-150.
Taormino, T. (2012). The Ultimate Guide to Kink. Cleis Press.
von Krafft-Ebing, R. (1866). Psychopathia Sexualis. Available at https://archive.org/details/PsychopathiaSexualis1000006945 (accessed 19 September 2018)
Wismeijer, A.A. and van Assen, M.A. (2013). Psychological Characteristics of BDSM Practitioners. Journal of Sexual Medicine 10 (8) pp.1943-1952.