|
In Reply to: Re: Your statement posted by someone else on October 02, 2006 at 21:05:55:
"Science aside, I think it is a logical tendency. When sex is made so trivial and routine and stripped of privacy and romance, it stands to figure that some people will need something more in order to muster a response."
Alright, science aside then.
A cow is an animal, does not mean an animal is a cow.
That S&M practitioners are desensitized in some way, does not mean desensitization leads to S&M.
Desensitization can sometimes, but does not always, lead to the need for harder forms of stimuli.
Fact: what any individual considers stimulating, progresses and changes over time, regardless of whether they are desensitized.
It is not "logical" that desensitization automatically leads to S&M or violent sex, as though they are the only choices of remaining when an individual lacks "simpler" stimuli.
A male working in a photo lab, exposed to nudity and scenes of sex, may not be easily aroused through seeing a naked woman, but may need to smell her vaginal secretions in order to achieve an erection; a gynecologist exposed to seeing and smelling vaginas all day long, may be aroused better through romance and intelligent conversation, than through the sight of a woman with her legs apart; but neither of them will necessarily be drawn to S&M and violent sex due to their desensitization. A sexually active individual may spend a whole lifetime being promiscuous and getting desensitized, without resorting to or showing interest in S&M or violent sex.
The view that S&M and violent sex are the inevitable result of desensitization, has typically been promoted by conservative religious segments of society, naive about the subject. However, there are entire cultures where large scale desensitization to nudity and "rampant sexual freedoms" occur, yet no evidence for S&M or violent sex being their norm.
S&M and the tendency to mixing violence with sex are built on something else in the psyche, and not necessarily related to desensitization. The ingredients for those orientations are often related to other factors, sometimes traceable to childhood, when the individual has yet to become desensitized.
Some have theorized that the phenomenon of S&M sub-cultures could in fact be caused in part, by the collision of the sexually progressive, with society's strict conservative mores. When mainstream society lacks social acceptance for sex and sexuality, viable alternative underground lifestyles are created, drawing in individuals who cannot identify with the mainstream.
S&M and violent sex practices have existed in force, where there were no prevalent "rampant sexual freedoms" in society at large, or in the individuals concerned. In fact, individuals often resort to S&M to satisfy their need for escapism from conservative society. Practitioners of S&M often (but not always) come from segments of high society, where the exercise of control and power are the norm. A S&M practitioner typically fantasizes about reversed roles from their real life. For example, a high court judge may wish to be whipped into submission by a dominatrix, who in real life is a wretch of society - a whore. The desire for dominance or submission is in fact the driving force behind sadomasochism, with the giving and receiving of pain acting only as an active stimulation to reinforce those feelings.
In today's societies, collective sexualization and default sexual mores are market-driven and market-determined (for example, fashion magazines set the standard, or they would argue "reflect" the standard, by saturating us with images of anorectic Barbie-doll ideals, and giving advice on how to get more sex from strangers). Markets in turn, are determined by government policies - magazines with frontal nudity will be considered soft porn, to be sold only in adult stores, where there happens to be hard porn as well. As a result, in a market-driven environment, where all things sexual are ghetto-ized, individuals wishing to indulge in, or satisfy their curiosity for simpler softer forms of stimuli, can get drawn in to consuming hard porn and "wierd" porn.
Not to equate porn consumption with drug consumption, but sexual ghetto-ization and the progression from soft to hard porn, might not be too different from the way hard and soft drugs are criminalized equally. By equating marijuana with crack cocaine, both products are driven into the hands of the same illegal vendors, into the same market. Buyers who start with a soft drug can be drawn into trying progressively harder drugs, by a vendor who promotes other equally illegal products. It has been shown that policies separating soft drugs from hard drugs, penalizing mainly the consumers/sellers of hard drugs, tend to abate the progression in users. Likewise, in some countries, the de-ghetto-ization and decriminalization of soft porn offsets a progression in porn consumption in the general population.
Progressive consumption is especially true for the Internet, where sexual ghetto-ization has fueled the growth of the porn industry. It has been argued that Internet porn arose as an answer to the lack of sexual acceptance and the unavailability of sexual gratification, in people's immediate geographic locations. A "beginner" looking for a peek at a relatively innocent nude picture of Marilyn Monroe, otherwise unpermitted in his immediate environment, could easily get drawn within a few mouse clicks, to "nude celeb sites," which link to voyeurism "peep cam" sites, "barely legal" teen sites, then to "anal-oral action" sites, and into an ever-widening range of fetish sites.
Even so, the practice of S&M or violent sex, are not necessarily brought on through porn consumption or the desensitization caused by it. Violent sex or S&M are an orientation - porn consumers are not inevitably drawn to S&M or violent porn, just because they are drawn into harder porn. There are other choices. They might be drawn towards "anal sex with big natural-titted mature women" sites, for example.
Although it happens, it is not established as a rule: Consumption does not always reflect in practice - and progression in consumption does not necessarily lead to a progression in practice. An individual moving from soft to hard porn, does not necessarily progress from "normal" sex to "harder" or "wierder" sex.
Those who practice S&M or violent sex, are often people who have had these preferences or inclinations from the early on, but often resort to introducing it into their relationships gradually, so as not to alarm their partners.
Overall, there is no proven logical correlation between desensitization and violent sex or S&M. That is a myth.
