The word masochism was coined by Dr. Richard von Krafft-Ebing in 1890. It was named after a patient of his who named the term after a patient of his named Leopold von Sacher-Masoch. His patient was a “masochist” and had written a novel entitled “Venus in Furs” (Noyes, 5). The novel depicted “the masochistic relationship between Serverin von Kusiemski dreamer and dillatante, and Wanda von Dunajew, a beautiful, free-spirited widow, to whom he becomes a slave” (Schlemowitz). The novel was based around events in Sacher-Masoch’s life.
Later Freud studied masochism, he made the important point about it that “Whenever our culture has imagined the masochist turning his cheek to receive a blow, I has always been absolutely essential that the blow is dealt by the right kind of person in the right kind of setting” (Noyes, 140). Freud was obviously an influential member of the field of psychology and his views on masochism developed it as a topic for study. Previously little academic work had been done on the subject.
Between 1924 and 1938 the theory of Masochism gained prominence. This was likely due to the influence of Freud on younger minds who he had trained in the field, such as Helene Deutsch (1884 – 1982), Karen Horney (1885-1952), Theodor Reik(1888 – 1969) and Wilhelm Reich(1897-1957)(Noyes, 166). However Freud’s disciples viewed masochism in a different light. “masochism was more real than it was for Freud. This meant that they approached it in the first instance as a clinical phenomenon, and not a metaphysical problem” (Noyes, 166). This distinction brings the study of masochism closer to real psychology and allowed for masochism’s objective study.
The first woman to study masochism and publish on it was Helene Deutsch. “She argued that since Freud had shown masochism to be characteristically passive, and since women were biologically passive, women are biologically predisposed to masochism” (Noyes, 168). Her view was understandably controversial and was particularly despised by feminists. Freud’s view that women are passive, which is the foundation for her reasoning, has also been questioned.
Another woman who studied masochism found a different view. Horney viewed masochism as an individual reaction rather than as an overarching one. “Horney sees masochism as a much more makeshift and contingent response of the individual to a given sociocultural environment” (Noyes, 179). This highlights how different theories have developed as well as the controversy that still surrounds what masochism is and what it is caused by.
Masochism as it is represented today:
Masochism is defined as “1: a sexual perversion characterized by pleasure in being subjected to pain or humiliation especially by a love object [and] 2: pleasure in being abused or dominated: a taste for suffering” (Merriam Webster). In this way masochism could be construed as either sexual or independent of sex. However in society the first definition with its sexual connotations is commonly assumed.
In society masochism is frequently not understood, many people fail to realize that people can carry a desire for pain or view pain as a type of pleasure. In fact the DSM-IV still categories masochism as a disorder. According to another source, “There are different theories related to sexual masochism, many stemming from the psychoanalytic camp. They suggest that childhood trauma (e.g., sexual abuse) or significant childhood experiences can manifest itself in exhibitionistic behavior”(allpsych) and that symptoms of this unfortunate disorder are “characterized by either intense sexually arousing fantasies, urges, or behaviors in which the individual is humiliated, beaten, bound, or made to suffer in some way”. This demonstrates the mainstream attitude towards people who are masochists.
Since society is critical and misunderstanding of masochists they are unlikely to openly admit their desires. In addition to the critique of sexual masochists by society “cutters” are also ridiculed. They are viewed as a whole as emo kids who perform self-destructive stunts for attention. However while “cutters” fit the second definition of masochism they are rarely called such because of the overwhelming idea that masochism is inherently sexual.
There are no readily available positive images of sexual masochists in mainstream society. Therefore sexual masochists often become part of subcultures where they are understood differently. In subculture people frequently accept that masochism in not inherently a psychological disorder and therefore provide a more welcoming atmosphere.
Interestingly though while “masochists” are treated with distain people who simply like to be bitten or scratched are common and acceptable in main stream society. While these people are technically masochists society fails to categorize them as such. Apparently there is a defining line in society between how much pain is incidental and how much is “sick”. When one looks for examples of incidental masochism or mild masochism there are more present, such as in sex scenes on TV and in movies. These preferences for being bitten or scratched fail to carry the masochist stigma, which demonstrates that there is a stigma associated with masochism once it is anything but exceptionally mild. These people still derive sexual pleasure from the pain of biting and scratching but they are not exiled for it.
Personally:
I completely reject the idea that masochism is an inherent disorder. I have never been sexually abused and I am not exhibitionist. In fact, the idea that I am being watched makes me self-conscious instead of aroused. Masochism can be a problem if it is not practiced safely in either of its sexual or asexual forms. However this is not a problem that dirties all masochism because masochism can be practiced safely in many ways. Society reflects only masochism as a taboo and fails to examine it independent of that.
I think Freud’s point about context is important. Simply because someone is a masochist does not mean that they enjoy all pain. I don’t enjoy car crashes or stubbed toes but the right kind of pain in the right context can be relaxing or arousing. It requires a degree of trust to let someone hurt you physically but many people are open to being hurt emotionally in relationships where they would dream on subjecting themselves to slight physical pain. The point is that yes, masochism has the danger of unwanted pain but so do all relationships and things. It is a risk that is accepted (although this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t practice precautions – there is a different between accepting risks and creating them).
The reason that people are willing to accept the potential risk that someone will actually hurt them is balanced against the pleasure they derived from the intended pain. Masochism can release endorphins which in create a pleasurable sensation for the person being “hurt”. I find that I cannot jump straight into pain but enjoy slowly being warmed up for it and then I enjoy it quite passionately. However with some types of pain I am able to directly appreciate the pain, without being “warmed up”, one of these is biting.
I’m not entirely sure what caused me to be a masochist or derive pleasure in pain but I have a feeling that it is more likely chemical and not psychological. I would guess that more endorphins are released in certain people in certain context than others – so people respond differently to sensual pain. Since I was not sexually abused and am unaware of any childhood trauma I doubt the diagnosis of sexual masochism as a disorder. I fail to see the danger that masochism poses to a masochist either psychologically or physically, provided it is practice with care. To me the idea that I should abstain from a type of pleasure because it is not understood by society is nonsensical.
Biliograpghy:
"Masochism." Merriam Webster. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 June 2010.
"Masochism in Paraphilias and Sexual Disorders at ALLPSYCH Online." Psychology Classroom at AllPsych Online. N.p., n.d. Web. 3 June 2010.
Noyes, John K.. The Mastery of Submission: Inventions of Masochism (Cornell Studies in the History of Psychiatry). Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1997.
Schlemowitz, Joel. "Leopold von Sacher-Masoch." Joel Schlemowitz. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 June 2010.
