Beyond Pleasure / Pain

"Rome becomes goddess and labyrinth..."

Tibullus wrote:

"at mihi parce, Venus: simper tibi dedita servit
mens mea: quid messes uris acreba tuas (97-98)

"Be gentle with me, Venus: my soul is ever they loyal slave.
Why burn thine own corn in thy passion?"

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

White Wounding.

Quote :

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

"Skoptsy is a plural of 'skopets,' an archaic word meaning 'castrated one' in the Russian language. As their title indicates, the main feature of the sect was castration. They believed that after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve had the halves of the forbidden fruit grafted onto their bodies forming testicles and breasts. Thus, the removal of these sexual organs restored the Skoptsy to the pristine state before the Original Sin. In this the Skoptsy maintained that they were fulfilling Christ’s counsel of perfection in [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.].

There were two kinds of castration: the 'lesser' and 'greater seal' (i.e. partial and complete castration). For men, 'lesser' castration was the removal of the testicles only, while 'greater' castration was the removal of the penis as well."
The reason was not that they were born in the wrong body, but:

Quote :

"The Skoptsy also believed that a chief evil of the world is rooted in the lepost (bodily beauty, human sexuality, sex appeal, etc.) which prevents people from communicating with God. The way to perfection begins with the elimination of the cause followed by the liberation of soul. Castration ensured that all sins caused by lepost could not be committed."

Naive readers could get an idea that Skoptsy were just a handful of crazies who couldn’t afford good hashish and ended up excessively sniffing glue, while scissors, to their misfortune, happened to be ready at hand. However, it was not entirely so:

Quote :

"Membership in the Skoptsy sect was not restricted to the peasant class. Nobles, military and naval officers, civil servants, priests and merchants were to be found in its ranks, and its numbers were so great that 515 male and 240 female members were transported to Siberia between 1847 and 1866 without seriously threatening its existence. In 1874 the sect numbered at least 5444, including 1465 women. Of these 703 men and 100 women had partaken in bodily mutilation."

Today, simply on account of cheap status whoring, people are prepared to amputate genitalia of their own children or feed them hormones. the key issue in both is the belief in the existence of Original Sin and the idea that this can be washed away only by great and deep suffering and renunciation – purchasing sainthood with self-mutilation:

Quote :

"They believed that after the expulsion from the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve had the halves of the forbidden fruit grafted onto their bodies forming testicles and breasts. Thus, the removal of these sexual organs restored the Skoptsy to the pristine state before the Original Sin."

The reason this occurred to me is because of an article in the Huffington Post, [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] massively shared via Twitter in the last few days by various Evilthinkers. The closing chorus is simply too good to be left unsung along:

Quote :

"Thus, white wounding is a call to action. It’s time to put our friends, family, co-workers, bosses, partners, social media connections, and our own comfort aside. The problem is real, and it is killing people. At this moment one of the most important and rudimentary things white anti-racists can do is spread awareness among other whites about racial inequality and oppression. It’s time for white wounding."

The essential thing being pushed here is an idea that, in order to be saved from the 'sin' of racism, one has to suffer certain form of self-destruction, necessary for enlightenment and the forgiveness of sins. Broadly: one has to have faith in Original Sin, which can be washed away only by intense physical pain, abstinence from earthly delights, and by belonging to proper group of people.


In the case of the Skoptsy, the order of the day was getting castrated and following the leader who declared himself to be the Son of God. In the case of the contemporary liberal elite, one has to make his or hers fellow men suffer by chanting the mantra of diversity while constantly feeling ashamed of the sins of one's forefathers.

As G.K. Chesterton said:

Quote :

"When a man stops believing in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he believes anything.

This perfectly applies to the liberals of today, be they atheists or hippy-Christian abominations. They have faith in the Original Sin of patriarchy, misogyny, racism, and homophobia, and, in order to make amends, they’ll make their fellow men pass through fire and leave a poorer, uglier, crueler world to their descendants. They need more Fergusons, Rotherams, more suffering, pain, and horror, in order to liberate the corrupted souls from sin and bring them closer to the Lord's Progress:

Quote :

"For I, Progress, your God, am a jealous God. I punish the sin of the fathers – those who hate me – down to the third and fourth generation, and show mercy to thousands who love me and obey my commands."

Bear in mind, of course, that the act of sacrifice won’t be equally distributed. The higher priesthood will sit back, smiling contently and observing the sacred deeds via their iPads. They’ll attend the diversity conferences in their 98% white-only neighborhoods, guarded by armed security, or they’ll visit Belgrade to get themselves photographed with children of Middle Eastern immigrants. People of poor beginnings and the generally lower strata of society – those who are not materially secure but are working like hell to get there – will, however, bear the full weight of the Glad Tidings upon their shoulders.

P.S. Comparisons of liberals with Skoptsy is entirely deliberate. Liberals have low levels of testosterone. Accepting political correctness is auto-castration.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

On kindness.

One kind is such it never wants to hurt anybody empathizing with the displeasure and pain and the meaninglessness of it, it would cause.

Another kind of kindness is such it doesn't stop at pleasure/displeasure it may cause in the immediate, concerned with the longer welfare in the larger view of things.

And there is also a third kind. A curiosity and a thirst for challenge that drives it to take up and dwell on all problems and is thus often mistaken for kindness, when it is rather a severe, exalted love.

The Masochist.

Some very interesting insights into the nature of the masochist, but note how the Xt. Reich committed to anti-patriarchy tries to boil it down to sociological factors (red bolded).

While Freud had kept it to the biological death-instinct, Reich counters him to explain it via sociology.
Not Freud's 'how biology affects the social', how repression leads to neurosis and civilization,,, but Reich's 'how the social affects biology'…

Logically it then follows to Reich, how and why a sexual revolution can change society and the world we live in.

Reich wrote:

"For the first time in the history of sexual pathology, it was proven on the basis of clinical investigations that:

1) The phenomena used to substantiate the hypothesis of the theory of the death instinct can be traced back to a specific form of orgasm anxiety.
2) Masochism is not a biologically determined drive; rather, it is a secondary drive in the sexeconomic sense, i.e., the result of a repression of natural sexual mechanisms.
3) There is no biological striving for unpleasure; hence, there is no death instinct.

The theory of the death instinct, i.e., the theory of self-destructive biological instincts, leads to a cultural philosophy of human suffering (cf. Civilization and Its Discontents). Human suffering is said to be ineradicable because destructive impulses and impulses striving toward self-annihilation cannot be mastered. The original formulation of the psychic conflict, on the other hand, leads to a critique of the social system.

In the shifting of the source of suffering from the outer world, from society, to the inner world, and in its reduction to a biological tendency, one of analytic psychology’s original and cardinal principles, the “pleasure-unpleasure principle,” was severely undermined. The pleasure-unpleasure principle is a basic law of the psychic apparatus, according to which pleasure is sought and unpleasure is avoided. In the previous concept, pleasure and unpleasure—or, otherwise expressed, the psychic reaction to pleasurable and unpleasurable stimuli—determined psychic development and psychic reactions. The “reality principle” was not antithetical to the pleasure principle; it merely implied that, in the course of development and because of the influence of the outer world, the psychic apparatus has to get used to postponing momentary gains of pleasure and to forgoing some entirely. These “two principles of psychic functioning” could be valid only so long as masochism was regarded as the desire to endure suffering arising from an inhibition of the tendency to inflict pain or suffering upon another person—was regarded, that is, as inverted sadism. So conceived, masochism lay wholly within the framework of the pleasure principle, though the problem remained as to how suffering can be pleasurable. From the very beginning, this was at variance with the nature and meaning of the pleasure function. While it was possible to understand how ungratified or inhibited pleasure could be transformed into unpleasure, it was hard to understand how unpleasure could become pleasure. In short, even the original concept of the generally accepted pleasure principle did not solve the basic enigma of masochism, for to say that masochism consisted in the pleasure derived from unpleasure did not explain anything.

A typical masochistic character trait is a chronic, subjective feeling of suffering which is manifested objectively and especially stands out as a tendency to complain. Additional traits of the masochistic character are chronic tendencies to inflict pain upon and to debase oneself (“moral masochism”) and an intense passion for tormenting others, from which the masochist suffers no less than his object. Common to all masochistic characters is an awkward, ataxic behavior, especially prevalent in their mannerisms and intercourse with people. In some cases, these traits can take on the nature of pseudo-dementia. Other character traits are sometimes present, but they do not make any noticeable change in the total picture. What is important is that, in some cases, this character-neurotic syndrome presents itself openly, while in other cases it is concealed by a surface disguise.

Genetically and historically, a deep disappointment in love lies behind the[ir] provocation. The masochist is especially fond of provoking those objects through whom he suffered a disappointment. Originally, these objects were intensely loved, and either an actual disappointment was experienced or the love demanded by the child was not sufficiently satisfied. It is already possible to note that a strong need for love goes along with the real disappointments experienced by the masochistic character.

What was the meaning of the provocation? This was his way of asking for love, a way peculiar to all masochistic characters. He needed proofs of love to reduce his inner tension and anxiety. This demand for love was directly dependent upon the degree of tension produced by his unsatisfactory form of masturbation. The more “squalid” he felt, the more strongly he displayed masochism in his behavior, i.e., the more urgent became his demand for love, which he sought to fulfill with every possible means. But why was this demand for love made in this indirect, veiled manner? Why did he defend himself so tenaciously against every interpretation of his attachment? Why did he go on complaining?
His complaints showed the following stratification with respect to their meaning, corresponding to the genesis of his masochism: “You see how miserable I am—love me!” “You don’t love me enough—you are mean to me!” “You have to love me; I will force you to love me. If you don’t love me, I’ll make you angry!” The masochistic passion for torment, the complaints, the provocation, and the suffering can, in terms of their meaning—we shall discuss their dynamics later—be explained on the basis of the fantasized or actual non-fulfillment of a quantitatively inordinate demand for love. This mechanism is specific to the masochistic character.

What is the meaning of the inordinate demand for love? Information about this is supplied by the analysis of the predisposition to anxiety which is always found in masochistic characters. There is a direct correlation between the masochistic attitude and the demand for love on the one hand and unpleasurable tension and the predisposition to anxiety (or danger of loss of love) on the other hand. The former is not antithetical to the predisposition to anxiety as a source of masochistic reaction, for again it is typical of the masochistic character to check the threat of anxiety by demanding love. Just as the complaining represents a disguised demand for love and the provocation, a desperate attempt to force love, the total formation of the masochistic character represents an abortive attempt to rid oneself of anxiety and unpleasure. It is abortive because, no matter how hard he tries, he never frees himself from the inner tension which constantly threatens to change into anxiety. Thus, the feeling of suffering corresponds to a concrete fact, namely the continually high-pitched inner excitement and predisposition to anxiety.

The masochistic character seeks to bind the inner tension and threat of anxiety by an inadequate method, namely by courting love through provocation and defiance. Naturally, there is a special reason for this, i.e., this manner of expressing the demand for love is specific to the masochistic character. It doesn’t succeed, because the defiance and the provocation are directed at the person who is loved and from whom love is demanded. In this way, the fear of losing love and attention is increased, just as the guilt feeling which one wants to be rid of is not diminished but intensified, for the beloved person is in fact tormented. This explains the extremely peculiar behavior of the masochist, who becomes more and more enmeshed in the situation of suffering, the more intensely he tries to extricate himself from it. It could not be otherwise, for these attempts to bind anxiety in the character are doomed from the outset.

We have spoken thus far of the inordinate demand for love on the part of the masochistic character. Now we have to add that this demand for love is based on a fear of being left alone that was intensely experienced in very early childhood. The masochistic character cannot endure being alone any more than he can endure the possibility of losing a love relationship. The fact that masochistic characters so often are lonely is ascribable to the success of a secondary mechanism embodied in the attitude: “See how unhappy, alone, and deserted I am.” Once, while discussing his relationship to his mother, our patient exclaimed in great excitement: “To be left alone is to be dead—my life is cut off!” I have often heard this feeling expressed by other masochistic characters, merely phrased differently. The masochistic character cannot endure the loss of an object (masochistic clinging to the love object) any more than he can divest it of its protective role. He cannot endure the loss of contact. When this happens, he will seek to reestablish it in his own inadequate way, i.e., by courting sympathy through misery. Many such characters are very susceptible to the feeling of being alone and deserted in the universe. We see no reason to interpret this feeling in the Rankian sense of womb anxiety, even if it is a common attitude. The fact is that in every masochist, whether he is masochistic solely in the moralistic sense or in the openly erogenic sense, we find a specifically erogenic basis for this feeling. In saying this, however, we are anticipating the later discussion of the masochist’s sexual structure.

The fact that skin eroticism plays a special role in masochists is known from several psychoanalytic authors (Sadger, Federn, and others). However, they attempted to regard skin eroticism as the direct basis for the masochistic perversion, whereas analysis shows that the skin assumes this special role in a very complicated and roundabout way, namely only when various elements of disappointment coincide. Only the fear of being left alone is based directly on the fear which arises when the contact with the skin of the loved person is lost. Let us begin by seeking out the syndrome which pertains to the skin in the erogenic masochists. We always find in one form or another an urge for activity involving the skin, or at least corresponding fantasies: being pinched, rubbed with brushes, beaten with whips, tied up—anything which causes the skin to bleed. The buttocks assume an important role in this connection, but only in the indirect way of the anal fixation. Common to these strivings is the desire to feel the warmth of the skin—the original intent is not a desire for pain. The object of being whipped is not to suffer pain; rather, pain is put up with for the sake of the “burning.” Coldness, on the other hand, has a repelling effect. Some masochists even go so far as to fantasize that their skin is being burned. Our patient’s “loafing in bed” can also be traced back to this, i.e., the gratification of a desire for warmth of the skin.

In terms of the physiology of anxiety, the contraction of the peripheral vessels heightens anxiety (pallor in the case of fright; sensation of cold in the anxiety state; chills brought on by fear, etc.). On the other hand, the sensation of warm skin caused by the stronger flow of blood through the peripheral vessels is a specific attribute of pleasure. Physiologically, inner tension is determined by the restriction of the flow of blood. The strong flow of blood through the body periphery, on the other hand, relieves the inner tension and, consequently, the physiological basis of the anxiety. From the physiological point of view, the fear-resolving effect of the orgasm is essentially based upon this process, which represents a remarkable change in the blood circulation with peripheral vessel dilation and discharge of tension in the center (splanchnic vessels).

It is not easy to understand why body contact with the loved person has the effect of resolving anxiety. In all likelihood, this can be explained by the fact that, physiologically, body warmth in the above sense and the innervation of the body periphery in the expectation of maternal protection resolve or at least alleviate the inner tension.

The peripheral vasodilatation, which relieves the inner tension and anxiety, represents the erogenic basis of the masochistic character. His later endeavor to avoid the loss of contact is merely the psychic duplication of a physiological process of innervation. To be left alone in the world means to be cold and unprotected, i.e., an intolerable condition of tension.

The oral greediness in masochism is much more likely the regressive result of an early disappointment in the love object, followed by the fear of being deserted, than a primary cause of the masochistic need for love. Several cases clearly revealed that the inordinate need for love stemmed from a different source. Here the fear of being left alone could be traced back to that phase of development in which violent aggressions and incipient infantile sexual curiosity, as opposed to the oral and anal impulses, met with severe frustrations by the loved parent or guardian. The enormous fear of punishment which obstructs the advance to genitality is the direct result of this contradiction between sexual impulses that are not only not frowned upon but even encouraged and those threatened with severe punishment. Our patient was allowed to eat as much as he wanted; indeed, he was encouraged to eat. He was allowed to lie in bed with his mother, to embrace her, pet her, etc. His bowel functions were faithfully taken care of. However, when he set about to explore further possibilities of sexual gratification, to take an interest in his mother’s genital, to want to touch her, etc., then he experienced the full severity of parental authority. Insofar as oral demands contribute to masochism, they account for the mood of depression, as they do in the other forms of neurosis. On the basis of what is presently known, the special combination of skin eroticism, anality, and the fear of being left alone which seeks resolution through body contact is specifically characteristic of masochism.

This erogenic disposition is one of the essential causes of the inordinate demand for love, which has the specific undertone of “warm me” (= “protect me”). “Beat me” is an expression of the same striving, but its form has already been changed. It would seem that the masochistic character had not received sufficient love and, for this reason, had developed such a strong demand for love. This is true as far as it goes. But it must also be borne in mind that he also suffered severe frustrations of love. Often, indeed, exaggerated coddling gives rise to it. This excessive demand for love, in turn, is itself the result of the miasma which is part and parcel of the patriachal system of education. The masochistic character is more than a disposition to anal or skin eroticism; rather, it is the result of a specific combination of external influences exercised upon the erogenic susceptibility of the skin and upon the entire sexual apparatus. This combination of influences specifically determines the masochistic character.

[The patient] tended to be readily disappointed on the most insignificant grounds and withdrew from reality into masochistic fantasies at the slightest difficulty. This vacillation between vigorous attempts to establish genital contact with reality and rapid retreats into masochism lasted for many months. Now it was revealed that he was full of anxiety notions about the genitals. Here are a few examples: the vagina is a “mire” swarming with snakes and vermin; his phallus is nipped off at the tip; one plunges into an abyss and does not find one’s way out. Above all, it was discovered that he immediately withdrew from the woman when a rival appeared. The idea that he had a small penis could not be easily dislodged. He developed an envious attitude toward every rival, which was immediately camouflaged by a passive-feminine bearing. This is a well-known mechanism of binding the fear of the father. Deep analysis of these attitudes did not bring about any change in his feeling that he had remained a masochist, in spite of external improvements.

The first attempts at coitus in which he was potent but remained unsatisfied were attended by a syphilis phobia. One day he showed me his penis and asked me whether a small erosion was not a sign of an infection. It was immediately clear that the intent behind this was exhibitionism. Now the analysis led directly to a clarification of an important aspect of his genital development. As a child he had reached the genital phase only in the form of exhibiting his penis, an act which had been immediately and strictly forbidden by his mother. The genital disappointment was all the worse because he had been allowed to indulge in anal exhibitions as much as he pleased in front of his mother, who had been intensely concerned with his functions of evacuation. At the age of ten, he was still taken to the bathroom by his mother. His pleasure in exhibiting his buttocks was clearly the reason why he introduced the genital phase precisely with the exhibition of his penis. The analysis revealed that his first attempts at a genital approach to his mother were of an exhibitionistic nature. His intentions had been immediately repressed, and this later resulted in the severe inhibition of his general bearing. In his attempts to have intercourse, he never ventured to show himself naked to the woman or allowed her to take hold of his penis. Following the analysis of this element of his neurosis, he began earnestly to cast about for a profession and he became a photographer. The first step in this direction was the purchase of a camera, with which he took pictures of just about everything. Here again we see how essential the elimination of genital repression is for sublimation. Today he does quite well as a photographer. For a long time, however, he derived no inner pleasure from his profession: “I don’t really feel myself; and when I do, so masochistically miserable.”

The introduction of the genital phase in childhood through exhibitionism, followed immediately by the severe frustration and repression of this pleasure and complete inhibition of further genital development, belongs, according to my experience, specifically to the masochistic character; just as the introduction of genitality through phallic-sadism and its inhibition, combined with anal-sadistic fixation, relates specifically to the compulsive neurosis. A number of typical character traits which form the basis of the masochist’s insecure, atactic, and awkward bearing can be traced back to these exhibitionistic impulses and their immediate frustration. Our patient once gave a drastic description of this inner condition. He said: “I always feel like an officer who, with drawn sword and cries of victory, marches far ahead of his troops, suddenly looks back and discovers that no one has followed him.”

A further character trait is connected with this feeling, which is only very superficially related to guilt feeling. Masochistic characters cannot endure praise and tend toward self-deprecation and self-abasement.

In masochists, this inhibition of exhibitionism can lead to the development of completely opposite traits. The genital-narcissistic character exhibits in a disguised form (cf. erythrophobia). The masochistic character employs an opposite reaction formation: a passion for self-deprecation in order not to stand out. He lacks the essential element of the narcissistic structure of the genital character: the ability to stand out.
The masochistic character, for the reasons set forth above, cannot assume a leadership role, although he will usually construct glorious fantasies of heroism.

As a result of the inhibition of exhibitionism, moreover, his ego has developed an intense inclination toward self-deprecation. This structure of the ego stands in opposition to and prevents the realization of an active phallic ego-ideal. The result of this is again an intolerable tension, which serves as a further source of the feeling of suffering and thus nourishes the masochistic process. The image of the advancing officer mirrors this ego-ideal, which one has to be ashamed of, which one has to conceal, because the ego (the troops) doesn’t—can’t—follow.

In this connection there is another character trait which is very often found in masochistic characters and in children who tend toward masochism: feeling oneself to be stupid or, the counterpart of this, acting as if one were stupid. It is very much part of the masochistic character structure to exploit every inhibition in order to debase oneself. Another patient once said that he could not endure praise because he felt himself to be on exhibition with his pants pulled down. It should not be underestimated how much importance the anal fixation, the preoccupation with the baring of the buttocks, has for the child’s genital development. Anal shame is brought into the genital phase and oppresses it with particular shyness. To the masochist, any kind of praise represents a provocation of exhibitionistic tendencies. Wherever he stands out, he is assailed by severe anxiety. Hence, it is necessary for him to debase himself to ward off anxiety. This, naturally, is a fresh reason for feeling neglected—which provokes the whole complex of the need for love.

“Making oneself stupid” or “acting as if one were stupid” is also a part of this. Once our patient described an infantile scene in which he had pretended to be stupid. “I want something that is not given to me, then I get mad and act stupid. But how much am I loved even when I pretend to be stupid? If I am not loved, then I am not worthy of being loved and have, therefore, to be really stupid and ugly.”

Another patient once said that he could not endure praise because he felt himself to be on exhibition with his pants pulled down. It should not be underestimated how much importance the anal fixation, the preoccupation with the baring of the buttocks, has for the child’s genital development. Anal shame is brought into the genital phase and oppresses it with particular shyness. To the masochist, any kind of praise represents a provocation of exhibitionistic tendencies. Wherever he stands out, he is assailed by severe anxiety. Hence, it is necessary for him to debase himself to ward off anxiety. This, naturally, is a fresh reason for feeling neglected—which provokes the whole complex of the need for love.

“Making oneself stupid” or “acting as if one were stupid” is also a part of this. Once our patient described an infantile scene in which he had pretended to be stupid. “I want something that is not given to me, then I get mad and act stupid. But how much am I loved even when I pretend to be stupid? If I am not loved, then I am not worthy of being loved and have, therefore, to be really stupid and ugly.”
Now it is time to answer the question of why the masochistic character expresses his demand for love in such a disguised form, why he is wholly incapable of showing or demanding love in a direct fashion. Another patient, having strong feelings of suffering and a tendency toward masochistic complaining, had a habit of showing himself to be miserable whenever he wanted to win a woman. He had a terrible fear of offering the woman his love directly. He was afraid she might get angry and make fun of or punish him. He suffered from the same inhibited exhibitionism as our patient.

All this, taken together, causes a feeling of inner ataxia, often a tormenting feeling of shame because of one’s external appearance. The inhibition of the ability to demonstrate or demand love openly entails distorted expressions and makes a person, as our patient put it, “bureaucratic,” i.e., unnatural and stiff. Behind this lies the ever-present fear of being disappointed or rejected. Once our patient said: “I am faced with the task of pushing a penis which doesn’t stand up into a vagina which is not offered me.” The hysterical character develops anxiety in place of an open testimony of love; the compulsive character manifests hate and feelings of guilt; the masochistic character demonstrates and demands love in the roundabout way of complaining, provoking, or putting on a show of misery. All these various forms are wholly in keeping with the respective geneses of these types: the hysterical character has fully developed his genitality but it is interfused with fear; the compulsive character has replaced his genitality with phallic sadism; the masochistic character has arrived at genitality through exhibitionism, has then repressed it, and now persists in the distorted expression of love.

In his attempts to bind anxiety, the masochistic character becomes more and more immersed in tension and unpleasure, thus strengthening the predisposition to anxiety. We learned further that this very inability to bind anxiety in an adequate way constitutes what is specific to the masochistic character. We found, moreover, that the punishment which the masochistic character thinks he fears is only a substitute for the punishment he really fears.

Could an experience of fear such as our patient had when he was three years old bring about the masochistic fixation of the fantasy of being beaten? The answer is no. It was possible for the patient unconsciously to give up completely the sexual demand which provoked the punishment he feared so terribly. (Other character types do this.) It was not absolutely necessary for him to hit upon a specifically masochistic means of extricating himself from the punishment situation. There must be another element or elements, then, which, when added to what we already know, specifically account for the masochistic mechanism as a whole.

This mechanism can be traced only after the patient has been brought to the genital stage, i.e., when his genital desires become resuscitated or develop for the first time. Then a new difficulty is encountered: the patient now develops strong genital desires which momentarily eliminate much of his masochistic attitude. When, however, in his first attempt to have genital intercourse, he experiences not pleasure but unpleasure he is once again thrown back into the “masochistic squalor” of anal and sado-masochistic pregenitality. It took many years to solve this puzzle and to understand that the “incurability of the masochist, who doesn’t want to give up his suffering,” was to be ascribed to our very imperfect knowledge of his sexual apparatus. It would have been impossible to find an answer had we adhered to the theory that the masochist is fixated on suffering because of a repressed guilt feeling or a need for punishment, supposedly the manifestation of a death instinct.

The masochistic character is based on a very peculiar spastic attitude which controls not only his psychic but, first and foremost, his genital apparatus. It immediately inhibits every strong sensation of pleasure and transforms it into unpleasure. In this way, the suffering which is the basis of the masochistic character reactions is continuously nourished and increased. No matter how deeply and thoroughly we analyze the meaning and genesis of the masochistic character, we cannot achieve a therapeutic effect unless we succeed in penetrating to the genesis of this spastic attitude. Otherwise, we shall not succeed in establishing the patient’s orgastic potency, the capacity for complete surrender in the genital experience. For orgastic potency alone is capable of eliminating the inner source of unpleasure and anxiety. Let us return to our patient.

From the ages of three to six, our patient developed a fear of the bathroom, sustained by the fantasy that an animal could crawl into his rear end. The dark hole of the toilet itself aroused anxiety. He began to hold back his bowel movements, which, in turn, aroused the fear that he would evacuate in his pants. When one evacuates in one’s pants, one is beaten by one’s father. The unforgettable scene at the age of three had provided ample proof of this. When one is beaten by one’s father, there is also the danger of castration. Hence, the blows have to be diverted to the buttocks, so that they don’t accidentally hit the penis. Nonetheless, in the “cultural” educational procedures which his father adopted and drastically applied, he was continually tormented by the fear that, by lying on his stomach, he might get a splinter in his penis. Everything together produced a spastic condition in the bladder and in the bowels, from which the child could not extricate himself. This, in turn, gave his mother further cause to be especially attentive to his bowel movements, thus creating a fresh contradiction. The mother was pleased with and took care of his bowel functions, whereas the father beat him for it. In this way, his Oedipus complex became predominantly anchored in the anal zone. At first, the additional anxiety developed that the bladder and bowels might burst, that, in short, holding back served no purpose in the long run, and he would again become the victim of his father’s rage, for the latter was not to be trifled with in such things, even if he, the father, did not impose any anal restraints upon himself. Thus, we have the typical picture of a bleak and wretched situation, whose roots are to be traced back not to biological but to purely sociological factors. We must not forget to mention that the father was especially fond of pinching his children on the buttocks and, among other things, took pleasure in letting it be known that he would “skin them alive” if they misbehaved.

Thus, to begin with, the child had an anal fear of the father which was combined with the anal fixation on the mother and beating himself (reflective of the fear of punishment by the father). Because of the  release and gratification connected with them, the child looked upon his bowel movements as punishable, and so he began to beat himself out of fear of being punished by the father. It is evident that this simple process was of far greater importance for the pathology of the case than the identifications with the punishing father and the masochistic attitudes toward the nascent anal superego. Such pathological identifications are of course themselves neurotic formations, essentially consequences, not causes, of the core of the neurosis. We divide our attention very poorly when we allot 98 percent of it to analytic embellishments and scarcely 2 percent of it to the gross injuries inflicted upon the children by the parents. This is why, thus far, we have not succeeded in utilizing psychoanalytic findings for a critique of patriarchal and familial upbringing.

When he attempted to have sexual intercourse for the first time, he had, it is true, an erection, but he did not venture to move inside the vagina. At first we thought that this was due to embarrassment or lack of knowledge—it wasn’t until much later that we discovered the real reason. He had been afraid of the intensified pleasure. This was certainly very strange behavior. We always encounter this fear in the cure of the orgastic disturbance of frigid women. In masochists, however, it has a particular character. Later, every time the patient came into contact with an adult man, he felt impotent. Out of fear, he immediately withdrew his cathexis from the genital zone and became anal-passive—which was expressed as admiration of these men.

It is now possible to draw the following conclusions: the usual toilet training (too soon and too harsh) causes anal pleasure to take precedence over other forms and the libido to become fixated in this phase. The idea of being beaten which is related to anality is definitely devoid of pleasure and, in the beginning, charged with anxiety. Thus, it is not the unpleasure of being beaten that becomes pleasurable. Rather, it is the fear of being beaten that blocks the sensation of pleasure. In the course of development, this fear is carried over to the genital zone.

The analysis of this sudden change from genitality to masochism during the sexual act yielded the following facts. As long as the sensation of pleasure was slight, the genital fantasy remained. However, as soon as the pleasure began to increase; when, as the patient put it, that “melting feeling” began to take possession of him, he grew afraid; his pelvis became spastic instead of relaxed and transformed the pleasure into unpleasure. He described exactly how he perceived the “melting,” usually an orgastically pleasurable sensation, as unpleasurable or, more specifically, with a sense of anxiety: he was afraid that the penis might dissolve. This feeling might cause the skin of the penis to melt away; the penis might burst if it continued to expand (as is normal in the sexual act). He had the feeling that the penis was a sac filled with fluid to the point of bursting. Here we had the incontestable proof that, in masochists, it is not unpleasure that becomes pleasure but the exact opposite: by means of a mechanism that is specific to the masochistic character, every pleasure which increases beyond a certain measure is inhibited and changed into unpleasure. It is also necessary to point out that the patient conceived of castration as referring to the skin of the penis: “In sex, I get as hot as a cooked chicken from which the skin can be peeled off.”
The ever-present fear of punishment causes the “melting” sensation of warmth, which accompanies the increase of pleasure toward the climax, to be looked upon as the realization of the expected penis catastrophe. This inhibits the course of excitation and results in a purely physiological, unpleasurable sensation to the point of pain. We can summarize the three phases of this process as follows:

1) “I am striving for pleasure.”
2) “I am ‘melting’—this is the feared punishment.”
3) “I have to suppress this sensation to save my penis.”

Here an objection will be raised: the inhibition of the sensation of sexual pleasure due to infantile anxiety is found in every neurosis. In some cases, indeed, it has destroyed genitality altogether. Hence, this inhibition cannot constitute the specific factor of masochism. For why does not every inhibition of the involuntary increase of the sensation of pleasure lead to the development of the masochistic mechanism?
This objection can be countered as follows:

There are two possibilities for such an inhibition of the sensation of pleasure. In the first, the “melting” feeling of pleasure is originally experienced without anxiety; later, anxiety supervenes and inhibits the completion of the sexual excitation, but pleasure is still perceived as pleasure. In the second, the sensation of pleasure and the sensation of unpleasure run side by side. This holds true for every nonmasochistic inhibition of the orgasm. In masochism, on the other hand, the melting feeling of the pleasure leading up to orgasm is itself perceived as the expected harm. The anxiety, experienced in the anal zone as a result of the attainment of anal pleasure, lays the foundation of a psychic attitude that causes the later genital pleasure, which is of course significantly more intense, to be perceived as the signal of injury and punishment.

Hence, we have the paradox that, though continually striving to realize a pleasurable sensation, the masochistic character is invariably plunged into an unpleasurable sensation. The impression is created that he strives for the unpleasurable sensation. What really happens, however, is that anxiety intervenes between the instinct and its goal, causing the desired pleasure to be perceived as the anticipated danger. In short, instead of pleasure, unpleasure is the final result of the initial striving.

Sex-economically viewed, therefore, the masochistic attitude and the fantasy pertaining to it originate from the unpleasurable perception of the sensation of pleasure and serve to master unpleasure through the psychically formulated attitude: “I am so miserable—love me!” Now the beating fantasy comes into play because the demand for love also contains genital claims which force the patient to divert the punishment from the front to the rear: “Beat me, but don’t castrate me!” Thus, the masochistic reaction has a specifically actual-neurotic basis.

Hence, the problems of masochism cluster around the peculiar disturbance of the pleasure function. It became clear that the fear of the distintegrating or “melting” feeling of the sensation of pleasure leading up to orgasm forces the masochist to cling to the low-curved sexual excitation.

This had the following meaning, which the patient remembered consciously: “I had the impression that my penis was boiling hot. At the fifth or sixth blow it would surely have to explode, the bladder would have to burst open.” Thus, the purpose of the blows was to bring about the release which was forbidden in other ways, i.e., autoerotically. If, as a result of the blows of the mother, his bladder burst; if, for the same reason, his penis exploded and the semen was ejaculated, then it was not he who was responsible—it was the tormentor who had caused this to happen. Fundamentally, therefore, the yearning for punishment had the purpose of bringing about the release in a roundabout way, of making the punishing person responsible, i.e., of exonerating oneself. The mechanism is the same on the surface and in the depth of the character. In the former, its meaning is: “Love me so that I won’t be afraid!” The meaning of the complaint is: “It is you who are responsible—not I.” The function of the beating fantasy is: “Beat me so that, without making myself guilty, I can release myself!” There can be no doubt that this is the deepest meaning of the passive beating fantasy.

In this category we also have the masochistic sexual attitude of neurotic women, which is regarded by some analysts as normal female behavior. The woman’s passive rape fantasy serves merely to exonerate her of guilt feelings, i.e., she wants to experience the sexual act without guilt. This is possible only under the condition that she is raped. The formal resistance offered by some women in the real act has the same meaning. This leads us to the problem of so-called pleasure anxiety, which plays a major role in masochism.

This representation of the masochistic process is far from offering a solution to all the problems of masochism. But it can be asserted that reincorporating the problem of masochism into the framework of the pleasure-unpleasure principle will facilitate the clarification of the remainder of the problems, which was delayed by the hypothesis of the death instinct." [Character Analysis]

Lyssa wrote:

"The pagan roots of "BDSM" can be traced back to Greek rites of "Flagellation" and later in Petrarch's Satyricon;

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

And the reason behind that reason…

Angus McLaren wrote:

"The charge of impotence was used by young men to disparage the power of their older and propertied rivals who controlled wealth, marriages, and inheritances. According to the poets, rustic couples were happy but the wealthy man only thought of property.

And when in Bed he shou’d Embrace his Spouse,
Like a Dull Ox, he’s still amongst the Cows;
Chew’s all the Night upon the next fair Day,
How much this Horse, how much that Load of Hay.

In satires, one historian has found, “the potency and poverty of youth are set against the wealth, but impotence, of age.” Even medical manuals mir- rored such scripts. “The youthful age lies open to Cupid’s dart / But the old man is valued not a ——.”

Older men were castigated for resorting to every means to arouse their desires. John Henry Meibomius, in A Treatise of the Use of Flogging in Medicine and Venery (1643), noted that the ancients, understanding that hot blood was needed to heat the kidneys and quicken the seed, recognized the use of nettles and the lash. School boys picked up the practice and prostitutes reported having clients who asked to be whipped.  

One seventeenth-century tract attacked the elderly who sought the help of prostitutes to raise their passions. “But what may we think of those decrepit half-pint Lechers, who being as sapless as a dry’d Fennel-stalk, yet you may dog them shuffling along with their crickling hams, till they pop into one of their old haunts of iniquity. Where they call for Vice to correct Sin, for forgetting their former Lessons of Lasciviousness. While the sturdy Quean belabours their buttocks, till their impotent wimbles peep out of their bellies to beg a reprieve for their Tayles."" [Impotence: A Cultural History]

Quote :

"The transposed variant "freudenschade" has been invented in English to mean sorrow at another person's success."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A true masochist probably does exhibit all four of those subtypes during the course of their  lifetime due to varying circumstances and the reflective insights accompanying those circumstances.  As a woman in regards to men and societal interchanges between genders, my independence is limited.  In another thread, another forum I level the charge that as a woman, my freedom does not exist out of man's grasp, I submit or I flee, no mutual terms, understandings, exist.  In essence, my being is submission or escape, which is simply the process of the attempt to be away rather than the fruition of that impossible endeavor.