Masochism and the Self

Roy F. Baumeister

• Publisher: Psychology Press
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN:
  9781138876064
  9780805804867
• Edition: 1
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317784364
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

This volume provides an integrative theory firmly grounded in current psychology of the self, and offers a fresh, compelling account of one of psychology's most enigmatic behavior patterns. Professor Baumeister provides comprehensive coverage of historical and cross-cultural theories and empirical data on masochism and presents recent, original data drawn from a large data set of anonymous masochistic scripts of fantasies and favorite experiences. Drawn from the latest social psychological research and theories, Professor Baumeister returns the emphasis to the original and proto-typical form of masochism -- sexual masochism - - and explains these phenomena as a means of releasing the individual from the burden of self-awareness.

It is the first volume to present a psychological theory compatible with the mounting evidence that most masochists are not mentally ill nor does masochism derives from sadism. Instead, Professor Baumeister finds that masochism emerges as an escapist response to the problematic nature of selfhood and he attempts to foster an understanding of sexual masochism that emphasizes both "escape from self" and "construction of meaning" hypotheses.

The book is directed at all those interested in the self and identity in paradoxical behavior patterns and in the construction of meaning, presenting specific clinical recommendations.

Chapter One

Why Is Masochism Interesting?

Masochism is one of psychology’s greatest puzzles. Masochistic actions and pleasures fly in the face of common sense. Sexual masochists desire physical pain, bodily restraint, and humiliating or embarrassing treatment. They want their sexual partners to tie them up, blindfold them, and spank or whip them. They ask to be insulted, displayed naked to strangers, kept on leashes like animals, or dressed in humiliating costumes. They desire to be forced to kiss their partner’s feet, to be subjected to various rules such as never looking their partner in the eye, and to other indignities.

Not only do they desire such things, but they apparently derive great satisfaction and even sexual pleasure from them. For most people, pain or embarrassment brings an instant end to sexual pleasure, yet for masochists these things stimulate it. For some masochists, these activities become almost indispensable to sexual enjoyment.

How could someone enjoy pain? Pain is the opposite of pleasure. Unpleasantness is the very essence of the sensation of pain. Yet masochists desire pain.

One way of understanding masochism has been the simple assumption that these people are mentally ill. In Western society, there is a long tradition of dismissing things that seem to make no sense as being produced by irrational forces. Some have argued that mental illness has replaced demons as an omnibus explanation for deviant behavior. The attitude behind these labels is, “We don’t need to understand these things, for they are incomprehensible.” Masochists and other deviants are simply exempted from all principles of normal human psychology, as if one should not even expect them to make sense.

This book attempts to make sense of masochism. It assumes that the behavior of these people is comprehensible—that in fact it conforms to many of the patterns and processes that guide the behavior of normal individuals in our culture. Whenever possible, we attempt to avoid explaining masochistic behavior as insane. It is not necessary to regard masochists as mentally ill in order to understand them.

Indeed, as we see here, there is increasing evidence that the majority of masochists are not mentally ill. They appear to be normal, capable individuals who are typical members of society in all respects except for their sexual tastes.

Most past theories about masochism have been based on clinical observations. The view offered in this book should be regarded not as a rival view but as a complementary view. There is little doubt but that some mentally ill people engage in masochism, and clinical observations and theories are the best way to go about understanding the dynamics involved in those cases. But if the majority of masochists are not mentally ill, it is necessary to develop some ways of understanding masochism on the basis of what is known about the behavior of normal, healthy individuals. The clinically based theories of masochism are presumably quite sound and accurate in explaining the appeal of these activities to mentally ill persons, but it may be wrong to assume that the appeal to healthy individuals is the same.

Masochism is worthy of study and explanation because on the surface it contradicts much of what we know about human behavior. Getting pleasure from pain is only the most obvious paradox of masochism. Let us take a closer look at some of the reasons to be interested in the psychology of masochism.

DEFINITION

Before proceeding further, it is necessary to furnish a definition of masochism. Psychology has furnished various definitions of masochism, and many psychologists have used the term without giving a definition of it, so one can easily become entangled just trying to decide what is masochism and what is not.

The term masochism was coined by the noted early sex researcher Krafft-Ebing. He used the term to refer to an unusual and deviant pattern of sexual activity involving pain and submission. Krafft-Ebing named the phenomenon after Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, a 19th century Austrian novelist whose writings portrayed men humiliated and tormented by beautiful women. Sacher-Masoch’s interest in these activities apparently extended beyond his literary work; he seems to have spent much of his adult life trying to get women to dominate him, in cluding having them whip him and having them betray him by having sex with other men (Cleugh, 1951).

Krafft-Ebing defined masochism as “the wish to suffer pain and be subjected to force” (1983, p. 27). He said that the masochist “in sexual feeling and thought is controlled by the idea of being completely and unconditionally subjected to the will of a person of the opposite sex; of being treated by this person as by a master, humiliated and abused” (p. 28). For a first attempt at definition, this was not far off the mark. To update his definition, it is necessary to change his stipulation that the master be of the opposite sex, for there is evidence that some people like to be dominated by members of their own sex.

The problem of defining masochism became much more complex with Freud. Krafft-Ebing had specifically defined masochism as a form of sexual behavior, but Freud began to use it to refer to nonsexual behaviors as well. Since Freud’s time, many psychologists have often used the term to refer to nonsexual behavior patterns, based on their presumed resemblance to sexual masochism (see Glick & Meyers, 1988; Panken, 1983, for excellent reviews of recent Freudian treatments).

The danger in describing nonsexual behavior patterns as “masochistic” is that at present it is almost impossible to say what is a false analogy and what is apt. Without a solid understanding of the original form of masochism—sexual masochism—one cannot generalize to other patterns. For example, if one assumes that masochism is essentially the wish for injury, then one might label all self-destructive behaviors as masochistic. If one assumes that masochists desire intense sensations, then one might label all other sensation-seeking behavior as masochistic. If one sees submission to another person as the essence of masochism, then all submission to authority can be called masochistic. And so forth.

In simple terms, one cannot decide what resembles sexual masochism until one understands what sexual masochism is. Labeling nonsexual behaviors as masochistic is argument by analogy, and analogies cannot be constructed until the core phenomenon is understood. Accordingly, this book postpones discussion of nonsexual masochism until the nature of sexual masochism has been carefully examined. The important task is to understand the original, prototypical form of masochism, which is a pattern of sexual behavior.

To get started, therefore, it is only necessary to provide a working definition for sexual masochism. Krafft-Ebing’s definition, suitably amended to include homosexual masochism, seems sufficient. To be more precise, one might define sexual masochism as a syndrome that associates sexual pleasure with one or more of the following three features: receiving pain; relinquishing control through bondage, rules, commands, or other means; and embarrassment or humiliation. Thus, not all masochistic sexuality involves pain, for example (Reik, 1941/1957), but at least one of the three features is necessary in order to label some sexual activity as masochism. Sex with any of these three features is masochistic; sex without any of them is not masochistic.

PREVALENCE

How common is masochism today? It is difficult to give a reliable estimate. Survey evidence is far from reliable, for many people may do such things but refuse to admit them to interviewers. One commonly quoted statistic comes from Kinsey’s research. He asked people whether they ever experienced sexual arousal in response to stories or depictions of sadomasochistic activities. Kinsey and his colleagues found that 22% of American men and 12% of American women admitted such arousal (Kinsey, Pomeroy, Martin, & Gebhard, 1953).

The proportion of people who admit actually engaging in sadomasochism (S&M) is no doubt much smaller than the proportion admitting to fantasies. A handful of such surveys was reviewed in the early 1970s by Greene and Greene (1974). In one survey of American university students, whipping or spanking before sex was reported by about 5% of the females and 8% of the males. The highest figure was obtained in an international survey: 33% of English women reported having had such an experience (Greene & Greene, 1974, p. 42). At the low end, the frequencies approach zero. Again, however, one must be a bit skeptical of all such numbers, because many people may be reluctant to admit having participated in sadomasochistic sex. The number of people who report such activities is undoubtedly smaller than the number of people who do them. And the different rates found for different groups may reflect different willingness to admit such activities rather than different experiences.

Probably the most plausible guess is that 5%–10% of the population has engaged in masochistic activity for sexual enjoyment. Probably two or three times that many have enjoyed S&M stories or fantasies, and probably only 1% or 2% has actually done such things on any sort of regular basis. Still, each 1% of the American population represents between 2 and 3 million people, so small percentages quickly translate into large crowds. It is also important to note that many people probably have masochistic desires but never act on them, either because they are ashamed of their desires (cf. Cowan, 1982), because they cannot find a willing partner (cf. Spengler, 1977), or because they are afraid or shy (cf. Scott, 1983). In short, it is clear that most modern individuals do not show any inclination toward sexual masochism, but there is a fairsized minority who have such interest or desires occasionally and a small group who actually engage in masochistic sex.

There is good evidence that many masochists are held back by fear, inner conflict, and other factors from acting out their fantasies. Prostitutes who advertise that they will dominate their clients have a large problem with no-shows. These professional dominatrices report that 80%–95% of the appointments they make with new (first-time) customers are broken (Scott, 1983). Typically, the client makes the appointment by telephone but simply never shows up. Apparently, many would-be masochists turn cowardly at the last minute, at least when dealing with a professional dominatrix. This suggests that many people have masochistic interests and desires but are reluctant to act them out. Thus, again, desires may be far more widespread than actual experiences.

The focus of this book is accordingly on the issue of masochistic desires and interests. Only a very small proportion of the population is regularly, actively engaged in masochism as a way of life or a hobby. A substantially larger group would like to engage in such activities, and even more have some interest in them. In any case, it seems clear that even the broadest definitions of masochism pertain to only a minority of the population. There is no basis for assuming that masochism is a part of the psychological makeup of everyone, or even of everyone in some broad category (such as women).

SELF

One major source of interest in masochism is the light it may shed on the psychology of self. Indeed, this is what led to my own interest in masochism, because much of my past research had been devoted to studying the self—and masochism posed a serious challenge to the psychology of self. Masochism apparently contradicts several of the most general principles about the nature of the self. Either psychology’s views of the self are wrong, or else some way must be found to understand the relationship between those views and masochism.

Modern psychology has been extremely interested in the nature of the self, in recent decades. It has devoted considerable attention to studying the self and theorizing about the self (e.g., Baumeister, 1982, 1986, 1987; Carver & Scheier, 1981; Greenwald, 1980; Higgins, 1986; Markus & Wurf, 1987; Schlenker, 1985; Swann, 1987; Yardley & Honess, 1987). There is so much information and theory about the self that it has been impossible to generate a comprehensive, satisfactory theory of the self. There is not even general agreement about the multiple, overlapping terms that sometimes mean the same thing as self and sometimes have more specialized meanings—terms such as ego, identity, proprium.

Despite this lack of a general theory of self, there are several broad principles that most theorists would agree about. Here are three generalizations about the self that fit what is currently known and would probably be acceptable to most psychologists:

First, selves are developed for a good reason, namely to help the person reach the natural, primary goals of achieving happiness and avoiding pain. In a word, selves are useful. They help the person organize experience and guide action toward these basic goals.

Second, the self develops a strong orientation toward control. The self seeks to control its environment, which means to achieve a good fit between itself and its world. Control can take the form of changing the world to fit the self’s demands, or of changing the self to fit the world’s demands (Rothbaum, Weisz, & Snyder, 1982). The quest for objective control of the world begins with curiosity, that is, the self’s quest for information about the environment. The self tries to learn how to manipulate its surroundings, often as a means of getting what it wants.

But even without a clear idea of what it wants, the self exhibits simple curiosity and other signs of the desire for control. In addition to the quest for objective control, the self seeks a subjective sense of being in control, that is, efficacy (e.g., Bandura, 1977). The self seeks to believe itself in control even when it is not. People tend to overestimate how much control they have, at least until something goes wrong (then, the self begins to deny responsibility). The self is prone to illusions of control, which are false beliefs of having control (Langer, 1975; also Alloy & Abramson, 1979). Deprived of control, the self immediately begins to fight back (e.g., Brehm, 1966). The self wants freedom, choice and multiple options.

Third, the self is strongly oriented toward maximizing esteem. There are many forms of this motive. People desire self-esteem, that is, they want to think well of themselves. They also desire public esteem, that is, they want other people to think well of them, to respect and to admire them. People want to preserve their esteem from loss, and so they react strongly to any threat to their esteem. They also desire to increase their esteem when they can.

These three basic principles about the self underlie most of the self’s activities. Countless research studies have demonstrated them in innumerable contexts. People want to be happy and to avoid pain and suffering. They seek to maintain and increase their control over themselves and their surroundings. And they desire to maintain and increase their prestige, respect, and esteem.

Viewed from the perspective of these three principles about the self, masochism is a startling paradox. Masochism contradicts these broad, fundamental features of the self. The self is developed to avoid pain, but masochists seek pain. The self strives for control, but masochists seek to relinquish control. The self aims to maximize its esteem, but masochists deliberately seek out humiliation.

On the surface, then, masochism poses a severe challenge to psychology’s knowledge about the self. No theory of masochism can be complete without explaining how masochism can run counter to the most basic facts about the self. Resolving this paradox will tell us a great deal about the essential nature of masochism.

GENDER

Another source of interest in masochism concerns its relation to gender. This relation has been a source of confusion and controversy. Freud associated masochism with femininity. He saw the women of his day as passive and submissive, and he concluded that passivity and submissiveness are feminine traits. These same traits are apparent in the behavior of masochists. He concluded that women are by nature masochistic.

Many of Freud’s followers sustained this view of feminine masochism. Some noted that the woman’s role in courtship is often passive and submissive, for the initiative is left to the man. Others suggested that woman’s experience of sexual intercourse is masochistic, starting with the physical injury upon loss of virginity. Many other broad features of women’s behavior were made to fit into this theory that women are masochistic (e.g., Deutsch, 1944).

Other theorists were far less certain that masochism was vitally linked to femininity. Theodor Reik debated the matter with himself and finally decided that women are not masochistic. In fact, he concluded that men are more masochistic than women, although he was not entirely consistent.

Feminists were outraged by the view that women are masochistic. They accused the Freudians of trying to blame women for their own inferior status, and they angrily contended that the theory of women’s masochism could be used to justify the oppression and exploitation of women. Feminists sought to correct the many social injustices that victimize women, from wife-beating to salary discrimination. They feared that these injustices would be allowed to persist if people accepted the view that women desired to be victims because of their innate masochism.

The debate is far from over. Recent work has argued forcefully that most of the evidence for women’s masochism is misleading and misinterpreted (see Caplan, 1984). For example, some have called women masochistic for being prostitutes or for remaining with abusive husbands, for these patterns seem like voluntary ways of bringing pain and suffering to the self. Yet prostitutes and abused wives are often simply making the best of a poor set of choices. They do not get pleasure from their suffering.

On the other hand, other theorists continue to spin out the theory of feminine masochism. One recent book reaffirmed masochism as a central feature of the psychology of women, using everything from menstrual cramps to social shyness as evidence for it (Shainess, 1984). Other recent papers have argued that women deliberately engage in self-defeating behaviors of many sorts, such as fearing and rejecting success at work (Horner, 1972).

The debate currently stands as follows. The more traditional members of the psychoanalytic community still believe that women are masochistic, although an increasing number of them are defecting f...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Preface
• Chapter One Why Is Masochism Interesting?
• Chapter Two Overview of Main Ideas
• Chapter Three Masochism, Culture, and History
• Chapter Four Essentials of Masochism
• Chapter Five Satisfactions of Masochism
• Chapter Six Masochism and Sexual Pleasure
• Chapter Seven Femininity, Masculinity, and Masochism
• Chapter Eight Sadism
• Chapter Nine Clinical Implications
• Chapter Ten Conclusion
• References
• Author Index
• Subject Index