The notion of MAPs as sadists

[Lightie Twinkle]

I meant regardless of whether they (the sadist) acts or just has the impulse or fantasy based on hurting someone. There is no behavioural test for being a sadist, outside of criminological categories, e.g. the idea that zoosadistic behaviour is a precursor to sadistic offending.

I can tell you that I am not a sadist since I don't derive pleasure for forcing or hurting someone thus I don't do it since I don't have that desire to begin with. No all Nepis are sadistic, no all Sadists are Acting-Sadists, so I don't see reason for unequal treatment for people who aren't doing anything wrong. And the ones who are being misunderstood.

I guess the notion of MAPs as Sadist follows from some MAPs to Nepis too.

[Jim Burton]

I meant regardless of whether they (the sadist) acts or just has the impulse or fantasy based on hurting someone. There is no behavioural test for being a sadist, outside of criminological categories, e.g. the idea that zoosadistic behaviour is a precursor to sadistic offending.

I can tell you that I am not a sadist since I don't derive pleasure for forcing or hurting someone thus I don't do it since I don't have that desire to begin with. No all Nepis are sadistic, no all Sadists are Acting-Sadists, so I don't see reason for unequal treatment for people who aren't doing anything wrong. And the ones who are being misunderstood.

I guess the notion of MAPs as Sadist follows from some MAPs to Nepis too.

Is it not necessary to treat the groups unequally in order to hold them to the same standard? You said it - not all sadists are practicing sadists, and it would be incredibly hard to argue that e.g. pro-c biastophiles can be granted the same choices, as, say teleiophiles. Since their choice would be a nonconsensual partner they could rape. For me, a mature and effective alliance accepts these basic facts instead of pandering to egalitarian delusions, such as pretending zoosadism is equivalent to hebephilia, as if both are kinks that exist on the same degree of abnormality with similar degrees of consent.

There are causes that I, as a gay man have in common with nepis, sadists and biastophiles. But it's better to be honest about what those are, and where I honestly believe I have privilege over many paraphiles (e.g. my partners can give verbal enthusiastic consent). Better than pandering a delusion.

[Lightie Twinkle]

I meant regardless of whether they (the sadist) acts or just has the impulse or fantasy based on hurting someone. There is no behavioural test for being a sadist, outside of criminological categories, e.g. the idea that zoosadistic behaviour is a precursor to sadistic offending.

I can tell you that I am not a sadist since I don't derive pleasure for forcing or hurting someone thus I don't do it since I don't have that desire to begin with. No all Nepis are sadistic, no all Sadists are Acting-Sadists, so I don't see reason for unequal treatment for people who aren't doing anything wrong. And the ones who are being misunderstood.

I guess the notion of MAPs as Sadist follows from some MAPs to Nepis too.

Is it not necessary to treat the groups unequally in order to hold them to the same standard? You said it - not all sadists are practicing sadists, and it would be incredibly hard to argue that e.g. pro-c biastophiles can be granted the same choices, as, say teleiophiles. Since their choice would be a nonconsensual partner they could rape. For me, a mature and effective alliance accepts these basic facts instead of pandering to egalitarian delusions, such as pretending zoosadism is equivalent to hebephilia, as if both are kinks that exist on the same degree of abnormality with similar degrees of consent.

There are causes that I, as a gay man have in common with nepis, sadists and biastophiles. But it's better to be honest about what those are, and where I honestly believe I have privilege over many paraphiles (e.g. my partners can give verbal enthusiastic consent). Better than pandering a delusion.

Is really sad for me to read things like this, I don't even know what to say.

[FairBlueLove]

I'm sorry to go a bit off topic here, focusing on the consent part, but reading Jim's "my partners can give verbal enthusiastic consent" sparked some thoughts in me.

First off, I consider myself a non-exclusive hebephile, so I have little erotic interest for small children, but I totally get the point of Lightie Twinkle and nepis in general.

Adults can fake "verbal enthusiastic consent" out of scare or because they think can gain something out of it (or whatever other reason). Small children, however, cannot fake non-verbal consent. So I guess I'm basically arguing that non-verbal consent from small children is even more valid than adult verbal consent.

(uhm, I think there was a topic on "understanding nepis" or something like that, so I might move this reply there if I find the thread, with a link to Jim's snippet for reference)

[WavesInEternity]

I happen to be a MAP (preferentially hebephilic) who has some sexually sadistic desires—although the younger the girl, the less sadistic I am. I find that BDSM is often misunderstood in the MAP community; in the past, I was ostracized from two MAP communities due to those aspects of my sexuality (I was also banned from a BDSM community and "reported to authorities" for being a MAP engaging in consensual age play with adults, but that's another story).

I must say that I'm not fundamentally different from any "average" Dominant BDSM practitioner except for the fact that I'm preferentially attracted to girls in early adolescence and seldom find adult women attractive. I also ought to point out that I've personally spoken to several AAMs, including a 13-year-old girl, who are already keenly aware of the submissive and masochistic elements of their own sexuality.

(In a saner world) I could very well see myself having an intimate relationship with a very young girl without any BDSM whatsoever, if I were to be truly in love with one who isn't into kink. In any case, I'd be very wary to explore any of the more intense practices with a very young partner—she'd have to be very convincing in expressing her desire. However, I'd have a much harder time having a relationship with an adult that doesn't involve kink, because the inclusion of BDSM compensates for the lower level of sexual attraction I feel.

The crucial part is that my sexual dominance and sadism are absolutely secondary relative to the deep affection I feel towards my romantic/sexual partner. The consent and masochistic enjoyment of my partner is something I would never, ever want to do without. I love to enact non-consent with a willing partner; the fact that I could in theory enjoy the "real thing" is inconsequential considering the fact that I would never do it for reasons that have nothing to do with legality and everything to do with me being a reasonable, ethical, and loving human being.

Furthermore, my kink does not translate into some sort of overreaching desire to control my partner, even if that may sometimes appear to be the case in e.g. a 24/7 Master/slave relationship (I've briefly been in one with an adult). It really is exclusively an erotic matter, which is something that people outside of the BDSM community often don't understand. In fact, as such things are actually practiced, sexual dominance isn't about power (if anything, the submissive partner wields the most power), nor is sexual sadism about causing suffering (the sadist wants to make sure the masochistic partner enjoys the ride).