Liberals and violent porn and rape simulation

[Major Nikon]

313. Sadism and sexual sadism are not the same thing

You can be a sadist and not a sexual sadist. Sadists are people who like to hurt other people. It can be someone like a cop who likes to beat perpetrators up for no other reason. SPD concerns sadism in general and I'm not even sure if the DSM-III even mentioned sexual arousal at all. At any rate it was never a pathology to begin with. It was just described. I'm sure someone wanted it to be studied and listed as a pathology, but this never happened and it was removed.

Even if something is described as a disorder by the DSM, does NOT mean it's a sickness. Consensual S&M was removed even as a disorder decades ago, probably around the same time homosexuality was or shortly thereafter when a lot of such consensual fetish crap was purged. SSD is a much narrower condition and generally refers to the desire for non-consensual sexual sadism. Even then it's not necessarily pathological, but I'm not going to argue that someone who gets their sexual jollies from hurting someone who doesn't want to be hurt isn't sick. The bottom line is that yes at one time people who engaged in consensual S&M were considered sick and this is now considered quackery by the mainstream and the same can be said for homosexuality and a lot of other sexual behavior. If you think it's sick, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't think you're going to find any medical professional worth the powder it would take to blow their nose to agree with you.