back to article Kinky? You're mentally healthier than 'vanilla' bonkers

A new study has discovered that practitioners of "bondage-discipline, dominance-submission, sadism-masochism (BDSM)" tend to be less neurotic, anxious, and paranoid, and more extroverted, conscientious, and open to new experiences than members of the "vanilla" general public. BDSM practitioners "either did not differ from the …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Eddy Ito Silver badge

    Alright then, who was it?

    "Sticks and stones may break my bones but whips and chains excite me"

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Happy

      Re: Alright then, who was it?

      ""Sticks and stones may break my bones but whips and chains excite me""

      Sledgehammer?

    2. PhilBuk
      Meh

      Re: Alright then, who was it?

      Tom Lehrer maybe?

      Phil.

    3. Vince

      Re: Alright then, who was it?

      And thanks to that post now all I can hear is the Rhianna track with that lyric.

      1. theblackhand
        Coat

        Re: Alright then, who was it? Rhianna track...

        "It's all about the money, money, money...."

        Back to Radio 4 for me.....

  2. Don Jefe
    Joke

    Kinky Fellow

    It sounds like this guy is trying to make himself comfortable with some new feelings.

    1. BrownishMonstr

      Re: Kinky Fellow

      I thought he was trying to prove to others, perhaps his missus, that it's okay.

  3. ShadowedOne
    Go

    This is..

    Not a surprise in the least.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: This is..

      For the last 300 hundred years human sexual urges have been have been attacked and suppressed by religion, governments, do gooders and women's lib. The result has been a need to conform to a norm, the norm issued by all these self interest groups.

      What is abnormal to one person is the elixir of a turn on to another.

      I say if it floats your boat, get boating.

      1. Wzrd1

        Re: This is..

        "I say if it floats your boat, get boating."

        Within constraints. Lest murder and rape become acceptable.

        Want to know this dirty old man's observations? The dominants tend from average psyche to potential sociopaths. The latter are of concern, for they respect no boundaries, social or legal.

        Fortunately, sociopaths are unusual outside of political leadership. (sorry, couldn't resist a political joke.) And hence, are even more unusual in any "kink" crowd.

        I use quotes for a reason. Kink for some is anything that isn't the "missionary position".

        In that case, this dirty old man's dirty old lady of 30+ years are downright kinky.

        But then, in our youth, we did submit an entire chapter to the Kama Sutra, with thanks. ;)

        We're on disability today because of that contribution.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This is..

          Cool story bro.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          RE: The dominants tend from average psyche to potential sociopaths.

          Not a very popular viewpoint, but one I agree with. Having moved in a variety of circles in my time, a good percentage of dominant people are just not very nice, and their behaviour towards others (not just their partners and not just in the bedroom) often verges on the abusive.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: This is..

          Actually the psychos usually get found out pretty quick.

          The BDSM community is fairly tight knit and although not everyone gets along, as with any group, they will usually support each other and word gets around if a guy is wrong in the head.

          As any Dom kno, the sub ultimately has all the power as (s)he has to give permission before play commences. If a guy misjudges this he will find himself blackballed by the community PDQ.

          (Posted anonymously because... well.. you know)

          1. Glenn Charles

            Re: This is..

            Just don't tend to be an experimentally-minded sailor or mix with them, because you're liable to end up dead. Oddest thing how sailor jokes tend to get taken seriously and how quickly that can lead to trouble. Yes, experience; yes, I know it's still valid--but yes, personally, it's from long ago.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: This is..

            "As any Dom kno, the sub ultimately has all the power as (s)he has to give permission before play commences. If a guy misjudges this he will find himself blackballed by the community PDQ."

            Yeah, except if the subs are basically in thrall to an arrogant asshole. Coercion exists in the BDSM community as much as anywhere else.

        4. Anonymous Coward
          Thumb Up

          Re: This is..

          Quoting the article: "The results mostly suggest favorable psychological characteristics of BDSM practitioners compared with the control group; BDSM practitioners were less neurotic, more extroverted, more open to new experiences, more conscientious, less rejection sensitive, had higher subjective well-being, yet were less agreeable."

          This defines the political class quite nicely I should think. Most politicians in the United States are definitely socio-pathic.

  4. bag o' spanners
    Devil

    Bend over....I'll drive.

  5. frank ly Silver badge
    Gimp

    "..more open to new experiences.."

    Just try getting my Mistress to wear a cute little frilly nightie. Brick wall.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "..more open to new experiences.."

      Why don't you wear it? Trust me, you'd be surprised what it does for some open minded ladies!

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Works for me??!!

    No further comment required

  7. This post has been deleted by its author

  8. Fibbles

    People who do what makes them happy (regardless of social norms,) are mentally healthy!

    Film at eleven.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Facepalm

    It's not the stuff you do

    It's the way you deal with it. And that isn't determined by your own (sexual) fantasies and or habbits but simply by the person(age) you really are. I guess this is way too cliched for these kinds of studies, in my opinion because there's little money to be made by stating the obvious, but it's simply the way it is.

    Just because a woman is into bondage doesn't automatically make her a sex-crazed femme fatal nor does it mean that the only way you can get along with her is to tie her up.

    The only thing to keep in mind is that you also can't rule these things out. Sometimes you /are/ dealing with a (sexual) disoriented person. But its not his or her hobbies which define that.

    In my opinion researches like these are no better than the well known "violence on TV is bad because it corrupts children", while totally overlooking the small yet important factor that the real issue is the way those children deal with it. And that's something normally taught by the parents.

    As said, IMO this isn't different.

    Of course; in the end this whole research is flawed by design. Because let's go over something obvious once again: most people are not very comfortable talking about their sexual desires or fantasies. Doesn't that fact alone indicate that if you start a research into this matter you'll automatically get answers which only reflect a small portion of the people involved?

    1. Bill Neal
      Devil

      Re: It's not the stuff you do

      So its OK for me to use BSD as long as I know how to deal with it?

      1. frank ly Silver badge

        @Bill Neal Re: It's not the stuff you do

        You should start slowly, with a sympathetic and experienced partner.

        1. Omgwtfbbqtime Silver badge
          Gimp

          Re: @Bill Neal It's not the stuff you do

          ..who you trust. ftfy

        2. Anonymous Coward 15
          Linux

          Re: @Bill Neal It's not the stuff you do

          It gets really weird when you start involving a penguin...

          1. gerryg
            Devil

            Re: @Bill Neal It's not the stuff you do

            you know how it goes:

            - definition of erotic - running a feather over your partner's body

            - definition of kinky - using the whole chicken

      2. gerryg
        Trollface

        Re: It's not the stuff you do

        FreeBSD? Or do you pay to play?

      3. oopsie

        Re: It's not the stuff you do

        I've been beaten for calling it BSDM before now...

        Other than that :-)

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It's not the stuff you do

        It's OK to use any OS, so long as it gets you a job.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It's not the stuff you do

      You said.. most people are not very comfortable talking about their sexual desires or fantasies

      Maybe but a local BDSM club (of which we were all unaware till then) rented a room upstairs at our local and didn't seem too bothered about it. Once our giggling was over, neither were we. They left the door open so we could hear the slaps and yelps. They didn't mingle but they certainly didn't shy away. So maybe you're right and maybe you're just projecting your own feelings onto it.

      Perhaps you should read the research paper before accusing the researchers of missing the obvious.

      Curiously, the aforementioned event organisers specified tea and coffee to be provided[*] - no alcohol.

      [*] Inevitable thought follows..."one lump or two?"

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Standard Stats jargon, but do they understand?

    That wodge of jargon is pretty standard statistics. But it isn't enough to show that the people using those mathematical tests understand what they are doing. And that's a rather too common problem. Pocket calculators have been able to compute the mean and standard deviation of a set of numbers since the 1970s, and "serious computer software" has been doing this complicared stuff on desktops since the 1980s, and it's really easy to do some standard test, and get a good result, without knowing whether that result is even measuring anything useful.

    And, on my experience, if any statistician is picked to take part in a survey, they will lie, just for the LOLs.

    1. Mycho Silver badge

      Re: Standard Stats jargon, but do they understand?

      Indeed, the statistical method is all very well but where is the information on how they gathered their data? That is where faults tend to crop up.

      1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

        Re: Standard Stats jargon, but do they understand?

        If one of the measurements you are making is "agreeability" then I don't think any amount of statistics can save you.

      2. Mike Richards Silver badge

        Re: Standard Stats jargon, but do they understand?

        That is where faults tend to [riding] crop up.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Anon - but only out of respect for my partner

    Trust and selflessness are the two crucial factors that make a BDSM relationship work. While it's true that these should be a part of any physical relationship, vanilla or otherwise, when you're dealing with restraint and punishment it gets very bad very quickly if either are missing.

    Perhaps this is why those who have successful and enjoyable Dom/Sub relationships show these traits - they wouldn't last very long without them!

    1. Poor Coco
      Happy

      Re: Anon - but only out of respect for my partner

      There’s a third aspect you’ve missed: kinky folk are amazingly good communicators. They are much better, on average, than the average person on the street at expressing their wishes honestly; they are also far more skilled at listening with empathy.

      Ahhhh, that “Submit” button has a whole new meaning today :D

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Anon - but only out of respect for my partner

      Not exactly a BDSM practitioners ourselves but we both do take part in age-play and I enjoy TV-play with my wife and yes it takes a hell of a lot of trust for you both to commit to something so personal. You can't get into the full experience or fully enjoy it without being able to express yourselves clearly or trust each other explicitly. That leads to the way we bring up our kids, we talk openly ( obviously not about this! ) in our house, we don't have secrets and make sure we all talk to each other about things. When we had to explain the "birds and the bees" to our daughter, it was just a casual and open talk, no silly embarrassment or mumbling about "trains and tunnels", just the facts using the correct terms and due to our solid relationship we stressed that mature relationships are about about trust and caring for the other person.

      On the subject, the thing we found so hilarious was when my Missus would come home from work and we'd laugh about all her ( bored? ) female work colleages getting so excited about the 50 Shades rubbish. They kept asking her to give it read but she said she had no interest in it, which they couldn't quite figure out. As we both agreed, if that lot stopped reading about it and actually started doing it they'd realise that it's much more exciting to make your own fun rather than reading someone else's fantasies.

  12. Wrong ended schtick

    Why on earth conclude that?

    Ie that S&M ptactitioners are more psychologically healthy than the community?

    what was measured was in fact 902 online forum members Vs 442 ostensibly women's magazine readers?

  13. This post has been deleted by its author

  14. FanMan
    Thumb Up

    Ripe

    Ripe

    Dr Wismeijer's findings seem ripe for a TV tie-up. Fewer calories than all that food porn.

  15. Ketlan
    WTF?

    WTF?

    "Associations were examined using χ2 tests of independence with φ and Cramer's V as effect size measures and eta or Pearson's correlation. Group differences were tested using analysis of covariance, with partial η2 as effect size measure. A priori contrasts were tested using α = 0.01 to correct for multiple testing; for all other tests we used α = 0.05, two tailed."

    Okay, I'm still interested but does someone want to explain what all that shit means?

    1. Chris Miller

      Re: WTF?

      It means: "we'd like this to sound a lot more scientific than it really is".

      The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't. - Ernest Rutherford (Baron Rutherford of Nelson) 1871-1937

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: WTF?

      Stripping it down the the nub:

      Compute the statistics on the people - where the "average" is (that is, where is the line where half the people are above the line, and half below), and compute how spread out people are (are they all pretty close to the line, or are they all pretty far away from the line).

      Then, compute the differences between the two groups - where is the average for one group vs. the average for the other group, and what is the spread of one group relative to the spread of the other group.

      OK, so far pretty simple. But what if one group's average is just a squeak above the other's? If the spreads are small, that may mean something, but if the spreads are large, it may mean nothing. So how do you turn that sort of fuzzy statement into measurable science? You do some math that tells you "what are the odds that that difference is really a difference, and not just noise?" That's what the χ2 (chi-square) tests do: they allow you to mathematically model the odds that the differences are really a difference.

      To people who know statistics, they know what those terms all mean, and this is basically the researchers showing how they came to the conclusions they did - describing the way they did the math.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: WTF?

        My supervisor in statistics used to say that many physicists and engineers distrusted statistics because it tended to demonstrate that their experiments were not convincing (or their engineering tolerances were not actually good enough).

        I imagine he's dead by now, an Internet search doesn't find him, which is a pity because when the crucial test for the discovery of a new boson last year was announced in terms of its statistical significance, he would surely have cheered.

        I didn't entirely believe hi, though, until our company got a new MD, a mechanical engineer, who wanted us to stop using this "statistical process control" because he didn't believe in it.

        1. Chris Miller

          @ribosome

          He was probably quoting my hero, Ernest Rutherford (see above), who also said:

          If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: @ribosome @Chris Miller

            Well, given that even the first demonstration of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity depended on statistical analysis, Rutherford was wrong.

            In fact my supervisor's favourite was the size of Pluto. Following its discovery, each successive measurement was smaller than the last. The explanation was that the original discoverer had estimated the size at the extreme top of the range - it was after all the only planet discovered by an American and it needed to be big to explain the perturbation of the orbit of Venus.

            Successive measurements were more accurate but, because they didn't like to challenge the estimate of a Great Astronomer, were still quoted at close to the top of the range, instead of in the middle. Thus the size of Pluto progressively declined until eventually it was downrated altogether from being a planet - a move which a number of American astronomers continue to complain about.

            Eddington did the measurement to demonstrate Special Relativity, and another Quaker, Jocelyn Bell Burnell, was in the chair at the IAU when Pluto was downgraded. As one of them myself, and someone who has done a lot of statistics in his time, can I just remark "Yay Quakers"?

            1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

              Re: @ribosome @Chris Miller

              That depends whether you think being Quakers had anything to do with their insight.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: @ribosome @Chris Miller

                Yes, because we are taught to question authority. Next?

            2. John H Woods Silver badge

              Re: @ribosome @Chris Miller

              Wouldn't Pluto would have to be pretty damn large to perturb the orbit of Venus?

            3. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: @ribosome @Chris Miller

              Correcting myself - orbit of Neptune, of course, not Venus. Mind obviously going even further than some of the people think who reply to me.

              1. Anonymous Coward 15

                Re: @ribosome @Chris Miller

                If it perturbed the orbit of Uranus it might be closer to the article's subject matter.

                /snigger

          2. Carl

            Re: @ribosome

            And yet quantum mechanics is all about stats isnt it, Dr.Rutherford?

      2. Ketlan
        Thumb Up

        Re: WTF?

        @ David D. Hagood

        Thanks for the explanation. I still don't really get it but I'm pretty thick anyway. Kudos for trying. :-)

      3. JCB
        Unhappy

        Re: WTF?

        " where the "average" is (that is, where is the line where half the people are above the line, and half below)"

        On average, people don't seem to know the difference between the mean and the median.

    3. Archimedes_Circle
      Boffin

      Re: WTF?

      <quote>"Associations were examined using χ2 tests of independence with φ and Cramer's V as effect size measures and eta or Pearson's correlation. Group differences were tested using analysis of covariance, with partial η2 as effect size measure. A priori contrasts were tested using α = 0.01 to correct for multiple testing; for all other tests we used α = 0.05, two tailed."</quote>

      Effect size measures are the expected differences you would find, given the p values expressed. In other words, it's a projected value of what the 'effect' of the difference would be. Phi and Cramer's V are correlations between nominal/categorical values, since pearon's correlations doesn't work for things like categorical crosstabs. Without getting the paper, they did something like numbers of males/femals who have/haven't been admitted to a psychiatric ward, or any other form of group membership. ANCOVA(analysis of covariance) is just t tables for multiple groups, with some expected differences controlled for (removed). For example, there may be systemic differences between different genders at two different college campuses, and I want to pose the question: do women graduate more often then men do, regardless of family income levels. You control for SES (previously measured) and find out if there are still differences, or if the gender differences are actually the result of SES differences.

      The alpha level choice is a bit weird, because the language seems to indicate that they chose it regardless of the tests they ran, but it would have been much easier to use either the Bonferroni or Sidak methods of correcting. Essentially, when you do multiple group testing, you can accidentally deflate the p values, and receive significant differences where non exist.

      Two tailed just means they looked at confidence intervals around the top and bottom of the distribution, rather than assigning the CI to one side or the other; standard practice, since the distribution is assumed to be gaussian. Oh, and the partial bit just means the correlations after controlling for differences.

      /research psychologist, although one who doesn't find this area of research to be anything useful.

    4. Glenn Charles
      Alien

      Re: WTF?

      Google it, but the very core of this is the assumption that if a hypothesis is formed and then a method of somehow isolating a process defined as causative is determined to be valid, then with a few tests refined mathematical analysis of the results is pursued for "proof". There are a few problems. The identity between tests is defined using strictly exclusive measures, with a great deal being "intuitively" adjudged unimportant which is definitely arguable. (Deciding that the color of a test area is unimportant is a common example.) The second is the usage of methods to determine identity between subjects--and the third is that the empirical hypothesis doesn't allow for proof, it allows for the transition between hypotheses and theories, which most supposed scientists in any modern discipline evidently find hard to grasp.

      My apologies in advance. That is the correct explanation, however.

  16. John Deeb
    Pirate

    But which mental health standard was being used? The whole field does not know any, there are only categories for when something seems troubling the social-economical functioning. And whatever neurosis the tested people might actually suffer from, the act of sublimating that into some play might be in itself the main factor here. Perhaps next time compare with other random groups like train spotters or theatre lovers. If my hobby is to suck the blood of wandering sheep, the very thing which keeps me sane and pleasant to be around: what does that mean?

    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
      Happy

      That doesn't necessarily mean you're a baaaad person, but I'm going to keep an eye on ewe, just in case...

  17. Pete 2 Silver badge

    Tells us more

    > "bondage-discipline, dominance-submission, sadism-masochism (BDSM)"

    ... about the researchers¹.

    And doing a Chi squared test doesn't impress anyone.

    [1] Psychology: The study of people who don't need studying by those who do

    1. Mycho Silver badge

      Re: Tells us more

      And doing a Chi squared test doesn't impress anyone.

      Ah, but as someone who has had academic papers published in the past, 90% of any paper is boring background stuff everybody skims over that they want you to include to pre-empt obvious questions about the 10% that is actually interesting.

      So no, most of any academic paper isn't going to impress anyone.

    2. Archimedes_Circle

      Re: Tells us more

      What you're largely referring to is clincal psychology, a field that doesn't have any claim to science, and which has a pretty active history of ignoring glaring flaws in favour of their ad hoc 'expertise'. Look up the 1954 book by Paul Meehl, or the 2000 meta-analysis which confirms that. Unlike the rest of the field, clinical psychology hasn't really moved on beyond Freud

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Tells us more

        It would be quite clever if it had gone beyond Freud, because Freud was a "psychoanalyst" and clinical psychology rejects psychoanalysis as being a closed system not susceptible of experimental proof.

  18. Denarius Silver badge
    Meh

    As IT bods, this is obvious

    Are not we sometimes subservient to a dominant deviant, dressed in suit, flogging us with lashings of ITIL? Or desiring to be the next BOFH (tm) ? And all of us restrained, tied up and bound by rulez ?

  19. Robin
    Happy

    Confusion

    Reminds me of the time I turned up for my BSM driving lesson in all my leather gear. How we laughed.

    1. Cameron Colley

      Re: Confusion

      Good thing you weren't learning to ride a motorbike -- I'd hate to think how you'd turn up to your CBT...

  20. Graham Marsden
    Thumb Up

    Great, but now...

    ... we need TPTB in the Mental Health community to start listening.

    There is a group called Revise F65 whose aim is to "get sexual sadism, masochism, fetishism and transvestic fetishism abolished from the World Health Organization's list of psychiatric diagnoses, ICD."

    These are archaic and obsolete definitions based on attitudes from the last century, yet, at the moment, these are what are used to define us and, worse, victimise us, for instance there are divorce custody cases where one (vanilla) partner uses the other's preferences to claim that they are not fit to care for the child because they are "mentally ill".

    Speaking as someone who runs a business making Affordable Leather Products, supplying BDSM gear to consenting adults, and who has been involved in the Fetish Community for 20 years, it is easy to see that there are fewer fundamentally fucked-up people involved, not least because they are *happy* with their interests and preferences and they have learned to ignore society's ignorant prejudices that what they are doing is wrong/ bad/ sinful/ harmful etc

    1. Poor Coco
      Gimp

      Re: Great, but now...

      Hear, hear!

      I am a moderator on a discussion board bridging kink and mental illness. A couple of years ago I started a thread analyzing trauma and whether it is correlated with kinky behaviour. It was certainly not an unbiased sample, but there were plenty of forum participants who reported no traumatic events in their lives — so many that the consensus seems to be no connection.

      There is another aspect or two of BDSM that seems to have escaped the author of the article.

      First, what precisely separates kinky behaviour from abuse? The borderline is enshrined in the kink motto “safe, sane and consensual.” If behaviour falls outside these borders, it is abuse; inside, consensual play. Note the issue of consent is ongoing consent which may be revoked at any time (but NOT retroactively).

      Second, while the Dom(me) is nominally in power and the sub, well, submits; the REAL power structure is inverted because the sub always holds the ultimate go/no-go authority. This is accomplished by safewords (or safe-gestures when words cannot be spoken) which (a) are agreed upon in advance by discussion and negotiation and (b) are ALWAYS respected; refusal to respect them is grounds for assault charges.

  21. Dodgy Geezer Silver badge
    Flame

    Playing with numbers..

    ...Group differences were tested using analysis of covariance, with partial η2 as effect size measure. A priori contrasts were tested using α = 0.01 to correct for multiple testing; for all other tests we used α = 0.05, two tailed....

    Modern data collection and processing systems using spreadsheets allow you to compute any complex statistical function you like at the touch of a button. Work that used to take skilled mathematicians weeks can now be done instantly.

    Worse, you can also alter various parameters slightly and repeat the calculation - many times, until you get the best set of numbers to support your argument. This is probably what the η2 and α figures are: I suspect that the results would have been much weaker if different parameters were used.

    The impact of this trick can lie anywhere between justifiable technical disagreement between statisticians, and downright fraud. It is extensively used in 'Climate Science' to maintain the fiction that earlier temperature variation was pretty flat, and that therefore the temperature rise from 1980-2000 was very unusual....

  22. Euripides Pants Silver badge
    Thumb Down

    Well, DUH

    In other words, researchers find that people who aren't uptight are less uptight than people who are uptight.

  23. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    More extroverted

    More extroverted is positive? Says who? I thought we'd got past this extrovert = good, introvert = bad theory.

    Or is the author also of the opinion that people who are not loud, shouty and dont post everything about themselves on twitter are deviants that need to become more like the more highly visible extroverts of society?

  24. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So, this story is...

    that people who do unusual things are more open to and less worried by doing unusual things?

    Is that news?

  25. The Alpha Klutz

    pfft

    pfft, even hitler was less neurotic, anxious, and paranoid, and more extroverted, conscientious, and open to new experiences than members of the "vanilla" general public.

  26. Mycho Silver badge

    Found an explanation

    Going as far back as Moser (1979), several studies have indicated that more educated people are more willing to experiment sexually.

    Is it likely that there is some kind of correlation between education and mental health? I can think of a few likely relations between the two, from the more cynical version that mental health issues will hold you back in school to the idea that education will help you overcome mental health issues.

    If anyone can find a study comparing people of the same level of education who do and do not participate in bdsm, I'd like to see it. Otherwise I'm going to assume that good mental health causes better education which causes more interest in fringe sexual techniques.

    Have a nice day.

    1. Graham Dawson

      Re: Found an explanation

      Given that higher intelligence tends to correlate with a higher instance of autism spectrum disorders and a higher chance of displaying particular classes of mental illness such as schizophrenia and - if you count it as a mental illness - sociopathy, I'd say no, it's not likely at all.

      Of course education and intelligence don't correlate all that well these days. You only have to look at the prevalence of poorly researched statistical metastudies that "prove" everything is bad for you and good for you in quick succession to see that. Perhaps it depends how you define education.

    2. sisk Silver badge

      Re: Found an explanation

      Personally I find the connection between mental health and education to be more likely caused be the relative stability it takes to get through those extra years of school, especially given the stress levels involved with earning some of those higher degrees and PhDs.

  27. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Less neurotic BDSM practioners?

      "BDSM practitioners are the most fucked-up people in the world"

      Nice troll bait. Been thrown out of a scene somewhere? (evil grin)

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Less neurotic BDSM practioners?

      I would think that the Taliban, the US Christian Right, the BNP, heroin addicts, paedophiles, serial killers, rapists, the Provisional Wing of the IRA, and the Israel Home Party could all provide people compared to whom BDSM practitioners would look very mentally healthy.

      After all, let's think about Rugby players. Every week in winter they get cold and wet while sometimes getting quite seriously hurt. They get shouted at by coaches, they go home during the week knackered after training, and they enjoy it. Yet nobody regards them as particularly odd.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Less neurotic BDSM practioners?

        Hey, you got me at "wet" :p

    3. Paul Crawford Silver badge

      Re: Less neurotic BDSM practioners?

      Most fucked up, really?

      Like boxers who spend 12 rounds punching the shit out of each other and sometimes ending with brain damage, detached retinas, or even death? As a sport?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Less neurotic BDSM practioners?

        "Like boxers who spend 12 rounds"

        That would be professional boxers, and not in every contest. Three to five (shorter) rounds is much more common.

        "punching the shit out of each other"

        I think you'll find there is quite a bit of strategy involved. The interesting part of full contact sports is precisely that it's as much of a mind game as a physical activity. Mindlessly punching the shit out of each other is what you see in pubs amongst the drunk, not in a ring. I'm sure even the untrained eye can spot the difference.

        "and sometimes ending with brain damage, detached retinas, or even death?"

        Yes, there are risks involved, just like in any sport and many other non-sport activities. You just learn to manage, control, and minimise those risks, while accepting the residual.

        "As a sport?"

        My personal definition: "if it's not likely to kill you it's not a sport", but that's just me. :)

        Disclaimer: I do my bit of punching and kicking, and as a result of my age I'm starting having to rely on strategy and skills against younger opponents' speed and endurance.

  28. Arachnoid
    Coffee/keyboard

    "..more open to new experiences.."

    Just cause its new don't mean its better and as for random questionnaires who ever fills in 100% of the truth anyway.In other words bad data in brick bats out..........

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "..more open to new experiences.."

      ... clearly looking for punishment. BAD research, BAD!

      :)

  29. Andrew 99

    football

    Its no worse than being a supporter of a football club,

    1. Horridbloke
      Gimp

      Re: football

      And the garments cost less.

  30. Andrew 99

    garments

    I think you'll find naked is pretty cheap.

    1. Poor Coco
      Gimp

      Re: garments

      Or encasing yourself in Saran Wrap.

      OTOH I used to have a latex outfit that cost more than $800.

  31. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge
    Joke

    Women in leather

    Why do men's hearts beat quicker, go weak in the knees, get dry throats and think irrationally when a woman wears leather clothing?

    Because she smells like a new truck!

  32. crtc
    FAIL

    Yawn.

    I think Terry Waite, after being released, was quoted as saying 'I used to enjoy bondage and preached, that it was a special experience between consenting adults. Then I was kindapped and discovered my fantasies were all immature bullshit and learnt to stfu'.

    This of course may all be completely false or in otherwords, a 'study'.

    1. sisk Silver badge

      Re: Yawn.

      There's a big difference between willingly submitting and being kidnapped.

  33. MACWINLINO
    Megaphone

    Fifty Shades of Kinky

    Does this include partners that were kinker while reading 50 Shades and then went back to normal afterwards?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Fifty Shades of Kinky

      If you find a real BDSM couple who doesn't loath that book I'll be shocked. Nothing like a semi-popular book that takes all the worst, and wrong for that matter, stereotypes about your already-misunderstood community and puts them into a neat little package for people who know nothing about what you do to stir up some negative emotions.

  34. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge
    Gimp

    RE: Yawn.

    The key word here is consenting. I think Waite may have found that his captors didn't give a damn about his safe word.

    1. crtc
      Meh

      Re: RE: Yawn.

      Yep, not at all fun when it becomes real rather than an immature game...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: RE: Yawn.

        Games end. For a lot of BDSM couples (not all) BDSM doesn't. They carry it out of the bedroom and even out of the house. But if you think of it as a game you'll never be capable of understanding the lifestyle aspect of it.

  35. Yag

    I translate the results of this experiment as...

    "People who are more extroverted, and open to new experiences are more likely to try out BDSM and eventually stick with it".

    Sounds like the overused "religion of the Pope" stuff

  36. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    After a 'chance meeting'...

    I came to feel differently about the secret arts.

    Hey, isn't that just like the start of L'Histoire d'O?

    I may be wrong but don't beat me up about it.

    or then again...

  37. Ed_UK
    Thumb Up

    Whatever toggles your bit

    Yeah.

  38. Rob73!
    Joke

    The Daily Mail won;t like this stoty. Next they'll be asking Google to ban the internet............

  39. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I would just like to point out that all the most self-confident people I know are subs. And by subs I mean full-time pets, not people who just like being tied up on the weekend. There's a very long winded explanation for this, but the short version is that they have to be confident to be able to give themselves over to another person like that. Believe it or not in a full time D/s relationship the sub is often the stronger of the two people involved. I also don't find it surprising that Doms/Dommes are generally well adjusted, but for different reasons. Caring for a sub in a BDSM relationship takes a very special type of person, able to care deeply for their partner even while whipping them.

    And yeah, in case you're wondering, my spouse does often get tied up and punished for our mutual pleasure. Anon for, I think, obvious reasons.

  40. Belardi

    Everyone has their nut-jobs.

    There are all kinds of people in all lifestyles or sexual orientation. I admit, I'm into the scene a bit and have quite a number of friends who are as well. Many are fine people... some are flat out crazy... a few are quite dangerous... no more than those who are not in the BDSM scene that are psycho.

    There are plenty of dangerous unbalanced church frees out there...

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019