Talk:BDSM

Edit Request: "Addiction" section on masochism is absurd and offensive. Remove it.

The section on sadomasochism that describes it as an addiction was added by someone with an axe to grind and no sources to back them up. One citation suffers from every imaginable bias (a "phenomenological study" of 9 criminals in prison is hardly a scientific endeavor), and the other isn't even relevant (it's about gambling, and the supposed link is not apparent in the data). 50.47.99.220 (talk) 15:48, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

The latter statement (correlating gambling) feels like OR/conclusion of the reader, so that has been removed. The study, I'm unsure about -- I've heard others speak of the addictive quality, so it's not entirely untrue, but I'll let someone else weigh in on the validity here. HalJor (talk) 21:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

According to Carlström:

"Although several informants in this study used the language of addiction to describe their BDSM practices, it is important to point out that BDSM has not been scientifically established as an addiction. In this context, the use of addiction and drug metaphors can rather be seen as a way to find suitable words to describe what one is feeling; by using a language that belongs to a drug discourse, one can make oneself understood because it has intelligibility, and a common significance for people outside the community. In this sense, Cameron and Kulick (Citation2003) describe the meaning of language, in making ourselves and our actions understandable:

"Language – used about anything – is not a perfect representation of experience or reality. But because humans are not able to read each other’s minds or experience each other’s bodily sensations, we depend on language to communicate (or dissemble) what we think and feel and want."

Carlström, C. (2018). BDSM, becoming and the flows of desire. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 21(4), 404–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2018.1485969

According to De Neef et. al, this study is not definitive and is an "interesting notion (that) should be explored in future research." Therefore, it is premature and stigmatizing to BDSM practitioners when there is no other supporting research on addiction and BDSM other than 9 practitioners' statements about their own experiences.

Nele De Neef, Violette Coppens, Wim Huys, Manuel Morrens, Bondage-Discipline, Dominance-Submission and Sadomasochism (BDSM) From an Integrative Biopsychosocial Perspective: A Systematic Review, Sexual Medicine, Volume 7, Issue 2, June 2019, Pages 129–144, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esxm.2019.02.002 SusanWrightAZ (talk) 19:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Suggested Edit: Prevelence

Under Psychology, 3rd paragraph, it states: "The prevalence of sadomasochism within the general population is unknown."

Suggest removing the above sentence and adding a new paragraph stating:

In the U.S., a 2017 prevalence survey found that in their lifetime, 32% of adults have engaged in spanking, 23% have engaged in role-playing, 21% in tying/being tied up, and 15% in playful whipping. Attending a BDSM party was much lower, at less than 4% of the U.S. population. (Herbenick, 2017) In Canada, nearly half of the people who responded to a prevalence survey said they were interested in at least one kind of unusual sexual interest: voyeurism, fetishism, frotteurism or masochism. Men and women both expressed similar levels of interest in masochism, and masochism was significantly linked with higher satisfaction in their sexual life. (Joyal, 2016)

Citations:

Herbenick, D., Bowling, J., Fu, T. J., Dodge, B., Guerra-Reyes, L., & Sanders, S. (2017). Sexual Diversity in the United States: Results from a nationally representative probability sample of adult women and men. PloS one, 12(7), e0181198. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0181198

Christian C. Joyal & Julie Carpentier (2016): The Prevalence of Paraphilic Interests and Behaviors in the General Population: A Provincial Survey, The Journal of Sex Research, DOI: 10.1080/00224499.2016.1139034 SusanWrightAZ (talk) 23:09, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2025

change

The initialism BDSM stands for:

• Bondage and discipline (B&D)
• Dominance and submission (D&s)
• Sadomasochism (or S&M)

to

The initialism BDSM stands for:

• Bondage and discipline (B&D)
• Dominance and submission (D&S)
• Sadomasochism (or S&M) Illimystic (talk) 04:41, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: Lowercase is correct. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 08:11, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

References

"Leash (BDSM)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Leash (BDSM) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12 § Leash (BDSM) until a consensus is reached. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:37, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

"Terminology and subtypes" reference error

"The initialism BDSM appeared for the first time in 1983 in the scientific paper 'S and M: Studies in Dominance and Submission' by Thomas Weinberg." cites Marcet's "Processos de construcción de identidades en una comunidad BDSM in Buenos Aires". This is pretty much what Marcet says, but this is a misinterpretation. S&M: Studies in Dominance and Submission is the 1995 collection of articles Marcet is citing, which (as best I could tell) contains no Weinberg articles from 1983.

The articles Weinberg contributed to in S&M: Studies in Dominance and Submission are from 1978, from 1994, or written for the collection. I'm pretty sure Marcet is referencing Weinberg's "Sadism and Masochism: Sociological Perspectives" from 1978, but that doesn't actually contain the initialism "BDSM". In the original English text, the term "S&M/B&D" appears (p. 126), which is then translated to "BDSM" in the Spanish version cited by Marcet (BDSM. Estudios sobre la dominación y la sumisión).

I could be missing something, but I don't think the citation given can be relied on to establish Weinberg as originating the term in 1983. KKITAANIK (talk) 03:07, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

I have removed the disputed sentence for now, to prevent possible misinformation until this can be resolved. I'm not super familiar with Wikipedia's editorial voice, so please feel free to make any adjustments to the surrounding sentences if needed. KKITAANIK (talk) 22:12, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@KKITAANIK thanks mate, I was not aware and just replicated what the paper stated. Now I'm a bit curious to look deeper into the subject, I might do some research today to clarify the matter. Notsonotoriousbig (talk) 13:05, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 March 2026

Change the word "conceptiosn" to "conceptions" in "Medical categorization"/"DSM" heading Contco (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

 Done - thanks for spotting. Chaheel Riens (talk) 22:27, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 June 2026

Change position for the hyperlink "pedophilia" in the section United States to conform to MOS:LINK ~2026-36433-14 (talk) 23:08, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Unlink the word in the quote and link it in the text ~2026-36433-14 (talk) 23:13, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done Day Creature (talk) 06:41, 24 June 2026 (UTC)