RE: The Ethics of Desire

RE: The Ethics of Desire (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

Lucienne -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/6/2009 6:09:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: looking4princess quote: ORIGINAL: daintydimples We are all morally responsible for our actions. Morally responsible for our desires? I don't see that. But, I feel the OP is attempting to inspire simplistic and moralistic conclusions about issues that are highly complex and have less to do with morality and more to do with psychology.. Let's take pedophilia, since I think most of us would consider that morally reprehensible. It's easy to say, "Having the desire to have sex with children is not wrong, but acting on the desire is wrong." Unfortunately pedophiles DO act on their desires. They tend to be highly compelled to do so, and once they have crossed that line from desire to action, it is impossible to stop them, unless they are locked up where they have no access to children. A compulsion is an irresistible impulse to act, regardless of the rationality of the motivation. I would consider several things on your list as compulsions, not desires IF someone has crossed that line and chosen to act on it: pedophilia, necrophilia, rape, torture/snuff (I viewed this as a sexually sadistic serial killing). I would also say that if someone spends large amounts of time fantasizing about these kinds of desire, they have a good chance of acting on them at some point. The psychology of how and why this happens is hugely complex. Although many pedophiles have been abused as children themselves, not everyone who is sexually abused becomes a pedophile. Those that do act on their compulsions do not so because they have managed to morally justify their actions, quite the contrary. They know what they are doing is morally reprehensible and do it anyway. That is the very nature of compulsion. This is really an interesting problem...where does desire become compulsion and what is your responsibility if compulsion leads to harm to yourself or to others? I have a desire for chocolates that on occasion leads to momentary compulsion which is solved only by throwing away half the bag. But that is tame stuff. .... I could just as easily have singled out sadists or exhibitionists. I am not being judgmental on the desire. I am trying to raise the question of the nature of compulsion. How resistable is compulsion? Jeffrey Dahmer was unable to resist the compulsion. Unfortuantely for him and his victims. But i see Jeffrey as a victim as well. It is too easy to say he knew what he was doing was morally wrong. His actions were compulsive. They transported him into an entirely disconnected world made up of just him and his victims. Why couldn't he resist the urge to act? I am not saying he should not have paid for his crimes. I am just wondering how well we understand the source of deviant desire and how much we know about the grip of compusion. How much Free Will is there really in deviant desires and morally reprehensible compulsions? Not to make excuses for human monsters but I suspect Free Will is absent. So, if compulsion is an irresistible impulse to act, as daintydimples defines it above, is there really an ethical responsibility? Are Monsters ethically responsible or are they just Monsters? The garden variety compulsion wouldn't fall into most people's definition of kink/desire/sexuality. And compulsions aren't irresistible, they're just very difficult to resist because your brain creates a "want to" loop independent of your individual desire. Yes, a key part of compulsion is that it isn't really pleasant at all. And the more you indulge it, the stronger and more stressful it gets. I have compulsions that are merely unhealthy to myself and don't involve violating children, animals, or corpses. So I don't have any problem stating that Free Will plays an important role.

IronBear -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/6/2009 7:34:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Justme696 quote: There's always ways "wrong" things can be seen as right I think that is one of the reasons we have laws. Only a very small and incidental reason

lovingpet -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/6/2009 8:09:13 PM)
~FR~ I can definitely say I didn't see a single one of these desires coming and I certainly didn't choose them. They were buried deeper down among all the more primal wiring. I think I have had to make a conscious choice of whether or not to acknowledge them or not. This is far beyond the whole idea of letting them become part of my fantasy life or acting on them, but allowing them to exist in the sphere of the world I live in. I think it is completely possible to toss out certain desires simply because it doesn't function in this particular frame of reference. I desired it. It didn't at all fit with what I want the rest of my life to be, so I no longer desire it because I desire other things so much more. A desire just is. It is an emotional response to a give set of input. It is akin to saying that being tempted is wrong. The difference is that practices that have ANY cultural constructs around them cannot really be right or wrong of themselves. It is the motive, intent possibly a better word, and practice itself that is going to determine whether or not it is a harmful. This means that those who would carry out these "extreme", "fringe" practices are responsible for doing so in some kind of an appropriate way. I would use one of the examples listed in the OP as an example, but I don't know if I could do so without violating terms of service even though it is pertinent to the subject at hand. The point is that any number of "wrong" things can be handled in a "right" way and be done for the "right" reasons and have the people involved come out of it happy and healthy as anybody ever is. The problem with a lot of the items mentioned is that it is very easy for health and well being of others to tip to the other side despite the best of intentions and the most fastideous of practices. It doesn't mean it is impossible, but that it extremely difficult. I think people are always responsible for their actions. That does not automatically equate to attributing certain traits to people who practice a given thing or whether or not they are or should be held legally accountable. What is right and what is legal really have nothing to do with each other. Some things are both right and legal. Others are legal but not right, or right but not legal. Some things are, in fact, neither right nor legal, but these are few and far between given that most anything can be practiced in a way that, if understood, is in good faith. It is when we write something off and even codify it into law that we error. Human behavior can't be sorted into neat little piles. lovingpet

looking4princess -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/6/2009 8:19:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne quote: ORIGINAL: looking4princess I could just as easily have singled out sadists or exhibitionists. I am not being judgmental on the desire. I am trying to raise the question of the nature of compulsion. How resistable is compulsion? Jeffrey Dahmer was unable to resist the compulsion. Unfortuantely for him and his victims. But i see Jeffrey as a victim as well. It is too easy to say he knew what he was doing was morally wrong. His actions were compulsive. They transported him into an entirely disconnected world made up of just him and his victims. Why couldn't he resist the urge to act? I am not saying he should not have paid for his crimes. I am just wondering how well we understand the source of deviant desire and how much we know about the grip of compusion. How much Free Will is there really in deviant desires and morally reprehensible compulsions? Not to make excuses for human monsters but I suspect Free Will is absent. So, if compulsion is an irresistible impulse to act, as daintydimples defines it above, is there really an ethical responsibility? Are Monsters ethically responsible or are they just Monsters? The garden variety compulsion wouldn't fall into most people's definition of kink/desire/sexuality. And compulsions aren't irresistible, they're just very difficult to resist because your brain creates a "want to" loop independent of your individual desire. Yes, a key part of compulsion is that it isn't really pleasant at all. And the more you indulge it, the stronger and more stressful it gets. I have compulsions that are merely unhealthy to myself and don't involve violating children, animals, or corpses. So I don't have any problem stating that Free Will plays an important role. I understand a little, not a great deal, Lucienne, about the dopamine and endorphine reinforcement loops that change desires or wants into habits and habits into compulsions. The desire is pleasant. We indulge it. The need becomes stronger as we repeat the behavior and a "want to" loop becomes a "must do" loop. There has been a great deal of brain scan and behavioral research apparently regarding drug addiction, habit formation, and as revealed in Dr. Kessler's recent book on food over-indulgence. A very strong and determined person can exercise Free Will or initiate distracting behaviors to stop compulsions involving "merely unhealthy" activities. I do wonder how much of a role compulsion plays in kinky "deviant" sexual behavior. I bet a lot. I also bet that someone will write to caution me against generalizing this connection and they will have merit in their objection. But really, how much of cross-dressing, foot fetish, other submissive activities can be attributed to the "want to - feels good -must do" behavior loops that become habitual patterns before they become desperately needed kink activities that compel people to troll for satisfaction? I guess a lot. I also wonder whether in the very extreme cases like the pedophile actors and serial killer/rapists - the Jeffrey Dahmers and Jack the Rippers - if there isn't a tipping point beyond which Free Will becomes inoperable. There doesn't seem to be any other way to account for such gross and callous behavior in which the victims become so thoroughly dehumanized and objectified. It's a puzzlement. I welcome any knowledgeable contributions here.

catize -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/6/2009 8:28:45 PM)
quote: I have often speculated that all of us in the BDSM community are part of a spectrum of desire and compulsion when we act out our desires (for the sake of argument here i am presuming deviance) I see us in the middle of an electomagnetic spectrum of sexual deviance with long wave, boring vanilla missionary sex on one end and socially condemned harmful, loathesome deviant sex on the shortwave, high energy end, wherein lie the serial killers, ritual cannibalist, and pedophiles for starters. Or you may wish to use the analogy of a normal distribution curve. Doesn't matter. I suspect there is a continuum of desires and behaviors in the human psyche, and I think of Jeffrey Dahmer or some well publicized pedophiles. I think there but for the grace of a neurochemical crapshoot go I. How far removed are my compulsions from his and why am I so damn lucky and he was not? I don’t know that I could say any thoughts or desires are wrong. But I do believe there is point where, if we dwell on some desires, it creates a greater chance that we will act on them. In fantasy it is easy to objectify those we would harm, and there, I believe, lies the danger. We become desensitized, less horrified, at the destruction we could cause if we proceed. And then it becomes a question of: are we stronger than our yearnings?

Lucienne -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/6/2009 8:36:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: looking4princess I understand a little, not a great deal, Lucienne, about the dopamine and endorphine reinforcement loops that change desires or wants into habits and habits into compulsions. The desire is pleasant. We indulge it. The need becomes stronger as we repeat the behavior and a "want to" loop becomes a "must do" loop. There has been a great deal of brain scan and behavioral research apparently regarding drug addiction, habit formation, and as revealed in Dr. Kessler's recent book on food over-indulgence. A very strong and determined person can exercise Free Will or initiate distracting behaviors to stop compulsions involving "merely unhealthy" activities. I do wonder how much of a role compulsion plays in kinky "deviant" sexual behavior. I bet a lot. I also bet that someone will write to caution me against generalizing this connection and they will have merit in their objection. But really, how much of cross-dressing, foot fetish, other submissive activities can be attributed to the "want to - feels good -must do" behavior loops that become habitual patterns before they become desperately needed kink activities that compel people to troll for satisfaction? I guess a lot. I also wonder whether in the very extreme cases like the pedophile actors and serial killer/rapists - the Jeffrey Dahmers and Jack the Rippers - if there isn't a tipping point beyond which Free Will becomes inoperable. There doesn't seem to be any other way to account for such gross and callous behavior in which the victims become so thoroughly dehumanized and objectified. It's a puzzlement. I welcome any knowledgeable contributions here. Allow me to be the first to caution against such a generalization. ;) I suppose compulsion can be on a continuum following from desire and habit. But I'm unaware of any research demonstrating it as such. In my personal experience and from my reading on the subject, I'd say that compulsion is a pretty unpleasant experience. There is no subspace. There is no orgasm. There is no delightful anticipation. There is never any real satisfaction. It's scratching yourself raw stretching for the itch you can't reach and eventually wondering - why can't I stop scratching!!!??? I know that some of the cognitive behavioral techniques developed to cope with compulsion have also proven effective dealing with bad habits/addictions. But there's a distinction in that compulsions don't start because they're pleasant. It's just mixed up wiring from the outset.

MarcEsadrian -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/6/2009 11:27:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth Here's a serious question... or series of them, really: 1. Did you consciously choose every one of your strong desires, or have some of them sort of filtered up, unbidden from the deep recesses of your psyche? Both, and more. Some seemed naturally in place at an early time in my life; I cannot truly say if I thought them into being, or if they grew organically with experiences. With others, I can clearly mark the before and after in my life when a want entered my consciousness. quote: ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth 2. How would you feel about yourself if one of your strong desires was something that everyone thought was an utterly horrible thing to even WANT, let alone DO? I could care less what others think of my past desires or experiences. Over time, the acts have become as meaningless to me as the outrage against them. In the shadow of that revelation, I realized the value of the Devil in making life a little sweeter. Youth's guilt and innocence are sometimes unwitting servants of "evil". Only by transcending them both can one truly ascend to reaching for what we describe as enlightenment. Or perhaps I'm fooling myself, and I'm more of a sociopath than I ever imagined I could be. quote: ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth 3. Given that there are people with such desires, do you think they are morally responsible for them? Put another way - does having those desires make them bad, regardless of whether they act on them? Why or why not? From my perspective, it depends upon how much the desires consume your thoughts and pervade your being. One's internal state is relevant; 6.5 millimeters of skull stands between it and a very real outside world. Every noble or infamous accomplishment of mankind started with a desire. For this reason, I don't hold desires as always harmless, though in general, it is acting upon a potentially destructive or nefarious desire that is the clear event horizon. It is my belief that nearly every human being harbors more than a few secret lusts not acted upon that the rest of "society" would find troubling. Given my sentiments expressed in question #2, it is not a moral matter for me so as much as it is one of rationale. Specifically, to what degree does a desire consume a person's thoughts obsessively to become a driver, and to what degree would acting out that desire cause irrevocable and serious harm? If the answer to particularly the latter question is "much", I consider the desire "bad". P.s. Excellent post, Ialdabaoth. Having respect for your past writings in the forum, I knew your questions would stimulate some interesting introspection.

looking4princess -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/7/2009 7:21:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucienne quote: ORIGINAL: looking4princess I understand a little, not a great deal, Lucienne, about the dopamine and endorphine reinforcement loops that change desires or wants into habits and habits into compulsions. The desire is pleasant. We indulge it. The need becomes stronger as we repeat the behavior and a "want to" loop becomes a "must do" loop. There has been a great deal of brain scan and behavioral research apparently regarding drug addiction, habit formation, and as revealed in Dr. Kessler's recent book on food over-indulgence. A very strong and determined person can exercise Free Will or initiate distracting behaviors to stop compulsions involving "merely unhealthy" activities. I do wonder how much of a role compulsion plays in kinky "deviant" sexual behavior. I bet a lot. I also bet that someone will write to caution me against generalizing this connection and they will have merit in their objection. But really, how much of cross-dressing, foot fetish, other submissive activities can be attributed to the "want to - feels good -must do" behavior loops that become habitual patterns before they become desperately needed kink activities that compel people to troll for satisfaction? I guess a lot. I also wonder whether in the very extreme cases like the pedophile actors and serial killer/rapists - the Jeffrey Dahmers and Jack the Rippers - if there isn't a tipping point beyond which Free Will becomes inoperable. There doesn't seem to be any other way to account for such gross and callous behavior in which the victims become so thoroughly dehumanized and objectified. It's a puzzlement. I welcome any knowledgeable contributions here. Allow me to be the first to caution against such a generalization. ;) I suppose compulsion can be on a continuum following from desire and habit. But I'm unaware of any research demonstrating it as such. In my personal experience and from my reading on the subject, I'd say that compulsion is a pretty unpleasant experience. There is no subspace. There is no orgasm. There is no delightful anticipation. There is never any real satisfaction. It's scratching yourself raw stretching for the itch you can't reach and eventually wondering - why can't I stop scratching!!!??? I know that some of the cognitive behavioral techniques developed to cope with compulsion have also proven effective dealing with bad habits/addictions. But there's a distinction in that compulsions don't start because they're pleasant. It's just mixed up wiring from the outset. First, let me remind you that the OP asked about desires and ethics. I take it he was referring to D/s desires and wants which are often sexually orientated and motivated. I also take ethics to mean the rightness/wrongness of the behaviors that emerge from those desires. From there I went on to speculate about the "want to" and "must do" neurochemical loops that result in addiction and then compulsion. Implicit in my definition of addiction and compulsion is the OP's query about desire and ethical behavior. I don't think I am out of bounds in speculating that addiction and compulsion can have roots in pleasurable experience. I am of the school that doubts any behaviors are "hard-wired." I suspect sexually "deviant" behaviors, my own included, probably begin innocently as eroticised events (no matter how urgently the gay,lesbian, transgendered community proclaim a "gay" gene) For an abundance of research please check out The End of Overeating by David A Kessler, MD and former chief of the FDA. He describes evidence for the pleasure/desire/habit/addiction/compulsion neurochemical loops. I believe you and I are referring to two different kinds of compulsion. From what I read in your remarks I would guess you are describing Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, which I learn elsewhere is "an anxiety disorder of recurrent and unwanted ideas or impulses and an urge to relieve the discomfort caused by the obsession." Hence, the desperate need to relieve the itch you describe. If that is the definition you are working with then your comments about the unpleasantness of the experience are certainly valid but imo fall outside the OP's query. However, you did give me some additional dimensions to ponder when considering the motivations of such outlyers as rapists, pedophiles, and serial killers. Maybe both definitions of compulsion are operational or maybe it is either/or depending upon the specific individual. Something to consider, but certainly not something to be resolved in this forum and by my meager talents.laughing But always interesting to speculate and exchange chit chat over. Thank you ever so much for your input.

Lucienne -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/7/2009 7:39:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: looking4princess I believe you and I are referring to two different kinds of compulsion. From what I read in your remarks I would guess you are describing Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, which I learn elsewhere is "an anxiety disorder of recurrent and unwanted ideas or impulses and an urge to relieve the discomfort caused by the obsession." Hence, the desperate need to relieve the itch you describe. If that is the definition you are working with then your comments about the unpleasantness of the experience are certainly valid but imo fall outside the OP's query. However, you did give me some additional dimensions to ponder when considering the motivations of such outlyers as rapists, pedophiles, and serial killers. Maybe both definitions of compulsion are operational or maybe it is either/or depending upon the specific individual. Something to consider, but certainly not something to be resolved in this forum and by my meager talents.laughing But always interesting to speculate and exchange chit chat over. Thank you ever so much for your input. I agree we're talking about two different kinds of compulsion, but I don't know how different they are. I don't know if the neuro-chemistry is similar. I only brought it up in response to a question about free will, which I think is within the subject matter of the OP's query. I'm not trying to have a detailed conversation about compulsions, just pointing out that free will is still in play. You asked a follow up question, I offered a follow up response. All good.

Justme696 -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/7/2009 9:18:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear quote: ORIGINAL: Justme696 quote: There's always ways "wrong" things can be seen as right I think that is one of the reasons we have laws. Only a very small and incidental reason Might depend on where you live.

IronBear -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/7/2009 10:58:37 AM)
Laws generally speaking are designed to allow those who have, keep their thingies and stop those who have nots from taking them. This is why their are heavier laws generally speaking, against insurrection of any other sort of slaves (to the system) from revolting (although it could be said that some of those would be revolters are indeed revolting). The power of the law it has been said on several occasions comes from the barrel of a gun. Also I could comment that in a number of countries, the penalties for offenders is far harsher for crimes against property. hell I know of a number of cases where some criminal type was jailed for life (was 10 to m15 years) with parole to be allowed for murder and yet another bod was jailed for 40 years for armed robbery where no one was harmed. Remember too that although there is usually in some countries a reasonable attempt to keep the Church (ie religion) separate from the State (laws) but the bible (or what ever "Holy Book" is seen as the State religion) thumpers and religious extremists seem to be able to but a great many favours and control many voting blocks which in turn ensures that their particular view of morality is made into legislation as seen in some States in the US and Australia about sexual deviance and so forth.Hence my comment that laws covering things which we may see as OK are against the local laws and even more so the interpretation by Police of such laws which alters according to the individual officer or supervisor in some areas. . After this is all just human nature and it is a fallacy to expect justice in many cases unless you are part of the wealthy elite and have both political and religious (community) clout or standing.

Justme696 -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/7/2009 11:03:54 AM)
O.k...thank you for explaining. I understand it. I meant with my remark, that law also protects others from what an "individual" might see as o.k. ( but is not seen as o.k. by the majority). (including selfjustice...which needs to be controlled also..even if there is a good reason to do it)

IronBear -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/7/2009 12:31:45 PM)
Never hurts to regulate from hurting ourselves. here I can be jailed or placed in a psych ward long term if I successfully suicide figure the rationality or logic in that [8\|][:-][:D]

Justme696 -> RE: The Ethics of Desire (10/7/2009 12:36:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: IronBear Never hurts to regulate from hurting ourselves. here I can be jailed or placed in a psych ward long term if I successfully suicide figure the rationality or logic in that [8\|][:-][:D] lol that is indeed weird.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625