Nick_Tarleton comments on Is masochism necessary? - Less Wrong

8 Post author: PhilGoetz 10 April 2009 11:48PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (143)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: HughRistik 13 April 2009 03:03:27AM *  1 point [-]

I suspect that evolutionary explanations of masochism suck for the same reasons that evolutionary explanations of homosexuality suck: these sexual orientations are the product of developmental factors, rather than being evolved adaptations. Purely social/environmental explanations are also pretty bad.

Homosexuality is related to certain developmental factors, particularly prenatal hormones. There's some preliminary evidence that masochists are more likely to be queer: BDSM practioners disproportionately report non-heterosexual orientations relative to the general population (one example: this study found rates of 51.9% and 20.6% for female and male bisexuality, which is way above the general population, though this sample wasn't random). If homosexuality is related to developmental influences, and masochism is correlated with queerness, then I would hypothesize that masochism is related to developmental influences, also.

Comment author: Nick_Tarleton 15 April 2009 04:49:29AM 5 points [-]

BDSM practioners disproportionately report non-heterosexual orientations relative to the general population

I've always chalked this up to the conjecture that once you've personally accepted, or interpersonally admitted, one minority sexual preference, you're probably more likely to accept/admit others. The effect you cite sounds too strong to be explained just by that, though.

Comment author: ciphergoth 15 April 2009 09:17:11AM 4 points [-]

I don't see any reason why what you suggest wouldn't be a very strong effect.