Psychology & Sexuality

ISSN: 1941-9899 (Print) 1941-9902 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpse20

BDSM practitioners understandings of their initial

attraction to BDSM sexuality: essentialist and
constructionist narratives
Megan R. Yost & L.E. Hunter
To cite this article: Megan R. Yost & L.E. Hunter (2012) BDSM practitioners understandings of
their initial attraction to BDSM sexuality: essentialist and constructionist narratives, Psychology
& Sexuality, 3:3, 244-259, DOI: 10.1080/19419899.2012.700028
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2012.700028

Published online: 13 Jul 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 931

View related articles

Citing articles: 7 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rpse20
Download by: [NUS National University of Singapore]

Date: 28 August 2016, At: 23:09

Psychology & Sexuality

Vol. 3, No. 3, September 2012, 244259

BDSM practitioners understandings of their initial attraction to

BDSM sexuality: essentialist and constructionist narratives
Megan R. Yosta* and L.E. Hunterb
a
Departments of Psychology and Womens & Gender Studies, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA,
USA; b Psychology and Womens Studies, University of Michigan, Michigan, MI, USA

(Received 25 September 2011; final version received 8 May 2012)

The purpose of this research was to explore essentialist and constructionist accounts
within BDSM (bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, and sadism and
masochism) practitioners stories about their first attraction to this sexuality. Whereas
prior research has examined the coming out stories of other sexual minorities (lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) individuals and polyamorous individuals), little scholarly
attention has been paid to narratives of initial interest in BDSM. A total of 144 women
and 128 men who self-identified as being involved in BDSM responded to a questionnaire that included the open-ended item What first attracted you to BDSM? Please
describe the reasons why you first became interested in BDSM as a sexual practice
or orientation. Using thematic analysis, we identified two mutually exclusive explanations for initial BDSM interests: (1) BDSM interests are an intrinsic part of the self and
(2) BDSM interests developed because of external influences. Analyses revealed very
few differences in the endorsement of these themes by either gender or BDSM role. The
only gender differences found were among submissive participants: a greater proportion
of men than women cited intrinsic self, whereas a greater proportion of women than
men cited external influences. Additionally, a small number of participants (primarily women and primarily submissives) described a socialised essentialism, in which
external influences initially brought them to BDSM, but these interests were then experienced as an essential part of themselves. We discuss these findings in relation to prior
research on the meanings of BDSM practice for participants, in terms of current theorising about the role of stories in the development of ones sexual self, and in relation
to essentialist, constructionist and dynamical theories of sexual identity development.
Keywords: sadomasochism; BDSM; sexual stories; essentialism

Introduction
Ones sexual story, or the narrative one tells about intimate life, focused especially around
the erotic, the gendered and the relational (Plummer, 1995, p. 6), often includes speculation as to the origins of desire. Some sexualities are thought to require less explanation than
others; in the modern West, this is particularly the case for normative sexualities (those that
are procreative, heterosexual, monogamous and genitally focused), whereas non-normative
sexualities (including queer sexuality and sex for pleasure) are questioned and condemned
(Rubin, 1993). This often leads individuals whose sexuality falls into the latter category
to construct narratives that explain and provide a justification for their interests (Plummer,
*Corresponding author. Email: yostm@dickinson.edu
ISSN 1941-9899 print/ISSN 1941-9902 online
2012 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19419899.2012.700028
http://www.tandfonline.com

Psychology & Sexuality

245

1995). The sexualities that have most often been explained in this fashion are lesbian,
gay and bisexual (LGB) identities, via the coming out story. More recently, individuals engaged in other non-normative sexualities have also begun telling their stories (e.g.
polyamory; M. Barker & Langdridge, 2009).
Many coming out or sexual identity development narratives examined in prior research
feature individuals who have claimed and defended an essential nature; that is, many
LGB-identified individuals (and some polyamorous individuals) argue that their sexual or
relationship orientation is an essential aspect of their true selves, with them since (or even
before) birth. This is perhaps not surprising, because when a sexual minority community
faces prejudice and discrimination, essentialist narratives of identity are used in an attempt
to garner social inclusion and validation (Morton & Postmes, 2009).
The purpose of this study was to extend research on narrative accounts of sexuality by
examining a particular form of non-normative and stigmatised sexuality: bondage and discipline, dominance and submission, and sadism and masochism (BDSM) sexuality. In this
research, we examined the extent to which BDSM practitioners positioned their desires as
an essential part of their selves in a fashion similar to LGB and polyamorous individuals.
We consider BDSM to refer to a sexual identity and a set of sexual practices characterised by explicit, negotiated power differentials, with a top or dominant person1
guiding interaction and a bottom or submissive individual following instructions or
receiving sensation from the dominant (Taylor & Ussher, 2001; Weinberg, Williams, &
Moser, 1984). For most, but not all, practitioners, BDSM has an erotic appeal and takes
place within a sexualised encounter.

Essentialism/constructionism in the sexual story

The sociologist Plummer (1995) argued that personal sexual stories have been on the rise.
As society has become more open about sexuality, sexual minority groups have become
empowered to tell their stories, even framing sexual storytelling as a collective identity
activity. Perhaps the most prominent example of this, Plummer claimed, is the LGB coming
out story. The master narrative that has emerged in recent decades involves an individual
who initially senses an internal LGB identity, and searches for a language with which to tell
it; once this language is found, one accepts her or his sexual story as an essential truth about
ones personal nature and constructs oneself as an essential biographic object in social
and historical context. Once one has come out to ones self, one may come out publicly
and politically. The political implications for sexual storytelling are those that pertain to
intimate citizenship: control over the body and relationships, access to representation and
space, and socially grounded choices about intimacy and gender (see Langdridge, 2006).
Psychological researchers analysing coming out stories have found extensive evidence
of this essentialist story, and thus, most models of LGB identity development are based
on the premise that sexual identity is an essential aspect of the self, of which the individual gradually becomes aware (e.g. Cass, 1990). The essentialist perspective on sexual
orientation was further validated by a proliferation of research linking sexual attractions
to biological determinants, such as genetics and prenatal hormones (e.g. Bailey & Pillard,
1995; Collaer & Hines, 1995; Dittman, 1997). LGB individuals often championed such
research results, finding validation for their sexual identities now that they had been
proven to be biologically based (Hegarty, 2010). This validation was possible because
biologically-based identities are seen by others as more real, unable to be changed and
exculpated from negative moral judgment (Hacking, 1995).

246

M.R. Yost and L.E. Hunter

Research has clearly demonstrated that the traditional coming out story with its
implicit essentialism fails to account for many same-sex attracted womens experiences.
For instance, among women who came to identify as lesbian later in life, the transition was
not always experienced as the development of a true lesbianism that lay dormant; rather,
many women felt that they simply experienced a change in their attractions (Kitzinger &
Wilkinson, 1995). Many other researchers have documented similar shifts in womens sexual identities, particularly in response to an emotionally close relationship with another
woman that then leads to sexual desire (Blumstein & Schwartz, 1993; Diamond, 2000;
Pillard, 1990). Thus, for some LGB-identified people, women in particular, the sexual identity story does not rely on essentialist perspectives, but instead focuses on the construction
of their new identities through social learning and socialisation processes.
The dichotomy between essentialist and constructionist accounts of ones own sexuality has emerged not only in the study of LGB research but also in the study of polyamorous
individuals. M. Barkers (2005) participants heavily drew on discourses of polyamory as
essential, natural and what I am, and less often on a framework of choice. The essentialist
narrative seemed to focus on the idea of biological essences as more real, whereas the
choice narrative reaffirmed that participants were capable of making responsible choices
that sometimes involved non-normative relationship patterns (e.g. polyamory). It seems
that, whatever the non-normative sexuality under study, essentialist narratives appeal to a
large proportion of individuals, with smaller proportions putting forward narratives that
can be read as constructionist.
Despite the popularity of essentialist narratives, recent theorising about sexual orientation within psychology has attempted to complicate the dichotomy posed by these two
seemingly opposing narratives. For example, Philip Hammacks life course development
model of sexual orientation (2005) represents an integrative paradigm that incorporates
both essentialism and constructionism. Hammacks model includes biological underpinnings that guide sexual orientation while acknowledging the influences of the cultural
context on self-identifications, integrating both essential and constructionist accounts into
one model. On the other hand, Lisa Diamond (2007) has called for researchers studying same-sex sexual attractions to move beyond essentialism/constructionism altogether.
Diamond argues for the application of dynamical systems to the study of sexual orientation identity, which would acknowledge multiple paths to sexual orientation, discontinuities
in attractions, capability of experiencing novel attractions depending on the social context
and potential reorganisation of sexual self-concepts. Dynamical systems can account for
participants who feel that their sexual identity is innate and unchanging, as well as those
who feel that their sexuality shifts in response to new interpersonal relationships, different
social contexts, or triggering events that are not necessarily labelled as momentous at the
moment they are experienced.
In this study, we hoped to explore the extent to which essentialist or constructionist
explanations were utilised by BDSM practitioners, another sexual minority group facing
discrimination and social exclusion (Wright, 2006; Yost, 2010). We also hoped that our
qualitative data would contribute to these ongoing theoretical conversations regarding the
nature of sexual desire and the applicability of a life story or dynamical systems approach
to the study of sexualities.
Research on BDSM identities
The initial approach to the psychological study of BDSM largely pathologised practitioners, considering sadism and masochism examples of pathological sexual desire (see

Psychology & Sexuality

247

Taylor, 1997, for a review). In contrast, BDSM practitioners and activists have been publishing positive self-studies and descriptions of their practices, identities and communities
for many years (e.g. Thompson, 1991; Townsend, 1972). Since this community literature
emerged, psychological research has also begun a more sympathetic interest in the study
of BDSM. Although some empirical work considers basic descriptions of BDSM samples and practices (Santtila, Sandnabba, Alison, & Nordling, 2002; Sisson & Moser, 2005;
Tomassilli, Golub, Bimbi, & Parsons, 2009), other work emphasises meaning and identity.
Our project is grounded in recent literature that views BDSM sexuality as a nonpathological sexual variation that can best be understood by listening to participants own
accounts. For instance, qualitative research conducted by Taylor and Ussher (2001) found
eight distinct meanings that BDSM held for practitioners, including seeing BDSM as dissidence (BDSM was seen as deliberately, consciously antithetical to a sexual hegemonic,
namely, patriarchal heterosexuality (p. 302)), as pleasure (including sexual play and more
playful fun) and as escapism (an opportunity to step out of the boredom of everyday life).
Other research, sparked perhaps by Taylor and Usshers foundational work, has explored
the meaning of pain (Newmahr, 2010), power and ritual (Moser & Kleinplatz, 2007) and
similarities between BDSM practice and spiritual transformation (Beckman, 2007).
The recent empirical literature at large suggests that a multiplicity of meanings of
BDSM practice/identity exists; however, there are only hints relating to practitioners
understandings of their own identities in terms of essentialist or constructionist narratives.
For instance, some of Taylor and Usshers participants (2001) thought of themselves as stable, essentially kinky actors, whereas others identified BDSM as a learned behaviour,
which reflects a more constructionist approach. Interesting gender differences exist; in
three quantitative studies (Breslow, Evans, & Langley, 1985; Plante, 2006; Scott, 1980),
men generally reported being interested in BDSM since childhood (an essentialist perspective), whereas women generally reported being introduced to BDSM by a romantic partner
(a constructionist perspective). Our goal was to extend this literature by specifically asking BDSM practitioners how they understood their initial attractions to this sexuality in
essence, soliciting their coming out story.
The present study
The present analysis uses data from a larger study of BDSM community members to contribute to the literature on essentialist, constructionist and dynamical understandings of
sexual desire and identity. For this article, we were interested in the role of BDSM identification, so sought to examine whether dominants, submissives and switches understood
the origins of their BDSM interests in similar or in different ways. Further, given prior
gender difference findings (Breslow et al., 1985; Plante, 2006; Scott, 1980), we were also
interested in examining gender differences in participants narratives of first attractions to
BDSM.
Method
Participants
Participants were 144 women and 128 men between the ages of 19 and 76 years (M =
40.45, SD = 11.86) who self-identified as participating in BDSM. Of the 268 participants
who responded to an open-ended prompt assessing sexual orientation, the majority identified as heterosexual (53.6%) or primarily heterosexual with some qualification provided
(14.6%), such as straightish, mostly straight and straight with a little flexibility.

248

M.R. Yost and L.E. Hunter

Approximately one-quarter of the respondents indicated a sexual minority orientation

(21.1% bisexual, 2.6% gay, 1.8% lesbian and 2.6% queer), and 3.6% of respondents used
a BDSM role as their sexual orientation (e.g. top or slave).
An open-ended prompt asked participants to self-identify their ethnic background.
Most participants (231; 84.7%) identified as White, 17 (6.3%) as multi-racial, 7 (2.6%) as
Latino, 5 (1.8%) as Jewish, 4 (1.5%) as Asian, 3 (1.1%) as Black and 5 (1.8%) declined
to respond to the item. The sample was highly educated: 89 participants (32.7%) had
completed some graduate education beyond a bachelors degree, 67 (24.6%) attained a
bachelors degree, 76 (27.9%) had attended some college, 22 (8.1%) attended vocational
or technical school and all but one of the remaining participants had a secondary school
education (16; 5.9%).
Procedure
The data reported here were obtained in conjunction with a larger study on power
and sexuality (Yost, 2006). Participants were recruited via advertisements in US-based
publications and communications in BDSM organisations, web sites and at community
events. Volunteers contacted the researcher through email or phone, and following a brief
screening, they were directed to an anonymous online questionnaire.
Measures
BDSM self-identification/BDSM role
In the context of several items on BDSM identities and practices, participants were asked
How do you define your BDSM role? and were able to select as many of the following as applied to them: dominant, top, master, mistress, sadist, submissive, bottom, slave,
masochist, switch and sadomasochist. The vast majority of participants (227; 84.2%)
selected between 1 and 4 roles; the remaining 16% selected between 5 and 10 roles (M =
3.15, MDN = 3.00, SD = 1.75).
In order to facilitate different analyses through chi-squares, a BDSM self-identification
variable was created, with three categories: Dominant Spectrum (any participant who
selected dominant, sadist, top, master or mistress), Submissive Spectrum (any participant who selected submissive, masochist, bottom or slave) and Switch (any participant
who selected Switch, or selected at least one Dominant Spectrum identity and at least one
Submissive Spectrum identity)2 . More participants who identified as Dominant Spectrum
were men, whereas more participants who identified as Submissive Spectrum were women;
however, men and women were equally represented among those who identified as
Switches, 2 (df = 2, n = 272) = 28.52, p < 0.01 (see Table 1).
Dominant Spectrum participants selected an average of 2.96 roles (SD = 1.12,
range 15) and Submissive Spectrum participants selected an average of 2.53 roles (SD =
1.14, range 15), but Switch participants selected an average of 4.53 roles (SD =
2.29, range 110). A one-way analysis of variance indicated that the number of roles
selected by Switch participants differed significantly from both Dominant and Submissive
Spectrum participants, F(2, 269) = 40.92, p < 0.01 (post hoc analyses used the Bonferroni
correction).
Initial BDSM participation
Participants were asked to respond to several open-ended items about their BDSM
participation. Because the purpose of this article was to examine the distribution of

Psychology & Sexuality

Table 1.

249

Themes reported by participants, by gender and by BDSM role identification.

Participants

Women
Submissive Spectrum
Switch
Dominant Spectrum
Men
Submissive Spectrum
Switch
Dominant Spectrum
Grand total

Intrinsic nature

External
influences

No primary
motivation

144
88
36
20
128
41
38
49
272

57
34
13
10
61
25
17
19
118

39.6
38.6
36.1
50.0
47.7
61.0
44.7
38.8
43.4

57
34
16
7
39
9
13
17
96

39.6
38.6
44.4
35.0
30.5
22.0
34.2
34.7
35.3

30
20
7
3
28
7
8
13
58

20.8
22.7
19.4
15.0
21.9
17.1
21.1
26.5
21.3

Note: In the rows marked submissive, switch and dominant, percentages are provided based on the number of
women and men; in the grand total row, percentages are based on the full number of participants in the study.

explanations for first attraction to BDSM, the item of interest for this study was What
first attracted you to BDSM? Please describe the reasons why you first became interested
in BDSM as a sexual practice or orientation.
Coding procedure
Our analysis of these data proceeded according to the guidelines for thematic analysis established by Braun and Clarke (2006), while being particularly attentive to any
comments that suggested a participant held an essentialist or constructionist perspective. Both authors independently read through all responses, making notes of potential
coding categories (i.e. a remark that related to a reason why a participant first became
interested in BDSM). We then discussed our lists of potential coding categories and
grouped similar coding categories together into two themes. The first theme, BDSM interests are an intrinsic part of the self reflected essentialist narratives, whereas the second
theme, BDSM interests developed because of external influences reflected constructionist
narratives.
After this thematic structure was developed, we independently went back to the data,
re-read the responses and indicated whether a code was 1 (present) or 0 (absent) in
each participants response3 . Percentage of overall agreement for the coding categories
(calculated by summing the number of cases in which the two coders agreed and dividing that by the total number of observations) ranged from a low of 0.79 to a high of
0.99 (M = 0.94, SD = 0.06). The disagreements that occurred were resolved through
independent re-reading of the data in question, followed by a discussion to achieve
consensus.
Results
In the results that follow, we describe the various ways that participants explained their
initial BDSM interests, providing examples of the two explanations of origins. Within
each theme, we also provide results of chi-square analyses testing for gender differences,
differences based on BDSM identification and gender differences within each BDSM
identification.

250

M.R. Yost and L.E. Hunter

BDSM interests are an intrinsic part of the self

We were interested in the extent to which essentialist narratives were described.
Approximately 43.4% of all participants indicated the belief that their interest in BDSM
was intrinsically motivated (see Table 1).
Many participants made a concrete statement that their core sense of self included
a BDSM identity. These claims highlighted an understanding of BDSM interests as being
almost inexplicable, not in need of explanation because it was simply who they were as people. Other participants espousing this explanation for their BDSM involvement explained
that their interests always existed, or they extended so far into their childhood that the
participants could not remember a time when they were not aware of those desires. Some
of these statements also included a description of fantasies that recurred during childhood or adolescence, or sexualised games that were continually played during those age
periods.
Ive always had a sort of fantasies4 about being immobilised. When I was very young, I liked
to pretend I was a damsel in distress. Id get my friends to tie me up and one of them would
have to rescue me. (Female, Submissive Spectrum)

Additionally, several participants drew on biologically based explanations, claiming that

their BDSM interests were natural or biological in origin, or that they were wired to be
interested in BDSM.
Attraction is a bad word to describe my experiences, because it assumes that some activity,
behavior or other outside source triggered my interest. In fact, I believe that I was born this
way, in the same way that some people are born heterosexual while others are born gay or
bi-sexual, etc. (Female, Dominant Spectrum).

We read this theme as indicative of an essentialist perspective on ones BDSM interests,

with BDSM interests being experienced by these participants as an essential aspect of the
self that, in many cases, has been a part of the self forever.
To test whether these essentialist narratives were reported more often by Dominants,
Submissives or Switches, a chi-square analysis of BDSM role was conducted; results
were not significant. To test whether essentialist narratives were reported more often by
women or men, a chi-square analysis of gender was conducted; results were not significant. To test the relationship between BDSM identification and gender, a series of
chi-square analyses were run, examining gender differences within each BDSM identification category separately. Among Submissive Spectrum individuals only, men were
more likely to indicate Intrinsic Self than women, 2 (df = 1, n = 129) = 5.62,
p < 0.05 (see Table 1).
BDSM interests developed because of external influences
We were interested in the extent to which constructionist narratives were described; approximately 35.3% of all participants indicated the belief that their interest in BDSM was
motivated by external influences (see Table 1).
Participants who pointed to external influences on their BDSM interests cited various sources. For many, their romantic partner was already interested in BDSM and
encouraged the participant to try it. For others, outside sources included friends or
media.

Psychology & Sexuality

251

a friend of mine began a relationship with a man who introduced her to BDSM. I began going
to classes and events with her and became very interested and eventually involved in BDSM
(Female, Submissive Spectrum)
I saw it in porn, tried it and liked that it was something different (Male, Switch)

Additionally, a small number of participants described an abuse history, and claimed

that their BDSM interests grew out of that abuse.
I guess being molested had something to do with it. As I became sexually active, I found
bondage and eroticwear a plus for me (Female, Switch)

We read this causal explanation as supportive of a constructionist view of sexuality, with

participants open to the idea that their sexuality and sexual interests can be shaped by their
social environment.
To test whether these constructionist narratives were reported more often by
Dominants, Submissives or Switches, a chi-square analysis of BDSM role was conducted;
results were not significant. To test whether constructionist narratives were reported more
often by women or men, a chi-square analysis of gender was conducted; results were not
significant. To test the relationship between BDSM identification and gender, a series of
chi-square analyses were run, examining gender differences within each BDSM identification category separately. Among Submissive Spectrum individuals only, women were
marginally more likely to indicate this theme than men, 2 (df = 1, n = 129) = 3.50,
p = 0.06 (see Table 1).
Socialised essentialism
Interestingly, some participants who described becoming interested in BDSM because of
these external influences also relied on essentialist terminology to describe their identities.
These participants noted that they were introduced to BDSM by someone else, but that once
the introduction occurred, it felt as if they had discovered their true nature. In this way,
these participants described an essentialist BDSM identity that was the result of socialisation. This differs from the purely essentialist understanding that characterises the first
theme (Intrinsic Self) only in the source; whereas participants understood Intrinsic Self in
terms of always-existing sexual interests (a born this way argument), this small group
of participants describe becoming involved in BDSM because of an external influence,
and then considering it an essential aspect of their selves. This is similar to the belief in
social determinism described by Rangel and Keller (2011) as an additional way that people understand essentialism: in addition to genetic determinism, some people believe that
social factors shape ones essential nature.
I cant say exactly what first attracted me to BDSM. I think it was just something within
me that came out when I saw BDSM-oriented segments on TV shows (Female, Submissive
Spectrum)
I first became involved because my partner is into BDSM. but i pretty quickly realized that it
feels very comfortable and natural to me (Female, Dominant Spectrum)

This pattern of responses was more common among women than among men, with
14 women but only 2 men describing it, 2 (df = 1, n = 272) = 8.15, p < 0.01. The majority of these 14 women were Submissive Spectrum (11 Submissive Spectrum, 1 Dominant
Spectrum, 2 Switch), whereas 1 man was Dominant Spectrum and 1 man was Submissive

252

M.R. Yost and L.E. Hunter

Spectrum. Thus, the gender difference in these findings also resonate with Diamonds
(2007) dynamical systems approach to sexuality, which acknowledges the potential for
a single relationship or a single encounter to cause a reorganisation of ones sexual self,
and which occurs more commonly for women than for men.
Neither intrinsic self nor external influences
The remaining 21.3% of participants claimed neither Intrinsic Self nor External Influences
as the source of their BDSM interests (see Table 1). Rather, these participants simply
described what was attractive to them about BDSM (e.g. what they found erotic), but
did not locate their interests in either their sense of selves or external influences. To test
whether Dominants, Submissives or Switches were more likely to not include a causal
explanation (neither essentialist nor constructionist), a chi-square analysis of BDSM role
was conducted; results were not significant. To test women or men who were more likely
to not include a causal explanation, a chi-square analysis of gender was conducted; results
were not significant. There were also no gender differences within each BDSM role (see
Table 1).

Discussion
The data reported here demonstrate the ways in which participants understandings of their
initial interests in BDSM are a form of sexual storytelling related to the construction of a
sexual self. In line with the narrative potential for multiplicity, the two themes intrinsic
self and external influences represent multiple ways in which BDSM practitioners
understand the beginnings of their interests.
Essentialist and constructionist stories
The intrinsic aspect of the self explanation for BDSM interests found in our study
(the essentialist perspective) has been claimed by many BDSM activists, including some
authors who explain that their BDSM interests have existed since childhood or are simply
a part of who they are (Baldwin, 1991; Califia, 2000; Farr, 1987; Midori, 2005; Portillo,
1991; Rubin, 1987) and others who rely on naturalising, biological arguments to explain
BDSM interests (see Mains (1991), who links BDSM interests to endorphins and the nervous system, and Antoniou (1996), who describes intrinsic programming that turns power
into sexual pleasure).
On the other hand, external influences, as expressed by some of our participants (the
constructionist perspective), have not been well described in the community literature, and
only minimally in the scholarly literature. We could find only one scholarly paper describing this perspective, and it was a very small-scale study (five BDSM practitioners; Kamel
& Weinberg, 1995). Participating in BDSM simply because a partner is interested is not a
story that is regularly told or celebrated.
The overlap seen between our studys findings and the BDSM community literature
suggests two things. First, our consistency with the community literature stands as an indicator of an appropriate sample that represents the BDSM community at large well, and as
evidence of a credible analysis (C. Barker & Pistrang, 2005).
Second, the overlap points to the potential effects of media on the construction of the
sexual self. The greater frequency of intrinsic interests compared with external influences found throughout the BDSM community literature and in the present research

Psychology & Sexuality

253

suggests the existence of a master narrative of BDSM interests, one that focuses on intrinsic desires (over which, presumably, one has little control). Like other master narratives
(see the struggle and success narrative common to same-sex desire stories; Cohler &
Hammack, 2009), this essentialist narrative may function to empower the community
(Langdridge & Butt, 2005; Rappaport, 1995). An essentialist, born this way narrative
is often used by LGB individuals to counter discrimination and heterosexism from the
dominant culture (Morton & Postmes, 2009); perhaps, BDSM practitioners, as a sexual minority, also wish to counter negative views of their community by drawing on an
essentialist narrative.
If, as Langdridge (2006) theorises, the idea of citizenship and transgression are
in tension with one another, BDSM practice may be inherently suspect when seen as a
non-essentialised identity. Essentialised or biologised groups can be rendered exempt from
moral judgement because their practices are framed as unchangeable (Hacking, 1995),
whereas sexual behaviours viewed as chosen are not so exempt. The transgressions
involved in BDSM may be simply too sexual, too erotic, and therefore too transgressive
for full citizenship (Langdridge, 2005, p. 380) if they are seen as chosen. We wonder
whether BDSM practitioners, aware of the ways in which choice has been used against
other sexual minority groups (such as LGB individuals), find the essentialist narratives
about their desire to be protective against this type of exclusionary rhetoric.
It is also possible that popular press books unintentionally create cultural norms that
influence some BDSM practitioners experiences, and these norms may coax individuals towards identities or practices that may not have arisen otherwise, even when the
interests are experienced by practitioners as innate. This process has previously been
described in relation to identity construction in general by Hacking (1995), who rejects
the essentialist/constructionist divide, noting that identities can be both real and constructed. Instead, he describes a looping effect, in which the naming of people as
part of an identified group spurs changes in that groups possibilities for future actions.
The changes that result from being named as a group, in turn, feed in to a change in
the groups perceived characteristics. This results in changes in both self-concept and
behaviour of individuals within those groups. Hacking ends by noting the emergence of
self-ascriptive kinds that are characterised by the members of a group pushing back
against external labels to contest negative moral connotations; gay liberation is his prime
example.
A similar process may occur in BDSM, wherein labelling BDSM identity as a distinct category may have led to the solidification of a BDSM community and literature; the
literature, in turn, may feed back into how the BDSM community perceives itself. That
same literature may then help BDSM practitioners conceive of themselves as relatively
normal, and thereby enable them to take BDSM as a self-ascriptive, self-determined
label.
Dynamical systems applications
We found that some participants used essentialist narratives and others favoured a constructionist narrative to explain their desires. In addition, a small subset of participants
characterised their BDSM identities as essential but highlighted the influence of socialisation rather than biology; these latter participants came to BDSM because of the influences
of another person (socialisation), but once they were involved, they felt that they had
discovered their true selves (essentialist). These participants expressed a belief in the
social determinism (Rangel & Keller, 2011) of their BDSM identities, which aligns with

254

M.R. Yost and L.E. Hunter

the dynamical systems approaches to understanding female same-sex sexuality proposed

recently by Diamond (2007).
We would argue that, in considering the conceptualisation of ones initial interests in
BDSM sexuality, a dynamical systems approach best accounts for all of our data, because
dynamical systems allow for non-linear variability the ability for an event or a relationship to cause a sudden shift in ones sense of self. Thus, this approach would account not
only for our participants who described an essentialist understanding of their BDSM interests and those who described a socialisation perspective, but also for those who described
a sudden shift in their sense of self.
It is worth noting that Diamond argued for dynamical systems approaches in order to
address womens sexuality. That is, it is more often women who noted a sudden shift in sexual attractions or the emergence of new sexual interests (e.g. Baumeister, 2000; Diamond,
2008b; Kitzinger & Wilkinson, 1995). In the present research, socialised essentialism was
primarily expressed by women (12 women, but only 2 men). Thus, our data align with previous studies of changes in sexual interests in that such changes were identified primarily
by women.
Differences in themes based on gender and BDSM roles
The themes identified in this study were expressed by similar proportions of women and
men, and similar proportions of Dominant Spectrum, Submissive Spectrum and Switch
individuals. Our analyses yielded two gender differences, but these occurred only for a
subset of our sample.
Among submissives only, a greater proportion of men than women explained that
BDSM was an intrinsic aspect of the self, whereas a greater proportion of women than men
cited external influences. Here, we may see the influence of traditional gender socialisation
in relation to how men and women understand the origin of their sexual interest. Previous
research on sexual orientation suggests that men are more likely than women to understand their sexuality as intrinsic, set from birth and relatively unchanging (Otis & Skinner,
2004; Savin-Williams & Diamond, 2000), whereas women are more likely to understand
their sexuality as fluid, responsive to social contexts and different partners (Baumeister,
2000; Diamond, 2008a). Perhaps these gendered understandings of sexuality extended to
our submissive participants understandings of their BDSM interests, with men more likely
to report an essentialist, intrinsic interest in BDSM and women more likely to acknowledge
external influences.
Further research is needed to ascertain why this pattern occurred only for participants
who identified as submissive, but one possible interpretation is based on cultural associations between submission and femininity. When men identify as submissive within BDSM,
they are claiming a desire that does not align with traditional expectations regarding masculinity. Western cultural norms associate masculinity with strength, dominance and other
agentic traits. Perhaps, then, submissive mens greater tendency to invoke intrinsic self
explanations is related to the recognition that their desires are counter to gender stereotypes
and, in fact, locate them more firmly in the outer limits rather than in the charmed circle of sexuality (Rubin, 1993). By claiming that their submissive desires are part of their
essential nature, men may be better able to feel comfortable in their submission; when ones
sexual desires are an essential part of the self, one cannot be held accountable for failing
to live up to gender stereotypes. Dominant men and men who switch may have fewer reasons to rely on essentialist explanations of their BDSM interests, because dominance is
consistent with hegemonic masculinity norms.

Psychology & Sexuality

255

Limitations
This study was limited in important ways. Due to the sampling strategies, this study cannot
be thought of as representative of the entire BDSM community. People who engage in
BDSM sexuality in private, without any ties to a local or national community, were likely
underrepresented.
Also, the data were not spontaneously produced stories of initial BDSM desire; some
participants might, in a social setting, describe their initial interests in BDSM differently
than they did on this questionnaire. Furthermore, these stories may be reconstructions of
the past, in which participants looked back on their initial interests in BDSM through the
lens of their current identifications. However, we would argue, along with other narrative
researchers (Bruner, 1990; Hammack, 2010), that the historical accuracy of these narratives
is less important than what the stories tell us about the meanings of initial BDSM forays
for those participants identities in the current moment.
Our participants identified their BDSM role in a manner largely consistent with gender
stereotypes: a greater proportion of men identified as dominant (compared with submissive or switch) and a far greater proportion of women identified as submissive (compared
with dominant or switch). Although this is not dissimilar to other studies of heterosexual
BDSM practitioners (Breslow et al., 1985; Cutler, 2000, 2003; Hunt, 1974; Levitt, Moser,
& Jamison, 1994), these gender-stereotypical patterns are not generally replicated when
samples include greater LGB representation (Bauer, 2007; Breslow et al., 1985; Moser &
Levitt, 1987; Sandnabba, Santtila, & Nordling, 1999; Spengler, 1977; Townsend, 1972).
It is possible that the stereotypical gender breakdown into the BDSM roles in this study
was related to sexual orientation make-up. Although our sample included substantial diversity (with 28% identifying as LGB or queer, and 4% using only BDSM roles), recruiting
more heavily from the LGB or queer communities might have yielded a different pattern
of gender and BDSM identifications.
Conclusions
In conclusion, BDSM clearly means different things to different people, and this research
demonstrates the multiplicity of sexual stories relating to initial BDSM involvement.
Whether learned or born this way, the variability of initial interests and meanings provides an alternative to the single master narrative that often characterises sexual minority
communities.
Acknowledgements
Data collection was supported by several grants to the first author from the Psychology Department
at the University of California, Santa Cruz. We gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments from
our reviewer, Dr. Meg Barker, and thank the Psychology Department at the University of Michigan
for hosting the LGBTQ Summer Research Institute and thus promoting our collaboration.

Notes
1.

Many BDSM activists and researchers point out important differences between these terms.
Top and bottom are often used to refer to pain or physical sensation-focused practices, whereas
dominant and submissive refer to power play and role play scenarios. Sadist and masochist
compared with master/mistress and slave have similar physical versus power connotations,
respectively. For the purposes of this article, the distinctions within the general category of
dominant/top/sadist/master/mistress and within submissive/bottom/masochist/slave are less
important than the distinctions between them. For further reading, please see Ernulf and Innala
(1995), Moser and Kleinplatz (2007) and Miller and Devon (2003).

256
2.
3.
4.

M.R. Yost and L.E. Hunter

A total of 37 participants selected sadomasochist, but all of them also identified additional
roles (28 identified as Switch 5 as Dominant Spectrum and 4 as Submissive Spectrum).
Please contact the first author for the full coding scheme.
The quotes provided are verbatim; because participants were typing their responses in an online
survey, standard written English was not always followed. In addition, BDSM-specific styles
were sometimes used, such as some Submissive Spectrum individuals not capitalising I and
some Dominant spectrum individuals capitalising any pronouns that refer to the self (e.g. in My
house). Due to the frequency of both mistakes and purposeful deviations from standard English,
we have refrained from noting these variations with [sic].

Notes on contributors
Megan R. Yost is an associate professor of Psychology and Womens & Gender studies at Dickinson
College, where she teaches courses on the psychology of gender, the psychology of sexuality, qualitative research methods and quantitative data analysis. Her research examines the gendered nature
of human sexuality from a feminist, social psychological perspective. Her work has been published
in Psychology of Women Quarterly, Journal of Sex Research, Journal of Lesbian Studies, Archives of
Sexual Behavior, and Journal of Homosexuality.
L.E. Hunter is a doctoral student in the Psychology and Womens Studies program at the University
of Michigan. Her research focuses on the links between sexual practices and social locations.
She has presented her work at the Association for Women in Psychology national conference, the
Society for Personality and Social Psychology national conference and the Society for Research
on Adolescence national conference. She received her B.A. in Psychology from the University of
California, Santa Cruz.

References
Antoniou, L. (1996). Electra, on the rocks: Following the paradigm tides. In P. Califia & R. Sweeney
(Eds.), The second coming: A leatherdyke reader (pp. 252257). Los Angeles, CA: Alyson
Publications.
Bailey, J., & Pillard, R.C. (1995). Genetics of human sexual orientation. Annual Review of Sex
Research, VI, 126150.
Baldwin, G. (1991). A second coming out. In M. Thompson (Ed.), Leatherfolk: Radical sex, people,
politics, and practice (pp. 169178). Boston, MA: Alyson Publications, Inc.
Barker, C., & Pistrang, N. (2005). Quality criteria under methodological pluralism: Implications for
conducting and evaluating research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 35, 201212.
Barker, M. (2005). This is my partner, and this is my . . . partners partner: Constructing a
polyamorous identity in a monogamous world. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 18(1),
7588.
Barker, M., & Langdridge, D. (Eds.). (2009). Understanding non-monogamies. New York:
Routledge.
Bauer, R. (2007). Playgrounds and new territories The potential of BDSM practices to queer
genders. In D. Langdridge & M. Barker (Eds.), Safe, sane and consensual: Contemporary
perspectives on sadomasochism (pp. 177194). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Baumeister, R.F. (2000). Gender differences in erotic plasticity: The female sex drive as socially
flexible and responsive. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 347374.
Beckmann, A. (2007). The bodily practices of consensual SM, spirituality and transcendence.
In D. Langdridge & M. Barker (Eds.), Safe, sane, and consensual: Contemporary perspectives
on sadomasochism (pp. 98118). Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Blumstein, P.W., & Schwartz, P. (1993). Bisexuality: Some social psychological issues. In L.D.
Garnets, D.C. Kimmel, L.D. Garnets & D.C. Kimmel (Eds.), Psychological perspectives on
lesbian and gay male experiences (pp. 168183). New York: Columbia University Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Breslow, N., Evans, L., & Langley, J. (1985). On the prevalence and roles of females in the
sadomasochistic subculture. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 14, 303317.
Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Psychology & Sexuality

257

Califia, P. (2000). A secret side of lesbian sexuality. In P. Califia (Ed.), Public sex: The culture of radical sex (pp. 158167). San Francisco, CA: Cleis. Reprinted from The Advocate, December 29,
pp. 1923, 1979.
Cass, V. (1990). The implications of homosexual identity formation for the Kinsey model
and scale of sexual preference. In D.P. McWhirter, S.A. Sanders, & J.M. Reinisch (Eds.),
Homosexuality/heterosexuality: Concepts of sexual orientation (pp. 239266). New York:
Oxford University Press.
Cohler, B.J., & Hammack, P.L. (2009). The story of sexual identity: Narrative perspectives on the
gay and lesbian life course. New York: Oxford University Press.
Collaer, M.L., & Hines, M. (1995). Human behavioral sex differences: A role for gonadal hormones during early development? Psychological Bulletin, 118(1), 55107. doi:10.1037/00332909.118.1.55.
Cutler, B. (2000). Basic research of the sexual profile of members of the Arizona Power Exchange
(Unpublished manuscript).
Cutler, B. (2003). Partner selection, power dynamics, and sexual bargaining in self-defined BDSM
couples (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Institute for the Advanced Study of Sexuality.
Diamond, L.M. (2000). Passionate friendships among adolescent sexual-minority women. Journal
of Research on Adolescence, 10(2), 191209.
Diamond, L.M. (2007). A dynamical systems approach to the development and expression of female same-sex sexuality. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2(2), 142161.
doi:10.1207/SJRA1002_4.
Diamond, L.M. (2008a). Female bisexuality from adolescence to adulthood: Results from a 10-year
longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 44, 514.
Diamond, L.M. (2008b). Sexual fluidity: Understanding womens love and desire. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Dittmann, R.W. (1997). Sexual behavior and sexual orientation in females with congenital adrenal
hyperplasia. In L. Ellis & L. Ebertz (Eds.), Sexual orientation: Toward biological understanding
(pp. 5369). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers/Greenwood Publishing Group.
Ernulf, K.E., & Innala, S.M. (1995). Sexual bondage: A review and unobtrusive investigation.
Archives of Sexual Behavior, 24(6), 631654.
Farr, S. (1987). The art of discipline: Creating erotic dramas of play and power. In SAMOIS (Eds.),
Coming to power: Writings and graphics on lesbian s/m (pp. 183191). Boston, MA: Alyson.
Hacking, I. (1995). The looping effects of human kinds. In D. Sperber, D. Premack & A.J. Premack
(Eds.), Causal cognition: A multi-disciplinary approach (pp. 351394). Oxford: Clarendon
Press.
Hammack, P.L. (2005). The life course development of human sexual orientation: An integrative
paradigm. Human Development, 48, 267290. doi:10.1159/000086872.
Hammack, P.L. (2010). The political psychology of personal narrative: The case of Barack Obama.
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 10(1), 182206.
Hegarty, P. (2010). A stone in the soup? Changes in sexual prejudice and essentialist beliefs among
British students in a class on LGBT psychology. Psychology and Sexuality, 1(1), 320.
Hunt, M. (1974). Sexual behaviour in the 1970s. Chicago, IL: Playboy Press.
Kamel, G.W.L., & Weinberg, T.S. (1995). Diversity in sadomasochism: Four S&M careers. In
T.S. Weinberg (Ed.), S&M: Studies in dominance and submission (pp. 7191). New York:
Prometheus.
Kitzinger, C., & Wilkinson, S. (1995). Transitions from heterosexuality to lesbianism: The discursive production of lesbian identities [Special Issue]. Developmental Psychology, 31(1), 95104.
doi:10.1037/00121649.31.1.95.
Langdridge, D. (2005). Actively dividing selves: S/M and the thrill of disintegration. Lesbian and
Gay Psychology Review, 6, 198208.
Langdridge, D. (2006). Voices from the margins: Sadomasochism and sexual citizenship. Citizenship
Studies, 10(4), 373389. doi:10.1080/13621020600857940.
Langdridge, D., & Butt, T. (2005). The erotic construction of power exchange. Journal of
Constructivist Psychology, 18, 6573.
Levitt, E.E., Moser, C., & Jamison, K.V. (1994). The prevalence and some attributes of females in
the sadomasochistic subculture. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 23(4), 465474.
Mains, G. (1991). The molecular anatomy of leather. In M. Thompson (Ed.), Leatherfolk: Radical
sex, people, politics, and practice (pp. 3748). Boston, MA: Alyson Publications, Inc.

258

M.R. Yost and L.E. Hunter

Midori. (2005). Wild side sex: The book of kink. Los Angeles, CA: Daedalus Publishing.
Miller, P., & Devon, M. (2003). Screw the roses, send me the thorns: The romance and sexual sorcery
of sadomasochism. Fairfield, CT: Mystic Rose Books.
Morton, T.A., & Postmes, T. (2009). When differences become essential: Minority essentialism in
response to majority treatment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(5), 656668.
Moser, C., & Kleinplatz, P.J. (2007). Themes of SM expression. In D. Langdridge & M. Barker
(Eds.), Safe, sane, and consensual: Contemporary perspectives on sadomasochism (pp. 5562).
Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Moser, C., & Levitt, E.E. (1987). An exploratory-descriptive study of a sadomasochistically oriented
sample. Journal of Sex Research, 23, 322327.
Newmahr, S. (2010). Power struggles: Pain and authenticity in SM play. Symbolic Interaction, 33(3),
389411.
Otis, M.D., & Skinner, W.F. (2004). An exploratory study of differences in views of factors affecting
sexual orientation for a sample of lesbians and gay men. Psychological Reports, 94, 11731179.
Pillard, R.C. (1990). The Kinsey scale: Is it familial? In D.P. McWhirter, S. Sanders, J. Reinisch, D.P.
McWhirter, S. Sanders & J. Reinisch (Eds.), Homosexuality/heterosexuality: Concepts of sexual
orientation (pp. 88100). New York: Oxford University Press.
Plante, R.F. (2006). Sexual spanking, the self, and the construction of deviance. Journal of
Homosexuality, 50(23), 5979.
Plummer, K. (1995). Telling sexual stories: Power, change and social world. New York: Routledge.
Portillo, T. (1991). I get real: Celebrating my sadomasochistic soul. In M. Thompson (Ed.),
Leatherfolk: Radical sex, people, politics, and practice (pp. 4955). Boston, MA: Alyson
Publications, Inc.
Rangel, U., & Keller, J. (2011). Essentialism goes social: Belief in social determinism as a component
of psychological essentialism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(6), 10561078.
doi:10.1037/a0022401.
Rappaport, J. (1995). Empowerment meets narrative: Listening to stories and creating settings.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 795807.
Rubin, G. (1987). The leather menace: Comments on politics and SM. In SAMOIS (Eds.), Coming
to power: Writings and graphics on lesbian s/m (pp. 194229). Boston, MA: Alyson.
Rubin, G. (1993). Thinking sex: Notes for a radical theory of the politics of sexuality. In C.S. Vance
(Ed.), Pleasure and danger: Exploring female sexuality (pp. 267319). London: Pandora.
Sandnabba, N.K., Santtila, P., & Nordling, N. (1999). Sexual behavior and social adaptation among
sadomasochistically-oriented males. Journal of Sex Research, 36(3), 273282.
Santtila, P., Sandnabba, N.K., Alison, L., & Nordling, N. (2002). Investigating the underlying
structure in sadomasochistically oriented behavior. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 13(2), 185197.
Savin-Williams, R.C., & Diamond, L.M. (2000). Sexual identity trajectories among sexual-minority
youths: Gender comparisons. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 29, 607627.
Scott, G.G. (1980). Erotic power: An exploration of dominance and submission. Secaucus, NJ:
Citadel Press.
Sisson, K., & Moser, C. (2005). Women who engage in S/M (sadomasochistic) interactions for
money: A descriptive study. Lesbian and Gay Psychology Review, 6(3), 209226.
Spengler, A. (1977). Manifest sadomasochism of males: Results of an empirical study. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 6(6), 441456.
Taylor, G.W. (1997). The discursive construction and regulation of dissident sexualities: The case
of SM. In J.M. Ussher (Ed.), Body talk: The material and discursive regulation of sexuality,
madness and reproduction (pp. 106130). London: Routledge.
Taylor, G.W., & Ussher, J.M. (2001). Making sense of S&M: A discourse analytic account.
Sexualities, 4(3), 293314.
Thompson, M. (Ed.). (1991). Leatherfolk: Radical sex, people, politics, and practice. Boston, MA:
Alyson Publications, Inc.
Tomassilli, J.C., Golub, S.A., Bimbi, D.S., & Parsons, J.T. (2009). Behind closed doors: An exploration of kinky sexual behaviors in urban lesbian and bisexual women. Journal of Sex Research,
46(5), 438445.
Townsend, L. (1972). The leathermans handbook. San Francisco, CA: Le Salon.
Weinberg, M.S., Williams, C.J., & Moser, C. (1984). The social constituents of sadomasochism.
Social Problems, 31, 379389.

Psychology & Sexuality

259

Wright, S. (2006). Discrimination of SM-identified individuals. Journal of Homosexuality, 50(2),

217231.
Yost, M.R. (2006). Consensual sexual sadomasochism and sexual aggression perpetration:
Exploring the erotic value of power (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California,
Santa Cruz.
Yost, M.R. (2010). Development and validation of the Attitudes about Sadomasochism Scale. Journal
of Sex Research, 47, 7991.