I got a bit confused (as I often do!) when chatting about sadists.

One of my "bibles" about bdsm (found at seekers.org.uk) includes the following definition in its terminology section:

"Sadism. A technical term in psychology introduced in about 1838 for obtaining pleasure from the unhappiness of another. This is not related to the pleasure of a BDSM Top who desires the Bottom to feel pleasure. Sadism has no place in BDSM. The word is derived from the name of the author of sadistic stories, Compte (D.A.F.) De Sade (1740-1814), better know as the Marquise de Sade. The evidence suggests that he was a BDSMer but not a sadist. Sadist. 1. A technical term in psychology, now little used, of no relevance to BDSM. 2. A term sometimes, incorrectly, used for a BDSM Top, especially one who gives pain." (I hope I have followed the rules about posting from elsewhere).

I realise that may be a "traditionalistic" or "conservative" view or definition, and that some here at the library may have "more liberal" viewpoint - nether viewpoint/opinion/etc. being more right or wrong than the other of course.

But it does very much confuse me that lots of people seem to think that a "good Dom" should also be a (bit of a?) sadist? I'm trying hard to learn how to be a "good Dom" and I derive pleasure when a sub enjoys what I am doing (it's a huge high) which includes delivering pain which she enjoys (up to the level I'm happy with).

What I can't do is be a "sadist" and enjoy inflicting that pain when the sub doesn't enjoy it. That doesn't mean that if it's the only option available I would never punish corporally - I'd be punishing myself at the same time though.

Any comments please?

VV