 |
| Lady Samantha, German pro-domme with a degree in psychology. |
Femdom Resource [ii] dug up an interesting piece of research. Unfortunately the result of all that science is not so benign. It's outcome was popularized for the masses (people like you and me) in Psypost's attempt to clickbait its readers. That's where doubtful science turned nasty. No other way to explain how the first bullet point from the Science Direct abstract:
"Involving in BDSM relationships and practices did not necessarily result in weaken empathy abilities."
magically turns into this headline:
"Female submissives have reduced empathy to others’ suffering, study on BDSM finds"
And yes I had the same questions you have now when I read that. So forget about the popular write-up and let's focus on the original article.
| This is a long read, I know. It's not really hot steaming kink either. Despite that, it's important to understand the risks crappy science poses to the freedom we kinkster have to indulge in our little understood passions. So I came up with an incentive. Read the whole story and I'll give you a freebie. Not just any freebie, but a guaranteed, fail-safe - no fun for me - way to humiliate me, Dutch! Cross my heart and hope to blabla. Scout's honour. Now get reading! |
Where are the men?
First of all why results on female subs only? Did the research include men? If so - and Psypost seems to suggest that - what explains the differences, if any, between both sexes? How can we understand the results anyway? And where are all the dommes? Even in a 20 to one world, it's hard to believe they went the way of the dinosaur. It all makes very little sense.Given this particular outcome, I wonder just how sound the author’s methodology is. Science is simple. You have an idea, run an experiment, throw in a bit of statistical analysis and pick up your Nobel prize. Unfortunately there are more scientists than Nobel prizes, so to be considered by the Swedish Academia of Science, what matters is getting a positive result. Not an entirely scientific approach, but like Abba (also from Sweden) once said: "Winner takes it all." The notion that smart researchers get positive results and lesser gods do not, is poison to the scientific community and an important reason to be sceptical of the outcome.
Reading the abstract, one wonders exactly which part of this researcher's scientific brain was poked to arouse their interest in the relationship between empathy and female submission. Too many people blame violence on TV for the perceived demise of society. Scientifically speaking that notion is so absurd, it doesn’t even reach the level of doubtful. Not that it stops most people from clinging on to their world-view. Guess it's the same thing when it comes to projecting personal preferences towards kink. If either one were true, the only thing you have to do is to force people to watch the Hallmark Channel 24/7. You don’t need to be a scientist to know that’s never gonna work.
If you want to run a scientific experiment that has merit, cover you bases first, meaning your test sample (the people that volunteer to participate) are representative of the group you want to research. For example: don't ask men to test female hygiene products. It makes no sense, even if your regression analysis tells you that the more often a man buys female hygiene products, the more submissive he is.
Once you have a group of test subjects, ask yourself: why do people sign up for your experiment and more specific, why do kinky folk sign up for it. That question is even more relevant in China. The Middle Kingdom is significantly less free than the West is. Last year Human Rights Watch reported how gay people were forced to undergo "conversion therapy" to "cure" them. Now raise your hans if you are female, enjoy kink, identify as submissive and live on the coast rather than in China proper.
Think
Real science is tough, don't believe Rick & Morty. You need to think long and hard where to start. What are the main factors that will adversely affect my experiment? Can I eliminate them? If so, how? If not, what is the effect on the outcome? Analysing the results, what statistical methods are available to eliminate potential bias? Am I honest to myself as in: am I really looking for answers or is it all about me, easy wins and cheap [scientific] glory?Are you genuinely interested in the effects of [female] submission on empathy or do you just want to score? Scientifically that is. Who pays for your research anyway? What makes them fork over all that money? Yet another government trying to weaponize its citizens’ happiness so they can turn it against them? Whatever. After you've eliminated the potential bias of your own [personal] interests, what remains is the question why does all of this matter?
I'm sorry to be such a hardcore geek, but science, real, hardcore, silly, selfish or whatever truth seeking thing you’re after eventually has a big influence on people's lives. You don't want a drug researcher to be sloppy, don't you? So why is it OK for a social scientist to be careless? Because nobody cares? All glory and no harm, damn the results?
Tell me why
Let's assume for a minute your research is unbiased, straight from the neutral scientists' heart. You know that one question keeps staring you in the face. WHY? It screams at you when you wake up all sweaty in the middle of the night. Answer the bloody question that is right in front of you. What do the results mean? What are the results trying to tell you? Do they even make sense? I bet you don't have the answers. And you call yourself a scientist? Slice and dice the date, again and again. Force the truth to reveal itself. Limited data? Go back to square one, aka bad design. After the fact, the least you can do is to discuss any omissions, whether they are men, the LGBT community, dommes or whatever.In isolation the outcome of this particular research paper feels like a pet project. Look up the author in Scopus and the majority of their 16 research papers involves the keywords empathy and distress. What makes them think submissive females are the final frontier? Did they every consider their own potential bias? Worse perhaps, was it perhaps the denial of their own personal preferences leaking into their research? As I argued before, it wouldn’t be the first time someone inadvertently expressed their interest in BDSM through their writing.
NIMBY means no worries?
So you think all that science stuff doesn't concern you? Not in my backyard? Think again. It was only recently that people who are into BDSM escaped the cruel clutches of family court once the DSM-V stopped listing kink as a mental illness. The DSM is a big book listing all kinds of [supposedly] mental diseases, so pretty important.Then again, who needs psychiatry in divorce court when you can let kink do your bidding? A few years ago the Canadian Supreme Court ordered the retrial of a man convicted of raping his wife in an alleged BDSM scenario. The original article has since been deleted, so the link points to Maymay, a contrarian BDSM blogger. What I remember is that the couple were getting a divorce and the accusation was only brought up only during the later stages of the procedure, where the courts would rule on which parent would be granted custody of their children. Poor kids, I remember thinking.
Now imagine a couple breaking up today. In the past they enjoyed their little master - servant game. Love has left town and the fight is all about their kids. Contrary to the past, it's not the kids' happiness that is at stake, but the change for ultimate revenge. In such a scenario there is no limit as to how low you can go hurt your soon-to-be ex. Revenge, burn Rome! Forget about Whatever happens to the kids is collateral damage, all in the name of saving them from a greater evil (newly discovered of course.) The notion that your offspring is living proof of the love that once was is beautiful. When nasty dommes proclaim that you should serve something bigger than yourself they don’t mean children, but I do. Meanwhile, the judgement of Solomon [iii] has long been forgotten by all warring factions.
In court his lawyer waves a copy of the Psypost article in front of the judge. "Female submissives have reduced empathy to others’ suffering, study on BDSM finds" Leave it to the legal profession to connect certain [non-existent] dots. Only in their universe one can go from "reduced empathy" to "not caring for your kids", which means she is a "bad mother", topping it all of with a hint of "Münchhausen by proxy".
Some scientists are in it for the science, others care mostly about themselves. Unfortunately.
To be continued...https://11dutch.blogspot.com/2018/10/gagging-on-it-scientists-who-love.html
---
Notes
i Unless the fake news itself is fake of course. It’s all so complicated.
ii Yes, Femdom Resource is my one-stop shopping destination for inspiration. Don’t blame me, blame Paltego for an average of six posts a week. Go clean a dungeon with a toothbrush or something please.
iii Solomon was a king who lived in Biblical times. Two women claimed to be the mother of an infant. To solve it, he proposed to cut the baby in half, whereupon the real mother screamed: “give it to her.”
No comments :
Post a Comment