How do I find participants for my thesis?

[lauraiversen]

Ok, so, admittedly this might not be the "knowledge" most of us are interested in...but I'm a senior psychology major at Pomona College in Claremont, CA, and while I've read stories here for quite a while I don't really have a community to pull participants from. How do I advertise my thesis survey without spamming? I promise I'm not trying to out anyone or "prove BDSM creates serial killers."

Any thoughts? I'm trying to reach women interested/participating in BDSM.

Thanks for any suggestions,
Laura

[phragmites]

I would think the standard methods for medical/psych surveys would apply, e.g. take out a classified ad requesting participants. Except instead of looking for left handed people between 18-21 who smoke, or whatever, you're looking for women in BDSM.

[Blue_Monday]

*hand up*

Hey, you have one right here!

Actually, I'd really love to hear more about your study. I'm a psych major myself (a sophomore, I guess, but on the 10-year part-time plan) and I've often wondered what other psychologists would have to say about BDSM. Can't exactly ask a professor! (Although that might make a good premise for a story....)

[lauraiversen]

There is really some fascinating research and a more fascinating LACK of research, but if you would be interested in taking my survey, you should probably take it first...

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=142631533885

Or if you don't really want to take it, that's cool too, I can still tell you about some research...

Psych majors unite!
Laura

[lauraiversen]

That is an idea, though it limits the geographical spread of my sample...I'll probably do that too, though...my advisors doubt my ability to find 100+ women involved in BDSM willing to fill out a survey...which I think is just a bit small-minded (one professor said..."people don't do that here" referring to our college and those surrounding...

[albear]

"people don't do that here" *giggle* Not that your professor knows about anyway! I'm a bit far away, but I did the survey anyway in case you can use my results. The only thing is, some of the questions in the part about how you feel about your life and how you feel about yourself (not the last page, darn, I should've taken note of which one it was) were influenced by other factors in my life that aren't related to BDSM. Like, yes, sometimes I do feel useless, but this is because of my health, not my interest in BDSM. And sometimes I do feel worthless, but not because of BDSM.

Best of luck!

[lauraiversen]

Those aren't meant to measure anything specifically relating to BDSM, no worries, thank you so much for filling it out...lots of people feel like that and they don't participate in BDSM at all...No assumptions are being made about causation, the questions are only assessing personality characteristics.

Thanks again!
laura

[lauraiversen]

generally, I'm targeting the U.S., but any English-speaking person can participate! If you want to pass it on to any Australian groups you participate in, their responses will be completely valid, assuming they are women with any level of interest in BDSM.

[Masters_lilone]

I'm willing to help you with your school assignment

[her_Joe]

I don't know how "blind" your study has to be, but have you thought of posting an "ad" on a bigger board ... Collar Me? or running an ad in the Alt messager? What about through some of the regional BDSM boards (eg, there is one in Florida I think) -- my guess is that you may have trouble deciding which hundred to survey, not in getting that many.
her_Joe

[lauraiversen]

My survey has been up for a day and a half and I've got 18 participants (who finished the survey)...i guess my professors sort of scared me with all of their "people won't fill out your survey..."people interested in alternative sexual practices won't fill out surveys"...blah, blah, blah...it looks like I'll be able to get more than 100 participants, and that will only make my research better. I don't have to pick 100, I can use as many as I can get, 100 is just a rough minimum...and thanks for those suggestions, I guess I don't really know the "big" boards...I've just been reaching out everywhere I go...

[Blue_Monday]

Not enough people interested in BDSM? People in alternative sexual practices won't fill out surveys? Come on! I definitely agree with Joe that with a handful of sites, you could find hundreds of respondents. 18 in 36 hours, and that's on Christmas Eve!

Another one is bondage.com. You can register free for access to the message boards.

I took the survey, and I would be interested to learn more. Is there much research about BDSM? If not, is it just because people don't want to talk about it? Personally, I would very much like to learn more about it and try to de-stigmatize it. Our society has (more or less) embraced normal, consensual, heterosexual sex; but we still frown upon anything out of the norm. As a consequence, sexual "offenders" are treated like lepers--I realize that rapists and pedophiles are dangerous, but I think we punish them disproportionately to their crimes and try to push them out of sight. Then, we squash the free expression of "alternative" sexuality (fiction, art, etc.) even when it doesn't harm anyone. It's definitely something of interest to people on this site!

I think you're very brave for approaching your professors with this and pushing ahead even if they weren't crazy about it. Good luck, and please share more!

[lauraiversen]

One problem with researching sexual practices is best understood by something a professor told me: "Are you planning to go to grad school? Because sex research doesn't get you in to grad school. You would be better advised to work on something more traditional. Perhaps you could do something about condom use? That research is being published..."

Psychology has been attempting to steer the field away from sex research since the potential for scandal/abuse/disturbing findings is so high. The first research about homosexuality occurred when psychologists, treating individuals with serious psychiatric disorders (schizophrenia, a personality disorder, psychosis, etc), took life histories and found that a shocking (to them) number of patients were gay! OMG! And so, they surveyed these gay patients and found that they were disturbed individuals...yeah, not a big surprise, but they decided this meant that their homosexuality was related to their psych problems. Then they were told that men in prison are sometimes homosexuals...and they said, "ahh, survey them!" and they did...and, big shock, the gay inmates were troubled (as most people in the prison probably). This is around the 30's/40's i think...

So, for years, homosexuality (particularly among men) was considered a sexual disorder, since it was seen as a rarity, which occurred among psychologically unsound men. But then a woman...Evelyn Hooker (1957) happened to come across a "normal" young gay man...and, curious about the fact that this man seemed less nuts than she expected from gay people...performed a study, which found that psychologists were not able to distinguish the sexuality of a person by looking at their psychological profiles (simplified...more extensive description here...http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbo...al_health.html)

A similar process describes the evolution of research into BDSM. So, if you look at serial rapists/killers...they are more likely than the average person to have viewed S&M themed porn, participated in S&M activities. Thus, S&M activities are associated with violent sexual criminals...even though the amount of pornography being sold for the last 40 years could not possibly be bought by the relatively few serial killers out there. Since S&M/BDSM appears to be nonconsensual, simulating rape/abuse/torture/battering/etc. Since witnessing real abuse DOES harm children raised in abusive homes, and ACTUAL abuse DOES harm people...it is easy to see how people out of the community get the wrong idea.

Here is something from a paper by gender theorist and philosopher Patrick Hopkins
"In significant ways, [BD]SM scenes parallel the experience of being on a roller coaster. There is intense emotion—fear, tension, anticipation, thrill. There is physiological arousal—adrenaline rush, headiness, gut twisting, a body high. All this because one has placed herself in the position of simulating plummeting to her death, of simulating flying off into space, of simulating the possibility of smashing into trees or metal railings. But is the best interpretation of the roller coaster rider’s desire that she really would like to plummet to her death or collide with another train? Is it the case that she genuinely desires to be crushed against the ground, but because the law and conventional morality attempt to prevent it, alas, she is not able? Is riding a roller coaster just a matter of settling for the weaker imitation, for the copy of plummeting to her death?"

Most of the research has been done on men, though there is support for BDSM's harmless effects on women. The Kinsey study estimated an 11% serious interest, though as many as 1/3 will experiment with it at some point in their lives...anyway...i've got to go now...one last link, and merry christmas!


here is an interesting internet survey project by Gloria G. Brame, PhD
Demographic BDSM/Fetish Survey
http://gloria-brame.com/domidea/survres.htm

[lauraiversen]

Here is something else
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/soc-subcult...age-faq/part3/
"If what I've been saying in this FAQ is accurate, then why haven't more
people heard this? Why are the prevailing images of SM so negative?

There is no doubt that they _are_ negative. Not long ago I was informed
that there are some members of the Winnipeg (Canada) police department
who believe that soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm is "a textbook on how to
torture women for sexual pleasure. It's obscene." Said police were
considering how to deal with s.s.b-b on obscenity grounds. In England
in 1991, a group of gay men who had gathered for an SM play party in
which they were using whips for pleasure were arrested and charged with
battery, EVEN THOUGH they had all agreed to be doing exactly what they
were doing, and WANTED to be doing it. Consensual SM is illegal in
England. How can this be?

The crucial distinction here is between consent and non-consent. The
difference between whipping someone in a scene and assaulting them on
the street is the difference between sex and rape. If everyone involved
agrees to what is happening, it is not a crime. If they do not, then it
is. This distinction is not in principle difficult to understand, and
being involved in SM makes it very clear. SM practitioners are _more_
familiar with consent issues than most, and as such are _less_ likely to
commit crimes of the sort that people confuse with SM. And NONE of the
material in this FAQ advocates ANY kind of nonconsensual, criminal
behavior.

Unfortunately, there are many who would be arbiters of what others may
and may not legally consent to do. I believe that consenting adults
should be free to do as they wish in the privacy of their homes. There
are many who don't believe this is acceptable. It serves them to
confuse the issue by claiming "SM people are sadistic rapists" when in
fact we are nothing of the sort. Criminalizing consensual sexual
activities (sodomy, SM, even prostitution) is an old tradition, but in
my view, an unjustifiable one.

This problem is exacerbated by the body of "scholarly research" on SM
and related practices. Almost all the books written about SM and other
alternative practices in this century have been written by psychologists
and therapists (i.e. people outside the scene), and almostall have
portrayed SM as a dangerous practice, indulged in only by "unhealthy"
individuals. The reason? Healthy individuals weren't the subjects
being studied; rather, the subjects were all seeking psychological
treatment from the authors of the books! The "studies" completely
ignored the many many well-adjusted, happy people who were also into SM.
It's easy to conclude SM is harmful when your only experience is with
psychologically maladjusted SM people, and when you aren't interested in
presenting a balanced view (as few authors are--psychologists can be as
sexually judgmental as anyone).

More recent events in the psychiatric community have shown a change in
opinion about SM. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Psychiatric
Conditions is a document produced by the American Psychiatric
Association. The DSM-III, published in the late '80s, classified
"sexual sadism" and "sexual masochism" as disorders for which treatment
was recommended. The APA, in the DSM-IV, reclassified SM as _not_
necessarily a disorder, unless the practice of the SM produces
clinically significant ongoing emotional trauma, or leads to death,
serious injury, or disability. The DSM-IV is recognition by the
theraputic community that SM can be practiced in a psychologically
healthy way.

As for "natural": people have practiced SM behaviors throughout history.
Many are the saints who scourged themselves in the name of the Lord.
Using intense sensation to reach altered states of mind is a practice as
old as humanity itself--and hence can be considered in no way
"unnatural".

Our society (as do most societies) tends to ostracize the different. If
you don't fit the mold, you're weird and dangerous. People into SM
don't fit the mold. This is why there is such pressure to remain
anonymous in the scene; people have lost their jobs, partners, children,
and liberty by having their sexual preferences revealed to their
community. This stems from the same source: lack of understanding of
what we do and why, and lack of respect for what is different.

Of course, there are plenty of people who just aren't into SM. (Most
people, in fact.) There's nothing at all wrong with not being into SM,
or with not wanting to be exposed to people who do various forms of SM;
many people have emotional issues with some kinds of SM activities and
may be repulsed or disturbed by witnessing them. These people should
clearly avoid SM (and probably should avoid
soc.subculture.bondage-bdsm). I would hope, however, that even these
people would manage to learn about consensuality as it relates to SM,
and learn how SM, practiced carefully, is not abuse.

Some people feel that any power exchange between people is unhealthy.
The argument is that giving power to someone else is tantamount to
giving away your essential right to self-determination, which must be
considered an unqualified evil. Moreover, there is no doubt that many
social evils--wars, abusive relationships, et al.--derive from one group
of people seeking power over another; therefore, the argument proceeds,
it is always wrong thusly to seek power.

These issues are very controversial, even now. In the 1992 Oregon state
ballot, voters narrowly overturned a measure named OR 9, which contained
the following paragraph:

"State, regional, and local government and their departments, agencies,
and other entities, including specifically the State Department of
Higher Education and the public schools, shall assist in setting a
standard for Oregon's youth that recognizes homosexuality, pedophilia,
sadism, and masochism as abnormal, wrong, unnatural, and perverse and
that these behaviors are to be discouraged and avoided."

Homosexuality, sadism, and masochism are neither wrong nor unnatural.
All three are consensual ways of living and loving that many people
enjoy. They are not for everyone, but nor should everyone be told that
they are for no one. Note also how this measure seeks to confuse the
issue by grouping homosexuality, sadism, and masochism together with
pedophilia, a practice which is in most places legally nonconsensual.
(It is not my intent to enter here into the debate over whether children
are ever capable of fully consenting to sexual acts. Suffice it to say
that whether they can or not has no bearing on the fact that adults
_can_ consent to SM play.) Legislating what consenting adults may and
many not do in private is neither healthy nor democratic."

[Blue_Monday]

Wow, Laura... all of this is great stuff. Thank you! Hope your survey is still rolling along.

Sometimes I really admire psychology as a field for being progressive... but it's had its setbacks, too. If I'm not mistaken, the female orgasm was once considered "abnormal"--the effect of overstimulation!

I think I would agree with the Kinsey number of 11% "seriously interested." However, I think 90% of those either don't talk about it at all, or only talk about it in anonymous spaces (the internet). Excellent point, and so simple as to almost be overlooked, that a comparison to hardcore porn sales vs. serial killings/rapes demonstrates at a glance that most people who buy/use porn are not dangerous.

I had almost forgotten about this, but back about 8 years ago, when I was a freshman in college (the first time!), I actually had the guts to tell a psychologist (not a therapist or professor, just a friend) that I thought it would be interesting to study sex. He asked what I meant in particular. I said, "You know... why we like the things we do... what it has to do with our personalities, our self image, etc." (Really what I meant was that I had discovered an aspect of sex I didn't know existed, and I was dying to find a way to piece it into my identity. But that's another story.)

He told me exactly what your instructors have told you--that nothing is really going on in that area. He said I could study fertility or STDs or even sexual dysfunction, but that the "fun" parts of sex were basically unimportant.

But if we're going to make stuff illegal that so many people like, it might be worth knowing why they like it.

Happy holidays! I know you'll be busy rounding up data in the next few weeks... but I hope you'll share your findings when you're ready!

[learningtopleez]

Hi laura!

I added in my 2 cents to your survey! Hope it helps luv...and thanks for all the interesting info!

hugs
~ltp~

[phragmites]

Would you be willing to post your aggregated results at the end of your survey period?

[Nikita]

Laura:

I'm with phragmites. Can you post the results of your study or a link to the results? Inquiring minds want to know.

Nikita

[lauraiversen]

A few months at least...but so far, things are (and this is non-statistically based) looking good for my thesis...My professor is a little bit shocked with my 6 day progress, lol...all due to my willing participants!

[FurryFury]

I took it but there were quite a few things I thought were constricting or too limiting in the questions and possible answers.

Expect some skewed results.

Do you have a "control" group of say 'nilla people to compare this to?

I hope so. That would help a lot before drawing conclusions I think.

Good luck,

Fury

[lauraiversen]

I know the "marital status" was a badly worded question...many of the demographics questions are only used to compare my group of individuals to other groups whose norms have been established... so let's say on a scale of red to blue, bdsmers are dark blue, well...the scale might pretend to be a scale of red to blue...but everyone who takes it comes out pretty blue! so...I could compare it to American women who responded to non-sexual surveys...or a group of American women who responded to sexual surveys (not related to BDSM interests, focused on condom use)...and i might notice that even though bdsmers are dark blue...and that seemed extreeeeme to me, a group of "normal" women are even more blue...so blue they are almost black...and so, while they were high on blue, they are actually LESS high on blue than the average woman taking the red-blue test...

I think it'll be ok...all the scales I'm using have been used in past research effectively, and I have the ability to "toss" questions that are terribly skewed...

Thanks so much for taking it!
laura

[fantazmaster]

The Conclusion I am drawing from all this is that the Blues Come Around Every Evening When The Sun Goes Down,if I am indeed reading the chromatic extrapolation ,as stated here ,correctly.

I know the "marital status" was a badly worded question...many of the demographics questions are only used to compare my group of individuals to other groups whose norms have been established... so let's say on a scale of red to blue, bdsmers are dark blue, well...the scale might pretend to be a scale of red to blue...but everyone who takes it comes out pretty blue! so...I could compare it to American women who responded to non-sexual surveys...or a group of American women who responded to sexual surveys (not related to BDSM interests, focused on condom use)...and i might notice that even though bdsmers are dark blue...and that seemed extreeeeme to me, a group of "normal" women are even more blue...so blue they are almost black...and so, while they were high on blue, they are actually LESS high on blue than the average woman taking the red-blue test...

I think it'll be ok...all the scales I'm using have been used in past research effectively, and I have the ability to "toss" questions that are terribly skewed...

Thanks so much for taking it!
laura

[FurryFury]

I didn't have a problem with the marriage thing what did bug me were these questions.

How often are you sexually dominant (in your fantasies as well as your real time experiences)?

How often are you sexually submissive (in your fantasies as well as your real time experiences)?

How often are you sexually masochistic (in your fantasies as well as your real time experiences)?

How often are you sexually sadistic (in your fantasies as well as your real time experiences)?

Why? Because what I fantasize about and what I do are often two completely different things. I felt I couldn't accurately answer the questions with in the confines.

For instance I am sexually dominant in RL at least 50% of the time or more but in my fantasies I am almost never sexually dominant.

I have a husband who is not comfortable being sexually dominant, so we switch off a lot. Plus I've always been the organizer about everything. If it were left up to him we'd have a lot less sex and doing a lot less new or different things. That would be because he simply wouldn't bother to put the effort into it to come up with the things I do.

So I felt restricted by these questions.

I wonder how many others have fantasies that do not match what they do in RL. A good many I'd wager. In fact, IMHO most fantasies should remain just that and never be turned into reality. That's a concept many do not understand.

The other thing I noticed was that there was a lot of dancing around consent and non consent. As if the person who made up the survey expects to find that more ladies who are into BDSM have had problems in this area than the 'nilla ladies.

I knew very few woman that haven't experienced some problems with force in either world. I don't think there is any correlation at all. If the data were truly out there and compared I believe it would be about the same for both groups.

You don't get forced because of your BDSM orientation. An orientation that I believe you are born with not "nurtured" into. You get forced because some ass wipe sees you as vulnerable. Most ladies are pretty vulnerable because society keeps telling us to be "nice and caring," all the time.

Anyway I am interested in seeing the results.

Please do let us know, even if you come up with a conclusion you suspect we won't like.

Thanks,

Fury

[CollegeSub]

I would also like to see the results of your study posted here. I'm a 3rd year psych student at UCLA. I just finished a Human Sexuality course but it didn't cover much in the way of sexual practice. Good luck on everything!

[Hime]

I'm doing a term paper for a Feminist Theory class on a similar subject. I probably won't need to use surveys, since the subject matter is theoretical, but this board has been an inspiration.