Whether BDSM is a sign of a sick individual or not, I don't know, as it can certainly be one of the more extreme fetish
es and sexual desires. But it has always existed, in one form or another, in the same way as homosexuality and paedophilia have always existed. The differing times give society different attitudes towards these sexual 'deviancies' (ie: not your usual man/woman missionary position sex), and this
is how BDSM measures whether our society is 'sick' or not.
The number of scandals with paedophiles in children's home in the United Kingdom is sickening. Positions of power have always been abused in different ways. Are we to say that the beating from a nun was always metered out just for punishment, or to sate their appetite for sadism?
Laws change, too, as parodied by this Chris Morris' Brass Eye Special quote:
Narrator: Victorian Britain. This man is having sex with a ten year old girl. ... But this isn't paedophilia, the girl's a whore.
Girl Whore: Can I have some money now, please?
Is it better that BDSM has come 'out of the closet', where good, safe guidelines can be drawn up? Or is it better that it be practised in secret, where the willingness of the bottom could be doubtful?
Surely the mark of a sick society is one that represses urges such as BDSM and says 'they don't exist', letting them continue unhindered, harming innocent, non-consenting victims?
LIFO - last in, first out... if this is getting too big, start pruning from the bottom...