Three people accused of conspiring to lure a 22-year-old Fallbrook woman out of her home three years ago, killing her and dumping her body in a neighboring county were convicted of first-degree murder and other felony charges Wednesday.
Louis Ray Perez, Dorothy Grace Marie Maraglino and Jessica Lynn Lopez were found guilty of murder, kidnapping, torture and attempted sexual battery by restraint. Perez and Maraglino were also convicted of conspiracy to commit kidnapping, though jurors acquitted Lopez of that charge.
The defendants were involved in bondage, discipline, sadism and masochism, often referred to as BDSM. Their conversations, writings and other expressions of BDSM fantasies became a major component of the evidence presented during the six-week trial, and several people who participated in the lifestyle were called to testify.
"We owe a great debt of gratitude to these individuals who basically exposed parts of their personal life to come forward and to offer testimony in hopes that ultimately justice could prevail," said Deputy District Attorney Patrick Espinoza after the verdicts were read, noting that the witnesses had been apprehensive because of intense media coverage early on in the case.
The victim, Brittany Killgore, was not involved in BDSM. Prosecutors Espinoza and Garret Wong argued that Killgore became the victim of the defendants' abduction fantasies played out in real life. She had just filed for divorce from her then-deployed Marine husband and was preparing to move back home with her parents in another state when she was killed.
On first hearing the word “guilty” for first-degree murder, Killgore’s parents hugged each other Wednesday as they sat in the front row of the courtroom. Her father Darryl Wrest closed his eyes as the guilty verdicts kept coming. Her mother Michelle Wrest dabbed her eyes.
Later, the mother thanked prosecutors for their work, and credited Sheriff's Detective Brian Patterson with "keeping us from completely losing our minds."
"Our daughter was a beautiful young woman inside and out, and unfortunately she ran across people that were not good, were monsters, and took her life," Michelle Wrest said. "She is going to be missed for the rest of our lives and we've got a lot of family that had to deal with this on a daily basis.
Recently I have had two conversations that reveal the incredible breadth of moral pluralism that exists not just in America but in the Christian population of America.
In one conversation, a young lady told me that her family adheres to a very conservative Protestant tradition. One aspect of this tradition is what can only be described as an extreme form of the idea that God set up a world where men are to rule and women are to serve.
In this family, the father works outside the home, but inside the home he is served by his women, a wife and daughter. After work, he comes in and sits down and puts up his feet. The nearest available woman literally takes off his boots and puts them away. He wants coffee. The nearest available woman makes him coffee. His women cook and serve and clean up after each of his meals. Every day. Every single day.
I gathered that the wife was much more amenable to this scheme than is the daughter. But contemplate that couple for just a minute. It is 2015. The feminist movement has helped shape modern America. Two women are serious candidates for president of the United States. But here in this country is a woman who has chosen to practice a religion in which it is explicitly understood that the man is superior and is to rule, the woman is inferior and is to serve. No one has required her to live such a lifestyle and to practice such a religion. But right now she (and many others) are voluntarily doing just that.
Second conversation. I had been lecturing on Christian sexual ethics to an audience of committed Christians. In the lecture, I ruled out the option of polyamory for Christians. I suggested that it was outside the boundaries of a recognizably Christian sexual ethic, that it had never been contemplated as an option in Christian history, and that there were very good reasons today to rule it out. I learned in a follow-up conversation that the practice of polyamory was not viewed in this way by certain of my listeners; that, indeed, there were practitioners of polyamory in the audience.
I had heard that polyamory was on the rise. I had not anticipated that it would be a live option among committed Christians.
It’s chaos out there. The spectrum of moral views among Christians on just about every subject spans from one extreme to another. And that’s within a faith community that supposedly shares a common Lord, common sacred text, and much common tradition. Now just add in adherents to every other religion and no religion at all and try to have a conversation. What a country!
For those who have managed to carve out a nicely homogeneous little enclave to live in, you might not notice it all that much. Everyone you know has a roughly similar set of beliefs.
But for various reasons I encounter the whole (Christian) spectrum, from the most liberal to the most conservative, the most traditional to the most avant-garde. I address audiences where, often enough, adherents of every particular spot on the spectrum are sitting in the room listening to me. It makes my work incredibly interesting. It also makes it at times almost impossible. ...
When I met Zed, he was wearing a pirate costume, restraining my friend with his faded red rope while slyly smiling at her but also with her. The smiles exchanged were heart warming — playful yet stern.
I fell in love with him in a way I like to have sex: fast and hard.
I don’t particularly care for relationships. Around the one-year mark, I get bored — bored of knowing that my interactions with my partner are repetitive cycles, that our life mimics what society expects of us and that I can have sex with only one person, of one gender, for the foreseeable future. So after ending my last relationship, I promised myself I wouldn’t repeat this cycle again.
I had a couple of partners when I met him, but none of them were serious. Zed was different. At the beginning of our courtship, we discussed what we each would want from a relationship while affirming that we were both polyamorous — in multiple, consensual relationships simultaneously. We had no intention of being emotionally committed, but it quickly happened anyway.
When some explain what polyamory is about, they tell those who are unfamiliar with it that it is “legalized cheating.” The issue with this approach is that it situates the negative repercussions of cheating within what could potentially be healthy relationship dynamics. Previous boyfriends have cheated on me, and my issue wasn’t the physical component but that they didn’t communicate their needs with me. Of all those times of lying and sneaking around behind my back, what hurt the most was that none of it was necessary. The pain of betrayal could have been prevented by a conversation.
Throughout my dating life, I have always lacked the jealousy that seems to be normal in other monogamous relationships. My previous boyfriends have criticized my lack of attention when others flirted with them, but I didn’t particularly care. As far as I’m concerned, I shouldn’t have to manage my partners’ responsibility to me, and if they are no longer interested, they can leave.
One of my favorite parts of being polyamorous is that I don’t participate in that jealousy. Although we are dedicated to each other, we are also very relaxed about our affection toward others. He swipes through Tinder frequently, and I encourage him to openly discuss his experiences. I would rather know specifically what is happening than be in the dark, coming up with imaginary scenarios that never occurred. I have proven to be more lazy than he is, which has resulted in him being more active in his “sluttery,” as he jokingly refers to it. I occasionally contemplate sleeping with others, but ultimately, the search of another partner is too tolling (especially given my desire to hook up with queer folk, which is often trickier than finding heterosexual men). ...
After the housing crash of 2008, James Lowe, a former construction worker, moved to San Antonio from his hometown of Columbus, Ohio. With him came Elizabeth. The two were close friends at the time and hoped to find a better life in San Antonio.
James, 34, and Elizabeth, 27, have since married and now have four children between them. Elizabeth is expecting her fifth child with James.
Elizabeth considers herself mainly lesbian but says that James is the exception to that rule. In 2011, when Elizabeth first came out to James, he revealed that he felt he had the capacity to love more than one person. Shortly after enrolling at San Antonio College in 2012, the couple met Audrie, 22, and Ashley, 21. Eventually, the couple’s friendship with the two women evolved into a romantic relationship between the four.
Today, they are in what the four call a polyfidelitous relationship, and all share the same home. They describe it as a “partnership between four people.” “It’s not an open relationship,” James explains. Each individual is fully committed to the others and has equal standing in the relationship.
Ashley has one child with James, and Audrie is expecting her first. James has five other children from two previous relationships, bringing his total number of biological children to 10. The four say they enjoy having a large family and see nothing wrong with it.
“I fell in love with the children first,” Ashley said. “Then with the ladies, and then with James.”
“Gradually, over time we all kind of grew to love each other, and we decided that our relationship just kind of worked between us,” Audrie said. “The kids really liked me and I fell in love with the kids as well. We just really worked as a family unit.”
Audrie and Ashley say their relationship with Elizabeth and James is ideal because they are both bisexual. “Living in a country where monogamy is the norm, I’ve always had to choose between a man and a woman and I’ve always had to struggle with that,” Audrie said. “This is definitely more natural to me.” Audrie and Ashley were legally married in July of this year.
Elizabeth says she is aware of the potential for unhealthy relations that a polyfidelitous relationship may bring. “I don’t think anyone is going to argue that,” she said. “There are people who have been in poly relationships and have had bad experiences. It just happens to work for us.”
While the four express satisfaction with their relationship, they say outsiders have been meddling in their family. The family is in a legal battle to keep custody of their children.
The trouble began in August 2013, when Elizabeth’s parents came from Ohio to visit. “One of the main reasons I had moved to Texas was to separate myself from them, because they were kind of controlling,” Elizabeth said. During their visit, Elizabeth’s parents had hoped to convince her to move back to Ohio and bring the kids with her. They offered to buy Elizabeth and James a home in Ohio and to provide childcare. At that point the couple had already made the decision to become polyfidelitous and were committed to Audrie and Ashley.
“Before they left we all had a meeting at their hotel,” Elizabeth said. “I felt that we needed to be honest, knowing that we were considering moving to Ohio, and accepting these things from them so that the kids could be closer to their grandparents. They had already been told by members of our old church and were very concerned.”
That meeting between James, Elizabeth, and her parents did not end well. Her parents were infuriated. “They told us if we continued in our relationship then the offer was off,” Elizabeth said. “My mother accused me of being controlled by the devil.”
“When we turned down their offer for money, they took that money and sued us,” James said. “They went and got a condo here in San Antonio to bring a suit against us [for custody of Elizabeth’s four children].”
Elizabeth says her parents have made false claims against the family, and that her parents believe James is controlling and manipulating the women in the relationship—a claim the women deny.
“[Elizabeth’s parents] said that there was broken glass everywhere, and feces and urine everywhere,” James said. “They said that I abused the children. They accused me of being some sort of manipulative mastermind and that I had everyone around me under some kind of mental control. They made it all about me.”
Elizabeth’s four children were taken from their home and sent to live temporarily with their grandparents. The family has been investigated by Child Protective Services, and a court appointed psychologist has met with the family. “CPS ruled everything out and the court-appointed psychologist had given note that she found no evidence of abuse and neglect,” James said.
“We were really encouraged by that,” Elizabeth added. “We thought that would be it.”
Nonetheless, a jury ruled against the family, giving custody to Elizabeth’s parents. Elizabeth’s parents have since moved back to Ohio. A judge has allowed the children to visit their parents unsupervised for up to six weeks during the summer. At the time of this interview, the children were visiting their parents at their home in San Antonio.
The family is going against advice to stay silent. “We were told to hide because our culture isn’t ready for our type of relationship,” Elizabeth said. But they now believe it is necessary to address misconceptions about what the family is and is not. The four want to make clear that they are not polygamists and are not involved in any type of religious cult. ...
Domina Elle is a former escort and current dominatrix who specializes in balloon fetish play. (Its practitioners are called "looners.") She is also a sex workers' rights advocate.
I like to call myself an adult play facilitator. The type of work I do is much broader than just BDSM or fetishistic type stuff. I specialize in helping people to open this part of their sexual selves, and be playful and creative. That's one reason I love balloons. It's a very friendly catalyst. It's erotic and playful, and yet it's not as scary as some of the other stuff when you start looking at BDSM.
For me specifically, balloons came out of my latex fetish. In general, looners are primarily men. Usually it started when they were kids and they got a hold of a balloon. It's a soft, puffy, nice thing. Humans are very tactile and sensory-based. They, for whatever reason, found an erotic stimulation there. About seven years ago, I saw someone on stage live-playing with big latex balloons. He was putting one or two people inside the balloons. I already had a latex fetish, and when I saw that I realized, Wow, I can get inside a balloon and have that wonderful latex smell all around me?
Balloons can be used for so many different kinky activities. The big balloons can be used to put underneath [yourself during sex]. You don't blow it up all the way. It's kind of exciting and scary to be on top of it while you're messing around. I love to fill a room with balloons. It's not as easy as it sounds because it really does take a lot of balloons to fill a room — like, thousands of them.
When you go to BDSM dungeons, they tend to be really stuffy. People are really serious. I would take the balloons to these very serious dungeon environments. I thought, How can I get this whole room activated? Once people see a couple of people get in, they start lining up. Then you have everyone in the room cheering and excited because they know there's a trick to getting in while the air is coming out.
It's been such a fun experiment to challenge boundaries and see everyone get so excited. I've been trying to get as many people inside [a balloon] as I can. I'm stuck on 13 and a half. I've been stuck there for about a year. [The big balloons I use] are advertising balloons that are 72 inches when they are inflated. I buy a brand called Rifco, which is from Italy. They cost anywhere from $20 to $50 each. I usually buy them 10 at a time. You can get clear and different colors. It's fun because the clear, everybody can see what's going on inside, which I really like. Then you can do fun stuff with neon paint and confetti. The colored ones allow people to be shielded inside so nobody can see what's happening in there. People feel more protected and in their own little world.
Part of the fun is walking up to someone I don't know and saying to them, "Will you get inside my balloon?" Wrap your mind around that. They visualize this tiny little thing at first. I cut the nipple off the edge of the neck and that gives it a little bit more stretch. You have to wrestle to get in that little hole. It's kind of a reverse birthing process. Most of the time, I'll get people down to their underwear right there. Sometimes, at dungeons, everybody just gets naked in there. ...
When I first arrived at the French Institute Alliance Francaise (FIAF) I filed into one of the few empty stadium seats left save for the neck busters at the very front. The place was packed for The Art of Sex & Seduction: Ceremonies of Love & Desire, I realized all eyes were pointed to a tiny, gray-haired woman immediately below and in front of me. She looked more like a gentle octogenarian nun than a famous dominatrix known for her cruelty. But every once in a while there were flashes of unflinching harshness delivered with a toothy, thin-lipped grin–there was a reason why people seemed to either tiptoe or burst into fits of uncomfortable laughter around Catherine Robbe-Grillet all night. She could turn even the most accomplished Tinder Queens amongst us to puddles of prudish mush.
The event began with a screening, bits of Lina Mannheimer’s short film and documentary (La Contrat and La Cérémonie, respectively) about Catherine and her decades-younger partner, Beverly Charpentier, who translated Catherine’s responses from French to English in the discussion to follow. The discussion was moderated by Toni Bentley, the journalist behind the Vanity Fair profile of Catherine Robbe-Grillet. Bentley had spent a couple of days getting cozy with the dominatrix at her 400-year old chateau in Normandy.
Before she left her seat for the stage, I got a close up look at Catherine. Squeezed between the filmmaker and Beverley, Catherine was childlike (she’s under five feet tall) her silver hair fastened in a tight, flat bun, a white headband holding her hair perfectly in place. She wore a prim black skirt and long-sleeve vest getup coupled with rimless oval glasses that sealed her look as an unusually compact, but severe junior nun. I guess you can’t beat the Catholicism out of the Catholic school girl. “These two ladies are atheists, but Catholicism and the props of Catholicism greatly inform their ceremonies,” Toni explained.
Catherine’s stature of course belies her powerful presence. All night, she delivered quippy responses and performed sarcastic, feigned innocence. In many ways, Catherine still has the mannerisms of a little girl down too– she squeals, gasps, and purrs, often widening her eyes in mock surprise. Her infantile movements reminded me of Toni’s piece: for Alain Robbe-Grillet, Catherine’s famous dead husband– the famed French writer, avant-garde artist, and intellectual–“Catherine embodied his lifelong obsession with young girls, resembling a little girl in her height, size, and manner.”
In the film, she described her relationship with Alain– a well-known sadist whose writing centered thematically on power structures, control, and lack of agency– as an “unusual” one. For a long time, she was his submissive. It wasn’t until he gave up sexuality altogether to focus more on writing (a detail hashed out in Toni’s article) that Catherine blossomed into a dom. The year was 1973. She’s been joyfully whipping whimpering subs ever since.
One audience member wondered if she’s ever wavered: “I was wondering if the Madame […] misses being submissive and wants to be dominated sometimes?”
Catherine answered simply, “Non,” and paused. “I relive my submission through Beverly, but I don’t want to relive it myself. I am simultaneously submissive and dominant, but my submission passes through her.” ...
In a clever sting operation, the feds nabbed creeps looking to buy ‘sex slaves’ for their home dungeons.
In March 2014, Steven Currence gave undercover agents a grand tour of the dungeon hidden inside his Montana home.
The subterranean hellhole contained a heavy wooden cross and a smattering of chairs. The walls were covered in whips, chains, and torture devices. Currence boasted of blacking out the windows to dash any hopes of escape.
Here was the sinister lair where the 65-year-old planned to lock his sex slaves. One kidnapped woman would sleep in the basement torture chamber, while the other would be chained to his bed—with a chain long enough to reach the bathroom.
Currence believed he would soon purchase the women from the agents, who posed as human traffickers. The creep previously told the agents that he wanted a “housekeeper with benefits” who would “take care of things, clean the house, take care of me,” court records reveal.
“These slaves will never leave,” Currence said. “I’m not looking for love, they’re just going to be in here and they are going to be serving.”
But Currence wouldn’t be the one doing the shackling. Instead, the feds cuffed him two months later when he traveled to Arizona to buy two women at what he believed was a slave auction.
In September of this year, Currence was sentenced to seven years in prison.
He was one of four men nabbed in an FBI sting operation targeting an extreme slice of the human trafficking underworld: people seeking sexual and domestic slaves.
Court papers paint a disturbing picture of the lengths all four fiends went to keep their would-be slaves hidden. They outfitted their homes with things like soundproof boxes, window coverings, and even a 500-pound therapeutic bed with chains.
One man hired a contractor to turn his BDSM “playroom” into a dungeon so secure visitors wouldn’t know someone was inside. Another ordered a “date rape” drug from China to knock his victim out as he transported her across state lines. ...
... After his arrest, Kandl tried telling law enforcement that although he knew the women weren’t consenting, he wouldn’t have purchased anyone who refused to go with him.
“Kandl was asked why he didn’t call the police and Kandl replied that he should have but his curiosity was piqued,” one FBI memo found in court papers read. According to the document, Kandl planned to interview the women to see if they were willing to go home with them. He told investigators he wanted to explain he could provide them with a better life.
When asked what that meant, Kandl said he’d provide a room, food, and clothes. He also planned to introduce his slave to the BDSM lifestyle, which he’d been engaged in for three years, according to the FBI document.
Kandl said the whole thing was a “bad idea” and that he “shouldn’t have done it.” He told investigators that in his life, “I did everything right until this stupid thing.”
For Kink Aware Professionals. Like everything on this blog, context matters. So if you find yourself acutely uncomfortable with a client’s material, what you do depends on when, where, and how it comes up. Some of these suggestions will not be helpful in all contexts. Some even contradict each other. Apologies to Mies van der Rohe, who didn’t first say ‘The devil and God are both in the details.’
Safety first, yours and theirs. Insofar as you can, do not back away from the material, and do not ask for details that you are not ready to hear and/or the client seems unready to discuss. You need the client to be able to observe their own responses, and for you to be listening to how it feels for them. Consent is critical in BDSM as it is in therapy. It is legitimate and often necessary to question the client about their consent when you reaction comes from ambiguity about whether they have agreed to whatever is disturbing you.
Ask yourself why you or the client are so offended. If the behavior violates your core values, or you are unwilling to do the work in understanding it in the client’s terms, maybe you need to refer the client out to someone who can. If the discomfort is primarily the client’s, then it may be resolved through therapeutic discussion. While the typical condition of human existence may involve some ambivalence, acute and intolerable ambivalence is a proper subject of treatment. Raw, unprocessed and out of control feelings do not advance the therapeutic process, and are signs that it may be premature to discuss disturbing material.
Give yourself permission to have your own feelings and do not rush to judge them a sign of inadequacy as a therapist. In order to use your own feelings in therapy, you must first have them and recognize them. Resolving countertransference is often a powerful resource in therapeutic change. It is often uncomfortable. Freud thought resolving transference was what therapy is all about, and countertransference was often how transference was first recognized. Even if you think your response is excessive, recognizing your feelings is the first step that can eventually lead to acting on them in ways that serve your client. If you have a strong therapeutic alliance with your client, any mistake you make is likely to be a point of learning for both of you, rather than ruin the treatment, if you deal with it honestly and directly.
Ask yourself if understanding and discussing the squicked material is essential to the treatment goals. Often a client’s kink is not central to the goals of therapy. If your client complains they are deeply troubled by their desire, obviously the details of their fantasies and actions are essential to understand. If they went to an event one time and had a bad reaction, you could be doing yourself and the client a favor to let the client vent as they need to, and return as soon as you can to the primary contract for treatment. And if you do not understand the relevance on any material, squicked or not, ask your client what connections they see. If neither of you see the relevance, let it go. One sure characteristic of treatment is that if you gloss over important issues, they will come up again, so if it is important, you are likely to get another good chance to discuss it.
Get more information. This holds the promise of helping you clarify why you are uncomfortable, and possible increasing your understanding in ways that make your reaction more manageable. The question is often where to get good information. Be careful of using sources like porn and fantasy sites, where there is a strong stylistic tendency to exaggerate for effect. On-line sources – yes, I realize Elephant in the Hot Tub is one of those – vary in their objectivity and reliability. Different Loving 2ed by Brame, Brame and Jacobs is a reliable resource for starters. Look also at reliable sources on edge play. It is wise when doing this work to have colleagues whose opinions you trust. Sometimes professional listservs and forums can be helpful. Triangulate information from multiple sources, and don’t simply cherry pick the information that suits your preconceptions. Do not take a poll on social media, or inadvertently out your client with specific information, even without names attached. Often edgy practices are rare or singular events, and public discussion creates the impression that people are being outed and confidentiality violated.
If you have such contacts, ask others in the kink community about how similar material is treated there. In this, you are not looking for advice, but trying to understand the context, contracting, consent, and community reactions to it. Kink communities differ, have their own micro-cultures and house rules, and are not unfailingly accepting or nonjudgmental. But understanding uncomfortable behavior in the likely context of the kink community can help you frame your own reaction, and perhaps, the client’s.
Know your strengths and limits. That knowledge is crucial in deciding which of the strategies listed here are most applicable to any specific case. In the Goode Olde Days, therapists had 5 years of psychoanalysis to deepen their self-understanding. That was good, but by no means a perfect assurance of self-knowledge. Nowadays you can practically get licensed by reading a few good books. Self-knowledge is fragile, but is also the best defense.
Get quality supervision from someone who knows about the scary practices that are vexing you. That does not necessarily mean falling back on an old supervisor who is a fantastic clinician, helped in your training, but knows nothing about kink. It is generally unwise to try to clinic such cases on listservs where just anyone can chime in, both for reasons of confidentiality, and for reasons that people unfamiliar with such material are at risk of being made uncomfortable too, and may simply and unintentionally reflect widespread social prejudices. That may mean cultivating professional relationships ahead of time with people who have a wide familiarity with outliers among the populations you treat.
If you think your own reaction violates your core values, or reflects incomplete work on your part, by all means return to psychotherapy. Being made uncomfortable by someone’s material is ultimately a problem you can walk away from. Be made uncomfortable with your own material is not.
Discuss your discomfort with an experienced and open client. This is their work too, and to the extent that they can cooperate in understanding together what your discomfort means, the client is an important resource. Ultimately, you are responsible for your feelings, but when they are a reflection of the client’s conflicts, showing the client you are comfortable with discussing your own discomfort can be good role modeling, and help them achieve important insight. When you lack a trusting relationship and good working alliance, discussing your own discomfort can be disruptive and drive away a client. It is wise to out-refer to someone better able to help. If a client is gaming you in a way that feels manipulative, make sure that you take steps to ensure your own safety. BDSM edge play, that is play that is known to be more dangerous and transgressive in the kink community, is mostly unsafe to discuss with severely personality disordered clients and clients with weak observing egos.
Therapy is a great way to fight social problems and social injustice in the world. But it operates under ethical guidelines that put the client first. Perhaps you can bring your own reaction into balance better by confronting some of the root problems that make you uncomfortable through teaching, advocacy, or direct social action and philanthropy better than through your psychotherapy with any one client. This is a special subset of my final suggestion:
Make sure that you are adequately supported in the clinical work you are doing. This may include your primary and secondary relationships, your institutional setting, your fees, office, training and other aspects of the context of doing treatment. It may include proper organizational affiliations, and friends who do similar work. And it includes collecting referrals and biblioresources that support the psychotherapy you are doing. All of these factors make it easier to understand intense and/or unexpected client materials if they suddenly arise and help you use them to better serve your clients.
That is a starter list, but it is far from exhaustive. Perhaps you can think of good coping strategies or additional resources I have left out. By all means, include them in the comments section.
Finkelhor, D., Araji, S., Baron, L., Browne, A. Peters, S. D. & Wyatt, G. E. A Sourcebook on Child Sexual Abuse. Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc (1986). 276 p.
Richters, J., De Visser, R. O., Rissel, C. E., Grulich, A. E., & Smith, A. (2008). Demographic and psychosocial features of participants in bondage and discipline, "Sadomasochism" or Dominance and Submission (BDSM): Data from a National Survey. The journal of sexual medicine, 5(7), 1660–1668.
Andreas A.J. Wismeijer PhD, Marcel A.L.M. van Assen PhD: Psychological Characteristics of BDSM Practitioners. The Journal of Sexual Medicine, Volume 10, Issue 8, pages 1943–1952, August 2013.
Patricia A. Cross PhD and Kim Matheson PhD in the book “Sadomasochism: Powerful Pleasures” (2006), published simultaneously as the Journal of Homosexuality, Vol. 50, Nos. 2/3.)
“Psychotherapeutic Issues with “Kinky” Clients: Yours and Their’s” by Margie Nichols, PhD in Sadomasochism: Powerful Pleasures ed. P Klienplatz and C. Moser (2006) published simultaneously as the Journal of Homosexuality, Vol. 50, Nos. 2/3.)
2015 Russell J Stambaugh, Ann Arbor, Michigan. All rights reserved.