Wikipedia’s Marquis de Sade
Wiki gets a lot of criticism for publishing inaccurate information. One must understand that the entries in Wikipedia depend on user input, not the admin of Wiki themselves.
There are a lot of entries that aren’t misleading or just plain made up. One has to do a lot of reading in your research of a subject in order to ferret out what’s accurate and what isn’t.
Enter Le Marquis de Sade, aka Donatien Alphonse Francois. Much of the information here is accurate, but the page is horribly lacking in factual information and purposely, IMO, misleads the reader into thinking that de Sade was merely a sexual revolutionary and a man ahead of his time.
In one respect, this is true. His beliefs on sexual liberation were indeed ahead of their time. His attitude about religion and how it needs to be no part of government was also ahead of its time… on par with our own deist Founding Fathers, who were contemporaries.
“Sadism” was coined after him for a reason. “Sexual Sadism” to be more specific.
Donatien was, IMO, the world’s most famous serial killer and serial rapist. His acts personified the narcissistic personality disorder. His “fiction” is a blueprint for depravity, and as a believer in sexual liberation, I can use “depravity” in its modern form, not its archaic(religious-based bullshit).
Now, when I say sexual liberation, I mean that I believe that consenting adults can do whatever they like as long as they do no harm. If a “sadist” wants to punish a “masochist” (one who orgasms through the infliction of pain), to each their own. I have no qualms with proper BDSM (Bondage Domination Sadism Masochism). Consent is the requirement. When consent isn’t freely given (without coercion), it’s rape.
Orgies are okay. Sadomasochism is okay. I don’t have to be into that sort of thing in order to “approve” of someone else wanting to do it. It all depends on consent. De Sade wasn’t about consent. He was all about “do what you want to anyone you want and fuck consent, decency, and the outdated ideas about depravity”. A bit much on the over-simplification, but it’s accurate. And you have to put aside the idiotic religious and Victorian notions about decency and depravity. For fuck’s sake, kissing in public was considered indecent, so let’s be rational. And back then, being gay or anal sex in general was considered a depravity. Hell, it was only 40 years ago when the psychiatric association took homosexuality out of the perversion playbook. Morality, decency, and depravity have changed and become more specific and less judgemental, thanks to secular laws.
All that said, de Sade was, and will always be, a sick fuck.
If you can get past the archaic language of “The 120 Days of Sodom”, de Sade’s most famous and depraved fictional book, you’ll find that the content can turn your stomach. I have a strong stomach so saying that means something special. The story is, thankfully, written up in Wikipedia accurately. It says:
It tells the story of four wealthy male libertines who resolve to experience the ultimate sexual gratification in orgies. To do this, they seal themselves away for four months in an inaccessible castle in the heart of the Black Forest with a harem of 36 victims, mostly male and female teenagers, and engage four female brothel keepers to tell the stories of their lives and adventures. The women’s narratives form an inspiration for the sexual abuse and torture of the victims, which gradually mounts in intensity and ends in their slaughter.
The fictional book was banned in several countries for two centuries and was only removed from the ban in the U.S. in the early 20th century (I don’t have the date, sorry). Now, as perverted as the book is, it should never be banned. If Mein Kampf can be sold, so can de Sade’s books. To me, they both exhibit forms of depravity no decent society should condone. (It’s available at Amazon for .99 cents, believe it or not.)
Have you ever read or listened to Hell House by Richard Matheson? A book ahead of its time, IMO. It’s one scary and sickening tale about a house haunted by the ghost of a sadistic madman, Eric Belasco, who took pleasure in other people’s suffering at the risk of his own deviant sexual appetites. (I don’t mean homosexual. I mean deviant. For example, sex with animals or corpses.)
Belasco was, IMO, Matheson’s supreme example of what a modern de Sade would be like, if the character had been real. The thing is, de Sade was the purest example of all serial killers, most of whom are and were interested in sexual sadism, which included inflicting horrible pain while raping them as well as necrophilia (sex with corpses). He may not have acted out most of what he’s written, but he believed that people should be allowed to sexually act in whatever way they wanted.
This is not a man who should be romanticized, yet this idiot of a writer in the Wiki entry does exactly that. They aren’t alone. Writers of books and Producers of film have done the same thing.
I have to ask. WHY? Why do people do that? Romanticize evil? Are they willfully ignorant or sick? It simply boggles my mind.
What doesn’t boggle my mind is the fascination with this dude.