Masochism, Western Elites, Sweden, and Rape

A recent video places Sweden as the rape capital of the world. 

A 2013 Front Page article had placed Sweden as number two:

• Sweden now has the second highest number of rapes in the world, after South Africa, which at 53.2 per 100,000 is six times higher than the United States. Statistics now suggest that 1 out of every 4 Swedish women will be raped.
  

• With Muslims represented in as many as 77 percent of the rape cases and a major increase in rape cases paralleling a major increase in Muslim immigration, the wages of Muslim immigration are proving to be a sexual assault epidemic by a misogynistic ideology.

When someone is seriously ill, he goes for testing to identify the source of the problem. Without accurate diagnosis, there can be no meaningful intervention. However, this isn’t happening in Western Europe. (See both the UK and Norway where Muslim rape of non-Muslims has also reached epidemic levels.) Instead, the diagnosis is strenuously avoided and even censured. It is as if the Western nations have a death wish or at least a virulent case of runaway masochism.

Benedict XVI wrote about this perplexing masochistic phenomenon. He notes how Western culture, en masse, has turned against itself and its Christian heritage:

• This case illustrates a peculiar western self-hatred that is nothing short of pathological. It is commendable that the West is trying to be more open, to be more understanding of the values of outsiders, but it has lost all capacity for self-love. All that it sees in its own history is the despicable and the destructive; it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure…Multiculturalism, which is so constantly and passionately promoted, can sometimes amount to an abandonment and denial, a flight from one’s own heritage. (Quoted by Jean Bethke Elshtain, First Things, March, 2009, 36)

Why has the West “lost all capacity” to appreciate its own heritage? Why does it punish itself? Author Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali Muslim turned atheist, shares this insight:

• Liberals in Western politics have the strange habit of blaming themselves for the ills of the world, while seeing the rest of the world as victims. To them, victims are to be pitied, and they lump together all pitiable and suppressed people, such as Muslims, and consider them good people who should be cherished and supported so that they can overcome their disadvantages. The adherents to the gospel of multiculturalism refuse to criticize people whom they see as victims. Some Western critics disapprove of United States policies and attitudes but do not criticize the Islamic world, just as, in the first part of the twentieth century, Western socialist apologists did not dare criticize the Soviet labor camps. Along the same lines, some Western intellectuals criticize Israel, but they will not criticize Palestine because Israel belongs to the West, which they consider fair game, but they feel sorry for the Palestinians, and for the Islamic world in general, which is not as powerful as the West. They are critical of the native white majority in Western countries but not of Islamic minorities. Criticism of the Islamic world, of Palestinians, and of Islamic minorities is regarded as Islamophobia and xenophobia.

Okay, victims are to be pitied, but why at the expense of the well-being of our own nations? What perverse psychological mechanism is preventing our elites from valuating and protecting their own people? Do they feel guilty for the benefits that the West has enjoyed?

Guilt and shame are life-controlling forces. In Healing the Shame that Binds, psychologist John Bradshaw perceptively wrote:

• When shame has been completely internalized, nothing about you is okay. You feel flawed and inferior; you have the sense of being a failure. There is no way you can share your inner self because you are an object of contempt to yourself…To feel shame is to feel seen in an exposed and diminished way. When you’re an object to yourself, you turn your eyes inward, watching and scrutinizing every minute detail of behavior…This paralyzing internal monitoring causes withdrawal, passivity and inaction. (13)

Bradshaw’s understanding of shame might explain why the West has been bending its neck before the sword of Islam. Perhaps the West feels ashamed of its privilege and must atone for it.

Shame had also been a life-controlling and life-diminishing factor for me. My feelings of unworthiness were so powerful that I couldn’t enjoy anything. I couldn’t take a shower for more than two minutes. I just didn’t feel worthy of it. Nor could I spend any money on myself. However, when I did go without, I felt more worthy. When I didn’t, I felt psychologically threatened, as if I had done the unpardonable. I was trying to redeem myself. However, when I came to know my Redeemer Jesus, this bondage began to loosen. Since He paid the price for my sins, I no longer had to redeem myself.

It seems that we are built with a moral law that tells us that we are unworthy unless a price is paid for our unworthiness. Some indulge in self-flagellation; others in self-mutilation; while others pay the price through compulsive do-gooding and people-pleasing. In any case, we are controlled by the slave-master “shame.”

I think that this problem has gone viral, as has rape in many of the Western nations. Why? We have rejected our only protection against internal accusations of shame and unworthiness – Jesus the Savior – and are paying the just price for this rejection.

The Guilt and Shame That Don’t Go Away

Guilt and shame are life-controlling emotions. Psychologist John Bradshaw warned:

• The internalized feeling of being flawed and defective as a human being…shame [or guilt] which should be a healthy signal of limits, becomes an overwhelming state of being, an identity if you will. Once toxically shamed, a person loses contact with his authentic self. What follows is a chronic mourning for the lost self.

However, few find their way free from this emotional bondage. Why? We tend to regard guilt and shame as no more than feelings that should be either denied, justified or medicated away.  We convince ourselves that once we get rid of these feelings, we will be free.

However, it might be more realistic to regard guilt and shame as truth-tellers or even fire-alarms. We would certainly laugh at the idea of a drug that promised to remove all sensory discomfort. We need to feel pain! Without this sensory feedback, we would pick our pimples until they became infected, or maybe we would take our time before removing our hand from a hot stove.

Instead, we need to regard pain as necessary – something that gives us essential feedback about reality. Likewise, a fire-alarm is not simply a disturbing noise. Rather, it is a necessary noise alerting us to a reality that requires appropriate action.

Perhaps guilt alerts us to a reality that requires our attention. However, this idea is contrary to the way we tend to think.  The late Swiss theologian, Emil Brunner, wrote:

• The specific evil of the modern history of thought…is the fact that modern man does not understand guilt, that the problem of guilt hardly interests him, with the exception perhaps of the guilt of war, that is, where he is not guilty himself. (The Scandal of Christianity, (91)

Consequently, the revelation of the Cross of Christ and its promise to eradicate our very real guilt is offensive to humankind. It informs us that we are objectively guilty, deserve condemnation, and require the forgiveness of the Savior. Many therefore find it more comfortable to regard guilt as no more than an annoying feeling. Brunner writes:

• Goethe…says that he does not want to hear of the cross; it is just ugly…It is his moral self-esteem which revolts against the cross. He does not want to hear that this had to be done for him…he does not want to bend his head beneath this yoke by complete humiliation. He does not want to receive, he is too proud to receive divine mercy. (92)

Goethe regarded guilt as no more than a pesky feeling. Sometimes we are unable to find the right answer because we are unwilling to ask the right question! What happens when we regard our guilt and shame as objectively reflective of our moral plight before God? We can turn to the right Person to find relief!

Western Intellectuals, Shame and S&M

We all want to be happy! Why then do we resort to masochism, a form of self-punishment - sadomasochistic sex, self-denial or even self-mutilation? However, masochism is not restricted to those forms we usually think of as “pathological.” In its many manifestations, it actually has gone mainstream.

Masochism seems to be at work when we silently endure painful relationships, ones we need not endure. How does this work? We feel guilty about something and therefore want to atone or compensate for this guilt by enduring the discomfort. Strangely, there seems to be a subconscious life-script, an inner logic that requires us to transact a cryptic deal with ourselves. We pay the price of enduring some discomfort, and then we entitle ourselves to receive a reduction in guilt.

Similarly, according to this hidden contract or “logic,” after having paid the price of a few lashes, we have “bought” the right to enjoy the things that are more important to us, like sex. Of course, this sexual satisfaction we derive from the lashes is predicated on deep-dwelling shame that regularly requires this “sacred offering.”

More commonly, armed with masochism’s inner logic of or “contract,” we punish ourselves when we fail to perform up to our standards and reward ourselves when we succeed. Likewise, I had my own internal script that specified what pleasures I could enjoy. Since “over-consumption” would make me feel guilty, I would restrict myself to three minute showers. My internal reward system signaled me that I was not worthy of longer showers. If I exceeded the limit that my legalistic script imposed upon me, I’d have to compensate with some form of saving-the-planet activity.

Similarly, when I’d get an “A” on an exam, I’d feel worthy and entitled to buy a chocolate milkshake. However, if I failed to receive the “A,” the milkshake wouldn’t have felt quite right going down. Somehow, I understood that my coveted sense of worthiness came at a price. Either I would have to earn it or if I couldn’t earn it, I would have to suffer for it.

Others, when they feel that they have achieved a certain scripted level of “worthiness,” feel entitled to take a vacation. Meanwhile, others who have a more stringent script never feel worthy of taking a vacation.

In many religions, self-denial and/or self-flagellation have become the staples for everyday righteousness or feelings of OK-ness. Sometimes they take the form of puncture wounds or walking on hot coals or even knives. As an Augustinian monk, Martin Luther endured walking on his knees, walking barefoot in the snow and long periods of sleeplessness in a vain attempt to prove himself to God. The faithful prove themselves by what they suffer.

In other religions self-denial is accomplished by making costly sacrifices, sometimes human, in order to earn the favor of their deities. As the plague stalked Europe in the 1300-1400s, a flagellant sect arose. They thought that the plague was a sign of God’s displeasure and punishment. Therefore, the flagellants paraded through Europe whipping one another, convinced that this would earn God’s favor. And for this, they received high grades from their admirers.

Masochism takes many forms. Benedict XVI writes about another form of masochism. He notes how Western culture, en masse, has turned against itself and its own Christian heritage:

• This case illustrates a peculiar western self-hatred that is nothing short of pathological. It is commendable that the West is trying to be more open, to be more understanding of the values of outsiders, but it has lost all capacity for self-love. All that it sees in its own history is the despicable and the destructive; it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure…Multiculturalism, which is so constantly and passionately promoted, can sometimes amount to an abandonment and denial, a flight from one’s own heritage. (Quoted by Jean Bethke Elshtain, First Things, March, 2009, 36)

Author Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali Muslim turned atheist, shares this insight:

• In certain countries, "left-wing," secular liberals have stimulated my critical thinking and that of other Muslims. But these same liberals in Western politics have the strange habit of blaming themselves for the ills of the world, while seeing the rest of the world as victims. To them, victims are to be pitied, and they lump together all pitiable and suppressed people, such as Muslims, and consider them good people who should be cherished and supported so that they can overcome their disadvantages. The adherents to the gospel of multiculturalism refuse to criticize people whom they see as victims. Some Western critics disapprove of United States policies and attitudes but do not criticize the Islamic world, just as, in the first part of the twentieth century, Western socialist apologists did not dare criticize the Soviet labor camps. Along the same lines, some Western intellectuals criticize Israel, but they will not criticize Palestine because Israel belongs to the West, which they consider fair game, but they feel sorry for the Palestinians, and for the Islamic world in general, which is not as powerful as the West. They are critical of the native white majority in Western countries but not of Islamic minorities. Criticism of the Islamic world, of Palestinians, and of Islamic minorities is regarded as Islamophobia and xenophobia.

Self-castigation is subtly and subconsciously understood as a reasonable payment for self-validation, a necessary defense against shame. It works something like this: “I am a good and worthy person if I champion the interests of others and am willing to criticize my own traditions.” (It is not my intention to devalue good deeds, but rather their self-righteous motivations!)

Can we ascribe all of these phenomena to pathology or to the idiosyncrasies of a limited number of cultures? Obviously, there is something more global taking place. Ordinarily, it would have been more in keeping with our pleasure-seeking nature to believe, “I make my gods happiest with me when I’m thoroughly enjoying myself”? However, this type of hedonistic religion is always replaced by more masochistic forms. Why? Why haven’t we become more proficient in rewriting our scripts to eliminate the necessity for pain and to maximize pleasure? Why has this mysterious script proved itself so impervious to editorial “improvements,” especially in view of the encouragement given to hedonism by our permissive, pleasure-seeking age? Evidently, there is something else indelibly taking place in humanity’s game-plan. This is why human history consistently testifies that we are more than ready to pay the price of self-mutilation or self-deprivation.

I don’t think we’re ready to answer this question until we have expanded our inquiry to include the sister of self-denial—self-indulgence! They both address the identical problem of shame and feelings of unworthiness. Although seeming polar opposites, they are kissing cousins. Writer and psychotherapist, John Bradshaw, points out that these opposite responses are both shame-generated:

• The most paradoxical aspect of neurotic shame is that it is the core motivator of the super-achieved and the underachieved, the Star and the Scapegoat, the “Righteous” and the wretched, the powerful and the pathetic. (Healing the Shame that Binds You, 14)

Interestingly, both self-indulgence and self-denial are closely associated in the practice of Eastern religions. Some of their practices attempt to dry up desire and lust through the fires of self-mortification, like rain evaporating on hot Florida asphalt. By extinguishing desire, they hope to transcend the “world of delusion.”

However, the opposite teaching of self-indulgence is often taught as a more appealing alternative. Instead of trying to burn away their desires, some gurus teach radical self-indulgence. As one Hindu mystic commented, “Fasting will only increase desire, and you will only think about food. Instead, consume as much honey as you can, and you won’t desire it anymore.”

The Doors’ Jim Morrison had a similar outlook. As is the case with all of us, his sense of shame wouldn’t be silenced by self-denial. Instead, he believed that it had to be saturated by self-indulgence until it fell apart, like a soggy paper towel. He was convinced that this would result in freedom and spiritual purification:

• “Sensuousness and evil is an attractive image to us now…It’s like a purification ritual in the alchemical sense. First you have to have the period of disorder, chaos, returning to a primeval disaster religion. Out of that you purify the elements and find the new seed of life.” (Quoted from Hungry for Heaven, Steve Turner, 96)

How do we explain self-mutilation and self-indulgence in the same breath? Is there a common thread connecting them? All humanity experiences guilt and shame. Counselor John Bradshaw claims that these feelings are so powerful that they are life-controlling. Guilt and shame tell us that there is something the matter with us and compel us to do something about the disturbing alarm they sound. We therefore resort to denial, self-mutilation, self-indulgence, drugs and even workaholism to convince ourselves that we’re really worthy people in the face of our persistent shame. We cut ourselves and for a few moments feel that life, once again, is good. (Clinical studies have shown that after an act of self-mutilation, cortisone production, directly associated with stress, is reduced.)

We deprive, afflict, and sacrifice ourselves for good reason. But why should self-castigation make us feel better? We are created in the image of God. Therefore, we are highly moral creatures, and we are painfully aware when we violate our internal God-infused rule book. In addition to this, we also have a sense that there must be retribution for the infractions. We’re then confronted with two choices: either we confess and seek the mercy of the One who created the rules or we deal with the problem ourselves. If we have a problem with God, we usually deal with the problem ourselves. This is exactly what Adam and Eve did. They covered their sin and shame with fig leaves—hardly an adequate solution. We, however, do the same thing. Instead of fig leaves, we cover ourselves with good deeds, accomplishments or self-affliction. We convince ourselves that we are fully able to pay the price for our guilt and shame. And we often do such a good job of this that we actually become convinced of our own righteousness, superiority and entitlement.

But an entitlement mentality is a lethal poison. Because of their self-inflicted punishments, the flagellants convinced themselves and others that they were even more spiritual and entitled than the priests. Consequently, they entered the cathedrals, driving away the “less worthy” presiding priests, sometimes even beating them.

Guilt and shame cause such psychological turmoil that we can’t ignore them. We feebly erect a wall of denials and self-righteous rationalizations in a vain attempt to shield ourselves against their indictments. However, we find that they are like inflated beach balls in the ocean, which inevitably resurface no matter how valiantly and persistently we fight to keep them submerged.

Are we condemned to vainly pursue an unattainable freedom from these slave-masters? Have we become servants of denial and image management to hide the painful truths about ourselves? It would seem so. If we need to feel that we are significant and worthy people and our unalterable script tells us we’re not, we have a problem—a fatiguing quest after the transient feeling of worthiness.

The Biblical faith affirms that we do have a very real problem—God (and even our God-given human nature) has been offended by both our sin and our inadequate, self-absorbed attempts to atone for our sin through self-righteous acts and justifications. We have covered ourselves with fig leaves in the form of accomplishments hoping that this would obscure the offense and silence the guilt and shame. When this failed to work, we ran from God and refused to meet Him in the light of true confession. And we have been running ever since.

However, He paid the price through mutilation by our human hands so that we wouldn’t have to suffer mutilation at His hands or even our own. If we are convinced that Christ has paid the price for our sins in full and that nothing will separate us from His love and forgiveness, then the sense of guilt and shame and the need to continually prove ourselves is neutralized.

Bradshaw claims that “By being aware of the dynamics of shame, by naming it, we gain some power over it” (23). He’s right if by “being aware of the dynamics of shame” he means understanding that we have a real-live sin problem that only God’s grace can adequately address. We do have to “name it” by confessing it, not in denying it or by covering it over by self-atonement or good deeds. Good deeds do play their very vital role, but not as a ploy to deny our guilt. As rain falls from clouds, so must forgiveness come from God. Any attempt to forgive ourselves is nothing short of masturbation and a refusal to grapple with the objective offense of our sins.

Martin Luther subjected himself to the most extreme and painful disciplines trying to earn God’s love. However, in the midst of his studies, the concept of grace and reconciliation through Christ suddenly came alive as never before. In his Commentary on the Book of Galatians, he wrote,

• Although an impeccable monk, I stood before God as a sinner troubled in conscience, and I had no confidence that my merit would satisfy Him. Therefore I did not love a just and angry God, but rather murmured against Him…Night and day I pondered until I saw the connection between the justice of God and the statement, “The just shall live by his faith” [Rom 1:17]. Then I grasped that the justice of God is that righteousness by which, through grace and sheer mercy, God justifies us through faith. Therefore I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through the doors into paradise.”

Luther discovered something that many of us have discovered—the Word of God is transformational! It (and the God who gave it) is the necessary antidote for masochism in its various forms. I still don’t enjoy taking long showers, but I no longer experience the need to prove my worthiness by keeping them under the three minute limit. In contrast to the reassurances of many psychologists that I was a “great guy,” it was only the Word of Christ that was able to convince me of this and free me from my internal shackles.

When we reject the gift of God’s righteousness procured on the Cross, we condemn ourselves to endlessly pursue our own righteousness, like Sisyphus self-condemned to push his boulder. When we fail to receive this payment for sin, we likewise sentence ourselves to lives of masochism, endlessly trying to pay off a debt that is far beyond our means to ever satisfy. Consequently, we are always paying, always pushing, always trying to prove ourselves.

In retrospect, I find it so remarkable that Jesus’ death on the Cross is the only antidote for humanity’s obsessions. It’s also the perfect piece to complete the jigsaw puzzle presented by our confused lives. Pleasure seeking, denial, and masochism each had failed to fill the gap. This forces us to ask the question, “Why is there is such an incredible fit between this Bible-centered event that occurred 2000 years ago and my mental well-being?” Perhaps, Christ is the missing piece!

All Religions are Basically the Same!

“All religions are basically the same. So I don’t see why you’re trying to say that yours is the best,” he proclaimed with a note of finality! However, my friend seemed to be saying that his own not-so-obvious religion of “religious pluralism” is the best!

“You’re right,” I responded, “They are all basically the same. They all recognize that, because of our sins and failures, we owe a debt and must, somehow, make payment on it. Therefore, they have all been engaged in some form of animal sacrifice. And, when they’ve realized that this lacked the necessary punch, they often graduated to human sacrifice. We moderns are little different. We accomplish this same thing through denial that there is any problem, masochism (self-punishment or deprivation) to convince ourselves that we’re worthy and righteous, and achievements (self-righteousness) to compensate for the indwelling-guilt. After we’ve inflicted enough pain or have experienced enough deprivation, we then assure ourselves that we are now worthy to enjoy ourselves for a bit. However, whatever pain we inflict or successes we achieve are only temporary.”

Guilt and shame are life-controlling forces. In “Healing the Shame that Binds,” John Bradshaw perceptively wrote,

“When shame has been completely internalized, nothing about you is okay. You feel flawed and inferior; you have the sense of being a failure. There is no way you can share your inner self because you are an object of contempt to yourself…To feel shame is to feel seen in an exposed and diminished way. When you’re an object to yourself, you turn your eyes inward, watching and scrutinizing every minute detail of behavior…This paralyzing internal monitoring causes withdrawal, passivity and inaction.” (13)

I continued, “Religion is merely an attempt to cover up the shame problem. It grants us a way to convince ourselves that we are truly deserving, at least more than the other guy, because of our good deeds. Some religions set the bar at the attainment of secret knowledge, which only the truly spiritual are capable of obtaining, while others try to distance themselves from their inner, shame-ridden reality through meditation and the hope of reaching true enlightenment. Nietzsche called it ‘the will to power,’ observing that everything we do is about self-promotion and self-protection.”

“So what’s your answer?” he challenged with a note of frustration. Although we don’t like to acknowledge these ugly truths about ourselves, it’s hard to keep reality at bay!

“The Bible’s answer is radically different,” I responded. “It exposes the ugly truth about ourselves, clearly demonstrating the impossibility of earning anything from God, let alone salvation. It also shows us that, instead of ascending to God through our “good” deeds, God had to descend to meet us in our utter destitution and self-deception and take the rap for us, paying off our debt in full. Only His dying for us would have the power to convince our shamed consciences to lay aside all of our feverish maneuvers to prove ourselves through masochism or self-promotion.”

“Well, if that nonsense works for you, fine!”

“It’s more than worked,” I continued. “He’s not only freed me from my sin but also the need to continually justify myself and to please others. This is because He’s taught me that it’s no longer about me and my righteousness but about Him and His forever-gift of righteousness and forgiveness. As a result of this, I am increasingly freed-up to take my obsessive eyes off myself and to look beyond my own needs.”

“I’m glad you’ve found something that works for you,” he uttered sheepishly. Whenever we’re faced with something we don’t want to accept, it’s very easy to hide behind the “insights” of post-modernism -- everyone has his own truth and road to finding peace, so we can’t say that we have the truth. However, it’s hard to deny the universality of the shame-guilt problem and the perfect logic of the solution. When we retreat to the hiding place of our own subjective “reality,” we are denying that great reality through which we must all navigate. It’s also a denial that we can learn anything about this reality from others. When we say that “All religions are basically the same,” we are not only contradicting ourselves—making a statement about our common reality, but in the same breath denying a common reality—but we are also refusing to recognize the distinctions among the religions. I’d rather hand a bomb to an Amish in his horse-drawn carriage than to a Jihadist. When we navigate with our eyes closed, we’re bound to crash.