Please if words mean their opposite, it's quite impossible to discuss. We can assume that in the extreme case of masochism, hanging on meat hooks is pleasurable. It has no bearing on the discussion.
Masochists crave pain because it gives them pleasure. In the end if something is perceived as "feels good" it's "feels good" whether it's pain or not.
So we can say that pain feels good to a masochist. He still can choose otherwise (not pleasure) and the argument remains the same.
Love is a two-way street in my world. Apparently not in yours.
No such thing as unrequited love in your world. Well, there goes a lot of good literature.
Why feed the dog who bites you?
Perhaps you don't want it to starve. And if it's not a dog, but a human, your child hypothetically, would you see it any differently?
I use words according tom their agreed upon meaning. masochists derive pleasure from pain or humiliation, ergo pain/humiliation = "feels good."
The Oxford Dictionary definition of masochism is very clear about that:
Those who are not masochists do not experience pain/humiliation as something desirable or "feels good." People do what they experience as "feels good" no matter how repulsive or undesirable it may seem to another person.
He still can choose otherwise (not pleasure) and the argument remains the same
He can if he is forced to. But left to his own choosing, he will choose what feels good.
No such thing as unrequited love in your world
Well maybe you enjoy loving those who hurt you. I don't.
[Why feed the dog who bites you?] Perhaps you don't want it to starve.
The issue is whether you would love him even if he bit the hand that feeds him.
And if it's not a dog, but a human, your child hypothetically, would you see it any differently?
No difference. Especially a human who should know better.