Once I wrote a column suggesting it might be wrong for fat admirers to encourage their mates to embrace poor health practices, such as binging on large quantities of high fat foods. The suggestion was not well received; in fact, I was accused of being a hypocrite and a traitor to my orientation. This wounded me deeply and made me think twice about what I had said. After several long seconds of soul-searching, I decided I'd been right, but I wondered if I'd ever say it again in a public forum.
My wondering is over. After reading several feeder-oriented articles over the past few months, I feel compelled to present the other side. I like to refer to this viewpoint as reality.
First of all, I simply do not believe any person has the right to nag or cajole another adult into changing his or her size or eating habits. A reasonable expression of concern directed to someone you care for might be appropriate, but that should be the beginning and end of it.
If you want to subsist on fatty meats and dairy products, that's a choice you have the right to make. If you want to go on Dr. Nimrod's turnip and watermelon diet, that's also a choice you have the right to make. I believe neither choice would be particularly wise, and I probably would state my position (once) to a person I loved who seemed headed in either of those directions. After that, it would be my place to shut up about the subject unless asked.
Let me be very specific: a fat admirer has no right to coax a woman to gain weight. You may say, "I'm just encouraging her to follow her own tendencies," but in most cases, you're encouraging her to follow your own tendencies. It is no different from the mainstream man who continually encourages his wife to diet.
Entering a relationship because of the other person's "potential" is an arrogant mistake. It proceeds from an assumption that the person with "potential" is not quite up to standard but can be raised to an acceptable level through your efforts. Of course, you set the standard this person will be expected to meet, and you determine the changes needed to meet it. The other party is expected to go along with your program, expressing only gratitude for the effort you're willing to expend on his or her improvement.
But what if the other party is an enthusiastic participant? Sorry, Charlie - I believe that in the great majority of cases, the person to be fed (feedee) is seduced not by the prospect of gaining weight but by the excitement of a new relationship, the novelty of a man who wants her to be bigger, and a temporary sense of exhilaration brought about by the feeling of freedom to eat without restriction or guilt.
There are two problems with this scenario. The first is that the feeling of being able to eat without restriction soon gives way to a realization that an outside party still is setting the dietary agenda. Previously the feedee did not have permission to eat when she was hungry; now she is "encouraged" not to abstain when she is full. In the end, she still is controlled by someone other than herself, however voluntary her behavior may appear.
The second problem is the failure of both the feeder and the feedee to take a hard look at the ramifications of their pact. Every person has a different immobilization point - it may be 300 pounds for one and 600 pounds for another - but eventually that point will be reached. As the months pass, climbing stairs will become more difficult; daily chores will become harder; walking will become a burden. Employment prospects will dwindle, due both to increasing physical limitations and the effects of discrimination.
Thus, a prospective feeder should be prepared to support and care for his intended feedee, since she may eventually sacrifice the ability to care for herself. The feeder must be willing to provide not only financial support, but complete maintenance of the household, including cleaning, shopping, and possibly even cooking. He must plan for his mate's security in the event of his death, disability, or disaffection.
The feedee must be prepared to turn over responsibility for her care to another person. This requires complete trust, not only in the feeder's good intentions, but in his continuing ability to carry out those intentions. Energy fueled by fantasy can accomplish wonders for a while, but eventually the most avid admirer can grow tired after working one or more jobs, keeping up the house, shopping, cooking, and caring for the personal hygiene of his mate. Some men can and probably do keep up such a pace, but they are gifted either with exceptional levels of commitment and stamina or the financial means to hire outside help.
The feedee also must have faith that her mate will never tire of her and leave, even after the weight gain fantasy has been fully played out and she can gain no more. She must work to ensure that she and her mate will never grow apart or fall into any of the pitfalls that plague relationships, not only because of her love and commitment, but because her very survival may depend upon it. It's a bad gamble. The risks are too great.
Make no mistake - I believe in love and commitment, and I intend to stay with my wife for the duration. But I married my wife because I loved her as she was, not for what I thought she might become. I hope and believe she felt the same way about me. In my book, that's the only rational starting point for a lifelong relationship. ß