Dimensions Forums  
Home Register Premium Membership Health Issues Market Place Big Fashion

Go Back   Dimensions Forums > Discussion > FA/FFA forum



Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-03-2009, 10:33 PM   #26
bbwsrule
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 430
bbwsrule can now be the recipient of "two cans" jokesbbwsrule can now be the recipient of "two cans" jokesbbwsrule can now be the recipient of "two cans" jokes
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tad View Post
I think the real issue here is that fat admirer is an incredibly broad term. It is a bit like saying 'athletes' or 'music lovers.' "Fat admirer" could mean someone who prefers a little padding, it could mean someone who doesn't look at anyone under four hundred pounds, it could mean someone whose only real preference is that the amount of fat be increasing, it could mean someone into big, muscular, athletic with some padding, and so on.

Some people who fall under the umbrella "FA" may have a fetish somehow related to fat. Those who do have a fetish may or may not also have a more normal preference for fat partners.

Anyway, in my opinion the existence of fat admirers in general should be at most a side issue in size acceptance. I do get that some people would argue "well, maybe all that you say about choice and health are true, but fat people are still ugly and nobody wants them" at which point the existence of fat admirers may be relevant (although maybe a better answer is "I think that is really my issue to worry about....and believe me, I'm not worried." After all, the main message is supposed to be about the inherent value of all people, no matter size, NOT that some other people value you in particular.
I just have to say...well said! You cut through the idea of obsessing about FA's and how to classify their "thing". It can be a wide variety of things and have little relation to SA. As you just said.
bbwsrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 07:52 AM   #27
butch
cuddly, hairy, and fat
 
butch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: among the bamboo thickets
Posts: 2,329
butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by butch View Post
Yep, I was thinking all this as I read this thread, thanks for posting it here. The use of 'fetish' as a meaningful word here at Dims is impossible, because there seem to be 153 different definitions of fetish used by folks who post, and 85% of those folks use it in a negative way, which does a disservice to SA because it allows the culture at large to continue to define any fat attraction AT ALL as a pathological psychological condition that needs to be fixed.

So, in order to further the cause of SA, lets stop throwing the word fetish around as if we all have PhDs in sexuality, and talk about the realities, the particularities, of fat attraction and fat sex.
Funny how people have a problem with the second part of my post, and not the first, but when someone else says the same thing as I do in the first paragraph, they get pats on the back. No offense meant to those making a similar point, but an observation that I felt needed to be made.

I stand by my second paragraph not because it is meant to demean anyone or close down discussion, but because I've had the fetish discussion too many time at Dims to count, and we never make any headway because no one agrees on what a fat fetish is, and how damaging aspects of fat fetishism may be to SA.

Because we can't use the terms with the specificity they need, then we further stereotypes that seep out of our fat communities and infect the culture at large. I'm tired of having smart, supportive non-fat folks think all fat sexuality is a fetish, and that anyone who would want to partner with a fat person for any reason must be a fetishist. This happened to me recently when telling someone I went to a bbw bash, after telling them that bashes for fat people were a lot like the historical gay bar for queers-the primary spot for socialization and community building for a marginalized community. To think they couldn't grasp the need for solidarity and socialization for fat people, all because the specter of thin men who like fat women also occupy this space, was disheartening to me.

So, my complaint is about the violence words do, the damage fuzzyily defined words do to us in the larger world. I think anytime we use fetish, we perpetrate a belief that no fat sexuality can be healthy, normal, and mentally sound. That isn't to say that there is no fat fetish, and that there is no damaging fat fetish, but that we have to be precise and clear about how we use fat and fetish in the same sentence, and we have to be mindful of exactly who gets caught up in our individual definitions of fetish.

If you still think my words are harsh and meant to shout down opposing views, so be it.
__________________
Have you seen my nip on the internet?
butch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 08:18 AM   #28
BeautifulPoeticDisaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,013
BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

No, I get it butch...and for the most part, I agree with you.

It's just that you could use the "you don't have a PhD" against anything. Like you can't talk about Women's Rights because you don't have a PhD in Women's Studies. It's a slippery slope were at the end, no one can talk about anything because we don't have PhDs.

PS-I'm one of "them"....a person with a fetish. I just tend to completely separate that side from my activism side.
BeautifulPoeticDisaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 10:45 AM   #29
kioewen
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 290
kioewen does more than just post hot picskioewen does more than just post hot picskioewen does more than just post hot picskioewen does more than just post hot pics
Default

It's a pity that the original myth was worded the way it was, because I think the questions about "fetish" and such are a separate issue (possibly related, but not necessarily).

Rather, I think the most important aspect of the myth is this:

"Fat Admirers...tarnish the credibility of the size acceptance movement through their association with it"

And to that, I can only second what the Webmaster said, which was 100% true.

And if the above is the myth, then this is the reality:

"Fat Admirers benefit the size acceptance movement (and benefit it greatly, tremendously, and invaluably) through their association with it"
kioewen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 03:44 PM   #30
Fascinita
Jeez, we're blessed!
 
Fascinita's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 4,162
Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.Fascinita has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by butch View Post
I stand by my second paragraph not because it is meant to demean anyone or close down discussion, but because I've had the fetish discussion too many time at Dims to count, and we never make any headway because no one agrees on what a fat fetish is, and how damaging aspects of fat fetishism may be to SA.
I disagree.

If the word is so tortured and obfuscated, it's worth looking into just why it has such a difficult history.

You may think your experience of having the discussion too many times is reason enough to stop talking about this, but if others now want to enter the discussions over the word, please take the time to acquaint yourself with the specifics of the current conversation before you try to shut it down. And if you want to enter the current conversation in a position of leadership because of your experiences, maybe try to do it in a constructive spirit. Telling people to hush because they don't have PhDs--all because your smart friends aren't smart enough to parse out the issues for themselves--is demeaning of any grassroots effort to grapple with issues that affect people directly. It's not acceptable.
__________________
......................
|:| Sponsor a puppy or kitten. |:|
Fascinita is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 04:27 PM   #31
Elfcat
Radical FPL from Hell
 
Elfcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Bay Point, CA
Posts: 794
Elfcat never has a post go unnoticedElfcat never has a post go unnoticedElfcat never has a post go unnoticedElfcat never has a post go unnoticedElfcat never has a post go unnoticedElfcat never has a post go unnoticedElfcat never has a post go unnoticedElfcat never has a post go unnoticed
Lightbulb Preferences, Fetishes and Kinks - my own take

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
"Fat Admirers are fetishists and thus tarnish the credibility of the size acceptance movement through their association with it"
My own take on this is that the "Admirer" term is a little ambiguous, which is why I am starting to gravitate toward calling myself a "fat-positive lover", or to mirror the greek root of a term like hetero- or homo- or bi- sexual, that I would say that just as each person manifests a somatomorphism, each also harbors a somatotropism. On that logic a fat person for instance is lipomorphic (as opposed to myomorphic or osteomorphic), and one who sexually favors the fat is lipotropic.

I suppose the question is whether fat is being regarded as a separate part of the body. I would argue that body size and shape are in the context of the overall body structure and therefore not localized in the sense that is defined for a fetish.

The foot fetish is one of the better known fetishes. And one could be either an osteotropic, myotropic, or lipotropic (or "bone-positive", "muscle-positive" or "fat-positive") foot fetishist. Even with regard to a gluteal fetish or an abdominal fetish, one of the most obviously likely fetishes for the fat-positive, there are certainly the counterparts who proclaim for the six-pack and say "tight butts drive me nuts". The flavor of the allegation as worded above speaks to the more general allegation that demonizes all fetishes and kinks and seeks to keep sexual mechanics confined to the single procedure or few procedures sanctioned as proper by various societal endeavors at control over individuals. The irony is that what is commonly called the traditionalist paradigm is so infused with proceduralism, domination, submission, corporal punishment, shaming, and even the catharsis of victimhood and martyrhood real or imagined ("If anyone else does anything different, the material representation of our all powerful master will utterly collapse!"), this construction itself manifests something at least one infiltrator and reporter on the ultraconservative culture has called spiritual sado-masochism.

Of course fetishes also refer often to extrasomatic objects, things to be worn or used in the execution of kinks - kinks to my mind describing sexual favoring of specific actions.

One wouldn't doubt that some fetishes and kinks arise more often in one somatotropism than another. Lifting one's legs over one's head? Probably a kink more likely in the thin-positive. Lifting and carrying a partner? Probably the most likely in the muscle-positive. Tight and narrow squeezes? That's most frequently the fat-positive's turf. Obviously there are people who are both muscular and fat and would therefore have an appeal to both the muscle-positive and fat-positive.

And none of this really has in the strictest sense to do with what kind of political activist one is, save only for the fact that fat people have been systematically targeted for desexualization as one component of the program of somatic cleansing endeavored against them. I would say therefore that having fetishes or kinks does not in itself tarnish anything, but that the more precise issue is that attempting to conflate these things alone into activism produces an incomplete and ineffectual result. If people with fetishes or kinks put their boots on and march for the political objectives, then they are to be as much commended for showing up as anyone else; those who never do this could be alleged to be more concerned with their own individual pleasure than with making the world a better place for the people who possess the characteristics which sexually inspire them.

Last edited by Elfcat; 11-04-2009 at 04:44 PM.
Elfcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 06:32 AM   #32
butch
cuddly, hairy, and fat
 
butch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: among the bamboo thickets
Posts: 2,329
butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.butch has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascinita View Post
I disagree.

If the word is so tortured and obfuscated, it's worth looking into just why it has such a difficult history.

You may think your experience of having the discussion too many times is reason enough to stop talking about this, but if others now want to enter the discussions over the word, please take the time to acquaint yourself with the specifics of the current conversation before you try to shut it down. And if you want to enter the current conversation in a position of leadership because of your experiences, maybe try to do it in a constructive spirit. Telling people to hush because they don't have PhDs--all because your smart friends aren't smart enough to parse out the issues for themselves--is demeaning of any grassroots effort to grapple with issues that affect people directly. It's not acceptable.
Ha, that is not at all what I was doing, but I was using snark, which perhaps in retrospect should not have been used. I guess I've just seen too much snark here lately in all the boards, and I let it go to my head. I am free to express my opinion, and you're free to disagree. fwiw, I included myself in the original 'PhD' reference, so there was no division of us and them, or me pretending to have some knowledge other didn't have. After all, I don't have a PhD in sexuality.

Please, continue to discuss fat fetishism. I don't have any power to stop anyone, nor would I.
__________________
Have you seen my nip on the internet?
butch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 08:23 AM   #33
BeautifulPoeticDisaster
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,013
BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!BeautifulPoeticDisaster keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

I'm going to make a statement that I am not sure belongs on this thread, but I need to get it out.

People are confusing the "SA movement" with the "SA community". There is no need for admirers, fetishists, or the like in the movement...they serve no political value. Of course FAs and fetishists can participate in the movement, but the labels they have no bearing (did I spell that right? lol) on politics. However, I think FAs and fetishists have a vital place in the community.

How many people with a fat fetish do you know who would go to a march in washington just to wank off? I am sure there are some, but you can't wank and petition congress at the same time.


I don't know if I made myself very clear. But I think people are lumping "the movemnt" with "the community" and those two things are very different beasts.
BeautifulPoeticDisaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 10:03 AM   #34
Tad
mostly harmless
 
Tad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 12,526
Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.Tad has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBellySSBBW View Post
I don't know if I made myself very clear. But I think people are lumping "the movemnt" with "the community" and those two things are very different beasts.
Great point--and I can't rep you again just yet So I'll just gush about it here. One of those simple but really key points....I don't know about anyone else, but I'd not really thought of that distinction before, so I'm really glad you brought it up!

Thanks!
__________________
Criticism is so often nothing more than the eye garrulously denouncing the shape of the peephole that gives access to hidden treasure.
-Djuna Barnes, writer and artist
Tad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 10:09 AM   #35
swamptoad
 
swamptoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 12,312
swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
"Fat Admirers are fetishists and thus tarnish the credibility of the size acceptance movement through their association with it"

This may have already been questioned or stated .. but are Fat Admirers being tagged as fetishists? I mean you have two words .. Fat .. and then you have... Admirer. This described admirer is a Fat Admirer, indicating an attraction to thus said attribute "Fat". "Fat" is a physical attribute and is thus objectified ..but only if there is a compulsion desire for this attribute does it then become a "fetish." I just wanted to see if anyone agrees with that.

I don't see how even having this particular fetish has an effect on the size acceptance movement. I still see them as private thoughts/actions done maturely and consensually.

People who have fat fetishes can still promote SIZE ACCEPTANCE and fight SIZE DISCRIMINATION. It's a personal and natural thing to us all - having these fetishes.

There are negative aspects though. If this fetish acts out in public or private with a certain demeaning factor (even as innocent as it were) THAT could possibly indicate bigotry. The person whose esteem was attacked may potentially make (the person as a whole being) feel undervalued, humiliated or unacceptable. This can initiate the tarnishing of that individual's integrity. Individualized behaviors and actions in us all make dents/impacts (good or bad) when you look at the bigger spectrum of things.

Something that MAY also have some negative impact is when fat-related HATE blogs spew belligerence and grow a "following" number of participants online and they may take THAT hostility with them when they leave their computer.
__________________
♥♥♥♥♥ love one another ♥♥♥♥♥
swamptoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 09:18 PM   #36
James
vibeout
 
James's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,710
James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!James keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Ok - I think we've reached a consensus that the first part of the myth is a straw man. Fat Admirers are not all fetishists and indeed, the key point to this myth is to discuss whether Fat Admiration and Size Acceptance can be compatible? People like Kate Harding refer to non-fat people who are invested in forwarding the cause of size acceptance as fat 'allies'. Are FAs fat 'allies' or does our aesthetic preclude us from being so?

This is the crux of what I want to get to with addressing this myth.... Do fat admirers help advance fat acceptance or does their association with it devalue the cause?

I have my own opinions and I'll bring them in at some point but I'd be interested to hear more of yours !

Thanks to all who have contributed so far. I think this is a very important topic.

Last edited by James; 11-06-2009 at 02:22 AM.
James is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 09:55 PM   #37
joh
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 142
joh can now be the recipient of "two cans" jokesjoh can now be the recipient of "two cans" jokes
Default

Most certainly FAs can add value to fat acceptance through association. I can see several cases in which they could help:

(a) They provide direct support to their fat-counterpart, be a friendship, marriage, or any other sort of relationship. By loving another for who they are I believe then that person will gain a lot more confidence, thus enabling them, in this particular case, to advance fat acceptance. I think this is true under any circumstance; I know personally just having my girlfriend, Rachel, by my side makes me a more confident and outgoing person.

(b) FAs can be role models of what fat acceptance could or should be. This is a double edged sword though; it would be easy enough to become a negative role model and thus hinder fat acceptance.

(c) Assuming we're referring to an "open-FA", they are a form of "fat-acceptors", are they not? They accept fat for what it is, and they love it. They are apart of the progression of fat acceptance. The more open-FAs there are is directly correlated to an increase in acceptance, right?

I do acknowledge that FAs could detract from fat acceptance, but couldn't that be true for anybody, in any form of "crusade", or even a fat person themselves?

Last edited by joh; 11-05-2009 at 09:57 PM.
joh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 02:34 AM   #38
SocialbFly
I am keeping Tina!
 
SocialbFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In a house
Posts: 3,090
SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

This is the crux of what I want to get to with addressing this myth.... Do fat admirers help advance fat acceptance or does their association with it devalue the cause?

So, my answer (btw I like the questions James, as it is something i have personally discussed with other people in size acceptance groups) is as usual not an easy one...i think the truest answer lies in the FAs desire of a fat partner, or if the desire is just one to view and etc...

my opinion, if you are involved with someone, or have the desire to be involved with a fat someone, you have a vested interest to make sure the person is happy and has access to everything you do...you want them to be able to sit with you in a cafe, to ride with you in a plane, to sit with you in a theatre...so your motivation is simple, you want them in your life so you are more apt to fight to have them there....

those that find fat more of a looky looky thing such as ______(without naming, insert any of the different kink things here) then i dont think your interest is how this person fits in to your life and i dont think they have the same vested interest in seeing the fat person in their everyday life...

So, to answer your question, in my mind, i think the first FA type advances size acceptance, and the second FA, unless he is extremely vocal on his kink...actually is a non entity in the size accceptance community, for it isnt what they are there for...

now the mixes...that all depends on the person...and that has too many shades of grey...
__________________
LEARN to ACCEPT without GUILT what is given in LOVE to you. RV

Medical advisor to the Mayor of Fatopia :)
SocialbFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 02:35 AM   #39
SocialbFly
I am keeping Tina!
 
SocialbFly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In a house
Posts: 3,090
SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.SocialbFly has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by joh View Post
Most certainly FAs can add value to fat acceptance through association. I can see several cases in which they could help:

(a) They provide direct support to their fat-counterpart, be a friendship, marriage, or any other sort of relationship. By loving another for who they are I believe then that person will gain a lot more confidence, thus enabling them, in this particular case, to advance fat acceptance. I think this is true under any circumstance; I know personally just having my girlfriend, Rachel, by my side makes me a more confident and outgoing person.
Can i just say, i love this statement?
__________________
LEARN to ACCEPT without GUILT what is given in LOVE to you. RV

Medical advisor to the Mayor of Fatopia :)
SocialbFly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 02:43 AM   #40
Verdant
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7
Verdant has said some nice things
Default

The collequial definition of a fetish is the sexual response to something that is not typically found sexual.
That's why the famous foot fetish is a real fetish; most men care nothing about feet when choosing a mate. They care much more about women's torsos and brains. The average man prefers thin torsos, while FAs prefer fat torsos -- but they are both focused on the same body parts. They just disagree about how those body parts should look.
Therefore, an FA is decidedly not a fetishist (unless he only cares about fat feet, hands, earlobes, etc.). The term fat fetish is a nisnomer. Any definition of fetish that would include FAs would have to be so broad that anything would be a fetish.
An FA saying a woman is only attractive if she is fat is like an average man saying a woman is only attractive if she is thin, and the latter is never called a fetish (not that either comment is necessarily laudable).
Verdant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 05:33 AM   #41
swamptoad
 
swamptoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 12,312
swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SocialbFly View Post
Can i just say, i love this statement?
Me too!
__________________
♥♥♥♥♥ love one another ♥♥♥♥♥
swamptoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 06:36 AM   #42
Dr. P Marshall
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,336
Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!Dr. P Marshall keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

I think this is an interesting topic, so I am briefly coming out of hiding to put in my two cents. I agree with Socialbfly that fat admirers as a group are very likely to be aware and personally invested in the issues of the size acceptance movement. What I was thinking, when I first read this topic, was that as a group we are a good pool from which to pull SA allies. But that does not mean all F/FAs will be allies of the SA movement, nor that all thin allies of SA wil be fat admirers. The issues and reasons Socialbfly addressed for F/FA participation could equally be true for someone who was not an F/FA, but had a fat spouse, partner, best friend, child, etc.

I think BigBellySSBBW is right in stating that there is a difference between the SA movement and the SA community. I also agree with her point that most issues of SA as a movement have nothing to do with attraction, sexual or otherwise. It is mostly civil rights issues on the table. Having said that, joh and swamptoad have both brought up the importance of social support or (unfortunately) lack of support that an experience with an F/FA can create. And I do agree that in that way, our FAness can have an impact on individual fat people.

As far as F/FAs being a detriment to the SA movement, again, I think that's only on an individual basis. I'm going to be honest, most people outside of the SA community don't think much about fat admirers, many don't even know we exist. Basically, if there was a rally or protest and there were a mixture of thin and fat people, most outside SA wouldn't stop to think who the thin people were. They would just assume they were allies who believed in the cause. So I don't personally think that even if someone had a bad impression of fat admirers, that they would necessarily think about them one way or the other when it came time to decide about issues of seating, airline policy, job discrimination, etc.

Sorry I didn't mulitquote you all, I wrote this out somewhere else and copied it in the post.

Last edited by Dr. P Marshall; 11-06-2009 at 06:36 AM. Reason: and yes, I also love joh's quote :)
Dr. P Marshall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2009, 02:23 PM   #43
joh
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 142
joh can now be the recipient of "two cans" jokesjoh can now be the recipient of "two cans" jokes
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SocialbFly View Post
my opinion, if you are involved with someone, or have the desire to be involved with a fat someone, you have a vested interest to make sure the person is happy and has access to everything you do...you want them to be able to sit with you in a cafe, to ride with you in a plane, to sit with you in a theatre...so your motivation is simple, you want them in your life so you are more apt to fight to have them there....

those that find fat more of a looky looky thing such as ______(without naming, insert any of the different kink things here) then i dont think your interest is how this person fits in to your life and i dont think they have the same vested interest in seeing the fat person in their everyday life...

So, to answer your question, in my mind, i think the first FA type advances size acceptance, and the second FA, unless he is extremely vocal on his kink...actually is a non entity in the size accceptance community, for it isnt what they are there for...

now the mixes...that all depends on the person...and that has too many shades of grey...
I completely agree, couldn't said it better myself (and this was mainly what I was trying to get at too).

And thanks SocialbFly and swamptoad!
joh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 01:58 AM   #44
swamptoad
 
swamptoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 12,312
swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
Ok - I think we've reached a consensus that the first part of the myth is a straw man. Fat Admirers are not all fetishists and indeed, the key point to this myth is to discuss whether Fat Admiration and Size Acceptance can be compatible? People like Kate Harding refer to non-fat people who are invested in forwarding the cause of size acceptance as fat 'allies'. Are FAs fat 'allies' or does our aesthetic preclude us from being so?

This is the crux of what I want to get to with addressing this myth.... Do fat admirers help advance fat acceptance or does their association with it devalue the cause?

I have my own opinions and I'll bring them in at some point but I'd be interested to hear more of yours !

Thanks to all who have contributed so far. I think this is a very important topic.

See, here's the thing. I see fat admiration as being compatible with size acceptance as no different than skinny admiration. It's all preference. So what? There's people with an admiration of fat men or fat women. How does that factor in that they have any less concern with the bigotry, discrimination, and disadvantaged conditions which people in the world are facing? I just don't see fat admirers as an enemy on the issue of size acceptance. Ally, sure!

Put simply, caring is caring. Another question comes to mind. Do you think FAs will be judged more harshly for being who they are while carrying the beliefs that fat should be acceptable?

Both are allies; non-fas or fas. Either can forward the cause. Its possible for either to take action. There shouldn't be implications that those admiring "fat" are also advocating the world to be larger. Same goes with skinny admirers; they wouldn't be advocating the world to be thinner. It's freedom of choice. Be skinny. Be big. Be who you want to be. Be happy.

Being one or the other doesn't pose ignorance or an unfulfilled livelihood. It still allows discrimination to flourish, however. It's something that will always be.

People can and will discriminate on all sorts of stuff. It's the way we make fine distinctions or considerations. We have made distinctions in favor or against by differentiating each other throughout history.

And also to add ....

Discrimination
can mean differentiation. Meaning .. the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect (Example: subject A - a skinny person and subject B - a larger person) are responded to differently.
I took the medical dictionary meaning. But as I thought about it, it just made sense to me.


Its also important not to form prejudices, as they are the feelings formed beforehand without knowledge, thought, or reason; speaking in regard to size acceptance.

And then there's refusal to tolerate; where those feelings are acted upon with opinions and beliefs beholding exact opposition.

Some viewpoints I thought to share ....

You can pollute the body at a skinny size just as you can pollute the body at a larger size when you talk about eating habits. The thing is ... A person who is larger sized really shouldn't be summed up/analyzed at first glance just as a skinnier person should not be summed up/analyzed at first glance. What your eyes tell you does not always distinguish the truth of a persons physical well-being. In other words a person looked at with much more fat on their body could be potentially much healthier than the skinnier person. The skinnier person could still be healthier. Every person is not designed the same.

This is how discrimination, for the most part, is made to differentiate people each and everyday; formed assumptions based on what society encourages or allows us to think or what the media or television pours into our noggins.

People will depict who is more deserving of reward or praise than the other based on those societal norms and sadly that is done with no consideration to individualized virtue. An individualized virtue could mean a person (even a fat admirer) that fights for a cause (be it fat acceptance and size acceptance) even if others think of him/her as a hypocrite or whatever judgment that they may pass along to them, if that may be the case.

I still think fat admiration and size acceptance are compatible, for those who invest in forwarding the cause by simple everyday actions as previously discussed. I'd imagine that fat admirers, the ones who live with a fat partner would think and act beyond their kinks to by and large serve a greater meritorious purpose.
__________________
♥♥♥♥♥ love one another ♥♥♥♥♥

Last edited by swamptoad; 11-07-2009 at 02:05 AM.
swamptoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 02:36 PM   #45
Jon Blaze
Dusk
 
Jon Blaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oklahoma City, OK ya dig? ;)
Posts: 6,746
Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!Jon Blaze keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

I understand your point about the fetish comment. It's a common logic used to put down FAs, but as said before I think that's a separate issue all together. Some are and some aren't.

That being said: Simply being an FA doesn't tarnish the credibility of the size acceptance movement, because FAs have things to add that can be both related to and non-related to how they feel about larger people as partners.

FAs can be added strength in numbers in spreading the messages, and in the past I've noticed that some people that newly learn about the movement really gain some hope when they find out FAs exist. Even just in general for larger people at times. Some of my past girlfriends that are big think it's interesting and/or a good thing.

I have to echo what BGB said. That kind of thing can be a form of tarnish.

Now bringing up my preferences has led people to respond awkwardly, and yes I like women of various sizes, but I think some people have trouble separating not being attracted to something, and not accepting it. I don't think FAs are obligated to join the movement (Or to even give support), but I think the ones that do need to consider the former (Accepting those you may not be attracted to) before joining up. Of course, not all people in the movement believe in that sort of thing as well.
__________________
Love people of all sizes!!! History is sometimes more logical than society.- Me :D

"Happiness is not stopping to think if you are."- Palmer Sondreal
Jon Blaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 07:05 PM   #46
chicken legs
yawn
 
chicken legs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: sin city
Posts: 3,242
chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!chicken legs has a ton of rep. Literally. As in over 2000!
Default

It doesn't make sense to me that people who say they are fat or were fat dislike people who are Fa's. Its like a catch 22.

Reality is ...no one is forcing you to be fat (if they are..then thats a subject for discussion somewhere else). If you dont like being that way...change it and move on. Its like a rock star talking shit about his/her fans.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by snuggletiger View Post
secret turn on.....Genuine affection :)
chicken legs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 09:56 PM   #47
pickleman357
Christian/Fattism Solider
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 557
pickleman357 carries a lot of weight on this boardpickleman357 carries a lot of weight on this boardpickleman357 carries a lot of weight on this boardpickleman357 carries a lot of weight on this boardpickleman357 carries a lot of weight on this board
Default

I was actually thinking of the whole fetish thing recently and it dawned on me. I think almost everyone has a fetish. Let's take a look at it

Fetish
Psychology. any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation.

So if a guy gets aroused by long legs then he has a leg fetish. Is this going to hinder the acceptance of short skirts and pantyhose?

If a guy gets aroused by physically fit women, then he has a muscle fetish. Does this fact hinder the acceptance of women going to the gym, or competing in the olympics?

If a guy gets aroused by fat on a woman, then he has a fat fetish. Why would this hinder the acceptance of fat women when none of the other examples do?

This seems to me like a chicken and egg senerio. The chicken is getting blamed for a rotten egg that it didn't lay!
pickleman357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-07-2009, 10:43 PM   #48
swamptoad
 
swamptoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 12,312
swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!swamptoad keeps pushing the rep limit!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melian View Post
Yes, I have a sexual fat fetish.

It coexists with my love of fat people, which I express through kindness, respect and support of fat friends and family members.

So while the fetish element is there, I feel it tarnishes nothing.

That's how I view it!
__________________
♥♥♥♥♥ love one another ♥♥♥♥♥
swamptoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2009, 10:52 AM   #49
musicman
I hate fat-haters!
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 281
musicman makes people happy simply by logging inmusicman makes people happy simply by logging inmusicman makes people happy simply by logging inmusicman makes people happy simply by logging inmusicman makes people happy simply by logging inmusicman makes people happy simply by logging inmusicman makes people happy simply by logging inmusicman makes people happy simply by logging in
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
This is the crux of what I want to get to with addressing this myth.... Do fat admirers help advance fat acceptance or does their association with it devalue the cause?

Some are saying that FAs have no place in SA, because it is a political movement. I don't understand that argument, but in any event, I think it is wrong to define SA as ONLY a political movement, where we pass a few laws, and then go home to live in some sort of paradise. Yes, laws will help, but laws won't stop the fat jokes, the diet scams, the harrassment of fat kids that have driven some to suicide, or the media portrayals of near-anorexia as "beauty". These things won't end until people no longer consider them as acceptable behavior. I hate to use a tired cliche, but this is really a battle for the "hearts and minds" of people. For this, we need FAs because we need all the warriors we can get. In addition, every mind we can change becomes an ally in this battle, and I think FAs can be especially valuable as "mind changers".

You can argue whether any one particular FA is good or bad for his/her particular partner, just like you can argue about people in any relationship. But it's undeniable that FAs are way ahead of the general public in their acceptance of fat people. I think this gives FAs an important role to play.

Discrimination and hatred of any minority is fueled by ignorance. If you don't know anyone in a particular group, it's easy to accept the propaganda that they are inferior. But once you know someone as a person, it's much harder to accept propaganda about them. This is true for any religious, racial, ethnic, or sexual preference group. For example, inter-racial dating and relationships do as much to combat racial discrimination, in the minds of people, as laws do. Joe is dating a girl of another race and she's nice and her family's nice, so how can all of "those people" be as bad as they say?

The same thing can help SA, if more FAs will come out of the closet. How many guys make fun of fat girls because they don't know that any of their friends are FAs?

The preference of FAs for fat partners is intimately tied up with the SA movement. Fat people will never get the acceptance they deserve, unless those with a preference for fat bodies are also accepted. Could we ever hope for full racial equality if inter-racial marriages were still illegal? For SA to succeed, the preference of FAs will have to be viewed by society with just as much legitimacy as a preference for any other human characteristic (tall, short, quiet, outgoing, blonde, brunette, etc.).

I think that most fat people just want to be accepted as people, regardless of their weight. By the same token, FAs must be accepted as people, no better or worse than others. In any group, some people are "good" and some are "bad". We deal with those on an individual basis. But as a group, the acceptance of FAs is vital to SA.
__________________
"He's a man of many contradictions," she observed. "He likes his pizza thin and his women fat."
musicman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2009, 11:31 AM   #50
Santaclear
User
 
Santaclear's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North America
Posts: 8,230
Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.Santaclear has ascended what used to be the highest level.
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by James View Post
Ok - I think we've reached a consensus that the first part of the myth is a straw man. Fat Admirers are not all fetishists and indeed, the key point to this myth is to discuss whether Fat Admiration and Size Acceptance can be compatible? People like Kate Harding refer to non-fat people who are invested in forwarding the cause of size acceptance as fat 'allies'. Are FAs fat 'allies' or does our aesthetic preclude us from being so?

This is the crux of what I want to get to with addressing this myth.... Do fat admirers help advance fat acceptance or does their association with it devalue the cause?
Yeah, the "fetish" thing is completely irrelevant to size acceptance. I'd agree with what Harding says. I'd say FAs who are interacting positively or romantically involved with fat people are "allies" of size acceptance, forwarding the cause with our support and/or living by example.
__________________
:confused:

Last edited by Santaclear; 11-08-2009 at 11:38 AM.
Santaclear is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright Dimensions Magazine. All rights reserved worldwide.