Blurred lines? Ffa and feeder

Dimensions Magazine

Help Support Dimensions Magazine:

ouroboros

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
60
Location
,
Has anyone else noticed that with female ffas that the line between feeder and ffa is more blurred as opposed to male counterparts?
 

dwesterny

Unpleasantly Plump
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,762
Location
,
Never spoke to a female FA who didn't like to watch a fat guy eat. I couldn't speak to male FAs. I wonder if it's almost like a foreplay type scenario? Women want more build up, guys are just thinking about the culminating act even for FAs.
 

ouroboros

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
60
Location
,
Never spoke to a female FA who didn't like to watch a fat guy eat. I couldn't speak to male FAs. I wonder if it's almost like a foreplay type scenario? Women want more build up, guys are just thinking about the culminating act even for FAs.
That's a pretty good connection, but it could also be society women are meant to be nurturers and this is a different take on that. Lol I can't speak for male fas either, but I've noticed less talk about enjoying a partner with an appetite if they also didn't identify as feeder. I didn't know that that was so common among ffas
 

agouderia

Library Girl
Staff member
Library Mod
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
2,592
Location
,
Your question has been discussed here and there buried in various threads under different aspects but never in a comprehensive manner.

You definitely have the main point ouroboros that nurturing is at the least fostered and encouraged in females.

Girls and woman are consciously and sub-consciously taught from early on that it is mark of a good female, caring, nurturing and rewarding to provide their loved ones with nutrition - doing well in this field is mostly rewarded with positive feedback and attention.

Even though sound empirical data on these fetishes is scarse, from comparable issues you're on the safe side to assume that at least 8 out of 10 women who bake a cake for you are plain showing you that they like you and care for you and are not feeders!

In the context of the story writer's board in the Library there have also been a few discussions on how male and female writers have different perceptions of their characters, whether they're BBWs or BHMs.

There is less objectification among FFAs in comparison to FAs - but that boils down to the general fact that men tend to objectify women much more than vice-versa. For a host of social, psychological, anthropological, historic, etc. reasons.

Bottom line is - the likelihood that an FFA even as a feeder will see the BHM as a person/subject and not an object is empirically just a lot higher.
 

dwesterny

Unpleasantly Plump
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,762
Location
,
There are some feeders who would be more aptly described as malicious than nurturing and then even some where it's both at the same time.
 

ouroboros

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
60
Location
,
Your question has been discussed here and there buried in various threads under different aspects but never in a comprehensive manner.

You definitely have the main point ouroboros that nurturing is at the least fostered and encouraged in females.

Girls and woman are consciously and sub-consciously taught from early on that it is mark of a good female, caring, nurturing and rewarding to provide their loved ones with nutrition - doing well in this field is mostly rewarded with positive feedback and attention.

Even though sound empirical data on these fetishes is scarse, from comparable issues you're on the safe side to assume that at least 8 out of 10 women who bake a cake for you are plain showing you that they like you and care for you and are not feeders!

In the context of the story writer's board in the Library there have also been a few discussions on how male and female writers have different perceptions of their characters, whether they're BBWs or BHMs.

There is less objectification among FFAs in comparison to FAs - but that boils down to the general fact that men tend to objectify women much more than vice-versa. For a host of social, psychological, anthropological, historic, etc. reasons.

Bottom line is - the likelihood that an FFA even as a feeder will see the BHM as a person/subject and not an object is empirically just a lot higher.
Sorry for bringing up something that's been discussed before.
I agree that most of the time she wouldn't be a feeder and that men are more likely to objectify women for a whole host of reasons.
Are you suggesting that it's equally as common but men aren't as open about it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tad

Xyantha Reborn

- Actually Very Tame!
Joined
Jul 23, 2014
Messages
2,858
Location
,
Don't be sorry. Dead threads should stay dead; they are nice for reference, but re-questioning previously discussed topics is healthy and leaves out the opinion bias of the past.

Has anyone else noticed that with female ffas that the line between feeder and ffa is more blurred as opposed to male counterparts?
I'm going to be more blunt than usual because I am tired.

Yes. I think ultimately it is because we are not required to delineate between them as much as male FAs are.

There is a much bigger stigma towards men who actively want to feed women. Generally, they seem to have deemed to have predatory natures, preying on weak women who are on the outcast fringe of society. That poor girl, taken advantage of by that man!

Whereas female FFAs enjoy the luxury of dealing with a sex that is still deemed to have more control. Well, she might have encouraged him a bit, but as a man, he should have had the balls to stop her.

I also think that society more strongly associates sex to men than women. So a man fattening up a woman is obviously sheer selfish sexuality :)rolleyes:) whereas with women, it is clearly just fulfilling her natural urges to have a big, strong mate, and the lack of muscle is just her being confused :)rolleyes:).

I don't know how this gender bias plays out in the GLTBQA (whatever the growing acronym is now :)) is, but that is my own personal observation in 'straight' circles.
 

ouroboros

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
60
Location
,
Don't be sorry. Dead threads should stay dead; they are nice for reference, but re-questioning previously discussed topics is healthy and leaves out the opinion bias of the past.



I'm going to be more blunt than usual because I am tired.

Yes. I think ultimately it is because we are not required to delineate between them as much as male FAs are.

There is a much bigger stigma towards men who actively want to feed women. Generally, they seem to have deemed to have predatory natures, preying on weak women who are on the outcast fringe of society. That poor girl, taken advantage of by that man!

Whereas female FFAs enjoy the luxury of dealing with a sex that is still deemed to have more control. Well, she might have encouraged him a bit, but as a man, he should have had the balls to stop her.

I also think that society more strongly associates sex to men than women. So a man fattening up a woman is obviously sheer selfish sexuality :)rolleyes:) whereas with women, it is clearly just fulfilling her natural urges to have a big, strong mate, and the lack of muscle is just her being confused :)rolleyes:).

I don't know how this gender bias plays out in the GLTBQA (whatever the growing acronym is now :)) is, but that is my own personal observation in 'straight' circles.
Okay good. I didn't want it to see like was beating a dead horse. But starting it fresh without previous opinion biases is a good point.
I have to agree, also with the role of the bhm/bbw and how the societal norms play out too. In general men are more likely to be encouraged to have a 'healthy appetite', while women are encouraged to eat things like salad.

LGBTQ (I just leave it at that, I can't keep up with the ever growing acronym.) I'm not sure how it plays out there. But I think in the gay community the men are either chasers or encouragers. But I think the role of a gainer is different too
 

bayone

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 5, 2014
Messages
394
Location
,
Yeah, I think the whole "the way to a man's heart is through his stomach" trope is commonplace even in non-FA/feedist depictions of heterosexual courtship.
 

ouroboros

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
60
Location
,
So is it a case of which came first the chicken or the egg? Was it society that allowed it to foster more than with males or was it something innate? Sorry if I'm not clear. I'm half asleep. Lol
 

dwesterny

Unpleasantly Plump
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,762
Location
,
Breastfeeding alone would be an argument for at least some innate component.
 

dwesterny

Unpleasantly Plump
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,762
Location
,
Right, but it established that role of feeding for women. Also fat or feeding isn't sexual for most people. I'm not saying that makes breastfeeding sexual for FFA/feedresses, but I think there plausibly could be some unusual expression of whatever the genetic basis for nurturing in women is.
 

ouroboros

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
60
Location
,
Right, but it established that role of feeding for women. Also fat or feeding isn't sexual for most people. I'm not saying that makes breastfeeding sexual for FFA/feedresses, but I think there plausibly could be some unusual expression of whatever the genetic basis for nurturing in women is.
I see what you're getting at, but I don't fully agree with it relating to these interests. I think with that its kinda going into the realm of age play, although it could just be my tired logic. Women are the nourisher, even without breastfeeding as a genetic example. I forget what the theory is called but our gender roles in society were formed by our strengths and power.
 

dwesterny

Unpleasantly Plump
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
1,762
Location
,
I would also add that breastfeeding is the main purpose of bewbs for the species, and bewbies are very sexual. Nipple sucking is standard foreplay, which when you think about is a little weird. So why not the possibility that the other half of breastfeeding is sexual as well?
 

MsBrightside

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2014
Messages
744
Location
,
Breastfeeding alone would be an argument for at least some innate component.
It's interesting that you're suggesting a connection.

As someone who has some personal experience in this area, I can tell you that...
But breastfeeding isn't a sexual experience...
in the case of a child, it's definitely not.

And it's often not pleasurable to feed an infant that way in the beginning, because of sore/crackled nipples, the possibility of mastitis, etc. But once the routine is established, it does feel nice. In fact there's a let-down reflex that occurs once the infant is latched on (if the mother is relaxed), which is accompanied by a not-unpleasant prickling sensation. Also, it's physically painful if circumstances prevent a nursing mother from feeding her child for several hours or more, and it's a huge relief to have that pain/pressure finally alleviated.

Sorry if this is TMI, but I'm going to blame it on D. for bringing it up!
 
2

Latest posts

Top