Does anyone else HATE this fetish?

Dimensions Magazine

Help Support Dimensions Magazine:

waldo

***
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
675
Location
Indiana
The way I understood it, 'paraphilia' is just the medical term for a fetish? :-/

I have no idea about the step-mother. I'm not sure that would be classed as a fetish or how it would work. But paedophiles and necrophiles, bestialists etc. probably could be described as fetishists, but the difference between these and and someone who has a fat fetish or a hair fetish is that their fetishes cannot ever be legally or morally acted upon. Living with this thing (whatever we want to call it) has given me a degree of compassion for people in this sort of situation (and by that I don't include people with these fixations who give in to them and harm children and animals) in that I'm convinced people have no choice in their sexualities/fetishes, and they ought to be entitled to therapy to make sure they don't turn into abusers and to help them come to terms with the fact that they will never be able to fulfil that part of themselves.

Many fetishes aren't illegal, but create hardship in people's lives because they're very difficult or even impossible to fulfil. Fat men of the sort I'm attracted to (I mean fat everywhere, and not just someone with a hard 'beer belly' made from abdominal fat who is average-size elsewhere) are rare where I live For some people, it is more of a preference in a spectrum of sexuality as posts by others here show, but for others they're stuck with an inability to be sexually aroused other than by this one thing.

I absolutely agree with the long life comment. Having watched a couple of relatives deteriorate in old age, I wouldn't want it for myself or anyone I love. And there's an interesting double standard in society's attitude to women being fat and women having children. Not all women are even interested in being mothers and pregnancy can cause serious complications, long-term medical issues, and even death, in a way that's comparable to how being fat can, so why are so many people's attitudes to a woman's personal choice of being fat and the choice of having a child so polarised?

Polyamory I think is a trendy modern word for something that's discreetly been around forever. I probably wouldn't use it myself and would call it having a paramour or 'a bit on the side'. If you've been in a relationship a long time, the sexual element and having fun just being with the other person can wear off, but that doesn't diminish the companionship and stability you both get from it. If you meet someone else you enjoy in that way, seeing the person on the side can be a valid alternative to breaking up your existing relationship. If everyone involved is happy with the arrangement, then it's not hurting anyone else. :)
Thanks for a very nice reply! I had worried I was going to get totally roasted over that post. The current Dimensions crowd really is a decent lot! The 'thing for the step mother' may not be so much a fetish as a 'fantasy'. I don't know but I do know it is showing up a LOT in porn (including in the SSBBW category).

As for women choosing to have a child versus being fat, it does not compute for me. While some people actively seek to and in most cases succeed in becoming fat, the vast majority were fat, involuntarily, to begin with. Some of that group might choose to embrace it and intentionally get fatter. That is usually what we see in a place like Dimensions - fatties embracing it and getting fatter. BUT I do not agree you can equate that with the choice whether or not to have a child. Having a child is what most people are intrinsically programmed to do. It is what makes the human species continue, like any other. So it is important, and some people nowadays seem to be too cavalier about it; in my old school opinion. I will tell you one thing: I had one of those epic 'Wal-mart sitings' this past Saturday. There she was the approximately 25-30 year old SSBBW (probably about 400 lb) pushing the shopping cart with 2 small kids in the cart and a guy by her side. Well that just makes me smile inside to see fat people out there living a 'normal' life like the skinnies. Well, he was skinny.

I agree that polyamory seems like just new-speak for 'having someone on the side'. For those who want to do it - yeah have at it if all adults are consenting. BUT what if there are minor children involved??????
 

waldo

***
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
675
Location
Indiana
I think people get too hung up on terminology. Yes, to some people, the words “fetish”, “kink”, and “paraphilia” all have negative connotations. And just calling it a “preference” isn’t really accurate, since that would make it akin to preferring a partner with a certain eye or hair color, and feedism (and adjacent interests) are usually associated much more intrinsically to our desires than that.
Ultimately, it doesn’t really matter what we call it within our own community. Trying to explain it to outsiders is a different story. Although I think most people understand that having a paraphilia doesn’t usually involve something as extreme or morally reprehensible as pedophilia, necrophilia, or zoophilia. I think fetish is a reasonable enough blanket term for PR reasons, since all a fetish means is a fixation. There are fishes that have no sexual implications at all, which also includes asexual members of our community. “Kink” and “paraphilia” both are necessarily sexual in nature. So if you consider it important to put a name to it, “fetish” is probably the best, most inclusive, blanket term.

However, as you pointed out, this community is incredibly diverse. Aside from the fact that some (probably most) consider this a sexual orientation, others do not associate it with sex at all, but within those two categories there are so many variables. Most are interested in fatness, but some are really more interested in stuffing, bloating, inflation, blueberry, breeding/pregnancy (both traditional and mpreg), and a host of other niches. Some enjoy static fatness, and others are interested in feeding or gaining. And within that category, there are multiple variations of feeder/feedee configurations, plus mutual feeders/gainers.

Some like fatness for purely aesthetic and/or tactile reasons. They find a fat partner sexy and fun to touch and squeeze and cuddle. Others like it because they enjoy the idea of losing control, or taking control in some cases. For some it is a form of rebellion, having been shamed or forced to stay in shape by someone in their past, including themselves. To some, it’s the ultimate form of freedom and acceptance, having a partner they know will love them no matter how much they let themselves go.

There are people who like the idea of gaining to immobility. Others are out off by that idea. There are death feedists on the extreme end of the spectrum. There are some who like the idea of their weight or eating habits being a spectacle, and others who consider it one of the most private parts of who they are.

For many it’s purely fantasy, only wanting to role play, or read stories, or look at and chat with sexy fatties. For others it’s not enough if they aren’t actually engaging in some form of practice, either Ali e or with a partner.

It’s often attached to a separate kink, such as BDSM, DDLG, furries, or any number of outside interests.

When you consider all that, it becomes extremely difficult to find a single word that accurately represents the whole
of the community.
You make some good points. But this statement: "Aside from the fact that some (probably most) consider this a sexual orientation, others do not associate it with sex at all" does not compute for me. Are you trying to say there are fat admirers who are fat admirers not because it makes their juices flow but just for some sexuality-unrelated 'esthetic reason/preference'? Seriously? LOL!!!!
And those who only dip into the fat fantasy world and run a 'straight' life in public - you do realize we call those closet FAs !? Right !?
 
Last edited:

waldo

***
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
675
Location
Indiana
Beautifully said Jack.




For clarification on the polyamory thing, it is when a person has multiple partners. Each partner and each relationship is as important and valid as the others. It's no more conditional than monogamous love, and it's nothing like having an open relationship or 'a bit on the side'.

Whether or not you understand the intricacies of polyamory, I would like to point out that we are a site that accepts people of different sexualities and don't accept discrimination towards people just for doing things a non-standard way. Just bare that in mind, guys.
Well as I already posted, I disagree with the premise of polyamory. On the other hand I have little first hand knowledge of this concept. If consenting adults want to do certain things, well that is up to them, BUT we all need to remember to never think for one second that our choices in life do not have consequences including and especially those we had not even considered going in. That does not mean sit on your thumbs for fear of making a mistake, just be thoughtful and responsible........
 
Joined
Apr 20, 2020
Messages
290
Location
Dallas, Tx
You make some good points. But this statement: "Aside from the fact that some (probably most) consider this a sexual orientation, others do not associate it with sex at all" does not compute for me. Are you trying to say there are fat admirers who are fat admirers not because it makes their juices flow but just for some sexuality-unrelated 'esthetic reason/preference'? Seriously? LOL!!!!
And those who only dip into the fat fantasy world and run a 'straight' life in public - you do realize we call those closet FAs !? Right !?
Yes, that’s right. Asexual people (you may have heard them referred to as aces) don’t have a desire for sexual contact, and some are incapable of sexual arousal. But many still desire romantic relationships for emotional reasons. Aces are not absent from the feedism/FA community. I’m not an ace, and I won’t pretend to understand this, but I respect their orientation. I was friends with an ace who was also a feeder over on Feabie. She was not the only one of her kind. Feabie even allows members to set their orientation to asexual if they choose to put that on their profile.
 

loopytheone

Staff member
Administrator
Global Moderator
***
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
5,321
Location
England
Mythical asexual FA here.

It varies depending on person. But yes, I find fat people/associated kinks hot. No, I don't have any desire to sleep with anyone of any gender, size, shape etc. I've never looked at a person and thought that I want to touch their junk. Or have them touch mine. Before anyone asks, no, no sexual trauma in the past or anything like that. Just never been interested in such things. My partner is also an asexual FA. Much grabbing of bellies and engaging in kinks like stuckage, but no interest in sleeping with each other.

There's been a handful of asexual FAs I've met over the years, both of here and other websites.

You don't have to understand it, but you do have to respect it as a sexual orientation. Fair warning here, anybody trying to say asexual people are sick/wrong/confused etc will not be tolerated. Dims has always been a place that is accepting of members of the LGBT community.

With that said, I feel like asexual people and their interactions aren't really the point/focus of this thread.
 

Metallicalover99

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Messages
46
Location
United States
I've had similar thoughts. My ex-boyfriend thought my preferences were funny (like he laughed at me lol) and didn't really believe me until after a year of being together (he would barely let me touch him due to insecurities). I also struggle with finding people who are ok with their weight while not being deep into a gaining fetish (I am not into that at all). My friend is a muscular man and when we first met he was flirting with me. I remember thinking that it would be so easy to flirt with him. If I had complimented his muscles, I wouldn't have had a weird reaction. It's harder with bigger people (especially men) because you can't just say you like their ass or their belly lol. I've had men think I was catfishing them or making fun of them for flirting with them because they are bigger. Big men are so beautiful though, I truly don't hate having this preference, even though at times I have wished that it was easier to flirt. Enjoy the ride with this guy! Dating is exciting, it doesn't have to be forever. It could be that even if he does lose some weight, you will still be attracted to so many other aspects about him. My ex-boyfriend went through a period of weight loss and I still thought he was attracted (even though I missed his belly); his still smelled the same, had his beautiful eyes, and his wonderful personality (and other thing that starts with a p! sorry lol)
 

waldo

***
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
675
Location
Indiana
Yes, that’s right. Asexual people (you may have heard them referred to as aces) don’t have a desire for sexual contact, and some are incapable of sexual arousal. But many still desire romantic relationships for emotional reasons. Aces are not absent from the feedism/FA community. I’m not an ace, and I won’t pretend to understand this, but I respect their orientation. I was friends with an ace who was also a feeder over on Feabie. She was not the only one of her kind. Feabie even allows members to set their orientation to asexual if they choose to put that on their profile.
Never seen that term 'aces' before. I guess it makes sense since if what you want is someone to be intimate/cuddle with but not have sex, a soft fat person would be ideal in some ways.
Mythical asexual FA here.

It varies depending on person. But yes, I find fat people/associated kinks hot. No, I don't have any desire to sleep with anyone of any gender, size, shape etc. I've never looked at a person and thought that I want to touch their junk. Or have them touch mine. Before anyone asks, no, no sexual trauma in the past or anything like that. Just never been interested in such things. My partner is also an asexual FA. Much grabbing of bellies and engaging in kinks like stuckage, but no interest in sleeping with each other.

There's been a handful of asexual FAs I've met over the years, both of here and other websites.

You don't have to understand it, but you do have to respect it as a sexual orientation. Fair warning here, anybody trying to say asexual people are sick/wrong/confused etc will not be tolerated. Dims has always been a place that is accepting of members of the LGBT community.

With that said, I feel like asexual people and their interactions aren't really the point/focus of this thread.
Thanks for sharing! I guess I live in a pretty fragile glass house, so who am I to judge. The money line is this: "You don't have to understand it, but you do have to respect it as a sexual orientation." Same goes for fat admiration. I think this is not an excuse for me being judgemental, but in the past, especially on this site, hetero cis male FAs have been chided for expressing reservations about coming out to friends, family, significant other, etc. about our inclination. We are told, oh it is just a preference like desiring a particular hair color or some such. No big deal; just man up and it will all be fine. Maybe I have been operating under that mentality and considering myself 'normal' even though I am anything but by society's standards. The vast majority of people would think me a freak if they knew my dream girl is 600+ pounds.

So back to the original post: yes sometimes this fetish/orientation really sucks, and I wish I didn't have it. But there is no wishing something like this away.
 
Last edited:

Anomaly

***
Joined
Oct 11, 2021
Messages
46
Location
Earth
It's harder with bigger people (especially men) because you can't just say you like their ass or their belly lol. I've had men think I was catfishing them or making fun of them for flirting with them because they are bigger.
Oh, hell, this. Like when a man tells you he enjoys cooking, and the obvious flirt response is 'you look like you are bloody good at it as well.'

Asexuality and a lot of the labels people are using now are getting confusing. When I was young, an asexual person was a person who was not gay, straight, or bisexual, i.e. a person who didn't experience sexual attraction to other people, essentially went through puberty and came out the other side with that light bulb never coming on. Nowadays it seems to be used to mean all sorts of things and even sometimes seems to be applied to gay men who don't enjoy anal sex and heterosexual people who don't like vaginal sex. How people choose to consensually be sexual together has always been personal and unique to them. :-S
 

loopytheone

Staff member
Administrator
Global Moderator
***
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
5,321
Location
England
Oh, hell, this. Like when a man tells you he enjoys cooking, and the obvious flirt response is 'you look like you are bloody good at it as well.'

Asexuality and a lot of the labels people are using now are getting confusing. When I was young, an asexual person was a person who was not gay, straight, or bisexual, i.e. a person who didn't experience sexual attraction to other people, essentially went through puberty and came out the other side with that light bulb never coming on. Nowadays it seems to be used to mean all sorts of things and even sometimes seems to be applied to gay men who don't enjoy anal sex and heterosexual people who don't like vaginal sex. How people choose to consensually be sexual together has always been personal and unique to them. :-S

Asexual = no sexual attraction to other people. Grey asexual = limited sexual attraction to other people.

I've never seen it be used to mean anything other than that. Bear in mind that you can't tell how other people feel and what they are or aren't attracted to.

It sounds like you are describing what we would call an aromantic asexual person, as in, a person that isn't romantically or sexually attracted to anyone. You also get hetero/homo/bi/pan/etc romantic asexual people, who are romantically attracted to other people but not sexually. I'm a panromantic asexual; I'd be willing to date people of any gender and be in relationships with them, but I'm not interested in sleeping with anyone. For a lot of people romantic and sexual attraction are all rolled up into one thing, but for asexual people they are often different.

Anyway, I will stop derailing the thread here; if anyone has any questions about what being asexual means, you are welcome to PM me. Thank you for being respectful, everyone. Back on topic now though please! =)
 
Last edited:

balthyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
52
Location
UK
I
The way I understood it, 'paraphilia' is just the medical term for a fetish? :-/

I have no idea about the step-mother. I'm not sure that would be classed as a fetish or how it would work. But paedophiles and necrophiles, bestialists etc. probably could be described as fetishists, but the difference between these and and someone who has a fat fetish or a hair fetish is that their fetishes cannot ever be legally or morally acted upon. Living with this thing (whatever we want to call it) has given me a degree of compassion for people in this sort of situation (and by that I don't include people with these fixations who give in to them and harm children and animals) in that I'm convinced people have no choice in their sexualities/fetishes, and they ought to be entitled to therapy to make sure they don't turn into abusers and to help them come to terms with the fact that they will never be able to fulfil that part of themselves.

Many fetishes aren't illegal, but create hardship in people's lives because they're very difficult or even impossible to fulfil. Fat men of the sort I'm attracted to (I mean fat everywhere, and not just someone with a hard 'beer belly' made from abdominal fat who is average-size elsewhere) are rare where I live For some people, it is more of a preference in a spectrum of sexuality as posts by others here show, but for others they're stuck with an inability to be sexually aroused other than by this one thing.

I absolutely agree with the long life comment. Having watched a couple of relatives deteriorate in old age, I wouldn't want it for myself or anyone I love. And there's an interesting double standard in society's attitude to women being fat and women having children. Not all women are even interested in being mothers and pregnancy can cause serious complications, long-term medical issues, and even death, in a way that's comparable to how being fat can, so why are so many people's attitudes to a woman's personal choice of being fat and the choice of having a child so polarised?

Polyamory I think is a trendy modern word for something that's discreetly been around forever. I probably wouldn't use it myself and would call it having a paramour or 'a bit on the side'. If you've been in a relationship a long time, the sexual element and having fun just being with the other person can wear off, but that doesn't diminish the companionship and stability you both get from it. If you meet someone else you enjoy in that way, seeing the person on the side can be a valid alternative to breaking up your existing relationship. If everyone involved is happy with the arrangement, then it's not hurting anyone else. :)
I came to polyamory without any partners at all. It's not about diminishing sexual attraction/activities or people "on the side".
 

balthyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
52
Location
UK
Ah yes the fetish versus paraphilia (in this case lipophilia) dilemma. The truth to me is that both have equally bad connotations. Fetish for boinking your step-mother versus a paraphilia for kids (pedophilia)?? Yes that one may be an extreme example but it seems classifying fat admiration as a paraphilia is no better than as a fetish. So do we (FAs) all just put a gun to our heads and be done with it!? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
The fact is that for the vast majority of FAs, we can have a fatty we desire and live a reasonably full life. Will that said fatty be as big as we dream of ? - could be but then you must accept many more consequences such as the person (especially a woman) may not be able to have kids and take care of those little rascals when they get to running around. Shortened life spans for USSBBW (and men) is a given. But long life nowadays means 80+ years. Living to 60+ is not the end of the world. Quality of life is a whole other issue........

I still think, that if we had the wherewithal, we should push to making fat admiration an actual sexual orientation in its own right. In other words not a fetish or a paraphilia, but just a 'thing' that is there and such a POWERFUL effect and grip on so many people's psyches.

The polyamorous part makes me confused about where you are actually coming from. To me polyamory is not unconditional love, but rather conditional on people being willing to accept their lover also being intimate with others. I have been intrigued by the idea in the past, but right now I would say it is just an excuse for promiscuity (aka have your cake and eat it too). Or is this just a warmed over version of old school polygamy!? Sorry but that's just how I view it.
And monogamy is conditional on so many things too? That's silly.

"their partner": polyamory is not just about a primary dyad.

"promiscuity": There are asexual polyamorists. You have a fundamental misunderstanding about what polyamory is
 

balthyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
52
Location
UK
Thanks for a very nice reply! I had worried I was going to get totally roasted over that post. The current Dimensions crowd really is a decent lot! The 'thing for the step mother' may not be so much a fetish as a 'fantasy'. I don't know but I do know it is showing up a LOT in porn (including in the SSBBW category).

As for women choosing to have a child versus being fat, it does not compute for me. While some people actively seek to and in most cases succeed in becoming fat, the vast majority were fat, involuntarily, to begin with. Some of that group might choose to embrace it and intentionally get fatter. That is usually what we see in a place like Dimensions - fatties embracing it and getting fatter. BUT I do not agree you can equate that with the choice whether or not to have a child. Having a child is what most people are intrinsically programmed to do. It is what makes the human species continue, like any other. So it is important, and some people nowadays seem to be too cavalier about it; in my old school opinion. I will tell you one thing: I had one of those epic 'Wal-mart sitings' this past Saturday. There she was the approximately 25-30 year old SSBBW (probably about 400 lb) pushing the shopping cart with 2 small kids in the cart and a guy by her side. Well that just makes me smile inside to see fat people out there living a 'normal' life like the skinnies. Well, he was skinny.

I agree that polyamory seems like just new-speak for 'having someone on the side'. For those who want to do it - yeah have at it if all adults are consenting. BUT what if there are minor children involved??????
It's not about "having someone on the side". Not all polyamorous people are couples that open up.

And what if there are children? It takes a village...
 

balthyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
52
Location
UK
I've had similar thoughts. My ex-boyfriend thought my preferences were funny (like he laughed at me lol) and didn't really believe me until after a year of being together (he would barely let me touch him due to insecurities). I also struggle with finding people who are ok with their weight while not being deep into a gaining fetish (I am not into that at all). My friend is a muscular man and when we first met he was flirting with me. I remember thinking that it would be so easy to flirt with him. If I had complimented his muscles, I wouldn't have had a weird reaction. It's harder with bigger people (especially men) because you can't just say you like their ass or their belly lol. I've had men think I was catfishing them or making fun of them for flirting with them because they are bigger. Big men are so beautiful though, I truly don't hate having this preference, even though at times I have wished that it was easier to flirt. Enjoy the ride with this guy! Dating is exciting, it doesn't have to be forever. It could be that even if he does lose some weight, you will still be attracted to so many other aspects about him. My ex-boyfriend went through a period of weight loss and I still thought he was attracted (even though I missed his belly); his still smelled the same, had his beautiful eyes, and his wonderful personality (and other thing that starts with a p! sorry lol)
Thank you! That is what I need to remember. I am getting ahead of myself with what could be.
 

balthyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
52
Location
UK
Well as I already posted, I disagree with the premise of polyamory. On the other hand I have little first hand knowledge of this concept. If consenting adults want to do certain things, well that is up to them, BUT we all need to remember to never think for one second that our choices in life do not have consequences including and especially those we had not even considered going in. That does not mean sit on your thumbs for fear of making a mistake, just be thoughtful and responsible.....

Beautifully said Jack.




For clarification on the polyamory thing, it is when a person has multiple partners. Each partner and each relationship is as important and valid as the others. It's no more conditional than monogamous love, and it's nothing like having an open relationship or 'a bit on the side'.

Whether or not you understand the intricacies of polyamory, I would like to point out that we are a site that accepts people of different sexualities and don't accept discrimination towards people just for doing things a non-standard way. Just bare that in mind, guys.
Thank you for your support!

FYI, polyamory is not generally considered a sexuality. That can be quite contentious! Many will say it is a "relationship orientation" though (which for some is only a choice of relationship agreement, for others an intrinsic identity, for others a bit of both).
 

waldo

***
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
675
Location
Indiana
It's not about "having someone on the side". Not all polyamorous people are couples that open up.

And what if there are children? It takes a village...
IMHO, your responses to being challenged on the polyamory issue are all perfectly reasonable (and well measured). I would say that I don't want to (shouldn't) derail this thread further by continuing to beat that particular horse. But, since you are the original poster, and that is obviously an important part of your makeup, I guess it should be appropriate. My cynical side would figure that you have an advantage, since if one of your lovers changes in a way that makes you less attracted to him/her/them, at least you have the other(s). I know, that is a crude assessment but is the obvious one. As I said in my earlier post, I have been previously intrigued with the polyamory concept. My issue is that: human nature being what it is: I suspect it will not work for 95+ % of the people; at least in the way it is ideally intended. Jealousy, envy, possessiveness, pride, and a whole lot of other human reactions/emotions would seem to sink it for the majority of us. As far as kids: I guess things are developing in a way that society would be more accepting of little Johnny having one Dad and two Moms or some such. The reality is that polygamy (forerunner of polyamory) is an age old practice and can theoretically be done in a way that is beneficial to all those involved. The issues that can derail it are just too numerous for most of us to overcome. If you and your romantic partners are able to make it work; then my hat is off to you all. You are better people than me! Or something like that......

As for the original issue: I went back and saw that you mentioned the man in questiuon had previously lost a lot of weight some years ago. Then I also saw you posted that you are 40 years old, so I suspect he is about the same or older. As a 53 year old with a major middle-age spread, I would say he may very well find losing weight to be much harder this time than when he was younger. One piece of good advice that I was once given: wait it out - even if the person loses weight, chances are they rebound and gain it back anyways. Again, I realize this is crude, but the odds are in your favor...................
 
Last edited:

balthyes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2022
Messages
52
Location
UK
IMHO, your responses to being challenged on the polyamory issue are all perfectly reasonable (and well measured). I would say that I don't want to (shouldn't) derail this thread further by continuing to beat that particular horse. But, since you are the original poster, and that is obviously an important part of your makeup, I guess it should be appropriate. My cynical side would figure that you have an advantage, since if one of your lovers changes in a way that makes you less attracted to him/her/them, at least you have the other(s). I know, that is a crude assessment but is the obvious one. As I said in my earlier post, I have been previously intrigued with the polyamory concept. My issue is that: human nature being what it is: I suspect it will not work for 95+ % of the people; at least in the way it is ideally intended. Jealousy, envy, possessiveness, pride, and a whole lot of other human reactions/emotions would seem to sink it for the majority of us. As far as kids: I guess things are developing in a way that society would be more accepting of little Johnny having one Dad and two Moms or some such. The reality is that polygamy (forerunner of polyamory) is an age old practice and can theoretically be done in a way that is beneficial to all those involved. The issues that can derail it are just too numerous for most of us to overcome. If you and your romantic partners are able to make it work; then my hat is off to you all. You are better people than me! Or something like that......

As for the original issue: I went back and saw that you mentioned the man in questiuon had previously lost a lot of weight some years ago. Then I also saw you posted that you are 40 years old, so I suspect he is about the same or older. As a 53 year old with a major middle-age spread, I would say he may very well find losing weight to be much harder this time than when he was younger. One piece of good advice that I was once given: wait it out - even if the person loses weight, chances are they rebound and gain it back anyways. Again, I realize this is crude, but the odds are in your favor...................
"if one of your lovers changes in a way that makes you less attracted to him/her/them, at least you have the other(s). I know, that is a crude assessment but is the obvious one"

It's absolutely not an obvious assessment. I have genuine feelings and connections for individuals and our individual relationships. I posted elsewhere that losing a child isn't okay as long as you have other children. Only someone who needs to be a parent but has no feelings would say that. Losing a friend isn't okay if you have other friends. Only a person who needs people to do activities with but has no feelings would say that. I don't just need to be or have a partner, any old partner. I love each partner and relationship.

Edit: I realised you're talking about attraction and not actual loss of a relationship. I *suppose* I can compartmentalise sex and attraction in that way, but those are still part of each individual relationship.

Polyamory may "sink it for the majority of us". That's okay. I'm not someone who believes polyamory is inherently better, for individuals or society, than monogamy. Some things work for some people, other things work for other people.

Monogamous relationships "fail" all the time too. But it's important to consider what success or failure in relationships means. One metric people seem to like is longevity. I (personally) never had a monogamous relationship last more than 2.5 years. But since being poly, I have a relationship of 13 years and a relationship of 4.5 years. Another metric is happiness. We're all happy in our relationships. There's no abuse or toxicity or even any jealousy.

I can't comment on kids as none of us have them. But with intentional prioritisation of the kids' needs, multiple caring adults in their lives can be a good thing, not much different from them having grandparents and aunts and uncles and step-parents. Many poly parents are extremely cautious of bringing new partners into their children's lives, just as many single parents are.

"wait it out - even if the person loses weight, chances are they rebound and gain it back anyways. Again, I realize this is crude, but the odds are in your favor....."

This does show that I'm catastrophising about something that hasn't even happened yet, so thanks. It is horribly crude, though, like you say, so I would still like to work through this and figure out how I can stop fixating on one aspect of what is an incredible person and relationship.
 
Last edited:

Anomaly

***
Joined
Oct 11, 2021
Messages
46
Location
Earth
Asexual = no sexual attraction to other people. Grey asexual = limited sexual attraction to other people.

I've never seen it be used to mean anything other than that. Bear in mind that you can't tell how other people feel and what they are or aren't attracted to.

It sounds like you are describing what we would call an aromantic asexual person, as in, a person that isn't romantically or sexually attracted to anyone. You also get hetero/homo/bi/pan/etc romantic asexual people, who are romantically attracted to other people but not sexually. I'm a panromantic asexual; I'd be willing to date people of any gender and be in relationships with them, but I'm not interested in sleeping with anyone. For a lot of people romantic and sexual attraction are all rolled up into one thing, but for asexual people they are often different.

Anyway, I will stop derailing the thread here; if anyone has any questions about what being asexual means, you are welcome to PM me. Thank you for being respectful, everyone. Back on topic now though please! =)
I think this is still part of the topic as the OP was about fetishes, and this comes back to sexuality and fetishes generally.

I'm going to try to explain why the terminology confuses me. This is because I'm an old fart, and should not in any way be seen as a judgement on how you or anyone else should describe yourself if you feel comfortable that way. :)

What actually is sex and sexual attraction and sleeping with? How can it be defined? Because when I try to understand it, it gets bogged down on this one point. People I know who are into BDSM do things with their partners that some people would probably not call sex, but the people themselves would not agree with that. In parts of history, men were persecuted for having anal sex with other men, while lesbians were often somewhat ignored because of the wrong belief that anything they do together can't count as sex.

For me, sexuality is intrinsically tied up with fat. My ideal relationship is with someone who is fat and enjoys having his fat played with. I just can't get enough of how it feels and looks. If he wants to do things in addition to that, it would be for us to talk through and agree on, but for me that would be secondary. My sexuality is not compatible with someone who hates being fat or merely tolerates it.

As for the definition of fetish as being attracted to an object or any body part other than the sexual organs, vanilla people are attracted to sexual organs?! Really? I mean, it's just a willy! I don't care if it's really small or even if he doesn't have one.

If I look at someone, and feel physically attracted to that person in any way, for me that is sexual attraction. How two people decide to consensually explore that attraction is personal to them. :) I think it would be hugely beneficial to everyone if the stereotypes surrounding sex went away. Like it's generally accepted that people don't enter into a heterosexual relationship expecting to be able to do pegging, but they also shouldn't go into it expecting to have vaginal sex just because that's considered 'normal'. It's between you and your partner to decide.

'Romantic' is potentially confusing as well. I assume it means spending time enjoying your partner's company, which again is going to be something unique to every relationship. But it could easily be misunderstood as the cultural stereotype of Valentines day and liking flowers etc., which was what people used to mean when they said 'I'm not romantic'. :)

I

I came to polyamory without any partners at all. It's not about diminishing sexual attraction/activities or people "on the side".
Would people in the situation I described still use that descriptor today? It was meant to be an example of a situation an older person might relate to rather than a blanket statement. :) The first I heard the term was when I told someone I wanted a paramour and was told that's what I was! Now I'm even more confused lol.
 

loopytheone

Staff member
Administrator
Global Moderator
***
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
5,321
Location
England
What actually is sex and sexual attraction and sleeping with? How can it be defined? Because when I try to understand it, it gets bogged down on this one point. People I know who are into BDSM do things with their partners that some people would probably not call sex, but the people themselves would not agree with that. In parts of history, men were persecuted for having anal sex with other men, while lesbians were often somewhat ignored because of the wrong belief that anything they do together can't count as sex.

Trust me, asexual people have spent a lot of time puzzling over lots of the things you ask about, hah. Typically, sex is defined as two or more people interacting with each others genitals. Sexual attraction is a desire to interact with another person's genitals, or to have them interact with yours.

As for the definition of fetish as being attracted to an object or any body part other than the sexual organs, vanilla people are attracted to sexual organs?! Really? I mean, it's just a willy! I don't care if it's really small or even if he doesn't have one.

That is definitely unusual. Yes, most non-asexual people are attracted to other people's genitals. They find them hot, want to touch them, or want the other person to touch theirs as being the 'main' part of sex.

'Romantic' is potentially confusing as well. I assume it means spending time enjoying your partner's company, which again is going to be something unique to every relationship. But it could easily be misunderstood as the cultural stereotype of Valentines day and liking flowers etc., which was what people used to mean when they said 'I'm not romantic'. :)

Romantic is probably best described as a type of love, rather than anything else. The way you feel about a partner that makes you want to say "I love you" and have a long term relationship with them and hold them etc etc. It's definitely a vague term, but it mostly means "want to have a typical relationship with, minus the sex part".



Honestly, if people want to have a real discussion like this about what various LGBT terms and such mean nowdays, I'm soooo happy to oblige, it's my community as much as Dims is my community. That said, OP, if you feel we are derailing and you want me to start a new thread about it, then I absolutely will.
 

Anomaly

***
Joined
Oct 11, 2021
Messages
46
Location
Earth
Trust me, asexual people have spent a lot of time puzzling over lots of the things you ask about, hah. Typically, sex is defined as two or more people interacting with each others genitals. Sexual attraction is a desire to interact with another person's genitals, or to have them interact with yours.



That is definitely unusual. Yes, most non-asexual people are attracted to other people's genitals. They find them hot, want to touch them, or want the other person to touch theirs as being the 'main' part of sex.



Romantic is probably best described as a type of love, rather than anything else. The way you feel about a partner that makes you want to say "I love you" and have a long term relationship with them and hold them etc etc. It's definitely a vague term, but it mostly means "want to have a typical relationship with, minus the sex part".



Honestly, if people want to have a real discussion like this about what various LGBT terms and such mean nowdays, I'm soooo happy to oblige, it's my community as much as Dims is my community. That said, OP, if you feel we are derailing and you want me to start a new thread about it, then I absolutely will.
It's quite interesting how things change in this respect. Seventeen odd years ago, I was looking at asexual fora online because I knew a couple of people who were asexual (or probably aromantic to use the modern term) and just wanted to understand more about their experiences and viewpoints. One of them unfortunately from my perspective was a fat man who I thought was absolutely gorgeous. One of the things that was commonly discussed was whether object fetishists should be considered asexual, as they weren't attracted to people, and at the time there was a lot of disagreement among asexual people as to whether they were or not. :)

Back to fetishes, probably the stereotype of a fetishist is a male who masturbates over something like a shoe. But I think even object fetishists are quite variable in how they express themselves. The fetish is a physical attraction and may not involve masturbation, but does always involve touching and physically experiencing the object. Being in love with a person is neurologically indistinguishable to addiction, so I'd guess object fetishists are addicted to their objects. Some people I guess in modern parlance would be called romantic object fetishists -- they are physically attracted to an object, but want the emotional connection to a partner, and so you get people who want a partner who is willing to wear something like rubber or leather during an activity the partner gets to choose, so both of them are satisfied.

I see a fat fetish and other body fetishes as a double bind. You can't experience it solo unless you yourself are fat, and you can't expect a partner to accommodate it as the object fetishists do as something your partner can don and doff. :-( Finding a partner who is fat and comfortable with it and their partner liking it can prove to be extremely difficult and prospects don't improve with age, and it creates further problems if your partner loses weight leaving you still loving his personality but no longer physically attracted or able to express yourself sexually any more.

I'm still not really convinced most people are attracted to genitalia, and that if they are, it makes them any better than fetishists lol! People's bits are just part and parcel of the person whose body and personality are attractive, and you touch them because your partner wants you to and the idea of giving someone you feel about in that way an orgasm (and watching them have it) is exciting lol. Unless people are very fastidious they tend to smell there. There's also a sort of assumed wisdom that for heterosexual people, vaginal sex, or for gay men, anal sex, are fantastic and the ultimate way of expressing yourself sexually with your partner, and a lot of young people were really quite anxious to experience it for that reason rather than an innate urge to do that particular activity. When it didn't meet expectations, people often continued doing it and pretended to enjoy it for fear of upsetting their partners, or if you were very open with your partner and mature you might have talked about it and decided to try other things. :)
 

Latest posts

Top