Tube Feeding, Any Suggestions?

Dimensions Magazine

Help Support Dimensions Magazine:

drizzt

New Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
2
Location
,
this is very simple and safe to do. there are a few methods that work. two that have personally worked

1. what you will need for the first method.

A...about 3, 4 feet of small diameter tubbing available at most hardware stores. the smaller the better as it helps to regulate the flow of what your going to be using as a liquid.

B... a water bottle 16 oz size is fine.

c... some tape

how to make this work..

take the cap off the water bottle and make a hole in the top of the cap alittle smaller then the size of your tubing. using a drill bit works very good.
pass the tubing thru the cap, only alittle bit about 1/2 inch at most.tape the tube and the cap on the outside alittle bit just to hold it in place. screw the cap back on the bottle. now you have a tube sticking out of the bottle thru the cap. now you have a real tubing device that you can fill up with any type of liquid. you can have your feedee/partner/ or whoever your trying to fill up take the tube into there mouth and you have yourself a real tubing device. i suggest your partner be half sitting up to make it easier to swallow. a few things you have to figure out is, are you going to hold the bottle for them to drink. or you can figure out an easy way to hold the bottle to a shelf so it stays above them and you can do all sorts of things to your partner while they are tubing. adding alittle more risk and fun you can get a baby pacifier and drill out the sucky thing and put the tube thru that, and tape that together and then rubber band that around your partners head so that cant spit out the tubbing. thats a real feeling of helplessness, but dont worry they wont chock as your using small enough tubing they can block the opening with thier tounge.

another way that is alittle simpler

get yourself a small cooler with the drainage spout on the bottom of it. simply find the right size tubing and put it on that and fill er up. works great.

i suggest doing your partner a favor, get a good hose clamp and let the liquid get near to the end of the tube. if you dont they will get a mouth full of air before the liquid gets to them. not a good thing. i have done it both ways and they both work great, it can make for a fun time if your both into exploring that fantasy.
 

Jes

is oddly aroused
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
12,517
Location
,
Side note: No one actually asked me how I came to write that story (Thin Discrimination), but I'll pretend they did.

The whole force feeding thing never really appealed to me and I couldn't figure out how to write a story about it.

Then I read about the geese they fatten in France to make pate de fois gras. They need really fat geese to make this stuff, and they force-feed the geese with a funnel to make them fat. Horrible, right?

But here's the kicker: The geese LOVE it! When it's feeding time, they honk excitedly and try to push each other aside to get to the funnel! I wondered if that would happen if you did it with people and came up with that story.

Morally it would be awful to do it to women; but I have to admit, I do find the idea kind of erotic...am I sick?

Dr. Feeder
AFLAC!


hahahaha. Oh, I do amuse myself.

But really, kudos to you for coming up with a way to make your fantasy work in a way you can justify. I'm always trying to do that with things that really, really are...inapporpriate, immoral and even illegal. I know what it's like to want to get into something totally, vs. with reservations.

didn't read your story. and, i know it's a duck, not a goose. let me have this!
 

Waxwing

Reckless Hero
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,177
Location
,
Um, the geese love it? No. I am all for humans engaging in mutually consented tube feeding, but the operative word there is consent. Don't confuse a human sexual practice with animal torture, please.

In modern foie gras factory farms, geese and ducks are confined, usually in either small pens or in tiny cages that virtually lock the birds in place. Thus restrained, the birds cannot escape the "feeder" and the mechanized feeding machine. One by one, the feeder grabs each bird and plunges the metal pipe of the feeding machine down their throats. The machine pumps a huge amount of a corn-and-oil mixture directly into their gullets in just a few seconds, equivalent to one-third to one-fourth of the birds' own body weight each day.

This brutal treatment is devastating to the health of the birds. In a matter of weeks, their livers have swollen up to ten times their normal size. Breathing and walking become difficult as the liver pushes against other organs, causing respiratory stress due to decreased air sac space in their lungs, and forcing the legs to move outward at an unnatural angle. Ducks at foie gras farms have been observed panting and struggling to stand, using their wings to push themselves forward when their crippled legs can no longer support them. Struggling to move causes infection-prone open pressure sores to develop and fester on their hocks (legs) and keels (chest area).

In this compromised state, depressed birds can no longer engage in normal preening behaviors, and this is compounded by the fact that they are denied access to water sufficient for them to engage in normal, instinctual behaviors. Their plumage becomes encrusted with filth, and most of them develop what foie gras farmers call "wet neck"-when their unpreened feathers curl up and become coated with dirt and oil.

They also suffer, as do all factory-farmed ducks, from debilling, which is performed ostensibly to prevent them from pecking each other when they are so severely confined. Shortly after birth, a hot knife sears off the tips of their sensitive upper bills, slicing through tissue rich in nerve endings. Debilled poultry suffer from chronic pain for the rest of their lives, often having trouble eating and preening.
Sounds great, doesn't it!?

I'm not trying to rain on everyone's tube parade, but there are people reading who may not know of the horrors of foie gras production, and I couldn't just let this one go.
 

LoveBHMS

default title
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
4,086
Location
,
To even joke or make light of something such as foie gras production is just awful. A kink practiced by adult humans has nothing to do with one of the most vile forms of animal abuse in existence.
 

Waxwing

Reckless Hero
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,177
Location
,
To even joke or make light of something such as foie gras production is just awful. A kink practiced by adult humans has nothing to do with one of the most vile forms of animal abuse in existence.
Thank you. Not only that but comparing a fun sex practice to animal abuse is a great way to make non-feeders think you're completely sick. The two have no correlation at all.
 

love dubh

douchebag reform school
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
1,728
Location
,
Um, the geese love it? No. I am all for humans engaging in mutually consented tube feeding, but the operative word there is consent. Don't confuse a human sexual practice with animal torture, please.



Sounds great, doesn't it!?

I'm not trying to rain on everyone's tube parade, but there are people reading who may not know of the horrors of foie gras production, and I couldn't just let this one go.
Beat me to it, girl. Immediately, I thought "WTF? No. Foie gras production tortures the geese." You, FTW.

And I threw up in my mouth a bit. Seriously. :[

ETA: I can rep neither LovesBHMs nor Waxy. My world is sad and bleak. :(
 

Waxwing

Reckless Hero
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
3,177
Location
,
Beat me to it, girl. Immediately, I thought "WTF? No. Foie gras production tortures the geese." You, FTW.

And I threw up in my mouth a bit. Seriously. :[

ETA: I can rep neither LovesBHMs nor Waxy. My world is sad and bleak. :(
No, your world is filled with love! And not tortured geese.

My reaction was the same; I haven't had that visceral an "oh hell no" in a long while.
 

Jes

is oddly aroused
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
12,517
Location
,
i didn't get it. i missed the boat. i don't know what i was thinking.
 

Jack Skellington

Grim Grinning Ghosts
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
3,605
Location
,
Um, the geese love it? No. I am all for humans engaging in mutually consented tube feeding, but the operative word there is consent. Don't confuse a human sexual practice with animal torture, please.
Guess who just earned some Rep.
 

Axof

Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2007
Messages
17
Location
,
Without going into the futile debate if it is right or not I am going to post some personal tips and tricks for people who are seriously interested.

I had been introduced to tube feeding by my ex girlfriend who was (as I thought at that time) into some weird kinky stuff. I later somehow lerned to like some of her extravagant plays (like the tube), but we ultimately broke out because things were getting out of hand and I felt my health or sanity would be in jeopardy.
Anyway, the best and easiest way is to go to a department store or cyclo store where they sell the hydratation backpacks. They also sell the replacement inserts - it is a plastic bag with attached tube and valve. Funny many of these bags have also a handle or hole so they can be actually easily hung! A good one is about 70 Oz (or 2 liters)
With the valve you can set the flow to the required setting and put the bag higher than the head.
Now the true trick for the tube feeding is to put the tube in the mouth further so it goes at least beyond the middle of the tongue. (like the trick to beer bong) This way you can't stop the flow by the tip of the tongue and all what you can do is to swallow. If you put the flow reasonably slow, you can easily breathe between swallows.

This has actually another effect as I soon learned on myself. Putting the tube further into the mouth you are bypassing the taste buds on the tongue and mouth and so you are able to gulp down faster, more volume and far more fattening liquids that you could normally. For example I couldn't drink half and half normal way without feeling sick just after few gulps, but with this method, my gf could pour the whole carton into my belly. You could immagine the results on my midsection after few of such feedings.

So be warned, you can actually seriously accelerate the weight gain of your loved ones in a record time with such tube feedeng. If you don't really want to endanger the health of your partner, do such things only as a special occassion. Also never attempt to pressure your partner into too much volume. I'd say one liter of fattening stuff is actually enough for many, many of first experiments and you can try later 1.5 liters or maybe even to 2 liters max if your partner develops really expanding stomach. (Which he/she will with tube feeding, I know)
Never ever experiment with any of the NG tube feeding that goes into the stomach. In best case it will end up in violent vomitting. That is the kinky stuff that has to be avoided at all cost.

A very fattening liquid is half and half, condensed milk (plain, NOT the sweet one!), condensed milk with melted ice cream, with melted butter etc.. These are unhealthy and sometimes very unhealthy. If your partner is lactose intollerant (as I found out I am) there are actually good alternatives that are at least as fattening if not even more and they can actually benefit your health which is quite a paradox. If you are interested, let me know, I'd explain some of them.
 

SensualDistender

Active Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2007
Messages
34
Location
,
There's always been an unwritten understanding on Dimensions that since fat is seen as so negative in the world outside Dimensions, any sort of negativity towards anything else goes against the message of the site.

The idea that if we can accept fat here, there's not much else we shouldn't be able to accept and/or be open to. Some people are just more militant about that than others.

The thought put simply is: This is an acceptance site, ergo, accept all things, or keep your mouth shut about your feelings against something.
There are quite a few regulars here who will tear you to pieces if you say something they don't agree with. Just read back through the forums and you will see who they are.
 

mandylover

Active Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
44
Location
,
I've been using the hydration pak approach since last year on myself. It's really quite efficient. If you leave the mouthpiece on it works pretty well. Bite, and the liquid flow, stop, and it stops. Very good for gaging your fullness. Safety first. That couple with working from home for the last 10 months has really done a complete job on my belly.
 

newlylarge

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
90
Location
,
Sorry if this posting is a bit long and may seem "preachy," but I really feel that this topic involves issue of SAFETY that needs to be addressed at some length. Sorry also if I am repeating some of what has already been said here.

Although I respect the desires of those who wish to engage in consented to "forced" or "tube" feeding, I cannot help but think it may be a bit too dangerous. Not only the actual feeding process, but also perhaps that the "efficiency" of such measures may result in weight-gain at an unhealthy rate. After all, your basic "overeating" is certainly capable of packing on the pounds at a very rapid rate. Is "tube" feeding really necessary?

But if one's interest is in engaging in "tube" feeding is more for the "fun" of the process itself than actual rapid weight-gain, then I might suggest a less "extreme" and safer alternative which my girlfriend and I engaged in that is still rather "fun" (or "exciting") for both "feeder" and "feedee." It is not actual "forced" feeding in the sense that it does not bypass the "feedee" actually swallowing at his or her own pace, but it preserves the element of "feeding" by "non-conventional" means.

The idea is to create the "feeling" or "illusion" that the "feedee" is being "force fed" or "overstuffed" when, in fact, that is not the case. "Stuffing" someone by use of a "tube" may be a fantasy for many people, but some fantasies are too dangerous to become reality. I would recommend merely, in a sense, "pretending" to play-out such a fantasy.

Once my girlfriend and I agreed upon the goal of my being "fattened-up" with her "assistance," our approach mostly took the form of her cooking for me and my eating what she cooked. This accounted for well over 90% of what I ate, but she sometimes literally "fed" me more as a form of "play" than anything else. We certainly did not regard it as "forced" feeding. At first, she would sometimes "hand-feed" me things like pastries or ice-cream. Eventually, as a result of her baking and icing cakes, my girlfriend hit upon the idea of "feeding" me with a pastry-bag. This is, of course, a bag normally filled with icing for the purpose of decorating cakes or filling pastries.

Some have already mentioned this method in the context of using actual icing or even cookie dough (which would seem to be a bit too thick), but my girlfriend filled the pastry bag with chocolate mousse which was not too thick and not so overwhelmingly sweet as actual icing would have been.

As I said, we did not use it as a means of "forced" feeding, but it does share elements with the use of a "tube" and in a totally SAFE and controlled manner. She would simply have me lay back on her couch or even in her bed with me "propped up" at about a 45 degree angle on some pillows. She would then place the tip of the pastry-bag in my mouth and squeeze in the mousse at a rate that allowed me to swallow it at my own pace. Totally safe.

As I said, we really did this as a form of "play" (generally in conjunction with moments of "intimacy") and not really as a means of "stuffing" me. But for those who also have the goal trying to "feed" someone more "efficiently," I will say that, when she "fed" me this way, I did find that I ate MUCH more than on most occasions when I merely "ate" what she had cooked for me. Very often, after a large meal, I would feel as if I was too full to eat any more. But on such occasions when she would "feed me" with a pastry-bag filled with mousse (after a couple of hours to "digest" part of my meal), I did often surprise myself (and probably my girlfriend) with how much more I was able to eat.

Many nights, I felt as if I was completely full after eating a meal that she had prepared for me. But then, I found that I was not so full as I thought when I was being "fed" with a pastry-bag and I was able to eat an entire bag of mousse with no problem or ill-effects. At worst, after being "filled like a pastry" (as my girlfriend liked to call it), I might merely feel "like a beach whale" as I lay on her bed. I would feel as if I "could not move," but of course this was not really the case.

Even so, my "feeling" and "looking" as if I was "stuffed" to the point of "immobility" added to the sense of "fun" and "play" which "excited" both my girlfriend and I during our moments of "intimacy" to follow. The point here is that I was not REALLY overstuffed to the point of not being able to move, but I sort of "felt" and even "looked" that way due to my rather swollen, full belly. But this was merely a "feeling" or "appearance" of such a state. It was not REAL, but was "illusion" which added to the "play" or "pretend" element. The key here is, don't REALLY do such a thing. Simply "pretend" that you have. It is safe and still accomplishes the "fantasy" element. :)

If one's interest in "tube" feeding is to completely "stuff" their partner, then my girlfriend's use of a pastry-bag created the "illusion" of my becoming "overstuffed" even when, in fact, I had only eaten to the point of feeling too full to eat any more. Once again, completely safe while creating the "illusion" of it having been something more.

Once again, I stress the issue of safety. If one, literally, sticks a tube down their partner's throat, it seems quite dangerous. In such a case, the "feeder" rather than the "feedee" would seem to be the one "regulating" the amount and rate at which the "feedee's" stomach is being filled. Moreover, such "tube feeding" may fill the "feedee's" stomach so rapidly that even he or she might not realize when it is too much. It seems rather risky.

As I said, with the approach my girlfriend and I took, the "illusion" was created that she was "stuffing" me, but in reality, she was merely squeezing chocolate mousse into my mouth (and not "far back" in my mouth) and I was still "swallowing" by normal means, there was no danger of my being "overstuffed" with too much food.

So, I would recommend extreme caution in the use of "tube" feeding and encourage the use of something like a pastry-bag to merely create the "illusion" of "forced" feeding without the potential dangers.
 

newlylarge

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
90
Location
,
If it was not obvious, my last posting was in response to the notion of "tube feeding" in the sense of literally placing a tube far back in a "feedee's" mouth or even, to any degree, down his or her throat. Naturally, if one is talking about merely having a "feedee" hold a tube or funnel in his or her mouth "by their own power" (not "fastened" in place in any way), then I suppose there is no danger and it is not fundamentally different than the use of a pastry-bag as I described. The key is that the "feedee" is in complete and IMMEDIATE control to stop eating at any instant.

Even so, if the goal is to engage in a form of "intimate play," then I might suggest that the approach of using a pastry-bag as my girlfriend and I did is quite a bit more "intimate" and therefore much more "fun" or "exciting." :)

I assume that even a safe form of "tube feeding," in which the "feedee" is swallowing at his or her own pace and able to stop at any time, somehow involves the "feedee" being seated as the "feeder" presumably stands and "feeds" a liquid or such thing into the "tube" or "funnel." Not very "intimate," but hey, whatever "floats your boat." ;)

For my part, the approach that my girlfriend took seemed more suited to "play" in connection with "intimacy." I am not sure what role such feeding plays in other people's "relationships," but as I said, for my girlfriend and I it was an occasional form of "play" undertaken as a segue into our moments of intimacy. As such, it was usually undertaken with me lying on her bed and with both of us "appropriately" dressed so that we could seamlessly transition from her "feeding" me to "other fun activities." But that is probably more than anyone here wanted to know. ;)

But if that is your purpose for such "feeding," than I might suggest that being side by side in bed, in our case with me "laying back" a bit as my girlfiend squeezed mousse into my mouth, creates a much more intimate situation than having the "feedee" seated in a chair as the "feeder" stands over him or her pouring liquid into a tube or funnel. With the "pastry-bag approach," both parties are very close together (virtually face-to-face) and the whole thing is rather conducive to a moment of "intimacy" to follow.

Again, it was not my intention to get too "personal" here, but I thought it made sense to point-out how my suggested approach is not only SAFE, but may even be preferable if the goal is to be a form of rather "intimate play." :)
 

fatboy1004

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
65
Location
,
If it was not obvious, my last posting was in response to the notion of "tube feeding" in the sense of literally placing a tube far back in a "feedee's" mouth or even, to any degree, down his or her throat. Naturally, if one is talking about merely having a "feedee" hold a tube or funnel in his or her mouth "by their own power" (not "fastened" in place in any way), then I suppose there is no danger and it is not fundamentally different than the use of a pastry-bag as I described. The key is that the "feedee" is in complete and IMMEDIATE control to stop eating at any instant.

Even so, if the goal is to engage in a form of "intimate play," then I might suggest that the approach of using a pastry-bag as my girlfriend and I did is quite a bit more "intimate" and therefore much more "fun" or "exciting." :)

I assume that even a safe form of "tube feeding," in which the "feedee" is swallowing at his or her own pace and able to stop at any time, somehow involves the "feedee" being seated as the "feeder" presumably stands and "feeds" a liquid or such thing into the "tube" or "funnel." Not very "intimate," but hey, whatever "floats your boat." ;)

For my part, the approach that my girlfriend took seemed more suited to "play" in connection with "intimacy." I am not sure what role such feeding plays in other people's "relationships," but as I said, for my girlfriend and I it was an occasional form of "play" undertaken as a segue into our moments of intimacy. As such, it was usually undertaken with me lying on her bed and with both of us "appropriately" dressed so that we could seamlessly transition from her "feeding" me to "other fun activities." But that is probably more than anyone here wanted to know. ;)

But if that is your purpose for such "feeding," than I might suggest that being side by side in bed, in our case with me "laying back" a bit as my girlfiend squeezed mousse into my mouth, creates a much more intimate situation than having the "feedee" seated in a chair as the "feeder" stands over him or her pouring liquid into a tube or funnel. With the "pastry-bag approach," both parties are very close together (virtually face-to-face) and the whole thing is rather conducive to a moment of "intimacy" to follow.

Again, it was not my intention to get too "personal" here, but I thought it made sense to point-out how my suggested approach is not only SAFE, but may even be preferable if the goal is to be a form of rather "intimate play." :)
Dude:

Interesting "posts" and I'm totally in "favor" of your "ideas" on "feeding" and "gaining" and "so on", but for the "love" of "all that is holy" will you "please" get a "screwdriver" and "pry" the "quotation mark" key off of your "keyboard?" And then perhaps "you" could "beat" the "fucking thing" to "smithereens" with a "hammer."

Please?
 
2

Latest posts

Top