If your purse is stolen, that is aggravating and scarey–to you. But not to the thief. Who is “right”? Both are.
Feeding someone to the point that they are helpless is not sane or normal behavior between partners. While I would hope that people are NOT perceived as horrifying just for doing abnomal things or making choices that are insane–the things and the choices can be horrifying to others.
How is this not clear? It’s not the people, it’s the practice.
I disagree. I find the people and the practice bizarre, dysfunctional, and unhealthy.
“It’s not the people, it’s the practice.”
How is that different from what so many people say about homosexuality? “Hate the sin. Love the sinner.”?
If a behavior is wrong, then the desire to engage in that behavior is also wrong. At best, you can hold that a person is good except for their sick desire which they must never act on.
You make a good point. But IMHO, the point where your argument falls down is the harm that’s involved when a person is in a feeder/feedee relationship. Homosexuality is no more ‘dangerous’ than heterosexuality when both partners practise safe sex. Even BDSM, properly done, involves a lot of safe words and various gestures/cues to alert when someone’s in trouble. And then the scene stops. Hence the credo of ‘safe, sane and consensual’. But when you are feeding someone to the point that they can no longer get out of bed, or indeed even sit up to perform basic hygeine actions, then there is (in my eyes) an unacceptible level of risk involved. You’re killing someone/allowing someone to kill you for the sake of a sexual fetish. I try not to pass judgement on those who have different sexual ideals to myself, but feederism is one of the few things that does set off my ‘wrong-o-metre’ for that very reason.
I was wondering if I needed to clarify that. Some people look at homosexuality and say "Hate the sin. Love the sinner.“I look at homosexuality and say"What sin?”. For further details, do a search of GD threads on the subject.
I was just using that phrase to point out what I see as a flaw in ElanorRigby’s view of feeders.
I agree that the people are sick and in need of help–if such help is to be found and if it is effective–I don’t know how how inherent such fetishes are.
A fetish does not equate to homosexuality in any way. One is a sexual orientation, the other a sexual habit/proclivity. Just for the record, I think that “love the sinner, hate the sin” is complete bollocks when it comes to homosexuality.
What I said, and it was said quite clearly, was that the I do not consider the people engaged in such behavior as horrifiying–I find their behavior to be horrifying. There is a difference between behavior and self–perhaps some of these folks are acting out old traumas or attempting to self-medicate a psychological pain of some sort. Who can say?
Sierra -thank you for your lucid post. I (to reiterate) also think that safe, sane and consensual is the healthiest way to go.
I’ve never seen any evidence you can ever get rid of them.
Equating feeders to homosexuals was not the point I was trying to make. However, a true fetish is not just a kink. It is the only way a person can become aroused and achieve orgasm. Many people like leather. Somebody with a leather fetish cannot become aroused without it. They have no interest in sex with a partner who is completely naked. Their partner must wear leather at all times.
Is there? It seems that the only feeders not currently engaged in feeding are the ones looking for a feedee. This is what they want to do. This is either the highest form of sexual pleasure for them, or the only way they can achieve sexual pleasure. They will always want a feedee. They will always dream of finding a woman and gorging her until that glorious day she can no longer walk. They will masturbate to images of morbidly obese women. Every act of the feeder fetish that you find horrifying will arouse them and bring them to orgasm. How are they not horrifying men?
Is a paranoid schizophrenic a horrifying person or a person suffering from a disease of the brain/psyche? I am not appalled at the fact of a person who is paranoid schizophrenic; I would be appalled at what that person does. I would hope that person got help to lessen the impact of poor choices made due to their schizophrenia.
I have a hard time wrapping my head around fetishes(probably because I am not the most strongly sex-driven person anyway, so having a fetish is quite alien to me), but your statement begs the question: what if the feeder cannot find a partner? In these days of internet, it is somewhat simple to find a “buddy”, but what of the years and years prior to this? Did they languish, celibate and lonely until death removed them from their misery? :dubious:
What of the feedee? Did she just overeat and sublimate her sexual desire into an oral fixation?
Seriously, what does a sadist do, if s/he can’t find anyone to hurt? Do the sexual urges just go away? Find other outlets? Does (in the case of SMBD) self injury then play a role?
IMO, this behavior seems to require reinforcement–what happens when that nurturing of a specific expression of desire does not occur?
Unmedicated paranoid schizophrenics tend to wear tinfoil helmets and preach on street corners. The overwhelming majority are not a threat to themselves or others.
Either that, or having found a partner who would not indulge their fetish, they spent their lives having unfulfilling sex and being unhappy.
Feedees would have had to restrain their apetites and either found chubby chasers, or men who were willing to look past what they saw as excessive weight.
Fantasize. Write stories. Draw pictures. Beat up mannequins.
Got any evidence that fetishes don’t require reinforcement? Please share. I don’t quite understand the lack of understanding here–what point are you trying to prove, DocCathode?
That seems…pretty insulting to me. Biting her fat? Calling her a fat blob? Okay, maybe someone can get off to that, but I find it pretty disturbing. To each his own, you know, but this seems like one person is severly being taken advantage of just so someone else can get their rocks off.
It’s not the people, it’s the practice.