The attraction to disability is weird. Period.

[Ambivalid]

I just had a conversation with a devotee online. This person was complimenting me on my body. Not my upper body, mind you, but my lower body. I have extreme atrophy of my legs, butt, etc. I told her I thought that was very weird and kind of creepy.

Her response was, “why? People are attracted to blondes, brunettes, noses, feet, all sorts of things.” I told her the difference between all those attractions and an attraction to disability is that the attraction is to a lack of something, or the result of what lacking that something has on the appearance of a person. She is attracted to my lack of ability to move my legs. I think there has to be some sort of mental illness associated with such people.

There are all sorts of devotees who are attracted to people who have had their legs amputated. This is fucking creepy too. So if “I” had legs, you wouldn’t be attracted to me? (general I) It’s NOT an attraction to a person despite their disability, it’s an attraction because of that disability. And that is offensive to me. Compliment me and be attracted to me because of how well I’ve kept myself healthy and in shape despite the challenges of paraplegia. That is all well and good. But being attracted to what I’ve lost due to my injury seems to boil down to just being attracted to the wheelchair, not the person in it.

I don’t know, I’m pretty fuzzy headed today due to no sleep. I know this subject is an interesting one with good discussions possible. So I recognize I may not have said what I was meaning to say, exactly, which could allow misinterpretation.

[Marlonius]

I just contemplated and understood your user name.

How well do you know this woman and does she seem otherwise well adjusted? It seems to be more of a fetish than what I’d consider as a normal attraction. I guess it takes all kinds, but I’ve never heard of that one before.

[Broomstick]

Well, yeah, I get your distinction between in spite of and because of.

It’s creepy… but so are a number of fetishes. I’d be more leery of someone exclusively attracted to disability as opposed to someone having a non-mandatory preference. Basically, the difference between someone MUST have a disability to be attractive vs. the disability is, to them, a nice add-on but not required for desirability.

[Ambivalid]

@Broomstick

Well, yeah, I get your distinction between in spite of and because of.

It’s creepy… but so are a number of fetishes. I’d be more leery of someone exclusively attracted to disability as opposed to someone having a non-mandatory preference. Basically, the difference between someone MUST have a disability to be attractive vs. the disability is, to them, a nice add-on but not required for desirability.

Yes, I fully agree.

[Spice_Weasel]

It’s a tough one because, on the one hand, it would be hard not to feel completely dehumanized and/or objectified in your shoes. On the other hand, I don’t know to what extent we can control our sexual proclivities or at what point a weird fetish becomes a mental illness. I understand fetish, in general, to mean that you can’t get off without that specific circumstance or element, which sounds problematic in and of itself.

But as someone who is pretty into BDSM (though I wouldn’t call it a fetish by my own definition), I feel weird judging other people for their weird things. It seems almost arbitrary at a certain point.

[Ambivalid]

@Spice_Weasel

It’s a tough one because, on the one hand, it would be hard not to feel completely dehumanized and/or objectified in your shoes. On the other hand, I don’t know to what extent we can control our sexual proclivities or at what point a weird fetish becomes a mental illness. I understand fetish, in general, to mean that you can’t get off without that specific circumstance or element, which sounds problematic in and of itself.

But as someone who is pretty into BDSM (though I wouldn’t call it a fetish by my own definition), I feel weird judging other people for their weird things. It seems almost arbitrary at a certain point.

Well I think you may feel differently if you were the subject of such particular dehumanization. It’s incredibly offensive to me. I could understand if my disability (or my response to it) added to the initial attraction. But if it is required for attraction, I feel that delves into mental illness. (I enjoy BDSM myself and I feel absolutely no similarity).

[Ambivalid]

Let’s say a man had a fetish for women who have totally lost their hair due to chemotherapy. How would you, as a woman, feel about such a fetish. It’s an attraction to a manifestation of the darkest aspect of your life.

[Ambivalid]

@Marlonius

I just contemplated and understood your user name.

How well do you know this woman and does she seem otherwise well adjusted? It seems to be more of a fetish than what I’d consider as a normal attraction. I guess it takes all kinds, but I’ve never heard of that one before.

I don’t know her well. But it IS a fetish. She was utterly uninterested in my face or upperbody. She just wanted to see my legs.

[Ambivalid]

People who have attractions that include attraction to disability but are not limited to only that attraction are not devotees. Devotees are exclusively attracted to one element or another of a particular disability.

[Tranquilis]

Eh. It’s people. I forget who said it, but one of the big-brain psych types said something along the line of “the only truely perverse sexuality is a complete lack of sexuality” or something like that.

[Ambivalid]

@Tranquilis

Eh. It’s people. I forget who said it, but one of the big-brain psych types said something along the line of “the only truely perverse sexuality is a complete lack of sexuality” or something like that.

Ok. Duly noted.

[Spice_Weasel]

I mean, I’m a woman. I’m pretty used to feeling dehumanized sexually. Especially in porn. Some people get off on that aspect of it (I don’t), but it’s a moral gray area for me. I read/write erotica too, and I’ve read some really disturbing shit, the kind of shit that prompts me to wonder what kind of person would get off on something like that. Fantasies about degrading and humiliating women, physically hurting them (not for their own pleasure), but some women get off on that. But as a victim of sexual abuse, rape fantasies are absolutely a fetishization of a darker aspect of my life. And sometimes they turn me on and sometimes they disturb me to the point of ruining my day. And I couldn’t tell you what makes the difference, why one fantasy is okay and the other is not. It’s just a visceral response.

I find this an endlessly fascinating subject precisely because it’s so nebulous.

I’m not saying you should feel happy about it or anything. I’m not even saying it’s not mental illness. I’m just saying human sexuality is weird and complicated.

[Spice_Weasel]

Hmm, on second thought, maybe a better comparison would be if someone were only attracted to me because of my abuse history.

That would be creepy as fuck. I see your point.

[Tranquilis]

@Spice_Weasel

Hmm, on second thought, maybe a better comparison would be if someone were only attracted to me because of my abuse history.

That would be creepy as fuck. I see your point.

Rule 34 is valid for fetishes, too. :eek:

[Ambivalid]

@Spice_Weasel

I mean, I’m a woman. I’m pretty used to feeling dehumanized sexually. Especially in porn. Some people get off on that aspect of it (I don’t), but it’s a moral gray area for me. I read/write erotica too, and I’ve read some really disturbing shit, the kind of shit that prompts me to wonder what kind of person would get off on something like that. Fantasies about degrading and humiliating women, physically hurting them (not for their own pleasure), but some women get off on that. But as a victim of sexual abuse, rape fantasies are absolutely a fetishization of a darker aspect of my life. And sometimes they turn me on and sometimes they disturb me to the point of ruining my day. And I couldn’t tell you what makes the difference, why one fantasy is okay and the other is not. It’s just a visceral response.

I find this an endlessly fascinating subject precisely because it’s so nebulous.

I’m not saying you should feel happy about it or anything. I’m not even saying it’s not mental illness. I’m just saying human sexuality is weird and complicated.

Yes I agree. And I’m not saying there is nothing like devotee sexuality in the world. It’s just a particular form of dehumanization that I find particular revolting. Speaking generally, women are often objectified as sexual objects. That’s a bad thing, I agree. But what the dehumanization is based on is different in those instances. Most attractive women probably get objectified on a regular basis. I’m sure that can have negative effects on the women in some way. BUT, if you asked them if they would rather be unattractive, I’d guess about 0 would answer yes (if being truthful).

Attraction to disability is different in the fact that if you asked a group of disabled people if they would rather be able-bodied, I’d say close to 100% would say yes. It’s as if a woman was objectified as a sexual object only because of the goiter sticking out of her neck.

[monstro]

@Tranquilis

Eh. It’s people. I forget who said it, but one of the big-brain psych types said something along the line of “the only truely perverse sexuality is a complete lack of sexuality” or something like that.

I dunno. As someone who is pretty dang asexual, you can call me a lot of things (weird, strange, eccentric). But at least I don’t bother anyone, like people looking for sex often do.

I don’t think having a fetish makes a person creepy. But the woman described in the OP is. I think bad-behaving people need to be told to their face that their behavior isn’t appreciated. That’s the only way that some people will learn.

There are plenty of fetish websites to help people find each other. The woman needs to take her crazy self over to one of those spots and leave the mundanes alone.

[Ambivalid]

@Spice_Weasel

Hmm, on second thought, maybe a better comparison would be if someone were only attracted to me because of my abuse history.

That would be creepy as fuck. I see your point.

Yes!

[Tranquilis]

@monstro

I dunno. As someone who is pretty dang asexual, you can call me a lot of things (weird, strange, eccentric). But at least I don’t bother anyone, like people looking for sex often do.

Being perverse isn’t the same as being bad - it’s just perversion, as opposed to, say, a tendency to commit major crimes.

Yeah, I know - Society has linked perversion with capital ‘B’ - ‘Bad.’ People are people, and just because someone is far outside the norm doesn’t make them bad folks. Yeah, I know - not many people are able to separate connotation from denotation, either.

[Acsenray]

I totally get what you’re saying, Ambi. It’s a fascinating and sometimes troubling issue. And now that you have brought it up, I think I can identify with it a little bit.

I’m a fat guy. Very fat. A lot of people would call that a kind of disability. So let me think about some kinds of statements and how I would react:

— “Your being fat makes you unattractive to me.” — Okay, that’s certainly not an uncommon sentiment. It makes me feel shitty, but I can’t really argue with that.

— “I would be attractive to you if you were less fat.” — Hard to distinguish too much from the first statement, but it does offer the smallest bit of appreciation.

— “I am attracted to you despite your being fat.” — This is where it gets weird. Okay, I love that you’re attracted to me. But that “despite”? Eh, I don’t know. It is a little bit of a spoiler.

— “I am attracted to you as you are.” —This is, of course, the sweet spot. And there are probably slight variations one way or another. But really I want someone to be attracted to all of me, as I am, the parts of me that have to do with being fat, and the parts of me that don’t. — The weirdness can sneak in, though— “If you changed at all, I would no longer be attracted to you.” Hm. Okay.

— “I am attracted to you because you’re fat.” — We’re past the crown here. It might be weird or it might not be. In the best of circumstances, it can be almost equivalent to the previous statement. Buuuuut … getting weird.

— “I’m only attracted to fat people.” —Okay, we’re entering fetish territory.

— “I am attracted to your being fat and I want to make you even fatter so I can be even more attracted to you.” — Okay, here’s the limit. This is too weird.

[monstro]

@Tranquilis

Being perverse isn’t the same as being bad - it’s just perversion, as opposed to, say, a tendency to commit major crimes.

Yeah, I know - Society has linked perversion with capital ‘B’ - ‘Bad.’ People are people, and just because someone is far outside the norm doesn’t make them bad folks. Yeah, I know - not many people are able to separate connotation from denotation, either.

Most of the definitions of “perverse” actually have a negative connotation. So I’d tell that big-brain psych type of yours to come up with a word that isn’t so loaded, if he/she doesn’t want to offend.

And I’m having a hard time imagine how not having a sexuality is more perverse–in the sense that you’re using–than being physically attracted to atrophied limbs.