# A Missed opportunity?



## superodalisque (Aug 3, 2010)

FAs are in many ways much more the average than guys who only like thin women. they have a greater range of attraction. so why is it that there seems to be some kind of an insistence on making them look as strange and abnormal as possibly ? it often bothers me when they are presented to as if they must always be freaky and fetishy. i have nothing against fetish but there is much more to sexuality than just fetish and fixation and not everyone has one. and even if they do its not everything they might be into. besides that guys who prefer slim women have fetishes but its not the foremost thing presented when their sexuality is explored. why so for FAs? 

IMO it does a disservice to FAs to act as though thats all any of them are interested in-- ever. what it can do is make them look like less of a person. it makes them look incapable of being truly human. it disrespects their capacity to just love the beauty of a fat woman or the woman herself. 

it could be that FAs would be a great tool to ultimately liberate the female form. unfortunately the way that they are often presented or pandered to, as kooky weird guys, it can create yet another restraint and burden for them and women. it seems to emphasize that there is something "wrong" and not just different. right now the whole thing seems to be just another missed opportunity for women and men to enjoy who they are and maybe even change the perceptions of the world. am i way off base? or does this even matter? do you feel people really appreciate you for all that you are as an FA, or do you ever feel pigeon holed to an extent?


----------



## blubberismanly (Aug 3, 2010)

I think our culture here is so dominated by heath and fitness that FA's have become an easy scapegoat. Fat lovers like us are almost a diversion from the "freaks"--Hardcore gay male BDSM stereotypes, bloodletting, suspension artists who admit to getting an erotic high from the flesh hooks, and other such "unspeakable" fetishes. Sometimes it seems society has us just above pedophiles in that sense (I'm not condoning pedophilia!). Hell, I know an open croperophiliac who gets more respect than we do. There is an expectation for ALL women to want to be skinny and that skinny is the only sexy, especially here in LA/OC. For that reason, I don't think this will change overnight, and if hollywood keeps ruling our lives it may be never. If Marilyn Monroe was just starting her career now, she wouldn't get far. Being unappreciated and not accepted by society is the price we pay, in one way or another. I accept it, being as vastly outnumbered as I am. I aslo accept myself for what and who I am, regardless of what others think or say.


----------



## mopardmc (Aug 3, 2010)

It's called prejudice. It's something people find out about me and then feel that I'm less than human somehow. Someone once said they weren't sure if they could be with me, because they didn't want to be the object of my fetish. There's so many painful assumptions in that, I don't even want to start. I'm just as human as the next guy.

Then again, we passed Prop 8 in California, so what the heck do I know about my fellow humans anymore.


----------



## CurvaceousBBWLover (Aug 3, 2010)

superodalisque said:


> FAs are in many ways much more the average than guys who only like thin women. they have a greater range of attraction. so why is it that there seems to be some kind of an insistence on making them look as strange and abnormal as possibly ? it often bothers me when they are presented to as if they must always be freaky and fetishy. i have nothing against fetish but there is much more to sexuality than just fetish and fixation and not everyone has one. and even if they do its not everything they might be into. besides that guys who prefer slim women have fetishes but its not the foremost thing presented when their sexuality is explored. why so for FAs?
> 
> IMO it does a disservice to FAs to act as though thats all any of them are interested in-- ever. what it can do is make them look like less of a person. it makes them look incapable of being truly human. it disrespects their capacity to just love the beauty of a fat woman or the woman herself.
> 
> it could be that FAs would be a great tool to ultimately liberate the female form. unfortunately the way that they are often presented or pandered to, as kooky weird guys, it can create yet another restraint and burden for them and women. it seems to emphasize that there is something "wrong" and not just different. right now the whole thing seems to be just another missed opportunity for women and men to enjoy who they are and maybe even change the perceptions of the world. am i way off base? or does this even matter? do you feel people really appreciate you for all that you are as an FA, or do you ever feel pigeon holed to an extent?




Since the WLS merchants, the modeling industry and the advertisers are saturating the airwaves with the idea that slim = normal, beautiful and healthy, I don't expect this to change. The war on obesity makes things worse. 

What people fail to see is that prejudice against fat people is no different from prejudice against any other group of people.

Yes, this is a missed opportunity. And as long as large numbers of people in this country fail to see that every person is valuable, there will be those who will continue to see FAs and FFAs as perverts. Preferring fat women is no different from preferring blondes or six foot tall men.


----------



## superodalisque (Aug 3, 2010)

is there something you guys think the community could do to help?


----------



## blubberismanly (Aug 3, 2010)

I doubt it. I've done a lot of reading online, and it seems clear that psychologists believe fetishes in general are abnormal, wrong and obscene. That is unless the person is attracted to anorexics or anorexic looking people of the opposite sex. The media follows this closely, and rarely ever sees things outside the box. Anything we say or do to raise awareness would come across as inane or asinine to outsiders. There are fat acceptance people who are not FA's but that just want respect and equality. If any of us get attention, they would be it. And they probably wouldn't draw attention to this huge, complex subculture of ordinary NORMAL people. I think, in this instance and for the time being, silence is golden. I know sounds defeatist, but I really think timing here is a big concern. When there's an open FA celeb who is a vocal activist, I'll be there to pounce. Hopefully it won't be too long.


----------



## mopardmc (Aug 3, 2010)

blubberismanly said:


> I think, in this instance and for the time being, silence is golden. I know sounds defeatist, but I really think timing here is a big concern. When there's an open FA celeb who is a vocal activist, I'll be there to pounce. Hopefully it won't be too long.



I totally agree. You can't put a positive spin on this without a media-worthy vehicle, because it's the media themselves that are a large part of the problem. Gay rights in San Francisco got a tremendous boost when Harvey Milk came along.

Any volunteers?


----------



## superodalisque (Aug 3, 2010)

blubberismanly said:


> I doubt it. I've done a lot of reading online, and it seems clear that psychologists believe fetishes in general are abnormal, wrong and obscene. That is unless the person is attracted to anorexics or anorexic looking people of the opposite sex. The media follows this closely, and rarely ever sees things outside the box. Anything we say or do to raise awareness would come across as inane or asinine to outsiders. There are fat acceptance people who are not FA's but that just want respect and equality. If any of us get attention, they would be it. And they probably wouldn't draw attention to this huge, complex subculture of ordinary NORMAL people. I think, in this instance and for the time being, silence is golden. I know sounds defeatist, but I really think timing here is a big concern. When there's an open FA celeb who is a vocal activist, I'll be there to pounce. Hopefully it won't be too long.



maybe what we need to do is steal ourselves back from psychology the same way the homosexual community took themselves out of their clutches. as far as i know homosexuality is no longer technically considered an "illness". after all, even men who like thin women enjoy most of the same things FAs do. they love squashing , facesitting, etc.... so rather than those things being seen as a fetish its intimacy and sexual exploration between people that gets showcased. its nothing weird or shameful. just people like anybody else. i think sometimes the insider thing HAS killed us a bit because we've forgotten how to relate to the rest of the world and we need to learn how to again.


----------



## blubberismanly (Aug 3, 2010)

From what I've read, a fetish is a "treatable condition" and in most instances only last about 6 months. So maybe we should not refer to ourselves as fetishists. Just as members of a unique subculture. But it should be focused on as an independent one. I say this because I know some leather enthusiasts who hide under the guise of goth and industrial to stay under the radar. We don't have such a luxury, rather the people into pergnancy, inflation, padding, weight gain, feeding and such would be under the category we create.


----------



## superodalisque (Aug 3, 2010)

blubberismanly said:


> From what I've read, a fetish is a "treatable condition" and in most instances only last about 6 months. So maybe we should not refer to ourselves as fetishists. Just as members of a unique subculture. But it should be focused on as an independent one. I say this because I know some leather enthusiasts who hide under the guise of goth and industrial to stay under the radar. We don't have such a luxury, rather the people into pergnancy, inflation, padding, weight gain, feeding and such would be under the category we create.



people stay under the radar with that stuff too. most of the men who are allowed to love to play with the pregnancy bellies at the hospitals. look at how popular ninja suits are. that is an excuse to try something like padding if i ever saw one. people have been into feeding for ages. it just isn't given a formalized name. this stuff isn't new or rare. its just that people feel alone when they aren't really. i think this culture specializes in aloneness. everyone thinks they are the only one. they are totally convinced. 

even people who aren't particularly aroused by something can at least understand it. but i think people feel they are so weird they don't dare explain. i once gave a squashing party for people who had no idea about the community. they loved it! guess what? the fat people were the most popular . people thought they felt the best maybe we just need to stop hanging out alone so much and acting like there is something wrong with us?


----------



## musicman (Aug 3, 2010)

CurvaceousBBWLover said:


> Since the WLS merchants, the modeling industry and the advertisers are saturating the airwaves with the idea that slim = normal, beautiful and healthy, I don't expect this to change. The war on obesity makes things worse.




Yes. This is what we are fighting. We (fat people and FAs) are in a war against the prevailing culture. Fat hatred and prejudice are fed by the billions (maybe trillions?) of dollars that are spent by the diet / weight loss / pharma / medical / fashion / media world (and now also government -- thank you, Michelle O). 

This isn't rocket science. Most people are sheep and they will hate whoever or whatever they are told to hate. The media will say whatever they are paid to say. And 90% of advertisers want people to hate us. That's all you need to understand about the prevailing culture.

Prejudice against FAs is an integral part of prejudice against fat people. FAs have to be ridiculed like sick freaks, because the media can't let fat people believe that any normal person could find them attractive. It would ruin the advertisers' message that fat is ugly and unhealthy, and needs to be "cured" by you spending your money on worthless scams.

Why are there no loud outspoken FA celebrities helping our cause? Because the advertiser-driven media would crush them in a heartbeat.

So to the OP's question, there isn't any "missed opportunity" here, because we don't have the billions of dollars it takes to BUY an opportunity. The best thing we can do is to strengthen and validate each other on an individual basis. Try to give your fellow FAs and fat people the confidence to live their lives with pride, be an example to the rest of the world, and tell the media bullsh*t machine to suck it.


----------



## mopardmc (Aug 4, 2010)

blubberismanly said:


> From what I've read, a fetish is a "treatable condition" and in most instances only last about 6 months. So maybe we should not refer to ourselves as fetishists. Just as members of a unique subculture. But it should be focused on as an independent one. I say this because I know some leather enthusiasts who hide under the guise of goth and industrial to stay under the radar. We don't have such a luxury, rather the people into pergnancy, inflation, padding, weight gain, feeding and such would be under the category we create.



I see where you're going with this, but really, why the need to create categories? It's a free country, at least where I live. I'd rather spend effort creating an attitude of open-minded tolerance than having to concede to people's need to categorize and stereotype.

I the thing I have to remember is that all the people whose bodies and attractions happen to fall into what is considered "normal" have a lot of validation all around them that this is how things are supposed to be, and they are rewarded for it; it's hard to see the world in an open-minded way when it is so self-reinforcing.

As deviants from the norm, having been through the exercise of learning to accept ourselves as different, we naturally are able to empathize and tolerate all kinds of differences in others much easier. Makes it all that much more frustrating that the non-deviants cannot seem to open their minds as easily, when their absurd judgments where what forced us to open ours.


----------



## mercy (Aug 4, 2010)

superodalisque said:


> FAs are in many ways much more the average than guys who only like thin women. they have a greater range of attraction. so why is it that there seems to be some kind of an insistence on making them look as strange and abnormal as possibly ?



I think there are plenty of guys who could say to their friends "I like big girls" without it being a big deal. However, if they went on to call themselves an "FA" or took the further step of talking about feederism and gaining, then that would single them out as unusual. 

I think perhaps it has to do with the *only* liking fat girls. That has always seemed a little strange to me, as I have a very wide spectrum of people I find attractive. My personal philosophy is "each to his own" but I actually think it's not saying "I like big girls" which singles people out. It's saying "I like *really* big girls and anyone less than 300lbs is automatically out." 

I'm not saying I agree with that viewpoint, but when there aren't many people who will openly admit to it, of course those who do will be seen as strange.


----------



## musicman (Aug 7, 2010)

mopardmc said:


> the thing I have to remember is that all the people whose bodies and attractions happen to fall into what is considered "normal" have a lot of validation all around them that this is how things are supposed to be, and they are rewarded for it; it's hard to see the world in an open-minded way when it is so self-reinforcing.
> 
> As deviants from the norm, having been through the exercise of learning to accept ourselves as different, we naturally are able to empathize and tolerate all kinds of differences in others much easier. Makes it all that much more frustrating that the non-deviants cannot seem to open their minds as easily, when their absurd judgments where what forced us to open ours.



Very interesting. I know that being an FA has made me more open-minded toward the situations faced by other sub-cultures, but I'd never considered the other side of this. Since the sheep are automatically indulged and validated by the prevailing culture, they are never challenged to develop any sort of empathy or tolerance toward those who are different. That's a very astute observation.


----------



## thirtiesgirl (Aug 7, 2010)

superodalisque said:


> is there something you guys think the community could do to help?



I think FA guys could be more active in the fat-o-sphere: read, participate and comment on size-acceptance blogs and communities, besides this one. I'm an active reader and participant on several size acceptance blogs and communities. None of them are women-only, and yet 98% of the people who read, participate and comment in these communities are women. It would be great to see FA men join the dialog. And by "joining the dialog," I don't mean stopping by to ogle, leer and try to pick up on women. I mean participating respectfully, taking our concerns seriously and offering your opinions and insight. Reading some of the fat-o-sphere literature might be a good thing, too, like Marilyn Wann's original size-acceptance bible, Fat? So!; Wendy Shanker's The Fat Girl's Guide to Life; Wendy McClure's memoir about creating her size issues blog, Poundy.com, and her struggle with weight loss and self-acceptance, I'm Not the New Me; and Kate Harding and Marianne Kirby's latest book, Lessons From the Fat-o-Sphere, with contributions from Fatshionista blogger, Lesley Kinzel.

The fat-o-sphere isn't just a "women's issue." If you're an FA and truly love and appreciate fat women, and are tired of the discrimination faced by fat people (men and women) and the people who are openly attracted to and love them, then you should join the dialog, add your voice, and continue to help us fight the good fight against fat hate and oppression.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Aug 7, 2010)

musicman said:


> Since the sheep are automatically indulged and validated by the prevailing culture, they are never challenged to develop any sort of empathy or tolerance toward those who are different.



If you've ever hung out with sheep, you know that their attitudes and opinions are set in stone; that's one factor that _makes_ them sheep. We're all that way a little bit: a belief requires a certain amount of commitment, which in turn involves at least some emotional attachment to one's opinion (cf. Hyde Park). When you talk about being challenged to develop empathy or tolerance you're talking about a slapdown between emotion and reason: emotion usually scores a knockout in the first round. Earlier this year a group of British psychologists conducted an experiment in which people who held a certain opinion were given a (doctored) article that supposedly showed irrefutable scientific proof that their opinion was wrong (a control group was given a non-controversial article). Nobody was convinced by the article: they went to great lengths to deny it, even challenging the (reported) experiments as "bad science." I don't know of a single social movement that has triumphed through argument: they have all won out in the long run -- sometimes the VERY long run -- by people's being themselves and furnishing a living example of the wrongness of the prevailing culture. Sure, we need to talk the talk, but even more we need to walk the walk. A persistent drip wears down the hardest stone. Fellow drips, our way is clear.


----------



## indy500tchr (Aug 7, 2010)

superodalisque said:


> FAs are in many ways much more the average than guys who only like thin women. they have a greater range of attraction. so *why is it that there seems to be some kind of an insistence on making them look as strange and abnormal as possibly ?* it often bothers me when they are presented to as if they must always be freaky and fetishy. i have nothing against fetish but there is much more to sexuality than just fetish and fixation and not everyone has one. and even if they do its not everything they might be into. besides that guys who prefer slim women have fetishes but its not the foremost thing presented when their sexuality is explored. why so for FAs?



It has been my experience that several self-proclaimed FA's have done the above to themselves by not treating women like a person but just a big blob of fat. It's always about the fat. I haven't met an FA yet who has seen me as woman and not for just my fat. I know they are out there just haven't met any yet.

This can also be for guys who just want skinny girls with blond hair and big boobs. They make themselves abnormal by being shallow assholes.


----------



## Carrie (Aug 7, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> I haven't met an FA yet who has seen me as woman and not for just my fat. I know they are out there just haven't met any yet.


Katie, just out of curiosity, are you saying you haven't met any FAs you want to date (or are available to date) like this, or any period? Because I think it's an important distinction to be made. I'm just thinking about the Dims bash last year, and all the FAs there, some of whom were creepy, and some really nice people. Some of the nice ones were there with their wives or girlfriends (the very happy birthday boy getting the squashings comes to mind, heh!), which does make them undatable, but they very much "count" as FAs, when considering whether you've met any nice ones. And for the record, if this has been your experience with all FAs, then that's fine, I've no desire to undermine it or try to discredit it. It just occurred to me that it seemed like an important question to ask.


----------



## superodalisque (Aug 7, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> It has been my experience that several self-proclaimed FA's have done the above to themselves by not treating women like a person but just a big blob of fat. It's always about the fat. I haven't met an FA yet who has seen me as woman and not for just my fat. I know they are out there just haven't met any yet.
> 
> This can also be for guys who just want skinny girls with blond hair and big boobs. They make themselves abnormal by being shallow assholes.



its tough regarding self proclaimed FAs . i don't know why some come across that way sometimes exactly. maybe its innate. maybe its how the community is thats at fault. it makes such a big deal out of fat sexuality and condones so much soley body and fat focused behavior. maybe the guys who might identify with it heavily and don't have a lot of real relationship experience get a warped idea about whats really appropriate out in the real world. we enable some of the guys and even encourage them to do things that are so physically centered. maybe its because some of the BBWs need so much reassurance sometimes. lately i've been thinking that there is an element of co -dependency in there too. but overall i've noticed with the fat community there isn't a lot of attention paid to relationship building. maybe thats why the guys who live outside of all of that behave so much differently in general. they spend more of their time around other people even when they're dating and they mirror that behavior instead of the behavior they might see inside of the community. like you say its probably no different than it is with the guys who are always at the big boobs conventions--same level of concentration.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Aug 7, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> I haven't met an FA yet who has seen me as woman and not for just my fat. I know they are out there just haven't met any yet.
> 
> This can also be for guys who just want skinny girls with blond hair and big boobs. They make themselves abnormal by being shallow assholes.



There have always been, and always will be, shallow assholes. But I think there's more to it than that, at least these days. For the first time, we are living in an age in which people form relationships without face-to-face contact (as I am doing now). Increasing numbers of people learn to relate through electronic devices which filter out the subtleties of expression, gesture, and intonation that gave previous generations immediate feedback about the appropriateness or inappropriateness of their words and actions. Not having learned these subtle signals and what they mean limits interactions to the shallows, since the participants have not learned to read the subtexts of the conversation (men have trouble with subtexts anyway, whichI suspect is why this is a more frequent complaint with women than men). To give an example of what I'm talking about, yesterday a friend reported seeing two teenagers standing three feet apart and texting each other; it probably felt more natural to them than talking.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Aug 7, 2010)

thirtiesgirl said:


> I think FA guys could be more active in the fat-o-sphere: read, participate and comment on size-acceptance blogs and communities, besides this one. I'm an active reader and participant on several size acceptance blogs and communities. None of them are women-only, and yet 98% of the people who read, participate and comment in these communities are women. It would be great to see FA men join the dialog. And by "joining the dialog," I don't mean stopping by to ogle, leer and try to pick up on women. I mean participating respectfully, taking our concerns seriously and offering your opinions and insight. Reading some of the fat-o-sphere literature might be a good thing, too, like Marilyn Wann's original size-acceptance bible, Fat? So!; Wendy Shanker's The Fat Girl's Guide to Life; Wendy McClure's memoir about creating her size issues blog, Poundy.com, and her struggle with weight loss and self-acceptance, I'm Not the New Me; and Kate Harding and Marianne Kirby's latest book, Lessons From the Fat-o-Sphere, with contributions from Fatshionista blogger, Lesley Kinzel.
> 
> The fat-o-sphere isn't just a "women's issue." If you're an FA and truly love and appreciate fat women, and are tired of the discrimination faced by fat people (men and women) and the people who are openly attracted to and love them, then you should join the dialog, add your voice, and continue to help us fight the good fight against fat hate and oppression.



I used to have a blog in the fatosphere actually. Good times.


----------



## indy500tchr (Aug 7, 2010)

Carrie said:


> Katie, just out of curiosity, are you saying you haven't met any FAs you want to date (or are available to date) like this, or any period? Because I think it's an important distinction to be made. I'm just thinking about the Dims bash last year, and all the FAs there, some of whom were creepy, and some really nice people. Some of the nice ones were there with their wives or girlfriends (the very happy birthday boy getting the squashings comes to mind, heh!), which does make them undatable, but they very much "count" as FAs, when considering whether you've met any nice ones. And for the record, if this has been your experience with all FAs, then that's fine, I've no desire to undermine it or try to discredit it. It just occurred to me that it seemed like an important question to ask.



Carrie I was referring to FA's that want to date me. You are very correct, I've met some very nice FA's who are married (such as Larry the b-day boy) or have very beautiful girlfriends but that doesn't help me in the dating department.

The FA's that seem interested in me are the one's that the first question out of their mouth is "how much do you weigh" or "how big is your ass" or just wanna fuck. It has nothing to do with me and everything to do with my fat. There have also been an occasional FA who IS married that wants to "get with me" so they go into the skeezie category too.

I guess I just have very bad luck.


----------



## Smushygirl (Aug 7, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> Carrie I was referring to FA's that want to date me. You are very correct, I've met some very nice FA's who are married (such as Larry the b-day boy) or have very beautiful girlfriends but that doesn't help me in the dating department.
> 
> The FA's that seem interested in me are the one's that the first question out of their mouth is "how much do you weigh" or "how big is your ass" or just wanna fuck. It has nothing to do with me and everything to do with my fat. There have also been an occasional FA who IS married that wants to "get with me" so they go into the skeezie category too.



You ain't never lied!




indy500tchr said:


> I guess I just have very bad luck.



Get in line behind me, baby.


----------



## truebebeblue (Aug 7, 2010)

I think some of this is self imposed. If you categorize yourself and insulate yourself with only other people in a group you are going to feel odd with people outside that group. When you develop/use a vernacular that other people are not familiar with it is going to draw some looks,questions,opinions. 
When I talk about electrocuting a guys balls in non BDSM company,people gasp 
I expect it.. and sometimes I get a big kick out of it.

If I focus on all the negative comments people make about kink then I guess I could feel like the odd person out but why would I do that? Doesn't seem healthy or productive just a bunch of energy spent worrying about something I can't control.

Also for the record BDSM is no longer considered something that needs treatment that was changed in 2008 I believe... most 'fetishes' are not considered to need treatment. Scat and a few others still are

Most people do not have a true fetish anyway... they have kinks... things that turn them on. Quite a difference. 

So I think a big step would be to stop treating yourself as a freak and just go on about your business.
If someone ask "oh wow you like fat chicks?!" Say yes... and leave it at that.
The people that get it probably won't need explanation the people who DON'T... probably never will... so why waste your energy?

Basically it all a variation of normal... more men are dating fat chicks because chicks are getting fat in droves... and men like women..soon you will just be a boring norm.Until then,enjoy the ridiculous fa/bbw ratio it really is working for you.


----------



## lust4bbbws (Aug 9, 2010)

*Not all,some of us adore,love and worship bbbws/ssbbbws as long as they can remember. I can't get aroused or involved with any woman that doesn't shope at Lane Bryant & Avenue. The rolls and folds and sexy bellies. I hate to disagree,but this is how I feel.*


----------



## lust4bbbws (Aug 9, 2010)

*I might have missed out on my soulmate due to my preference but I feel and have experienced two date with sex with petite women but I found myself bored and not into it . I craved the curves and full bodied contact..the look of a bbbw in a t-shirt with her thick thighs out the bottom of it that cute chubby arms and sexy bellies and not to mention those hips,thighs and luscious full round ass.*


----------



## joswitch (Aug 9, 2010)

musicman said:


> Yes. This is what we are fighting. We (fat people and FAs) are in a war against the prevailing culture. Fat hatred and prejudice are fed by the billions (maybe trillions?) of dollars that are spent by the diet / weight loss / pharma / medical / fashion / media world (and now also government -- thank you, Michelle O).
> 
> This isn't rocket science. Most people are sheep and they will hate whoever or whatever they are told to hate. The media will say whatever they are paid to say. And 90% of advertisers want people to hate us. That's all you need to understand about the prevailing culture.
> 
> ...



^Very much this.


----------



## joswitch (Aug 9, 2010)

thirtiesgirl said:


> I think FA guys could be more active in the fat-o-sphere: read, participate and comment on size-acceptance blogs and communities, besides this one. I'm an active reader and participant on several size acceptance blogs and communities. None of them are women-only, and yet 98% of the people who read, participate and comment in these communities are women. It would be great to see FA men join the dialog. And by "joining the dialog," I don't mean stopping by to ogle, leer and try to pick up on women. I mean participating respectfully, taking our concerns seriously and offering your opinions and insight. Reading some of the fat-o-sphere literature might be a good thing, too, like Marilyn Wann's original size-acceptance bible, Fat? So!; Wendy Shanker's The Fat Girl's Guide to Life; Wendy McClure's memoir about creating her size issues blog, Poundy.com, and her struggle with weight loss and self-acceptance, I'm Not the New Me; and Kate Harding and Marianne Kirby's latest book, Lessons From the Fat-o-Sphere, with contributions from Fatshionista blogger, Lesley Kinzel.
> 
> The fat-o-sphere isn't just a "women's issue." If you're an FA and truly love and appreciate fat women, and are tired of the discrimination faced by fat people (men and women) and the people who are openly attracted to and love them, then you should join the dialog, add your voice, and continue to help us fight the good fight against fat hate and oppression.



You're assuming things here^.
I've certainly read a lot of the fat-o-sphere bloggers, including much of Kate Harding's stuff. I've restricted my "activism" to posting on my own Facebook, writing protest letters to advertisers, and face-to-face when appropriate in social situations.... Why?

*The current paradigm of activism excludes people who do not live that experience (e.g. of being fat) from vocal participation.*
So - thin people are restricted to supporting roles:
handing out flyers and such.

If those thin people are understood to have any kind of motivation* (e.g. sexual / looking-for-love) for their involvement, other than a pure and driven quest for civil rights for all... Those thin people will often be looked on by people within (and outside) the movement with suspicion and regarded as self-serving for their involvement...

(*whether or not that motivation is voiced in context, or not)

You'll find a similar dynamic at work in the transpeople rights movement re. "trans-allies"... You can find transpeople arguing vehemently on blogs etc. that "allies" need to step right back, as far as the movement is concerned. 

Further:
The entire structure / mode of operation of fat activism has been built largely on the same paradigm as feminism. There are particular unwritten rules for communicating - who gets to say what, when and how. There is great issue made of validating / invalidating what people say within the movement. Men don't tend to / are unwilling to / have not been trained/inculcated in these communication modes. So, well meaning men who try to involve themselves in a female/feminist dominated movement generally end up stirring up an enormous shitstorm by default - not necessarily for what they say, but for HOW they say it.
Enormous fights within movements, don't help movements.

That said: I think there's a lot BHMs can do for themselves / paralell / in cooperation to the BBW fat rights movement.

Not that it's my "place" to tell BHMs that,of course.

Disclaimer:
I understand that you, thirtiesgirl, will disagree with this analysis.
And that's OK.
Maybe you're right.
This is just how I perceive the "state of the movement" atm, IMO.
It is possible that I could be wrong!


----------



## thirtiesgirl (Aug 9, 2010)

joswitch said:


> *The current paradigm of activism excludes people who do not live that experience (e.g. of being fat) from vocal participation.*
> So - thin people are restricted to supporting roles:
> handing out flyers and such.



You can do those things and _also_ be a vocal supporter within fat acceptance communities. I've seen a handful of thin women who participate in fat-o-sphere communities, who are vocal about their dislike of fat hate and discrimination. I wish there were more than just a handful. I've yet to see any of them ever get shot down for participating in a conversation simply because they're thin. I've seen them get shot down in fat acceptance conversations for being ignorant of their thin privilege and for not doing a good job of listening when fat people discuss discrimination and hate, but if they know how to listen and support the cause, I've never seen them experience ostracism simply because they're thin.



joswitch said:


> If those thin people are understood to have any kind of motivation* (e.g. sexual / looking-for-love) for their involvement, other than a pure and driven quest for civil rights for all... Those thin people will often be looked on by people within (and outside) the movement with suspicion and regarded as self-serving for their involvement...



If you're part of a community where finding sexual and/or romantic companionship is not the point of the community and that's one of your motives for being there, _of course_ your motives will be questioned and regarded as suspicious. How can you expect it to be otherwise? Has it occurred to you, Jos, that you can talk to women and be among a group of them without the need for sexual or romantic approval? You can just be friendly with them, support their cause and the issues they discuss without getting all tight in the pants? Or is this a foreign concept to you?



joswitch said:


> The entire structure / mode of operation of fat activism has been built largely on the same paradigm as feminism. There are particular unwritten rules for communicating - who gets to say what, when and how. There is great issue made of validating / invalidating what people say within the movement. Men don't tend to / are unwilling to / have not been trained/inculcated in these communication modes. So, well meaning men who try to involve themselves in a female/feminist dominated movement generally end up stirring up an enormous shitstorm by default - not necessarily for what they say, but for HOW they say it.



I don't disagree with you on this point. But if you _listen_ and don't approach every group of women with a subconscious agenda, you can _learn_. And in so doing, you can move beyond the typical male socialization and participate in feminist and fat acceptance discussions without getting shit for it.


----------



## joswitch (Aug 9, 2010)

thirtiesgirl said:


> You can do those things and _also_ be a vocal supporter within fat acceptance communities. I've seen a handful of thin *women* who participate in fat-o-sphere communities, who are vocal about their dislike of fat hate and discrimination. I wish there were more than just a handful. I've yet to see any of them ever get shot down for participating in a conversation simply because they're thin. I've seen them get shot down in fat acceptance conversations for being ignorant of their thin privilege and for not doing a good job of listening when fat people discuss discrimination and hate, but if they know how to listen and support the cause, I've never seen them experience ostracism simply because they're thin.



I'm sure. 
Thin men are one more step removed from the immediacy of experience, tho.


(Attempts to draw parallels between e.g. the body-negativity/discrimination I experienced as a very, very thin person growing up, tend to be met with short-shrift online... In contrast with RL F2F in-person, with women / gfs who know me well, who have used that as an exemplar to help me understand what they are trying to deal with in the now.)



> If you're part of a community where finding sexual and/or romantic companionship is not the point of the community and that's one of your motives for being there, _of course_ your motives will be questioned and regarded as suspicious. How can you expect it to be otherwise? Has it occurred to you, Jos, that you can talk to women and be among a group of them without the need for sexual or romantic approval? You can just be friendly with them, support their cause and the issues they discuss without getting all tight in the pants? Or is this a foreign concept to you?



Even if I can, it is often assumed that I can't - and I hate to get a bollocking for trying to be helpful.



> I don't disagree with you on this point. But if you _listen_ and don't approach every group of women with a subconscious agenda, you can _learn_. And in so doing, you can move beyond the typical male socialization and participate in feminist and fat acceptance discussions without getting shit for it.



Yeah, I'll stick with listening / reading for now.
And I'll continue activist stuff where I see appropriate opportunity for me to do so.


----------



## joswitch (Aug 9, 2010)

blubberismanly said:


> From what I've read, a fetish is a "treatable condition"



I find it creepy as hell that there is a profession of people who dedicate any part of their time to reduce the diversity of consenting adult human sexuality.


----------



## bigunlover (Aug 9, 2010)

I am personally of the mind that whatever is done consentually (sp.?) and legally is all good. For example, BDSM. (I think someone mentioned that earlier.) Obviously if someone is being stuffed full of food against his or her will, not good at all. But if a person wants to do this...whatever. Bottomline, many people allow society to dictate their sexuality instead of allowing themselves to be free enough to determine it on their own.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Aug 9, 2010)

joswitch said:


> I find it creepy as hell that there is a profession of people who dedicate any part of their time to reduce the diversity of consenting adult human sexuality.


 
Joswitch, I doubt very seriously that any professional would treat someone who didn't consider his/her fetish to be interfering with the ability to enjoy life. The goal isn't to get people to "conform" to a vanilla concept of what sex/sexuality is or should be about -- it is to help people embrace who they are, and what they are, while working on minimizing or eliminating problem areas _that the patient identifies as being problematic._

The DSM-IV criteria for treatment of fetishism requires that the person experiences significant distress or impairment in important areas of functioning. Also, a "fetish", to me, signifies an inanimate/non-living object. A man or woman who requires a specific body type/body part would probably be more defined as a partialist. And again, would only be treated if his/her fixation was causing significant distress ... to him/her.


----------



## joswitch (Aug 9, 2010)

TraciJo67 said:


> Joswitch, I doubt very seriously that any professional would treat someone who didn't consider his/her fetish to be interfering with the ability to enjoy life. The goal isn't to get people to "conform" to a vanilla concept of what sex/sexuality is or should be about -- it is to help people embrace who they are, and what they are, while working on minimizing or eliminating problem areas _that the patient identifies as being problematic._
> 
> The DSM-IV criteria for treatment of fetishism requires that the person experiences significant distress or impairment in important areas of functioning. Also, a "fetish", to me, signifies an inanimate/non-living object. A man or woman who requires a specific body type/body part would probably be more defined as a partialist. And again, would only be treated if his/her fixation was causing significant distress ... to him/her.



OK then.


----------



## thirtiesgirl (Aug 9, 2010)

joswitch said:


> Even if I can, it is often assumed that I can't - and I hate to get a bollocking for trying to be helpful.



There's a difference between trying to be genuinely helpful and supportive, and being supportive with an ulterior motive, like thinking it will win you 'points' and admiration from women. We're usually pretty darn good at sensing when someone's acting on those motives.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Aug 9, 2010)

thirtiesgirl said:


> There's a difference between trying to be genuinely helpful and supportive, and being supportive with an ulterior motive, like thinking it will win you 'points' and admiration from women. We're usually pretty darn good at sensing when someone's acting on those motives.


 
I'd like to think that I'm pretty good at sussing them out, and I'm flummoxed. I don't think that Josey is a bad guy and frankly I'm surprised to see him taking so much heat here. And if he's getting flame-broiled in an effort to win 'points', then he's got to be the dumbest man alive. And I don't think that his mama raised him to be a fool. 

Can we focus on the gist of what he's saying (that which you find problematic) and resist the impulse to sling around accusations about his character?


----------



## blubberismanly (Aug 9, 2010)

bigunlover said:


> many people allow society to dictate their sexuality instead of allowing themselves to be free enough to determine it on their own.



I agree. 

I also think that a good number of people are disgusted by feeders more because of the outcome than the act. Fat looks bad, therefore getting fat must be really bad. And looks are the first thing strangers identify others with. So people at large assume that looking good only works for people who aren't fat and they shouldn't be, either.

All that matters is image. Self expression is only allowed within a box created by media and stereotypes. Anything outside that box is labeled either freakish or ugly or both. So choosing to be fat, or accepting one's self as fat, is seen as offensive. I read a post in another forum not long ago that said the person thought it was everyone's dream to be thin. I wasn't scared until I realized that so many other people think that way that even those who don't think they have to.


----------



## thirtiesgirl (Aug 9, 2010)

TraciJo67 said:


> I'd like to think that I'm pretty good at sussing them out, and I'm flummoxed. I don't think that Josey is a bad guy and frankly I'm surprised to see him taking so much heat here. And if he's getting flame-broiled in an effort to win 'points', then he's got to be the dumbest man alive. And I don't think that his mama raised him to be a fool.



I don't think he's a bad guy either. But my experience of him so far has been that he can't handle it when a fat woman disagrees with and disapproves of him. I don't think he's experienced much disapproval on this site so far and he doesn't know what to do with it when it happens. In my opinion, he's acting in ways that suggest he's desperate for fat laydee approval. If that's how he chooses to behave, that's his business. But when it spills over into a disagreement he and I having over opinions and he brings _my_ character and motives into question, I'm not going to just acquiesce and leave it alone. His motives and character will not escape being questioned if he can do the same to me and not experience censorship or at least have someone else on the boards tell him to slow his roll and check his attitude at the door.


----------



## vardon_grip (Aug 9, 2010)

TraciJo67 said:


> I'd like to think that I'm pretty good at sussing them out, and I'm flummoxed. I don't think that Josey is a bad guy and frankly I'm surprised to see him taking so much heat here. And if he's getting flame-broiled in an effort to win 'points', then he's got to be the dumbest man alive. And I don't think that his mama raised him to be a fool.
> 
> Can we focus on the gist of what he's saying (that which you find problematic) and resist the impulse to sling around accusations about his character?



Well said...


----------



## isamarie69 (Aug 9, 2010)

I'm on my phone so i can not post the 100 eye rolling smileys i want to post.


But heres an idea! Maybe the two of you can start a we don't like each other/ refuse to argee with anything the other says thread, so then the rest of us can comment and enjoy the actual intent of the orginal thread? Because I think your both nice people but feel like anything i would post would get lost in the drama. That's all


----------



## isamarie69 (Aug 9, 2010)

Oh i guess i should have named who i was talking to, lol For some odd reason i thought it was obvious! So just call it the Jo/30s thread.


----------



## CastingPearls (Aug 9, 2010)

thirtiesgirl said:


> There's a difference between trying to be genuinely helpful and supportive, and being supportive with an ulterior motive, like thinking it will win you 'points' and admiration from women. We're usually pretty darn good at sensing when someone's acting on those motives.


I haven't been here very long but my impression of Jossy is that he neither wants nor needs brownie points from the ladies here. He's sincere and earnest and likes to analyze (sometimes to death) and sometimes people have to agree to disagree.


----------



## thirtiesgirl (Aug 9, 2010)

CastingPearls said:


> I haven't been here very long but my impression of Jossy is that he neither wants nor needs brownie points from the ladies here. He's sincere and earnest and likes to analyze (sometimes to death) and sometimes people have to agree to disagree.



I think he's sincere and earnest about his admiration of fat women, yes. But in my opinion, he expresses that earnestness in ways that suggest he's desperate for approval. Which is his business and doesn't affect me until it clouds an argument he's having with me. The way he chooses to express his disagreement with me suggests that he can't handle the disapproval, and has lead him and his buddy Vardon to write some things that I feel are a little off-the-beam about me. And, as yet, they haven't been censored or had anyone else on the boards tell them to cool it and maybe re-think their choice of expression. Unlike is happening with me. I'd offer an opinion as to why that is, but I don't think it would be met with much respect or consideration.


----------



## joswitch (Aug 9, 2010)

thirtiesgirl said:


> I don't think he's a bad guy either. But my experience of him so far has been that he can't handle it when a fat woman disagrees with and disapproves of him. *I don't think he's experienced much disapproval on this site so far*



Ahahahaha! ROFLMAO! Seriously, you want to see disapproval? Take a dig through my two years + worth of posts - especially anything early on, where I try to present any scientific research, then you will see disapproval of me on an EPIC, flamewar and chargrill scale! lolz! 



> and he doesn't know what to do with it when it happens. In my opinion, he's acting in ways that suggest he's desperate for fat laydee approval. *snip*



You're entitled to your opinion.
You're wrong, but you're entitled to your opinion.
Honestly, if I cared about approval, I would mostly STFU and just agree with teh laydeez....



> If that's how he chooses to behave, that's his business. But when it spills over into a disagreement he and I having over opinions and he brings _my_ character and motives into question, I'm not going to just acquiesce and leave it alone. His motives and character will not escape being questioned if he can do the same to me and not experience censorship or at least have someone else on the boards tell him to slow his roll and check his attitude at the door.



You may question, I may, quite often, not be arsed to answer you tho'.
Enjoy! 




thirtiesgirl said:


> I think he's sincere and earnest about his admiration of fat women, yes. But in my opinion, he expresses that earnestness in ways that suggest he's desperate for approval. Which is his business and doesn't affect me until it clouds an argument he's having with me. The way he chooses to express his disagreement with me suggests that he can't handle the disapproval, and has lead him *and his buddy Vardon* to write some things that I feel are a little off-the-beam about me. And, as yet, they haven't been censored or had anyone else on the boards tell them to cool it and maybe re-think their choice of expression. Unlike is happening with me. I'd offer an opinion as to why that is, but I don't think it would be met with much respect or consideration.



^Also: *snerk* my ??buddy?? Vardon???
No, we are really not BFF...  
That me and Vardon, who have had at least one epic disagreement in the past, and who tend to rub each other up the wrong way, happened to find ourselves on the same side of an argument debating against you?.... Well, I'll leave you to think on what that might signify or not.....

I refuse to be drawn into an argument about how we have conducted ourselves in past arguments... :doh: especially as those threads are still there for anyone who gives a toss to go and read :shudder:


----------



## joswitch (Aug 9, 2010)

isamarie69 said:


> I'm on my phone so i can not post the 100 eye rolling smileys i want to post.
> 
> 
> But heres an idea! Maybe the two of you can start a we don't like each other/ refuse to argee with anything the other says thread, so then the rest of us can comment and enjoy the actual intent of the orginal thread? Because I think your both nice people but feel like *anything i would post would get lost in the drama. * That's all






CastingPearls said:


> I haven't been here very long but my impression of Jossy is that he neither wants nor needs brownie points from the ladies here. He's sincere and earnest and *likes to analyze (sometimes to death)* and sometimes people have to agree to disagree.



Sorry.:blush:


----------



## LovelyLiz (Aug 9, 2010)

I'm not going to go back and cite every post where this happened in this thread - but just want to offer a friendly reminder that not every FA is a thin, heterosexual man. Sometimes we talk about "Why don't those FAs advocate size acceptance, if they really care about us fat women so much?" But lots of FAs care about size acceptance on their own terms because of their own fat bodies, etc. 

Just wanting to reiterate that. I often start talking like that too! So I'm reminding myself.


----------



## blubberismanly (Aug 9, 2010)

joswitch said:


> I find it creepy as hell that there is a profession of people who dedicate any part of their time to reduce the diversity of consenting adult human sexuality.



I had a link but my blackberry won't let me post it right. It deifned a fetish as a body part or non living object.

There a lot of sites dedicated to eradicating people's quirks. Some say that most fetishists never bother to seek treatment. Just google for fetishes and you'll find plenty of resources.


----------



## isamarie69 (Aug 10, 2010)

LOL I read the opening post, turns out I really didn't have anything important to say after all. Oh well


----------



## superodalisque (Aug 11, 2010)

lust4bbbws said:


> *Not all,some of us adore,love and worship bbbws/ssbbbws as long as they can remember. I can't get aroused or involved with any woman that doesn't shope at Lane Bryant & Avenue. The rolls and folds and sexy bellies. I hate to disagree,but this is how I feel.*



but this does not make you a freak. lane bryant caters to size 14 and over. 14 is the norm. i know you're talking about a higher weight but most FAs are not as size specific as you are. a lot of them don't even have to have an ssbbw. for some its even okay if a woman is just plump.


----------



## FA Punk (Aug 11, 2010)

IMO FA's don't get enough support with in the community as a whole. I've always felt that the women in this community get more suport then the men and I think thats why some guys don't want to speak out about there preference for larger women because they aint got nobody to back them up.


----------



## indy500tchr (Aug 11, 2010)

FA Punk said:


> IMO FA's don't get enough support with in the community as a whole. I've always felt that the women in this community get more suport then the men and I think thats why some guys don't want to speak out about there preference for larger women because they aint got nobody to back them up.



Then I'd complain to this guy....read the last line. Unless of course you are referring to the SA community and not DIMS specifically.


----------



## FA Punk (Aug 11, 2010)

indy500tchr said:


> Then I'd complain to this guy....read the last line. Unless of course you are referring to the SA community and not DIMS specifically.



I said as a ''whole'' which means more then just DIMS. So what I was getting at was there are other FA/BBW web forums other then just DIMS. I'm a part of three myself and my opinion is based on what I've seen in these three.


----------

