# Separation Within Dimensions



## Chimpi (Jul 6, 2008)

I'm not sure if others have witnessed the same thing(s) as me or have the same opinion(s) that I do, but I wanted to bring this perspective up and find out what others believe.

*Main Dimensions Board*: Size/size acceptance issues
*The Lounge*: For fun, games, and off-topic stuff
*Weight Board*: Erotic weight gain and fat sexuality
*BHM/FFA*: Female Fat Admirers and Big Handsome Men
All four are easily viewable as different Boards within the entire Dimensions Forum. However, what are the general consensus rules as far as posting certain threads in certain Boards?

That's probably confusing. Here's an example:
*Here is a "Happy July 4th" Post*. Posted in The Lounge. My opinion is that it belongs there - "off-topic stuff". However, *here is another "Happy 4th" Post*. Posted in the BHM/FFA Board. My opinion is that it belongs in The Lounge.
I have seen Moderators merge threads into one single thread so that there are no duplicate threads. That is not always the case, but I have seen it happen quite a few times.

In another example:
*Here is a "Hancock" Post*. Posted in the BHM/FFA Board. My opinion is that it belongs in The Lounge - "off-topic stuff". I see nothing in the thread that defines why it belongs in the BHM/FFA Board (was Hancock a "BHM"? No.). Yet there are many threads in The Lounge containing discussion about movies, and threads dedicated to one specific movie and discussion thereof are always welcome within The Lounge.
Why would this thread be posted in the BHM/FFA Board. Moreover, why would the person that posted the "Hancock?" thread feel the need to talk about it only in the BHM/FFA Board (homersimpson, I'm trying not to single anyone out, but I'm curious as to what you might answer that question with..?)?

My main question is why should the BHM/FFA Board act as a completely separate Forum, consisting of their own Lounge and Weight Board? I feel that the continuation of this sort of separates the fat men from the fat women, or at least one side of the board from another.
Is Dimensions strictly still a Community Board geared towards 'Fat women and the men that admire them"?
Has Dimensions become a Community Board that gears towards 'Fat people and the people that admire them?
What do you think?

My intent for creating this thread is to address the separation issues that many people here on Dimensions feel is evident, though has not been directly addressed by too many people [yet] (that I have seen). I would like to see the BHM/FFA Board/World merged into the rest of the Community. "Off-topic stuff," including discussion of movies, holidays, and "how was your day?" topics all belong in The Lounge. Discussion of any variety of Weight Gain or fetish-related material (including both fat men _and_ women) belong in The Weight Board. Maybe there could be a breakdown between "BBW/FA" and "BHM/FFA" within The Weight Board. I, personally, do not think this site should separate one fat person from another, nor one type of fat person or admirer from another.
What do you all think?


----------



## goofy girl (Jul 6, 2008)

I completely agree.


----------



## SoVerySoft (Jul 6, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> ...What do you all think?



What do I think? I think it is up to Conrad to determine what's appropriate in the various forums. 

I also think the BHM/FFA forum has felt a bit excluded and it is understandable that they would build a community from within. I don't think it's really up to the rest of us to determine what's ok and what isn't - that's up to Conrad and then his decisions are implemented by the mods.

Although we do welcome input, I don't know if a thread like this will be productive or simply inflammatory. Sorry, Chimpi.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 6, 2008)

I think it's a good topic.

I honestly do not think it will become inflamatory. Many posters have said that if the BHM/FFAs feel marginalized, it's our own fault or that we marginalize ourselves.

Maybe if they see posts such as Goofy's and think they are truly welcome on other boards, they will participate more.


----------



## FaxMachine1234 (Jul 6, 2008)

SoVerySoft said:


> What do I think? I think it is up to Conrad to determine what's appropriate in the various forums.
> 
> I also think the BHM/FFA forum has felt a bit excluded and it is understandable that they would build a community from within. I don't think it's really up to the rest of us to determine what's ok and what isn't - that's up to Conrad and then his decisions are implemented by the mods.
> 
> Although we do welcome input, I don't know if a thread like this will be productive or simply inflammatory. Sorry, Chimpi.



What's wrong with a suggestion?


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 6, 2008)

SoVerySoft said:


> What do I think? I think it is up to Conrad to determine what's appropriate in the various forums.
> 
> I also think the BHM/FFA forum has felt a bit excluded and it is understandable that they would build a community from within. I don't think it's really up to the rest of us to determine what's ok and what isn't - that's up to Conrad and then his decisions are implemented by the mods.
> 
> Although we do welcome input, I don't know if a thread like this will be productive or simply inflammatory. Sorry, Chimpi.



Fair enough.

I'm very curious as to what most of the people that post mostly within the BHM/FFA Board might have to say about the subject. It is understandable that the "BHM's" and "FFA's" would build a community within their own Board and that is absolutely fantastic. I'm all for that. However, I see a lot of them making statements of how they feel so "left out," so I wanted to address that. As I said, I would personally like for everyone to feel welcome and at home here at Dimensions, and indeed everyone _is_ welcome here to Dimensions (provided they follow the rules). But it seems that so many people feel excluded for different reasons (see: "Feeling 'Out Of Place' At Dimensions"). More recently, it seems the "BHM's" have felt a very imminent separation from the rest of this community, I wanted to open that up for discussion.

I'm also aware that it's ultimately Conrad's decision, and I would never call that into question. I'm very grateful for how he has set this place up and how universal this place really is.
As far as it being productive vs. inflammatory, that's up to the rest of the posters to decide (unless the thread is closed for whatever reason). I think (I hope?) people can discuss this in a productive and positive manner.


----------



## goofy girl (Jul 6, 2008)

If people want to hang on just one board, then cool. But we're here to be a community and to learn from and support each other and I hate for people to feel like they aren't welcome on any board available for any kind of discussion going on.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 6, 2008)

goofy girl said:


> If people want to hang on just one board, then cool. But we're here to be a community and to learn from and support each other and I hate for people to feel like they aren't welcome on any board available for any kind of discussion going on.



Agreed. I think that if more people spent more time on all parts of the board that there would be more understanding, or at least more tolerance of differing opinions.


----------



## olwen (Jul 6, 2008)

Chimpi, I for one think this is a good topic for discussion. From what I understand there is a real need for the BHM/FFA board otherwise there'd be a lot of "hey are there any women here who..." or "are there any men who..." kind of threads and it would be hard for bhms and ffas to find each other. I totally get that. I get the community building that would happen from that too. Makes total sense to me. But given all the recent discussion going around about this, the only thought I keep coming back to is - "Why don't they just mingle more? Is it a guy thing? Am I missing something here?" 

Another thing I've noticed too is that when there are get togethers from people from the boards in real life - at least at the few I've been too - there either aren't any or perhaps one or two bhms present and fa's (male or female) for that matter as well, and we all wonder aloud why that is.

ETA: I have my own theories about why that is, but....


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 6, 2008)

olwen said:


> Another thing I've noticed too is that when there are get togethers from people from the boards in real life - at least at the few I've been too - there either aren't any or perhaps one or two bhms present and fa's (male or female) for that matter as well, and we all wonder aloud why that is.



I'm trying to think, I'm pretty sure I saw some big guys at Heavenly Bodies when I went for Memorial Day and I know there are bigger guys here in CA at Big Boogie Nights. You're right though in that they are definitely outnumbered by the big girls. I personally would LOVE to see more larger men at the social events.


----------



## olwen (Jul 6, 2008)

Ella Bella said:


> I'm trying to think, I'm pretty sure I saw some big guys at Heavenly Bodies when I went for Memorial Day and I know there are bigger guys here in CA at Big Boogie Nights. You're right though in that they are definitely outnumbered by the big girls. I personally would LOVE to see more larger men at the social events.



I would love to see more of them too.


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 6, 2008)

olwen said:


> Chimpi, I for one think this is a good topic for discussion. From what I understand there is a real need for the BHM/FFA board otherwise there'd be a lot of "hey are there any women here who..." or "are there any men who..." kind of threads and it would be hard for bhms and ffas to find each other. I totally get that. I get the community building that would happen from that too. Makes total sense to me. But given all the recent discussion going around about this, the only thought I keep coming back to is - "Why don't they just mingle more? Is it a guy thing? Am I missing something here?"



[Moderators] Please understand that I am not trying to get it to be the way that I am making an example of. I am just mentioning.
olwen, I understand the need for a BHM/FFA section, too. What you (specifically you) may or may not understand (and I think you do because you're pretty darn intelligent) is that I'm saying it doesn't need to be a separate, "specialized" BHM/FFA Board. Going back to my original post, it could be a thing where The Weight Board is divided into two parts: "BBW/FA Secton" and "BHM/FFA Section." (Also, it gets very complicated because I normally do not separate "Fat Admirers" from "Female Fat Admirers")
It's merely an observation I have had, something I would (and I emphasize) _really_ like the input of most of the "BHM's" and "FFA's," and something I wanted to throw out on the table.



olwen said:


> Another thing I've noticed too is that when there are get togethers from people from the boards in real life - at least at the few I've been too - there either aren't any or perhaps one or two bhms present and fa's (male or female) for that matter as well, and we all wonder aloud why that is.



Pure Speculation: Fat men and their admirers feel confined and in their own little world. Possibly they do not feel welcome (which is far from the truth, methinks), or at least do not feel like they have much in common with many of the bash-goers so they don't attend [regularly or at all].

Also thanks to everyone so far for their input and support.


----------



## Santaclear (Jul 6, 2008)

Personally, I don't care much which board any given thread is on. I wasn't aware of "separation issues" until recently, some of the board dramas of the last couple months. I think the way to proceed is to be aware that some people DO feel that way and to be sensitive to it. Changes will happen if they need to be made - squeaky wheel and all.


----------



## Smite (Jul 6, 2008)

It's all hush-hush in nature. Having this on the main board probably won't have the secretive society come out either, as it's prime for targeting from the members who don't want us to blend in.

But still a good idea.


----------



## Carl1h (Jul 6, 2008)

Most fat guys go to the BHM/FFA forum originally for one reason, they want to meet women who are into fat guys. You google search, that forum comes up. Some of them look around and post in other parts of Dimensions and some don't. Some look at the other parts of dimensions and don't feel like they would fit in. As a guy who just started posting put it, "the Weight board seems more geared towards women gaining than men." It isn't meant to be only that, but it seems that way when someone first looks at it simply because that's the way the numbers are. Men end up at the BHM/FFA forum like that because it is the place that looks the most like them. The FFAs voice the same sort of things, and end up staying mostly there because that's the place that looks most like them.

Then after posting there that becomes their circle of friends. There's overlap between people who read and post in the lounge and people who read and post in the BHM/FFA forum, but not a big one. So if a BHM/FFA regular wants to post a message of happy 4th to the people he has gotten to know in the BHM/FFA forum he posts it in that forum. Maybe it doesn't really belong there, but I think that if it couldn't be posted there, it wouldn't usually be posted instead in the lounge, but instead not posted at all. Why would someone go to a crowd of strangers and say happy 4th rather than say it to the people they are familiar with?

As for mingling on the other boards, I think eventually that some do. We're not talking about big numbers to begin with, so any percentage of that is also going to be small, probably unnoticeable. That's the key, we're out there on the other boards, there just isn't many of us.

As far as exposure leading to acceptance... I understand the theory but I'm not sure how it actually plays out on the internet. There are landmine opinions and topics around here and there are groups that have to step lightly and carefully to avoid trouble. If someone like Ripley, with more reputation than a non-controversial but beloved religious figure and somewhere around a half million posts can feel so mistreated and attacked over a post on one of those subjects then what chance does anyone new to the board have? Why would people leave the idyllic hollow of the BHM/FFA board to get ripped apart for expressing an unpopular opinion?


----------



## goofy girl (Jul 6, 2008)

Carl1h said:


> Most fat guys go to the BHM/FFA forum originally for one reason, they want to meet women who are into fat guys. You google search, that forum comes up. Some of them look around and post in other parts of Dimensions and some don't. Some look at the other parts of dimensions and don't feel like they would fit in. As a guy who just started posting put it, "the Weight board seems more geared towards women gaining than men." It isn't meant to be only that, but it seems that way when someone first looks at it simply because that's the way the numbers are. Men end up at the BHM/FFA forum like that because it is the place that looks the most like them. The FFAs voice the same sort of things, and end up staying mostly there because that's the place that looks most like them.
> 
> Then after posting there that becomes their circle of friends. There's overlap between people who read and post in the lounge and people who read and post in the BHM/FFA forum, but not a big one. So if a BHM/FFA regular wants to post a message of happy 4th to the people he has gotten to know in the BHM/FFA forum he posts it in that forum. Maybe it doesn't really belong there, but I think that if it couldn't be posted there, it wouldn't usually be posted instead in the lounge, but instead not posted at all. Why would someone go to a crowd of strangers and say happy 4th rather than say it to the people they are familiar with?
> 
> ...



I completely understand where you are coming from. And I think the BHM/FFA board is really really important. I think there is a definite need for the BHM's and FFA's to talk about dating/relationship/emotional issues or whatever...But I have to say, that is makes me a little bit sad when I see things like Chimpi mentioned about movies, or music or other "fluff" topics on the BHM/FFA board when they are up for discussion in the Lounge. It took me a long time just to venture from the Lounge into Foodee or the Main Boards, so I get that sometimes it just takes some to check other places out. I just wish we could all feel like the labels don't matter as much and we could all just shoot the breeze with each other.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 6, 2008)

As far as bashes/social setting go, that partly goes back to gender. Not just "women are judged on looks and men are judged on accomplishments" but also that men seek out partners based on sexual attraction or appearance.

A man goes to a BBW social event to find a pool of women who excite him sexually. He may require something beyond looks in a woman he wants to date, but by going to a BBW party or club, he starts with sexual attraction. A fat event is based on looks; men are there because they have a sexual orientation towards BBW/SSBBW. A woman attending such an event knows the male attendees are likely to find her attractive. 

Socially, men are not primarly judged on looks, neither are women encouraged to see out partners based on sexual appeal. More importantly, men are not encouraged to attract potential partners based on looks. Men display their wealth, jobs, cars, social status, or potential to attract partners. Very few men would think to attend a social venue whose primary purpose was to display ONLY their looks. Very few women would seek out a partner based primarly on his looks; we're more likely to go to a bar in an upscale neighborhood and say "well, everyone here is rich, so i'll just home in on the fat guys" rather than go to a place that is full of fat guys and try to find the "good providers" so to speak.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 6, 2008)

Smite said:


> It's all hush-hush in nature. Having this on the main board probably won't have the secretive society come out either, as it's prime for targeting from the members who don't want us to blend in.
> 
> But still a good idea.



I don't actually know anyone who has a problem with the BHM crew coming out of that secton.


----------



## toni (Jul 6, 2008)

SoVerySoft said:


> What do I think? I think it is up to Conrad to determine what's appropriate in the various forums.



SVS, you know you are my girl. However, why does every question or suggestion about the board always get met with this type of answer from the mods? It's as if people are being reprimanded like children because they do not agree with something and dare post about it.


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 6, 2008)

goofy girl said:


> I completely understand where you are coming from. And I think the BHM/FFA board is really really important. I think there is a definite need for the BHM's and FFA's to talk about dating/relationship/emotional issues or whatever...But I have to say, that is makes me a little bit sad when I see things like Chimpi mentioned about movies, or music or other "fluff" topics on the BHM/FFA board when they are up for discussion in the Lounge. It took me a long time just to venture from the Lounge into Foodee or the Main Boards, so I get that sometimes it just takes some to check other places out. I just wish we could all feel like the labels don't matter as much and we could all just shoot the breeze with each other.



I agree, goof.
Regarding the observation of the movie/holiday posts specifically, and in response to Carl, I think it's great that people want to chat with their friends about such things. I don't want that to stop. In fact, I think it would be good and healthy for the same people to make new friends and talk about the same things with new people, people they've never talked to before. I, too, think it's sad to see that people only talk within their little group, though I understand it happens and that there's nothing wrong with that at all. I do it myself. But when many "BHM's" express their unpleasant experience here at Dimensions, I think it should be discussed.
Yes, it's possible that the same people might not post those topics at all (in regards to people chatting with their friends about the holidays or movies or whatever), but that goes for every subject that can be posted about. I know that's no consolation at all, but I think it's a valid point. And you're also right, Carl, in that the numbers overall of "BHM's" and "FFA's" are much smaller than the other folk in this community. But that's neither here nor there when Smite mentions a "secretive society" that won't even venture into this part of the community, and has expressed unwelcome feelings himself before.
Also: "prime for targeting from the members who don't want us to blend in." Such behavior, I hope, would be taken care of rather than allowed to go on.

I'm not trying to force people to come out of the BHM/FFA Board and discuss things elsewhere. I believe I'm trying to address their concerns in a format that all people can give input and hopefully allow people to realize they're not unwelcome anywhere on Dimensions.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 6, 2008)

Tooz said:


> I don't actually know anyone who has a problem with the BHM crew coming out of that secton.


 

Neither do I. I think a lot of the 'separation' ideaology comes from particular individuals only.


----------



## SoVerySoft (Jul 6, 2008)

toni said:


> SVS, you know you are my girl. However, why does every question or suggestion about the board always get met with this type of answer from the mods? It's as if people are being reprimanded like children because they do not agree with something and dare post about it.



Toni, I don't think I was reprimanding Chimpi like a child. If you feel that the mods seem to give the same type of responses to "every question or suggestion" then maybe we understand that ultimately, it really IS up to Conrad.

I understand that people want to give input, and that's great. I'm just hoping to encourage it be done in the most constructive way possible.




Chimpi said:


> ...I'm not trying to force people to come out of the BHM/FFA Board and discuss things elsewhere. I believe I'm trying to address their concerns in a format that all people can give input and hopefully allow people to realize they're not unwelcome anywhere on Dimensions.



Chimpi, I think if you really felt that the FFA/BHM folks should venture out of their forum and mingle, maybe a nice way to address that would be to go to that forum and let strike up a conversation about it. I think posting here (IMO) came across as accusatory (i.e. that they don't follow "the rules" and post on the right boards) and might even exacerbate an already sensitive situation. You know I think really highly of you, but this post was a difficult one for me to ignore.




Carl1h said:


> ...Then after posting there that becomes their circle of friends. There's overlap between people who read and post in the lounge and people who read and post in the BHM/FFA forum, but not a big one. So if a BHM/FFA regular wants to post a message of happy 4th to the people he has gotten to know in the BHM/FFA forum he posts it in that forum. Maybe it doesn't really belong there, but I think that if it couldn't be posted there, it wouldn't usually be posted instead in the lounge, but instead not posted at all. Why would someone go to a crowd of strangers and say happy 4th rather than say it to the people they are familiar with?...



Sounds completely reasonable to me. 




Smite said:


> It's all hush-hush in nature. Having this on the main board probably won't have the secretive society come out either, as it's prime for targeting from the members who don't want us to blend in.
> 
> But still a good idea.



I wish you could post in a kinder, gentler manner. I think your points would be better received. I will say I don't believe there is a faction that doesn't want you to blend in, at least, I haven't seen evidence of it. 




LoveBHMS said:


> I think it's a good topic.
> 
> I honestly do not think it will become inflamatory. Many posters have said that if the BHM/FFAs feel marginalized, it's our own fault or that we marginalize ourselves.
> 
> Maybe if they see posts such as Goofy's and think they are truly welcome on other boards, they will participate more.



Maybe so, let's hope so.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Jul 6, 2008)

Ekim said:


> What's wrong with a suggestion?



There's absolutely nothing wrong with a suggestion. However, the best way to handle a suggestion is to send it to a mod or to Conrad directly. Posting a suggestion on the forum for everyone to vote or comment on, can be counterproductive, especially if it gets inflamitory. And as mentioned, the decision on whether to implement a suggestion lies with Conrad, not the community at large.


----------



## Carl1h (Jul 6, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> But when many "BHM's" express their unpleasant experience here at Dimensions, I think it should be discussed.
> 
> Such behavior, I hope, would be taken care of rather than allowed to go on.
> 
> I'm not trying to force people to come out of the BHM/FFA Board and discuss things elsewhere. I believe I'm trying to address their concerns in a format that all people can give input and hopefully allow people to realize they're not unwelcome anywhere on Dimensions.



I agree that there is some need for honest discussion. However I don't know if we can actually have that in any meaningful way in an unmoderated discussion on the internet (where it is notoriously easy to snark and disrupt for no other reason than to just snark and disrupt). Also, we aren't dealing with monolithic groups that have one opinion on these issues. Despite that the posters on this thread might be voicing similar thoughts none of us can truly say we represent a particular block, be it FA, BHM or BBW. Other voices would come in with their opinions and beliefs and arguing and name calling would ensue.

I think that this current state of talk here at dimensions could be called a general state of truce. A lot of people try not to walk too much on other people's toes, the smaller groups with less voice work on becoming more accepted, and sometimes even the majority tries to understand other views. But even though it's not perfect, maybe it's working anyway?

For my part, I don't feel universally loved, accepted or understood, but I do feel like I have made some very real contacts and understandings with some very real people and I know that I understand more about other people here now than I did even just a year ago. And given that Bud Light beer is the most popular beer in America, being universally loved and accepted doesn't seem to be all that great of a recommendation anyway.


----------



## Sandie S-R (Jul 6, 2008)

Smite said:


> It's all hush-hush in nature. Having this on the main board probably won't have the secretive society come out either, as it's prime for targeting from the members who don't want us to blend in.
> 
> But still a good idea.




Smite...

This was a fairly inflammitory comment in and of itself. You keep suggesting that people are "trashing the BHMs", and now you say there is "targeting" from the members here who don't want you to blend in.

It sure seems like you are the one that is attempting to cause a rift here with the above kind of comments.

As I have said to you before, if there is something going on like you suggest, report it to the mods as it is against the rules here.

Otherwise, stop with the veiled accusations.

Sandie
/mod


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 6, 2008)

Smite said:


> It's all hush-hush in nature. Having this on the main board probably won't have the secretive society come out either, as it's prime for targeting from the members who don't want us to blend in.
> 
> But still a good idea.



I personally don't think the rest of the forums have any problems with the "secretive society." 

I think the problem is from a *very small* number of those in the "secretive society" not wanting to leave the BHM forum because they don't want to blend in. Because it loses them a sense of misplaced martyrdom and they wouldn't be the center of attention as a BHM. They would be just like the rest of us. Just another forum member of many. 

Again, I think that only relates to a *very tiny* number of people. From what I've seen, there have always been BHM posting all over the forums and are just as welcome as anyone else.


----------



## Carl1h (Jul 6, 2008)

SoVerySoft said:


> Chimpi, I think if you really felt that the FFA/BHM folks should venture out of their forum and mingle, maybe a nice way to address that would be to go to that forum and let strike up a conversation about it. I think posting here (IMO) came across as accusatory (i.e. that they don't follow "the rules" and post on the right boards) and might even exacerbate an already sensitive situation. You know I think really highly of you, but this post was a difficult one for me to ignore.



I agree that Chimpi's first post can sound accusatory, but I think he has made it clear that it wasn't his intention to be accusatory. I agree with his selection of the main boards for the post because it is less hypocritical to post about posts going in their proper place, in the proper place. This is a general discussion topic and should be in the general discussion thread. Also, similar discussions take place periodically on the BHM/FFA board already, the last one being only a week or two ago. He's not forcing anyone off the BHM/FFA board, but if he lures some off of it, then all the better.


----------



## SoVerySoft (Jul 6, 2008)

Carl1h said:


> I agree that Chimpi's first post can sound accusatory, but I think he has made it clear that it wasn't his intention to be accusatory. I agree with his selection of the main boards for the post because it is less hypocritical to post about posts going in their proper place, in the proper place. This is a general discussion topic and should be in the general discussion thread. Also, similar discussions take place periodically on the BHM/FFA board already, the last one being only a week or two ago. He's not forcing anyone off the BHM/FFA board, but if he lures some off of it, then all the better.



Thanks, Carl. It is good to hear your perspective and I appreciate that.


----------



## Smite (Jul 6, 2008)

First things first, I don't feel unwelcomed. I don't limit myself to the BHM FFA board. I'm not part of this secret society. And you don't neccesarily have to post here to know you're not welcomed. It can be insults by proxy, or just general feeling.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 6, 2008)

Smite said:


> First things first, I don't feel unwelcomed. I don't limit myself to the BHM FFA board. I'm not part of this secret society. And you don't neccesarily have to post here to know you're not welcomed. It can be insults by proxy, or just general feeling.



Well, how is it our problem if people feel unwelcome and we're not actually the ones doing anything to make it that way ... ?


----------



## Smite (Jul 6, 2008)

I'd like to know where my argument went from all over the place to just DIMs. I was even talking about within my own site.


----------



## lostjacket (Jul 6, 2008)

Can I be a part of the Dimensions Illuminati? I mean I sort of look like Tom Hanks in the Da Vinci Code.


----------



## olwen (Jul 6, 2008)

Smite said:


> I'd like to know where my argument went from all over the place to just DIMs. I was even talking about within my own site.



Can you elaborate on that?


----------



## Smite (Jul 6, 2008)

I was stating my opinions on how both sides of the equation feel that way, and I said it was something i've noticed throughout all sides of the internet. I don't believe (and if I did, I didn't mean to) I shined the spotlight solely on DIMs.


----------



## squurp (Jul 6, 2008)

THe artificial separations that are maintained in these forums are why I have restricted my postings a great deal in the last year. Moderators have made it clear that censorship is good, and no conversation shall cross boundaries. I spend the entire day monitoring my speech. If I have to do it here, I often just choose not to. Perhaps others feel the same?


----------



## William (Jul 6, 2008)

Hi 

I have seen BHM post in many threads on other Boards. I use at least 5 of the boards on Dimensions myself. I do think that there are some comments about the experiences of BHMs and FFAs that can only be said on the FFA/BHM board without creating a clash.

William 





Jack Skellington said:


> I personally don't think the rest of the forums have any problems with the "secretive society."
> 
> I think the problem is from a *very small* number of those in the "secretive society" not wanting to leave the BHM forum because they don't want to blend in. Because it loses them a sense of misplaced martyrdom and they wouldn't be the center of attention as a BHM. They would be just like the rest of us. Just another forum member of many.
> 
> Again, I think that only relates to a *very tiny* number of people. From what I've seen, there have always been BHM posting all over the forums and are just as welcome as anyone else.


----------



## ayschucks (Jul 6, 2008)

Sandie S-R said:


> There's absolutely nothing wrong with a suggestion. However, the best way to handle a suggestion is to send it to a mod or to Conrad directly. Posting a suggestion on the forum for everyone to vote or comment on, can be counterproductive, especially if it gets inflamitory. And as mentioned, the decision on whether to implement a suggestion lies with Conrad, not the community at large.



Might I make a comment from an outside perspective. Having been a member of a number of various forums, on various topics- this approach to private messaging the owners of the site or moderators has rarely yielded the results that is implied in your suggestion.

Because it is a community forum, I believe healthy discussions about improving that community can be done publicly, creating a place where the owners and moderators can get an unabashed view of the community and the ideas that may improve that community. 

In cases where those communities thrive on donations, support or advertising support, these public discussions may yield fresh ideas on how to create new ways to support and maintain the community. It may also create opportunities for members to encourage other members to throw more financial support behind the forum without it sounding like a pitch from the site owners or moderators. 

I respect the rules of the forum and were I to have any issue with the community, I would take it to the site owner first and ask for permission to start this type of thread, with his or her blessing.

Best of luck in this discussion, may it yield positive results for the Dim's community.


----------



## olwen (Jul 6, 2008)

Smite said:


> I was stating my opinions on how both sides of the equation feel that way, and I said it was something i've noticed throughout all sides of the internet. I don't believe (and if I did, I didn't mean to) I shined the spotlight solely on DIMs.



Right, I was hoping for more details re the other sites to help shed some light on the issue, for me anyway. But okay.


----------



## KendraLee (Jul 6, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> I'm not sure if others have witnessed the same thing(s) as me or have the same opinion(s) that I do, but I wanted to bring this perspective up and find out what others believe.
> 
> *Main Dimensions Board*: Size/size acceptance issues
> *The Lounge*: For fun, games, and off-topic stuff
> ...



I've noticed numerous threads on the same topics too. When George Carlin died I didnt know where to go. My poor blonde head couldn't take all the confusion. Seriously though I just go wherever I find a topic that interests me and that could be in any part of the board. I tend to stay away from the serious topics in Hyde Park but mostly because I like to be here to get away from the real world. I guess people will go or stay where they are comfortable but I agree with you about off topic posts being in the proper places. Then it would give everyone a chance to mingle and step outside of their comfort zone


----------



## Smite (Jul 6, 2008)

I can do that, just not tonight as I don't have time


----------



## William (Jul 6, 2008)

Hi 

I browse most of the threads that I read using the New Post button which lets a person see all that is going on in Dimensions. It works well for me except for one time that I broke a rule on a board because I did not even realize I was in the weight-board.

William





missaf said:


> Different forums within one discussion site have their own flavor. Like chatrooms, people gravitate to what they know and what they care to discuss. Add to that the personalities of all the people involved, and certain people feel comfortable posting in certain locations. This is all human nature.
> 
> That being said, the ongoing culture of the BHM board has always had a sense of being the wicked step-child. For the past 12 years, that's been the norm. When discussing attraction to fat men in other areas besides the BHM forum, the posts are ignored, shunned, or inappropriate rep or PMs sent to me. So I stopped doing it. There are other ladies that I know of who won't acknowledge their attraction to larger men but on occasion because of this. The BHM board has been a shelter for a long time, and I don't see that changing as well, because the men are looking for that type of environment.
> 
> Another aspect to look at here is that people need to look before they post. Do a search for "George Carlin" if you don't know where to post -- look at what the boards are for, and find the most applicable one to your discussion. It's not hard, it just requires effort, and some people aren't aware of the tools, or they're just too lazy.


----------



## KendraLee (Jul 6, 2008)

missaf said:


> Different forums within one discussion site have their own flavor. Like chatrooms, people gravitate to what they know and what they care to discuss. Add to that the personalities of all the people involved, and certain people feel comfortable posting in certain locations. This is all human nature.
> 
> That being said, the ongoing culture of the BHM board has always had a sense of being the wicked step-child. For the past 12 years, that's been the norm. When discussing attraction to fat men in other areas besides the BHM forum, the posts are ignored, shunned, or inappropriate rep or PMs sent to me. So I stopped doing it. There are other ladies that I know of who won't acknowledge their attraction to larger men but on occasion because of this. The BHM board has been a shelter for a long time, and I don't see that changing as well, because the men are looking for that type of environment.
> 
> *Another aspect to look at here is that people need to look before they post. Do a search for "George Carlin" if you don't know where to post -- look at what the boards are for, and find the most applicable one to your discussion. It's not hard, it just requires effort, and some people aren't aware of the tools, or they're just too lazy.*




I did that, I was just being facetious when I made the comment about my poor blonde head not knowing where to go


----------



## Tina (Jul 6, 2008)

Carl1h said:


> I think that this current state of talk here at dimensions could be called a general state of truce. A lot of people try not to walk too much on other people's toes, the smaller groups with less voice work on becoming more accepted, and sometimes even the majority tries to understand other views. But even though it's not perfect, maybe it's working anyway?


I agree, Carl. Maybe, when it comes to a board this well trafficked by many different types of personalities this is the best we can ask for on some days. On other days it's almost a love-fest. I won't mention the other days on the opposite side of the coin. 


> For my part, I don't feel universally loved, accepted or understood, but I do feel like I have made some very real contacts and understandings with some very real people and I know that I understand more about other people here now than I did even just a year ago. And given that Bud Light beer is the most popular beer in America, being universally loved and accepted doesn't seem to be all that great of a recommendation anyway.


Meh. No one here is universally loved and accepted. No one. Them's the breaks, eh?


Smite said:


> First things first, I don't feel unwelcomed. I don't limit myself to the BHM FFA board. I'm not part of this secret society. And you don't neccesarily have to post here to know you're not welcomed. It can be insults by proxy, or just general feeling.


Paranoia, maybe? So much of this is "you reap what you sow" kinda stuff.


Smite said:


> I'd like to know where my argument went from all over the place to just DIMs. I was even talking about within my own site.


You gave _no_ indication of that. Since it's Dims that was mentioned, and you never mentioned your own site or any other, you might be able to see how your original post in this thread might come off as paranoid and divisive...


Smite said:


> It's all hush-hush in nature. Having this on the main board probably won't have the secretive society come out either, as it's prime for targeting from the members who don't want us to blend in.
> 
> But still a good idea.


----------



## cute_obese_girl (Jul 7, 2008)

William said:


> Hi
> 
> I have seen BHM post in many threads on other Boards. I use at least 5 of the boards on Dimensions myself. I do think that there are some comments about the experiences of BHMs and FFAs that can only be said on the FFA/BHM board without creating a clash.
> 
> William



I agree, some topics are best suited for the FFA/BHM board.

The following part isn't directed at you William, just my general response to the topic:
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that for whatever reason some FFAs/BHMs don't feel accepted outside of that board, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily want to be either. Even if it was all roses and ticker tape parades on the rest of the Dims boards all the time, people don't want to lose the board that focuses on their desires. It can be intimate and special in a way that gets lost in the translation over on the other boards.

That aside, I do wish some of the fantastic, funny people that I know on the BHM board would venture out more, at least to the gender neutral parts of the board like the lounge or the foodee board. Or even Hyde Park if they dare 

Carl's right, it totally makes sense to wish Happy 4th to the people you know. When it comes to other threads that can have a broad based audience like the Hancock thread, I think perhaps the best thing we can do is encourage them to exist simultaneously on the BHM board and the main boards when it happens. Those of us who travel around and know a similar thread exists on the Lounge could simply post a link to it in the thread with a note of: I just thought you might be interested to read some of the responses to this topic over in the Lounge. Over time it could encourage people to branch out into other places and become even more involved in this community. 

I know what Chimpi's getting at, and I certainly don't think this has to be a negative or inflammatory topic. There may have been some hurt feelings and harsh words of late, but I really don't think that anyone is actively/purposely trying to make BHMs/FFAs feel unwelcome. The fact that it happens sometimes is just part of putting oneself out there.


----------



## William (Jul 7, 2008)

Hi C-O-G

I do use the Lounge a lot and recently even made a Fashion Post  

I am also on the Main Board a lot. I have slowed down my activity on Dimensions because there is still passive-aggressive remarks springing up on threads. I have also gotten Reps with sarcastic messages. 

I do not think that all Fat Men react to body size in the same way as Women.

I was just speaking to a Mother (herself a Fat Women) of two teenage boys who are big guys. One pays it no mind to his fat and is often seen topless walking around the house and when out with friends. The other is bothered by his fat to the extreme.

Does the reaction of the first Son negate the need of the second Son? I do not thing so. What I am saying is that many BHM on Dimensions may not need to go any further than the FFA/BHM Board. Others could benefit from participating on the Main Board, but they have to feel accepted and not have their statements dissected.

The best advice I can give people is that when reading the experiences of others is to identify with the experiences and not compare. I try never to compare my experiences to those of others (BBWs and chubby/skinny men and women). I do like to feel like I have a voice in how BHMs are classified and I am sure that FFAs feel the same.

William



cute_obese_girl said:


> I agree, some topics are best suited for the FFA/BHM board.
> 
> The following part isn't directed at you William, just my general response to the topic:
> I could be wrong, but it seems to me that for whatever reason some FFAs/BHMs don't feel accepted outside of that board, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily want to be either. Even if it was all roses and ticker tape parades on the rest of the Dims boards all the time, people don't want to lose the board that focuses on their desires. It can be intimate and special in a way that gets lost in the translation over on the other boards.
> ...


----------



## olwen (Jul 7, 2008)

William said:


> Hi C-O-G
> 
> I do use the Lounge a lot and recently even made a Fashion Post
> 
> ...



I get what you're saying here. But, the question that popped into my mind was: "Well what do they need in order to feel accepted?" Seriously? I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of a bhm or ffa who is scared to post for fear of reprisals or criticisms or whatever. I want to say that's just a personality thing as you intimated in your post here. I don't really worry about that sort of stuff when I post. I say what's on my mind regardless of what's happening and I try to say it in a way that won't be misconstrued. I know that is impossible tho. People will bring their own experiences into everything I say. Same goes for everyone else. That is unavoidable. 

I just wonder what that sort of shy person would need to hear or have happen in order to feel more comfortable? If that sort of person would be like that on an internet forum, would they be like that in real life? What would they be missing out on by closing themselves off from sharing themselves with other people? I would think it would be difficult to be accepted if one doesn't put oneself out there and just try not worry if their feet will get eaten by wolves. Could be there were no wolves to begin with....but I suppose that's just me.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 7, 2008)

Something I keep wondering...where exactly is the "BBW/FA forum"?

I keep seeing it said that this site is all about BBWs and FAs...but we don't even really have a place for that exclusively. The Main Board strikes me as being for weight related issues. The weight board is for feeders. The Lounge is for "fun and games" and Hyde Park is for debate. 

Where is the BBW/FA board at?

Hell, I wouldn't mind having just a board like that........


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Jul 7, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Something I keep wondering...where exactly is the "BBW/FA forum"?
> 
> I keep seeing it said that this site is all about BBWs and FAs...but we don't even really have a place for that exclusively. The Main Board strikes me as being for weight related issues. The weight board is for feeders. The Lounge is for "fun and games" and Hyde Park is for debate.
> 
> ...



I'd hit it. :bow:

I mean, seriously. Not all the men here are here for BBW, obviously, some are big and prefer skinny women. If there is going to be a forum for women who like BHM, why not a forum for men who like BBW because clearly that isn't really a given and shouldn't be considered automatic anymore.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 7, 2008)

I would love it....and you know what? I keep seeing all these complaints about "bbws coming to our boards" but where in hell are we supposed to go? Aren't we just about the only faction left that doesn't even have our own forum? 

Feeders and BHMs get their own stuff....even get "protected" in particular areas. The SSBBW ask for a place to discuss hygiene and some people got miffed over that... yet WHERE IS OUR BOARD? (I can't go the the ssbbw board even...just thought I would point that out, too)

Gee, if anyone has a gripe point, wouldn't it be the regular old FA/BBWs ?


----------



## CleverBomb (Jul 7, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I would love it....and you know what? I keep seeing all these complaints about "bbws coming to our boards" but where in hell are we supposed to go? Aren't we just about the only faction left that doesn't even have our own forum?
> 
> Feeders and BHMs get their own stuff....even get "protected" in particular areas. The SSBBW ask for a place to discuss hygiene and some people got miffed over that... yet WHERE IS OUR BOARD? (I can't go the the ssbbw board even...just thought I would point that out, too)
> 
> Gee, if anyone has a gripe point, wouldn't it be the regular old FA/BBWs ?


...but wouldn't it become a place for gratuitous come-ons and general flirtation?

-Rusty


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 7, 2008)

CleverBomb said:


> ...but wouldn't it become a place for gratuitous come-ons and general flirtation?
> 
> -Rusty



Exactly 

And it could be a place for us BBWs and FAs to post our pics......without all the "I would love to see you gain" stuff that offends some people. 

And people couldn't get bent over BBWs that like a thin man.....(or rather they can go get bent for all I care  )


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 7, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Something I keep wondering...where exactly is the "BBW/FA forum"?
> 
> I keep seeing it said that this site is all about BBWs and FAs...but we don't even really have a place for that exclusively. The Main Board strikes me as being for weight related issues. The weight board is for feeders. The Lounge is for "fun and games" and Hyde Park is for debate.
> 
> ...



I think the Main Dimensions Board and The Weight Board cater a lot more to "BBW's" and "FA's" overall.
So as to not cause some sort of ruckus, I'm going to try and lay out a DISCLAIMER here. The statement I am about to make is made purely out of example. I am not judging the person behind the title, I am not saying it's wrong, I am just using it to illustrate a point.
This thread: http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43387
*"Has There Ever Been a FA/BBW Couple Pic Thread?"*
Why does the title not include "FFA's" and "BHM's?"
(at this point I'm having trouble connection that question to my point...)

The Weight Board is not just for feeders. "Erotic weight gain _and_ fat sexuality." I think the fat sexuality in and of itself, not to mention the fact that each of those have their own specific and designated sub-Forum means that it allows for things other than weight gain related issues, fantasy-based issues, and everything in between.
The last time I saw a topic on there catering specifically to "BHM's" it was moved to the BHM/FFA Board.

Just going off the main part of The Weight Board, here are all the threads dedicated to either "BBW's" or "FA's" (on the first page!):


*Sticky: The Reality Of Dating An SSBBW*http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40247
*Grocery Store Love*
*FA's Gone Wild lol*
*Middle Eastern Women: Weight Gain?*
*I created a belly play video...* (started by and about "BBW")
*Guess the shape!!*
*FA's; A Secret Society*
*OMG the weight I've gained!! Free video * (started by and about a "BBW")
*A New Drawing or Two* (started by a male about "BBW" drawing(s))
*"I Love Those Guys that Love Bellies" appreciation thread*
*My weight gain..my butt and thighs are so much bigger!!!*
*Good free BBW site?*
*Lingerie thats not!*
*Hi i am a FA Feeder, just want to know if there are many big girls in USA*
*How much weight do YOU think I should gain?* (started by and about "BBW")
*Celebrity FA?*
*Dead or Alive BBW collage*
*a little bbw body language*
*Binge!* (started by and about "BBW")
(That's 19)
Now, my personal opinion is that because the majority* of the threads are dedicated to "BBW's" and "FA's," I think that pretty much makes it that type of Board, except without the specific defining title of "BBW/FA Board" (because of the home to the Weight Gain and Fat Sexuality sub-Forums).

majority*: Yes, there are some threads about men - "Caught between gaining and not?," "British guy gaining," "WoW...World of Weight gain" (that's 4) - and some threads that include "FFA's" - "Discussion: Feeders/Feedees and emotions/mentality," "Post Your Goofiest Pictures," "WALL-E: FA/FFA Alert" (that's 4). However, I think because the majority of the threads on that Board are for "BBW's and FA's," I personally think it makes it that Board.

'Slippery slope', as mossy would say.


----------



## William (Jul 7, 2008)

Hi Olwen

I am not a good example because I have no problem posting what I think anywhere 

I would guess that having six or more people shooting questions at a person is a deterrent. The Multiple "blocking posts" that people make are also a problem. The confrontations that seem to follow when BHMs post their thoughts about being Fat are another problem. 

I think that if there were always a group of BHM waiting to criticize a BBW for posting her experiences that there would be less posts by BBWs.

I do not know if it was on here or Smite's site that some guy said that he did not want to appear weak. I think that if BBW faced a hostile audience here because they were BBW that their would be less BBW posts made and they would hesitate to share their personal feelings.

I am not saying that there was any intent or malice in these problems, but they do happen.

William (signing off for the night)




olwen said:


> I get what you're saying here. But, the question that popped into my mind was: "Well what do they need in order to feel accepted?" Seriously? I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of a bhm or ffa who is scared to post for fear of reprisals or criticisms or whatever. I want to say that's just a personality thing as you intimated in your post here. I don't really worry about that sort of stuff when I post. I say what's on my mind regardless of what's happening and I try to say it in a way that won't be misconstrued. I know that is impossible tho. People will bring their own experiences into everything I say. Same goes for everyone else. That is unavoidable.
> 
> I just wonder what that sort of shy person would need to hear or have happen in order to feel more comfortable? If that sort of person would be like that on an internet forum, would they be like that in real life? What would they be missing out on by closing themselves off from sharing themselves with other people? I would think it would be difficult to be accepted if one doesn't put oneself out there and just try not worry if their feet will get eaten by wolves. Could be there were no wolves to begin with....but I suppose that's just me.


----------



## ripley (Jul 7, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> I think the Main Dimensions Board and The Weight Board cater a lot more to "BBW's" and "FA's" overall.
> So as to not cause some sort of ruckus, I'm going to try and lay out a DISCLAIMER here. The statement I am about to make is made purely out of example. I am not judging the person behind the title, I am not saying it's wrong, I am just using it to illustrate a point.
> This thread: http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43387
> *"Has There Ever Been a FA/BBW Couple Pic Thread?"*
> ...



So it is moved to the BHM/FFA board...well, the only way that is not going to happen is if there is no BHM/FFA board, and they are forced to mingle with the other boards. 

Say there was a board for SSBBW who love collies and gardening. It would have me and Kimberleigh in it, and I'm sure we'd be very happy amongst the seedings and puppies. But if I had that board, and went to the other boards to post collie or gardening posts, then the mods would sort me right back to the SSBBW Collie & Gardening forum. It wouldn't be because anyone disliked SSBBW, Collies, or gardening. It would be simple housekeeping, the same as moving a recipe thread to the Foodee Board.

I don't see how BHM/FFA are marginalized when they choose to stay on that board, and choose not to participate as much in general discussion. I hear what you're saying, that the discussions are BBW/FA centric, but you can't have a board for BHM/FFA without putting BHM/FFA threads there!

Chimpi, you're a BHM, right? Well you're a great participant on all the forums. Several FFAs are too (missaf, Dr. P. Marshall are two that come to mind). If you and they can do it, why can't any other BHM/FFA?


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 7, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> I think the Main Dimensions Board and The Weight Board cater a lot more to "BBW's" and "FA's" overall.
> 
> 
> So as to not cause some sort of ruckus, I'm going to try and lay out a DISCLAIMER here. The statement I am about to make is made purely out of example. I am not judging the person behind the title, I am not saying it's wrong, I am just using it to illustrate a point.
> ...



Errmmmm Chimpi...have you been down to the BHM/FFA board? They have dozens of threads like that......
and back to my original point....the BHM have their OWN FORUM for those threads...so if you feel it is "inappropriate" or "exclusionary" for such a BBW/FA on the main board, where in the world should it be posted instead? The BHM keep saying they feel "left out" but if the majority of posters here are BBW, why don't we have our own seperate board? I keep seeing this message that the BBW have done something wrong...and I'm sick of it. 


Chimpi said:


> The Weight Board is not just for feeders. "Erotic weight gain _and_ fat sexuality." I think the fat sexuality in and of itself, not to mention the fact that each of those have their own specific and designated sub-Forum means that it allows for things other than weight gain related issues, fantasy-based issues, and everything in between.



You know Chimpi- I thought that at first...but there does seem to be a lot of arguing over there ....with the repeated theme of "this is OUR PLACE" from the feeders....the weight board in it's entirety. I have been made to feel pretty damn unwelcome over there myself...since this is a thread about people "feeling more welcome". If if it supposed to be for BBW/FAs, too, then perhaps someone needs to point that out to some of the feeders that seem entirely too territorial, IMO.



Chimpi said:


> The last time I saw a topic on there catering specifically to "BHM's" it was moved to the BHM/FFA Board.




They have THEIR VERY OWN FORUM...why shouldn't it be? If there was actually a BBW/FA forum, you don't think stuff would be moved there? You can't move things to a place that does not exist.......

As you pointed out in your OP, they keep making threads down there to remain "exclusionary" and I find it pretty damn insulting myself....esp when someone comes up to the main board to say that BBWs shouldn't be allowed to post pics of celebrities in the lounge. You know, that place that HE NEVER SEEMS TO POST ON YET HE THINKS HE SHOULD TELL OTHERS WHAT TO POST THERE :doh:



Chimpi said:


> Just going off the main part of The Weight Board, here are all the threads dedicated to either "BBW's" or "FA's":
> 
> 
> *Sticky: The Reality Of Dating An SSBBW*http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40247
> ...



Once again, where should it go if not there? and who stops the BHMs from going to the weight board to make their own threads? Oh let me guess, it's all the BBW fault again, I suppose.....

Oh and not all the BBW are into weight gain....in case that needs to be clarified. (lots of posts there about weight gain, I noticed- not necessarily a "BBW/FA thing")
Oh and "good free bbw site" was a guy asking for a link to OTHER sites....as if he didn't think he was at one already. Then a feeder goes in there to criticize the BBWs, as usual. 

Oh, and my "I love guys that love bellies" thread invited FFAs to say what they love about bellies...right there in the OP. There is also a thread on the weight board asking what people love about BHM...and it has garnered little participation from the FFAs, I have noticed. 

If the FFAs are sticking to the BHM board, then you best bet your bottom dollar the BHM will, too. 



Chimpi said:


> majority*: Yes, there are some threads about men, and some threads that include "FFA's" - "Discussion: Feeders/Feedees and emotions/mentality," "Post Your Goofiest Pictures," "Caught between gaining and not?," "British guy gaining," "WoW...World of Weight gain," "WALL-E: FA/FFA Alert." However, I think because the majority of the threads on that Board are for "BBW's and FA's," I personally think it makes it that Board.
> 
> 'Slippery slope', as mossy would say.



Not slippery at all....if there is no other place for us fat women to go to be admired....like the fat guys have and are always complaining about....then what do you suggest? We don't have our own forum....and people keep bitching about us on the other boards like we have "taken over" (gee, feeling my resentment yet?) so what a better way to allow us to "roam" instead of people implying that we should "stfu". Personally, I would be quite happy NOT to be "treading" on someone else's groove......


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 7, 2008)

ripley said:


> So it is moved to the BHM/FFA board...well, the only way that is not going to happen is if there is no BHM/FFA board, and they are forced to mingle with the other boards.



And I don't want to see that happen. At this point I think it would be a bigger downfall were the Board to be removed because I think most of the regular posters on that Board would no longer post at all.



ripley said:


> Chimpi, you're a BHM, right? Well you're a great participant on all the forums. Several FFAs are too (missaf, Dr. P. Marshall are two that come to mind). If you and they can do it, why can't any other BHM/FFA?



I cannot speak for the others, but I'll throw some ideas out on that.
I am a "Big Handsome Male," sure. I'm big and I am a male; handsome is subjective.  I do not, however, consider that the main reason I am here on this Forum. I consider myself a "Fat Admirer" before I consider myself a "Big Handsome Male." Meaning, if I had to choose one (a thin "Fat Admirer" or a non-"Fat Admirer" "Big Handsome Male") I would most definitely choose to be a thin "Fat Admirer." I understand that "Big Handsome Male" (as well as "Big Beautiful Woman") are more redeeming terms about those types of people than they are status/social labels, but that's not how I completely see it. Also, on that same note, I do not fall under the category of needing a "Female Fat Admirer" as a partner, so the appeal of "FFA's" are much less to me than they are others (though, I will not admit that it does make it all the sweeter, that's for sure).
I think that combined with the fact that I'm willing to put my views and opinions out there and participate more on the rest of the boards makes me willing to withstand unwelcome or marginalized feelings more than some. I'm trying real hard not to say it this way, but to be blunt, I think I can handle criticism better than some that prefer to stay in their 'happy place' (BHM/FFA Board). That's not to say that the majority, or even all of the people that do prefer to stay on the BHM/FFA Board cannot handle criticism.
Different feelings, purposes, viewpoints, and experiences for different people.


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 7, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Errmmmm Chimpi...have you been down to the BHM/FFA board? They have dozens of threads like that......
> and back to my original point....the BHM have their OWN FORUM for those threads...so if you feel it is "inappropriate" or "exclusionary" for such a BBW/FA on the main board, where in the world should it be posted instead? The BHM keep saying they feel "left out" but if the majority of posters here are BBW, why don't we have our own seperate board? I keep seeing this message that the BBW have done something wrong...and I'm sick of it.



I don't feel that it is inappropriate for that thread to be on the Main Dimensions Board. I was just pointing out that it's designated specifically for "BBW and FA's," and remains in the Main Dimensions Board. Where else does it go? The only place I personally would suggest would be the main part of The Weight Board. Otherwise it is up to the Moderators' discretion.




Green Eyed Fairy said:


> You know Chimpi- I thought that at first...but there does seem to be a lot of arguing over there ....with the repeated theme of "this is OUR PLACE" from the feeders....the weight board in it's entirety. I have been made to feel pretty damn unwelcome over there myself...since this is a thread about people "feeling more welcome". If if it supposed to be for BBW/FAs, too, then perhaps someone needs to point that out to some of the feeders that seem entirely too territorial, IMO.



I'm very glad you brought this up, Greeny. I think others might feel the same way, and it has some very valid and justified reasoning behind it. Yet another idea for more good discussion. 
I have seen the territorial position of a lot of the 'Feeders' in The Weight Board, as well. However, I think it has died down a lot due to the sub-Forums that have been created in The Weight Board.



Green Eyed Fairy said:


> They have THEIR VERY OWN FORUM...why shouldn't it be? If there was actually a BBW/FA forum, you don't think stuff would be moved there? You can't move things to a place that does not exist.......
> *snip*
> Once again, where should it go if not there? and who stops the BHMs from going to the weight board to make their own threads? Oh let me guess, it's all the BBW fault again, I suppose.....



Again, the only place I, personally, feel these "BBW and FA" threads should go is mainly The Weight Board, and if not there then here in the Main Dimensions Board. Otherwise I think it is completely up to the opinion of the Moderators. I cannot speak for them nor their stance on that. That's something else that some people might want some clarification on (wanting and getting are two separate things ).



Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Oh and not all the BBW are into weight gain....in case that needs to be clarified. (lots of posts there about weight gain, I noticed- not necessarily a "BBW/FA thing")



I am well aware of that (not suggesting you were saying that I was not aware of that). However, out of all the threads I listed on the list, I only see 4 threads with the premise or mention of Weight Gain. And you're right about the "I love guys that love bellies" thread, I should have included that in my mention of threads that "include 'FFA's'." I'm sorry, Greeny. 



Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Not slippery at all....if there is no other place for us fat women to go to be admired....like the fat guys have and are always complaining about....then what do you suggest? We don't have our own forum....and people keep bitching about us on the other boards like we have "taken over" (gee, feeling my resentment yet?) so what a better way to allow us to "roam" instead of people implying that we should "stfu". Personally, I would be quite happy NOT to be "treading" on someone else's groove......



I am not sure what to suggest. Right now I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this issue that I'm trying to find out more about as it is. You might want to see if others feel the same way as you do (which is the reason I started this thread and the thread down on the BHM/FFA Board... to see who and why people felt the unwelcome/marginalized/separation feelings). I am quite pleased with the way the Dimensions Forums is laid out, and am only disheartened to see that so many people feel "out of place" or "marginalized."


----------



## ripley (Jul 7, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> And I don't want to see that happen. At this point I think it would be a bigger downfall were the Board to be removed because I think most of the regular posters on that Board would no longer post at all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah, I get that.  If I had my SSBBW Collie & Gardening Form and FAs Who Love Them* I doubt I'd ever come out, lol. It's just...if I had such a Utopia I would not be upset that the rest of the forum doesn't extend me an invitation to participate, especially if I believed (as I have heard some say) that they are unwelcome, abused, whatever "out here".






*Mods, I think this has real potential.


----------



## ripley (Jul 7, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> I'm very glad you brought this up, Greeny. I think others might feel the same way, and it has some very valid and justified reasoning behind it. Yet another idea for more good discussion.
> I have seen the territorial position of a lot of the 'Feeders' in The Weight Board, as well. However, I think it has died down a lot due to the sub-Forums that have been created in The Weight Board.



Nope, hasn't died down as far as I can see. A very vocal "Feeder" PM'd me in chat a couple of weeks ago to ask me why I post to it. He said that Dimensions was created with them in mind and it is "THEIR PLACE" and he'd like to see it surrounded by a high wall keeping everyone else out. I replied that Dims is everyone's place, and asked if he really thought segregation was the answer. 

The irony is that it made me think, and was part of the reason I made the poll there that I did...to try to understand better, and to get a dialog going. I think we'll all be better off if we learn about each other and stop dividing into factions. It bothers me that the poll seemed to have the opposite effect and seemed to cleave things further.


----------



## Paquito (Jul 7, 2008)

We could start a thread in the main board where BHMs and FFAs could post openly why they feel left out and like outsiders here, ya know, get the ball rolling on bettering the communication here.
Just a thought.


----------



## KendraLee (Jul 7, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> I think the Main Dimensions Board and The Weight Board cater a lot more to "BBW's" and "FA's" overall.
> So as to not cause some sort of ruckus, I'm going to try and lay out a DISCLAIMER here. The statement I am about to make is made purely out of example. I am not judging the person behind the title, I am not saying it's wrong, I am just using it to illustrate a point.
> This thread: http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43387
> *"Has There Ever Been a FA/BBW Couple Pic Thread?"*
> ...


 
See this is exactly why I hate labels. Why does everything have to be so literal. Do you really feel that unwelcome to post your pics in that thread because of an oversight in the wording. I'm not a couple but I post in there. That thread was originally a question that turned into couples posting their pics. Maybe the whole thread can just be turned into a Couples of Dimensions thread. The pictures are just a testament that there is love out there and I'd welcome seeing everyones pics.


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 8, 2008)

missaf said:


> Isn't that what this is?



Precisely.



KendraLee said:


> See this is exactly why I hate labels. Why does everything have to be so literal. Do you really feel that unwelcome to post your pics in that thread because of an oversight in the wording. I'm not a couple but I post in there. That thread was originally a question that turned into couples posting their pics. Maybe the whole thread can just be turned into a Couples of Dimensions thread. The pictures are just a testament that there is love out there and I'd welcome seeing everyones pics.



I don't feel unwelcome to post there, no. The reason I, personally, do not post there is because I'm no longer in a relationship.
I think others will not see it the same way you and I do, though, Kendra. Some people might see "BBW/FA" and immediately be turned off to posting just because it doesn't include "BHM/FFA" in the title. Where I cannot say I know how many people will be turned off because of that, I know it's a very likely outcome. Not everyone is liberal in that sort of thinking. On a very, very, very extreme example, I would feel welcome going to the bathroom in a "Womens" bathroom (because, regardless of gender, they're still toilets), but most people would not strictly because of the sign.

*EDIT:* Confession - I have the inherent feeling this is such a broad and complex issue, nothing will come of this. Hopefully people might learn and understand others better, though.


----------



## olwen (Jul 8, 2008)

William said:


> Hi Olwen
> 
> I am not a good example because I have no problem posting what I think anywhere
> 
> ...



LOL, I highly doubt that a few criticisms would stop too many of us from posting our opinions as you no doubt have already noticed. 

Seriously tho, the only way so many questions would be a deterrent is if the poster just couldn't handle the barrage of questions for whatever reasons, which seems to me to be more of a personality thing than a weight or gender issue. To say that every time someone posts they get hostile voices back makes me wonder if it's just what the person is saying rather than the gender or weight of the person. I have noted that when some bbws and thin FAs post arguments do ensue. I can almost predict the turn a thread might take based on *who *is posting - and *not *their size or gender.

This is not to say there may not be some truth to what you say, but I'd want to dig deeper to make sure that was indeed the case.


----------



## KendraLee (Jul 8, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> Precisely.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I do understand your point. I just wish those who wouldn't feel comfortble could find a way to work through it and not take things so personal. Its something I've had to do. It may be cliche but it does make a person stronger. 
And I've used the mens room before. The line is shorter


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 8, 2008)

I have a stupid question.

Is a BHM who loves fat partners a BHM or an FA? Or both?

If a BHM who loves fat partners can be classified as an FA, for the purposes of this discussion, and given the claim that the boards exclusive of the BHM/(F)FA board are the domain of BBWs and FAs, then is the BHM/(F)FA board the domain of non-fat (F)FAs?

Because it seems to me that, under these circumstances, a BHM who appreciated fat partners--either male or female--may find that there are many more opportunities to get to know people out on the main boards.

So I'm curious as to why, given how unhappy some BHM seem to be, feeling relegated to a single board, more BHM are not out mingling on the main boards.

What needs are being met right now by the BHM/(F)FA board that can't be met out on the boards at large?


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 8, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Is a BHM who loves fat partners a BHM or an FA? Or both?
> 
> If a BHM who loves fat partners can be classified as an FA, for the purposes of this discussion, and given the claim that the boards exclusive of the BHM/(F)FA board are the domain of BBWs and FAs, then is the BHM/(F)FA board the domain of non-fat (F)FAs?
> 
> Because it seems to me that, under these circumstances, a BHM who appreciated fat partners--either male or female--may find that there are many more opportunities to get to know people out on the main boards.



Both, I say.

Under those circumstances, it would be much more common for "FABHM's" to have more opportunities to mingle about. I do think there are a good portion of some well-rounded (literally), fat "Female Fat Admirers" that are regular posters on the BHM/FFA Board.



Fascinita said:


> So I'm curious as to why, given how unhappy some BHM seem to be, feeling relegated to a single board, more BHM are not out mingling on the main boards.



I am hoping to find out the same.



Fascinita said:


> What needs are being met right now by the BHM/(F)FA board that can't be met out on the boards at large?



I think a lot of the "BHM" population on the BHM/FFA Board enjoy being admired and want to keep it readily simple, so they just stay within their designated area. I have had moments (in real life and online) where I have only wanted to mingle among my peers, the ones I knew already and/or knew would have the same understanding as I. I do not think there is anything wrong with that.
Just my observation (not necessarily the only reason I think "BHM's" mingle on the BHM/FFA Board exclusively).


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 8, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> I have had moments (in real life and online) where I have only wanted to mingle among my peers, the ones I knew already and/or knew would have the same understanding as I. I do not think there is anything wrong with that.



But the BHM/(F)FA board is not just for BHM. So it is not solely for one set of peers to mingle exclusive of other sets of peers. I'm not sure that I understand completely, Chimpi, if only because of lack of first-hand experience. I am not a BHM. On the other hand, as has been pointed out, there is no single board on Dims where BBWs can go to mingle only with their own peers, who may or may not have the same understanding as one another, but who certainly probably have many commonalities as BBWs (not shared with non-BBWs.) In fact, no one board here is off-limits to anyone else, except that some people do seem to get territorial.

Is the BHM/(F)FA board the place where BHMs go to be admired rather than to admire? There seems to be an undercurrent having to do with wanting to be admired but not finding the admiration they/you (BHM) need out on the main boards. The thread formerly known as "I'm the guy who hates..." was in fact started as an expression of discontent for what was seen as a lack of representation of BHM on the boards. If this is indeed the core issue, the fact is you can't legislate what people find attractive. But there is a thread here for everything, seemingly. BHM should have their admirers just as BBWs should be free to like who they like.

I do object to a number of false claims and specious arguments that have been made regarding the supposed rejection of BHM on the main boards. On the other hand, I've always found that where there's a will, there's a way. When people of good faith decide to put their heads together, mountains can literally be moved. But in my opinion, false faith and obduracy aren't generally productive.


----------



## Observer (Jul 8, 2008)

Just scaning some of the posts here I get a sense of a gross point of misunderstanding. 

The intent of the BHM/FFA forum, at least as I understand it, was to focus on topics of especial interest to BHMS and FFAs. There was never discussion or intent of creating a corral into which these individuals would be herded and restricted. I know of no one who is advocating otherwise; in practice it is certainly true most who post here also post elsewhere, so it seems apparent that there has been no corraling..


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Jul 8, 2008)

Smite said:


> I'm not part of this secret society.



What secret society? What are you talking about? I post all over these boards, including the BHM/FFA board and I honestly don't know what you're talking about. Maybe I am oblivious, but I think I am reading the same things you are and I don't see it. 

And I don't actually have any great answer as to why I post on all the boards. It never occurred to me that I shouldn't, or that anyone would think that I shouldn't. I read the other boards and when I see something that interests me or I feel I have something to contribute to a thread or( if it's the lounge or something) if I feel I will be amused by participating, then I do. I did lurk for a long time here at Dims and so I had read a lot of posts and threads and figured out the lay of the land before I even joined. And yes, it took some time for me to get comfortable posting (first on the BHM board and then venturing out to Dims as a whole), but I have honestly never had a problem on any of the boards. Maybe it's because I came here to deal with more personal issues for me as an FA and so I am looking for common ground with and understanding from the other members of the community. That's my personal agenda if you will. I am looking to make sense of myself and seeing posts that reflect my feelings or that answer questions I have as an FA about the experiences of fat people, that helps me. Along the way I have become genuinely fond of more than a few people of all types on this board and since I always like things that make me laugh, I enjoy being on the boards for off topic issues too. There are some really funny people here. That's why I like the Lounge for example. 

I personally, am not big on drama or conflict. I would rather take the time to triple review a post before I post it to make sure I am clear. I'm not interested in immediately responding to things. I'd rather be understood than make my argument immediately and risk making one I didn't really mean because it was clouded by my anger or offense. If someone is going to argue with me, it should be about what I intended to say, not some side argument that has nothing to do with what I meant. If I misspeak, it is my responsibility to clarify my position. It's pretty simple. In fact, on the rare occasion where I responded to a post because I was offended, it took me much longer to answer because I wanted to let my anger ebb and then go ahead and say what I really wanted to say. So, I would recommend a cooling off period before posting. That is my only personal tip. 

And I do agree with KendraLee's point about ignoring labels. If you want to respond, respond. I have seen very few people tell others to get out of a thread because it was for BBW only or male FAs only or what have you. Usually they just say, "Oh crap, I meant to put both but forgot."


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

Hi Owlen

I have seen Male FAs get attacked for expressing their thoughts on admiration or on being a FA, but I have never seen a BBW attacked to sharing her experiences on being Fat. Sure BBW get attack for personality issues, but that is different.

It is like there is a wall set up against the experiences of BHM most often caused by a commentary, correction or comparison by a non-BHM about what is shared. There are thousands of posts on Dimensions by BBWs about their lives and experiences and there are not that many replies from people of other sizes and gander correcting  and critiquing them, their statements are taken on face value.

Another theme that BHM talking about their problems is automatically classified as whining instead of sharing. This could be cause by the fact that BHM have to repeat their statements so much.




olwen said:


> LOL, I highly doubt that a few criticisms would stop too many of us from posting our opinions as you no doubt have already noticed.
> 
> Seriously tho, the only way so many questions would be a deterrent is if the poster just couldn't handle the barrage of questions for whatever reasons, which seems to me to be more of a personality thing than a weight or gender issue. To say that every time someone posts they get hostile voices back makes me wonder if it's just what the person is saying rather than the gender or weight of the person. I have noted that when some bbws and thin FAs post arguments do ensue. I can almost predict the turn a thread might take based on *who *is posting - and *not *their size or gender.
> 
> This is not to say there may not be some truth to what you say, but I'd want to dig deeper to make sure that was indeed the case.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 8, 2008)

This is what worries me about segmentation:

"Has There Ever Been a FA/BBW, or FFA, or BHM, or FFA Bi or Lesbian, or BHM that is into BBW's, or BHM that is into skinny girls, or Feeder/Feedee or Gainer/Foodee or Plushie Couple Pic Thread?"

I think as a whole we tend to want to pigeonhole things in our lives so as to save time. We can dismiss the music that we don't want to listen to ("not everyone likes reggaeton.......but I LOVE everything I hear on FRED radio"), and movies ("I hate slasher-horror, but I love vampire movies").

I think we're doing that here, it it may not be necessary, provided that people can be a bit more considerate & understanding within the boards.

Observer made a good point in stating that the BHM/FFA board is a place to discuss issues relevant to them, but was not meant to corral them into a board where they have to remain for the rest of their living days. I enjoy when I see people cross from other boards to discuss topics that they feel they have something to contribute to.......you know, sense of community and all. Also, props to Dr. P., who works diligently on being a FFA who is involved in many forums here in Dimensions, and does so without reprisal, simply because her comments are on topic, and discuss *issues* that are based on the merits of the argument, rather than how she feels about a particular person posting on a particular day.

William, you and I have engaged in both open, and private conversation, and I enjoy your posts on the boards. However I DO have to ask you about something you said in your most recent post in this thread:



> Another theme that BHM talking about their problems is automatically classified as whining instead of sharing. This could be cause by the fact that BHM have to repeat their statements so much.



May I ask why you feel that BHM have to repeat their statements so much? Is it because most people here don't understand the BHM experience? Do you feel it's a defense mechanism put up by BBW's who don't want to minimize their experience by having the opposite sex put their experience out there? Can we get some responses from William without flaming him, as this could be very enlightening for all of us.


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

Hi WG

I think that BHMs have to repeat their point of view because of the unofficial wall here at Dimensions. Statements by BHM seem to have to be measured, compared, classified in regards to the experiences of BBWs.

This is totally wrong and unfair because Fat Men have a different mindset and expectations in life. What may be devastating for a BBW may not be a big deal for a BHM and the What really bothers a BHM may not even bother a BBW. (talking to a BBW friend last night I know how true this is)

For men in Women in general there are entire sections of bookstores dedicated to the differences between the genders, yet in Fat Acceptance the gender experience for Fat People is treated as similar or comparable.

William 




wrestlingguy said:


> This is what worries me about segmentation:
> 
> 
> William, you and I have engaged in both open, and private conversation, and I enjoy your posts on the boards. However I DO have to ask you about something you said in your most recent post in this thread:
> ...


----------



## Tad (Jul 8, 2008)

Im going to take a different slant on this. Why have more than one board at all? Why dont we just have one board for all posts, and people can just read what they want to read? It happens that Ive been around these boards literally since theyve started, when in fact there was just one board (and it was not even on Dimensions yet). Also as a chubby FA who appreciates weight gain on myself or others, loves food, and is interested in living well and healthily Ive posted on most of the Dimensions boards. Ive seen two things driving the diversification: difference in interests, and volume of posts.

The very first split was an example of the difference in interests, it was to create a separate Weight Board (as opposed to the main board). The boards at the time were hosted on the BBWQT site, a site hosted by a BBW married to an FA, and up to then mostly serving as a place for BBW and FA to find each other (it had pictures and profiles, as I recall). Once there was a board, fairly quickly it became obvious that there was a real flash-point: some posters (mostly male) wanted to talk about feeding and gaining, and some other posters (mostly female) did not want to hear about those topics at all. The only read what you want approach didnt work well because of a mix of ambiguity (you would not always know what a thread was about from the title) and curiosity (I lot of people were posting in that thread, even if you didnt think you were interested you might want to know what was going on). The board owner therefore created the weight board for feeding/gaining discussions. This let those who wanted to talk about such things do so without being attacked, and those who didnt want to hear about it could more easily ignore it. Feelings really were running quite high; Id realized I did have interest in feeder talk even if it was largely considered evil, so wanted to participate in the new board, but I was worried that in doing so Id be cut out of discussions on the main board, so I created a different user name for the weight board.

A more recent example of the difference in interests splits is, I think, the creation of Hyde Park. Some people delight in more political discussions, others have little interest in them. However they used to erupt in a lot of threads (granted often due to just a few posters). The creation of Hyde Park gave a safe place for those discussions, let those not interested avoid them, and made it non-permitted to divert other threads into political discussions. I think most people have really appreciated that (although maybe some good fights of that sort would drain some of the tenseness and help avoid fights of other types? I dont know).

The other thing that has driven the creation of new boards is sheer volume. When you open up a board, and since the previous day fifty threads have been updated, it gets overwhelming. On the other hand, if no threads have updated you are apt to quickly lose interest. I dont know what the exact sweet spot on discussion levels is, and I suppose that perception of it probably varies by observer, but in general I think most people would agree that too much traffic or too little traffic are both bad for a board. This was a good part of the reason, I think, for the creation of the Lounge. It took a lot of traffic off of other boards. There was also some difference of interests factors Im sure (those who only wanted to discuss weight issues were not distracted by all the non-related posts). 

Now, imagine for a moment that the BHM/FFA board was on its own site. Is there a sufficient difference in interests amongst the posters that a new thread is needed to separate them? Is the volume so high that dividing it up would make the board more manageable? In both cases I think the answer is no. As many people have remarked, the BHM/FFA board tends to be one of the more tranquil parts of Dimensions. And as for the volume, my perception is that it is very manageable, and in fact still a little below where it would be nice to have it. (it is higher than when the board was first created, and it has gradually trended higher over the years, but it could go farther still comfortably, I think).

So I see no reason, from the BHM/FFA board side of things, to push posts elsewhere. This is not the only thing to consider, but Ill put the next part in another post, to split the topics up.


----------



## Tad (Jul 8, 2008)

Are there other reasons why getting more cross talk between BBW/FA and BHM/FFA would be good? That is, if the BHM/FFA board is fine the way it is, are there other reasons why it would be a good think to get people to roam more widely? On the contrary, are there reasons that maybe that would not be a good idea?

On the plus side, I can think of a few possibilities:

There are shared issues between people of size no matter their gender, and between FA no matter their gender. As a general rule the larger a community is, and the more connections between its members, the healthier it will be and the more it will thrive. So by creating a larger pool of fat posters and a larger pool of FA posters, maybe we get better discussions, more information, more good ideas, more potential for socialization and for actions.

Dimensions sometimes straddles a somewhat ambiguous line between size acceptance and fat admiration. In all honesty I think a goodly number of posters, big folk and FA, male and female, embrace one of those but not the other. Weve discussed a fair bit in various threads around having SA but not FA (threads like would you prefer or not to date a dedicated FA). But we get do get a lot of people who exhibit fat admiration but not size acceptance. There are guys who admire fat women, but have no respect for fat guys. We get fat women who like being fat, or who at least appreciate that there are men who admire them, but who have no respect for fat guys. Likewise with BHM and FFA. When on your own dedicated boards it is easier to mistake heterosexual fat admiration for size acceptance, because most of the fat people you meet will be of the gender being admired. With a more mixed group it might challenge some peoples perceptions, which might be a good thing (or might not).

It might draw out or develop more of the interests of some of the people on the BHM/FFA boards, in areas that other boards specialize in. Someone who only posts on the BHM/FFA boards might not feel good starting a movie trivia thread, but might enjoy it. There could be people who have fashion questions, but feel uncomfortable talking about them. There could be guys seriously wondering if they should have weight loss surgery who dont realize that there is a board dedicated to such agonizing decisions, and who dont feel that it would be appropriate to discuss on the BHM board.

On the con side, there is mostly just two things that I can think of:

As I mentioned above, not everyone here is very size accepting. Maybe more exposure to fat-people-you-dont-lust-for would help some people broaden their SA feelings, but on the other hand there are bound to be some hurt feelings as well, and some people would no doubt firmly dig in their heels and maintain that only one gender should be fat. That is a recipe for acrimony and hurt.

Dilution and volume, the opposite of the reasons for splitting in the first place. Does the Lounge need more traffic? And do the BBW and FA posting pictures in the recent picture of you care that much about pictures of BHM and FFA? Do they really want to hear about how hot some chubby secondary character was in a recent movie, or see the speculation that some skinny starlet likes heavier guys? Even if they accept it, does it just make it harder to get what they want out of the forums in a reasonable amount of time? In other words, does adding in more people, with different interests, kind of undo a natural, normal, and useful evolution?

I dont have any answers about how the above issues balance out. I think the issues are interesting to talk about, and Id love to know if others see other pros or cons to more integration.
__________________


----------



## Admiral_Snackbar (Jul 8, 2008)

edx said:


> Ive seen two things driving the diversification: difference in interests, and volume of posts.
> ...
> A more recent example of the difference in interests splits is, I think, the creation of Hyde Park. Some people delight in more political discussions, others have little interest in them. However they used to erupt in a lot of threads (granted often due to just a few posters). The creation of Hyde Park gave a safe place for those discussions, let those not interested avoid them, and made it non-permitted to divert other threads into political discussions. I think most people have really appreciated that (although maybe some good fights of that sort would drain some of the tenseness and help avoid fights of other types? I dont know).


I spend most of my time hanging out in the Lounge or Hyde Park, mainly for the excellent discussions. I do follow a few blogs in the clubhouse, but I think the majority of my posts are in HP or the movie/YouTube threads. As a married BHM, I don't usually go to the BHM/FA threads at all, the Weight Board threads only in certain circumstances (and again, that thread is it's own particular animal). In many of the threads marrieds are not welcome, and for good reason.

I think HP could be separated into people who legitimately want rational, reasoned discussions and people who come to do drive-by flaming. That's the nature of the REAL HP Speaker's Corner, is to take all comers, so that to me censors the discussion, although the risk of derailment is very high.



> The other thing that has driven the creation of new boards is sheer volume. When you open up a board, and since the previous day fifty threads have been updated, it gets overwhelming.


 This to me is A-#1 the reason why things have gotten difficult. Once Dimensions got into the Internet zeitgeist, it grew in popularity and volume. I would be curious again to plot out in terms of the total # of members whom are regular contributors here and who just have 'place holders' to lurk and gawk. Then you have the outright shit disturbers (of whom thankfully are few) that come in just to take advantage of the Internet Anonymity Factor to stir the pot.



edx said:


> There are shared issues between people of size no matter their gender, and between FA no matter their gender. As a general rule the larger a community is, and the more connections between its members, the healthier it will be and the more it will thrive. So by creating a larger pool of fat posters and a larger pool of FA posters, maybe we get better discussions, more information, more good ideas, more potential for socialization and for actions.
> 
> Dimensions sometimes straddles a somewhat ambiguous line between size acceptance and fat admiration. In all honesty I think a goodly number of posters, big folk and FA, male and female, embrace one of those but not the other. Weve discussed a fair bit in various threads around having SA but not FA (threads like would you prefer or not to date a dedicated FA). But we get do get a lot of people who exhibit fat admiration but not size acceptance. There are guys who admire fat women, but have no respect for fat guys. We get fat women who like being fat, or who at least appreciate that there are men who admire them, but who have no respect for fat guys. Likewise with BHM and FFA. When on your own dedicated boards it is easier to mistake heterosexual fat admiration for size acceptance, because most of the fat people you meet will be of the gender being admired. With a more mixed group it might challenge some peoples perceptions, which might be a good thing (or might not).


In another thread on this topic, it is also quite apparent of the cliques on here, and how many people rush in not to so much comment on the issue but as a measure of solidarity toward a friend who may be getting bombed or attacked in a discussion. There are large polar groups of extreme FA/gaining and anti-gaining/"just fat, nothing more" who clash on occasion when a rather volatile thread is put out there.

I think in any site of this type you're going to get people coming at it from all sides, all extremes, all situations.



> Dilution and volume, the opposite of the reasons for splitting in the first place. Does the Lounge need more traffic? And do the BBW and FA posting pictures in the recent picture of you care that much about pictures of BHM and FFA? Do they really want to hear about how hot some chubby secondary character was in a recent movie, or see the speculation that some skinny starlet likes heavier guys? Even if they accept it, does it just make it harder to get what they want out of the forums in a reasonable amount of time? In other words, does adding in more people, with different interests, kind of undo a natural, normal, and useful evolution?


But see, you're going to get that conflict anywhere. We have so many threads about fat-acceptance with "fic-shun-ul char-ack-turrs" when in fact it's just a symptom of a bigger problem, or just an instance of relative offense. I work with people for example who politicize EVERYTHING, and it's either an evil liberal plot or a neo-conservative careless attitude. Never, ever, a middle-of-the-road situation, or a live/let live attitude. We are a species of this or that, never a bit of both. I worked in an ethnically diverse office once and you again get discussions on all fronts. Try having post 9/11 discussions with an Indian woman and her lower-caste subordinate who felt Caucasians abuse their powers and that 9/11 was some form of payback for decades of atrocities...and she's over here on a Green Card trying to make a living and raise a family! 

We live in a society that by and large abhors size extremes. It's in our popular culture, our prejudices, our indices of attractiveness. It's going to create a cell of fat-positivity regardless, and even then you're going to get infighting. Anything like Dimensions is going to be an experiment of sorts, and that any extremism or oddity we perceive is going to just going to be yet another outlier in the graph of the _status quo_. For the most part, this is an incredibly cool bunch of people, and like anything else, we either tolerate or eliminate those who spin around in their own particular circle and expect everyone else to watch.


I always use the Glen Batement standard (from Stephen King's The Stand), and although it's extreme in view, it still to me stands relevant:_"Show me a man or a woman alone and I'll show you a saint. Give me two and they'll fall in love. Give me three and they'll invent the charming thing we call 'society'. Give me four and they'll build a pyramid. Give me five and they'll make one an outcast. Give me six and they'll reinvent prejudice. Give me seven and in seven years they'll reinvent warfare. Man may have been made in the image of God, but human society was made in the image of His opposite number, and is always trying to get back home."_​


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 8, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> May I ask why you feel that BHM have to repeat their statements so much? Is it because most people here don't understand the BHM experience? Do you feel it's a defense mechanism put up by BBW's who don't want to minimize their experience by having the opposite sex put their experience out there? Can we get some responses from William without flaming him, as this could be very enlightening for all of us.



Phil,

I appreciate the spirit in which this was written, but I'm opposed to validating the claim that BHM meet with "correction" when they post, and that they "have to repeat their statements."

I just don't see evidence of that. I see posts from BHM all over the board every day. And I have not noticed a trend of either correcting the BHM accounts of their own eperiences or of ignoring or silencing them such that they'd have to repeat themselves. I just don't see it. It's true I don't read every post on Dimensions, by far. Which is why I remain open to being shown specific evidence that proves that BHM are not being given a fair shake on the main boards.

What I _have_ seen is a repeated insistence and vague implications that somehow BBW have the run of this place and are not being very neighborly and are kind of ruining it for everyone else a little. But again, that has not been substantiated. It all seems to be based on supposition and fear and exaggeration. One detractor even claims there is some kind of secret society or inner circle at Dimensions, hinting at some form of conspiracy, I can only assume. What's ironic is that a claim is being made that BBWs detract from BHMs by comparing BHM experiences to their own, yet the accusations that have flown at BBW in this debate have taken the form of comparisons precisely--just how much better BBWs seem to have it at Dimensions than anyone else!--at least according to the rhetoric that's being wielded around recently.

One person, in particular, who makes these claims against BBW in particular has kept making them for weeks now, yet has failed to point us to specific instances of this purported poor treatment from BBW toward BHM. 

I don't know how this will end. But I do know this: Unless there is a willingness to communicate in good faith on both sides, this thread and others, your willingness and mine and everyone else's to correct whatever mistakes may have been made... none of this will mean anything. I cannot have a meaningful, rational conversation with anyone about a supposed problem of which I've seen absolutely no evidence. Know what I mean?


----------



## Paquito (Jul 8, 2008)

Yea, I'm definetely late for the party folks, flew right over my head.
Though I don't see alot of BHMs of FFAs posting, which made me raise the question. 
Continue pplz.


----------



## charlieversion2 (Jul 8, 2008)

> Though I don't see alot of BHMs of FFAs posting, which made me raise the question




see: here for details


----------



## RobitusinZ (Jul 8, 2008)

Ya know, isn't it a perfectly normal state of being to have cliques and dissenting opinions?

I belonged to a Catholic youth movement for years, and even there, where the goal was to promote peace, love and understanding in the world, you had people with totally different views in diametrically opposed cliques. Some people were very spiritual, and thus thought that the entire movement should be more spiritual. Some were more pragmatic and thought all the Bible-thumping would simply scare people (I was in this group). There were some who wanted leadership roles just for the sake of having them. Etc. etc. etc. The cliques were always present, and it was impossible to have any singular view or agenda.

I don't really think we should twist our boxers and panties over dissension or divisions. They're a perfectly normal factor of human behavior. When a guy goes up and posts in a thread dominated by women, the women are all gonna go catty and defend their territory. When a woman does the same in a guy's thread, you get a similar reaction. It's not something that has anything to do with BHMs or BBWs or FAs or FFAs or ABCs or 123s, or whatever acronym you wanna use to label yourself, it's simply part of human nature.

Look, guys, you don't want the claws to come out, stay away from the chicks. You KNOW where you are and are not welcome. You don't HAVE to be welcome EVERYWHERE. Same for the girls. Everybody should know their place, and everybody should have their place, their comfort zone. Just let it be and don't worry about what other people are doing in their sandbox.

This is a forum...it's not like you can absently wander somewhere. If you post somewhere, then you're putting yourself out there and anyone can flame you or do whatever they please. Them's the breaks. If you're gonna give it, be prepared to take it. That's all there is to it.

Oh, and yes, I'm new to Dims, but Dims isn't the only forum on the internet. This same type of stuff goes on on countless other boards. It's high school drama at its finest, all done under the anonymity of the net.


----------



## charlieversion2 (Jul 8, 2008)

And for those with short attention spans.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 8, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Phil,
> 
> I appreciate the spirit in which this was written, but I'm opposed to validating the claim that BHM meet with "correction" when they post, and that they "have to repeat their statements."
> 
> ...



Bingo.....I'm still waiting for someone to give some example of these supposed gang bangs going down......if they happen so frequently, why in the world aren't we being directed to those threads? 
And if we ever were actually directed to a thread or two, would our perspective of it be the same as his? Probably not...and I suspect that person knows this....which is why he goes vague and mentions google when pressed.



ChrisVersion2 said:


> see: here for details



Sorry, I don't feel welcome enough down on "your board" to go read that.....


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

Hi Fascinita

You are in denial. Even if you just look at all the Fat Women vs. Fat Men threads that have been on Dimensions (most not intended grant and in reality did not grant any/many Fat Issues to the Fat Male Experiences) you would have to see a trend. 

I enjoy my experiences outside of the FFA/BHM Board until I start speaking of the experiences of Fat Men, then.......................................

William




Fascinita said:


> Phil,
> 
> I appreciate the spirit in which this was written, but I'm opposed to validating the claim that BHM meet with "correction" when they post, and that they "have to repeat their statements."
> 
> ==Snip==


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 8, 2008)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> What secret society? What are you talking about? I post all over these boards, including the BHM/FFA board and I honestly don't know what you're talking about.


A little too enthusiastic of a reply there... not suspicious at all..











View attachment images[7].jpeg


----------



## charlieversion2 (Jul 8, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Sorry, I don't feel welcome enough down on "your board" to go read that.....



Just for the record, I post in other part of DIMs often. That part will always be home to me.

I've just been monitoring this, you know being a BHM and all. I'll stick by what I say. I fly no flag :bow:


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 8, 2008)

William said:


> Hi WG
> 
> I think that BHMs have to repeat their point of view because of the unofficial wall here at Dimensions. Statements by BHM seem to have to be measured, compared, classified in regards to the experiences of BBWs.
> 
> ...



William, I keep attempting to get a clearer perspective in understanding what you're saying, and frankly, I'm struggling some, but I'm trying.

Would you agree that statements by *ALL* people who post here have to be measured, compared, classified in regards to the experiences of BBWs, FA's, FFA's and BHM's? I think that our life experience dictates our slant or take on anyone's given post in Dimensions, and in life, for that matter. We use our perspective, regardless of how broad or narrow it may be, and that becomes our measure of others statements or actions. So, I think that when I read one of your posts, I do the same thing that a BBW does, or a FFA does, but may come to a different conclusion, based on my perspective. I'm not saying that act in and of itself is right or wrong, just saying it is, IMO.

I agree with everything you say in your second paragaph. I think BBW's would agree as well, but the same thing goes for FA's or FFA's, again, based on perspective.

Would you acknowledge that the reason that there are entire sections of bookstores dedicated to the differences between the genders, yet in Fat Acceptance the gender experience for Fat People is treated as similar or comparable is because there has been more study on differences solely between genders because that is a more important issue for most of the world? Since the concept of fat acceptance is a more recent one, I would think that in the coming years there will be more research dedicated to the different experiences between Fat Men and Fat Women. I don't know, but it seems to me that you're preaching to the choir here, men and women alike.

I think that most of the women here would gladly acknowledge that your experience as a Fat Man is quite different than theirs, and I believe that the bulk of your posts indicate that. I think what the women are asking for is some concrete examples of what happens with you in life, as well as in Dims that your experience as a Fat Man is different than theirs, without having to point solely at the "I'm the guy who hates............" thread, and countless Google searches as your source. I think they would really prefer to hear YOUR experiences, so true (and non researched) comparisons could be made.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 8, 2008)

William said:


> Hi Fascinita
> 
> You are in denial. Even if you just look at all the Fat Women vs. Fat Men threads that have been on Dimensions (most not intended grant and in reality did not grant any/many Fat Issues to the Fat Male Experiences) you would have to see a trend.
> 
> ...



Yo, Will.

Hey, that's not very nice to say I'm in denial, Willie. You know what I think? I think you like all this excitement you've created, and I think you get your kicks out of trying to piss people off while pretending to stay cool and all polite-like. Know what I mean, chilly bean?

How's that for a BS answer?! See, if I want I can try to avert responsibility for holding up my side of the debate with passive-aggressive pop-psych BS, too. It's not just you who knows how to pull that off.

But back to what I was saying...

Links, my brother. Links.

You copy, you paste. Any idiot knows how to do it.  You paste the links to your evidence and I click on 'em and that way I get to see how it is that us evil fat ladies are oppressing you wonderful flower children BHM.

Oh, and for the record--my BHM friends I think know how I feel about them--and for the rest of you, I could care less whether you feel comfortable with me or with SA or with BBWs or whatever TF is bugging you this week. Let me be very clear, unless I know you and I like you, I don't know you or like you. Make sense? And if you think BBWs should be nice to you, how about you start by being nice to BBW? I must say, you William, have not been very nice to me nor to any number of others here lately.

I am not obliged to excuse bad behavior from entire demographics just because I happen to love a number of individuals who represent that demographic. I don't have to be nice to anyone who can't be bothered to be nice to me.

In case it's not clear, Williaroonie, I really don't care one whit about _your_ specific needs, most especially not your need to be the dramatic center of attention and to stir things up around here in the name of revamping SA.

You want to get along, then be nice. And above all, be rational. You have nothing specific to talk about nor any evidence to support your claims about fat women at Dimensions. All you do is stir the pot. People have given you ample opportunity to speak. It's a downright shame how you've wasted an entire month railing against the supposed lack of dialogue here, while people repeatedly ask you to point the way and make an argument that we can respond to. 

Telling people they are in denial is discourteous, hostile, unproductive and frankly inadequate as a response. As far as I'm concerned, you either put up evidence to support you claims or shut up about it. There's no two ways about it. You keep trying to get around that by throwing the spotlight back on the supposed defficiencies and lack of consideration of the very people who are trying to engage with you. But there's no two ways about it: so far, you've done nothing but stir the pot for the sake of absolutely nothing concrete. 

You see what I'm saying? 

Oh, and also 

Don't start none, and there won't be any. That's what my momma always said.


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 8, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> I think they would really prefer to hear YOUR experiences, so true (and non researched) comparisons could be made.


 That is both the key and the catch 22 that will either disarm it all, or make it go boom.. You caught it in the other thread early on as well, but the peanut gallery decided that show, it really very predictable what will happen at the next show.. boom!

It's an abused minority, trying to contend with it's own minorities.. rationale is tossed in these situations..


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

Hi Phil

Yes Everyone is compared on Dimensions and all over in Fat Acceptance. What is wrong in the case of BHM is that the comparison is always meant to minimize the experiences of Fat Men. This is different than the case of different people sharing their unique experiences.

It really does not matter that Fat Acceptance is a young area of study, the study of gender is not and having a Fat Body does not call for researchers to throw out what is already known about genders. Existing studies already show that men and women have different expectations and self-image issues that do relate to Fat People. Being Fat does not make us a branch species of the human race that needs a rework of the gender concept.

We know enough to expect Fat Women and Men will have different reactions, different levels inhibitions and different emotions in regards to Fat, yet Fat Acceptance treats the genders like two cars on the same Race Track.

The only area that Fat Acceptance needs to grow is the incorporation Fat Men as being Real Fat People then in published Fat Acceptance papers Fat Men will not be something added on a sentence at the last minute (something that I have seen even this year).

As for my sharing well trust is earned, I have never (in recent years) used anything someone shared online against them. There are too many people on Dimensions that I do not think I could trust to do the same right now. Maybe in the future.

William





wrestlingguy said:


> William, I keep attempting to get a clearer perspective in understanding what you're saying, and frankly, I'm struggling some, but I'm trying.
> 
> Would you agree that statements by *ALL* people who post here have to be measured, compared, classified in regards to the experiences of BBWs, FA's, FFA's and BHM's? I think that our life experience dictates our slant or take on anyone's given post in Dimensions, and in life, for that matter. We use our perspective, regardless of how broad or narrow it may be, and that becomes our measure of others statements or actions. So, I think that when I read one of your posts, I do the same thing that a BBW does, or a FFA does, but may come to a different conclusion, based on my perspective. I'm not saying that act in and of itself is right or wrong, just saying it is, IMO.
> 
> ...


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

Hi 

I am a nice guy and you should try to understand why what I say bothers you so much. Then maybe we could have a discussion.

William




Fascinita said:


> Yo, Will.
> 
> Hey, that's not very nice to say I'm in denial, Willie. You know what I think? I think you like all this excitement you've created, and I think you get your kicks out of trying to piss people off while pretending to stay cool and all polite-like. Know what I mean, chilly bean?
> 
> ==Snip==


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 8, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Yo, Will.
> 
> Hey, that's not very nice to say I'm in denial, Willie. You know what I think? I think you like all this excitement you've created, and I think you get your kicks out of trying to piss people off while pretending to stay cool and all polite-like. Know what I mean, chilly bean?
> 
> ...





William said:


> Hi
> 
> I am a nice guy and you should try to understand why what I say bothers you so much. Then maybe we could have a discussion.
> 
> William



See? This is all your fault, Fasc...William told you and that's it 

Oh, and you're exactly right and I want to marry you right now :wubu: :bow:

I like fat chicks, do you?


----------



## ripley (Jul 8, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Bingo.....I'm still waiting for someone to give some example of these supposed *gang bangs* going down......if they happen so frequently, why in the world aren't we being directed to those threads?



I do not think it means what you think it means.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 8, 2008)

Hey, hey, hey, you are forgetting the VICTIMS Ripley....must you be so cold?


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

Most of my existance in Fat Acceptance has been colaberating with Fat Women, my Mother was Fat, many of my relatives of both genders are Fat and most of my Girlfriends have been Fat.

In all of my existance in Fat Acceptance I have never felt the need to minimize or qualify any experience shared to me by a Fat Woman, I have only seen the reverse in a few areas of Fat Acceptance.

William





Green Eyed Fairy said:


> See? This is all your fault, Fasc...William told you and that's it
> 
> Oh, and you're exactly right and I want to marry you right now :wubu: :bow:
> 
> I like fat chicks, do you?


----------



## ripley (Jul 8, 2008)

Oh, and the only BHM I've seen that is "forced to repeat himself" is William...and then he projects that into something that plagues all BHM. No, William...it is _*you*_ who repeats himself when questioned, rather than seek to better explain what you mean.

Questioning someone is NOT inherently a hostile act. It's a way to say "I don't understand this, come again?" But it will _become_ hostile if it's met with repitition of the same statement or with "proof" that is not concrete.

Instead of repeating the same statements that people are telling you they don't understand or that they don't agree with, perhaps you should try to explain in a better or clearer manner. I can't help but wonder if other people "not getting it" and getting frustrated and angry with you serves a purpose for you...bolstering your view that BHM are marginalized, maligned, and every other bad thing.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 8, 2008)

William said:


> In all of my existance in Fat Acceptance I have never felt the need to minimize or qualify any experience shared to me by a Fat Woman...
> 
> William



Sure you have, Bill. In the cheeze thread, I pointed out two places in the "Peter Pan" thread where you'd done just that--I went to the trouble of providing quotes with links to said posts, and everything. 

When I asked you to explain why you should be allowed to "minimize or qualify" the experiences of others, even as you chastised others for purportedly "minimizing or qualifying" the experiences of BHM, you avoided addressing my question and simply pretended that you had not "minimized or qualified" the experiences shared with you by fat women, though the evidence was staring you right in the face.

The world must be a great place when you can make things true simply by saying that they're true.


----------



## olwen (Jul 8, 2008)

William said:


> Hi Owlen
> 
> I have seen Male FAs get attacked for expressing their thoughts on admiration or on being a FA, but I have never seen a BBW attacked to sharing her experiences on being Fat. Sure BBW get attack for personality issues, but that is different.
> 
> ...



I don't agree that bbws aren't "attacked" when they share their experiences about being fat. A person who lives in a 500lb body will have different experiences from a person who lives in a 200lb body and heated disagreements may occur no matter the gender. You see gender as the reason for the attack or non-attack, where I would see something else.

...Are you sure that your gender is the ONLY reason you or any other bhm would feel marginalized? Are you 100% positive that's the ONLY reason? I'm not saying what you experience doesn't happen, but I've honestly never witnessed it and so I want to know why it would....

....To be honest, I'm having a hard time trying to have this discussion with you...it's frustrating - for me anyway. I feel like no matter what I say, no matter how I say it, no matter what I ask or how I ask it, you will say - "My point of view will be attacked and I will be marginalized because I am a fat man in a room full of fat women." All I want to know is, WHY do you feel this way? It's the whys that you haven't given reason to. I honestly want to know what your experiences are, but it seems to me that you might think that if you talk about them, we'll all make fun of you or tell you your experiences are meaningless or imply that you are weak when you do. I'm inclined to say that won't always be true, and even if it is, why should that stop you or any one else for that matter....If you keep assuming that this is what will happen every time you or any other bhm talks, then that's exactly what will happen. You see - because you will _always _be looking for that _rrrrowwrrr hiss hiss_ moment no matter what. 

I really want to know what you go thru, but you're not making it easy...


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

Hi Olwen

I can said that Fat Male views are marginalized in Fat Acceptance from my own experiences on boards at NAAFA, FATSO, Big Fat Blog and many others. The main theme on these boards was "how little Fat Men need Fat Acceptance", I will admit that thinking on these boards have and are improving. 

Too many times my experiences have been measured against BBW examples even though my issues flow from a totally different mindset and experience. 

You have done this yourself on several threads recently 

I have had BBWs state that the the tolerance of Fat is much higher for Men as if as a Fat Men this had any relevance to my experiences or that Fat Women suffer more abuse, like that has any relevance to what I have experienced. Funny that a recent report that Fat Men experience more violence because of their Fat was some how passed over by the FA Commmunity. Another recent study that showed that Men have experienced Fat Bias far earlier than Feminism and Fat Acceptance will acknowledge has been passed over while in the same period many other studies were placed in the forefront of Fat Acceptance.

So I say, yes Fat Men are still marginalized in Fat Acceptance.

William




olwen said:


> I don't agree that bbws aren't "attacked" when they share their experiences about being fat. A person who lives in a 500lb body will have different experiences from a person who lives in a 200lb body and heated disagreements may occur no matter the gender. You see gender as the reason for the attack or non-attack, where I would see something else.
> 
> ...Are you sure that your gender is the ONLY reason you or any other bhm would feel marginalized? Are you 100% positive that's the ONLY reason? I'm not saying what you experience doesn't happen, but I've honestly never witnessed it and so I want to know why it would....
> 
> ...


----------



## Blackjack (Jul 8, 2008)

William...

Prove it. Prove anything that you've said.

You're making claims, so the burden of proof is on *YOU*. Unless you can back up your arguments- and I mean *YOU *backing them up, not telling *US *to do *YOUR *research- then you're not going to be taken at all seriously.


----------



## Paquito (Jul 8, 2008)

William-

Blackjacks right, you need to prove yourself. Post a link to somewhere you were attacked, or to one of the studies you mentioned, but for the love of God just put up some evidence.


----------



## ripley (Jul 8, 2008)

William said:


> So I say, yes Fat Men are still marginalized in Fat Acceptance.
> 
> William



Okay, then what are some ideas for changing things?


----------



## Blackjack (Jul 8, 2008)

missaf said:


> No one has to prove or justify why they feel the way they do.



No, they don't have to justify opinions... but they should justify claims. Stating that BHMs are always ganged up on isn't an opinion, it's making a claim that can be disproven, and it's up to the person who's making that claim to prove that there's any truth to it.

If BHMs and FFAs feel marginalized, then there ought to at least be some suggestions to help change that... suggestions that don't include an implied "but it'd be worthless 'cause people would just insult and attack anyways".


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

I am not bookmarking the history of Fat Acceptance. Google "Fat Acceptance" and Fat Men" and you will see plenty of posts, articles and studies minimizing and marginalizing the experiences of Fat Men. Go to NAAFA and look at some of the older articles, there is a historical record of the experiences of Fat Men being marginalize, I am not sure if Dimensions has cleaned up some of its older articles that deal with Fat Men. 

You are asking me to show instances of this activity when this has been the normal activity in Fat Acceptance almost from the beginning

Here are two studies I mentioned

Fat Men & Feminism 
http://bod.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/13/1/107

Gina Kolata's Rethinking Thin ( I have not read the whole book)
http://rioiriri.blogspot.com/2008/03/hatred-becomes-violence.html

William



free2beme04 said:


> William-
> 
> Blackjacks right, you need to prove yourself. Post a link to somewhere you were attacked, or to one of the studies you mentioned, but for the love of God just put up some evidence.


----------



## Paquito (Jul 8, 2008)

William said:


> I am not bookmarking the history of Fat Acceptance. Google "Fat Acceptance" and Fat Men" and you will see plenty of posts, articles and studies minimizing and marginalizing the experiences of Fat Men. Go to NAAFA and look at some of the older articles, there is a historical record of the experiences of Fat Men being marginalize, I am not sure if Dimensions has cleaned up some of its older articles that deal with Fat Men.
> 
> You are asking me to show instances of this activity when this has been the normal activity in Fat Acceptance almost from the beginning
> 
> ...



There we go, those are some good articles.
Gracias William


----------



## William (Jul 8, 2008)

I have been saying from the start that Fat Male experiences do not need to be disected and examined by peers before being accepted by the community.

My (any BHM or person) experiences can not be validated or devalued by comparison to any other group of people, those experiences are mind (our's).

William




ripley said:


> Okay, then what are some ideas for changing things?


----------



## Blackjack (Jul 8, 2008)

Good start with those studies, however regarding this:



William said:


> Google "Fat Acceptance" and Fat Men" and you will see plenty of posts, articles and studies minimizing and marginalizing the experiences of Fat Men. Go to NAAFA and look at some of the older articles, there is a historical record of the experiences of Fat Men being marginalize, I am not sure if Dimensions has cleaned up some of its older articles that deal with Fat Men.



I will repeat this:



Blackjack said:


> Unless you can back up your arguments- and I mean *YOU *backing them up, not telling *US *to do *YOUR *research- then you're not going to be taken at all seriously.


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

I have given those articles out several times and another that I have has been removed by a University in Australia.

it use to be here but they moved it because I do not think that the Professor is still teaching there

Fat, Gender, and Transgression
http://arts.anu.edu.au/History/forth/hist2003/HIST2003 - 12 - Fat, Gender, and Transgression.ppt

It is a Powerpoint File

William




free2beme04 said:


> There we go, those are some good articles.
> Gracias William


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 9, 2008)

missaf said:


> No one has to prove or justify why they feel the way they do. The fact is many members of this board feel marginalized, and it's a real issue. Chimpi attempted to bring this up in good faith, and it's becoming nothing more than a bashing thread.



Missa, no one's being asked to justify feelings. People are flinging accusations of secret societies around like they're marshmallows. People keep bringing up a supposed cabal of BBWs on Dimensions. These are not feelings, but accusations. And as they can potentially be hurtful and destructive in their own right, I would like these accusations and innuendo to either be backed up or go away.

Feelings of exclusion are one thing, and I think most of us here would be willing to help out in any way we were able. But it's quite another thing to have a few people continue to insist that there is an issue of marginalization, and when they are asked to explain what they mean, simply respond by throwing accusations at people that they are too insensitive to "get" the self-evident issues and that they themselves are part of the problem. I mean, when someone comes to you asking you to say more about a problem that you have, do you snap at them and tell them to go figure it out themselves, or do you provide details?


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Well it is obvious that you have done very little reading of Fat Acceptance literature, show me a Fat Acceptance Publication that *includes Fat Men *as anything more than men that have minimal Fat Issues.

A statement like "this is not to say that Fat Men do not experience..............." does not count

William



Blackjack said:


> Good start with those studies, however regarding this:
> 
> 
> 
> I will repeat this:


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Well maybe everyone should go back and add links for everything that they have ever posted on Dimensions?

William





Fascinita said:


> Missa, no one's being asked to justify feelings. People are flinging accusations of secret societies around like they're marshmallows. People keep bringing up a supposed cabal of BBWs on Dimensions. These are not feelings, but accusations. And as they can potentially be hurtful and destructive in their own right, I would like these accusations and innuendo to either be backed up or go away.
> 
> Feelings of exclusion are one thing, and I think most of us here would be willing to help out in any way we were able. But it's quite another thing to have a few people continue to insist that there is an issue of marginalization, and when they are asked to explain what they mean, simply respond by throwing accusations at people that they are too insensitive to "get" the self-evident issues and that they themselves are part of the problem. I mean, when someone comes to you asking you to say more about a problem that you have, do you snap at them and tell them to go figure it out themselves, or do you provide details?


----------



## Blackjack (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Well it is obvious that you have done very little reading of Fat Acceptance literature, show me a Fat Acceptance Publication that *includes Fat Men *as anything more than men that have minimal Fat Issues.
> 
> A statement like "this is not to say that Fat Men do not experience..............." does not count
> 
> William



You're the one making the claim. All I'm doing is asking that you prove it. Instead of using _ad hominems_ and telling us to do your research for you, it would probably be better to back up your statements yourself.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Well maybe everyone should go back and add links for everything that they have ever posted on Dimensions?
> 
> William



Honestly, W. Is that all you got?


----------



## ripley (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> I have been saying from the start that Fat Male experiences do not need to be disected and examined by peers before being accepted by the community.
> 
> My (any BHM or person) experiences can not be validated or devalued by comparison to any other group of people, those experiences are mind (our's).
> 
> William



No, they don't. But if you're talking about a message board like this one, _everyone_ gets dissected. 

If they can't be devalued by comparisons, why are you so against them?


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Hi Ripley

I disagree if a BBW shares that she had a negative episode at work, her experience is not immediately placed on a mental graph comparing it and measuring it against BHM or any other experience. I have seen very few experiences of BHM allowed to exist without a "indexing" in regards to BBW experiences, this happens at Dimensions and else where in Fat Acceptance.

William



ripley said:


> No, they don't. But if you're talking about a message board like this one, _everyone_ gets dissected.
> 
> If they can't be devalued by comparisons, why are you so against them?


----------



## out.of.habit (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Hi Ripley
> 
> I disagree if a BBW shares that she had a negative episode at work, her experience is not immediately placed on a mental graph comparing it and measuring it against BHM or any other experience. *I have seen very few experiences of BHM allowed to exist without a "indexing" in regards to BBW experiences, this happens at Dimensions* and else where in Fat Acceptance.
> 
> William



Can you show us a recent example of this? I haven't run into this issue at all. I don't question how much this is upsetting you, but I would like to have a solid understanding of what you're referring to.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 9, 2008)

out.of.habit said:


> Can you show us a recent example of this? I haven't run into this issue at all. I don't question how much this is upsetting you, but I would like to have a solid understanding of what you're referring to.



I'm totally confused, as well. Any time he is asked to give examples or discuss this, he just says "I refuse to devalue the etc etc etc" or whatever...


----------



## RobitusinZ (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Well it is obvious that you have done very little reading of Fat Acceptance literature, show me a Fat Acceptance Publication that *includes Fat Men *as anything more than men that have minimal Fat Issues.



Not for nothing, but considering that everything in this world runs on money and/or the potential to make such, wouldn't just about any product on any market cater to the majority demographic for that product?

You know who cares about Fat Acceptance? Women.

That's why Lane Bryant exists in all its glory, and guys get the hole-in-the-wall, barely standing "Big & Tall" stores, or the "Fat Kid" section at Sears (I think they called it "Husky" when I was a kid...have they dropped the euphemism yet?).

I think you're just being a little too naive about this whole situation. Idealism is great, but sometimes you just gotta put it aside and accept the reality of the world. 

How many BBWs are on this site? How many BHMs? How much of the traffic that gets generated through the "paysite" board can be attributed to FFAs looking for fat dude porn?

Get it yet?


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Hi 

I disagree most of the early Fat Acceptance writings that I have seen spoke of Fat Women, Fat Men and All Fat People needing Fat Acceptance. By the time that acronyms like BBW were invented all that had changed. The writings that I speak of was written by radical feminists, yet they included gender and age inclusion.

I would say that we will never see what Fat Acceptance was meant to be.

William




RobitusinZ said:


> Not for nothing, but considering that everything in this world runs on money and/or the potential to make such, wouldn't just about any product on any market cater to the majority demographic for that product?
> 
> You know who cares about Fat Acceptance? Women.
> 
> ...


----------



## lostjacket (Jul 9, 2008)

I'm pretty sure my head just exploded.

Not in a good way.


----------



## RobitusinZ (Jul 9, 2008)

Karl Marx rolls around in his grave whenever he hears the word "Marxism", and/or "communism" and the way those terms have been horribly perverted and misused.

Like communism, socialism, or any other "ism" it seems like a great idea to a few people, but the fact is that you're not going to change the status quo. "Fat Acceptance" already exists...fat people aren't shackled and made to pick cotton, nor are they forced to stay home and wear burkas, nor are they deprived the right to vote.

I think we should take the fact that we're lucky enough to remain functioning members of society and run. I'm not gonna get pissy cuz someone happens to not like me. If instead of being fat, I had a big nose, or huge ears, or something that made me equally unattractive or even moreso, I wouldn't go all "boohoo" about it and make a "big nosed, big eared freaks acceptance" campaign.

Look, I probably come from a different background here than most. My last name is Gonzalez, I'm a native Spanish-speaker, and if you spoke to me, you'd catch an accent even though I'm perfectly fluent in English. I was the broke kid who persevered and "made it". I'm not an NBA player...I'm just a software engineer. In my short professional career, I've had to put up with so much SHIT from people who thought I was some sort of Affirmative Action quota fill-in that when I see other Hispanics doing it, I feel like pissing on their faces and vomiting on their graves (and believe me, living in Miami, FL, you see PLENTY of these Affirmative Action rejects). Can you imagine how I feel now, being a fat guy who found a place where other fat people can hang out and chat, and see this same kind of pity-party "Fat Acceptance" bullshit getting thrown about?

You want "Fat Acceptance"? Go be a productive member of society.

The hard-working blue and white collar people who go to work everyday despite their flaws and their difficulties are the ones who FORCE "acceptance". I certainly don't need anyone to "accept" me.



William said:


> Hi
> 
> I disagree most of the early Fat Acceptance writings that I have seen spoke of Fat Women, Fat Men and All Fat People needing Fat Acceptance. By the time that acronyms like BBW were invented all that had changed. The writings that I speak of was written by radical feminists, yet they included gender and age inclusion.
> 
> ...


----------



## olwen (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Hi Olwen
> 
> I can said that Fat Male views are marginalized in Fat Acceptance from my own experiences on boards at NAAFA, FATSO, Big Fat Blog and many others. The main theme on these boards was "how little Fat Men need Fat Acceptance", I will admit that thinking on these boards have and are improving.
> 
> ...



First, lets remember the context of the thread that shall not be named. Whatever comparisons I brought up were relevant to the discussion. You talk as if none of us should be having discussions about anything related to fat and gender. 

So you're saying that you are basing your POV on your experiences alone But here you are looking for other experiences. Sounds to me like you do want to have experiences to compare to your own, otherwise, why look?



William said:


> I am not bookmarking the history of Fat Acceptance. Google "Fat Acceptance" and Fat Men" and you will see plenty of posts, articles and studies minimizing and marginalizing the experiences of Fat Men. Go to NAAFA and look at some of the older articles, there is a historical record of the experiences of Fat Men being marginalize, I am not sure if Dimensions has cleaned up some of its older articles that deal with Fat Men.
> 
> You are asking me to show instances of this activity when this has been the normal activity in Fat Acceptance almost from the beginning
> 
> ...



Finally an example of something. Great. Now as to the first link. I'm reminding you that I started a thread on the BHM board about definitions of masculinity and how it relates to fat men, http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40743&highlight=masculine
as well as one for femininity and how it relates to fat women. There was lots of input on the femininity thread, but not as much on the masculinity thread even tho it was on the board where I'd expect many bhms to give their input. These threads are about the very thing you're saying isn't being addressed. You won't find what you are looking for if you don't begin to look.



William said:


> Well it is obvious that you have done very little reading of Fat Acceptance literature, show me a Fat Acceptance Publication that *includes Fat Men *as anything more than men that have minimal Fat Issues.
> 
> A statement like "this is not to say that Fat Men do not experience..............." does not count
> 
> William



What exactly do you mean by "minimal fat issues?" Seriously? I don't know what you consider a minimal fat issue. And if I don't, I'm sure there are others reading this thread who don't know either. And I should hope that you don't think asking you to clarify this is asking too much either. 

....see here's the thing that's frustrating me about this whole topic: What's the point of saying this? _"A statement like 'this is not to say that Fat Men do not experience...............' does not count"_ Do you want people to acknowledge what you go thru as a fat man or not? I'm getting mixed messages from a lot of your posts. You say you want to be heard, but then you turn around, get angry and obsfuscate when we ask you to speak. You can't have it both ways. 

I'm starting to wonder if it's even worth it to try to have this discussion with you. I don't think you want anyone to actually talk to you about this. I think you just want to let off steam. Problem is, you're probably alienating the very people who'd be more than willing to hear you out.



William said:


> Hi
> 
> I disagree most of the early Fat Acceptance writings that I have seen spoke of Fat Women, Fat Men and All Fat People needing Fat Acceptance. By the time that acronyms like BBW were invented all that had changed. The writings that I speak of was written by radical feminists, yet they included gender and age inclusion.
> 
> ...



...I'm not so sure I want to know what you think fat acceptance is meant to be given the way you express yourself. You're not helping your cause. 

You feel separated. That's unfortunate, but ask yourself how much of that separation is self-imposed. Some of us have been more than willing to hear you out, and help you tear down some walls, but you're not breaking your share of bricks.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Most of my existance in Fat Acceptance has been colaberating with Fat Women, my Mother was Fat, many of my relatives of both genders are Fat and most of my Girlfriends have been Fat.
> 
> In all of my existance in Fat Acceptance I have never felt the need to minimize or qualify any experience shared to me by a Fat Woman, I have only seen the reverse in a few areas of Fat Acceptance.
> 
> William



So does this mean that your Mother didn't give you enough attention? I'm not sure what your fat family has to do with the issue at hand.....I come from a family that has mostly skinny people that don't think fat is good or sexy....and? 



olwen said:


> ...Are you sure that your gender is the ONLY reason you or any other bhm would feel marginalized? Are you 100% positive that's the ONLY reason? I'm not saying what you experience doesn't happen, but I've honestly never witnessed it and so I want to know why it would....
> 
> *....To be honest, I'm having a hard time trying to have this discussion with you...it's frustrating - for me anyway. I feel like no matter what I say, no matter how I say it, no matter what I ask or how I ask it, you will say - "My point of view will be attacked and I will be marginalized because I am a fat man in a room full of fat women." * All I want to know is, WHY do you feel this way? It's the whys that you haven't given reason to. I honestly want to know what your experiences are, but it seems to me that you might think that if you talk about them, we'll all make fun of you or tell you your experiences are meaningless or imply that you are weak when you do. I'm inclined to say that won't always be true, and even if it is, why should that stop you or any one else for that matter....If you keep assuming that this is what will happen every time you or any other bhm talks, then that's exactly what will happen. You see - because you will _always _be looking for that _rrrrowwrrr hiss hiss_ moment no matter what.



I'm extremely curious....why does it seem that William only has issues with fat women? Why doesn't he feel "marginalized" by skinny women? or thin men?
Do thin people give him the big audience he so desires? Do thin people "relate" to him in the way he thinks fat women should? 

Can you answer this question William or should I go try to google it?





William said:


> Hi Olwen
> 
> Too many times my experiences have been measured against BBW examples even though my issues flow from a totally different mindset and experience.
> 
> ...



Okay okay okay, you convinced me to google it, Will.....

Here are some of my findings....


> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/03/health/main603825.shtml
> 
> Fat Can Hit Women In The Wallet
> Study: Highly Educated Fat Women Paid Less Than Co-WorkersBeing fat may hurt your income - if you're a highly educated woman.
> ...





> How again is being fat socially acceptable?
> posted in Fat Bias |
> 
> Being fat isnt a piece of cake regardless if youre a man or a woman.* But it seems as if fat women have a heavier load to bear. *This is not to say that fat men do not suffer size discrimination  they do, but at much higher weights than women do.
> ...







> Study: 'Weight-ism' More Widespread Than Racism
> Yale Researchers Find Widespread Discrimination Against Overweight People
> 
> *Overweight women are twice as vulnerable as men, and discrimination strikes much earlier in their lives, the report states.*
> ...





> Fat Bias Worse for Women
> 
> *
> It only takes a modest weight gain for a woman to experience weight discrimination, but men can gain far more weight before experiencing similar bias, a new study shows.*
> ...





> Those surveyed were asked to report incidents of bias they experienced, such as employment discrimination, sub-standard medical care and customer service, name calling, etc, and the reason for that bias. *Women had it the worst*15.5% of female adults said they experienced weight discrimination in the 2004-2006 timeframe, up from 10% a decade earlier. For men, the comparable numbers were 8.1% and 4.1%. The discrimination also got worse the heavier the respondent, with 42.5% of severely obese adults saying they had experienced weight bias.
> 
> http://www.businessweek.com/careers/workingparents/blog/archives/2008/04/new_survey_noth.html






> By Svetlana Shkolnikova, USA TODAY
> Weight discrimination, *especially against women,* is increasing in U.S. society and is almost as common as racial discrimination, two studies suggest.
> 
> http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/weightloss/2008-05-20-overweight-bias_N.htm





> WOMEN PAY PRICE FOR BEING OBESE
> 
> By GINA KOLATA
> Published: September 30, 1993
> ...



Wow wee- lookee at what I found....should I keep on googling William?

Let me guess what your response, if any, to this will be "BBWs always compare the experience of BHMs with their own...." 
Well fuck Will, why should we give you any sympathy...especially when YOU don't seem to much give a damn about anything other than your own problems. 
I don't consider the problems of a man better/worse than my own because he's a man.....
Tell me Will...do you ever talk to or see other fat men having worse experiences than your own? If you do, do you tell them that they shouldn't tell you their experiences because it "marginalizes" yours? 


Oh, and apparently not all BHMs feel your burden, William....



> http://community.livejournal.com/150interests/205076.html
> 
> *I enjoy being a fat guy, although I must confess I wouldn't want to be a fat girl. The societal deck really is stacked against them (unfairly, I might add,* because fat girls are in many ways superior to skinny ones). But being a fat guy is great. I've never felt that my weight kept me from getting a job or a girl, or from gaining admittance to a club. And it has many, many advantages


.





William said:


> Hi
> 
> I disagree most of the early Fat Acceptance writings that I have seen spoke of Fat Women, Fat Men and All Fat People needing Fat Acceptance. By the time that acronyms like BBW were invented all that had changed. The writings that I speak of was written by radical feminists, yet they included gender and age inclusion.
> 
> ...



Yeppers, it was all surely ruint by the time those feminists bitches got hold of it, eh? :doh:


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Hi GEF

What keywords did you use and what is the percentage of Fat Men included in the study results that you found? 


William




Green Eyed Fairy said:


> So does this mean that your Mother didn't give you enough attention? I'm not sure what your fat family has to do with the issue at hand.....I come from a family that has mostly skinny people that don't think fat is good or sexy....and?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 9, 2008)

first:

fat men fat women abuse study

second: 

Study fat men fat women discrimination


Gee, want me to fudge it so I find those blogs by fat men instead?

Oh, and I used the word "study" in the search because I really didn't want blogs...those are people just asserting their personal opinions....I much prefer genuine tests and studies.

Though, of course, I am sure I could find plenty of blogs to back up my own personal opinions if I thought that would suit my purpose here....however, I realize that actual proof is always much better than opinion


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Try

"fat women" "Fat men" "Fat Acceptance" and include the gender breaks-outs of people surveyed.

William 




Green Eyed Fairy said:


> first:
> 
> fat men fat women abuse study
> 
> ...


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Try
> 
> "fat women" "Fat men" "Fat Acceptance" and include the gender breaks-outs of people surveyed.
> 
> William



No William, you may find this hard to believe but I am not here to do what you tell me 

You have something to prove, then get off your hiney and do it yourself, like I did


----------



## snuggletiger (Jul 9, 2008)

Rings the bell and cues the Ring Announcer to introduce the fighters.


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Hi GEF

The facts are:

1. I have had nothing but good things to say about BBWs
2. My Mother was a great lady
2. I never said that I thought BBWs hated me
3. I did say that some BBW here at Dimensions have invested too much emotions in rejecting Fat Men for once commenting about what has _traditionally_ been said for them. Posts like this one is a example.
4. I have never said that BHM have been marginalized by anything other than Fat Acceptance.

Maybe if you understood why you have a need to twist the facts instead of communicating, we could make progress here.

William










Green Eyed Fairy said:


> So does this mean that your Mother didn't give you enough attention? I'm not sure what your fat family has to do with the issue at hand.....I come from a family that has mostly skinny people that don't think fat is good or sexy....and?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Fyreflyintheskye (Jul 9, 2008)

Santaclear said:


> Personally, I don't care much which board any given thread is on. I wasn't aware of "separation issues" until recently, some of the board dramas of the last couple months. I think the way to proceed is to be aware that some people DO feel that way and to be sensitive to it. Changes will happen if they need to be made - squeaky wheel and all.



Hear, hear on the squeaky wheels, Santaclear; there certainly are a few. I can count on you to be this fun, yet grounding, voice of reason in 99.9% of all threads I peruse on here, which is great to see, because, personally, my only qualm on this board is about perception and (over)sensitivity. 

The rest is deliberately somewhat off-topic, but if the drama queens can have their agendas, so the Hell can I. My agenda is, more or less, telling them to stfu and enjoy themselves because that's the reason most of us are here. 

Perhaps if some of us grew some thicker skin and learned to laugh when a joke is intended, rather than get defensive and assume another is unintelligent because they like to laugh and make light of an issue from time-to-time, that would help me be more receptive to anything else they had to say. I'm not asking for Utopia, but I think a little more practice what you're preaching would change the overall stew from cold, uncooked spots to allover engaging, hot, spicy, witty banter and discussion. It turns my stomach when I have to change the wording on my posts because I don't want to offend anyone whom always has to be right, even when they're not, and calls themself "intelligent" and "open-minded" on every place they post opinions. Consequently, I get the person who is one of _their_ friends who is angry and passive-aggressive with me because I don't get along with the person who calls themself intelligent everywhere and said friend is an attention-whore for whom I don't drop everything and fawn on them as someone I "crush" on in the "crush thread" because we aren't actually friends and we've never spoken beyond this person typing in all caps to me in the chatroom to get my attention or me returning a hello. It's just not my way to humor someone who is phony and spends their idle time kissing everyone's ass here and in chat. I see that a lot here, but I'm not going to narrow it down any more than I have because you generally know when I don't like you. It's usually apparent. Humoring self-important, holier than thou and the brownnosers really defeats the whole purpose of being here. So, if a few people here are pissed at me for not taking them or their posts and threads seriously, that's why. You need to grow some thicker skin, *genuinely *appreciate people for what you find fantastic about them inside (and not for how many rep points they give you or however many people they bring to your self-righteous blog or adult site), and enjoy life instead of trying to drag others down by being humorless and stoic just for the sake of brickwalling others. Have your cliques and all, that's not the issue; just do yourselves and others a favor and don't go around stamping your feet in bitchy protest when many of us try to enjoy ourselves here. This is also why I occasionally use specific and AWKWARD WORDING like "living as male" and "living as female" in polls and posts: to keep the humorless, "intelligent" people who have stoic views on sexual identity and everything else from making pointless, snarky remarks because the only ones allowed to enjoy themselves on a thread are said humorless, "intelligent" people. That's come to a close... I no longer give a damn about how people will choose to skew my words. And, groundbreaking as it is, saying you are and actually demonstrating intelligence are two very different species. Speaking of thread separation, I am thinking half this thread belongs in some confessions thread lol ... albeit, I'm not going to go seek it out because I'm on my way out for ice cream. 
:happy:


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Hi GEF
> 
> The facts are:
> 
> 1. I have had *nothing but good things to say about BBWs *





William said:


> 3. *I did say that some BBW here at Dimensions have invested too much emotions in rejecting Fat Men for once commenting about what has traditionally been said for them. Posts like this one is a example*.



That's a fact, eh?



William said:


> *4. I have never said that BHM have been marginalized by anything other than Fat Acceptance.*



You haven't? 



William said:


> By the time that acronyms like BBW were invented all that had changed. The writings that I speak of was written by radical feminists, yet they included gender and age inclusion.
> 
> I would say that we will never see what Fat Acceptance was meant to be.
> 
> ...






William said:


> The confrontations that seem to follow when BHMs post their thoughts about being Fat are another problem.
> I think that if there were always a group of BHM waiting to criticize a BBW for posting her experiences that there would be less posts by BBWs.
> I think that if BBW faced a hostile audience here because they were BBW that their would be less BBW posts made and they would hesitate to share their personal feelings.



Gee, seems pretty heavily implied here that you are saying that BBWs attack the BHMs.....doesn't sound too flattering ...or innocent on your part William.




William said:


> 2. I never said that I thought BBWs hated me



You just said this instead....



William said:


> Lately I feel that it would be a great Idea if this board had password protection for the messages. I am not feeling very trusting of some of our peers.
> 
> I am still correcting lies told about me.







William said:


> Maybe if you understood why you have a need to twist the facts instead of communicating, we could make progress here.
> 
> William



I twisted what facts? Those studies I posted...you know the ones you told me to google on up, are not "facts"? What is factual to you? Your opinion?

Enough of this......I have made my point and you get it...even if you keep on pretending you don't. You're not an innocent and you're not a victim. End of story.

*out*


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

Oh my god oh my god oh my god PLEASE if you value my sanity STOP CAPITALIZING THINGS THAT ARE NOT PROPER NAMES.

*shoots self in face*

On topic:

I'm wondering if this current feeling of strife is just sort of a natural glitch in a long relationship. I don't think that we'll all be at each other's throats for ever, but perhaps there are some long-suppressed tensions and resentments that have to come out in order for everyone to move forward.

I hope that's it. I would hate to think that Dims is just turning into a big ol' hate fest. I'd like to think that with all of these threads we are little by little understanding what everyone's concerns are. I want to understand what is making William and others feel marginalized, because I think that they're important issues. 

Of course, that makes me sound like a smelly hippie.

In closing, I hate you all.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 9, 2008)

Waxwing said:


> In closing, I hate you all.




I love an honest person :wubu: :bow: :happy:


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I love an honest person :wubu: :bow: :happy:



:wubu:

........


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

You may be right I should never say never.

I think that I have said enough times that Fat Acceptance marginalized Fat Men that people know what I mean, there has been so many twists and turns in this conversation that I could have said something different.

I listed the things that you had misrepresented me on, I do not think that I listed or said anything about the studies that you mentioned in another post. If you are going to twist everything I post what is the point of answering you?

I have found that in situations like this a little proactive behavior goes a long way, maybe we could even find a Win-Win conclusion?

William





Green Eyed Fairy said:


> That's a fact, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Hi

I will consult the Internet grammar rule book on capitalization rules and get back to you.

I feel that even explaining what makes a person feel marginalized creates more attacks on this thread which means that we will continue with this forever.

William






Waxwing said:


> Oh my god oh my god oh my god PLEASE if you value my sanity STOP CAPITALIZING THINGS THAT ARE NOT PROPER NAMES.
> 
> *shoots self in face*
> 
> ...


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Hi
> 
> I will consult the Internet grammar rule book on capitalization rules and get back to you.
> 
> ...



I don't care about internet grammar, but the ghost of William Strunk, who lives in my hat, is all up in arms about this. And no foolin' that guy is a beast when he's angry.

Yeah, it seems as though it just leads to more bad blood between each side, but eventually there has to be some understanding. We're smart people; eventually we'll figure out what the other is saying. 

If not, I give up on humanity entirely.


----------



## mossystate (Jul 9, 2008)

this thread is beyond funny, at this point


----------



## cute_obese_girl (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> Try
> 
> "fat women" "Fat men" "Fat Acceptance" and include the gender breaks-outs of people surveyed.
> 
> William



The fact that there are fewer men active in fat acceptance does not = marginalization. It only means fewer men participate. There could be many reasons for that. Here are some suggestions:

a) more men might prefer to fight their battles solo rather than seek out organizations to join in with
b) maybe fewer men feel the need to fight for acceptance, because fewer of them feel unaccepted in the first place
c) maybe they're scared to ask for help, because it could be seen as weakness
d) maybe they have no idea that the fat acceptance movement is out there

There are many reasons that could contribute to fewer men participating. I do not agree it is because men are marginalized by the fat women of the movement, which is what you are implying no matter how you put it. *One group cannot be marginalized, without someone doing it to them. Therefore when you equate fewer men participating in fat acceptance with "marginalization" you are saying that women are marginalizing them.* That is why people are so upset with you. They are not attacking you because you are a BHM in the movement. 

I assume, none of the possible reasons I gave apply to you William, which is why you are active in the fat acceptance movement. That's great, nothing wrong with it. That does not mean, however, that there is something inherently wrong with fat acceptance and its treatment of fat men.


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

mossystate said:


> this thread is beyond funny, at this point



Oh, what, I bring up the dead guy who lives in my hat and suddenly it's funny?


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> I have found that in situations like this a little proactive behavior goes a long way, maybe we could even find a Win-Win conclusion?
> 
> William



Speaking quite bluntly, William, I have been on your side for quite some time. Though, repeated attempts to get LINKS from you has failed numerous times, and I am beginning to see that you're just venting your own frustration and not providing ample opportunities for improvement.

Point that "proactive behavior" statement to yourself, William, and post some links to issues regarding Fat Acceptance and the marginalization of fat men. Please. Can you please do that for me? Hopefully in non-Blog format...


----------



## olwen (Jul 9, 2008)

cute_obese_girl said:


> The fact that there are fewer men active in fat acceptance does not = marginalization. It only means fewer men participate. There could be many reasons for that. Here are some suggestions:
> 
> a) more men might prefer to fight their battles solo rather than seek out organizations to join in with
> b) maybe fewer men feel the need to fight for acceptance, because fewer of them feel unaccepted in the first place
> ...




Thank you Thank you Thank you Thank you Thank you! Did I forget to say Thank you?


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 9, 2008)

Waxwing said:


> I don't care about internet grammar, but the ghost of William Strunk, who lives in my hat, is all up in arms about this. And no foolin' that guy is a beast when he's angry.
> 
> Yeah, it seems as though it just leads to more bad blood between each side, but eventually there has to be some understanding. We're smart people; eventually we'll figure out what the other is saying.
> 
> If not, I give up on humanity entirely.



Just curious... not implying anything negative.. the other one was watching bugs or something.. what's your angle?


----------



## JoyJoy (Jul 9, 2008)

"I'm 'en-ery the eighth I am
'en-ery the eighth I am, I am"





Ev-ry body SING!


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> Just curious... not implying anything negative.. the other one was watching bugs or something.. what's your angle?



I don't have an angle. Playing fast and loose with grammatical rules raises my fake dander, and venting it is fun.

As to the fighting, I do think that both sides have valid points, but that it's largely been framed as:

"My feelings are hurt." 
"Why?" 
"My feelings are hurt!"

cute_obese_girl just knocked it out of the park with that last post, though. Marginalization isn't wholly imagined, but it feeds on itself when one group hides away in the shadows without speaking up. The problem is that if that "speaking up" is unavoidably a questioning of the status quo, it takes a lot of rational argument and evidence to make your position clear.


----------



## ripley (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> I have found that in situations like this a little proactive behavior goes a long way, maybe we could even find a Win-Win conclusion?
> 
> William



I'm curious as to what you would see as a win-win conclusion? What would you like the results to be from this? 

You keep repeating yourself, and we hear you. Is that what you want, for people to just acknowledge that they hear what you're saying? 

I think that none of us will say "but fat men don't have it as bad" ever again, so that's a win, no?


----------



## Donna (Jul 9, 2008)

I am of the belief there is no win-win, or even a win-lose, to this conundrum we keep visiting repeatedly. It's too subjective, IMHO. I just hope we're learning from it, though. I know I am learning some things.

For example, when I first came to Dimensions, the BHM/FFA board mostly contained pictures threads and hook up threads. I was/am happily hooked up with my own BHM, so I never really saw a reason to go there. With all the hooplah lately, I decided to read more posts on the BHM board and was pleasantly surprised to see some other topics. YMMV, though.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 9, 2008)

cute_obese_girl said:


> There are many reasons that could contribute to fewer men participating. I do not agree it is because men are marginalized by the fat women of the movement, which is what you are implying no matter how you put it. *One group cannot be marginalized, without someone doing it to them. Therefore when you equate fewer men participating in fat acceptance with "marginalization" you are saying that women are marginalizing them.* That is why people are so upset with you. They are not attacking you because you are a BHM in the movement.



This very,very good.


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 9, 2008)

Waxwing said:


> cute_obese_girl just knocked it out of the park with that last post, though. Marginalization isn't wholly imagined, but it feeds on itself when one group hides away in the shadows without speaking up. The problem is that if that "speaking up" is unavoidably a questioning of the status quo, it takes a lot of rational argument and evidence to make your position clear.



Not quite a knock out of the park, but a good logical assumption, and it's right on many levels.. I didn't want to post in this thread and only stay in the other but.. I know william isn't clear, but at the same time the others are just resorting to argument fallacies and such to defend something that's not even an attack etc.. etc.. here we go..

It's obvious that alot of the people on the "other side" haven't actually read much of the lit. out there produced by the SA movement, by its "esteemed" members. With the exception of 2-3 published books/lit. I've seen to date, the complete story of BHM is always summerized as "Not having it as hard as BBW", and that's about it. Up until a point, literature produced by NAAFA and similar organizations would almost be devoid of BHM reference, it's now shifted to gender neutral, but any studies that are sill comming out are focused to the BBW experience, with the usual disclaimer of "BHM's don't have it as hard".
This year is the first time in the entire history of the NAAFA where a BHM specific item has appeared on the calendar for the conference. Yes the BHM plight is the same as that of the thin FA, and the janitor watching in the corner..
This is all fine/dandy but the reality isn't "BHM's don't have it as hard", the reality has nothing to do with that statement at all. The BHM experience is different from the BBW, just as societal roles, how our brains are wired etc.. make it different. To summerize what BHM experience as just a lesser exent of what BBW go through is a lie, and about as scientfically valid as voodoo.

SA was created from Feminism, so it's rank and elite are filled with femenists, the focus of SA has been from a womens perspective, and then they just add "BHM's don't have it as hard", and sent it to publish, or organize events around it.. It's a simple as that. 
I attribute some of it to not having a clue, some of it to those with fringe agendas etc.. and the end result has been an alienation of fat males

If you want to continue this, then please come to the other thread...


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> SA was created from Feminism, so it's rank and elite are filled with femenists,



Yes, yes, the dreaded Feminists. Those horrible ball stomping dykes that are out to get poor little defenseless men everywhere.


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> Yes, yes, the dreaded Feminists. Those horrible ball stomping dykes that are out to get poor little defenseless men everywhere.



Why doesn't anyone stop those women!?


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 9, 2008)

And why I didn't want to post here, instant argument fallacies.. stoop to your level.. why not.. 
Honestly do you people actually read what people write or you get out of bed, thinking "how can I misinterpret someone so I can be be a better asswipe today"
You're just pathetic people, there's no point in talking to you, becuase you're not here to listen, one is here just to score some ass, gettin' more jacko boy fatties gonna play with the stick now "you 'teh manz!!!"

and the other I'm still not sure why.. examinig ants as well.. also a thing for fat chicks??


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> SA was created from Feminism, so it's rank and elite are filled with femenists, the focus of SA has been from a womens perspective, and then they just add "BHM's don't have it as hard", and sent it to publish, or organize events around it.. It's a simple as that.
> I attribute some of it to not having a clue, some of it to those with fringe agendas etc.. and the end result has been an alienation of fat males
> 
> If you want to continue this, then please come to the other thread...



Hey, if I show you a picture of Gloria Steinem, do you melt into a puddle of water?






Heh... Just kidding, Officer Farva. But what have feminists ever done to you?


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

I keep repeating myself because there is a wall here that seems to spring up when ever the keywords like "BHM telling their own story" are spotted. 

It would help if the people that disagree with us would stop acting as if the viewpoints that we bring up are something new to Fat Acceptance and need proving. Fat Men have always commented on how their life histories have been hijacked by Fat Acceptance and that includes all these news articles that use Fat Acceptance sources.

The attack tactics used here only scrambles the communication and sets the process backward. A win-win outcome can only come from communication and a large part of the participates here rather attack others or post Campy messages all over the boards to high-light their power in numbers.

William




ripley said:


> I'm curious as to what you would see as a win-win conclusion? What would you like the results to be from this?
> 
> You keep repeating yourself, and we hear you. Is that what you want, for people to just acknowledge that they hear what you're saying?
> 
> I think that none of us will say "but fat men don't have it as bad" ever again, so that's a win, no?


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> And why I didn't want to post here, instant argument fallacies.. stoop to your level.. why not..
> Honestly do you people actually read what people write or you get out of bed, thinking "how can I misinterpret someone so I can be be a better asswipe today"
> You're just pathetic people, there's no point in talking to you, becuase you're not here to listen, one is here just to score some ass, gettin' more jacko boy fatties gonna play with the stick now "you 'teh manz!!!"
> 
> and the other I'm still not sure why.. examinig ants as well.. also a thing for fat chicks??



Let's make out.


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 9, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Hey, if I show you a picture of Gloria Steinem, do you melt into a puddle of water?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If I give you a brain that works properly would you be able to read what's there and not imagine what you think is there?


----------



## ripley (Jul 9, 2008)

William said:


> I keep repeating myself because there is a wall here that seems to spring up when ever the keywords like "BHM telling their own story" are spotted.
> 
> *It would help if the people that disagree with us would stop acting as if the viewpoints that we bring up are something new to Fat Acceptance and need proving*. Fat Men have always commented on how their life histories have been hijacked by Fat Acceptance and that includes all these news articles that use Fat Acceptance sources.
> 
> ...



I think that no one that has read these threads will do this any more. So you've won, no? No reason to keep repeating yourself, you have done your job.

That'll do, pig, that'll do.*



*a reference from the movie Babe, about an actual pig, not a slander against William or any other fat person.


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> If I give you a brain that works properly would you be able to read what's there and not imagine what you think is there?



Hey now (hey now, don't dreeeeeam it's over).

You can't just saunter in, say something vaguely demeaning about "feminists" and then expect some sort of ticker-tape parade. Unless by "ticker-tape" you mean "razor blades and fire". 

Your point was that the SA movement was largely begun by women and might have had less representation of BHMs than it should have. And who knows, that may be true. We can talk about that. But see how that has nothing to do with "feminists"? That was just inflammatory and bad. Like rheumatism. 

Jeez.


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

I love the ideas of the early Feminists in Fat Acceptance. 

It was not until writers like Susie Orbach, Marcia Millman, Kim Chernin, Marilyn Lawrence, Carole Spitzack , Naomi Wol, Morag MacSween and Susan Bordo came on the scene that fat men were written out of Fat Acceptance.

The Radical Feminist Therapy Collective and and the Fat Women's Problem-Solving Group from the early 70s most often used the phrase Fat People when dealing with Fat Issues unless the issue was strictly gender related.

William




Fascinita said:


> Hey, if I show you a picture of Gloria Steinem, do you melt into a puddle of water?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> If I give you a brain that works properly would you be able to read what's there and not imagine what you think is there?



You mean other than the obvious male martyrdom? Give the people here some credit. My brain may not work properly but the tone and intent of your post was pretty obvious. Those evil Feminists started the SA movement so of course they are keeping the men in it down.


----------



## Donna (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> And why I didn't want to post here, instant argument fallacies.. stoop to your level.. why not..
> Honestly do you people actually read what people write or you get out of bed, thinking "how can I misinterpret someone so I can be be a better asswipe today"
> You're just pathetic people, there's no point in talking to you, becuase you're not here to listen, one is here just to score some ass, gettin' more jacko boy fatties gonna play with the stick now "you 'teh manz!!!"
> 
> and the other I'm still not sure why.. examinig ants as well.. also a thing for fat chicks??



Dude, you just did exactly what you were pissing and moaning about. Do two wrongs make a right? 

I want to respond to something you said in your previous post, though:



> SA was created from Feminism, so it's rank and elite are filled with femenists, the focus of SA has been from a womens perspective, and then they just add "BHM's don't have it as hard", and sent it to publish, or organize events around it.. It's a simple as that.
> I attribute some of it to not having a clue, some of it to those with fringe agendas etc.. and the end result has been an alienation of fat males



More than once in this discussion, you have mentioned the connection to feminism and the roots of SA stemming from feminism. When you speak of the feminist movement, your tone comes across demeaning and somewhat misogynistic. Is that your intent? Is it possible the whole "BHMs don't have it as hard" idea is a SA-specific version of the larger idea that men in general often don't have it as hard. 

I hate to resort to broad generalizations, but in the interest of trying to make a point, I am going to. Men and women are different. Apples and oranges. BHM and BBW are different, with different issues. Cantelope and honeydew.


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 9, 2008)

Waxwing said:


> Hey now (hey now, don't dreeeeeam it's over).
> 
> You can't just saunter in, say something vaguely demeaning about "feminists" and then expect some sort of ticker-tape parade. Unless by "ticker-tape" you mean "razor blades and fire".
> 
> ...


Let's see easier to ask someone to clarify a point that you might not be understanding since the person is summarizing and asking you to follow up in another thread, or bring out the torches.. hmmmm... whatever.. you've shown your character quite well..


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 9, 2008)

Donna said:


> More than once in this discussion, you have mentioned the connection to feminism and the roots of SA stemming from feminism. When you speak of the feminist movement, your tone comes across demeaning and somewhat misogynistic.



That's what I'm getting from it.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> you've shown your character quite well..



As have you.


----------



## William (Jul 9, 2008)

Hi 

Now that I think of it if I said Fat Acceptance marginalizes Fat Men and GEF equates that to mean that I said that BBW marginalizes Fat Man, this may be the primary problem in this debate. Maybe if when thinking of Fat Acceptance we all thought of "Fat People" there would be better communication here.

I do not know, this may be nothing?

William



William said:


> I keep repeating myself because there is a wall here that seems to spring up when ever the keywords like "BHM telling their own story" are spotted.
> 
> It would help if the people that disagree with us would stop acting as if the viewpoints that we bring up are something new to Fat Acceptance and need proving. Fat Men have always commented on how their life histories have been hijacked by Fat Acceptance and that includes all these news articles that use Fat Acceptance sources.
> 
> ...


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 9, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> Let's see easier to ask someone to clarify a point that you might not be understanding since the person is summarizing and asking you to follow up in another thread, or bring out the torches.. hmmmm... whatever.. you've shown your character quite well..



Rein it in there, Tex. I have every intention of checking out the other thread, which is probably really interesting. That doesn't mean that I have to agree with what you've said here. 

You said something which was brief and inflammatory, and you know it. This thread has pissed you off, and I'm genuinely interested to know why, but not if that means I have to lie down and take it when you say something I think is stupid. 

And out of everyone who disliked your characterization of those nasty evil feministes, I like that you choose MY character to impugn in response.


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 9, 2008)

Donna said:


> Dude, you just did exactly what you were pissing and moaning about. Do two wrongs make a right?
> 
> I want to respond to something you said in your previous post, though:
> 
> ...


Thank you, for asking before making an assumption of my motives, I wish more were like that here..

There is no tone I'm just infering what you are, apples and oranges.. I don't expect women to understand what the males issues are, we have to explain it.
The catch is that the movement was started by women, for just purposes to combat how their self/societal worth was deteriorated, they built all the infrastructure to combat a war that was against them.
Along the way men started to become targets in the same war, we have no infrastructure.. we have trouble even organizing tea parties.. but all the size acceptance "machinery" is all there, we'd like to join.. but it was designed to handle fat in a perspective of womans issues. Most are highly educated women in the ranks, but their backgrounds are from a feminist point of view, so they don't really get the "male experience", they try.. but they failed miserably at it... 

I really don't want to continue this here, in the BHM/FFA forum there another thread, please take a look at it, and if you want to contnue I'll go do it from there.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 10, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> Thank you, for asking before making an assumption of my motives, I wish more were like that here..



Oh, please. Your post was poorly worded (and you know it) and when you felt you were being challenged on it you lashed out in long profanity filled tirade. 

The intensity of your reaction mixed with the tone of your previous post was pretty much text book of a man freaking out when they feel they are being challenged by women, that being Feminism in the SA movement and Waxwing and Fascinita. Your comments towards Waxwing and Fascinita were particularly telling to me considering their obvious tongue and cheek comments.


----------



## JoyJoy (Jul 10, 2008)

In case anyone didn't get it the first time (I hate not being "gotten")

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5dK9FNPgA4


----------



## butch (Jul 10, 2008)

I'm not sure where this idea that SA/FA was borne out of feminism came from? NAAFA was founded in what, 1969, by thin male FAs, and one of the earliest pro-fat acceptance book was written in the 1970's by a man named Louderback. The authors that William mentioned, like Susan Bordo, Susie Orbach, and others, are concerned about how fear of fat and appetitie affect average sized women as a form of control, and in fact have little to no interest in exploring their theories when it comes to actually supporting fat positivity. I would not classify their work as 'fat acceptance' work in the way that others seem to, because the focus of these authors work are not fat bodies-fat bodies are only the thing the women they focus on are scared of. They still have some benefit to SA/FA, but they are in no way exclusively or foundationally 'fat positive/fat studies' texts.

If you actaully look at feminism as an 'official' field, you find a lot of resistence to fat activism. Many feminist scholars are on record as being anti-fat, and there has been little space at leading feminist organizations for overtly pro-fat research. policy initiatives, and so forth. The most truly influential fat feminists I'm aware of is The Fat Underground, and they disbanded, I believe, in the early 80's. If you can find their anthology Shadows on a Tightrope, do pick it up, as it is a critical book in the history of fat activism.

In terms of scholarship, in the 90's and in this decade more work is being done that is focused on fat men-check out Fat Boys, A Slim Book by Sander Gilman as one example. In general, scholarship and research that is remotely fat positive is relatively new, and yes, a lot of what is out there is focused on fat women. A lot of it is also focused on white people, or straight people, and as the field grows, the scholarship grows as well, and more work is being done on people of color and fat, the disabled and fat, and so on. 

In terms of activism, since all fat activist work is grassroots and unpaid, all any man has to do is volunteer at an existing organization, or start their own. If more women then men are doing this, it sure isn't because there is some hierarchal organization keeping them out, and I have heard leading fat activists plead for more fat men active in the movement. 


Plus, most feminism and women's studies fields are now being re-named 'gender studies' precisely because of the need to look at the experiences of women and men (and those in between), because there are plenty of ways that gender is as confining and oppresive to men as it is to women, and I think we're seeing that here in these debates about fat and gender.


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 10, 2008)

butch said:


> I'm not sure where this idea that SA/FA was borne out of feminism came from? NAAFA was founded in what, 1969, by thin male FAs, and one of the earliest pro-fat acceptance book was written in the 1970's by a man named Louderback. The authors that William mentioned, like Susan Bordo, Susie Orbach, and others, are concerned about how fear of fat and appetitie affect average sized women as a form of control, and in fact have little to no interest in exploring their theories when it comes to actually supporting fat positivity. I would not classify their work as 'fat acceptance' work in the way that others seem to, because the focus of these authors work are not fat bodies-fat bodies are only the thing the women they focus on are scared of. They still have some benefit to SA/FA, but they are in no way exclusively or foundationally 'fat positive/fat studies' texts.


You're 100%, I should have phrased it better, to something like modeled after feminism, added the note about Fabrey. No motive there, I'm just pointing out how the framework was all based at the time. To explain how it would be percieved as alien to those from the outside.

From what I read on dims when the subject pops up, it seems like most think that organized SA, and it's workings are gender/color/sexaul neutral which is not the case, and like any other organization that were built to suit 1 client, are now going through hardships to try and change..




butch said:


> In terms of scholarship, in the 90's and in this decade more work is being done that is focused on fat men-check out Fat Boys, A Slim Book by Sander Gilman as one example. In general, scholarship and research that is remotely fat positive is relatively new, and yes, a lot of what is out there is focused on fat women. A lot of it is also focused on white people, or straight people, and as the field grows, the scholarship grows as well, and more work is being done on people of color and fat, the disabled and fat, and so on.



This is where most of the misunderstanding is happening, there's a poor habit omongst most early authors to toss in that "BHM don't have it as" line. Which then peeple assume that item has some relevance to the BHM experience.



butch said:


> In terms of activism, since all fat activist work is grassroots and unpaid, all any man has to do is volunteer at an existing organization, or start their own. If more women then men are doing this, it sure isn't because there is some hierarchal organization keeping them out, and I have heard leading fat activists plead for more fat men active in the movement.



There isn't a heirarchy that detracts male, it's just that when males do get an interest they realize that there's not much there for them, and change to attract the males is not happening, or you can say at less than a turtles pace. An organizaton that membership and ranks consists mainly of BBW and thin FA. and the complete lack of information on the BHM/FFA experience would pose a problem. all I've seen over the last while was talk, on how more fat men need to get involved, this is the first year the NAAFA actually did something rather than just talk..


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 10, 2008)

butch said:


> I'm not sure where this idea that SA/FA was borne out of feminism came from?



That was awesome. So much great info.


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi Butch

I used Susan Bordo, Susie Orbach because Authors like them tended to leave Fat Men 100% out of the picture when they did speak on fear of fat.

The radical feminist that that I was taking about were just as strongly Pro-Fat as Feminist. Still they talked about Fat People and did not invent acronyms like BBW and FA to represent the totality of Fat Acceptance.

Look at these links:

http://www.largesse.net/Archives/FU/manifesto.html

http://www.largesse.net/Archives/FU/roster.html

These women had plenty of papers and positions that focused on Fat and the Fat Female, but they never seemed to forget Fat People and if they did invent acronyms to be used to represent people in Fat Acceptance I think that they would have had one for everyone from the start.

I too wish that more Fat Men would get involved in Fat Acceptance, I also wish organizations like NAAFA would not place so much of their activities in conventions across the country.

Still the absence of Fat Men in Fat Acceptance does not grant Fat Acceptance the right to write anything it wants about the experiences of Fat Men, it would be better if nothing was said, because that could easily be corrected. There is already a Fat Acceptance "Folklore" on the ease of the lives of Fat Men that is a bane to any Fat Guy that may have a interest in Fat Acceptance.

William






butch said:


> I'm not sure where this idea that SA/FA was borne out of feminism came from? NAAFA was founded in what, 1969, by thin male FAs, and one of the earliest pro-fat acceptance book was written in the 1970's by a man named Louderback. The authors that William mentioned, like Susan Bordo, Susie Orbach, and others, are concerned about how fear of fat and appetitie affect average sized women as a form of control, and in fact have little to no interest in exploring their theories when it comes to actually supporting fat positivity. I would not classify their work as 'fat acceptance' work in the way that others seem to, because the focus of these authors work are not fat bodies-fat bodies are only the thing the women they focus on are scared of. They still have some benefit to SA/FA, but they are in no way exclusively or foundationally 'fat positive/fat studies' texts.
> 
> If you actaully look at feminism as an 'official' field, you find a lot of resistence to fat activism. Many feminist scholars are on record as being anti-fat, and there has been little space at leading feminist organizations for overtly pro-fat research. policy initiatives, and so forth. The most truly influential fat feminists I'm aware of is The Fat Underground, and they disbanded, I believe, in the early 80's. If you can find their anthology Shadows on a Tightrope, do pick it up, as it is a critical book in the history of fat activism.
> 
> ...


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 10, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> My intent for creating this thread is to address the separation issues that many people here on Dimensions feel is evident, though has not been directly addressed by too many people [yet] (that I have seen). I would like to see the BHM/FFA Board/World merged into the rest of the Community. "Off-topic stuff," including discussion of movies, holidays, and "how was your day?" topics all belong in The Lounge. Discussion of any variety of Weight Gain or fetish-related material (including both fat men _and_ women) belong in The Weight Board. Maybe there could be a breakdown between "BBW/FA" and "BHM/FFA" within The Weight Board. I, personally, do not think this site should separate one fat person from another, nor one type of fat person or admirer from another.
> What do you all think?



I think that Dimensions has ultimately become too big for itself, which is one reason why we've seen this forum start out with three divisions and work its way to over ten. 

Another reason why we have these divisions is that people just want attention and were going about it the wrong way. The weightgain/feederism board has always been a very popular one, and the people who weren't into it and felt left out made it their business to attack everyone in the threads who supported it.

All these new boards were put in so that everyone would feel welcome, but the assaults and the us vs them bullshit never really goes away. Hence, the Jim Crowe laws. Perhaps in another ten years, we'll have even MORE divisions on these boards, and eventually, people be attacking each other over the way they dress or style their hair.


----------



## Santaclear (Jul 10, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> The weightgain/feederism board has always been a very popular one, and the people who weren't into it and felt left out made it their business to attack everyone in the threads who supported it.



I'm neither passionately feeder nor anti-feeder, but that sounds like a deliberately dumbed-down generalization on your part so you can get a dig in. There are enough other reasons for the people who aren't into it besides "felt left out" and you probably know that.



UncannyBruceman said:


> I think that Dimensions has ultimately become too big for itself, which is one reason why we've seen this forum start out with three divisions and work its way to over ten.



I think it's great Dims has grown. We're becoming more of a force. AFG posted on one of the other threads that the current megabickering is probably just a phase, and I think/hope she's right.


----------



## Carl1h (Jul 10, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Perhaps in another ten years, we'll have even MORE divisions on these boards, and eventually, people be attacking each other over the way they dress or style their hair.



Only the ones in kilts.


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi Donna 

I have been saying the same from many posts ago, yet Fat Acceptance still measures and compares the experiences of BHMs and BBWs as if they were inter-changeable.

Another misrepresentation that BHM face is that Fat Acceptance seem to equate the fact that Fat Men face less open bias as proof that Fat Men are more accepted. Really all that shows is that people are more willing to bug a Woman than a man. A fat hater may think a Fat Man is gross, but may be less willing to get into his face and say so. The anonymous comments online point to that both Fat Men and Women are considered rejects by society.

William



Donna said:


> Dude, you just did exactly what you were pissing and moaning about. Do two wrongs make a right?
> 
> 
> I hate to resort to broad generalizations, but in the interest of trying to make a point, I am going to. Men and women are different. Apples and oranges. BHM and BBW are different, with different issues. Cantelope and honeydew.


----------



## Tina (Jul 10, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> SA was created from Feminism, so it's rank and elite are filled with femenists, the focus of SA has been from a womens perspective, and then they just add "BHM's don't have it as hard", and sent it to publish, or organize events around it.. It's a simple as that.
> I attribute some of it to not having a clue, some of it to those with fringe agendas etc.. and the end result has been an alienation of fat males


This is not true. Yes, there was Susan Faludi's book, but that had mostly feminist readers and not everyone agreed with it back then! In fact, SA, or as it really was termed, Fat Acceptance, was begun by a MALE, William Fabrey, when he started NAAFA in 1969. That was the genesis of "SA," not Faludi or feminism. The idea that women's fat bodies were a feminist issue didn't take hold for a while. I mean, hell, look at Gloria Steinhem. I was alive during these times and I remember it. I also used to buy Ms. Magazine then, too.

Many men were at the forefront of Fat Acceptance, including Conrad, who supported NAAFA literally and figuratively for years and years.

I smell sour grapes. At least get your facts straight.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> You mean other than the obvious male martyrdom? Give the people here some credit. My brain may not work properly but the tone and intent of your post was pretty obvious. Those evil Feminists started the SA movement so of course they are keeping the men in it down.





William said:


> Hi
> 
> Now that I think of it if I said Fat Acceptance marginalizes Fat Men and GEF equates that to mean that I said that BBW marginalizes Fat Man, this may be the primary problem in this debate. *Maybe if when thinking of Fat Acceptance we all thought of "Fat People" there would be better communication here.*
> 
> ...



I find this laughable at this point William.....
Almost every post you have made through out this entire forum has been about BHM this and BHM that aren't treated right, etc. and NOW that your own posts came back to haunt you, you suddenly want this to be a "people" thing?
My ultimate impression of you and a few others is that none of you give one shit about the fat women here....you think we're a bunch of bitches that should all just stfu and kiss your ass....yet you only seem to want this from us fatties. PolarKat seems outright stunned that a thin women darest to speak up and not agree with him.....



Waxwing said:


> Rein it in there, Tex. I have every intention of checking out the other thread, which is probably really interesting. That doesn't mean that I have to agree with what you've said here.
> 
> You said something which was brief and inflammatory, and you know it. This thread has pissed you off, and I'm genuinely interested to know why, but not if that means I have to lie down and take it when you say something I think is stupid.
> 
> And out of everyone who disliked your characterization of those nasty evil feministes, I like that you choose MY character to impugn in response.



You're thin....you're supposed to be "different" from us fat women.....


What I think they really don't get is how biased they are towards fat women....and how, in the end, it's that discriminatory thinking that is going to cut them off at the knees...especially if they are looking for the fat women to do every damn thing for them...as they seem to be. 





Santaclear said:


> I'm neither passionately feeder nor anti-feeder, but that sounds like a deliberately dumbed-down generalization on your part so you can get a dig in. There are enough other reasons for the people who aren't into it besides "felt left out" and you probably know that.
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's great Dims has grown. We're becoming more of a force. AFG posted on one of the other threads that the current megabickering is probably just a phase, and I think/hope she's right.



I'm miffed that it won't let me rep you right now......:bow:


----------



## butch (Jul 10, 2008)

missaf said:


> It is just a phase, but the phase has become more intense over the years.
> 
> Yes, we're becoming a force, but an unfocused one at that, and the lack of leadership and communication is going to stop the growth and put us into a downward spiral.



Yeah, I feel that way about the whole Fat Acceptance/Fat Activism world, not just Dims. I feel a lot of dismay and frustration and hope things improve.


----------



## Raqui (Jul 10, 2008)

I can understand why things should be seperate and in its self if certain people only visited certain boards of interest then they are missing out on diffrent goofy, serious, FA related etc. post. 

Personally when i come by i try to go around every board and just reply to what really catches my eye. 

i think more people would enjoy the forum if they did but to each their own. 

I dont have a preference as of yet on the merging any of the seperated forums.


----------



## snuggletiger (Jul 10, 2008)

Certain people are going to get drawn to certain things and places, thats in any group you got. And with a variety of folks like we have, I think the current partitions are fine, there maybe some overlap but I think its all good.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> What I think they really don't get is how biased they are towards fat women....



I would say towards women in general.

I feel what we have is a very, very small handful of men that cant see past their own sense of entitlement and self victimhood throwing around vague accusations that women are somehow keeping them down in the Fat Acceptance movement. The popular scapegoat of Feminism really brought it full circle to me.


----------



## olwen (Jul 10, 2008)

butch said:


> I'm not sure where this idea that SA/FA was borne out of feminism came from? NAAFA was founded in what, 1969, by thin male FAs, and one of the earliest pro-fat acceptance book was written in the 1970's by a man named Louderback. The authors that William mentioned, like Susan Bordo, Susie Orbach, and others, are concerned about how fear of fat and appetitie affect average sized women as a form of control, and in fact have little to no interest in exploring their theories when it comes to actually supporting fat positivity. I would not classify their work as 'fat acceptance' work in the way that others seem to, because the focus of these authors work are not fat bodies-fat bodies are only the thing the women they focus on are scared of. They still have some benefit to SA/FA, but they are in no way exclusively or foundationally 'fat positive/fat studies' texts.
> 
> If you actaully look at feminism as an 'official' field, you find a lot of resistence to fat activism. Many feminist scholars are on record as being anti-fat, and there has been little space at leading feminist organizations for overtly pro-fat research. policy initiatives, and so forth. The most truly influential fat feminists I'm aware of is The Fat Underground, and they disbanded, I believe, in the early 80's. If you can find their anthology Shadows on a Tightrope, do pick it up, as it is a critical book in the history of fat activism.
> 
> ...



Thanks for this post Butch. I just want to add that _Shadows on a Tightrope_ is out of print as far as I know. And that "Fat Studies" is a brand new academic field that branched off from women's studies, gender studies, GBLT studies, and body studies precisely because the issues concerning fat women are not being addressed by feminists in academia. They see anything to do with fat as a health issue and nothing more. If this field is to grow the more people who participate the better. If anyone reading this is in college, go to the dean of humanities or whatever and ask them to consider adding fat studies courses to the curriculum if it's something you would be interesting in studying.


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

HI GEF

It is simple 

I say Fat Acceptance Marginalizes Fat Men

You interpret my statement as saying BBWs marginalize Fat Men.

I think of Fat Acceptance as being for Fat People, there is a chance that you do not.

William




Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I find this laughable at this point William.....
> Almost every post you have made through out this entire forum has been about BHM this and BHM that aren't treated right, etc. and NOW that your own posts came back to haunt you, you suddenly want this to be a "people" thing?


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 10, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> You're 100%, I should have phrased it better, to something like modeled after feminism, added the note about Fabrey. No motive there, I'm just pointing out how the framework was all based at the time. To explain how it would be percieved as alien to those from the outside.
> 
> From what I read on dims when the subject pops up, it seems like most think that organized SA, and it's workings are gender/color/sexaul neutral which is not the case, and like any other organization that were built to suit 1 client, are now going through hardships to try and change..
> 
> ...





Tina said:


> This is not true. Yes, there was Susan Faludi's book, but that had mostly feminist readers and not everyone agreed with it back then! In fact, SA, or as it really was termed, Fat Acceptance, was begun by a MALE, William Fabrey, when he started NAAFA in 1969. That was the genesis of "SA," not Faludi or feminism. The idea that women's fat bodies were a feminist issue didn't take hold for a while. I mean, hell, look at Gloria Steinhem. I was alive during these times and I remember it. I also used to buy Ms. Magazine then, too.
> 
> Many men were at the forefront of Fat Acceptance, including Conrad, who supported NAAFA literally and figuratively for years and years.
> 
> I smell sour grapes. At least get your facts straight.



Yes, please refer above, I assume you read that as well since your post came after it, so I'm unsure why you're implying something of my character after I corrected what I said initially. 

I assume that you also read the other posts in the BHM/FFA thread that have been going on as well, before you passed judgement on me, so I would like to really know where I'm wrong and would like your explination for the descrepancy that I mentioned in that thread.. It's only fair that if I am to be dismissed that you do so and address all the points I have mentioned on this topic, and not just focus on one that I corrected.

Thank you,


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 10, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> I would say towards women in general.
> 
> I feel what we have is a very, very small handful of men that cant see past their own sense of entitlement and self victimhood throwing around vague accusations that women are somehow keeping them down in the Fat Acceptance movement. The popular scapegoat of Feminism really brought it full circle to me.



You're just not reading everthing, and doing your best to pull single bits out of context.. I still haven't seen you address anything I wrote except that 1 item, nor have I seen you provide what you perception or critique on any item that I've stated so far.


----------



## Tina (Jul 10, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> It's only fair that if I am to be dismissed that you do so and address all the points I have mentioned on this topic, and not just focus on one that I corrected.


To you it's only fair. To me, I don't have the time to read every post in every thread that you have posted in on the subject. If you retracted it, fine, but I was responding to the post I responded to and no other. I have no obligation to read all of your words on every subject before responding to one of your posts. To imply that I have that responsibility is ridiculous. I'm glad you retracted. Thanks for letting me know.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 10, 2008)

missaf said:


> It is just a phase, but the phase has become more intense over the years.
> 
> Yes, we're becoming a force, but an unfocused one at that, and the lack of leadership and communication is going to stop the growth and put us into a downward spiral.



The problem is when someone rises in power or have been around a while, they assume that their opinion means more than someone new.

That's where people who have bad opinions on thin FFA's, feeders/feedees, WLS and other controversial topics begin to badmouth the people and attack because they feel no one can stop them, and since some of them are bestest buds with moderators, some do get a free ride.

There;s always going to be debate on here, but lately its been getting harsh. Some of the nastiest fights start on innocent threads no less. Like I said before, when people think they've been around forever they think they're right no matter what and everyone should listen.

Here's a small sample

"I think gaining weight is wrong and morally repulsive"

"Awww come on, I think if someone will be happy with themselves then its ok."

"Well you're wrong and repulsive if you think like that"

"And so are you for being so closed minded"

This goes on...and on.....and on....and then more people join in and takes sides depending on whichever their friends are.

There needs to be more bashes, cookouts and other events because those events are pure positive and nothing bad really ever happens, so the more people talk to each other in reality the less likely they're going to rip on someone on boards.


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 10, 2008)

Tina said:


> To you it's only fair. To me, I don't have the time to read every post in every thread that you have posted in on the subject. If you retracted it, fine, but I was responding to the post I responded to and no other. I have no obligation to read all of your words on every subject before responding to one of your posts. To imply that I have that responsibility is ridiculous. I'm glad you retracted. Thanks for letting me know.


But is that fair or polite to pass judgement on someone from just a small part of a larger conversation. Would you like that others form an opinion of you based on random posts they happen to pass by. I would understand not reading the other thread, but a couple posts later in this same thread I corrected what I originally wrote. 

This type of behavior seems really foreign to me, Where I am from it's very impolite to judge on snapshot of a larger picture. I always make sure I've read all that is relevant before passing any judgement, and even then, benefit of the doubt is always to be given. This is what one is expected to do.
I'm not an american as the majority here, and I'm starting to notice this type of behavior/pattern, is this behavior the norm amongst americans, or is this a norm amongst dim members?


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 10, 2008)

Santaclear said:


> I think it's great Dims has grown. We're becoming more of a force. AFG posted on one of the other threads that the current megabickering is probably just a phase, and I think/hope she's right.



This "phase" is something that has been around as far as I can remember it, and I've been here for about ten years. Whether you think I'm trying to make an indirect dig at anyone or not, you can't exactly tell me that I'm making anything up. There has always been infighting, there have always been cliques, and the only "force" here in Dimensions is force against each other.

The paysite boards helped bring a lot of traffic into this site over the years, and it's attracted a lot of closeted men who have no interests other than getting off. On the same token, a lot of women have followed them here, and they'll gladly pass judgment on anyone who gets the attention from the men they're after. This obviously does not apply to everyone, but it's still out there. It's always been this way and it likely always will be.

Dimensions has always served as a resource for BBWs and FAs looking for love, friendship, and support (not exactly in that order), but maybe 3-4 out of every 10 people really care to use it for that purpose. You can walk into the chat room and find a dozen people who like to share pictures with the fresh meat but never really participate in any of the discussions here, let alone offer anything constructive.

A lot of new people get attacked around here when they either ask a generic question about the community, share a thought or fantasy, or post a picture in an effort to get some positive reinforcement. This is supposed to be a safe place for a young fat girl who wants to be queen for a day or a young FA who has no buddies to talk to about his orientation, and they're often crucified when they try to out themselves...and a lot of it is unwarranted. 

I happen to be adamantly against weight loss surgery for a multitude of reasons, but you don't see me going to the WLS to tell people that what they're doing is wrong. I'm not exactly a BHM, either, and you don't see me going into THAT board to question the girls as to why they wouldn't want a boyfriend that spends several hours a week at the gym and takes an interest in martial arts and wrestling. I've given a lot of people a lot of shit in this community over the years, but only if there was provocation to do so and none of it was undeserved...you don't see me going to a board that I have nothing to do with just to give anyone a hard time because I don't belong.

Dimensions doesn't have to be perfect, but it would certainly benefit if certain people weren't as self-serving as they are.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> I would say towards women in general.
> 
> I feel what we have is a very, very small handful of men that cant see past their own sense of entitlement and self victimhood throwing around vague accusations that women are somehow keeping them down in the Fat Acceptance movement. The popular scapegoat of Feminism really brought it full circle to me.




I won't say on the boards exactly what it is I think they are "entitled" to....  



Will you marry me, Jack? :wubu:


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 10, 2008)

butch said:


> I'm not sure where this idea that SA/FA was borne out of feminism came from? NAAFA was founded in what, 1969, by thin male FAs, and one of the earliest pro-fat acceptance book was written in the 1970's by a man named Louderback. The authors that William mentioned, like Susan Bordo, Susie Orbach, and others, are concerned about how fear of fat and appetitie affect average sized women as a form of control, and in fact have little to no interest in exploring their theories when it comes to actually supporting fat positivity. I would not classify their work as 'fat acceptance' work in the way that others seem to, because the focus of these authors work are not fat bodies-fat bodies are only the thing the women they focus on are scared of. They still have some benefit to SA/FA, but they are in no way exclusively or foundationally 'fat positive/fat studies' texts.
> 
> If you actaully look at feminism as an 'official' field, you find a lot of resistence to fat activism. Many feminist scholars are on record as being anti-fat, and there has been little space at leading feminist organizations for overtly pro-fat research. policy initiatives, and so forth. The most truly influential fat feminists I'm aware of is The Fat Underground, and they disbanded, I believe, in the early 80's. If you can find their anthology Shadows on a Tightrope, do pick it up, as it is a critical book in the history of fat activism.
> 
> ...



Butch, thanks for this. This is such an informative post. So glad to see this surface in this thread.

You rule


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 10, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> The problem is when someone rises in power or have been around a while, they assume that their opinion means more than someone new.
> 
> That's where people who have bad opinions on thin FFA's, feeders/feedees, WLS and other controversial topics begin to badmouth the people and attack because they feel no one can stop them, and since some of them are bestest buds with moderators, some do get a free ride.
> 
> ...



Good post, Hayes. But the only thing I don't agree with is that NO ONE is in power around here. I'm not here to win any popularity contests, I don't feel like I should be entitled to anything (this site could close down tonight and I honestly won't miss it), and I personally don't give a fuck if I'm the most hated man on the boards (even though I probably already am). But I DO give a fuck if I share a thought or a story that can help a total stranger with a personal problem or maybe see a certain issue from a different perspective. These days, I prefer to do it in private. Whether it's at a bash or in a private email, I communicate with people from within the community all the time, judgment free.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 10, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Good post, Hayes. But the only thing I don't agree with is that NO ONE is in power around here. I'm not here to win any popularity contests, I don't feel like I should be entitled to anything (this site could close down tonight and I honestly won't miss it), and I personally don't give a fuck if I'm the most hated man on the boards (even though I probably already am). But I DO give a fuck if I share a thought or a story that can help a total stranger with a personal problem or maybe see a certain issue from a different perspective. These days, I prefer to do it in private. Whether it's at a bash or in a private email, I communicate with people from within the community all the time, judgment free.



I think I can make a claim to the most hated here but that's not important lol.

You're right about the total stranger coming in here and getting crucified when asking a question. On another thread one bird nose I won't mention said to "Suck it up" when the person got angry he got attacked.

What happened is that a lot of people have gone through so much hate and negativity in their lives and they vicariously want to pass it along to others to make them aware life isn't all fun and games. Hence attacking someone for asking a simple question, they want that person to experience the hate they did when they themselves were younger.

Its immature and wrong to be bitter against someone new for no reason, but as you said no one is in power here to stop it.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 10, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> What happened is that a lot of people have gone through so much hate and negativity in their lives and they vicariously want to pass it along to others to make them aware life isn't all fun and games. Hence attacking someone for asking a simple question, they want that person to experience the hate they did when they themselves were younger.



I can easily elaborate on this, but I won't. I'm not exactly encouraging a hippie-like utopia where everyone loves each other and dances naked in the meadow, but at the same time, size acceptance cannot flourish here if our members are unwilling to accept each other. There is honestly more discrimination, finger-pointing, and name-calling from within our own ranks than there is from the outside world. Not to say that I'm a saint by any means, because I will be the first to admit that I've had some nasty battles with members over the years, but again, most of them had provocation. I'm not gonna let some asshole walk all over me because he or she has a problem with the woman I date, the fantasies I have, or the opinions I have on any big or small issue. On the same token, if we have a troublemaker in need of a smack, my hand is likely to be there.

You're right, though, it doesn't really happen often at the bashes, and I definitely have more fun having a drink in person with a new FA than I do here on the boards. I do it all the time, OUTSIDE the community as well as inside. I try to encourage as many men and women as I can to attend events with me, and I take great pride in helping them boost their confidence and making them feel like they're #1 on the dance floor.

As for being Dimensions' most hated man...well, with you being a wrestling fan and all, it appears that we have the makings of a good heel tag team.


----------



## olwen (Jul 10, 2008)

William said:


> HI GEF
> 
> It is simple
> 
> ...



Ensign, Full stop. 

You're backpeddaling now and you know it. You imply that fat women marginalize men when you say "fat acceptance marginalizes fat men." To say otherwise implies that other fat men are marginalizing you and that has not been the basis of your point of view for this and other threads for months now. I'm almost offended that you would think we're too simple for clear, rational, and logical arguments when you haven't been clear yourself. Almost. And since you keep directing so many of your convoluted statements at all the fat women, it makes me wonder if you just have always, always thought of bbws as the enemy....Honestly, if it hadn't been for PK and Carl I wouldn't have even begun to understand a thing you've been trying to say about this issue....


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

My statement about GEF stands, to me Fat Acceptance is about Fat People.

Here you go again writing a paragraph of your own thoughts and intentions and implying that they are mine. If I wanted to single out BBWs in this discussion I would have, but I did not and I do not feel that way about BBWs no matter what you say.

William 




olwen said:


> Ensign, Full stop.
> 
> You're backpeddaling now and you know it. You imply that fat women marginalize men when you say "fat acceptance marginalizes fat men." To say otherwise implies that other fat men are marginalizing you and that has not been the basis of your point of view for this and other threads for months now. I'm almost offended that you would think we're too simple for clear, rational, and logical arguments when you haven't been clear yourself. Almost. And since you keep directing so many of your convoluted statements at all the fat women, it makes me wonder if you just have always, always thought of bbws as the enemy....Honestly, if it hadn't been for PK and Carl I wouldn't have even begun to understand a thing you've been trying to say about this issue....


----------



## JoyJoy (Jul 10, 2008)

View attachment 45772
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyznowiknowmyabcsnexttimewon'tyousingwithme


----------



## Tina (Jul 10, 2008)

PolarKat said:


> But is that fair or polite to pass judgement on someone from just a small part of a larger conversation. Would you like that others form an opinion of you based on random posts they happen to pass by. I would understand not reading the other thread, but a couple posts later in this same thread I corrected what I originally wrote.
> 
> This type of behavior seems really foreign to me, Where I am from it's very impolite to judge on snapshot of a larger picture. I always make sure I've read all that is relevant before passing any judgement, and even then, benefit of the doubt is always to be given. This is what one is expected to do.
> I'm not an american as the majority here, and I'm starting to notice this type of behavior/pattern, is this behavior the norm amongst americans, or is this a norm amongst dim members?


You are presuming I have an opinion on you. I will honestly say that I haven't paid enough attention to you to _have_ an opinion on you, so you're giving yourself way too much importance in my life and on these boards. I did have an opinion on _your post_, though, and gave it. Fini.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 10, 2008)

Apropos of nothing, I wrote a little story.

Like to hear it? Here it goes.

_I was dying of thirst, so I started digging a well.

It was back-breaking labor and the sun was hot. The longer I went without water and the harder I worked, the thirstier I got.

One day I heard a faint rush of water gurgling in the earth. I leapt up and let out a long shout of joy. My mouth had filled with dust and my throat was parched, but I was overcome, grateful that my work would come to something. I began digging again, with more gusto than ever, knowing that soon I'd slake my thirst.

My neighbor, who was also thirsty, heard the commotion and came out to see what had happened. Instead of digging under the sun, she had sought shade and rest in her house. I heard her call to me above and when I looked up from deep where I had dug, I saw her face peering down, straining to see what I was doing.

Just at that moment, the first trickle of water surfaced. I dipped my hand and let my palm fill, then brought it up to my mouth, before turning my face upwards again to beam with pride at my neighbor.

"See that you dig so there's enough water for me, too," she hollered down, even as I saw that she was now lowering a bucket attached to a rope. "And fill this with water and bring it up for me to drink. This well will do nicely for me, as well. I'm only glad I heard you let out that cackle of glee, since I would never have known you'd finally found water otherwise. And another thing... You might've done more to keep me informed of your progress here. I could've clued you in and given you instructions on what kind of well I prefer to drink from." 

"Neighbor, I've been digging for weeks. My face is caked with dust. My hands are cracked from holding this shovel. And my back aches from all this effort. But there's water to be had! And this digging would go faster with two of us at work. I could use some help, neighbor" said I.

"Curse you!" she answered. "I've been sitting home for months dying of thirst! Now I see what a terrible neighbor you are! Digging a well for your own selfish ends, while I die of thirst. Come out of that well at once. At this point, an awful, thoughtless person like you would only ruin the well for the rest of us who've been waiting to be given water. Curse you and your father before you!"
_

And the moral is: I don't work for you.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi William

I am a nice woman and you should try to understand why what I say bothers you so much. Then maybe we could have a discussion.

I say your interpretation of "people" does not include women. 

Do not ask me to prove this because that would be extremely unfair to me as a BBW. You can google what I tell you to if you do not believe me.

It is simple.


These are the facts.



Green Eyed Fairy




William said:


> HI GEF
> 
> It is simple
> 
> ...


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi 

I understand what you are saying, but no matter who digs the the well any publications or statements to the press or public about the history of people connected to the well has to be truthful and from real sources. The well digger can not publish any old statements about her neighbor without consulting her neighbor.

William




Fascinita said:


> Apropos of nothing, I wrote a little story.
> 
> Like to hear it? Here it goes.
> 
> ...


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi GEF

The fact is once again you have twisted my statements.

William



Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Hi William
> 
> I am a nice woman and you should try to understand why what I say bothers you so much. Then maybe we could have a discussion.
> 
> ...


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi William


Stop spreading lies about me. There should be password protection for some people to post here. 


Green Eyed Fairy


----------



## Tooz (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi William

I think you are Confused about when to let Sleeping dogs lie.

Tooz


----------



## Paquito (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi GEF,

I have $50 riding on you that you'll win this showdown

Don't let me down.


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi Tooz

I would but you can't just let lies go unanswered. I wish that everyone here was looking for communication and progress, but these are the things we have to deal with.

William



Tooz said:


> Hi William
> 
> I think you are Confused about when to let Sleeping dogs lie.
> 
> Tooz


----------



## Tooz (Jul 10, 2008)

You need to understand that you aren't GETTING anywhere, though. It's just an endless circle between you and some other people, neither making any progress. Sometimes you just need to say, "fine, look, think you you want, I'm out."


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi free2beme04

Do you have any more.....cheesecake?  

I would rather have that than the money. 

It is simple.

These are the facts.



Green Eyed Fairy



free2beme04 said:


> Hi GEF,
> 
> I have $50 riding on you that you'll win this showdown
> 
> Don't let me down.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 10, 2008)

William said:


> Hi
> 
> I understand what you are saying, but no matter who digs the the well any publications or statements to the press or public about the history of people connected to the well has to be truthful and from real sources. The well digger can not publish any old statements about her neighbor without consulting her neighbor.
> 
> William



Hi William,

Talking to the press _is_ digging the well.

Stop trying to "correct" the digging that's been done by others, and get to digging for yourself.

Fascinita


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Is digging a metaphor for googling? :blink:


----------



## Paquito (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Hi free2beme04
> 
> Do you have any more.....cheesecake?
> 
> ...




You know I got the hook up. 
Here's a lil taste of what I have to offer.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Oh my......what a big.......cheesecake you have....... :batting:


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Is digging a metaphor for googling? :blink:



Actually, I think it's a metaphor for noodling.


----------



## William (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi Tooz

One thing that I have learned on the job and off is that change is one of the most difficult endeavor people can ever attempt. Some people fear change to the point where their behavior that borders on Psychotic.

I agree with you that this is a endless circle, there are too many people fighting change, any and all change.

William







Tooz said:


> You need to understand that you aren't GETTING anywhere, though. It's just an endless circle between you and some other people, neither making any progress. Sometimes you just need to say, "fine, look, think you you want, I'm out."


----------



## Paquito (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Oh my......what a big.......cheesecake you have....... :batting:



I get that alot 

Maybe a little field trip is in order


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Do they have......CHEESE in that joint? I wouldn't mind some fondu.......


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 10, 2008)

I'll du you and it'll be fon.


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 10, 2008)

Wagimawr said:


> I'll du you and it'll be fon.



I just pictured GEF being gently lowered into melted chocolate. FYI.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

only if free2beme can watch....there are others that can't have any.....fondu though


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Waxwing said:


> I just pictured GEF being gently lowered into melted chocolate. FYI.



Oh you're definitely invited to the party :wubu:


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 10, 2008)

Yes, party is the appropriate word.

In my pants.


----------



## Punkin1024 (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I'm miffed that it won't let me rep you right now......:bow:



Got him for you Green! 

~Punkin


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

You has cheez cake in ur pants?  :wubu:


----------



## Paquito (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> only if free2beme can watch....there are others that can't have any.....fondu though



*Pulls up chair to fondue fountain immediately*


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> You has cheez cake in ur pants?  :wubu:


It's like a budget ripoff of American Pie over here, damn.


----------



## Paquito (Jul 10, 2008)

I think this thread has proved something profound: cheese is the ulimate tool of the thread hijacker. :bow:


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 10, 2008)

free2beme04 said:


> *Pulls up chair to fondue fountain immediately*



Instead of fondue, I would like warm brownies with cold vanilla ice cream.

*drool*


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 10, 2008)

*ahem*

Breyers Cookies and Cream is superior, kthx.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Instead of fondue, I would like warm brownies with cold vanilla ice cream.
> 
> *drool*



How dare you attempt to highjack this thread......with brownies 


Good Night to All, and to All a Good Night  

*waves*


----------



## Paquito (Jul 10, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Instead of fondue, I would like warm brownies with cold vanilla ice cream.
> 
> *drool*



I haz the hook up for that too


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 10, 2008)

free2beme04 said:


> I haz the hook up for that too





Fickle  .


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 10, 2008)

Sounds more like "Feeder" to me.


----------



## Paquito (Jul 10, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Fickle  .



You know I'll always have a vat of fondue saved for you :happy:


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 10, 2008)

free2beme04 said:


> I haz the hook up for that too



Ooooh, free. 

That looks heavenly.


----------



## William (Jul 11, 2008)

All I can say is thanks for proving that you do not have leg to stand on and sarcasm is all you have to give to the conversation.

I also ask where are the moderators here?


William



Fascinita said:


> Ooooh, free.
> 
> That looks heavenly.


----------



## BubbleButtBabe (Jul 11, 2008)

I have read every single post in this thread three times. I wanted to make sure I got it half way right when I post this.

I am sorry but I really do not see the sarcasm in Fascinita's earlier post.

"Hi William,

Talking to the press is digging the well.

Stop trying to "correct" the digging that's been done by others, and get to digging for yourself.

Fascinita"

After reading her story I understand perfectly what she is saying and to me I saw no sarcasm. She is saying that by going out and talking to the press about the problems BHMS have in every day life is like digging the well. She is saying do not be like the neighbor and say well if you had come to me before you dug the well then I could have told you the proper way of doing it..That doesn't work. In other words if you want BHMS issue brought to the forefront then it is time to get out and make some noise to the media about the problems men deal with. In other words do not just be active for the whole movement but specific parts that bother you. Such as, the way you say BHMS are treated.

Sorry if that doesn't make a lot of sense but it is 5 am and I haven't been to bed yet!


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 11, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> I can easily elaborate on this, but I won't. I'm not exactly encouraging a hippie-like utopia where everyone loves each other and dances naked in the meadow, but at the same time, size acceptance cannot flourish here if our members are unwilling to accept each other. There is honestly more discrimination, finger-pointing, and name-calling from within our own ranks than there is from the outside world. Not to say that I'm a saint by any means, because I will be the first to admit that I've had some nasty battles with members over the years, but again, most of them had provocation. I'm not gonna let some asshole walk all over me because he or she has a problem with the woman I date, the fantasies I have, or the opinions I have on any big or small issue. On the same token, if we have a troublemaker in need of a smack, my hand is likely to be there.
> 
> You're right, though, it doesn't really happen often at the bashes, and I definitely have more fun having a drink in person with a new FA than I do here on the boards. I do it all the time, OUTSIDE the community as well as inside. I try to encourage as many men and women as I can to attend events with me, and I take great pride in helping them boost their confidence and making them feel like they're #1 on the dance floor.
> 
> As for being Dimensions' most hated man...well, with you being a wrestling fan and all, it appears that we have the makings of a good heel tag team.



LADIES AND GENTLEMEN........coming down the aisle......from Yonkers New York, weighing 227 pounds and from Boston Massachusettes, weighing 189 lbs....they are the Dimensions TAG TEAM CHAMPIONS OF THE WOORLLLLLDDDDDDDD

BRUCE


KEVIN

They are....THE FEEDERSSSSSSSSSSSS

(crowd boo's)


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 11, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN........coming down the aisle......from Yonkers New York, weighing 227 pounds and from Boston Massachusettes, weighing 189 lbs....they are the Dimensions TAG TEAM CHAMPIONS OF THE WOORLLLLLDDDDDDDD
> 
> BRUCE
> 
> ...



Actually, it's STRONG Island, NY, and the weight is about 207 

I'm thinking it over, though...between me, you, and we'll throw Wrestlingguy in there as well...we kinda got our own little FA's answer to Evolution...


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 11, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Actually, it's STRONG Island, NY, and the weight is about 207
> 
> I'm thinking it over, though...between me, you, and we'll throw Wrestlingguy in there as well...we kinda got our own little FA's answer to Evolution...



Holy mother of Foley you're right.

You, Blaze, Haze, Phil.....cue the Motorhead music right now.

http://a552.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/87/l_f530dd0c664b94e9a0be49477298aa7f.jpg


----------



## Tina (Jul 11, 2008)

William said:


> All I can say is thanks for proving that you do not have leg to stand on and sarcasm is all you have to give to the conversation.
> 
> I also ask where are the moderators here?
> 
> ...



To do what? Tell people to keep on topic? We don't heard people like cattle through the appropriate gates. If someone wants to talk brownies with Breyer's cookies and cream it might frustrate me (because I want some!), but it's not up to me to direct the flow of conversation.


----------



## William (Jul 11, 2008)

Hi 

No I think that Fascinita was honestly trying to make a analogy of the problem here, but as with most analogy there are issues that are not dealt with by the analogy.

The sarcasm is the trolling that is consistently follows these discussions and that are not being dealt with by the moderators. If any of us went on any other forum and disrupted threads, we would be banned in a minute.

William




BubbleButtBabe said:


> I have read every single post in this thread three times. I wanted to make sure I got it half way right when I post this.
> 
> I am sorry but I really do not see the sarcasm in Fascinita's earlier post.
> 
> ...


----------



## William (Jul 11, 2008)

Why are people allowed to say anything here and not in the gaining forums??? Keeping the conversation on track is the job of the moderator or else any troll should be welcomed here.

William




Tina said:


> To do what? Tell people to keep on topic? We don't heard people like cattle through the appropriate gates. If someone wants to talk brownies with Breyer's cookies and cream it might frustrate me (because I want some!), but it's not up to me to direct the flow of conversation.


----------



## Tina (Jul 11, 2008)

The Erotic Weightgain forum has its own set of rules, just like the Paysite board does and Hyde Park does. We have no general, board-wide rules about keeping on topic. For further info, ask Conrad or one of the mods of this forum.


----------



## William (Jul 11, 2008)

So if a person is not vulgar they can post anything off topic and it even does not have make sense, it could even be gibberish and that is acceptable? The trolls that hate the Fat Community smf Dimensions will love this!!

I do not think that this is good logic!!

William




Tina said:


> The Erotic Weightgain forum has its own set of rules, just like the Paysite board does and Hyde Park does. We have no general, board-wide rules about keeping on topic. For further info, ask Conrad or one of the mods of this forum.


----------



## Tina (Jul 11, 2008)

You don't have to agree, William. As I told you in PM, take it up with Conrad if you don't like it.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jul 11, 2008)

William said:


> So if a person is not vulgar they can post anything off topic and it even does not have make sense, it could even be gibberish and that is acceptable? The trolls that hate the Fat Community smf Dimensions will love this!!
> 
> I do not think that this is good logic!!
> 
> William



William,

It might not be good logic but it's logistically practical. Keeping this many threads on track would make cat herding or mercury juggling look as easy as falling off a log. I've noticed much of your reasoning seems to be designed for an ideal world; not just any ideal, but yours. Slow your roll and try focusing on what does work in the world and on Dims. Just a suggestion.

To paraphrase Churchill "Dims is the worst possible Fat Acceptance Forum, except for all the others." :bow:

Respectfully,
Scott


----------



## William (Jul 11, 2008)

Hi EN

If my posts and logic were designed for a perfect world then I would be the one here trolling and disrupting traffic. I merely reply to any questions asked. If everyone would limit themselves to that we would have communication.

William




Ernest Nagel said:


> William,
> 
> It might not be good logic but it's logistically practical. Keeping this many threads on track would make cat herding or mercury juggling look as easy as falling off a log. I've noticed much of your reasoning seems to be designed for an ideal world; not just any ideal, but yours. Slow your roll and try focusing on what does work in the world and on Dims. Just a suggestion.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 11, 2008)

Tina said:


> If someone wants to talk brownies with Breyer's cookies and cream it might frustrate me (because I want some!)


It was yummy. You would have enjoyed it.

*[USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST]*


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jul 11, 2008)

William said:


> Hi EN
> 
> *If my posts and logic were designed for a perfect world then I would be the one here trolling and disrupting traffic.* I merely reply to any questions asked. If everyone would limit themselves to that we would have communication.
> 
> William



You're on a good path here, William. Just hold onto that first thought until it feels at home. 

And you're spot on about the first part of your second statement. You do _*reply*_. The protocol for effective communication however is _answer_ questions, _acknowledge_ statements.

I'm not picking on you, William, STG. I just think it behooves all of us to try and look from another perspective now and then. One of the main reasons I come here is to spend a little time with thoughts other than my own. It's a healthy thing to do, kinda like exercise. Not always pleasant but generally worth the effort.

I won't pretend I haven't had my own share of problematic conversations here or encountered a fair amount of unwarranted meanness or obstinacy. 

To quote my namesake "Some men have a necessity to be mean, as if they were exercising a faculty which they had to partially neglect since early childhood." ~ F. Scott Fitzgerald

I try and look past those folks and remember something else he said

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function."

I don't much worry if I've changed anyone elses opinion as whether I can still change my own when it is appropriate or beneficial to do so. As long as the snarking, sniping and silliness don't make me any more intransigent than I was when I got here I'll count it a day at the park with friends. :happy:


----------



## Tina (Jul 11, 2008)

Wagimawr said:


> It was yummy. You would have enjoyed it.
> 
> *[USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST]*



I'll let you off easy because I am right now eating a Tim Horton's boston creme donut. You have no idea how close you came to your own personal armageddon, Wag.


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 11, 2008)

Tina said:


> I'll let you off easy because I am right now eating a Tim Horton's boston creme donut. You have no idea how close you came to your own personal armageddon, Wag.



Why must you taunt me with donut talk!? My hunger, she knows no bounds.

Oh also, William--

people goof around in threads because it lets off steam, and because this isn't a high school debate team. It's the internet. We're enjoying ourselves. A handful of posts about fondue doesn't negate the topic at hand. A bunch of bullshit fighting does that quite successfully on its own.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 11, 2008)

Waxwing said:


> Why must you taunt me with donut talk!? My hunger, she knows no bounds.
> 
> Oh also, William--
> 
> people goof around in threads because it lets off steam, and because this isn't a high school debate team. It's the internet. We're enjoying ourselves. A handful of posts about fondue doesn't negate the topic at hand. A bunch of bullshit fighting does that quite successfully on its own.



You like donuts huh? *points to the box behind me* Join us....Jooooooiiinnnnn ussss


----------



## Waxwing (Jul 11, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> You like donuts huh? *points to the box behind me* Join us....Jooooooiiinnnnn ussss



*gives in to the power of the donut*


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 11, 2008)

William said:


> All I can say is thanks for proving that you do not have leg to stand on and sarcasm is all you have to give to the conversation.
> 
> I also ask where are the moderators here?
> 
> ...



Hi William,

Is that you? 

Prove that you're William, and not some impostor. Just because you sign your posts "William," doesn't mean that it's _you_ typing.

(I thought--since _you_ feel you don't have to make any sense in your posts--that all bets were off and I could be as absurd and nonsensical as I wanted to be from now on.)

I am bathing in a giant vat of brownies and ice cream right now. Good for the skin, and yummy for the tummy.

Also, I think I have a spare leg around here somewhere...


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 11, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Actually, it's STRONG Island, NY, and the weight is about 207
> 
> I'm thinking it over, though...between me, you, and we'll throw Wrestlingguy in there as well...we kinda got our own little FA's answer to Evolution...



I guess I'm Flair?????????????

WHOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 11, 2008)

Do you know where you're going to? Do you like the things that life is showing you? 

Well, do you!?

Me, meh, I'm good.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 11, 2008)

Waxwing said:


> Why must you taunt me with donut talk!? My hunger, she knows no bounds.
> 
> Oh also, William--
> 
> people goof around in threads because it lets off steam, and because this isn't a high school debate team. It's the internet. We're enjoying ourselves. A handful of posts about fondue doesn't negate the topic at hand. A bunch of bullshit fighting does that quite successfully on its own.



Hey, Wax.........I agree that the letting off of steam can be good, and I've even done so in this thread, but having to look through pages & pages to see the topical discussion can be tedious, wspecially for those who have time constraints to do so.

Kinda like listening to your favorite song, and having a bunch of commercials between the lyrics.


----------



## Paquito (Jul 11, 2008)

Hi William,

I know the idea is to stay on topic in a thread, but it was getting so tense up in here that I had to use the almightly desserts of the Gods to cool it down. Even you have to admit that it was getting way too nasty in this thread.

Now if you don't mind, I must refill Fascinitas vat of brownies and ice cream, good day sir.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 11, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> Kinda like listening to your favorite song, and having a bunch of commercials between the lyrics.



So, what are you getting at there Ric Flair? Don't make me bring out the Hulkamaniacs on you.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 11, 2008)

free2beme04 said:


> I must refill Fascinitas vat of brownies and ice cream



Oh, you.

You're wonderful.

Bring on the sweets!

:wubu:


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 11, 2008)

William said:


> All I can say is thanks for proving that you do not have leg to stand on and sarcasm is all you have to give to the conversation.
> 
> I also ask where are the moderators here?
> 
> ...


Hi William.

Sarcasm (although I haven't seen any evidence of that in Fascinita's posts) is often a reflection of personality. I use it in many of my posts in other forums (I try reeeeeeeealllly hard to keep it in check here), and it's just part of my persona.

If in fact Fascinita had been somewhat sarcastic, would you deny a person the right to be themselves? There was another thread on the boards recently that asked if you were the same person in real life that you are on the internet. Just like in life, some people are sarcastic. I'm one of them.


----------



## William (Jul 11, 2008)

Hi Phil

No I thought that Fascinita's post was a honest attempt at a analogy. It is the Troll posts by GEF and others that disrupt threads.

William




wrestlingguy said:


> Hi William.
> 
> Sarcasm (although I haven't seen any evidence of that in Fascinita's posts) is often a reflection of personality. I use it in many of my posts in other forums (I try reeeeeeeealllly hard to keep it in check here), and it's just part of my persona.
> 
> If in fact Fascinita had been somewhat sarcastic, would you deny a person the right to be themselves? There was another thread on the boards recently that asked if you were the same person in real life that you are on the internet. Just like in life, some people are sarcastic. I'm one of them.


----------



## fatlane (Jul 11, 2008)

Read the first million pages, skipped the second million... 

Yes, Dim forums are segregated into odd little communities. Some of the more gregarious folks cross over and make contact in other areas, but not everyone steps out of a particular part of the forum.

Part of that has to do with the size of the place. It's HUGE and there are so many posts per second, one can't really keep up with new posts since last visit as a reliable way of staying in touch around here.

Next, this board is dealing with a HUGE spectrum of issues, preferences, and, yes, even fetishes. Not everyone tolerates the many ways folks let their freak flags fly. Are the men shunted off to a side? Take a look at the paysite forum. I don't see any BHM-oriented paysites mentioned there. They're all BBW/SSBBW sites. That, right there, should give a hint as to what kind of traffic might predominate on the boards: BBW/FA will outnumber BHM/FFA.

While I'm no BHM, some of my best online friends here are BHMs. Some are also GLBT. Some may also be purchasing paper plates FOR ALL THE WRONG REASONS! I'm a tolerant guy, so I let it roll. 

The problem seems to be that not enough people are having that sort of attitude and that conflicts do arise within the membership of the board because that membership isn't all part of a single community, nor does all the membership necessarily want to be part of a single community. 

Such is the dilemma when there are so many different groups here.

Now, there's no use in describing a problem, unless it's part of developing a solution for that problem, so here goes.

If this board were to split up and become 20+ separate boards, one for each forum category, then things would be a lot quieter, that's for sure. The social areas would pretty much have the current members post for a while and then die down. The sexually-oriented areas would draw in new members, but I expect the level of discourse would diminish somewhat to a more... earthy... level... 

But it would be a solution of sorts. Much easier than trying to educate everyone to be tolerant and banning those that fail to learn... but if we went with a mentoring system, we could make it clear that full membership is not for everyone who just shows up. People have to learn community standards, and THEN they can come into full membership if they promise to uphold those standards, with the understanding that not upholding them can cost one's membership.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 11, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> I guess I'm Flair?????????????
> 
> WHOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!



Yeah...between me, you, and Hayes/Blaze, we've got three generations of FA attitude and style.

I got dibs on Triple H/King of Kings moniker.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 11, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> So, what are you getting at there Ric Flair? Don't make me bring out the Hulkamaniacs on you.



Hulkamania isn't gonna cut it, Skellington. Better call Hall and Nash if you're gonna throw down with us.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 11, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Yeah...between me, you, and Hayes/Blaze, we've got three generations of FA attitude and style.
> 
> I got dibs on Triple H/King of Kings moniker.



*does the Randy Orton twirl around pose* Guess we know who I am ;-)





UncannyBruceman said:


> Hulkamania isn't gonna cut it, Skellington. Better call Hall and Nash if you're gonna throw down with us.



Hey Yo.......


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 11, 2008)

William....you seem quite angry. Was it something I said? :batting:


----------



## GWARrior (Jul 11, 2008)

I would call shotgun on being Mick Foley.... but I cant really cut it as the most amazing man the wrestling world has known.


:wubu:

ew.. Orton???? That dude is so juiced up, he sweats steroids. YUCK!!


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 11, 2008)

GWARrior said:


> I would call shotgun on being Mick Foley.... but I cant really cut it as the most amazing man the wrestling world has known.
> 
> 
> :wubu:
> ...



If that's your real pic in your avatar, if you grew a beard you'd look like Hercules Hernandez lol


----------



## NancyGirl74 (Jul 11, 2008)

I'm not really sure what all the wrestling talk is about and I don't feeling going back and reading it all.....but I call dibs on Kane. MINE!


----------



## GWARrior (Jul 11, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> If that's your real pic in your avatar, if you grew a beard you'd look like Hercules Hernandez lol



considering Im a female and my avatar is a 22 year old picture of a now 50 year old man...

... yea its me.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 11, 2008)

GWARrior said:


> considering Im a female and my avatar is a 22 year old picture of a now 50 year old man...
> 
> ... yea its me.



Sorrry, now that I've seen your REAL pic you're a dead ringer for Ariel from WWECW


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 11, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Hulkamania isn't gonna cut it, Skellington. Better call Hall and Nash if you're gonna throw down with us.



Fine, how about the Slim Jims dude?


----------



## lostjacket (Jul 11, 2008)

D | I | M | E | N | S | I | O | N | S


Sorry...I should have done this way earlier in the thread.


----------



## Blackjack (Jul 11, 2008)

lostjacket said:


> D | I | M | E | N | S | I | O | N | S



My anti-drug.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 11, 2008)

Blackjack said:


> My anti-drug.



Mine's spite.


----------



## fatlane (Jul 12, 2008)

Quick question... where do the non-English-speaking folk that are involved with bigness, one way or another, go to chat and hobnob? And I don't mean pr0n-only sites for the non-English?

And if it's not here... DIVISION! OH NOES!


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 12, 2008)

They come here and are unintelligible.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 12, 2008)

Wagimawr said:


> They come here and are unintelligible.



Pretty much like the rest of us here.


----------



## fatlane (Jul 12, 2008)

Anyone else interested in a bunch of sound and fury?


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 12, 2008)

fatlane said:


> Anyone else interested in a bunch of sound and fury?



How about Balls of Fury? I can't get enough of Christopher Walken. 

View attachment balls.jpg


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 12, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> How about Balls of Fury? I can't get enough of Christopher Walken.



"What part of Sudden Death...do you not understand?"

awesome


----------



## PolarKat (Jul 12, 2008)

fatlane said:


> Quick question... where do the non-English-speaking folk that are involved with bigness, one way or another, go to chat and hobnob? And I don't mean pr0n-only sites for the non-English?
> 
> And if it's not here... DIVISION! OH NOES!



Un éléphant, sa trompe, sa trompe...
Un éléphant, ça trompe énormément.
Deux éléphants, ça trompe, ça trompe 
Deux éléphants, ça trompe énormément
Trois éléphants, ça trompe, ça trompe 
Trois éléphants, ça trompe énormément


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jul 12, 2008)

fatlane said:


> Anyone else interested in a bunch of sound and fury?



Signifying what? Never mind, I remember.

"Our true nature is the nothing which the something arises out of." ~ julie sarah powell


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 12, 2008)

Just a big thank you, thus far, to those whom have provided any information on the subject to help me and others better understand.  And to those whom felt uncomfortable, but posted anyway - Good for you. Your opinion is just as important.

/ Incredibly Generic Post.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 12, 2008)

*prances around like a fairy and tosses big handfuls of fairy dust all over everyone in the thread*



I LOVE SPREADING THE LOVE!!!!!


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 12, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> *prances around like a fairy and tosses big handfuls of fairy dust all over everyone in the thread*
> 
> 
> 
> I LOVE SPREADING THE LOVE!!!!!


Is it supposed to throb like that? You might want to get that checked.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 12, 2008)

Personally....I tend to like big, throbbing things....... :batting:


----------



## Tina (Jul 12, 2008)

We know, GEF, we know!!!


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 12, 2008)

and I have tried so hard to keep it a secret all this time.......


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 12, 2008)

lol penis

heh. apparently my message was too short. IRONY


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 12, 2008)

Lol...oh how I wish I could rep you right now.......for your humor...not because it's short or anything.....errrrrrrrrrr I mean how funny


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 12, 2008)

my penis is just fine thankyouverymuch


----------



## SocialbFly (Jul 12, 2008)

squurp said:


> THe artificial separations that are maintained in these forums are why I have restricted my postings a great deal in the last year. Moderators have made it clear that censorship is good, and no conversation shall cross boundaries. I spend the entire day monitoring my speech. If I have to do it here, I often just choose not to. Perhaps others feel the same?



i dont feel that way, BUT i do have to say i tread lightly in some places because of MY OWN personal feelings...and i think that is the correct thing to do...because i have an opinion, does not always make it the right thing to post, not all opinions belong out in the world, sometimes you use your inside of yourself voice and realize it is counterproductive...

i feel for everyone who feels out of place here, but i had some awesome advice from a wise woman who said, if you dont put yourself out there, no one will know you and you will never feel a part of anything....

i can see why some would like an FA/FFA only board, but how many more private boards do there need to be...i can see that some guys would like a board where they can voice their opinions as they see fit, but seeing some of the posts here, that is kinda scary....but i am not an FA who lacks their support system (or so they say they feel).

and i am sending some support to Chimpi who has never been anything but wonderful (lucky Angel).

and last, but most important, i feel for the mods, who do this job thanklessly, and i know how many hours many of them put in here, and i for one, thank you for it, you get all the critics but hardly ever the appreication you deserve...thank you.


----------



## SocialbFly (Jul 12, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Personally....I tend to like big, throbbing things....... :batting:



isnt that a little SI?? lol


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 12, 2008)

I have to stop now before I truly go too far


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 12, 2008)

It'd be a great flick: GREEN EYES GOES TO FAR

I can see it now...in my mind...'scuse me....


----------



## SocialbFly (Jul 12, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I have to stop now before I truly go too far



Hugs back to you too my Queen, you goof...


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jul 12, 2008)

Wagimawr said:


> It'd be a great flick: GREEN EYES GOES TO FAR
> 
> I can see it now...in my mind...'scuse me....



Would this be the sequel to furry balls.........errrrrr I mean Balls of Fury?


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 12, 2008)

SHE'S DOING IT AGAIN

I NEED AN ADULT


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 14, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> Fine, how about the Slim Jims dude?



So you're the Macho Man now?

Also, a little fun fact for you, the Macho Man actually WAS NOT the first wrestler/spokesman for Slim Jim. It was the Ultimate Warrior.


----------



## Santaclear (Jul 14, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> Hey, Wax.........I agree that the letting off of steam can be good, and I've even done so in this thread, but having to look through pages & pages to see the topical discussion can be tedious, wspecially for those who have time constraints to do so.
> 
> Kinda like listening to your favorite song, and having a bunch of commercials between the lyrics.



You're comparing the topical discussion here to your favorite song?


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 14, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Also, a little fun fact for you, the Macho Man actually WAS NOT the first wrestler/spokesman for Slim Jim. It was the Ultimate Warrior.



Ah, coolness, I did not know that.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 14, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> So you're the Macho Man now?
> 
> Also, a little fun fact for you, the Macho Man actually WAS NOT the first wrestler/spokesman for Slim Jim. It was the Ultimate Warrior.



I still remember the commercial where 2 kids are sitting around and says they're bored and Warrior comes in and snaps slim jims, then the whole garage falls apart lol.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 14, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> Ah, coolness, I did not know that.



Hayes just described the whole commercial in the above post. I don't remember ever seeing it on TV but it was woven into the coming attractions and assorted advertisements that were crammed into movie rentals in the early 90's.

In fact...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNEd4KH_A4s
...God save youtube.


----------



## Wild Zero (Jul 14, 2008)

Macho Man was so much better at pitching little tubes of ground beef and bone chips than Mr. Warrior.

EPIC LULZ-ART THOU BORED?


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 14, 2008)

Since this thread has gone off on about a thousand different tangents, here's a recent promo video from the Macho Man himself!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=jzFC0RcefS8&feature=related


----------



## Shosh (Jul 14, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> Since this thread has gone off on about a thousand different tangents, here's a recent promo video from the Macho Man himself!
> 
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=jzFC0RcefS8&feature=related




Remember how Miss Elizabeth was Macho Man's " Manager"


----------



## Webmaster (Jul 14, 2008)

Susannah said:


> Remember how Miss Elizabeth was Macho Man's " Manager"



I do. But my favorite was the original, unmodified, scowling Chyna.


----------



## SparkGirl (Jul 14, 2008)

_*Ahh yes, that's when I used to love watching wrestling...it was like a big soap opera (for boys). *_



Susannah said:


> Remember how Miss Elizabeth was Macho Man's " Manager"


----------



## Shosh (Jul 14, 2008)

SparkGirl said:


> _*Ahh yes, that's when I used to love watching wrestling...it was like a big soap opera (for boys). *_




The 8o's was the golden age of wrestling for me. I got into it through my brothers. We loved Mr Fuji, Mr Wonderful, Macho Man, Andre the giant, British Bulldogs, Junkyard Dog,Ravishing Rick Rude, etc etc.

Ah the good old days.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 14, 2008)

Susannah said:


> The 8o's was the golden age of wrestling for me. I got into it through my brothers. We loved Mr Fuji, Mr Wonderful, Macho Man, Andre the giant, British Bulldogs, Junkyard Dog,Ravishing Rick Rude



ALMOST ALL of which are now dead...Fuji is something like 168 years old and he's outlived most of wrestling's biggest names by leaps and bounds.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 15, 2008)

Susannah said:


> The 8o's was the golden age of wrestling for me. I got into it through my brothers. We loved Mr Fuji, Mr Wonderful, Macho Man, Andre the giant, British Bulldogs, Junkyard Dog,Ravishing Rick Rude, etc etc.
> 
> Ah the good old days.



Listen, let's not forget Captain Lou Albano. Points for remembering Mr. Fuji, though.


----------



## Shosh (Jul 15, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Listen, let's not forget Captain Lou Albano. Points for remembering Mr. Fuji, though.



Remember Bobby "The Brain" Heenan? He was the original pissed off manager.
Them was da days!


----------



## Wagimawr (Jul 15, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Listen, let's not forget Captain Lou Albano.


How CAN we?



CAN'T UNSEE


----------



## Shosh (Jul 15, 2008)

Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat anybody?


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 15, 2008)

Susannah said:


> Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat anybody?



I see your Ricky Steamboat and I raise you...

ADORABLE....


ADRIAN.....

ADONIS....

the guy who could sell a simple forearm by heaving himself over the top rope to the floor faster than most cruiserweights.


----------



## Smite (Jul 15, 2008)

You guys aint seen nothing yet. THE ASS PUNCH!!!!!11111!


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jul 15, 2008)

I've been thinking of opening a school for professional wrestling bookies. I wonder how hard it is to get approved to receive student loan money?


----------



## Wild Zero (Jul 15, 2008)

Smite said:


> You guys aint seen nothing yet. THE ASS PUNCH!!!!!11111!



I see your Beef Wellington and give you, EbeSTAN HANSEN the God of Pro Wrestling

All hail Ebessan/Ebetaro/Kikutaro


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 15, 2008)

Wild Zero said:


> I see your Beef Wellington and give you, EbeSTAN HANSEN the God of Pro Wrestling
> 
> All hail Ebessan/Ebetaro/Kikutaro




How can you forget the great...............Bastion Booger????




Here's the incredible one as he takes on a local jobber, and takes him out for the 3 count with one of the most intense finishing moves I've ever seen.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4fns8qB1tuI

In the words of Jenny Bombshell...........ENJOY!!


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 15, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> How can you forget the great...............Bastion Booger????
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sad thing was he was one of the most mobile big men of his time, he easily could have been in a better gimmick lol


----------



## Smite (Jul 15, 2008)

Bastion is a true american.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 15, 2008)

So, would you say that the growth and separations (and different variations) of and within the nWo reflect that of what we have seen in Dimensions these past few years? Or vice versa?

I'm nWo Hollywood all the way.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 15, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> So, would you say that the growth and separations (and different variations) of and within the nWo reflect that of what we have seen in Dimensions these past few years? Or vice versa?
> 
> I'm nWo Hollywood all the way.



Don't turn your back on the wolfpack

*makes the W signal*


----------



## Wild Zero (Jul 15, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> Don't turn your back on the wolfpack
> 
> *makes the W signal*



*Gets poked in the chest by Hollywood Hulk Hogan and sells it like a champ*

1...2...3!


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 15, 2008)

Wild Zero said:


> *Gets poked in the chest by Hollywood Hulk Hogan and sells it like a champ*
> 
> 1...2...3!



The last time I ever watched WCW.....Goldberg was the man, people paid to see him, he was on fire......yet Nash and Hogan did everything to keep the spotlight on them and only them.

To top it all off, their announce crew (on orders from Bischoff) put down one of the most respected workers in the history of the business, which led to 500,000 people (me included) to switch over to see him win the title.


----------



## Wild Zero (Jul 15, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> The last time I ever watched WCW.....Goldberg was the man, people paid to see him, he was on fire......yet Nash and Hogan did everything to keep the spotlight on them and only them.



I can see why they didn't want to throw the title on Goldberg back when he was the hottest thing they had, done correctly his pursuit of the title would have been really compelling. But I just remember watching the first hour of Nitro week after week with Schiavone saying something incredibly lame like, "OMG THIS IS THE GREATEST NITRO IN THE HISTORY OF SPORT, GOLDBERG PUTS HIS UNDEFEATED STREAK ON THE LINE AGAINST...GLACIER/ALEX WRIGHT/THE DEMON!!!" For the most part I'd switch over to Raw after I saw some cruiserweight matches and DDP.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 15, 2008)

Wild Zero said:


> I can see why they didn't want to throw the title on Goldberg back when he was the hottest thing they had, done correctly his pursuit of the title would have been really compelling. But I just remember watching the first hour of Nitro week after week with Schiavone saying something incredibly lame like, "OMG THIS IS THE GREATEST NITRO IN THE HISTORY OF SPORT, GOLDBERG PUTS HIS UNDEFEATED STREAK ON THE LINE AGAINST...GLACIER/ALEX WRIGHT/THE DEMON!!!" For the most part I'd switch over to Raw after I saw some cruiserweight matches and DDP.



The problem was Nash was the booker, and he used his power to have Goldberg in the 3rd or 4th match against complete stiffs to keep Hogan and Nash in the main events.

Even when Goldberg was CHAMPION Hogan main-evented almost every ppv from July to December 98.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 16, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> The problem was Nash was the booker, and he used his power to have Goldberg in the 3rd or 4th match against complete stiffs to keep Hogan and Nash in the main events.
> 
> Even when Goldberg was CHAMPION Hogan main-evented almost every ppv from July to December 98.



Yeah but this is Hogan we're talking about...he's pulled this shit before and with other champions.

As for Goldberg, he was IN NO WAY held down. The man had less to bring to the table than the Ultimate Warrior and they still managed to make a blockbuster out of him. If anything, there are several dozen guys who were held down to make Goldberg a star.

The booking is what MADE Goldberg, and Hogan had the creative control to keep his title or pass it on to him. He passed it.

Ten years later, Hogan and Nash are still active in the business (and so is the Warrior, for that matter) and Goldberg is nowhere to be found...nor is there a demand for him.


----------



## Shosh (Jul 16, 2008)

What do you all think about Vince McMahon? Good for wrestling or he gots ta go?


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 16, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> Yeah but this is Hogan we're talking about...he's pulled this shit before and with other champions.
> 
> As for Goldberg, he was IN NO WAY held down. The man had less to bring to the table than the Ultimate Warrior and they still managed to make a blockbuster out of him. If anything, there are several dozen guys who were held down to make Goldberg a star.
> 
> ...



I think Bischoff said it best about Goldberg. "He'd come through the curtain, he'd spit, he'd breathe fire, he'd get in the ring, he'd hit ya, he hit ya again, he speared ya then hit the jackhammer and be in the locker room 5 minutes later." If you don't book a 20 minute match, you can't expect someone who's never been there to suddenly perform to that level.

I'm not sure everyone remembers but when Goldberg originally started, he was pretty much Deborah's hired gun to take out Steve "Mongo" McMichael and he did have 5+ minute matches...it wasn't until after that he went on his tear.

The problem with booking face monsters that do squash fests is that the worker never really gets a chance to work 10-15 minute matches, and before you say Hogan and Nash could.....just because they can doesn't make them good lol (Hogan vs Andre for instance was historically important but the in ring action sucked).

The problem with both Goldberg and Warrior and their runs was one man, Hogan. When Warrior beat Hogan for the title at Wrestlemania, he had NO competition because Hogan had beat every heel on the roster the past 6 plus years so nobody could be taken seriously enough to give Warrior a true threat. When Goldberg was given the title, he had already beaten every heel on the roster en route to his 70-0 win streak going into that July 6, 1998 Nitro so nobody other than the nWo were threats to him.

I will agree several people were held down in favor of Goldberg, but they were held down for years before and prior. The men such as Guerrero, Benoit, Jericho, and even Mick Foley, Steve Austin and Triple H all had nowhere to go in WCW because of Hogan and his cronies.

As for Hogan passing the torch, I disagree. After all, the fingerpoke of doom did happen after all which was the beginning of the end for WCW. In that one instant Hogan and Nash basically told the entire world, "This is what we want, if you don't like it, change the chanell" and pretty much everyone did change the chanell. Hell 2 years after the fingerpoker, an even older, even more immobile Hogan was crying about having to job to Jeff Jarrett, 2 more years of holding people down.

You can't really use the 10 years later thing because Hogan hasn't worked an active schedule since 2002 and Goldberg retired in 2004. In fact Hogan is STILL holding people down, I will never understand why he was put over Randy Orton at Summerslam in the Gahden other than politics. Orton needed that win a lot more for his future main event matches and losing to Hogan made him look bad in the minds of the fans.



Susannah said:


> What do you all think about Vince McMahon? Good for wrestling or he gots ta go?



He's great for wrestling, he just needs a boot in the ass. Competition brings out the best in wrestling promoters but without any competition, WWE has grown stagnant and stale. Things go in cycles though, a few years some young hot shot will come along to give the business the much needed boot in the ass which will cause Vince to take a look at what needs to be done to bring the fans back.


----------



## olwen (Jul 16, 2008)

I feel like this is starting to turn into a wtf? thread...LOL.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 16, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> He's great for wrestling, he just needs a boot in the ass. Competition brings out the best in wrestling promoters but without any competition, WWE has grown stagnant and stale.



And that's the exact reason why Vince McMahon is HORRIBLE for wrestling, or as he calls it, "sports entertainment". Vince McMahon doesn't just want to be #1, he wants to be THE ONLY one, and that would explain the slow but irreversible decay of territories. He'd honestly be happier to have 1000 people attend an event and be the only name out there as opposed to having 10,000 people attend and be second to WCW or TNA or whoever else.

And TNA is a joke. The tag line of "we are wrestling" can just about be thrown out the window, because everything they do every Thursday on Spike is a cheap imitation of what WWE is doing, and what WWE is doing really has little to do with wrestling. Watch an episode of Monday Night Raw from ten years ago and compare it to what you saw this week...you'll see an entirely different product. And I'm not really talking about changes in the roster or the fact that WWE has been split into two rosters (under the same banner, which is stupid on its own)...I'm referring more to there being less time spent performing complex storylines with predictable plot twists that can include anything and everything from a wedding to a funeral. And you didn't see these extravagant sets and stages that cost who knows how much money to build. Everything was simplified and all the attention was placed on a story told in the ring. It was a wrestling show on TV. Now, it's a TV show with wrestling, and there are no signs of it getting any better.

This is all Vince McMahon's fault. Competition breeds creativity, but Vince McMahon will not stand for competition. Furthermore, TNA is not going to accomplish anything by having Kurt Angle and his wife trying to salvage their marriage on the air. In other words, TNA is no threat to WWE and probably never will be. If they're still on the air two years from now, I'll be surprised.

Wrestling is on its way to another lull. There's no gas left in its tank, and what'll happen is that TNA will disappear, WWE won't be as popular and start to decrease in revenue, someone else will get enough money together to start something new and exciting, and it'll work its way back up from there.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 16, 2008)

PS God bless Rhonda Sing
1961-2001


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 16, 2008)

Trivia question of the day. Goldberg actually LOST his debut match in WCW, but it was before he was THE (ho hum) Goldberg.

The first person who gets this question right will get a bottle of their choice at the next bash in New Jersey.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 16, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> And that's the exact reason why Vince McMahon is HORRIBLE for wrestling, or as he calls it, "sports entertainment". Vince McMahon doesn't just want to be #1, he wants to be THE ONLY one, and that would explain the slow but irreversible decay of territories. He'd honestly be happier to have 1000 people attend an event and be the only name out there as opposed to having 10,000 people attend and be second to WCW or TNA or whoever else.
> 
> And TNA is a joke. The tag line of "we are wrestling" can just about be thrown out the window, because everything they do every Thursday on Spike is a cheap imitation of what WWE is doing, and what WWE is doing really has little to do with wrestling. Watch an episode of Monday Night Raw from ten years ago and compare it to what you saw this week...you'll see an entirely different product. And I'm not really talking about changes in the roster or the fact that WWE has been split into two rosters (under the same banner, which is stupid on its own)...I'm referring more to there being less time spent performing complex storylines with predictable plot twists that can include anything and everything from a wedding to a funeral. And you didn't see these extravagant sets and stages that cost who knows how much money to build. Everything was simplified and all the attention was placed on a story told in the ring. It was a wrestling show on TV. Now, it's a TV show with wrestling, and there are no signs of it getting any better.
> 
> ...



That's pretty much what I just said. WWE has gone stagnant because everything that used to be cool.....was cool 10 years ago. Even in 1998 there were funerals, weddings, attempted embalments (Undertaker/Austin...and wtf was Kane doing there) but this was all new at the time. I see WWE now the same as it was in 1991, its had the same champ for years and years (Hogan/HHH) the style of wrestling hadn't changed in about 10 years and the fans were bored.

TNA is no competition because of Vince Russo. WCW was already dying when he was brought on board, he just was the man to bury it completely. Remember when he first got to WCW he tried to copy everything WWE was doing, well look at TNA now, lightning has struck twice. That man has no idea how to run a company and as long as he's around, TNA will never be a threat to WWE. After all, McMahon beat him once, he probably can do it again.

The brand split needed to be done in all honesty, as good as Raw and Smackdown were from 99-02, the fact was that's too many hours of wrestling a week and its a killer road schedule. At least when they're on one show you don't get tired of someone as quickly.....unless they completely suck (every single WWE diva cept for Beth Phoenix in the last 4 years). 

You're right about wrestling going into a lull...I was a diehard from 93-07 but I haven't watched a single show since October and a single ppv since the Royal Rumble. Its gotten completely stale and until someone shows up with real competition, it won't get any better.




wrestlingguy said:


> Trivia question of the day. Goldberg actually LOST his debut match in WCW, but it was before he was THE (ho hum) Goldberg.
> 
> The first person who gets this question right will get a bottle of their choice at the next bash in New Jersey.



Rowdy Roddy Piper.......I just wish I was taping that night (I was probably taping Raw)


----------



## cupcakediva (Jul 17, 2008)

Ummmm big handsome men!!!


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 17, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> In fact...
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNEd4KH_A4s
> ...God save youtube.



Neat, I don't think I've ever seen that before.


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 17, 2008)

cupcakediva said:


> Ummmm big handsome men!!!



I don't know what your personal tastes are, but, try Yokozuna, Typhoon, Bam Bam Bigelow, and Big Daddy V for starters.

And for GOD'S SAKE do it in the BHM thread!! This is about separation, damn it!!


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 17, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> I don't know what your personal tastes are, but, try Yokozuna, Typhoon, Bam Bam Bigelow, and Big Daddy V for starters.
> 
> And for GOD'S SAKE do it in the BHM thread!! This is about separation, damn it!!



Bastion Booger, Abdullah The Butcher, Mr. Hughes, Kamala, Akeem, Big Bossman, Earthquake.....ok I'm getting ahead of myself


----------



## Wild Zero (Jul 17, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> Bastion Booger, Abdullah The Butcher, Mr. Hughes, Kamala, Akeem, Big Bossman, Earthquake.....ok I'm getting ahead of myself



At the sound of the tone the time will be VADER


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Jul 17, 2008)

.. wait, isn't Handsome like somewhere in BHM? Those dudes are busted as shit. Wasn't Bastion Boogers finishing move him dropping his crotch down on his opponents face? Worst finisher ever.

I remember him and Rick Martel were fueding and it basically amounted to Rick Martel touching Bastion Booger on occasion and running away spraying his Martel Fabreeze all over himself and at Booger.

At that point you'd realize Raw was almost over and they had been doing this for 45 minutes.

I actually met Bam Bam Bigalow once. My sister's friend had a bulldog which had puppies and Bam Bam came to her house and purchased 'em. This was like .. maybe 12yrs ago. Shame that he died and all. He was really nice in person. Got his autographed picture and put it right along with all my family photos. Aunts. Uncles. Bam Bam. You know. 

Also met X-Pac & Roaddogg or whatever when DX was really popular. X-Pac was an asshole, but Roaddogg was nice even though he was like the most out of shape I've ever seen a wrestler be and this was in his career prime. I was pretty sure that I'd be able to kick his ass. 

I remember seeing a video of Vader on youtube recently when he came out as a body guard for Eric Bischoff against I think Stone Cold Steve Austin. He ran to the ring and promptly fell out of it. It was awesome. 

Anyone remember when Scott Steiner could actually move? This GIF is NOT a representation of that era time period. 

It's like hypnotic in it's awfulness.


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 17, 2008)

BothGunsBlazing said:


> .. wait, isn't Handsome like somewhere in BHM? Those dudes are busted as shit. Wasn't Bastion Boogers finishing move him dropping his crotch down on his opponents face? Worst finisher ever.
> 
> I remember him and Rick Martel were fueding and it basically amounted to Rick Martel touching Bastion Booger on occasion and running away spraying his Martel Fabreeze all over himself and at Booger.
> 
> ...



From all the accounts I heard Bam Bam was one of the nicest wrestlers so its nice to know someone else got to meet him before his untimely death.

Vader's well over 40 now and that angle with Austin/Batista was nice for nostalgia but damn I'm glad he's retired. Still though, Big Van Vader in 1993 was one of the most terrifying heels to ever step in the ring. A big 400 pound monster in his prime, not even Bad News Brown could scare me like that.

Its amazing how Scott Steiner still has a job, does he have naked pictures of Russo or something....poor Christian.


----------



## Smite (Jul 17, 2008)

I believe you're all mistaken. THIS is the best finisher:


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 17, 2008)

Smite said:


> I believe you're all mistaken. THIS is the best finisher:



Norman Smiley.....lol damn that brings back memories


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 17, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> Norman Smiley.....lol damn that brings back memories



That man carried all of WCW on his poor, brittle shoulders for a good six months. TNA is doing him a HUGE injustice by feeding him to no-talent assholes like Steiner...at least without hamming it up like he does so well.


----------



## tonynyc (Jul 17, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> Don't turn your back on the wolfpack
> 
> *makes the W signal*



Wolfpack was ok - but, don't forget "The Four Horsemen"




wrestlingguy said:


> Trivia question of the day. Goldberg actually LOST his debut match in WCW, but it was before he was THE (ho hum) Goldberg.
> 
> The first person who gets this question right will get a bottle of their choice at the next bash in New Jersey.



Hi Phil: he wrestled under the name 'Bill Gold' and i believe he lost his first match to Chad Fortune aka 'Travis'


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 17, 2008)

KHayes666 said:


> Bastion Booger, Abdullah The Butcher, Mr. Hughes, Kamala, Akeem, Big Bossman, Earthquake.....ok I'm getting ahead of myself



I know Curtis Hughes very well. Have you seen him lately? He dropped like over 125 pounds. As he got older, he got hung up on living a more healthy lifestyle, and the end result was weight loss. Believe it or not, he was always a very good technical worker, but MR. McMahon wanted him strictly to be a brawler, and it hung with him for most of his career.


PS, send me a PM, and tell me what you drink. I owe ya one!


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 17, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> PS, send me a PM, and tell me what you drink. I owe ya one!



Hayes doesn't drink, so I think I'll play my Triple H card and take it in his place.


----------



## HDANGEL15 (Jul 17, 2008)

*this thread got holy high-jacked OMG...I can't wade through all of the pages here..but I will keep it simple..I am identified as a FFA and use the lounge a lot and am quite comfortable there, and sometimes feel like I should double post, as I don;t think lots that frequent bhm/ffa boards go to the lounge/main boards etc..but FK it...I like to keep it simple and am cool using all the boards here, damnit I have an opinion just like everyone else here so its all GOOOOOOOOOOOD in my opinion* 



Chimpi said:


> I'm not sure if others have witnessed the same thing(s) as me or have the same opinion(s) that I do, but I wanted to bring this perspective up and find out what others believe.
> 
> *Main Dimensions Board*: Size/size acceptance issues
> *The Lounge*: For fun, games, and off-topic stuff
> ...


----------



## KHayes666 (Jul 17, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> I know Curtis Hughes very well. Have you seen him lately? He dropped like over 125 pounds. As he got older, he got hung up on living a more healthy lifestyle, and the end result was weight loss. Believe it or not, he was always a very good technical worker, but MR. McMahon wanted him strictly to be a brawler, and it hung with him for most of his career.
> 
> 
> PS, send me a PM, and tell me what you drink. I owe ya one!



I actually did see Big Cat a few years ago looking slim, trim buff and cut. Its a shame he was only used for a few short months in WWE (not counting HHH's butler in 97) but hey, at least his one big match had Mr. Perfect in it.

I still say him and IRS would have made a perfect tag team after Dibiase retired....oh well.



UncannyBruceman said:


> Hayes doesn't drink, so I think I'll play my Triple H card and take it in his place.



what he said! lol


----------



## Jack Skellington (Jul 18, 2008)

BothGunsBlazing said:


> It's like hypnotic in it's awfulness.



What the Hell!?


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Jul 18, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> What the Hell!?



They're supposed to time it so it makes it look like the other guy is being smashed into the ring by the guy holding out his arms which are SUPPOSED to go down at the same time as the opponents head/upper body. This is what happens when you suck at pretending to kick some one's ass.


----------



## Shosh (Jul 18, 2008)

Smite said:


> I believe you're all mistaken. THIS is the best finisher:




That is ace.


----------



## GWARrior (Jul 18, 2008)

I personally enjoyed this duo 







oh Mick... you werent so happily married, Id hunt you down and have my way with you :wubu:


----------



## Shosh (Jul 18, 2008)

GWARrior said:


> I personally enjoyed this duo
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Mankind! Fuck yeah!


----------



## wrestlingguy (Jul 19, 2008)

GWARrior said:


> I personally enjoyed this duo
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah!! The Rock.............and The Sock!!!!


----------



## bexy (Jul 21, 2008)

GWARrior said:


> I personally enjoyed this duo
> 
> 
> 
> ...



how many times do we have to go over this....HE'S MINE!!!


----------



## Shosh (Jul 21, 2008)

bexylicious said:


> how many times do we have to go over this....HE'S MINE!!!



You two both in the ring then for a match for the heart of Mick Foley!


----------



## bexy (Jul 21, 2008)

Susannah said:


> You two both in the ring then for a match for the heart of Mick Foley!



omg! that sounds like a tremendous idea!!! i'm up for that!


----------



## UncannyBruceman (Jul 21, 2008)

bexylicious said:


> omg! that sounds like a tremendous idea!!! i'm up for that!



I'll SO ref it! We've got to get in touch with Wrestlingguy and have him book this for his next indy show. I've got a few ideas of how we can do this...lemme know what you think...

A) you girls can spend the rest of the summer beefing up and we can have a sumo-style match. Female sumo are fucking badass and hot to boot.

B) donut-on-a-pole match...we'll hang a box of Dunkin Donuts on one of the corners, whoever reaches it is the winner!

C) pudding pit match. Only instead of beating on each other, the goal will really be to eat your way out.

And with Bexy being from Belfast and all, I think we're going to have to borrow Hornswoggle for a night and throw him into the mix. PS, Mick Foley doesn't live too far from me, I can always show up at his house and ask if he's interested in any of this!

Geez this is the most fun I've had on Dimensions in about three fuckin' years...


----------



## bexy (Jul 21, 2008)

UncannyBruceman said:


> I'll SO ref it! We've got to get in touch with Wrestlingguy and have him book this for his next indy show. I've got a few ideas of how we can do this...lemme know what you think...
> 
> A) you girls can spend the rest of the summer beefing up and we can have a sumo-style match. Female sumo are fucking badass and hot to boot.
> 
> ...



ooh ooh and i have to have a shalale (sp, though i really should know how its spelt :doh


----------

