# Can't i just prefer bbws without being labelled a "FA"



## Con (Sep 16, 2010)

As above^^^

I am wondering if i can just be me, a guy who prefers bbws, and not labelled an FA or some kind of fetishist.... because i don't see it or think about it in that way. If i said i liked redheads would that make me some kinda festish-y guy too?

I'd like be able to have and express my preference without there being any label or tag attached to it. 
To some extent it seems that among some people, the fact that i'm what i guess you folks here would call a BHM gives me (in their minds/mentality/thoughts or whatever) an "excuse" or a "pass" of some kind? i've had it said to me when i defended my preference for larger women "it's ok man your a big guy yourself" or "you're fat too so that's ok". My physical stature has nothing to do with who i find attractive (of course, it affects who finds_ me_ attractive but that's another sotry and i don't mind that) 

Please, i don't want that, i do not want some kind of excuse or free pass, because it's what i like, to me it's perfectly normal and i wish it was to others too. I find myself having to say "I don't need it or want it, so please stop trying to give it to me".

Also, i am not attracted to bbws "because they're fat" or in any kind of festish. I've been kind of disgusted to see that some of the bbws here have felt creeped out by a certain kind of guy liking them and the reason for his attraction to them being a some wierd thing like seeign the difficulties sometimes created by more extreme size. that kind of disturbs me as it implies that those guys are maybe thinking of someone being fat as some kind of freaky thing or some kind of deformity. Or maybe i'm wrong?


I am tired today and probably not making as much sense as i should, but please feel free to ask any questions.


So, any thoughts on the above?


----------



## bigsexy920 (Sep 16, 2010)

Yes please.


----------



## HappyFA75 (Sep 16, 2010)

I second this. Thing is, FA is like some kind of univeral label!

There always seems to be a need to make things "labeled." I get it all the time. "Why do you only like big girls?" It isnt perceived as "normal," .. hence a label seems to be required.

Sort of like premium branding, perhaps? idk.


----------



## Shosh (Sep 16, 2010)

I can understand what you are saying. I am not big on labels either.
You like what you like, and that is all it has to be.

I can also understand your point re creepy guys who get off on fat women struggling to get around etc. No woman wants that kind of attention. That is just creepy.

My advice is to just keep on enjoying and loving the women that you are attracted to in particular, and that would be BBW'S. You do not have to give yourself a label.


----------



## Jes (Sep 16, 2010)

Shosh said:


> I can also understand your point re creepy guys who get off on fat women struggling to get around etc. No woman wants that kind of attention. That is just creepy.
> .



apparently, some do.


----------



## thirtiesgirl (Sep 16, 2010)

No label needed. If you like fat women, you like fat women. I'm also not keen on the 'BBW' label either, since it brings to mind certain fetishistic behavior and expectations, things that are not true of me and that I won't tolerate from someone I'm dating. I prefer to refer to myself as fat, not a 'BBW.' I know that's not true of every fat woman, and some openly eschew the word fat, but it's true for me and I appreciate it if a guy _asks_ how I like to refer to myself before doing so himself.


----------



## Con (Sep 16, 2010)

thirtiesgirl said:


> No label needed. If you like fat women, you like fat women. I'm also not keen on the 'BBW' label either, since it brings to mind certain fetishistic behavior and expectations, things that are not true of me and that I won't tolerate from someone I'm dating. I prefer to refer to myself as fat, not a 'BBW.' I know that's not true of every fat woman, and some openly eschew the word fat, but it's true for me and I appreciate it if a guy _asks_ how I like to refer to myself before doing so himself.





You know. i don't like it a lot either, but i guess it seems to cause the least offense most times, as fat is used as an insult so much but, yes, it is applicable to me too, and if someone says "you're fat" to me, i just say, yes i know and usually laugh at them. 
I know that in Ireland if i said "the fat girl/guy over there" the majority would assume i was being negative and saying it as an insult.

I hate all these terms and labels really, but i would tend to worry about asking someone "would you rather be called fat or bbw or bhm or what" in case it was a sore point with them and cause even more offense. However, if you personally would prefer not to be referred to by the term bbw or indeed don't want me to use that term in your presence then i'll gladly not do it. If you think fat is ok for you then its ok for me. I'd really rather everyone was jsut another person though and we didnt need to put eachother in little labelled boxes, but i guess that isn't goin to happen any time soon.


by the way, thanks for saying no label needed, it's nice to see some people feel that way


----------



## Con (Sep 16, 2010)

Thankyou Shosh, bigsexy920 and happyfa75 too


----------



## Shosh (Sep 16, 2010)

Con said:


> Thankyou Shosh, bigsexy920 and happyfa75 too



You are welcome. Just enjoy what you love.


----------



## HappyFA75 (Sep 16, 2010)

Con said:


> Thankyou Shosh, bigsexy920 and happyfa75 too



+1000!



thirtiesgirl said:


> No label needed. If you like fat women, you like fat women. I'm also not keen on the 'BBW' label either, since it brings to mind certain fetishistic behavior and expectations, things that are not true of me and that I won't tolerate from someone I'm dating. I prefer to refer to myself as fat, not a 'BBW.' I know that's not true of every fat woman, and some openly eschew the word fat, but it's true for me and I appreciate it if a guy asks how I like to refer to myself before doing so himself.



Its true. How would YOU feel if you were to be referred to as "The BBW." Might not be perceived as all that different as saying "Look at that big tasty piece of meat," or "Wow thats a large burger, Im going to have to try it one day." Not literally, per se, but yes, I can see the "BBW" feeling that way. Im also not a "BBW" so its not like I have experience there.

There ARE those that get off on seeing larger women struggle, be immobile, etc, etc (fetishistic behavior and expectations..) Also models that pander, right to that. However, i think its unhealthy, both ways, all ways. 

Playful competition of sizes is a different story!


----------



## samestar (Sep 16, 2010)

I had not really thought about "labels" until I read this thread. My wife is a BBW but I don't consider her to be one. She is just my wife who just so happens to be larger than most which is my preference. So to me she is just a woman. Yes, she's big. Yes she is certainly beautiful and certainly all woman, but why call her a BBW? She is a woman above all else, so if that's what you prefer, why use labels at all?


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Sep 16, 2010)

samestar said:


> why use labels at all?



We use labels in order to talk to other people about our concepts: WE know what we are thinking about, but they don't unless we tell them, and that requires a label for the concept we're talking about. And there's no guarantee that your concept of, say, justice, is going to be exactly the same as mine, so when I hear you I may stick the same label on something very different from what you intend ... which is why we get threads about 'what is an FA?', etc. We will never get away from labels entirely, but it helps to remember that they are only approximations for the sake of discussion: they don't define the thing you attach them to. The map is not the terrain.


----------



## Forgotten_Futures (Sep 16, 2010)

HappyFA75 said:


> "Look at that big tasty piece of meat,"



And what, pray tell, is wrong with that line of thinking?


----------



## CarlaSixx (Sep 16, 2010)

Only call yourself an FA if you want to. If you don't, that's perfectly alright. No one's gonna chop your head off for it. Just put it as you know what you like and call it a day. 

Because when it comes down to it, you don't _need_ to be labeled if you don't _want_ to be labeled. There's just a term out there for those that do. That's all. And if ever someone shoves a gun to your head and asks you to label yourself, I'd tell them to shove the gun up their ass and fire it.

Only you can decide what you'd like to be called, if you want to even be called anything at all.


----------



## Con (Sep 16, 2010)

CarlaSixx said:


> Only call yourself an FA if you want to. If you don't, that's perfectly alright. No one's gonna chop your head off for it. Just put it as you know what you like and call it a day.
> 
> Because when it comes down to it, you don't _need_ to be labeled if you don't _want_ to be labeled. There's just a term out there for those that do. That's all. And if ever someone shoves a gun to your head and asks you to label yourself, I'd tell them to shove the gun up their ass and fire it.
> 
> Only you can decide what you'd like to be called, if you want to even be called anything at all.



Well.. i CAN be called most things... just depends how brave someone is... or what mood i'm in... or how cute they are 


But seriously, i am definately non label. And i'm very glad to see it's been nearly all positive reaction to me wanting to not be put under that heading. Nice understanding people we have here


----------



## Elfcat (Sep 16, 2010)

I think we all do what we do because we feel it makes sense. I like using the label because sometimes it is useful to identify myself that way I think, and also, as with membership in any group, there is a power in feeling a commonality with a certain number of other people on a particular opinion or stance or position or line or whatever you wish to label that.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Sep 16, 2010)

I don't know why people think you have to take the term. It's just jargon used in the community. No one said it has to describe everyone, and it would be incredibly odd to go up to someone with no formal knowledge of the community and use of such terms.

Just like what you like.


----------



## Chimpi (Sep 17, 2010)

I agree overall with the opinion that it's just a label and each person can choose to abide or not to it. I once minded about not being called a fat admirer, but I've just kind of learned (for myself) to just go with the flow. I retain my attitude, just as you do that it's my preference (or more, personally, my orientation), it's perfectly normal, doesn't need a label, but can quickly get the point across when needed.



Con said:


> As above^^^
> 
> I am wondering if i can just be me, a guy who prefers bbws, and not labelled an FA or some kind of fetishist.... because i don't see it or think about it in that way. If i said i liked redheads would that make me some kinda festish-y guy too?
> 
> ...



In regards to the section I put in *bold*, I am attracted to fat women, especially because they are fat. To me, being big is representative of femininity, desire a la sexuality and sensuality, and absolutely appealing. Of course I can fall in love with the person and wish to do so (and certainly have), but I also have a very hard-wired desire to be attracted to *only fat women*. I don't see how that particular trait of being attracted to fat women "because they're fat" a 'fetish.'



Shosh said:


> I can understand what you are saying. I am not big on labels either.
> You like what you like, and that is all it has to be.
> 
> *I can also understand your point re creepy guys who get off on fat women struggling to get around etc. No woman wants that kind of attention. That is just creepy.*
> ...



In regards to the rest of that paragraph, Con, and a continuation of what Susannah said, there *are* women that want that kind of attention and do not find it creepy. I can understand not wanting to be desired because you break furniture and nothing else, but the fact of the matter is that when furniture breaks, or she has a hard time walking, or whatever the description is, from my point of view (as well as to some women) it's a reminder of just how fat that woman is - which in itself is purely beautiful. Fat is beautiful and everything that comes along with it is just matter of fact, and I've found that I "learned to embrace it" for myself as well as some of these particular women that enjoy it.

Otherwise, I'm pretty much one of those creeps. However, I don't think the reason behind some guys is as black and white as desiring the problematic nature of being fat / super fat.

/Shrug
I'm not trying to be overly critical, I just don't want to be misrepresented or misunderstood as one of those folk that love fat women and enjoy being reminded of how big (and absolutely beautiful and sexy) she is by some of the symptoms of fat-womanly-hood.


----------



## Dromond (Sep 17, 2010)

I could have written the opening post, it sums up exactly how I feel. I don't like the term "FA" and don't use it to describe myself. I like big women because that's what I like. Period.


----------



## bmann0413 (Sep 18, 2010)

Dromond said:


> I could have written the opening post, it sums up exactly how I feel. I don't like the term "FA" and don't use it to describe myself. * I like big women because that's what I like. Period.*



Yup, exactly how I feel as well.


----------



## Ola (Sep 18, 2010)

Con said:


> If i said i liked redheads would that make me some kinda festish-y guy too?


With the loosest definition of the term, yes that could be regarded as a fetish, just as with liking, say, breasts, butts, etc. They are just more common fetishes. That said, most people use the term more strictly, even though it's nowhere near the narrow definition you'll find in an encyclopedia. Personally I think it's a bit sad that the word is such a negative thing to some people, but I guess the media has helped playing a role in that since the only fetishes you hear about are the most extreme ones that weird people out, so the word gets instantly associated with people running around in leather masks and doing god knows what. Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with being kinky though, I mean to each their own, right? But being so adamantly opposed to the word fetish suggests to me that it's NOT ok.

Sorry for the rant, but anyway, just call it whatever you want dude. Use the word "preference", if nothing else.  It sounds just a little too PC to me personally (maybe not in regards to liking BBW's, but in general), but like I already said in the paragraph above: To each their own. ^^ I think the term FA/FFA is more a matter of convenience on the forum, just like BHM and BBW is. Helps people identify one another and keeps confusion to a minimum. I might not be a huge fan of labels, but I AM a fan of simplicity, and that is what the terms represent to me.


----------



## Shosh (Sep 18, 2010)

Chimpi said:


> I agree overall with the opinion that it's just a label and each person can choose to abide or not to it. I once minded about not being called a fat admirer, but I've just kind of learned (for myself) to just go with the flow. I retain my attitude, just as you do that it's my preference (or more, personally, my orientation), it's perfectly normal, doesn't need a label, but can quickly get the point across when needed.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't know Chimpster, I dont think watching women sweating and breathing heavily and breaking furniture portays them in a pleasing or feminine light.
Fat or thin women ( most women) would want to project their pleasing and feminine side, not such unattractive things as mentioned above.
You can love and admire fat, but admire the beauty, not that which displeases.
I am a 300 pound fat woman, and I am so private about certain things like exercising etc. Who wants anybody to see them sweating? Not many women I know.
Anyway good to see you posting again.


----------



## superodalisque (Sep 18, 2010)

Con said:


> As above^^^
> 
> I am wondering if i can just be me, a guy who prefers bbws, and not labelled an FA or some kind of fetishist.... because i don't see it or think about it in that way. If i said i liked redheads would that make me some kinda festish-y guy too?
> 
> ...




i'm really proud of you. thank you for being here and speaking out. and no, you are definitely no freak for sure. just a man who loves beautiful women who happen to be fluffy. maybe if more guys felt like it wasn't such a freakfest it would make it easier for them to come out and not be closeted. maybe we need to put the call out to all of the guys who've been looking at the paysite forum but don't want to mix with some of the stuff that makes them feel somethng is wrong with them. you are normal. just a man. come and post. show yourselves. only you can change the perception. time to stop being quiet or only talking about it in private.


----------



## IrishBard (Sep 18, 2010)

con gratulations, you win the point of dimensions. 

have a cookie.


----------



## superodalisque (Sep 18, 2010)

PS: i'll never understand people who make being fat or liking fat into a freakfest but then get angry when the rest of the world treats them like some god awful freak. i'll just never get that i guess.


----------



## Bagalute (Sep 18, 2010)

Con said:


> But seriously, i am definately non label. And i'm very glad to see it's been nearly all positive reaction to me wanting to not be put under that heading. Nice understanding people we have here



I hear what you are saying and agree whole-heartedly. But as Dr.Feelgood has already pointed out - there's a reason we use labels and tend to think in categories. It's not so much a bad thing, as rather something to be aware of - btw: were you aware of your use of the label "bbw" when making the thread title?


----------



## liz (di-va) (Sep 18, 2010)

Bagalute said:


> were you aware of your use of the label "bbw" when making the thread title?


heh 

And (to answer OP question/my opinion) yeah, of course you don't have to use the term FA (nobody "has to").


----------



## Con (Sep 18, 2010)

Bagalute said:


> were you aware of your use of the label "bbw" when making the thread title?



Yes, i was "aware", and i was not very happy about using it really, but i made do with it, for whatever may come of that, good or bad, and i have already said that anyone who does not wish to be called that, i will not call her that.
No need to be smart dude.


I don't like all this political correctness stuff you never know what you're supposed to say so as not to offend people, and while i don't care about offending some people, i'd rather not offend most people. I try to be nice mostly. 

I'm not overly fond of the label/name BHM, which i'd be referred to on this site, because i do not credit myself with the H part in any way. I am a big man, usually quite a nice man and i'm sure i have some other good attributes but i don't ever pretend i'm a handsome man. Unless you called bhm big hairy man, in which case that would be true. But that is more to do with my image of myself.


----------



## CastingPearls (Sep 18, 2010)

I only use any of the lingo as shorthand cos it's easier than saying, dude who prefers big chicks (and sometimes a distinction needs to be made simply cos that dude is stating a preference ie: hey why don't you fix up so and so with your buddy? naahh, he likes fat chicks) so in a forum like this it's just easier.

And I can take or leave BBW, SSBBW, BHM or FFA too. Acronyms don't define me.


----------



## Chimpi (Sep 19, 2010)

Shosh said:


> I don't know Chimpster, I dont think watching women sweating and breathing heavily and breaking furniture portays them in a pleasing or feminine light.
> Fat or thin women ( most women) would want to project their pleasing and feminine side, not such unattractive things as mentioned above.
> You can love and admire fat, but admire the beauty, not that which displeases.
> I am a 300 pound fat woman, and I am so private about certain things like exercising etc. Who wants anybody to see them sweating? Not many women I know.
> Anyway good to see you posting again.



I wasn't trying to imply that I thought (nor that it is - or isn't) women sweating, breathing heavily or breaking furniture is feminine. What I meant was that being fat is curvy and sexy and beautiful and feminine. The examples given thus far are _reminders_ of a quality that I found very appealing; a quality that *is* feminine and sexy - fatness. The things such as breathing heavily and breaking furniture are not the desirable traits, it's that the woman is so curvy, so lovely, so big and plush that such things happen. It's a conscious and unconscious reminder of that quality which is so incredibly desirable.
Simply put, I do not enjoy the suffering of fat women, I just enjoy the fat woman and I enjoy reminders of her size - not any specific reminders, just reminders. I've learned to embrace those things as part of a fat woman's reality. I want to love and admire my own fat woman (and certainly do  ) through those situations; hold her hand while she is having trouble walking, wipe the sweat from her beautiful, fat skin, ease her situational effect.


----------



## AnnMarie (Sep 19, 2010)

Be whatever the hell you want. 

FA&#8800;fetishist - it's just a label of a person with a preference to partner with someone who is large. 

If you don't want to use it, don't. Assuming that people who use it, on either side, are referring only to people with a fetish for body fat regardless of person attached to the fat, is ridiculously simplistic and pretty dismissive of large portions of men and women here who actually are FAs or prefer them, etc. Myself included.

And if you're someone who likes dating fat women as a preference, I'd generally consider you an FA - so regardless of what you call yourself, you might fit the bill. Walk like a duck, talk like a duck...


----------



## Mishty (Sep 19, 2010)

Jon Blaze said:


> I don't know why people think you have to take the term. *It's just jargon used in the community.* No one said it has to describe everyone, and it would be incredibly odd to go up to someone with no formal knowledge of the community and use of such terms.
> 
> Just like what you like.



Exactly.......


----------



## Paquito (Sep 19, 2010)

Shosh said:


> Fat or thin women ( most women) would want to project their pleasing and feminine side, not such unattractive things as mentioned above.



I dunno, this statement just seems so... '50s. It just rubs me the wrong way, like women have to act a certain way or they aren't "feminine."


----------



## Weeze (Sep 19, 2010)

superodalisque said:


> PS: i'll never understand people who make being fat or liking fat into a freakfest but then get angry when the rest of the world treats them like some god awful freak. i'll just never get that i guess.



Can someone take away this woman's can opener?


----------



## Blockierer (Sep 19, 2010)

It's like the question:

*Can't I just drink bourbon whiskey without being labeled an alcoholic?*


Yes you can, nothing to fear!


----------



## Shosh (Sep 19, 2010)

Paquito said:


> I dunno, this statement just seems so... '50s. It just rubs me the wrong way, like women have to act a certain way or they aren't "feminine."



I don't think that is such a bad thing actually. A lot of women today could learn a lot from the women who came before us.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Sep 19, 2010)

I just really want to say that I dislike immensely the word "prefer".


----------



## Ned Sonntag (Sep 20, 2010)

Con said:


> If i said i liked redheads would that make me some kinda festish-y guy too?
> 
> I'd like be able to have and express my preference without there being any label or tag attached to it.So, any thoughts on the above?


Goddess love the Newbies. Ya gotta realize us oldtimers have seen this precise question asked continually since DIMz began in '84. The spelling of 'fetish' is festive at least. But seriously, it's always redheads. Always.:doh::blush:


----------



## Dromond (Sep 20, 2010)

Newbies need love, too. What they don't need is condescension from the old-timers.


----------



## gangstadawg (Sep 20, 2010)

Dromond said:


> Newbies need love, too. What they don't need is condescension from the old-timers.



can the old timers just pwn the newbs?


----------



## Con (Sep 20, 2010)

Ned Sonntag said:


> Goddess love the Newbies. Ya gotta realize us oldtimers have seen this precise question asked continually since DIMz began in '84. The spelling of 'fetish' is festive at least. But seriously, it's always redheads. Always.:doh::blush:





Ned Sonntag said:


> Goddess love the Newbies. Ya gotta realize us oldtimers have seen this precise question asked continually since DIMz began in '84. The spelling of 'fetish' is festive at least. But seriously, it's always redheads. Always.:doh::blush:



There is always someone who will point out a spelling mistake as in important part of a post... Why? Can you if it? If so then by all means feel free to. However, since discovering that having posted the original post from my phone, it's stupidly designed predictive text system combined with my malfunctioning keypad, it had caused one accidental addition of an S to be replicated. 
And there's a reason why it's readheads ..... seriously.... because readheads are rare and apparently getting even more rare, so it's a bit eyecatching. Thus making it more "specialized" as a reference. 

As for the newbie thing, someone has to be new, someone is ALWAYS new, and I personally was not alive in 1984, so I never had the chance to be in on it from the start. I feel it's quite reasonable for me to want to thrash out the issue myself, and so far several people have been quite helpful. But right now with a post like this one which i'm quoting, am I supposed to start feeling like a boy scout who hasn't earned enough patches and badges yet? 

I just wanted to ask a question in the hope that some people might give some advice which they mostly did, and I since expressed my gratitude for.


----------



## Con (Sep 20, 2010)

Dromond said:


> Newbies need love, too. What they don't need is condescension from the old-timers.



I like you.


----------



## superodalisque (Sep 21, 2010)

Con said:


> There is always someone who will point out a spelling mistake as in important part of a post... Why? Can you if it? If so then by all means feel free to. However, since discovering that having posted the original post from my phone, it's stupidly designed predictive text system combined with my malfunctioning keypad, it had caused one accidental addition of an S to be replicated.
> And there's a reason why it's readheads ..... seriously.... because readheads are rare and apparently getting even more rare, so it's a bit eyecatching. Thus making it more "specialized" as a reference.
> 
> As for the newbie thing, someone has to be new, someone is ALWAYS new, and I personally was not alive in 1984, so I never had the chance to be in on it from the start. I feel it's quite reasonable for me to want to thrash out the issue myself, and so far several people have been quite helpful. But right now with a post like this one which i'm quoting, am I supposed to start feeling like a boy scout who hasn't earned enough patches and badges yet?
> ...



time for a fresh perspective and new visitation anyway. analyze away as much as you need or like for your own generation. stagnation stinks. *holds nose*


----------



## Shosh (Sep 21, 2010)

Dromond said:


> Newbies need love, too. What they don't need is condescension from the old-timers.



I dont think Ned was being condescending. The way Ned opines is just Ned.
He just has a constant flow of thoughts that he expresses.


----------



## superodalisque (Sep 21, 2010)

Ola said:


> With the loosest definition of the term, yes that could be regarded as a fetish, just as with liking, say, breasts, butts, etc. They are just more common fetishes. That said, most people use the term more strictly, even though it's nowhere near the narrow definition you'll find in an encyclopedia. Personally I think it's a bit sad that the word is such a negative thing to some people, but I guess the media has helped playing a role in that since the only fetishes you hear about are the most extreme ones that weird people out, so the word gets instantly associated with people running around in leather masks and doing god knows what. Personally I don't think there's anything wrong with being kinky though, I mean to each their own, right? But being so adamantly opposed to the word fetish suggests to me that it's NOT ok.
> 
> Sorry for the rant, but anyway, just call it whatever you want dude. Use the word "preference", if nothing else.  It sounds just a little too PC to me personally (maybe not in regards to liking BBW's, but in general), but like I already said in the paragraph above: To each their own. ^^ I think the term FA/FFA is more a matter of convenience on the forum, just like BHM and BBW is. Helps people identify one another and keeps confusion to a minimum. I might not be a huge fan of labels, but I AM a fan of simplicity, and that is what the terms represent to me.



i agree with what you said a lot. but i'd like to go for clarification on something. finding a physical characteristic attractive or having a sexual preference for something is NOT a fetish. finding fat people sexually attractive isn't a kink a taboo or any other totally outside of society weirdness that a lot of people like to make it out to be. being attached to certain ways of looking at a fat person's body or way of interacting with it to the exclusion of everything else can be. but just being into fat people alone isn't a freakfest--sorry if that disturbs somebody's fantasy life. 

the problem, like you said, is people not really understanding what a fetish is and being so in love with the idea of being kinky and the attention getting aspects of that they want to make everything they do and like into a fetish. it reminds me of all of the young pseudo lesbians in clubs who climb all over each other mainly to get the attention of frat boys. most lesbians probably could care less if guys notice them sexually or not. i think sometimes in todays world people love to use the fetish come freak label as an attention getting device. but they aren't really doing anything new or even shocking especially when it comes to fat people. they're just trying to convince themselves that they are edgy somehow or come up with a reason for why they feel like they are on the outside looking in. or maybe they like getting a rise out of people and saying "hey look at me! i'm different and unique". well--not really. you're just fat, hanging out with and having relationships and sex with fat people. thats not new or different.


----------



## Ned Sonntag (Sep 21, 2010)

Shosh said:


> I dont think Ned was being condescending. The way Ned opines is just Ned.
> He just has a constant flow of thoughts that he expresses.


 LOL thanks Shosh:bow: for ascribing sensitivity:blush: to the Nedster but indeed I was being condescending. Newbies:doh: entering a subculture that's been going full-blast:eat2: for a quarter-century and wanting to b*tch about the jargon are fair game for "oh brother" from the curmudgeonly.


----------



## cinnamitch (Sep 21, 2010)

I am a woman and I like men. ( toss all the letters you want in front of em , I will still like em.) :kiss2:


----------



## Ned Sonntag (Sep 21, 2010)

Con said:


> But right now with a post like this one which i'm quoting, am I supposed to start feeling like a boy scout who hasn't earned enough patches and badges yet?


 Rubbing two sticks together etc.


----------



## liz (di-va) (Sep 22, 2010)

Ned Sonntag said:


> thanks Shosh for ascribing sensitivity to the Nedster but indeed I was being condescending.


bwah!!  
Ned...you have an emoticon problem.


----------



## CastingPearls (Sep 22, 2010)

Ned Sonntag said:


> LOL thanks Shosh:bow: for ascribing sensitivity:blush: to the Nedster but indeed I was being condescending. Newbies:doh: entering a subculture that's been going full-blast:eat2: for a quarter-century and wanting to b*tch about the jargon are fair game for "oh brother" from the curmudgeonly.


Those emoticons look like M&M's and therefore made me hungry. BAD NED!!! I have no candy in the house!


----------



## Mishty (Sep 22, 2010)

Can I be a Fat Girl without being a BBW?
BBW sounds like a damn war vet or something, yet I don't complain, I don't shun the word because it's OURS, whether we like it or not. I hope someday FA will be as common and normal as BBW has become in the last few years. Even my friends not online know what a BBW is, and I always feel a little pride, because I'm kind of a _part_ of this movement. I don't blame you for not liking labels, but sometimes even when we try really hard not to, we fall under categories. That's life. 

Now about the topic of GMILFS......


----------



## BodaciousBella (Sep 22, 2010)

Mishty said:


> Can I be a Fat Girl without being a BBW?
> BBW sounds like a damn war vet or something, yet I don't complain, I don't shun the word because it's OURS, whether we like it or not. I hope someday FA will be as common and normal as BBW has become in the last few years. Even my friends not online know what a BBW is, and I always feel a little pride, because I'm kind of a _part_ of this movement. I don't blame you for not liking labels, but sometimes even when we try really hard not to, we fall under categories. That's life.
> 
> Now about the topic of GMILFS......



you can always be a plumper
and personally i like the term chubby chaser to fa


----------



## Mishty (Sep 22, 2010)

BodaciousBella said:


> you can always be a plumper
> and personally i like the term chubby chaser to fa



Hmmmm, nawwww. 

I passed Plumper about 100 pounds ago, and Chubby Chaser sounds like a really bad mixed drink that involves cheap whiskey....


----------



## Dromond (Sep 22, 2010)

I think Gabriel Iglesias has the right term: Fluffy.


----------



## Leonard (Sep 22, 2010)

Blockierer said:


> It's like the question:
> 
> *Can't I just drink bourbon whiskey without being labeled an alcoholic?*
> 
> ...



So, in other words, you can merely _like_ fat girls without being labeled an FA, but if you're _addicted_ to them, well, consider yourself labeled.

But seriously, FA is just shorthand for "I like fat girls". It doesn't necessarily have to stand for anything, and I sincerely believe that in time it won't. It's like KFC. It's used to mean "Kentucky Fried Chicken", but now it's just shorthand for "I like to eat out of a bucket". 

View attachment FA STAMP of APPROVAL.jpg


----------



## Blackjack (Sep 22, 2010)

Labels describe, not define. 

The sooner people realize this, the happier people will be about it.


----------



## Blockierer (Sep 22, 2010)

Leonard said:


> So, in other words, you can merely _like_ fat girls without being labeled an FA, but if you're _addicted_ to them, well, consider yourself labeled.
> 
> But seriously, FA is just shorthand for "I like fat girls". It doesn't necessarily have to stand for anything, and I sincerely believe that in time it won't. It's like KFC. It's used to mean "Kentucky Fried Chicken", but now it's just shorthand for "I like to eat out of a bucket".



_But seriously, FA is just shorthand for "I like fat girls"._
I completely agree!


----------



## gangstadawg (Sep 22, 2010)

BodaciousBella said:


> you can always be a plumper
> and personally i like the term chubby chaser to fa



i thought the term chubby chaser actually comes from the GLBT community?


----------



## gangstadawg (Sep 22, 2010)

Blackjack said:


> Labels describe, not define.
> 
> The sooner people realize this, the happier people will be about it.



hella agree!!


----------



## CastingPearls (Sep 22, 2010)

gangstadawg said:


> i thought the term chubby chaser actually comes from the GLBT community?


It does but it was hijacked. We stoled it cuz the GLBT community stoled the rainbow. It's all good. We can share.

This KFC talk made me hungry. <tummy rumble>


----------



## AnnMarie (Sep 22, 2010)

I like to eat out of a bucket. 


Or, as I like to call it, ... cautionary pail.


----------



## Paquito (Sep 22, 2010)

Can't I just be an animal with opposable thumbs, the ability to stand up right, and have a common ancestry with monkeys without being labelled a "human?"


----------



## Con (Sep 29, 2010)

Paquito said:


> Can't I just be an animal with opposable thumbs, the ability to stand up right, and have a common ancestry with monkeys without being labelled a "human?"



in some places yes. Particularly if you're talking to a monkey. he doesn't even know what HE is... well maybe he has a rough idea that he's some sort of thing which is similar to the other ones over there, but he sure wont call you human


----------

