# What % of Fas are feeders?



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

I thought it would be interesting to find out what % of the Fas here consider themselves feeders?

The definition of feederism (taken from the fat fetish page on wikipedia) is quoted below. 


> Feederism refers to the acts of feeding, encouraging eating, or being served large quantities of food. Sexual pleasure is derived from the act of eating itself, and/or from the process of becoming fatter. Pleasure may be derived from specific changes to specific areas of the body.


This is an anonymous poll.


----------



## kioewen (Dec 16, 2009)

This is an interesting poll. I'll be curious to see the results.

Question, though: Does a "yes" also include people who like the idea of a feeder/feedee relationship? Or just those who are actually in such a relationship?


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Dec 16, 2009)

Im totally looking forward to seeing the results


----------



## D_A_Bunny (Dec 16, 2009)

kioewen said:


> This is an interesting poll. I'll be curious to see the results.
> 
> Question, though: Does a "yes" also include people who like the idea of a feeder/feedee relationship? Or just those who are actually in such a relationship?



I would think if you like it, then yes is your answer.


----------



## Tad (Dec 16, 2009)

I'm curious too about how you want it to be, Mer.....the definition you quoted covers only 'act' not 'likes' 'interested in' or any other way of saying it is hot in your head but you are not currently (or possibly not ever) carrying that out in actuality.

Do you want to know how many find it erotic, or how many actually (want to?) do it?


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Dec 16, 2009)

Tad said:


> I'm curious too about how you want it to be, Mer.....the definition you quoted covers only 'act' not 'likes' 'interested in' or any other way of saying it is hot in your head but you are not currently (or possibly not ever) carrying that out in actuality.
> 
> Do you want to know how many find it erotic, or how many actually (want to?) do it?



The post was edited by James...not sure which part though...could be the definition.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> The post was edited by James...not sure which part though...could be the definition.


Yes. I thought i would leave it up to the individual to decide what their definition was. I think if you think you are then you are. You don't have to have actually had any experience.


----------



## James (Dec 16, 2009)

Mergirl agreed to let me add the definition. Because of the stigma associated with feederism in general, I thought it would be helpful to add a clarifying statement about what feederism actually encompasses.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

ahh we posted at the same time again. I think if you feel you are a feeder then you are one. No experience required.


----------



## Emma (Dec 16, 2009)

I think there needs to be a few more answers on the poll. 

I suggest. 

Yes
No
I enjoy weight gain but I don't like to feed
Its a secret fantasy that I wouldn't admit to
I like it but I wouldn't do it

blah blah


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

CurvyEm said:


> I think there needs to be a few more answers on the poll.
> 
> I suggest.
> 
> ...


I was thinking about the weight gain thing.. maby it can be another poll. I guess the definition that wikipedia gives is pretty broad and encompasses weight gain only too. The...."And the process of becoming fatter.." bit.
I wondered if perhaps the definition was too broad or maby there were not enough options in the poll. 
I'm guessing another poll could be added to the weight board to find out which aspects of the fetish people enjoyed.
ETA-Hmm.. actually, the point about people having the fantasy but never wanting to actually engage in it is a good point too... oh well.. maby we can have another poll at another time. 
Hmm.. i would think that if you had the fantasy but had no intention of ever practicing it i'm not sure you would fit into the definition that wiki gave because it talks about an 'act'.....hmmm.


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 16, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I thought it would be interesting to find out what % of the Fas here *consider themselves* feeders?


I think it's interesting that even with this in the initial question, people are still pushing to be labeled by someone else.


----------



## KHayes666 (Dec 16, 2009)

I'm a feeder/encourager, add me to the list


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

Wagimawr said:


> I think it's interesting that even with this in the initial question, people are still pushing to be labeled by someone else.


Why do you find that interesting?


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

KHayes666 said:


> I'm a feeder/encourager, add me to the list


You can add yourself.. its a poll!


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 16, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Why do you find that interesting?


Do people on Dimensions REALLY need a definition to tell them what feederism is?


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

Wagimawr said:


> Do people on Dimensions REALLY need a definition to tell them what feederism is?


Well yes i thought this. I guessed if you were here you would have your own definition. I didn't think a definition needed to be added but i agreed.. so you need to ask James about that one.


----------



## vardon_grip (Dec 16, 2009)

I'm glad that the poll was re-opened. I assume it was closed briefly to give James time to add info. I hope you get a lot of responses.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Dec 16, 2009)

Wagimawr said:


> Do people on Dimensions REALLY need a definition to tell them what feederism is?



i think so.

There are a lot of nuances to this.

A feeder may enjoy feeding but not care about resulting weight gain, or s/he may need to see the resulting body changes in order to get turned on.

Somebody involved in stuffing or inflation may be aroused by the actual feeling of being stuffed or having a very full belly, but may not like or actively not want weight gain. Numerous posts on here have talked about activities like drinking litres of water to get that "bloated/stuffed" feeling but obviously there would be no weight gain. Conversely, some feedees are pure gainers who just want to be fat or fatter and don't so much care how that happens.


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 16, 2009)

Feeder without a feedee and/or encourager. THAT'S ME.



mergirl said:


> you need to ask James about that one.


Hey James,


Wagimawr said:


> Do people on Dimensions REALLY need a definition to tell them what feederism is?



Like that?


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 16, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> There are a lot of nuances to this.
> 
> A feeder may enjoy feeding but not care about resulting weight gain, or s/he may need to see the resulting body changes in order to get turned on.
> 
> Somebody involved in stuffing or inflation may be aroused by the actual feeling of being stuffed or having a very full belly, but may not like or actively not want weight gain. Numerous posts on here have talked about activities like drinking litres of water to get that "bloated/stuffed" feeling but obviously there would be no weight gain. Conversely, some feedees are pure gainers who just want to be fat or fatter and don't so much care how that happens.


Yeah, the nuances are quite frankly damned annoying.  But then if I say that I sound like somebody who loves labeling.

For me, I guess I just don't see the point of FEEDING without WEIGHT GAIN but I think that makes me all kinds of messed up:
1) associating weight gain with food only. BAD
2) not seeing the point of somebody else's fetish/turnon is rather judgemental. BAD.
3) implying that if you don't fit into my definition of feeding then you're not what you think you are. BAD

I should probably quit while I'm ahead.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> i think so.
> 
> There are a lot of nuances to this.
> 
> ...


Actually.. i wanted to know mainly how many fas -liked to encourage people to gain weight. Maby i should have asked how many fa's are weight gain fetishists?? Though i think just a general 'feeder' with a definition which pretty much covers everything is a start. Maby we could try another poll another time, perhaps with more options.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

Wagimawr said:


> Like that?



yes. well done! :wubu:


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> I'm glad that the poll was re-opened. I assume it was closed briefly to give James time to add info. I hope you get a lot of responses.


I hope so too. Though now i'm wondering if i should have added more choices, i feel the findings could be diluted through too much definition of the word 'feeder'.


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 16, 2009)

POLLS, DIMENSIONS 2009

Are you a feeder?
Are you a feeder with a feedee?
Are you a feeder without a feedee?
Are you a "stuffer"?
Are you into food but none of the effects of it save for keeping you alive?
Are you just a foodee WHOOPS WRONG BOARD
Are you into weight gain?

etc etc.


----------



## vardon_grip (Dec 16, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I hope so too. Though now i'm wondering if i should have added more choices, i feel the findings could be diluted through too much definition of the word 'feeder'.



I like that is a very simple poll. With only two answers there shouldn't be any confusion. How someone defines a word is all up to them.


----------



## James (Dec 16, 2009)

My rationale for asking mergirl to allow a definition to be added was the following; 

Firstly, there is a stigma associated with the word 'feeder' and I felt that many might avoid the label on account of this alone. This could lead the results of the poll to become unrepresentative of the objective in the thread title i.e "What percentage of FAs are feeders?". 

By setting a standard definition, the results of the poll end up having some meaning in relation to the question.... if you see what I mean?

I agree that many more categories are possible but by having a definition, it facilitates an answer to fit into one of the two categories (yes/no) that mergirl posed.


----------



## The Orange Mage (Dec 16, 2009)

CurvyEm said:


> I enjoy weight gain but I don't like to feed



bingo........


----------



## disconnectedsmile (Dec 16, 2009)

i enjoy weight gain, and everything that comes with it -- both the positive and the "negative."

i don't *need* to have any and/or all aspects of feederism in a relationship in order to feel satisfied, but i crave it, want it, desire it, and love it.

although i don't need it in my life to feel complete, i enjoy feederism and weight gain - both in my partner and in myself - and all the nuances that are associated with it.

i voted yes.


----------



## joh (Dec 16, 2009)

I'm a feeder, that enjoys weight gain. I enjoy feederism mostly because of it's direct result on weight gain.


----------



## Weirdo890 (Dec 16, 2009)

I've had fantasies about the idea, so that's a yes for me.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

See, i voted no because it is not something which directly turns me on. I was thinking tonight about this though and if i found out my partner was a fedee i don't think i would dismiss the idea totally and i obviously wouldn't dump her! Though i had to vote no, because the weight gain and feeding of others just isn't a turn on for me. Though, its not a turn off either. .. aye so thats a No!


----------



## Lastminute.Tom (Dec 16, 2009)

I like cooking but I don't think I have it in me to be in a feeder/feedee relationship, I tend to think too much in the long term and hence never get anything done in the short term, I would say the concept turns me on but the guilt turns me off so I voted no


----------



## Melian (Dec 17, 2009)

joh said:


> I'm a feeder, that enjoys weight gain. I enjoy feederism mostly because of it's direct result on weight gain.



Same here. I also like to cook, and like to see people enjoy it. However, I won't push anyone - they're either receptive or they're not, and I'll drop it after one "no" (but will still continue to think about it  ).


----------



## Lady Bella UK (Dec 17, 2009)

Almost a ratio of 2:1 Feeder/Non-feeder.

I voted for Feeder


----------



## mergirl (Dec 17, 2009)

Lady Bella UK said:


> Almost a ratio of 2:1 Feeder/Non-feeder.
> 
> I voted for Feeder


Hmm..it could mean the non feeders are just a bit slower to read a thread with 'feeder' in the title. lol
You could read the findings in a few ways but maby its better to wait for a while and see how the poll pans out. 
It could be that fa's who also have feeder tendencies are attracted to the website dimensions. I know a few Fa's irl who don't have feeder tendencies but don't feel the need to share that fact online.
Obviously this poll is not the best for 'lernin' but its interesting... 
What do you think the results mean?
are you surprised.
I thought a smaller % of Fa's would consider themselves feeders.. though i guess the term is pretty wide..


----------



## AnnMarie (Dec 17, 2009)

The term is insanely wide - I think a lot of FAs might identify with the label if they're turned on by eating, feeding, gaining, any combination there off, the idea, the actual practice, the possibility, etc. 

Even if the results were a dead on the money stat that carried across all FAs, I don't think it really says much at all about what the results actually mean. You'd then need to poll those exact same people with specific breakdowns of what defines a "feeder" to them, what part they fit in by percents, then try to figure out - for these purposes - what a feeder is and who of those percents really IS. 

Bottom line, this is hardly scientific and the results are what they are - a bunch of people clicking buttons.


----------



## KHayes666 (Dec 17, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> i think so.
> 
> There are a lot of nuances to this.
> 
> ...



A lot of stuffing sessions I've conducted have been under this bolded statement. A lot of times my friends eat themselves silly and sit back and enjoy their round, stuffedness. However in some cases, we don't say a word about possible weight gain. 

It is possible to have a feeding/stuffing session because it arrouses both parties but then not talk about weight gain ......unless that kind of thing is arousing to someone.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 17, 2009)

AnnMarie said:


> Bottom line, this is hardly scientific and the results are what they are - a bunch of people clicking buttons.


True. I guess thats all the internet is too. A bunch of button clickers.
I think though that the 'do you define yourself as a feeder' is important. I don't think it matters what that personal definition is. What matters is that it is there and is different from those who are Fa without added bits. I think this is interesting to know. I'm sure there can be other polls exploring other facets of this, though i guess on a site like this qualitative is usually the most informatitive.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 17, 2009)

KHayes666 said:


> A lot of stuffing sessions I've conducted have been under this bolded statement. A lot of times my friends eat themselves silly and sit back and enjoy their round, stuffedness. However in some cases, we don't say a word about possible weight gain.
> 
> It is possible to have a feeding/stuffing session because it arrouses both parties but then not talk about weight gain ......unless that kind of thing is arousing to someone.


When you say 'conducting' i imagine you with a baton!  Please say it happens like this!! I guess even if it is not talked about, it is significant if it is thought about more than just fleetingly.


----------



## Cors (Dec 17, 2009)

Hmm I love preparing food for people and do like watching them eat, but the enjoyment isn't sexual (unless partner is doing something suggestive with the food eg. sucking on a banana). I have no interest in weight gain _unless_ my partner is way thinner than what I normally find attractive (and my standards are nowhere near extreme).


----------



## KHayes666 (Dec 17, 2009)

mergirl said:


> When you say 'conducting' i imagine you with a baton!  Please say it happens like this!! I guess even if it is not talked about, it is significant if it is thought about more than just fleetingly.



Yes....its exactly how it sounds. I put on a top hat and say "hurry hurry step right up!" to all the confused restaurant patrons. Then I wave my baton and all the girls start to eat as the patrons watch.

*end sarcasm*

It is possible to have dinner with a friend, have he/she overindulge and get bloated then have a nice belly rub/snuggle time/etc and then wake up the next day and go on with daily lives...no weight gain talk needed.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 17, 2009)

KHayes666 said:


> Yes....its exactly how it sounds. I put on a top hat and say "hurry hurry step right up!" to all the confused restaurant patrons. Then I wave my baton and all the girls start to eat as the patrons watch.
> 
> *end sarcasm*
> 
> It is possible to have dinner with a friend, have he/she overindulge and get bloated then have a nice belly rub/snuggle time/etc and then wake up the next day and go on with daily lives...no weight gain talk needed.


I know you might not talk about it but arn't you thinking about it a wee bit?


----------



## mergirl (Dec 17, 2009)

Cors said:


> Hmm I love preparing food for people and do like watching them eat, but the enjoyment isn't sexual (unless partner is doing something suggestive with the food eg. sucking on a banana). I have no interest in weight gain _unless_ my partner is way thinner than what I normally find attractive (and my standards are nowhere near extreme).


see, did you vote non feeder? (Though obviously you dont need to answer as this poll is anonomous..pm me! lol). Cause there are times when i think food can be sexy, feeding someone fruit or going for a nice meal or sharing some nice cake while cozying. I don;t count this as 'feedism' though i wonder if anyone does?


----------



## tonynyc (Dec 17, 2009)

AnnMarie said:


> The term is insanely wide - I think a lot of FAs might identify with the label if they're turned on by eating, feeding, gaining, any combination there off, the idea, the actual practice, the possibility, etc.
> 
> Even if the results were a dead on the money stat that carried across all FAs, I don't think it really says much at all about what the results actually mean. You'd then need to poll those exact same people with specific breakdowns of what defines a "feeder" to them, what part they fit in by percents, then try to figure out - for these purposes - what a feeder is and who of those percents really IS.
> 
> *Bottom line, this is hardly scientific and the results are what they are - a bunch of people clicking buttons*.



*S*o true AnnMarie: and seeing that this is a feeding site and it's all about food love & appreciation... :happy:

Along with clicking on these '"button" for survey responses.. I propose more "Button noshing" :eat2:







*WeebitoScotland*


----------



## Weirdo890 (Dec 17, 2009)

Lastminute.Tom said:


> I like cooking but I don't think I have it in me to be in a feeder/feedee relationship, I tend to think too much in the long term and hence never get anything done in the short term, I would say the concept turns me on but the guilt turns me off so I voted no



I would say the guilt would get to me too and take away all desire for it. Still, the desire is still there so I'll stick by my yes.


----------



## vermillion (Dec 17, 2009)

Wagimawr said:


> For me, I guess I just don't see the point of FEEDING without WEIGHT GAIN but




I don't really care for my boys to get too fat (feminine fat I like to call it) but _ I_ still enjoy the act of feeding. It's to nurture and make them happy.


----------



## Cors (Dec 17, 2009)

mergirl said:


> see, did you vote non feeder? (Though obviously you dont need to answer as this poll is anonomous..pm me! lol). Cause there are times when i think food can be sexy, feeding someone fruit or going for a nice meal or sharing some nice cake while cozying. I don;t count this as 'feedism' though i wonder if anyone does?



I don't consider that feedism either. To me, a feeder/feedee has to at least be aroused by the thought of feeding or gaining or related roleplay. 

Anyway, I voted no because my interest in nurturing people with food is not sexual at all (not to generalise but most women I know have that quality). I don't even like food in bed because of the mess and well, I am probably paranoid but it just sounds like a yeast infection waiting to happen. I might get excited if a partner really, really enjoys her food and shows it, but it has more to do with passion as I will get equally turned on if she is engaging in a heated debate or showing pleasure from say, a back rub. 

I have nothing against feedism so if I end up dating someone who is into it, I don't mind trying it. I will probably get turned on because my partner is turned on and I like knowing that I can satisfy her fantasies. I might then end up associating food, weight gain and feedism with the amazing times I shared with her. That could very well cultivate my own interest in feedism and possibly lead me to identify as a feeder, if you get what I mean.


----------



## vermillion (Dec 18, 2009)

vermillion said:


> I don't really care for my boys to get too fat (feminine fat I like to call it) but _ I_ still enjoy the act of feeding. It's to nurture and make them happy.



I come back...because while I don't particularly care for a boy to gain weight from my feeding, I really enjoy a girl gaining weight from my feeding. HMMMM


----------



## Jon Blaze (Dec 18, 2009)

Basically what Cors said. She's always on point. 

When I describe feederism, to me it's strictly about the food/eating being an aphrodisiac where gaining is something that you could add to it as well. I think a person or their partner taking pleasure in being fed as a simple act of love is a different thing all together. In that latter case I think the food is just an object that's a part of the real aphrodisiac, which like Cors said is satisfying your partner/being satisfied. 

I've considered using food as part of foreplay. I mean literally feeding my partner too (In fact my current one lol :wubu, but the only thing that's going to make it hot to me is that A) It's foreplay, and B) She's like the idea and consider it a way of pampering her from what we've spoke about. Same thing with me hoping to get better conditions so I can get my cooking skills better (But I think that works for both feederism and not; It can be an act of love in both instances  ). 

But yea. I'm not into eating in itself, and gaining is not my thing. I'm in it trying to appreciate the way it comes. Is there anything wrong with either case? Nope.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 18, 2009)

tonynyc said:


> *S*o true AnnMarie: and seeing that *this is a feeding site* and it's all about food love & appreciation... :happy:


Yes. This appears to be true.


----------



## Santaclear (Dec 18, 2009)

From what I've seen in online and offline Fatland, I'd say most FAs have some feeder in them and many BBWs have a bit of feedee but I've never liked the terms "feeder/feedee." 

Around Dimensions Feederism/Feedism is increasingly marketed as a flavor of sexuality and to me it's always felt limiting, single-minded and one-dimensional, just a tiny part of the true picture. So I can't identify as such.


----------



## Jes (Dec 18, 2009)

Are we assuming that feederism tends to result in weight gain? I know that we don't have to define it as such, but is weight gain a common result of actual feederism?


----------



## mergirl (Dec 18, 2009)

Jes said:


> Are we assuming that feederism tends to result in weight gain? I know that we don't have to define it as such, but is weight gain a common result of actual feederism?


I know that it has been said that this isn't always the case, though personally when i hear the term 'feeder' i assume that weight gain is a part of that fetish. This was actually what i was more interested in finding out, though definition if a tricky thing. Perhaps my next poll should be how many Fas are weight gain fetishists because that seems more tangable.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Dec 18, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I know that it has been said that this isn't always the case, though personally when i hear the term 'feeder' i assume that weight gain is a part of that fetish. This was actually what i was more interested in finding out, though definition if a tricky thing. Perhaps my next poll should be how many Fas are weight gain fetishists because that seems more tangable.




some don't like the term fetishist...maybe the next poll should be, how many self identifying FAs find weight gain a turn on. ? Would that give you the answers you seek?


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 18, 2009)

Actually, maybe.


----------



## mergirl (Dec 18, 2009)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> some don't like the term fetishist...maybe the next poll should be, how many self identifying FAs find weight gain a turn on. ? Would that give you the answers you seek?


Yessum.. to be honest.. i think thats that is exactly it donni. Can you be my brain for a while?..


----------



## Sir Shrek (Dec 19, 2009)

Well i cant find a feeder anywhere, im having to feed myself up, going strong though even if i do say so myself 120lbs on in 12 months, im now at 310lbs or so now.


----------



## kioewen (Dec 19, 2009)

Jes said:


> Are we assuming that feederism tends to result in weight gain? I know that we don't have to define it as such, but is weight gain a common result of actual feederism?



I think the two, weight gain and feeding, have to go hand in hand. Either one separately is not particularly attractive in and of itself. For example, feeding with no gain seems pointless. On the other hand, there's a writer out there somewhere who pens stories where the female characters usually "magically" gain weight overnight, through some kind of fantasy switch, and that too doesn't seem attractive, as it's so abrupt and artificial, not natural.

The getting-there (to a fuller figure) is the attraction, not just the arrival.


----------



## BeautifulPoeticDisaster (Dec 19, 2009)

kioewen said:


> Either one separately is not particularly attractive in and of itself. For example, feeding with no gain seems pointless.



Oh how wrong you are. Feeding with no intention of gaining is awesome! From the one who is being feds perspective, just enjoying the food, the sensations, teasingly giving a bit to the one who is feeding. No gain intended just erotic eating/feeding. You can see this in a many mainstream movies where people are fed strawberries etc. Food and sex is AWESOME!


----------



## Miss Vickie (Dec 19, 2009)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> You can see this in a many mainstream movies where people are fed strawberries etc. Food and sex is AWESOME!



Oh yes. That movie Chocolat? Lovely, lovely film. Very sexy.


----------



## D_A_Bunny (Dec 19, 2009)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> Oh how wrong you are. Feeding with no intention of gaining is awesome! From the one who is being feds perspective, just enjoying the food, the sensations, teasingly giving a bit to the one who is feeding. No gain intended just erotic eating/feeding. You can see this in a many mainstream movies where people are fed strawberries etc. Food and sex is AWESOME!





Miss Vickie said:


> Oh yes. That movie Chocolat? Lovely, lovely film. Very sexy.



I loved the movie Chocolat too. And let's not forget 9 1/2 weeks. Ooh baby.


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 19, 2009)

I guess I just associate eating with the physical activities (#1, chewing) too much, not to enjoy food in a regular context, but definitely enough that it would be a distraction during erotic activity.


----------



## D_A_Bunny (Dec 19, 2009)

Wagimawr said:


> I guess I just associate eating with the physical activities (#1, chewing) too much, not to enjoy food in a regular context, but definitely enough that it would be a distraction during erotic activity.



That's why you use food that doesn't require a lot of chewing. Chocolate melts, whipped cream is more of a licking food and small soft fruits don't require much chewing either.


----------



## Wagimawr (Dec 19, 2009)

True. Licking is fun.


----------



## kioewen (Dec 19, 2009)

BeautifulPoeticDisaster said:


> Oh how wrong you are. Feeding with no intention of gaining is awesome



Not necessarily. It's there in the definition that's posted at the top of this thread:



> Sexual pleasure is derived from the act of eating itself, and/*or* from the process of becoming fatter.



Many would fall into the "or" part, meaning just the latter, not the former; just the fact that this is how becoming fuller-figured is accomplished.


----------



## Blackjack (Dec 19, 2009)

kioewen said:


> Not necessarily. It's there in the definition that's posted at the top of this thread:
> 
> 
> 
> Many would fall into the "or" part, meaning just the latter, not the former; just the fact that this is how becoming fuller-figured is accomplished.



She didn't say that it was the only way, just that she thought it was awesome.

I'm not really sure where the disagreement on that one should kick in.


----------



## bbwsrule (Dec 20, 2009)

I don't consider myself a feeder, but I enjoy it when my wife indulges in food.
I'll get her what she wants but I don't push her to eat anything she doesn't ask for.

Like many other fantasies, if my wife had this one I would be happy to indulge her in this way. The subject has never come up and never will unless she brings it up.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Dec 20, 2009)

bbwsrule said:


> I don't consider myself a feeder, but I enjoy it when my wife indulges in food.
> I'll get her what she wants but I don't push her to eat anything she doesn't ask for.
> 
> Like many other fantasies, if my wife had this one I would be happy to indulge her in this way. The subject has never come up and never will unless she brings it up.



Exactly THIS ^ for me! (Well, no wife now but...) I'm happy to bring her brushes and paint as she desires but her body is her work of art. I want her vision, her truest expression of herself, pure and undiminished. 

I have to be honest and say feeding/feederism has always felt more than a little controlling _to me_. *JMFO, OK?* I'm clear that for some of you it's more of a collaboration. Where I'd feel I was interfering you'd perhaps feel intimately involved? 

It seems to me that the feedee has the real control though? She can go from willing to unwilling any time and that changes everything, doesn't it? If she shifts gears and you can't, what then? Is that where the preference vs fetish question really get answered? I'm genuinely curious.


----------



## MistahSmooth_CT (Dec 20, 2009)

Where in the world is the "I don't know" button? LOL.. Just kidding, I think I am one in fantasy.


----------

