# I am not an Fa anymore.



## mergirl (Nov 12, 2009)

I've decided i am not an Fa anymore. Actually, i don't think i ever was in the first place. 
I hate the term and all that it encompasses. I would actually rather wander about a barren wasteland than be in the fa la la club. *For full details of this just look around*
For the record I will always be attracted to fat people. (If they are my type)
Thanks. 
The irony of this is that it is likely my post will get moved to the Fa board. There are certain topics i would like input from everyone so i decide not to actually post them in a protected forum but they get moved anyway..
Anyway, to recap.. I hate HATE the term 'Fat admirer':
Its embarrassing to describe yourself as a 'fat admirer' !!?? (I find "Big women are beautiful" is much more accurate and less cringy)
No one actually has ever heard of the term Fat admirer anyway-Unless you tell them (Or Unless they are an audience member of tyra banks)
Does having a body type preference really need a 'term'? Like if you prefer Blondes, should you be referred to as a 'Blonde admirer'? (Sounds very specific and kinna shallow).
Who actually made up this term anyway?? 
Can we think up something better?
Does anyone else really hate this term as much as me?? I ask this of 'Fat admirers' and Fat people too.
Admiration is something i save for achievements and good contributions that people make. I cant admire fat. 
Calling ourselves fat admirers is sort of a double edges sword, as on one hand
it does sound quite shallow and really does not encompass what loving a fat partner is about; Quite simply because 'Fat' is the total mass of this term, not even something that co exists with other words.. eg (off the top of my head) "Fat people lover". On the other hand- It implies a type of worship and idolisation, which i don't belive is healthy for either fat people of those who are in relationships with them. The term implies that the Fa is the one who does all the worshipping and adoring..but in a relationship this love and adoration should be mutual, no matter what the reasons behind the love and adoration are. 
Anyway, i am not identifying as an Fa anymore.
I guess i shall either try to come up with a term i am comfortable with and doesnt make me feel like a dick when i say it or i will just go back to before i heard of the term and keep loving fat people (One fat person in particular) without having to have a 'name' for just finding atractive who i find attractive.


----------



## 1300 Class (Nov 12, 2009)

Fair enough. Some people probably quite relish the term. Others do not. Either way, labels are here to stay. I hope you find something that best fits what you want. With everything going on in the world these days, its probably not something to lose to much sleep over.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 12, 2009)

Australian Lord said:


> With everything going on in the world these days, its probably not something to lose to much sleep over.


You could say the same about most of the things discussed here. No sleep lost but perhaps a discussion open?


----------



## joswitch (Nov 12, 2009)

mergirl said:


> You could say the same about most of the things discussed here. No sleep lost but perhaps a discussion open?



Umm... Apparently FA got coined on teh internetz back in the day, as a kind of "fall-back" descriptor, cos the term "chubby chaser" was already considered to be gay-bloke specific on the internet at least... Altho' most hetero people who fancy thin folks would still probably refer to people who fancy big people in general as "chubby chasers" ....

"Chubby chaser" does have a bit of a fnar-fnar Benny Hill vibe, tho' and it also suggests a certain predatory nature too...
 
*shrugs*

I dunno. Off of the internetz I just say "I love cute fat chicks" . That'll do, right? 

So I guess I kinda agree with you. Problem with labels is they lump us all in together.... 

F'r instance: I'd been happily chatting away - in a "getting to know you" way (so no sexay talk to speak of) online - with a BBW who I "met" on here. She then read a fiction story, on here - written by someone else, nothing to do with me and not even my "thing" (to the point I hadn't read it and in fact couldn't be bothered to do so). 

Anyway said BBW was so freaked by this other fellas story that not only did she then flee this board, but also broke off all contact / "de-friended" me. I'm not boohooing too much, as anyone who'll hang me for what another man has done isn't someone I'd be able to / want to form a strong bond with.... But if calling myself an FA leads people to believe I am the same as some others, that seems to be a disadvantage to me, eh?


----------



## GTAFA (Nov 12, 2009)

joswitch said:


> Umm... Apparently FA got coined on teh internetz back in the day, as a kind of "fall-back" descriptor, cos the term "chubby chaser" was already considered to be gay-bloke specific on the internet at least...



I think this is correct, but I'd take it a step further. At least some of the terms we're using here come from abbreviations designed for use in personal ads. "FA" became a kind of shortcut to indicate someone looking for a BBW. I think it was originally meant to show what team you were on --that is, the people who like BBWs rather than those who avoid them-- and not much more than that. 

And later, as usual, it took on a life of its own. Just as you can't simply say "i'm a christian" or "I vote Republican" without inviting a whole series of inquiries and analysis, so too with being an FA. People want to know: 
do you ONLY like BBWs? (or thin women as well)
do you like SSBBWs?
etc...
And taken out of context -- that is, when you're no longer simply answering an ad from a BBW -- people wonder, hm, well what IS fat admiration? Is it a fetish? 

I don't claim to have answers, just a fascination with the way humans transform ideas into institutions. This site is a case in point (for better or worse). And then those little concepts become political.


----------



## joswitch (Nov 12, 2009)

GTAFA said:


> I think this is correct, but I'd take it a step further. At least some of the terms we're using here come from abbreviations designed for use in personal ads. "FA" became a kind of shortcut to indicate someone looking for a BBW. I think it was originally meant to show what team you were on --that is, the people who like BBWs rather than those who avoid them-- and not much more than that.
> 
> And later, as usual, it took on a life of its own. Just as you can't simply say "i'm a christian" or "I vote Republican" without inviting a whole series of inquiries and analysis, so too with being an FA. People want to know:
> do you ONLY like BBWs? (or thin women as well)
> ...



Good points! 

Make your gods* small! The better to truly see (one another)!

(*ideas / memes / loas)


----------



## Captain Save (Nov 12, 2009)

Maybe 'flesh aficionado' would be a little more appropriate? 

I always thought of wearing the FA title as being similar to wearing a Star Trek badge; it's to be expected at the conventions, and not too suprising from the more rabid fans. Ultimately, to most but not all reasonable people, the desire for someone of size should not the only factor in choosing a significant other; like the aforementioned blonde admirer, it's just something most of us here would really like to have. After that, it's an individual measurement of a person who is unable to have a successful relationship with someone who doesn't fit that description. If, going into a relationship, you know deep inside that it's a fetish, and you're going to eventually find yourself in a compromising position with a BBW or BHM, it should be made clear. Other than that, I don't see the need for a term describing what is admired.


----------



## superodalisque (Nov 12, 2009)

*nearly squeezes Mer to death out of affection* they wouldn't let me rep you again:smitten:

and the same to all of my wonderful friends who love us fat but so much more-i luv y'all!


----------



## cinnamitch (Nov 12, 2009)

superodalisque said:


> *nearly squeezes Mer to death out of affection* they wouldn't let me rep you again:smitten:
> 
> and the same to all of my wonderful friends who love us fat but so much more-i luv y'all!



I got her for ya Super


----------



## LillyBBBW (Nov 12, 2009)

joswitch said:


> Umm... Apparently FA got coined on teh internetz back in the day, as a kind of "fall-back" descriptor, cos the term "chubby chaser" was already considered to be gay-bloke specific on the internet at least... Altho' most hetero people who fancy thin folks would still probably refer to people who fancy big people in general as "chubby chasers" ....
> 
> "Chubby chaser" does have a bit of a fnar-fnar Benny Hill vibe, tho' and it also suggests a certain predatory nature too...
> 
> ...



It's the nature of sheepul to typecast. There are plenty of people who take one look at me and assume I cheat the welfare system because of my race. The name for 'black' in terms of race has changed so many times that the concept of even mentioning it now by any term has become politically incorrect, it's really messed up. Whatever name you affix to yourself the preconceived notion will follow you unless you're willing to kill. Get rid of all the unseemly ones you wish would stop asking for hourglass pictures. While I would raise my hand in favor of such a thing I am forced to admit that such an endeavor would be impractical.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Nov 12, 2009)

Captain Save said:


> Maybe 'flesh aficionado' would be a little more appropriate?



Only if your name is Hannibal Lecter.


----------



## katorade (Nov 12, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I guess i shall either try to come up with a term i am comfortable with and doesnt make me feel like a dick when i say it



How about "Lisa"?


----------



## superodalisque (Nov 12, 2009)

katorade said:


> How about "Lisa"?



sounds like a good one to me!


----------



## FatAndProud (Nov 12, 2009)

Just use this phrase, "I Get It In"...not sure what it means, but I don't think it means you like just fat? lol


----------



## Captain Save (Nov 12, 2009)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> Only if your name is Hannibal Lecter.



What charming company with which to enjoy fava beans and Chianti!


----------



## mossystate (Nov 12, 2009)

_The term implies that the Fa is the one who does all the worshipping and adoring..but in a relationship this love and adoration should be mutual, no matter what the reasons behind the love and adoration are. _

---
I like the whole post, but I wanted to snag this bit. While many use the term because everybody else is doing it, it does take on a life of its own, and some ' fa's ' use it as some sort of superhero shield. With that type, fat women have a harder time being seen as something other than someone who should be flattered and ' adored '. That is suffocating, and the woman is viewed as passive and without an equal voice. How many times have I seen, when a woman expresses a struggle..." Why don't you just find some fa to handle that for you! ". It's not always just a lighthearted comment...some really do think that way. I wonder if it also, for some, a way to hide their own shortcomings. There are conversations about who is a *real* fa, and who is not. That has always baffled me. You are attracted to fat women...anything else you bring to the table ( good or bad...or somewhere in between ) is no different than any other human being on the planet.


----------



## bbwsrule (Nov 12, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I've decided i am not an Fa anymore. Actually, i don't think i ever was in the first place.
> I hate the term and all that it encompasses. I would actually rather wander about a barren wasteland than be in the fa la la club. *For full details of this just look around*
> For the record I will always be attracted to fat people. (If they are my type)
> Thanks.
> ...



I agree completely about the "FA" term. I started a thread some time ago on this subject. I suggested "Fat Appreciator" but of course that is FAP which I was informed means masturbation (I've since seen it used many times).

I would never say to someone "I'm a Fat Admirer". Yuck! "I appreciate a fuller figure" sounds much better. How about FFA -- full figure appreciater -- except of course that is taken for Female Fat Admirer. So how about LFF, which stands for "Likes Full Figures"?


----------



## bdog (Nov 12, 2009)

If a guy is a "breast man" ... he's not made of breasts, nor does he get turned on by chicken breasts, nor does it imply that he only cares about breasts and not the person wearing them. People know this. 

I too am not a big fan of the term FA. And yet.. I think in common practice it's just a convenient shorthand for exactly what you said you are, a person who is attracted to fat people.

While your objections are valid, I just don't get too caught up in it. I'm not actually a huge fan of the term BBW either. The constant need to declare beauty is a strange reminder of why the term came about in the first place.

Diabetics are sometimes now referred to as Persons with Diabetes (PWDs). It's well intentioned, but possibly unnecessary and a little clumsy. That being said, if anyone has any alternatives to FA then I'd be willing to listen..

f_BBWs? BHM_F's. Fans of BBW? Friends of BBW? It's very neutral... that's why I like it. It could be friends... or parents.. or anyone who supports bigger people. It moves the word from a sexually loaded internet term to a broader term that anyone can embrace. It's a little clumsy... could use some work.


----------



## kioewen (Nov 12, 2009)

I like the "admirer" part of the phrase, and LOATHE the "fat" part of the phrase. It's insulting (and I don't care what the "acceptance" movement says -- it IS an insulting word), and totally subjective, because what one person considers "fat" another person won't.

The trouble is, there really aren't any good alternatives. It's hard to think of a worse term (well, "chubby chasers" IS worse), but hard to think of a better one too. "Curve admirer"? The words "curve" and "curvy" don't necessarily mean full-figured. Even the term "plus-size" has been debased by the modelling industry, which has whittled this label down from a 16 to an 8!

There has got to be some halfways-decent word that could be discovered or constructed to apply to women above, say, a size 16, to denote that one's aesthetic preferences run that way.

If at least there was a magazine featuring this figure type, you could use that brand label. (E.g., MODE magazine.) But there isn't anymore. So there's nothing, at least in English.

Do any other languages have positive words for indisputably full-figured women? I keep hearing the Spanish term, "Gordita," but that's not always positive, is it?


----------



## mossystate (Nov 12, 2009)

Even though all this is veering away from mer's orignal post....

......some of you do realize that you can just live your lives....be attracted to whom you are attracted...without the seemingly rabid need for labels.


----------



## joswitch (Nov 12, 2009)

Wow! If you're still thinking of the simple descriptive adjective "fat" as being insulting I'd say you've got a long way to travel yet... Why do you consider it to be an insult in and of itself??? ... And fyi "gordita" is spanish for "fatty" the diminutive implies cuteness (and sometimes hotness) esp. in Mexico*... It's not generally derogatory like when many anglos use "fatty" in english... (*I lived in Mexico for a while... Entonces hablo Espagnol)


----------



## tonynyc (Nov 13, 2009)

joswitch said:


> Wow! If you're still thinking of the simple descriptive adjective "fat" as being insulting I'd say you've got a long way to travel yet... Why do you consider it to be an insult in and of itself??? ... And fyi "gordita" is spanish for "fatty" the diminutive implies cuteness (and sometimes hotness) esp. in Mexico*... It's not generally derogatory like when many anglos use "fatty" in english... (*I lived in Mexico for a while... Entonces hablo Espagnol)



Another thing to consider with the use of these "Labels" - is that some of this may have carried over from the pre-internet days when folks had to write classified ads...


----------



## mergirl (Nov 13, 2009)

katorade said:


> How about "Lisa"?





superodalisque said:


> sounds like a good one to me!



Nope, don't like it! 
Yeah, Lisa will do just fine.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 13, 2009)

tonynyc said:


> Another thing to consider with the use of these "Labels" - is that some of this may have carried over from the pre-internet days when folks had to write classified ads...


See, i was wondering about that but i have never met any fat people in real life that have heard of the term 'fat admirer'. When i 'have' tried out the term before it almost felt like i should have been wearing a mac and rubbing my hands up and down my own thighs while giving serious consideration to eating her liver with some flava beans and a nice chianti.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 13, 2009)

mossystate said:


> _The term implies that the Fa is the one who does all the worshipping and adoring..but in a relationship this love and adoration should be mutual, no matter what the reasons behind the love and adoration are. _
> 
> ---
> I like the whole post, but I wanted to snag this bit. While many use the term because everybody else is doing it, it does take on a life of its own, and some ' fa's ' use it as some sort of superhero shield. With that type, fat women have a harder time being seen as something other than someone who should be flattered and ' adored '. That is suffocating, and the woman is viewed as passive and without an equal voice. How many times have I seen, when a woman expresses a struggle..." Why don't you just find some fa to handle that for you! ". It's not always just a lighthearted comment...some really do think that way. I wonder if it also, for some, a way to hide their own shortcomings. There are conversations about who is a *real* fa, and who is not. That has always baffled me. You are attracted to fat women...anything else you bring to the table ( good or bad...or somewhere in between ) is no different than any other human being on the planet.


YES. I find it strange.. The Fa-bbw relationship becomes somehow or is seen to be one sided, when there is no need for it to be. I know in the case of my relationship we are both equal partners and i couldn't imagine it any other way. GD does generally prefers women with a dark complexion and dark hair..these things i have but she doesn't need to worship me because of that, i have these attributes with or without her and am quite happy that i am her type sexually but equally i am glad she doesn't only discuss matters of brown hair with me or i would get very bored very quickly and shave my head out of spite! lol


----------



## mergirl (Nov 13, 2009)

Captain Save said:


> What charming company with which to enjoy fava beans and Chianti!


haha.. i missed this! Promise i wasn't copying you there! :blush:


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Nov 13, 2009)

Well, Mer, you're certainly not alone in your concern about labels. I understand it's even becoming a bit of a trend lately that some women are actually having their labels surgically altered to be more appealing? Oh, wait; maybe I'm thinking of _labias_?!? :doh::eat2: Never mind. :blush:


----------



## mergirl (Nov 13, 2009)

I..
Ok.. first slut bags and now chopping off of labias!! 
I'm frightened!! 
How did we get from there to here???


----------



## kioewen (Nov 13, 2009)

This question in your post:



joswitch said:


> Wow! If you're still thinking of the simple descriptive adjective "fat" as being insulting ... Why do you consider it to be an insult in and of itself???



is answered by this statement in your post:



joswitch said:


> And fyi "gordita" is spanish for "fatty" the diminutive implies cuteness (and sometimes hotness) esp. in Mexico*... It's not *generally derogatory like when many anglos use "fatty" in english*...



As you state, "fat"-related terms are generally meant in a derogatory way, and that's how people will generally take it.

You can try to "reclaim" any insult you want -- and they'll still be insults.


----------



## Blockierer (Nov 13, 2009)

That's me:
_54 y.o. FA married to SSBBW._


Anything wrong?


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Nov 13, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I..
> Ok.. first slut bags and now *chopping off of labias!!*
> I'm frightened!!
> How did we get from there to here???



Technically I think they're just _pruned_? (npi) 

OK, I lied. Pun _horribly _intended.


----------



## joswitch (Nov 13, 2009)

@kieowen - aaand you've completely missed the point... Never mind... Not my job to handhold you through fat acceptance... So, if YOU think fat = bad, what the hell are you doing HERE!?? On DIMS, that is? Why aren't you off haunting some weightloss board?


----------



## mergirl (Nov 13, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Technically I think they're just _pruned_? (npi)
> 
> OK, I lied. Pun _horribly _intended.


Ahhh thank goodness for that!!! Phew!


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 13, 2009)

kioewen and joswitch are the new william and judge dredd


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 13, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I've decided i am not an Fa anymore.



i don't blame you sister


----------



## kioewen (Nov 13, 2009)

joswitch said:


> @kieowen - aaand you've completely missed the point... Never mind... Not my job to handhold you through fat acceptance... So, if YOU think fat = bad, what the hell are you doing HERE!?? On DIMS, that is? Why aren't you off haunting some weightloss board?



What is your major malfunction? I do not think that fat is bad. The TERM is bad.

This entire thread is about terminology.


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 13, 2009)

http://news.discovery.com/dinosaurs/dinosaurs-sauropodomorph-sauropod.html


----------



## tonynyc (Nov 13, 2009)

exile in thighville said:


> kioewen and joswitch are the new william and judge dredd


----------



## joswitch (Nov 13, 2009)

@kieowen - so you're saying YOU like fat (people, women) but you think other people are what? Too dumb? Too evil? To be brought around to the idea that fat is a good or even just ok thing to have/size to be? And you reckon some kind of euphimism(s) are needed? Take a look at the history of PC euphimisms and see a long, long line of fresh insults.. spastic, retard and suchlike all started out as medical descriptors aimed to remove stigma-all became insults... People know what you mean when you say voluptuous, or zaftig..etc. And what spin they put on THOSE words will depend on their personal attitude to.... fat. So why not cut the BS and get to work on the attitudes - by using what IS (in the abscence of personal / societal attitudes) a neutral descriptor... btw - I'm not just coming out with this stuff, this is like fat acceptance / activism 101... As put together by actual fat people, standing up for themselves...


----------



## Captain Save (Nov 13, 2009)

mergirl said:


> haha.. i missed this! Promise i wasn't copying you there! :blush:



I still got a great laugh out of this! 

Any way this plays out, dinner is looking _really_ appetizing; how can anyone beat labias, fava beans, and chianti?


----------



## Chimpi (Nov 13, 2009)

kioewen said:


> I like the "admirer" part of the phrase, and LOATHE the "fat" part of the phrase. It's insulting (and I don't care what the "acceptance" movement says -- it IS an insulting word), and totally subjective, because what one person considers "fat" another person won't.
> 
> The trouble is, there really aren't any good alternatives. It's hard to think of a worse term (well, "chubby chasers" IS worse), but hard to think of a better one too. "Curve admirer"? The words "curve" and "curvy" don't necessarily mean full-figured. Even the term "plus-size" has been debased by the modelling industry, which has whittled this label down from a 16 to an 8!
> 
> ...



I simply disagree with your view of the word "fat." It is just a word. The person behind the word, whether that person is using it or receiving it in a descriptive manner, is what will determine what it means to them. A word is a word. Common usage and common interpretation are completely different from the word itself. I hope you're able to some day understand that just because it commonly carries a derogatory connotation does not necessarily mean you cannot view it as a simple, descriptive word; or better yet, embrace it fully and view it only with positive implications. 

At this point, I don't mind people identifying themselves as a "fat admirer."
I'm not on board with labels much these days, not to mention I've never really called myself a "fat admirer." /shrug
It is what it is and that's all it shall be. I like fat women - everything about them.


----------



## collared Princess (Nov 13, 2009)

Mergirl as long as you still like fatties I call you super!!! Im very thankful to all of those who admire us.. you go girl....

A friend of mine who is a bbw met a guy on line and in his nic it said ssbbw..she asked him what does ssbbw meen and he told her supersexy bbw..lol..I said no it ment supersized..so has anyone heard of the ss being super sexy..

BY the way you can call me anything just dont call me late to dinner...yuck yuck....lol..Im so corny


----------



## Elfcat (Nov 13, 2009)

There is Bodacious, though their issuance has been a bit sporadic lately.


----------



## Elfcat (Nov 13, 2009)

This has been the term I have known in NAAFA since 1988 when I first came across them.

I did start talking with a couple of coworkers at one job once while we were all kibbitzing about related stuff. As I was explaining my sentiments, one of them said, "You know I saw something on this talk show about 'fat admirers'", at which point I said, "At your service".

Any descriptor of this kind is going to have problems. Yeah it is true, I think most people don't know the term FA. But when I venture forth with my GoddessBBW shirt that says "I <HEART> Fat Chicks", that's kind of a statement that's easy to understand. I have gotten I think 95% good reactions from those who visibly reacted. Sometimes with a fat gal (or even sometimes a gal who just has a little bit of curve) it's just a momentary joining of the eyes. That I think is the nicest way of propagandizing, that way I'm not directing it at anyone specifically, and they can choose how to respond to it.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Nov 13, 2009)

Plus sized is kind of a relic now but it seemed no one ever had any real objections to the term. Although PSA is already taken. The conflicting message there might not be desirable.


----------



## superodalisque (Nov 14, 2009)

mossystate said:


> Even though all this is veering away from mer's orignal post....
> 
> ......some of you do realize that you can just live your lives....be attracted to whom you are attracted...without the seemingly rabid need for labels.



couldn't have been said better. i wonder why its so important for people to have a label just to be who they are? is it the need to be a part of some kind of group mentality?


----------



## ZainTheInsane (Nov 14, 2009)

I don't get why it matters if someone identifies themselves as an FA or not. I mean, nobody outside the small community really knows what you're saying anyway, unless they've checked it out.

Seriously, if I tell some random person I'm an FA, they're going to ask what that means? Why not just say, "Hey I like fat girls." Or "I prefer curvy girls" or whatever else suits your fancy. Its a lot simpler than explaining a stupid term, which really is out-dated and overused.


----------



## Fascinita (Nov 14, 2009)

In communist Russia, "FA" means "dancing bear"!


----------



## mergirl (Nov 14, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> In communist Russia, "FA" means "dancing bear"!


Well..i AM that!


----------



## joswitch (Nov 15, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> In communist Russia, "FA" means "dancing bear"!



I often dance bare... 

out of bed in the morning - radio on - aaaaand nekkid dancing!


----------



## Hathor (Nov 16, 2009)

Yes, mergirl, I feel the same. It makes me feel like the guy is only in love with my fat and skin as opposed to the woman that wears it. I wish they could just stick simply to BBW or SSBBW.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 16, 2009)

Hathor said:


> Yes, mergirl, I feel the same. It makes me feel like the guy is only in love with my fat and skin as opposed to the woman that wears it. I wish they could just stick simply to BBW or SSBBW.


I can see why people feel the need to catagorize themselves and at the end of the day i suppose the reasoning behind this is so they can identify and learn from those who are the same. As a catagorical term though i feel Fa is not a positive one and actually seems somewhat derogitory to those people that they are ment to be attracted to. Ie 'people who happen to be fat'. Its not the inclusion of the word 'fat' or 'admirer' (well admirer is actually slightly wanky) i have the problem with, it is the lack of the word 'person' that makes me shudder.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 16, 2009)

kioewen said:


> You can try to "reclaim" any insult you want -- and they'll still be insults.



They're only insults if you let yourself be insulted.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 16, 2009)

As far as terminology about FA's goes, I always use the term FA as shorthand for this site and community but wouldn't use it outside of here simply because no one would know it. It's much quicker and to the point to use "chubby chaser" (it's not associated with gay people only where I live) or to just say "I like fat girls/guys" if you're talking to someone from someone outside of the community. 

I never really got this overanalyzation of the term or why there are so many threads started like WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT ABC OR XYZ TERM? It doesn't really matter what you call yourself. I mean, how many of you actually sit there and think about the specific meaning of FA every time you write it? I don't. For me, it's simply just become a shorthand symbol to express a characteristic about a person or group of people to a group of people that already knows and understands the idea of fat admiration. I don't need to clarify in every post MEN WHO ARE ATTRACTED TO LARGER WOMEN, FA gets that idea across easily and efficiently within the community.


----------



## Blackjack (Nov 16, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> As far as terminology about FA's goes, I always use the term FA as shorthand for this site and community but wouldn't use it outside of here simply because no one would know it. It's much quicker and to the point to use "chubby chaser" (it's not associated with gay people only where I live) or to just say "I like fat girls/guys" if you're talking to someone from someone outside of the community.
> 
> I never really got this overanalyzation of the term or why there are so many threads started like WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT ABC OR XYZ TERM? It doesn't really matter what you call yourself. I mean, how many of you actually sit there and think about the specific meaning of FA every time you write it? I don't. For me, it's simply just become a shorthand symbol to express a characteristic about a person or group of people to a group of people that already knows and understands the idea of fat admiration.* I don't need to clarify in every post MEN WHO ARE ATTRACTED TO LARGER WOMEN, FA gets that idea across easily and efficiently within the community.*



I'm not really certain why it should be any more than exactly this.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 17, 2009)

Yeah, its convenient here to say 'fa' but like you say it has no meaning outside the community, simply because it feels weird to say it. Words have meaning, so i think you have to be careful how you chose them, especially if you are making up a term that describes a large group of people. If it doesn't accurately describe them then it is of no use. We would be as well calling ourselves "Fat fuckers".. really, cause thats really what the term implies.


----------



## Leesa (Nov 17, 2009)

That's ok; I still like you.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 17, 2009)

Leesa said:


> That's ok; I still like you.


Aww.. thank you 
I havn't really changed... "A rose by any other name would still make you bleed if you grabbed it".. or whatever he said!!!


----------



## Skinny6ft4 (Nov 17, 2009)

if i take any umbrage with the term "fat admirer"... it's that it tends to suggest certain behavioral expectations. i.e., that one person is meant to adore and admire, and the other is meant to be adored and admired.

i'm more than willing to do my share of pursuing... of giving compliments and demonstrating affection, etc. but the moment i start to sense that things are too one-sided, i get bored with the pursuit really quickly. i like for there to be give and take, and to receive a certain share of being admired in return!


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 17, 2009)

You guys are giving the term too much power. It shouldn't have this much impact on the way you view yourselves or your relationships with BBW/BHM. Of course, the characteristic of being an (F)FA will, but the term itself should not. It's the same as letting yourself be insulted by the word fat or being afraid to call yourself fat. The word itself has very little meaning, it's just an adjective.. it's the POWER we as a society give to the term that gives it these other connotations and lets it affect us when it shouldn't. If you overanalyze the term FA and let it negatively affect how you view yourself, your relationship, your preference, your fetish, your orientation, whatever.. then it will.


----------



## joh (Nov 17, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> You guys are giving the term too much power. It shouldn't have this much impact on the way you view yourselves or your relationships with BBW/BHM. Of course, the characteristic of being an (F)FA will, but the term itself should not. It's the same as letting yourself be insulted by the word fat or being afraid to call yourself fat. The word itself has very little meaning, it's just an adjective.. it's the POWER we as a society give to the term that gives it these other connotations and lets it affect us when it shouldn't. If you overanalyze the term FA and let it negatively affect how you view yourself, your relationship, your preference, your fetish, your orientation, whatever.. then it will.


I agree to some extent, but labels are important. Even they are just words, they have a powerful impact.

For example, take deaf people. What should they be called? Deaf, hearing-impaired, "the deaf and dumb," hearing-handicapped? Many people cringe at calling them deaf, but the truth is they preferred to be called deaf (or should I say "Deaf"). Though all are technically correct (well, except for "the deaf and dumb"), they all carry negative connotations. The Deaf community has their own culture that they feel adds a valuable quality of life, not a handicap that disables them. As well, the other terms represents ignorance on the part of the "name-caller." They obviously don't really know the person, or their culture, if they don't know what that person would preferred to be called. 

Relating this back to being called an FA. One could just choose to associate with the term, even if you don't prescribe to its culture, its meaning, and all of its connotations. But by doing this you're allowing people to mislabel and thus not accurately get to know who you are and what you represent this. I'd say this would be pretty awful, and would also confuse a lot of people negatively. It would be better to not be termed an FA if you don't prescribe to what it means and instead just tell people who and what you are.

On the flipside, FA isn't exactly a popular term outside of the actual SA community, so whether or not being called an FA has any real-life impact is arguable.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 17, 2009)

joh said:


> I agree to some extent, but labels are important. Even they are just words, they have a powerful impact.
> 
> For example, take deaf people. What should they be called? Deaf, hearing-impaired, "the deaf and dumb," hearing-handicapped? Many people cringe at calling them deaf, but the truth is they preferred to be called deaf (or should I say "Deaf"). Though all are technically correct (well, except for "the deaf and dumb"), they all carry negative connotations. The Deaf community has their own culture that they feel adds a valuable quality of life, not a handicap that disables them. As well, the other terms represents ignorance on the part of the "name-caller." They obviously don't really know the person, or their culture, if they don't know what that person would preferred to be called.
> 
> ...



You're still giving the term too much power. Allowing labels to take on cultural and connotational meanings gives the label it's own identity that ends up reflecting on those who use it. Striping labels of these connotations, whether positive or negative, allows the term to remain neutral and be used simply to identify rather than celebrate or condemn. In regular society, this is a very daunting task simply because many of these connotations have been around for so long and because of the sheer volume of people who are part of a culture. For example, completely erasing negative connotations of the word "fat" in the United States is very daunting because it's had this negative connotation for a very long time and because nearly everyone in the US subscribes to this idea. However, this community is much smaller and more tightly knit and for that reason, it would be easier (although, still not easy) to do this and I really think ultimately, it'd benefit the community and help erase some of the tension that occurs between (F)FA's and BBW/BHM.

ETA: To sum this up.. they have a powerful effect because we LET them.


----------



## joh (Nov 17, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> You're still giving the term too much power. Allowing labels to take on cultural and connotational meanings gives the label it's own identity that ends up reflecting on those who use it. Striping labels of these connotations, whether positive or negative, allows the term to remain neutral and be used simply to identify rather than celebrate or condemn. In regular society, this is a very daunting task simply because many of these connotations have been around for so long and because of the sheer volume of people who are part of a culture. For example, completely erasing negative connotations of the word "fat" in the United States is very daunting because it's had this negative connotation for a very long time and because nearly everyone in the US subscribes to this idea. However, this community is much smaller and more tightly knit and for that reason, it would be easier (although, still not easy) to do this and I really think ultimately, it'd benefit the community and help erase some of the tension that occurs between (F)FA's and BBW/BHM.
> 
> ETA: To sum this up.. they have a powerful effect because we LET them.


You're right, but I don't think it's that easy. There isn't a concrete definition of the term FA. Personally, I don't view "FA" as a term that carries any connotations, but obviously some other people do. So before stripping the term FA of it's negative connotations, we must all first agree upon on what "FA" actually means; I believe that's the greatest hurdle we all face (but one that I that is feasible due to the size of this community, as you pointed out).


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 17, 2009)

joh said:


> You're right, but I don't think it's that easy. There isn't a concrete definition of the term FA. Personally, I don't view "FA" as a term that carries any connotations, but obviously some other people do. So before stripping the term FA of it's negative connotations, we must all first agree upon on what "FA" actually means; I believe that's the greatest hurdle we all face (but one that I that is feasible due to the size of this community, as you pointed out).



I think there really is a concrete definition. Liking larger figures. We may try to broaden the definition or clarify it such as discussing preference vs. fetish vs. orientation or discussing bisizuality vs. being an FA but when it comes down to it's most basic meaning, it's the idea that someone finds larger bodies physically appealing. I'm not saying we shouldn't have these discussions, just saying that we shouldn't let the fact that we are having those discussions impede the basic idea of FA = likes fat guys or girls, thus allowing these negative connotations to build up.. not based on the basic definition of an FA but based on the ideas and beliefs we've developed surrounding the term.


----------



## Tooz (Nov 17, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> They're only insults if you let yourself be insulted.



Unfortunately, this only works with some derogatory words. I lost this battle to those wiser than me on this very forum a while ago.

But, some CAN be reclaimed successfully and I think it is important to do it.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 17, 2009)

Tooz said:


> Unfortunately, this only works with some derogatory words. I lost this battle to those wiser than me on this very forum a while ago.
> 
> But, some CAN be reclaimed successfully and I think it is important to do it.



Hm, do you have a link to the thread? I'd be interested in reading it.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 18, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> You're still giving the term too much power. Allowing labels to take on cultural and connotational meanings gives the label it's own identity that ends up reflecting on those who use it. Striping labels of these connotations, whether positive or negative, allows the term to remain neutral and be used simply to identify rather than celebrate or condemn. In regular society, this is a very daunting task simply because many of these connotations have been around for so long and because of the sheer volume of people who are part of a culture. For example, completely erasing negative connotations of the word "fat" in the United States is very daunting because it's had this negative connotation for a very long time and because nearly everyone in the US subscribes to this idea. However, this community is much smaller and more tightly knit and for that reason, it would be easier (although, still not easy) to do this and I really think ultimately, it'd benefit the community and help erase some of the tension that occurs between (F)FA's and BBW/BHM.
> 
> ETA: To sum this up.. they have a powerful effect because we LET them.


I am not giving 'Fa' any power because i have decided to stop using it as a descriptor to myself. The reason i stopped using it was not because i thought it had a lot of power or that i myself would attribute power to it but because i dont like the term. I think its cheesy, one sided, embarresing and dehumanising. 
You can reclaim fat because you are seen as a fat 'person'. The human element is there. people don't just say "OH..look at that Fat" when they see you. They might say "look at that fat person" and you can be feel safe in the knowlege that 'fat' has been reclaimed and cannot harm you anymore. If you were just "A fat" or a "Piece of fat" it would be impossible to reclaim because it was not related to a human in the first place. This is why Fat admirer makes no sense. It lacks the human element to make it relevent to me in any way. I don't care if some people want to be called 'Fa'.. i dare say there are black people who don't care about being called 'coloured'.. but for the people who do mind; Don't call them it.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 18, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I am not giving 'Fa' any power because i have decided to stop using it as a descriptor to myself. The reason i stopped using it was not because i thought it had a lot of power or that i myself would attribute power to it but because i dont like the term. I think its cheesy, one sided, embarresing and dehumanising.
> You can reclaim fat because you are seen as a fat 'person'. The human element is there. people don't just say "OH..look at that Fat" when they see you. They might say "look at that fat person" and you can be feel safe in the knowlege that 'fat' has been reclaimed and cannot harm you anymore. If you were just "A fat" or a "Piece of fat" it would be impossible to reclaim because it was not related to a human in the first place. This is why Fat admirer makes no sense. It lacks the human element to make it relevent to me in any way. I don't care if some people want to be called 'Fa'.. i dare say there are black people who don't care about being called 'coloured'.. but for the people who do mind; Don't call them it.



I don't see how FA lacks the human element.. admirer.. you have to be human to admire something, right?


----------



## Elfcat (Nov 18, 2009)

LillyBBBW said:


> Plus sized is kind of a relic now but it seemed no one ever had any real objections to the term. Although PSA is already taken. The conflicting message there might not be desirable.



Hmmm, why yes, actually, I *am *a public service announcement.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 18, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> I don't see how FA lacks the human element.. admirer.. you have to be human to admire something, right?


No i mean what you admire. To admire fat only, lacks a human element.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 18, 2009)

mergirl said:


> No i mean what you admire. To admire fat only, lacks a human element.



Where in FA do you see to admire fat ONLY? IMO, you're overanalyzing this and construing meanings that aren't really there. No one ever said fat admirer means I only admire fat and don't give two shits about anything else. That's the definition that YOU'RE giving it. An FA is someone who likes/prefers fat people. It's a symbol that is used within the community to refer to a group of people that are part of it. I don't see why it has to be more than that?


----------



## mergirl (Nov 19, 2009)

Fair enough, i'm not asking you to see it as any more. I tend to pick my self descriptors more carefully because i think words and acronyms have more power than people realise.


----------



## joswitch (Nov 19, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Fair enough, i'm not asking you to see it as any more. I tend to pick my self descriptors more carefully because i think *words and acronyms have more power than people realise.*



Ooh! I wrote a poem about that! 
- called Name of a Name:
http://www.users.totalise.co.uk/~drjonoverton/page3.html
and cos it's all about the video nowz :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3dIQbquDOU


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

mergirl said:


> No i mean what you admire. To admire fat only, lacks a human element.



I agree with what you are saying. 

Maybe it has been argued before, but if fat people are seen as a whole being (personality, looks/beauty, hobbies or interests, intelligence, body shape/size ...etc.) then why are there a lot of posts by some FA's that bemoan their significant other wanting to lose weight? From the posts, it seems that the particular FA is in A LOT of turmoil over a proposed weight loss or body change. They speak of their sexual interest being lost along with the pounds that their partner wants to shed or weight lost due to an uncontrollable circumstance like illness; and that they don't know if they can continue the relationship. Others maintain that it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to be sexually excited with out a specific amount of fat. So it seems that seeing the person as a WHOLE is in conflict. If someone said that you need to have an income of $1 million dollars or more for them to be even slightly interested in having sex and a relationship with you AND that if your income were to ever decrease after time, they would leave you...you might say that was a very shallow position.

An orange the size of a baseball has the same QUALITIES as an orange the size of a basketball. If you are one who already is in love with an orange (and the orange loves you back)-why does it matter what the size of it is? 

I am one of those people who wants to view others and be viewed as a whole being. I think the term FA gets in the way of that. 

If I am kind, caring, loving, exciting, responsible, smart, funny, whatever you think is attractive...then what does it matter what my size is if I want to return any and all of your affection? That, to me, is the human element.


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 19, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> They're only insults if you let yourself be insulted.



yes. if someone calls me a kike and that doesn't bother me, how did they succeed in insulting me? it's not a matter of reclaiming anything.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 19, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> I agree with what you are saying.
> 
> Maybe it has been argued before, but if fat people are seen as a whole being (personality, looks/beauty, hobbies or interests, intelligence, body shape/size ...etc.) then why are there a lot of posts by some FA's that bemoan their significant other wanting to lose weight? From the posts, it seems that the particular FA is in A LOT of turmoil over a proposed weight loss or body change. They speak of their sexual interest being lost along with the pounds that their partner wants to shed or weight lost due to an uncontrollable circumstance like illness; and that they don't know if they can continue the relationship. Others maintain that it is IMPOSSIBLE for them to be sexually excited with out a specific amount of fat. So it seems that seeing the person as a WHOLE is in conflict. If someone said that you need to have an income of $1 million dollars or more for them to be even slightly interested in having sex and a relationship with you AND that if your income were to ever decrease after time, they would leave you...you might say that was a very shallow position.
> 
> ...



See the problem here is that you're saying these FA's did XYZ and because of that, you don't want to be called an FA. You're letting the actions of a few ruin the entire term.. the term has nothing to do with those people's actions. Look at it this way, most of those people were also men.. are you suddenly embarrassed and dehumanized by the term man? Do you now not want to be associated with that group in society? What if some of those people were brunettes and let's say you're a brunette (never seen pictures of you, so just go with this).. are you suddenly mortified to be a brunette, do you go out and bleach your hair? I doubt it. These people are assholes who HAPPEN to be FA's.. being an FA and calling themselves an FA didn't make them an asshole and their behavior shouldn't reflect on the term itself.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Nov 19, 2009)

I guess my opinion is that of the general consensus.

There's a lot of gripes with the terms for many reasons, but for me and a lot of other people it's something that I do not often use outside of the community. It has nothing to do with fear, but I know that very few understand. Of all the people that I've known that have some sort of admiration for fat people, none them minus the ones I've met in the community knew what an "FA" is so I steer clear of it. 


99 out of 100 times I will say "I like big women," and that' s pretty much it. I might be "Specific" if I'm talking about it here by referring to people like large partners, but with friends and family? I know they would be puzzled, so I don't even try. lol


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> See the problem here is that you're saying these FA's did XYZ and because of that, you don't want to be called an FA. You're letting the actions of a few ruin the entire term.. the term has nothing to do with those people's actions. Look at it this way, most of those people were also men.. are you suddenly embarrassed and dehumanized by the term man? Do you now not want to be associated with that group in society? What if some of those people were brunettes and let's say you're a brunette (never seen pictures of you, so just go with this).. are you suddenly mortified to be a brunette, do you go out and bleach your hair? I doubt it. These people are assholes who HAPPEN to be FA's.. being an FA and calling themselves an FA didn't make them an asshole and their behavior shouldn't reflect on the term itself.




I don't see it as a "few" vs. "the rest". I find it very difficult to separate because they ALL use the SAME term of FA. Those are my feelings about it and just because YOU say so, I have to like the term? Why are you fighting so hard for the acceptance of the term FA? You've challenged the OP in numerous posts. Don't all your posts add up to this "overanalyzation" you keep referring to? Does it lend legitimacy to your feelings if everyone agrees? You like the term and if I hate it, will you change your mind about it or your feelings about being an FA? Probably not, nor should you. Does everyone who is fat or has a fat partner have to like the term? We all have reasons that we do or don't like the term. I fall into the latter category. 

And yes, because I am a man I am now associated with all the asshats that pull creepy shit on the women here in Dimensions and on the outside. You wanna pull creepy shit, that's your problem. But what you don't seem to understand is that every time some asshat pulls some creepy shit on a woman that ISN'T into creepy FA shit, she adds another row of bricks on her "wall of self-protection" AND after several years and several creeps, that wall is 100 feet tall. Along comes a good man and before he can attempt to get to know this woman, he has to try and tear down the all the bricks that stand between him and her-Now your creepy shit IS my problem. 

Now tell me that I should like this term.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 19, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> I don't see it as a "few" vs. "the rest". I find it very difficult to separate because they ALL use the SAME term of FA. Those are my feelings about it and just because YOU say so, I have to like the term? Why are you fighting so hard for the acceptance of the term FA? You've challenged the OP in numerous posts. Don't all your posts add up to this "overanalyzation" you keep referring to? Does it lend legitimacy to your feelings if everyone agrees? You like the term and if I hate it, will you change your mind about it or your feelings about being an FA? Probably not, nor should you. Does everyone who is fat or has a fat partner have to like the term? We all have reasons that we do or don't like the term. I fall into the latter category.
> 
> And yes, because I am a man I am now associated with all the asshats that pull creepy shit on the women here in Dimensions and on the outside. You wanna pull creepy shit, that's your problem. But what you don't seem to understand is that every time some asshat pulls some creepy shit on a woman that ISN'T into creepy FA shit, she adds another row of bricks on her "wall of self-protection" AND after several years and several creeps, that wall is 100 feet tall. Along comes a good man and before he can attempt to get to know this woman, he has to try and tear down the all the bricks that stand between him and her-Now your creepy shit IS my problem.
> 
> Now tell me that I should like this term.



Well, the reason I'm responding is actually because this is a discussion board so as the OP brings up new points about why she doesn't like it, I'm addressing those points based on my own little theory about it. That's usually how message boards work. I haven't been rude to mergirl or any other responders, including you. I've also continually stated "imo" to let everyone know I wasn't speaking for every person in the community, only myself. I find it interesting you make those remarks and then at the end you say "tell me why I should like it." Okay.. you just asked why I continue to bother posting? Clearly, you're not ready for a discussion. When you are, get back to me. Next.


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> Well, the reason I'm responding is actually because this is a discussion board so as the OP brings up new points about why she doesn't like it, I'm addressing those points based on my own little theory about it. That's usually how message boards work. I haven't been rude to mergirl or any other responders, including you. I've also continually stated "imo" to let everyone know I wasn't speaking for every person in the community, only myself. I find it interesting you make those remarks and then at the end you say "tell me why I should like it." Okay.. you just asked why I continue to bother posting? Clearly, you're not ready for a discussion. When you are, get back to me. Next.



I didn't ask why you were responding. (I read what you had to say) I asked why it was so important that you have to fight so hard and why you are "overanalyzing" all of this. No one said you were being rude, so why are you bringing it up? I wasn't rude to you. You are answering things that no one asked of you. I know you are addressing YOUR points. That is all YOU are doing. My original comment was to the OP and you felt you needed to "share" your opinion with me. You don't answer the questions that are asked, it seems you completely ignored the last post I made, you talk only about what is on YOUR agenda, you don't understand what a rhetorical question is, you "attempt" talking down to me and you think you can lecture me about having a "discussion"?


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 19, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> I didn't ask why you were responding. (I read what you had to say) I asked why it was so important that you have to fight so hard and why you are "overanalyzing" all of this. No one said you were being rude, so why are you bringing it up? I wasn't rude to you. You are answering things that no one asked of you. I know you are addressing YOUR points. That is all YOU are doing. My original comment was to the OP and you felt you needed to "share" your opinion with me. You don't answer the questions that are asked, it seems you completely ignored the last post I made, you talk only about what is on YOUR agenda, you don't understand what a rhetorical question is, you "attempt" talking down to me and you think you can lecture me about having a "discussion"? You are too young to understand all the intricacies of communication.



Your last line was extremely rude. If you have a problem with my posts, that's one thing, but don't try to make your point by saying I'm too young/immature to understand it. I've reported your post just so you know.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Nov 19, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> Your last line was extremely rude. If you have a problem with my posts, that's one thing, but don't try to make your point by saying I'm too young/immature to understand it. *I've reported your post just so you know.*




So did I. Ageism has no place here. Rachel is a legal adult and she communicates just fine. For example:




> Well, the reason I'm responding is actually because this is a discussion board so as the OP brings up new points about why she doesn't like it, I'm addressing those points based on my own little theory about it. That's usually how message boards work. I haven't been rude to mergirl or any other responders, including you. I've also continually stated "imo" to let everyone know I wasn't speaking for every person in the community, only myself. I find it interesting you make those remarks and then at the end you say "tell me why I should like it." Okay.. you just asked why I continue to bother posting? Clearly, you're not ready for a discussion. When you are, get back to me. Next.



I giggled out loud when I read that.

About the term FA, my personal opinion is it's like rejecting the word "lesbian" on the basis that you're attracted to more about your partner than just her gender. Obviously you not going to be turned on by every single female body you encounter, and obviously you're not going to say "I'm turned on b/c she's female and that's all that matters" but being a lesbian simply means your sexuality is such that you're turned on by women. It doesn't mean all women and it doesn't mean that sexuality is so narrow that all you need to be aroused is a female body. It's the same thing with being an FA.


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> Your last line was extremely rude. If you have a problem with my posts, that's one thing, but don't try to make your point by saying I'm too young/immature to understand it. I've reported your post just so you know.



You only look at the last line. Everything else you choose to ignore. I have made the point about the rest of your post which you have not said anything about. If you think that what I said is "reportable" instead of actually engaging the original post and can only look at the subsequent actions after you were so lovingly dismissive. It goes to say that, you are free to do what you want. You have been doing it all along anyway.
If you succeed in getting my posts pulled, that is fine. I still feel that you haven't engaged the discussion and it is not a matter of ageism.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 19, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> You only look at the last line. Everything else you choose to ignore. I have made the point about the rest of your post which you have not said anything about. If you think that what I said is "reportable" instead of actually engaging the original post and can only look at the subsequent actions after you were so lovingly dismissive. It goes to say that, you are free to do what you want. You have been doing it all along anyway.
> If you succeed in getting my posts pulled, that is fine. I still feel that you haven't engaged the discussion and it is not a matter of ageism.



You're too young to understand communication isn't ageism? That's weird.

I have engaged repeatedly in this discussion regarding the original post and also the other information other posts and the OP shared within the thread regarding my personal beliefs on the term and it's usage within this community and outside it. If you'd like to believe that because I don't agree with your personal beliefs on the issue that I haven't engaged, that's fine. I'm continuing to ignore the rest of your discussion regarding the original topic because you are clearly incapable of carrying on a discussion in a way that is appropriate and respectful.

ETA: Also, if you'd like to continue to discuss this please send me a PM as I don't want to continue to detract from the thread with an arguement.


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> You're too young to understand communication isn't ageism? That's weird.
> 
> I have engaged repeatedly in this discussion regarding the original post and also the other information other posts and the OP shared within the thread regarding my personal beliefs on the term and it's usage within this community and outside it. If you'd like to believe that because I don't agree with your personal beliefs on the issue that I haven't engaged, that's fine. I'm continuing to ignore the rest of your discussion regarding the original topic because you are clearly incapable of carrying on a discussion in a way that is appropriate and respectful.



That's where we differ. Trying to talk down to me as you do now and did before is very dismissive and rude and then following it up with "Next" is not respectful at all when you were acknowledged in an earlier post. You didn't like a rhetorical question and then you tried to answer it. Rhetorical questions aren't asked to be answered.


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 19, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> You are too young to understand all the intricacies of communication.



you're too old to think intelligence has an age limit


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 19, 2009)

i don't blame in ageism fyi, just in retarded excuses for lacking an argument

but...but...you're only a child! _how could you know so much_

can it POPS


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

exile in thighville said:


> you're too old to think intelligence has an age limit


That may be true chinstrap. I'm not going to get upset about it.


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 19, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> That may be true. I'm not going to get upset about it.



you solved the "being talked down to" problem though


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

exile in thighville said:


> you solved the "being talked down to" problem though



Namaste....


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 19, 2009)

riposte...


----------



## Fish (Nov 19, 2009)

I have to admit that I don't care for the term "FA/Fat Admirer" either. It, for me, removes the PEOPLE from the equation, implying that those that use it are admiring a thing rather than a person. Though to be perfectly honest, I've heard my fair share of self-proclaimed "FA's" talking about women as though they ARE little more than just fat. Applying a blanket objectification of women no different or less insulting than guys in a bar staring at a woman's breasts or butt with no regard to the person as a whole and having NO qualms about letting everyone KNOW it.

As for the specifics of the use of the word "admire", I don't understand how it applies to a preference. As a man, I am attracted to, and find beautiful, the larger female form. I don't need a cute little tag to define that as I'm not particularly afraid of sentences to explain myself on occasion. 

Also, Admiration (as the OP said) means something different that that. It's not like I could say: _"I really ADMIRE that fat. It cured cancer and landed on the moon."_


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 19, 2009)

i'm literally no longer a fat admirer so it's not the term, i'm just done with identity politics


----------



## KittyKitten (Nov 19, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I've decided i am not an Fa anymore. Actually, i don't think i ever was in the first place.
> I hate the term and all that it encompasses. I would actually rather wander about a barren wasteland than be in the fa la la club. *For full details of this just look around*
> For the record I will always be attracted to fat people. (If they are my type)
> Thanks.
> ...


_*

I agree, I think the term is stupid--just a step above "chubby chaser". *_


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 19, 2009)

thatgirl08 said:


> Your last line was extremely rude. If you have a problem with my posts, that's one thing, but don't try to make your point by saying I'm too young/immature to understand it. I've reported your post just so you know.



I will take back that you are too young.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 19, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> I will take back that you are too young.



Appreciated.


----------



## Lightning Man (Nov 20, 2009)

I am going to stop using the terms male, man, human, and poster as they can apply to me *and* Vardon Grip and I don't want to be confused for him.


----------



## mergirl (Nov 20, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> About the term FA, my personal opinion is it's like rejecting the word "lesbian" on the basis that you're attracted to more about your partner than just her gender. Obviously you not going to be turned on by every single female body you encounter, and obviously you're not going to say "I'm turned on b/c she's female and that's all that matters" but being a lesbian simply means your sexuality is such that you're turned on by women. It doesn't mean all women and it doesn't mean that sexuality is so narrow that all you need to be aroused is a female body. It's the same thing with being an FA.



I disagree. The term Lesbian encompasses a lot more than just one aspect of someone. It is a term that has historical meaning and encompasses a homosexual relationship between two woman which is more than just sexual. I don't have a problem with this term because it neither objectifies nor places the other partner in an unequal position. It does not focus on one aspect of the person to sexualize at the loss of the person.
If lesbian were to be called "vagina admirers" i may have a problem with that.


----------



## comaseason (Nov 20, 2009)

mergirl said:


> If lesbian were to be called "vagina admirers" i may have a problem with that.



Mer - Have you ever had fizzy water come out of your nose? Burns like crazy.

Sadly I must spread the rep around.


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 20, 2009)

exile in thighville said:


> i don't blame in ageism fyi, just in retarded excuses for lacking an argument
> 
> but...but...you're only a child! _how could you know so much_
> 
> can it POPS



Sorry to not let this go...

Didn't you have in your signature or something several weeks ago a dialog between you and thatgirl where you commented on her age and not appreciating wine and she said something about you not being much older so how can you talk? I could be wrong, but I think that was you.



Pops


----------



## exile in thighville (Nov 20, 2009)

nah you're seeing things

which is normal at your age


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 20, 2009)

exile in thighville said:


> nah you're seeing things
> 
> which is normal at your age



Yep, that has to be it. You are probably right. It wouldn't be that you just couldn't man up and admit to being a hypocrite. My bad.


----------



## vardon_grip (Nov 22, 2009)

I must be seeing things again. Gotta get my eyes checked. You may want to have yourself checked to be safe. 

View attachment Forum.jpg


----------



## cheekyjez (Nov 22, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I disagree. The term Lesbian encompasses a lot more than just one aspect of someone. It is a term that has historical meaning and encompasses a homosexual relationship between two woman which is more than just sexual. I don't have a problem with this term because it neither objectifies nor places the other partner in an unequal position. It does not focus on one aspect of the person to sexualize at the loss of the person.
> If lesbian were to be called "vagina admirers" i may have a problem with that.



To add to this, it's one reason the words "gay" and/or "lesbian" are favoured over "homosexual" - they express an identity rather than solely a sexual preference.


----------



## kayrae (Nov 22, 2009)

You're not an FA if you don't want to be an FA... But you'll still be a BBWGLBTQWTFBBQ to me


----------



## Jes (Nov 22, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> I must be seeing things again. Gotta get my eyes checked. You may want to have yourself checked to be safe.



i must be seeing things too, b/c I just saw that. and i'm a ripe old 26.


----------



## thatgirl08 (Nov 22, 2009)

vardon_grip said:


> I must be seeing things again. Gotta get my eyes checked. You may want to have yourself checked to be safe.



Two wrongs don't make a right?


----------



## mergirl (Nov 23, 2009)

kayrae said:


> You're not an FA if you don't want to be an FA... But you'll still be a BBWGLBTQWTFBBQ to me


yes... well you have insulted me because i am actually not a BBWGLBTQWTFBBQ i am a BBWGLBTQWTFBBQLOL - Stop objectifying me


----------

