# Blurred lines? Ffa and feeder



## ouroboros (Feb 3, 2016)

Has anyone else noticed that with female ffas that the line between feeder and ffa is more blurred as opposed to male counterparts?


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 3, 2016)

Never spoke to a female FA who didn't like to watch a fat guy eat. I couldn't speak to male FAs. I wonder if it's almost like a foreplay type scenario? Women want more build up, guys are just thinking about the culminating act even for FAs.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 3, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Never spoke to a female FA who didn't like to watch a fat guy eat. I couldn't speak to male FAs. I wonder if it's almost like a foreplay type scenario? Women want more build up, guys are just thinking about the culminating act even for FAs.



That's a pretty good connection, but it could also be society women are meant to be nurturers and this is a different take on that. Lol I can't speak for male fas either, but I've noticed less talk about enjoying a partner with an appetite if they also didn't identify as feeder. I didn't know that that was so common among ffas


----------



## agouderia (Feb 3, 2016)

Your question has been discussed here and there buried in various threads under different aspects but never in a comprehensive manner.

You definitely have the main point ouroboros that nurturing is at the least fostered and encouraged in females. 

Girls and woman are consciously and sub-consciously taught from early on that it is mark of a good female, caring, nurturing and rewarding to provide their loved ones with nutrition - doing well in this field is mostly rewarded with positive feedback and attention.

Even though sound empirical data on these fetishes is scarse, from comparable issues you're on the safe side to assume that at least 8 out of 10 women who bake a cake for you are plain showing you that they like you and care for you and are not feeders!

In the context of the story writer's board in the Library there have also been a few discussions on how male and female writers have different perceptions of their characters, whether they're BBWs or BHMs.

There is less objectification among FFAs in comparison to FAs - but that boils down to the general fact that men tend to objectify women much more than vice-versa. For a host of social, psychological, anthropological, historic, etc. reasons.

Bottom line is - the likelihood that an FFA even as a feeder will see the BHM as a person/subject and not an object is empirically just a lot higher.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 3, 2016)

There are some feeders who would be more aptly described as malicious than nurturing and then even some where it's both at the same time.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 3, 2016)

agouderia said:


> Your question has been discussed here and there buried in various threads under different aspects but never in a comprehensive manner.
> 
> You definitely have the main point ouroboros that nurturing is at the least fostered and encouraged in females.
> 
> ...


Sorry for bringing up something that's been discussed before.
I agree that most of the time she wouldn't be a feeder and that men are more likely to objectify women for a whole host of reasons. 
Are you suggesting that it's equally as common but men aren't as open about it?


----------



## Xyantha Reborn (Feb 3, 2016)

Don't be sorry. Dead threads should stay dead; they are nice for reference, but re-questioning previously discussed topics is healthy and leaves out the opinion bias of the past.



ouroboros said:


> Has anyone else noticed that with female ffas that the line between feeder and ffa is more blurred as opposed to male counterparts?


 
I'm going to be more blunt than usual because I am tired.

Yes. I think ultimately it is because we are not required to delineate between them as much as male FAs are. 

There is a much bigger stigma towards men who actively want to feed women. Generally, they seem to have deemed to have predatory natures, preying on weak women who are on the outcast fringe of society. _That poor girl, taken advantage of by that man!_

Whereas female FFAs enjoy the luxury of dealing with a sex that is still deemed to have more control. _Well, she might have encouraged him a bit, but as a man, he should have had the balls to stop her. _

I also think that society more strongly associates sex to men than women. So a man fattening up a woman is obviously sheer selfish sexuality rolleyes whereas with women, it is clearly just fulfilling her natural urges to have a big, strong mate, and the lack of muscle is just her being confused rolleyes.

I don't know how this gender bias plays out in the GLTBQA (whatever the growing acronym is now ) is, but that is my own personal observation in 'straight' circles.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 3, 2016)

Xyantha Reborn said:


> I'm going to be more blunt than usual because I am tired.


As opposed to your normally tactful and reserved manner?


----------



## Xyantha Reborn (Feb 3, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> As opposed to your normally tactful and reserved manner?



What can I say? You bring out the worst in me.

Edit Ps ask crumbling, he should know what it is


----------



## Crumbling (Feb 3, 2016)

Xyantha Reborn said:


> ask crumbling, he should know what it is



it's why she used the past tense here Dwes..



Xyantha Reborn said:


> he should have had the balls


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 4, 2016)

Xyantha Reborn said:


> Don't be sorry. Dead threads should stay dead; they are nice for reference, but re-questioning previously discussed topics is healthy and leaves out the opinion bias of the past.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Okay good. I didn't want it to see like was beating a dead horse. But starting it fresh without previous opinion biases is a good point.
I have to agree, also with the role of the bhm/bbw and how the societal norms play out too. In general men are more likely to be encouraged to have a 'healthy appetite', while women are encouraged to eat things like salad. 

LGBTQ (I just leave it at that, I can't keep up with the ever growing acronym.) I'm not sure how it plays out there. But I think in the gay community the men are either chasers or encouragers. But I think the role of a gainer is different too


----------



## Hozay J Garseeya (Feb 6, 2016)

I wish I had something intelligent to add to this conversation, but Xyantha pretty much covered it all.


----------



## bayone (Feb 6, 2016)

Yeah, I think the whole "the way to a man's heart is through his stomach" trope is commonplace even in non-FA/feedist depictions of heterosexual courtship.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 6, 2016)

So is it a case of which came first the chicken or the egg? Was it society that allowed it to foster more than with males or was it something innate? Sorry if I'm not clear. I'm half asleep. Lol


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 6, 2016)

Breastfeeding alone would be an argument for at least some innate component.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 6, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Breastfeeding alone would be an argument for at least some innate component.


But breastfeeding isn't a sexual experience, or even pleasurable. (From what I've heard)


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 6, 2016)

Right, but it established that role of feeding for women. Also fat or feeding isn't sexual for most people. I'm not saying that makes breastfeeding sexual for FFA/feedresses, but I think there plausibly could be some unusual expression of whatever the genetic basis for nurturing in women is.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 6, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Right, but it established that role of feeding for women. Also fat or feeding isn't sexual for most people. I'm not saying that makes breastfeeding sexual for FFA/feedresses, but I think there plausibly could be some unusual expression of whatever the genetic basis for nurturing in women is.



I see what you're getting at, but I don't fully agree with it relating to these interests. I think with that its kinda going into the realm of age play, although it could just be my tired logic. Women are the nourisher, even without breastfeeding as a genetic example. I forget what the theory is called but our gender roles in society were formed by our strengths and power.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 6, 2016)

I would also add that breastfeeding is the main purpose of bewbs for the species, and bewbies are very sexual. Nipple sucking is standard foreplay, which when you think about is a little weird. So why not the possibility that the other half of breastfeeding is sexual as well?


----------



## MsBrightside (Feb 6, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Breastfeeding alone would be an argument for at least some innate component.


It's interesting that you're suggesting a connection.

As someone who has some personal experience in this area, I can tell you that...


ouroboros said:


> But breastfeeding isn't a sexual experience...


in the case of a child, it's definitely not.

And it's often not pleasurable to feed an infant that way in the beginning, because of sore/crackled nipples, the possibility of mastitis, etc. But once the routine is established, it does feel nice. In fact there's a let-down reflex that occurs once the infant is latched on (if the mother is relaxed), which is accompanied by a not-unpleasant prickling sensation. Also, it's physically painful if circumstances prevent a nursing mother from feeding her child for several hours or more, and it's a huge relief to have that pain/pressure finally alleviated.

Sorry if this is TMI, but I'm going to blame it on D. for bringing it up!


----------



## BigChaz (Feb 14, 2016)

Sorry, I stopped reading this thread after I figured out that Xyantha linked a tool designed to destroy balls and I'm pretty worried about her husband right now. 

Can you post proof of life, please


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 14, 2016)

BigChaz said:


> Sorry, I stopped reading this thread after I figured out that Xyantha linked a tool designed to destroy balls and I'm pretty worried about her husband right now.
> 
> Can you post proof of life, please



I can verify Mr. Xy was alive as of Friday night, though he was quite unhappy about having to clean up copious amounts of dog poo.


----------



## Xyantha Reborn (Feb 15, 2016)

Tis true. Apparently all my animals ate something that upset their tumtums a fair deal. Hubby was intensely unhappy at having to clean that up while i was at the movies lol! Despite me telling him after it was 2.5 hours of watching Leo crawl through the snow as his lips grew more and more chapped, and he ate random dead things.

I removed the pic to help protect your delicate sensibilities.

Besides, that was aimed specifically at Dwes!


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 16, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> I would also add that breastfeeding is the main purpose of bewbs for the species, and bewbies are very sexual. Nipple sucking is standard foreplay, which when you think about is a little weird. So why not the possibility that the other half of breastfeeding is sexual as well?



Good point. I see where going going with that and it makes sense. although the thought of sexual breast feeding is still weird to me, but it makes sense.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 16, 2016)

ouroboros said:


> Good point. I see where going going with that and it makes sense. although the thought of sexual breast feeding is still weird to me, but it makes sense.



Well sexualizing things that make someone more suitable for breeding and raising young is why guys like boobs and wide hips. 

http://www.medicaldaily.com/fat-bottomed-girls-women-wide-hips-more-sexually-active-due-confidence-bestowed-evolution-278650


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 16, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Well sexualizing things that make someone more suitable for breeding and raising young is why guys like boobs and wide hips.
> 
> http://www.medicaldaily.com/fat-bottomed-girls-women-wide-hips-more-sexually-active-due-confidence-bestowed-evolution-278650


But wouldn't it in this scenario refer to the guys guys reaction to the women?


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 16, 2016)

ouroboros said:


> But wouldn't it in this scenario refer to the guys guys reaction to the women?



Well, I still think a core similarity is applicable. But, yes it is not exactly the same. Also sexual pleasure can be derived from an almost vicarious enjoyment of the pleasure you give. So having attributes or behaviors that are gratify a partner is fulfilling on both sides. This is part of why I can deeply enjoy being the object of a fetish I don't independently share.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 16, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Well, I still think a core similarity is applicable. But, yes it is not exactly the same. Also sexual pleasure can be derived from an almost vicarious enjoyment of the pleasure you give. So having attributes or behaviors that are gratify a partner is fulfilling on both sides.


That's true, but there is a separation between sexual and not sexual. Even if those areas are sexual. There's a part of the brain that's in charge of that. But wouldn't the vicarious pleasure then be not actually about the breastfeeding but the emotions?


----------



## BigChaz (Feb 16, 2016)

This conversation is getting pretty deep and the end result is just gonna be that you guys are gonna find out you are attracted to your mom's titties.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 16, 2016)

BigChaz said:


> This conversation is getting pretty deep and the end result is just gonna be that you guys are gonna find out you are attracted to your mom's titties.


[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsQH7PFrI04"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsQH7PFrI04[/ame]


----------



## Tad (Feb 16, 2016)

I think that people being the complicated bundle of drives, hormones, experiences, influences, and semi-random things that made an impact upon us, it will always be hard to show a blanket A --> B for what motivates us. 'Rule of thumb', maybe, or 'this could be a cause,' etc.

That said, a lot of things that help prove our fitness and competence have become part of sexuality, secondary sexual characteristics if you will. I saw one study which purported to show that creativity in males (measured as major works of art and scientific discoveries) followed testosterone levels (that is, there were more in the highest testosterone years) -- suggesting that even creativity can be a sexual display. Which kind of makes sense, it shows the capacity for risk taking (which implies you can survive the consequences of taking risks), the time to think beyond survival, as well as mental cleverness.

Looking at it similarly, nurturing others beyond your own offspring shows you have the energy, ability, and resources to more than take care of yourself and any children you have (and implicitly that you can take care of your mate and additional children, so would be a good breeding partner). So perhaps nurturing of others could be thought of as female sexual display in some cases?

Yes, I'm basing that on nothing but pure conjecture and extrapolation of some study that I read something about some years ago, so feel free to ignore my thoughts on this one.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 16, 2016)

Also I think a lot of this develops during very early childhood and infancy. The thing is that we start forming associations and behavioral expectations (attachment style and so on) before our brains are capable of fully processing what we experience. So maybe the things that would directly be associated in an adult brain might have more nebulous and varying associations in an infant or very young child. Almost every FFA reports the preference showing up at like 10 or younger so these preferences could easily set in very early and may not necessarily follow fully logical paths.

Also, bewbies.


----------



## Xyantha Reborn (Feb 16, 2016)

I also don't know that blurred line is accurate. There isn't necessarily a line at all, but rather a sliding scale (like those ones they used to use in math).

You can be one, or both, or any mixure of either PLUS have daddy or pain tendencies.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 16, 2016)

Xyantha Reborn said:


> I also don't know that blurred line is accurate. There isn't necessarily a line at all, but rather a sliding scale (like those ones they used to use in math).
> 
> You can be one, or both, or any mixure of either PLUS have daddy or pain tendencies.



I guess I've always thought of them as separate. 
Oreven like the Kinsely scale?


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 16, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Almost every FFA reports the preference showing up at like 10 or younger [\QUOTE]
> For the record I for one actually don't follow that type, I don't like dating younger. Lol


----------



## Xyantha Reborn (Feb 16, 2016)

ouroboros said:


> I guess I've always thought of them as separate.
> Oreven like the Kinsely scale?


 
Like an Abacus.

I envision each line of beads to be a single "stream" of preference, with 'extremes' at both ends of each row.

A lot of girls have this saviour complex; they love damaged goods. They find the idea of saving a guy hot. 

On another line, they could have a mild feeder tendancy (ie always tend to have food around, like watching a guy eat). 

On another line, they identify strongly as an F/FA

On another line, they really like S&M stuff.

Edit: As opposed to a line you "cross"


----------



## BigChaz (Feb 24, 2016)

My recently ex-girlfriend is a feeder and she told me she knew she was into fat guys from when she was just a little girl and used to fall in love with john candy, chris farley, etc.


I think some people are just born that way.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 24, 2016)

BigChaz said:


> My recently ex-girlfriend is a feeder and she told me she knew she was into fat guys from when she was just a little girl and used to fall in love with john candy, chris farley, etc.
> 
> 
> I think some people are just born that way.



Almost every FFA I know was into fat early. Winnie the pooh has been described by more than one as disturbingly arousing. Xy wrote a kind of blubber porn story at 10 or so. I'm not sure it has to be at birth though, a lot of our preferences are determined during infancy and todlerhood, but it could be innate.


----------



## Tad (Feb 24, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Almost every FFA I know was into fat early. Winnie the pooh has been described by more than one as disturbingly arousing. Xy wrote a kind of blubber porn story at 10 or so. I'm not sure it has to be at birth though, a lot of our preferences are determined during infancy and todlerhood, but it could be innate.



Yah, I think when when it is "as far back as I can remember" we often way "I was born that way" when it could be that things clicked together that way when we were really young. As to why it clicks together that way? If you have spent any time with toddlers you'll know that cause and effect or any kind of logic don't have a lot to do with how their brains function, so I don't think there needs to be some obvious reason.


----------



## agouderia (Feb 24, 2016)

dwesterny said:


> Almost every FFA I know was into fat early. Winnie the pooh has been described by more than one as disturbingly arousing. .



Definitely! Winnie the Pooh is the sex-god for all pre-school FFAs! 

(And they are aware they are FFAs, only don't know what it means yet. The other pre-schoolers like Barbie.) 

View attachment Winniethepooh.png


----------



## Tad (Feb 24, 2016)

I had very mixed feelings about Pooh. To be so blissfully gluttonous sounded fantastic, but being so very dull sounded rather horrible. It probably biased me against fat to some degree for quite some time.

I wonder if young FFA ever had such concerns about the bear of little brain?


----------



## agouderia (Feb 24, 2016)

Quoting oneself is the most vain and stupid thing one can do - nevertheless I am doing as much.

Simply because I've already written exactly this discussion from an FFAs perspective in 'Available in All Sizes' between Philip & Antonia:

_Absolutely Philip whispered hoarsely, letting something drop he had clenched in his fist. 

Whats that .oh sorry, Heathers boys, Henri and Pierre arranged the Christmas cookies we baked last weekend on these Winnie-the-Pooh napkins I didnt have time to clear everything away 

I hate Winnie-the-Pooh..

Pardon? How can anybody hate Winnie-the-Pooh? Antonia sat up in dismay.

Hes fat, greedy and . stupid, really stupid,

What? Winnie-the-Pooh isnt stupid  hes just a bear with very little brains! But he has a lot emotional intelligence since he sees and knows his own faults, even though he isnt able to follow his own insights time and again  Come to think of it, Winnie-the-Pooh with academic smarts would be literally un-bear-ably perfect! Antonia was intrigued by the idea. Imagine  hes cute, cuddly, loving, and loyal, a good friend, compassionate, curios  a high IQ would be almost too much. Whats your issue with poor Winnie-the-Pooh? she nuzzled his cheek.

 my nanny was told to read me only the one chapter where Pooh gets stuck in Rabbits hole because he ate too much and was too fat to get back out Philip muttered under his breath, stiffening in Antonias arms; who was appalled.

But thats awful, how cruel! the words slipped before she could hold them back. I always hated that chapter, too. When I was older, could read the book myself, thats the one I skipped. I was especially mad at Rabbit and his stupid relations!

You were mad at Rabbits relations?

Yes  those stupid rabbits, digging holes all over the place  couldnt they have dug Rabbits front hole a bit bigger to help Pooh out and then fill it up again? That would have spared poor Pooh a diet and the humiliation of having his sexy hind paws being used as a towel rack!

Philip laughed out loud and with a surprising move flipped Antonia down into his lap raising his eyebrows in mock questioning: So  youve always had the impetus to try to rescue poor teddy bears in distress? 

Ummm  I guess I have_

This was my attempt at capturing how I think many FFAs see Winnie-the-Pooh as part of their formative experiences.


----------



## Xyantha Reborn (Feb 24, 2016)

Oddly enough Pooh didn't trigger my FFA at all. Templeton the rat did, though.

Pooh was so asexual to me I don't even think I thought of him as a him until I was grown!

But i think that its possibly to be feedery and fetishy in your mind and never act on it. Templeton could be 'hot', a fictional BHM could be hot doing it, but to be honest a lot of those behaviours would be intolerable in my day to day life. And the idea of hurting, in any way, someone i love is more painful than any temp satisfaction.

But i still can get my mental kicks and giggles.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 24, 2016)

Xyantha Reborn said:


> Oddly enough Pooh didn't trigger my FFA at all. Templeton the rat did, though.
> 
> Pooh was so asexual to me I don't even think I thought of him as a him until I was grown!
> 
> ...



I'm in exactly the same boat in regards to Pooh and Templeton. I totally forgot about Templeton.


----------



## dwesterny (Feb 24, 2016)

Oh bother.


----------



## Xyantha Reborn (Feb 24, 2016)

ouroboros said:


> I'm in exactly the same boat in regards to Pooh and Templeton. I totally forgot about Templeton.




Rewatch that scene. Beings back all the feels.


----------



## agouderia (Feb 24, 2016)

Xyantha Reborn said:


> Oddly enough Pooh didn't trigger my FFA at all. Templeton the rat did, though.
> 
> Pooh was so asexual to me I don't even think I thought of him as a him until I was grown!
> 
> ...



Templeton fascinated me too. But 'Charlotte's Web' is one of my absolute favorite childhood books anyway. I also liked that Wilbur as protagonist wasn't intended as a slimness advertisement.

I feel similiarly about the practical side too - there is a big difference to fictional fantasy, because that has no real life consequences.

As much as I like cooking & baking, there has always been a mental barrier to using those skills actively for potentially harmful feeder fantasies. Two close friends/family have serious issues with compulsive overeating - and I can see their struggle.
So for birthdays, reunions etc. I will make a big dinner - but always let variety, quality and basic health considerations overrule any quantity or stuffing aspects.


----------



## ouroboros (Feb 24, 2016)

Xyantha Reborn said:


> Rewatch that scene. Beings back all the feels.



I use to watch Charlotte's Web just for that scene. Time for all the feels.:wubu:


----------



## Cobra Verde (Feb 24, 2016)

Tad said:


> I had very mixed feelings about Pooh. To be so blissfully gluttonous sounded fantastic, but being so very dull sounded rather horrible. It probably biased me against fat to some degree for quite some time.
> 
> I wonder if young FFA ever had such concerns about the bear of little brain?


TIL Tad (or is it Stewart?) works as a columnist:

http://www.clickhole.com/blogpost/i-dont-let-my-kids-watch-winnie-pooh-because-i-don-2842


----------



## bayone (Feb 27, 2016)

agouderia said:


> What? Winnie-the-Pooh isnt stupid  hes just a bear with very little brains! But he has a lot emotional intelligence...



I don't think he's particularly lacking in inventive smarts either. Wasn't he the one who when they were trapped in Owl's collapsed house suggested they rig a pulley system to get Piglet up to the window so he could go for help? 

Pooh's just too modest for his own good.


----------



## Tad (Mar 1, 2016)

I _like _Pooh, but his nature did not seem like something to aspire to, at least to my young self. I've come to greater appreciation of accepting things as they are and finding happiness in small things, but I still don't consider it a goal that in and of itself I would want to pursue.

Hang out with him sometimes? Sure. Accept that to be happy with being fat meant being like him? No, I wasn't going to accept that.


----------



## dwesterny (Mar 1, 2016)

Such Pooh bashing! Shame on you all! 









> Hoff presents Winnie-the-Pooh and related others from A. A. Milne's stories as characters that interact with him while he writes The Tao of Pooh, but also quotes excerpts of their tales from Milne's actual books Winnie-the-Pooh and The House at Pooh Corner, in order to exemplify his points. Hoff uses many of Milne's characters to symbolize ideas that differ from or accentuate Taoist tenets. Winnie-the-Pooh himself, for example, personifies the principles of wei wu wei, the Taoist concept of "effortless doing," and pu, the concept of being open to but unburdened by experience. In contrast, characters like Owl and Rabbit over-complicate problems, often over-thinking to the point of confusion, and Eeyore pessimistically complains and frets about existence, unable to just be.[2] Hoff regards Pooh's simpleminded nature, unsophisticated worldview and instinctive problem-solving methods as conveniently representative of the Taoist philosophical foundation. The book also incorporates translated excerpts from various prominent Taoist texts, from authors such as Laozi and Zhuangzi.


----------

