# Feeding Machine



## Judge_Dre (Aug 21, 2011)

Feeding machines have long been part of weight gain erotica. The web comic "Paige's Story" by The Studio is one of my favorite depictions of one such device and recently Ivy and Violet used a prop feeding machine for a photo set on their adult site. I wonder if they are actually feasible. Does anyone think its possible to build a feeding machine? Would any feedees use a feeding machine if the opportunity was available?


----------



## WickedWaggy (Aug 21, 2011)

There would be no problem making such a machine. Using anything from a hand pump to a variable speed electric motor. You could connect it to a foot pedal, control knob, a dimmer switch for lights would work. The only limitation there would be is the viscosity of the liquid to be pumped through the machine. And of course the ability of the end user to hold the contents of the machine.


----------



## Tina (Aug 22, 2011)

"End user"?


----------



## Fuzzy (Aug 22, 2011)

I'm getting some major deja vu with this thread..


----------



## WickedWaggy (Aug 23, 2011)

Tina said:


> "End user"?



Hmm, that makes it sound bad.

I jumped on this thread because I work in the fluid power industry. End user is referring to the final customer, through the contractor or directly from the manufacturer, that any system is installed. Hydraulic pumps and high pressure fluid distribution is an everyday job to me. I was merely explaining the feasibility of project - not that I am into it or offering to produce such a contraption. Please don't take this out of context. Thanks.


----------



## SensualDistender (Aug 25, 2011)

Anyone remember the artwork (I think it was on the fatten up web site but maybe it was some other FNGA site) where a woman was lying face up on a table with a feeding machine pumping something into her belly?


----------



## pdt (Aug 29, 2011)

I don't think it would be difficult; you just need to make it modular enough to be cleanable.

Mod a mini-fridge with a hole and gasket as though you were turning it into a kegerator. Instead of a keg, you have a refrigerated reservoir for your liquid fattening mix. This can be pumped through a length of tubing by a simple electric pump.

For variable speed, as above mentioned, consider a dimmer switch. Either way, a master operating switch, possibly under lock and key, should be placed on the inside of a 20-minute timer switch. The timer allows the gainer to stop the machine if they are too full or need to use the bathroom, or whatever, but the 20 minute time limit on the pause ensures that whoever is on the machine will be kept packed completely full until somebody turns off the master switch. The machine can only be turned off by somebody who can get at the locked master switch, so the gainer has to stay on it or risk making a big mess when the timer runs out.

Simple, compact design, efficient and relentless without being ridiculous. I would totally let some enterprising feeder hook me up to one of these.


----------



## MadLordOfMilk (Sep 4, 2011)

pdt said:


> I don't think it would be difficult; you just need to make it modular enough to be cleanable.
> 
> Mod a mini-fridge with a hole and gasket as though you were turning it into a kegerator. Instead of a keg, you have a refrigerated reservoir for your liquid fattening mix. This can be pumped through a length of tubing by a simple electric pump.
> 
> ...



That... Huh. That could actually be doable.

(I can't help but feel like that exact thought I just had is how a LOT of bad ideas started, though )


----------



## joemurphy (Sep 6, 2011)

Feeding machines need to be left to the comic books. A bad idea in the real world.


----------



## Totmacher (Sep 6, 2011)

joemurphy said:


> Feeding machines need to be left to the comic books. A bad idea in the real world.



Won't you favor us with the anecdote that led you to that conclusion? If not, at _least_ the credentials that make you more qualified to make that determination than, say, the hydraulic industry insider.


----------



## Rickgm (Sep 7, 2011)

joemurphy said:


> Feeding machines need to be left to the comic books. A bad idea in the real world.



Because...........


----------



## Silver Fox (Sep 9, 2011)

I have seen videos of the simplest of feeding machines already. It is simply a gravity feed system. A container placed higher than the feedee and a tube. Here is Betsy and her partner using such a system in what I find to be an extremely erotic video: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xcdho8_betsy-feeding_sexy


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 9, 2011)

Totmacher said:


> Won't you favor us with the anecdote that led you to that conclusion? If not, at _least_ the credentials that make you more qualified to make that determination than, say, the hydraulic industry insider.



Because the end user is not a machine. The esophagus, stomach, throat, tongue, etc. are biological functions and dont operate on a controled, programmable rythm. The subject must breathe, swallow, cough, blink, laugh, choke on her owm spittle, swallow down the wrong pipe, roll her eyes back into her head and cunvulse violently, etc. Not ideal.


----------



## LalaCity (Sep 9, 2011)

LillyBBBW said:


> Because the end user is not a machine. The esophagus, stomach, throat, tongue, etc. are biological functions and dont operate on a controled, programmable rythm. The subject must breathe, swallow, cough, blink, laugh, choke on her owm spittle, swallow down the wrong pipe, roll her eyes back into her head and cunvulse violently, etc. Not ideal.



Not to mention the question of basic hygiene. All manner of dangerous micro-organisms could potentially grow in such a machine if it's not kept scrupulously clean.

Something to think about, eh?


----------



## Jes (Sep 9, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> Not to mention the question of basic hygiene. All manner of dangerous micro-organisms could potentially grow in such a machine if it's not kept scrupulously clean.
> 
> Something to think about, eh?



yeah, but if the cookie dough already has raw egg in it, why not just say 'fuck it?' and tempt fate?


----------



## MadLordOfMilk (Sep 10, 2011)

Jes said:


> Remember when we talked about that machine that could toss little balls of raw cookie dough into my mouth at planned intervals? I've been sitting here with my mouth open ever since then, but no machine!
> 
> 
> mmm. raw cookie dough.





Jes said:


> yeah, but if the cookie dough already has raw egg in it, why not just say 'fuck it?' and tempt fate?



I would just like to mention that your posts made my day. Still snickering periodically


----------



## Totmacher (Sep 11, 2011)

LillyBBBW said:


> Because the end user is not a machine. The esophagus, stomach, throat, tongue, etc. are biological functions and dont operate on a controled, programmable rythm. The subject must breathe, swallow, cough, blink, laugh, choke on her owm spittle, swallow down the wrong pipe, roll her eyes back into her head and cunvulse violently, etc. Not ideal.



From what I've seen and read human beings just aren't that delicate. Sure people choke to death on small particles of food and drown in bowls of cereal all the time, but the vast majority of us are perfectly capable of drinking from a tube. The more sophisticated a machine constructed the more it will have to take the, "end user"'s comfort and safety into account but, it's the feeder who's supposed to notice and yank the plug if something goes wrong.
Have a polarizing experience you'd like to share? It sounds like something major's happened to turn you off to the whole concept.



LalaCity said:


> Not to mention the question of basic hygiene. All manner of dangerous micro-organisms could potentially grow in such a machine if it's not kept scrupulously clean.
> 
> Something to think about, eh?



Welll, duh. Just like how you're supposed to wash the pots and pans; dishes and flatware; etc.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 11, 2011)

Totmacher said:


> From what I've seen and read human beings just aren't that delicate. Sure people choke to death on small particles of food and drown in bowls of cereal all the time, but the vast majority of us are perfectly capable of drinking from a tube. The more sophisticated a machine constructed the more it will have to take the, "end user"'s comfort and safety into account but, it's the feeder who's supposed to notice and yank the plug if something goes wrong.
> Have a polarizing experience you'd like to share? It sounds like something major's happened to turn you off to the whole concept.
> 
> 
> ...



See, the thing with tube feeding is that as the feedEE, you are still essentially in control. The liquid has a minor amount of force through gravity but so does a bottle of soda for example. You turn it up to your lips but still, your actions and your impluse is the controling factor. With a machine forcing liquid out, even in generally mild impulses, the body is going to be automatically resistant to it because it's and outside force. A gag reflex will be innduced even if you employ a 'mind over matter' approach. I don't know why this is as I've not studied it exstensively. My preliminary theory is that the body is automatically designed to be in contol in this matter. Any outward control is going to cause the body to rebel against it or erect a defense. It's like sticking your head out of the window while driving. Air is being pushed down your nostrils and your breathing automatically shuts down even if you try to override this and breathe anyway. You *can't* breath. With a machine the mechanics of the body's reaction is similar and please dont ask me how I know this or I'd have to kill you.

The machine hypothetically would be cleaned the same way all dairy farms and food processing plants clean their machines. They run a cleaning solution through them and then flush them with heated distilled water after each use. Still, such a machine would not be compatable with living beings. It would only be for show with properties no more intricate than a funnel and a tube with no mechanical force.


----------



## Totmacher (Sep 11, 2011)

LillyBBBW said:


> See, the thing with tube feeding is that as the feedEE, you are still essentially in control. The liquid has a minor amount of force through gravity but so does a bottle of soda for example. You turn it up to your lips but still, your actions and your impluse is the controling factor. With a machine forcing liquid out, even in generally mild impulses, the body is going to be automatically resistant to it because it's and outside force. A gag reflex will be innduced even if you employ a 'mind over matter' approach. I don't know why this is as I've not studied it exstensively. My preliminary theory is that the body is automatically designed to be in contol in this matter. Any outward control is going to cause the body to rebel against it or erect a defense. It's like sticking your head out of the window while driving. Air is being pushed down your nostrils and your breathing automatically shuts down even if you try to override this and breathe anyway. You *can't* breath. With a machine the mechanics of the body's reaction is similar and please dont ask me how I know this or I'd have to kill you.



The machine you're imagining is a bit more than I'd think most people'd go for on a first attempt. I'm familiar with the gag reflex, but the head-out-the-window-of-a-moving-car one is new to me (don't experience it myself). Regardless, reflexes are something a feeding-machine builder would have to take into account. I'd suggest either constructing a machine where the feed_ee_ still has to swallow or run the tube down into the esophagus below epiglottis, larynx, and other suchlike structures involved in the gag reflex (like they use in hospitals when someone is fed through a nasogastric tube).
Now that you've phrase it like that I've gottah ask. We're friends, you can PM me. I'll try not to be too jealous. 



LillyBBBW said:


> The machine hypothetically would be cleaned the same way all dairy farms and food processing plants clean their machines. They run a cleaning solution through them and then flush them with heated distilled water after each use. Still, such a machine would not be compatable with living beings. It would only be for show with properties no more intricate than a funnel and a tube with no mechanical force.



The machine _you_ would build. Have a little faith that humanity and technology has advanced to the point that someone could use things like pressure sensors, feedback loops, and expert knowledge to make a machine that could be used safely and pleasantly by two willing - and possibly well-trained - adults. 
Machines already exist to feed and force-feed people and animals. Sometimes when one gets intubated, it's hooked up to a pump. Someone has got to have called one of those a, "feeding machine" by now. There's also the apparatus used for gavage which - though not particularly humane, safe, or (presumably) fun - has worked pretty well for quite some time. I don't know the mortality rate from choking, but I imagine it wouldn't be too high.


----------



## NancyGirl74 (Sep 11, 2011)

Totmacher said:


> Machines already exist to feed and force-feed people and animals. Sometimes when one gets intubated, it's hooked up to a pump. Someone has got to have called one of those a, "feeding machine" by now. There's also the apparatus used for gavage which - though not particularly humane, safe, or (presumably) fun - has worked pretty well for quite some time. I don't know the mortality rate from choking, but I imagine it wouldn't be too high.




Feeding tubes are inserted directly into the stomach and strictly regulated. They can cause infection quite often. Many times people lose weight rather than gain because they are not getting the kind of nutrients needed. Plus, to constantly fill the stomach could be deadly. Another fun little something to think about...what goes in must come out. If you are on a liquid diet you are going to be shitting water which could lead to sores and more infections. Choking happens when the tube gets pulled and the liquid food is not going directly into the stomach. The person may begin to cough and spew their own food into their lungs. 

Although it might be fun for some to "play at" or fantasize about...The reality of a feeding tube is very, very different. I hope no one ever ends up on one.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 11, 2011)

NancyGirl74 said:


> Feeding tubes are inserted directly into the stomach and strictly regulated. They can cause infection quite often. Many times people lose weight rather than gain because they are not getting the kind of nutrients needed. Plus, to constantly fill the stomach could be deadly. Another fun little something to think about...what goes in must come out. If you are on a liquid diet you are going to be shitting water which could lead to sores and more infections. Choking happens when the tube gets pulled and the liquid food is not going directly into the stomach. The person may begin to cough and spew their own food into their lungs.
> 
> Although it might be fun for some to "play at" or fantasize about...The reality of a feeding tube is very, very different. I hope no one ever ends up on one.



^^ Yes, this. There are manual feeding methods that are administered to people either because they cannot or they refuse to eat. These methods are emphatically unsexy, mainly for the end user. If the person is into it, the best parts of the experience for them will bypass them altogether and you have nothing. Bypassing a gag reflex and feeding directly through the side of the neck or into the stomach will not stop the brain's function in regulating eating. The brain gets signals from the body, organs, etc. and will stop the feeding by any means necessary. You'll have dumping, vomiting, etc. The subject would be killed. It's not like breathing. Breathing is rythmic and can be monitored and measured. There are too many organs and mechanics involved with eating and no machine can take the place of the brain which receives impulses from these organs and acts accordingly independent of free will and at far too random intervals to be anticipated. It won't work.


----------



## Totmacher (Sep 14, 2011)

Slightly off-topic, but I'd like to state my distaste for the tact of burying anything you don't like or understand in (in my opinion unfunny) snark. Personally I find the most equitable response to be not commenting on threads that have taken a turn for the unreadable and let people I don't agree with have their fun or the mods do their job. All this snark-spam really does is frustrate anyone who's actually trying to read the thread.




NancyGirl74 said:


> Feeding tubes are inserted directly into the stomach and strictly regulated. They can cause infection quite often. Many times people lose weight rather than gain because they are not getting the kind of nutrients needed. Plus, to constantly fill the stomach could be deadly. Another fun little something to think about...what goes in must come out. If you are on a liquid diet you are going to be shitting water which could lead to sores and more infections. Choking happens when the tube gets pulled and the liquid food is not going directly into the stomach. The person may begin to cough and spew their own food into their lungs.
> 
> Although it might be fun for some to "play at" or fantasize about...The reality of a feeding tube is very, very different. I hope no one ever ends up on one.



Thanks for your post. I have now _thoroughly_ considered that a tube-in feeding machine probably shouldn't be your feedee's sole form of nourishment. I realize that placing a feeding tube is not someone someone should venture into lightly, but I still believe a tube-feeding is something that can be done safely and enjoyably. Now, hopefully we can get back to our hypothetical discussion. 
I am well aware of the realities and risks of the process and have no intention of deceiving anyone about them. Just because someone knows what you know does not mean that one will draw the same conclusions. I'd also like to point out that the Funnel-and-Tube style machine where the feedee still has to swallow is still perfectly viable in light of all this. 
I agree. I hope nobody ends up needing a feeding tube. Except, perhaps, Dromond. 



LillyBBBW said:


> ^^ Yes, this. There are manual feeding methods that are administered to people either because they cannot or they refuse to eat. These methods are emphatically unsexy, mainly for the end user. If the person is into it, the best parts of the experience for them will bypass them altogether and you have nothing. Bypassing a gag reflex and feeding directly through the side of the neck or into the stomach will not stop the brain's function in regulating eating. The brain gets signals from the body, organs, etc. and will stop the feeding by any means necessary. You'll have dumping, vomiting, etc. The subject would be killed. It's not like breathing. Breathing is rythmic and can be monitored and measured. There are too many organs and mechanics involved with eating and no machine can take the place of the brain which receives impulses from these organs and acts accordingly independent of free will and at far too random intervals to be anticipated. It won't work.



Again, first and foremost, nothing you've said has any bearing on the concept of a Funnel-and-Tube machine. That's still a perfectly viable design to discuss and pursue.
How do you know what parts of the experience the feedee in this experiment would be into? How are you so sure the human body is completely against the feeding process? Why would you be feeding someone through the side of the neck? I understand that the construction of a machine to feed someone and its operation would be delicate processes, but I fail to see how such a machine is doomed to result in the death of the "end user" before said user and the operator would be able to stop it. Your more dire warnings do not jive with anything I have read or experienced about tube-feeding and if you choose not to share why you believe what you believe I'll be forced to guess and I'm sorry, but I can't come up with a plausible good reason.


----------



## Blackjack (Sep 14, 2011)

You're approaching this mechanically and not treating the theoretical feedee as a person but rather as a receptacle. I understand that this is a fetish and that some people are into it (hell, I like the general idea), but by de-humanizing the person in question you're fully deserving of the flack you're getting for it. _Particularly from actual feedees_.

But keep chugging along and wishing violence on those who would dare question your judgement in this. Covering your ears and going "LALALALA YOU'RE NOT INTO IT YOU DON'T GET A SAY" seems like a better plan than actually listening to anything that people are saying.


----------



## Lou Grant (Sep 14, 2011)

Please note this thread has been moved to a protected area. If you had a post that is no longer here it is most likely under review for potential infraction.

An open discussion with differing points of view is fine. Sarcastic nonsense meant to derail the discussion because you don't like what is being discussed is not. Hopefully everyone involved is mature enough to know the difference going forward.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 14, 2011)

Totmacher said:


> Slightly off-topic, but I'd like to state my distaste for the tact of burying anything you don't like or understand in (in my opinion unfunny) snark. Personally I find the most equitable response to be not commenting on threads that have taken a turn for the unreadable and let people I don't agree with have their fun or the mods do their job. All this snark-spam really does is frustrate anyone who's actually trying to read the thread.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Totmacher you seem to be clinging to your beliefs and completely unwilling to consider personal experiences and practical applications here. I've divulged everything I'm am willing to at this time and I honestly don't think exposing myself further would make any difference so carry on as you wish. I dont' think you will be satisfied untill you see for yourself, which at this point I would highly recommend. Crawl up under your funnel feeding machine and have at it. Seriously. Don't divise what can be safe and satisfying and wonderful for someone else until and unless you are willing to demonstrate from personal experience. And don't forget to post pics.


----------



## KHayes666 (Sep 14, 2011)

Apparently people are disgusted by feeding machines and the mindset that go along with it.

I think this is cause for celebration.

*picks up a feeding tube hooked up to a jug of Vodka*

Who's taking the first shot?


----------



## joswitch (Sep 14, 2011)

Man enjoys hat of beer.


----------



## The Orange Mage (Sep 20, 2011)

I got your feeding machine RIGHT HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGH-AvVa8c4


----------



## KHayes666 (Sep 20, 2011)

The Orange Mage said:


> I got your feeding machine RIGHT HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGH-AvVa8c4



Impeccable feeding machine


----------



## LillyBBBW (Sep 20, 2011)

The Orange Mage said:


> I got your feeding machine RIGHT HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGH-AvVa8c4



_"You must spread some Reputation before giving it to The Orange Mage again."​_
Your eager feedee beckons. heehee

http://youtu.be/Cxj_-RGAxWM


----------



## russianrobot (Sep 20, 2011)

I posted this on the Main Board. thought it might be more relevant here.

*From &#8216;The Thing’ #15 Jul-Aug 1954 Charlton Comics (Family Mix-Up) Writer/Artist Steve Ditko
*

_So Jack Sprat could eat no fat, His wife could eat no lean….
So Jack built a feeding machine & killed his wife for insurance fraud._

Before even considering building something like this might I suggest the most excellent story archives here at Dimensions for any kind of Fat filled Fantasy you might desire. The building of a device as shown in Mr. Ditko’s art in real life will most probably cause the death of the subsequent end user. Whether it is corn starch, chocolate pudding or whatever one might put in it, just don’t do it.

In all fairness the poor woman does get her revenge & squashes her husband to death. Anyway interesting stuff from the co-creator of Spiderman. 

View attachment glugglug.jpg


View attachment mort.jpg


----------



## Rickgm (Sep 28, 2011)

My whole take (and answer to the questions posed) depends entirely on whether the OP was talking about a "literal" feeding machine with the sole purpose of mechanically fattening a person OR if he was thinking in terms of some sort of erotic foreplay. Surely the idea of feeding someone like this is absurd in reality, but in the context of erotic role play, with the proper precautions, it is entirely feasible. We have already seen it depicted on some pay sites.


----------



## Totmacher (Oct 1, 2011)

LillyBBBW said:


> Totmacher you seem to be clinging to your beliefs and completely unwilling to consider personal experiences and practical applications here. I've divulged everything I'm am willing to at this time and I honestly don't think exposing myself further would make any difference so carry on as you wish. I dont' think you will be satisfied untill you see for yourself, which at this point I would highly recommend. Crawl up under your funnel feeding machine and have at it. Seriously. Don't divise what can be safe and satisfying and wonderful for someone else until and unless you are willing to demonstrate from personal experience. And don't forget to post pics.



You _never_ said you had any personal experience in the matter. You only said that you had mysterious and intimate knowledge the origins of which you would not reveal. If you're not willing to tell us what your personal experience is or why it trumps my personal experience then there's really no reason to believe you, is there? 



Blackjack said:


> You're approaching this mechanically and not treating the theoretical feedee as a person but rather as a receptacle. I understand that this is a fetish and that some people are into it (hell, I like the general idea), but by de-humanizing the person in question you're fully deserving of the flack you're getting for it. _Particularly from actual feedees_.



I've thought about this on and off for quite some time now and I really have no clue where you're getting these ideas. I'm pretty sure it's just prejudice, hearsay, or a failed attempt at humor because I certainly didn't _say_ any of them. IIRC I've only caught flack from one feedee and she has her own issues which she will not, under any circumstances, reveal. I would appreciate it if you could explain to me how the inclusion of a mechanism to assist in the feeding process - with the appropriate kill-switches in easy reach of all involved; over-pressure cutoffs, and safety measures - is de-humanzing. Show me where anyone is being compelled to do things against his or her will.



Blackjack said:


> But keep chugging along and wishing violence on those who would dare question your judgement in this. Covering your ears and going "LALALALA YOU'RE NOT INTO IT YOU DON'T GET A SAY" seems like a better plan than actually listening to anything that people are saying.



I find it sardonically amusing that you accuse me of attempting to drown out alternate opinions because that is exactly how I feel many of the posters on this thread are responding me. All I've done is suggest the idea is plausible and get attacked for it.



Rickgm said:


> My whole take (and answer to the questions posed) depends entirely on whether the OP was talking about a "literal" feeding machine with the sole purpose of mechanically fattening a person OR if he was thinking in terms of some sort of erotic foreplay. Surely the idea of feeding someone like this is absurd in reality, but in the context of erotic role play, with the proper precautions, it is entirely feasible. We have already seen it depicted on some pay sites.



What is the difference between, "erotic role play" and, "reality" in this context? I think that's an issue this thread has run into quite a bit over its lifetime. What makes a funnel-vid you _shot_ in reality unreal?


----------



## Rickgm (Oct 2, 2011)

Totmacher said:


> What is the difference between, "erotic role play" and, "reality" in this context? I think that's an issue this thread has run into quite a bit over its lifetime. What makes a funnel-vid you _shot_ in reality unreal?



If you don't know the difference between forcibly feeding someone and erotic foreplay then I don't know what to say.


----------



## Totmacher (Oct 4, 2011)

Rickgm said:


> If you don't know the difference between forcibly feeding someone and erotic foreplay then I don't know what to say.



Was that really necessary  ? I'm aware of the dictionary definitions of those terms, but those don't seem to be the generally accepted ones around here. I'm just curious what _your_ definitions are.


----------



## Rickgm (Oct 6, 2011)

Totmacher said:


> Was that really necessary  ? I'm aware of the dictionary definitions of those terms, but those don't seem to be the generally accepted ones around here. I'm just curious what _your_ definitions are.



Sorry... I wasn't trying to be mean or anything. I just don't know how to respond to that question. It's like playing army vs being in combat.


----------

