# Catfish 1



## moniquessbbw (Mar 1, 2014)

http://moniquejurgen.blogspot.com/2014/02/catfish-1.html 
This new segment of my Blog is very entertaining and no one gets pushed off a bridge.


----------



## penguin (Mar 1, 2014)

FYI catfish =/= creeper.


----------



## The Orange Mage (Mar 1, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> http://moniquejurgen.blogspot.com/2014/02/catfish-1.html
> This new segment of my Blog is very entertaining and no one gets pushed off a bridge.



If anyone gave a crap you wouldn't have to link this shit here.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 1, 2014)

The Orange Mage said:


> If anyone gave a crap you wouldn't have to link this shit here.



Speak for yourself! People who catfish are irritating to me.


----------



## Marlayna (Mar 1, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> http://moniquejurgen.blogspot.com/2014/02/catfish-1.html
> This new segment of my Blog is very entertaining and no one gets pushed off a bridge.


Great read. You sure don't have patience for fakers.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Mar 1, 2014)

The Orange Mage said:


> If anyone gave a crap you wouldn't have to link this shit here.



Based on your responses to her in the thread that was closed here recently, one would think you'd find no need to look at her posts.


----------



## tonynyc (Mar 1, 2014)

wrestlingguy said:


> Based on your responses to her in the thread that was closed here recently, one would think you'd find no need to look at her posts.



Well Phil given the feelings of joy and such that was expressed by many in that discussion and this being an "open" forum and all...anything is bound to happen. We shall have to see what develops as others continue to chime in...


----------



## J34 (Mar 1, 2014)

I wish there was a way to separate like the different posts or interactions on the page/blog. Looked like a run-on conversation.

Yeah, there are a lot of fake people online, no surprises there. Its actually way worse for guys with tons of fake women profiles. Plus "txt talk" is a clear indicator of a fake profile. No excuse for not being able to write a complete sentence.


----------



## moniquessbbw (Mar 1, 2014)

J34 said:


> I wish there was a way to separate like the different posts or interactions on the page/blog. Looked like a run-on conversation.
> 
> Yeah, there are a lot of fake people online, no surprises there. Its actually way worse for guys with tons of fake women profiles. Plus "txt talk" is a clear indicator of a fake profile. No excuse for not being able to write a complete sentence.



What is text talk? I don't know what the fake women are doing. Do they come up with the same BS as the fake men do? It also has the date and says conversation started between each one.

FYI Mage no one is forcing you to read it. Notice you were the first negative response. It might all go down hill from here but hey I tried. By the way people all over the world read my Blog. I post here because I do have plenty of friends here. They know who they are.


----------



## cinnamitch (Mar 1, 2014)

Keep giving these creeps hell Monique. I quit using yahoo messenger just because of shit like this.


----------



## J34 (Mar 1, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> *What is text talk? I don't know what the fake women are doing. Do they come up with the same BS as the fake men do?* It also has the date and says conversation started between each one.
> 
> FYI Mage no one is forcing you to read it. Notice you were the first negative response. It might all go down hill from here but hey I tried. By the way people all over the world read my Blog. I post here because I do have plenty of friends here. They know who they are.



The text talk is just like this- "u look gud hun, wutz up", Well I guess you can take it from there where the conversation is headed. Yeah more or less the same thing, more often than not it is men pretending to be women. Such a sad state of things.

I took a look at it again, might be the dark background making it a bit hard to see the dates. No big issue really.


----------



## CastingPearls (Mar 1, 2014)

Monique, I would say don't let anyone stifle or suppress you, but I know you've got that already covered.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 2, 2014)

J34 said:


> I wish there was a way to separate like the different posts or interactions on the page/blog. Looked like a run-on conversation.
> 
> Yeah, there are a lot of fake people online, no surprises there. Its actually way worse for guys with tons of fake women profiles. Plus "txt talk" is a clear indicator of a fake profile. No excuse for not being able to write a complete sentence.



hmmm this is an interesting thought. i think women are most likely to be catfished in terms of being approached by men pretending to be single or without a relationship. i do think men are catfished a whole lot. but the strange thing is that as BBWs go we are really most likely to have our pix stolen and used by straight men with other straight men. don't let that set your hair on fire  i'm not sure if that occurs as much in the average sized world. and i have absolutely no clue why. if anybody has any theories about that i'd sure love to know.

one case here, we were catfished for years chatting by a guy who put up a thin pic of himself. i always thought that was really odd. but he was not the only one for sure. there were also several who were a lot older or not as muscular as they once were in their pix. i do think society makes it easier for men to catfish because they are much less likely to be called on putting up thinner or younger pix or are always making excuses for not having one at all while asking for ours. i have never seen a woman do that but then again i've never looked for women. as an older woman i'd say it's pretty common for guys my age to show 10 or 15 yr old pix and act like it's a non issue. it's as though women really don't have the same right to judge at all by physical appearance. it might not be that men are catfished more but just they are more verbal about it when it does happen because they feel more entitled and society expects the to actually be more entitled to have a woman look exactly like her pix.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 2, 2014)

The Orange Mage said:


> If anyone gave a crap you wouldn't have to link this shit here.



you don't have to click on it


----------



## lucca23v2 (Mar 3, 2014)

The Orange Mage said:


> If anyone gave a crap you wouldn't have to link this shit here.



Let's see if I can respond to this with more respect for you than you had for Monique.

It is very clear you do not like what she has to say. Which is ok because everyone has a right to their feelings and is allowed to express them as long as you are respectful in expressing that opinion. I know you may still be mad over things expressed in the other thread, but we are all adults. ( I hope) We should be able to take a breath and calm down and not keep attacking.

If you did not care about what this person had to say or you didn't want to read anything they had to say, you could have avoid the thread all together. (Given that you can see who started the thread- or does that ony appear for me? - I think not. You could have completely avoided reading anything or the unnecessary drama- Sorry this last part might be a bit harsh)

Just my thoughts.


----------



## ScreamingChicken (Mar 3, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> it might not be that men are catfished more but just they are more verbal about it when it does happen because they feel more entitled and society expects the to actually be more entitled to have a woman look exactly like her pix.



I am not seeing at all how entitlement factors in to the equation when calling "BS" on the way someone has presented themselves, whether it is their physical appearance or their personal background.

Where is all this male entitlement coming from? I guess my male predecessors failed to clue me and the good majority of the men of my generation in on our birthright <sarcasm>...in fact, I was always taught that in dating and relationships, the power lies in the female. Forty years on this Earth and observing what I saw around me pretty much reinforces that opinion. 


As for catfishing...men can lie women; women can lie. Neither sex has the high ground of moral superiority when it comes to this sort of thing. No one sex is the victim here.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 3, 2014)

ScreamingChicken said:


> I am not seeing at all how entitlement factors in to the equation when calling "BS" on the way someone has presented themselves, whether it is their physical appearance or their personal background.
> 
> Where is all this male entitlement coming from? I guess my male predecessors failed to clue me and the good majority of the men of my generation in on our birthright <sarcasm>...in fact, I was always taught that in dating and relationships, the power lies in the female. Forty years on this Earth and observing what I saw around me pretty much reinforces that opinion.
> 
> ...



i'm not saying one sex is. but what i am saying is that men are not called on it nearly as much. and that women are supposed to forgive it or be silent about it. in fact when they do call it out they are treated like Monique has been on this thread and others. we are not even supposed to talk about it or somehow we are a bad person. but in contrast a web model or anybody else remotely available online is called out and dressed down out in the open in public if she doesn't actually gain weight per fantasy or if she ever has any kind of WLS and even attempts to lose a little weight on her own or in any way deviates from what people even think she should be much less from what she says she is. the evidence of that is even here on this forum so there is no argument about that. 

of my friends i've met online (both here and elsewhere) the guys are much more likely to be older or fatter poorer etc... than they pretend they are online. guys are also most likely to post profiles without pix at all on dating sites. i don't know too many BBWs like myself who are very likely to have their pix stolen by other women but we are in constant danger of having them stolen by men and having them pretend to be us on social media. i know hardly any guys who've ever gone through that related to dating unless it's some nigerian trying to get women to send money. and, that is another type of catfishing that is actually also directed at misleading women.

i'm not quantifying victimhood here just stating a reality. the guys i have met online who were obviously catfishing it are still around with people feeling sorry for them and even daring people to call them out or even remind anyone of what they did --per the guy who chatted with us for years and lied to absolutely everyone about everything. but he is happily accepted at bashes like a lot of those guys are. there are guys with mental issues keeping them completely under raps and acting as though all of the things they say and do are rational and okay. that's the entitlement part. there is a lot of that going on, a lot of liars walking around out there entitled to do whatever it was again. which is exactly why a lot of guys who are attracted to fat women have to slog through so much paranoia when they try to flirt with somebody.

there are guys here now pretending to be doctors and lawyers. it's obvious to me that they aren't because none of the actual doctors or lawyers i know ever have that kind of time and they generally don't even care about the trivial stuff we talk about here because they do work where lives actually hang in the balance. i remember a while back someone who was an active poster here put himself out as a doctor and when i said i didn't think he was one and asked him how he had the time people jumped all over me. now there is someone here who has been posing as an attorney or a legal professional for years but i also know that he could not be. he has too much time too and says stuff an attorney would never say.

so don't get mad. i'm just telling you what our reality looks like from my perspective. if you want to make it into a man against woman thing go right ahead. that's your issue. but i do feel it obviously denotes a sense of entitlement when someone does something blatantly wrong and you can't even question it without being attacked first and solely.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 3, 2014)

i just wikied this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_differences_in_social_network_service_use


Despite these concerns about privacy, researchers have found that women are more likely to maintain up-to-date photos of themselves.[23][24] Further, Kolek and Saunders found that in their sample of college student Facebook users that women were more likely to not only post a photograph of themselves in their profile but they were more likely to have a publicly viewable Facebook account (a contradictory finding compared to many other studies), post photos, and post photo albums.[23]


----------



## Azrael (Mar 3, 2014)

Ehh..

That didn't really seem like catfishing more like the usual creepers that lurk on the internet.

As someone else has already mentioned there are ways of figuring out if they're a creeper or not, usually it's the whole "text talk" thing and what they type being the biggest giveaway.

ANYWAYS onto catfishing.

In regards to the whole thing I honestly never understood why reasonable people really did it (criminals, perverts, and FBI agents I can understand however).

I mean, if these people are going to meet others offline what's the damn point? Why post a picture of your younger self or of someone else since when you meet it will just result in disappointment and anger (at least in regards to dating sites)?

I am aware of the fact however that perverts usually do it in order to fool men into "sexy chat" and get their wank on. Sometimes it works, sometimes they're easily caught.

I am also aware of the fact that criminals do it in order to do a whole array of nasty sort of stuff. You know, child kidnapping, soliciting sex from minors, etc..

FBI agents do it however in order to basically fish for the former. As one of t the popular "rules of the internet" goes:

The Internet, where men are men, women are also men, and children are FBI agents

Beyond these, I don't really see why others would do it except for trolling.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 3, 2014)

ScreamingChicken said:


> I am not seeing at all how entitlement factors in to the equation when calling "BS" on the way someone has presented themselves, whether it is their physical appearance or their personal background.
> 
> Where is all this male entitlement coming from? I guess my male predecessors failed to clue me and the good majority of the men of my generation in on our birthright <sarcasm>...in fact, I was always taught that in dating and relationships, the power lies in the female. Forty years on this Earth and observing what I saw around me pretty much reinforces that opinion.
> 
> ...



also if males are not entitled why are women paid less for the same job. why did they get the vote centuries later than men did. why are we still having to fight about whether rape is right and over our ability to decide whether we procreate or not. why are we most like to be abused or impoverished along with our children. what you are taught has not borne itself out in how society actually works. it's a veneer. as young people we are taught a lot of things we might believe until we actually have experience of the world.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 3, 2014)

i'm not crazy about Dr Phil but...

http://www.drphil.com/articles/article/720

*Online Dating Red Flags: Warning Signs of a Catfish*

With more than 40 million men and women online looking for love, there are bound to be some scam artists out there.* A catfish is a person who creates a false online identity in the hopes of luring people into romantic relationships.* Nev Schulman starred in the 2010 documentary, Catfish, about being drawn in by a woman online claiming to be someone she wasnt. Now the executive producer of Catfish: The TV Show on MTV, he advises you to think before you begin your next online relationship. Look out for these early warning signs that your love interest may not be who they say they are: 


The Modeling Profession
If anyone says they are a model, watch out. It means that they are recognized as a very attractive person. If the person you are talking to says they are a model, but also has another amazing career, he or she may be too good to be true. Models are generally very busy and travel a lot. Also, it's easy enough for a scam artist to access model photos online and post as their own.

Facebook Profiles
If a persons profile has fewer than 100 friends, and more specifically, if there are photos of the person with other people but the other people arent tagged, be cautious. These may be pictures taken off an unsuspecting persons profile. 

Traumatic Injuries and/or Illness
We see car accidents, deaths in the family and cancer a lot in catfish scams. This is very common because the best way to avoid meeting up is by having a traumatic experience. It will make the other person say, Oh, my God, dont worry about meeting with me now. I will just wait until you are better. This is a way of tugging at your heartstrings and making you feel guilty. "Sympathy is an incredibly strong emotion," Nev says.

No Pictures
If a person cant immediately send you pictures of themselves in this day and age, then you should proceed with caution. "You've got to expect and require them to show you to some degree that this is who they are," he says.

No Webcam
If a person cannot get to a webcam after repeated requests and attempts, then this is an early potential warning sign that they are trying to avoid you seeing who they really are.


----------



## Fat Molly (Mar 3, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> http://moniquejurgen.blogspot.com/2014/02/catfish-1.html
> This new segment of my Blog is very entertaining and no one gets pushed off a bridge.



Yeah this is quite entertaining.  Thanks for doing troll-baiting (a little, or at least troll-occupying) so that these lads don't take advantage of real folks who aren't smart. :/


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 3, 2014)

*8 Types of Catfish on Catfish*
By Lindsey Weber and Jeanette D. Moses
http://www.vulture.com/2013/08/eight-types-of-catfish-the-tv-show.html


1. Opposite gender
This ones simple: You think youre dating a person of the gender to which your romantic preference leans, but thats not the case. For example, puppy-eyed Tyler was pretty devastated when he realized hed sent a dick pic to a gay man and not the pretty blonde Amanda Miller with whom he thought he was chatting. "There's always that chance that he's a guy," Tyler's BFFs unknowingly predicted before the episode's reveal. The shows very first episode featured Sunny, a southern gal who fell in love with a model named Jamison ... who turned out to actually be a girl named Chelsea. Not that this always prevents a happy ending: Tattooed Kya and Alyx (or, as it was discovered, Dani) remained a couple after meeting on VampireFreaks.com and then in real life  even though Alyx turned out to be female-to-male transgender. Good thing Kya didn't really care: "That's okay. I've been attracted to women before. ... It doesn't matter. I love this person, and that's all that I care about."

2. Revenge seeker
Used to be that people got revenge for themselves or their friends by egging their enemy's house. And then came the Internet, which made it possible to basically egg someone's heart. It's the harshest of long cons: Slowly build up an intimacy online by pretending to be a suitor, and then ultimately destroy the lovestruck by revealing your lie. Perhaps Catfishs most physically confrontational moment came in the fourth episode of season one, when it was discovered that Jasmines online boyfriend of over two years, Mike, was actually her exs ex, Mhissy, who wasn't ever clear on just why she thought Jasmine deserved this. The reveal was expectedly not-so-friendly, even making our list of the years top reality show freak-outs.

3. Right gender, wrong face
This is by far the most likely outcome, with often the cruelest ending: Sometimes, after it is revealed that the Catfish had been sending pictures of someone else, the pictorial fabulist's online love will want to stay friends, and more often theyll flip out  but there's rarely a romance. "Trina the Natural" thought Scorpio was a young stripper like her, but he was actually a 32-year-old with four kids (and no six-pack). Jarrod thought Abby Johnson was a cute blond (arent they all!) but she was Melissa, a bespeckled brunette with low self-esteem. And Dorion even put his actual girlfriend aside to pursue the model Jeszica, a vampy model he met through Facebook who turned to be a normal-looking girl named Alexis. These leave the viewer feeling saddest for the liar, seeing how someone's low self-esteem can lead them to submitting fake photos that will inevitably backfire. It's like watching a teen movie where the outcast removes her geeky glasses and the jock falls in love with her...but in reverse.

4. Right picture, wrong bio 
No one is actually a model, so when your Catfish turns out to be attractive but not as successful, does it really matter? Jamari (or James!) claimed to be a successful model, but was actually a bus driver. But Rico found him to be just as adorable as his pictures showed, and the two decided to try to make it work. 

5. One of your friends, who means well
Rose had feelings for her good friend Joe, but instead of professing her love, she instead Catfished him by playing Kari Ann"  using the identity of Miss Teen USA Kari Ann Peniche. When Joe discovered that he had been Catfished by the person he thought was his best friend, there was no movie script ending, just the end of a friendship. Sometimes protecting a friend from being self-destructive goes way too far: Cassies BFF Gladys Catfished her to make her happy so that she wouldn't go out and find trouble elsewhere. When Cassie discovered her online fiancé "Steven" was actually Gladys, she was devastated and when the episode ended, it was still going to take time for the two to repair their broken friendship. 

*6. Pickup Artists using the web as their Crossfit gym
PUAs, if you want to work on your moves, try an OKCupid profile. One of the only times that the perpetually upbeat Nev got truly heated was when he helped Jen discover that Skylar (the boy she met through an online game, and had been chatting with for months) was really an asshole named Bryan who was using the game to meet girls and work on his game. 
*
7. Catfished is also the Catfish
What happens when both people lie so shamelessly that they both become the Catfish? Read closely, because this is confusing. Rod was talking to a girl named Ebony, whom he met on a website for gays and bisexuals. And although Rod claimed to not be gay and not interested in guys, he didn't mind because Ebony claimed to be transgender. It all really didn't matter, though: Throughout their four-year relationship, Rod had been using pictures of his cousin and calling himself "KJ," just as Ebony (who was using her own photos and name) wasn't actually transgender. To make matters more complicated, Nev and Max discover that Ebony had been sending Rod money while he was unemployed, which is why he continued the relationship. Unsurprisingly, Rod didn't seem too upset about the revelation, though Ebony was. It didn't work out.

8. They are exactly who they claim to be
We all dreamed the day would come when Catfish and Catfishee would meet and reveal that there were no lies, just true love. This particular breed of Catfish proved to be the most elusive, until finally, in season two, Lauren, the single mom from Texas, met Derek from Maryland, the boy she met eight years before on MySpace, and they found each other to be, well, accurately each other. And it was boring and should never happen again.

number six sounds a lot like what goes on here


----------



## ScreamingChicken (Mar 3, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> also if males are not entitled why are women paid less for the same job. why did they get the vote centuries later than men did. why are we still having to fight about whether rape is right and over our ability to decide whether we procreate or not. why are we most like to be abused or impoverished along with our children. what you are taught has not borne itself out in how society actually works. it's a veneer. as young people we are taught a lot of things we might believe until we actually have experience of the world.


:doh:

Felicia, I am just going to walk away now rather than helping lead this thread straight down the toilet, where it will probably end up anyway.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 3, 2014)

ScreamingChicken said:


> :doh:
> 
> Felicia, I am just going to walk away now rather than helping lead this thread straight down the toilet, where it will probably end up anyway.



you know what the truth is. let's stop pretending. if you didn't know something you wouldn't have gotten so steamed and defensive in a civil convo. there is really not much drama there just facts that might be difficult to acknowledge.


----------



## penguin (Mar 4, 2014)

As expected, this thread is full of garbage.

You can be a creep without engaging catfish mode. Which, as I understand it, is pretending to be someone else/lying about parts of your life, for an extended time during a relationship. Being a creep with poor social skills and no idea how to flirt is NOT the same thing.

I don't know what the point of sharing that blog post was other than getting site hits and attention. It wasn't entertaining and there was nothing of value in it.


----------



## tonynyc (Mar 4, 2014)

penguin said:


> As expected, this thread is full of garbage.
> 
> You can be a creep without engaging catfish mode. Which, as I understand it, is pretending to be someone else/lying about parts of your life, for an extended time during a relationship. Being a creep with poor social skills and no idea how to flirt is NOT the same thing.
> 
> I don't know what the point of sharing that blog post was other than getting site hits and attention. It wasn't entertaining and there was nothing of value in it.



Well it is what it is... and at the end of the day individuals are free to decide what to make of this.


----------



## Wild Zero (Mar 4, 2014)

My favorite part in all the trolling of clueless creepy guys with limited English skills was when Monique showed her fat hate.



> I never said you starve BBW's from your page you are looking for SSBBW's and wondering why they are becoming extinct. They are dead like the dinosaurs. Nothing can live forever at 500 plus pounds.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 4, 2014)

A quick & dirty observation: I notice two distinct types of responses here. One on hand, there are those of us who actually know Monique, the whole (or just enough of) the situation/context of what shes saying and doing. Whore coming from a place of (informed) compassion. And who seem pretty fixed on letting what mistakes or miscues she presents fall by the way-side, as if unnoticed.

And then there are those of us whose innate sense of reason or logic will not allow us to move past certain points. Just from a practical standpoint. Whore, necessarily, seeing things beyond this particular case. We hate to be wrong and rarely are. And this is so much more tenable, to find all of the faults laid in plain-view.

For me, its not always such an easy choice. But my own experience (in however crudely attempting to diffuse certain types of situations) has lead me to seeing the importance of being demonstrative in how Im looking at each problem with a fresh set of eyes. To look at the entirety of the machine at work before following whichever wire indefinitely.

Right now, Monique feels a need to be heard. So, what I put to any of you is: 1) What do you suppose is most immediately driving that need? 2) Do you have a similar such need? 3)Whats most immediately driving yours? 4)How do those respective drives match-up? 5)Whats the common ground?


----------



## wrestlingguy (Mar 4, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> Right now, Monique feels a need to be heard. So, what I put to any of you is: 1) What do you suppose is most immediately driving that need? 2) Do you have a similar such need? 3)Whats most immediately driving yours? 4)How do those respective drives match-up? 5)Whats the common ground?



1. I would suggest asking Monique why she writes her blogs to get that answer. Others may have their own ideas, but if you want the truth, it would be best to put it to her, and see.

2. I started blogging for me. When I started, I had a lot of angst, and my therapist suggested blogging as a way to think through things, and chronicle my therapy, which involved lots of problems that I encountered with the sexually charged social part of the fat community. While my blogs have become more widely read (though I think you might have a hard time believing that they are), I don't consider the criticism of my blogs, because I still write them for me. I've lost "friends" as a result of my blogs, but I knew well in advance that some of my friends were simply around for the same reasons that Monique has discussed in her writings, which is, to further their own agendas or protect their personal interests.

3. The past year, some of the angst in my blogs have subsided. Just like life, we go through good and bad times. I strive to cover as much good as I do bad in my blogs. Driving me is exactly that. We can't always look at the world through rose colored glasses, but that doesn't mean that we need to be only negative or only positive in what we do/say. A week or so ago, I posted a blog about a plus sized pole dancer from Great Britain. I have friended her on Facebook, and we're discussing a size positive interview for my blog page.

4. I think I answered this in #3. My personal drive has moved from freeing my own mind from the issues I experienced in co-running the NJ BBW Bash, as well as relationships that I had with people in the fat community, to trying to address size acceptance, and motivate more people to become active in it.

5. I don't see a common ground, with the exception of my personal attraction to fat women, and being motivated to working towards fat/size acceptance after witnessing some of the horrible things that were said/done to people in my life that I care(d) for or love(d).


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 5, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> My favorite part in all the trolling of clueless creepy guys with limited English skills was when Monique showed her fat hate.



honey i got news for you. a lot of fat people are looking at their friends dropping like flies around them and feeling the very same way. it's not fat hate. it's fear that your friends who can't handle that size will die. and also anger at people who don't care about anybody but themselves and don't have a clue at all what it's like being that size pushing them in that direction. Monique was a very fat girl for a very long time and loved it. she is still fat. she still loves herself. she loves her fat friends. i'm fat and she has never preached at me about what i should do or anybody else that i know of. what she is sick of is people who are too cowardly to gain the weight themselves because they already know it isn't a cakewalk and pushing other people to do stuff that they really would like to do themselves.

she has grounds to be angry at people who are just plain old stupid. you have it twisted. she isn't the troll they are. who can blame her? it's about time people turned the tables on them --unless you like those jerks? yet again you are angry at the wrong people. don't lie. if people who wanted her to be thin were acting this way toward her you'd be all for it--no holds barred. your problem is that you relate to these guys and that is what makes you and others like you so angry. you have some thinking to do. i think a lot of you really worry that you relate so much that this makes you angry that you probably feel more affinity with them than you'd like deep down. you're not angry at Monique. the anger really isn't about her.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 5, 2014)

wrestlingguy said:


> "_1. I would suggest asking Monique why she writes her blogs to get that answer. Others may have their own ideas, but if you want the truth, it would be best to put it to her, and see._"


Well, my questions were really intended more as a kind of rhetorical exercise. For each of us to attempt to deal with & answer them for for ourselves. And to put some examination into how we've come to those answers. And-here, I'm not only talking about just why she's blogging, but also the sense of urgency through which she seems to be throwing so many of the normal conventions or rules or formalities by the wayside.

Obviously, I have my own answer. Just as I know you have yours. And, pressed on it, I don't think they're so far apart. Still:



wrestlingguy said:


> "_2. I started blogging for me....I had a lot of angst...a way to think through things, and chronicle...*I don't consider the criticism of my blogs, because I still write them for me. *_"


That's great, as far as a starting point. People who're extroverted, who tend to process things externally, can learn a lot, especially in the way of self-knowledge just from the process of putting word to page. I am that way too, even though I don't do it in the form of a blog. However, it doesn't really mean that criticism, even thinking very seriously about it, is an obstacle. In fact, strong, insightful, & well-considered criticism is often critical to ultimate development the theoretical type of ideas we tend to explore in our writing. 



wrestlingguy said:


> "_3. I strive to cover as much good as I do bad in my blogs. Driving me is exactly that. We can't always look at the world through rose colored glasses, but that doesn't mean that we need to be only negative or only positive in what we do/say._"


This was more by way of asking what's really at stake, should any of us, individually, just decide to overlook the how of what Monique's trying to do to collectively focus on the what. Again, for each person to answer for themselves.



wrestlingguy said:


> "_...to trying to address size acceptance, and motivate more people to become active in it._"


I guess my point-then is to point to how they way we deal with Monique will, at some level, fold into this. Or speak to it. 



wrestlingguy said:


> "_5. I don't see a common ground..._"


Yet. We know it's there. Since we're all here. It will take time, we have to give everyone else a chance to speak.


----------



## KHayes666 (Mar 5, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> honey i got news for you. a lot of fat people are looking at their friends dropping like flies around them and feeling the very same way. it's not fat hate. it's fear that your friends who can't handle that size will die. and also anger at people who don't care about anybody but themselves and don't have a clue at all what it's like being that size pushing them in that direction. Monique was a very fat girl for a very long time and loved it. she is still fat. she still loves herself. she loves her fat friends. i'm fat and she has never preached at me about what i should do or anybody else that i know of. what she is sick of is people who are too cowardly to gain the weight themselves because they already know it isn't a cakewalk and pushing other people to do stuff that they really would like to do themselves.
> 
> *she has grounds to be angry at people who are just plain old stupid. you have it twisted. she isn't the troll they are. who can blame her? it's about time people turned the tables on them --unless you like those jerks? yet again you are angry at the wrong people. don't lie. if people who wanted her to be thin were acting this way toward her you'd be all for it--no holds barred. your problem is that you relate to these guys and that is what makes you and others like you so angry. you have some thinking to do. i think a lot of you really worry that you relate so much that this makes you angry that you probably feel more affinity with them than you'd like deep down. * you're not angry at Monique. the anger really isn't about her.



No, what she's doing is blaming everyone for the actions of the few. Her last little party brought to light her disdain for ALL feeders because her ex husband was a piece of garbage. Now she's trying to say that most guys on the internet dating sites are like the autistic/retarded men that display no social skills when talking to her. Just like before, just because a few people suck now everyone sucks according to her.

Also, no, I can't relate at all to retarded FA's who message her saying "can I feed u? how much do u weigh?" or to the married men who hide the fact they are married. I also can't relate to the guys that are abusive to their spouses or to the guys that are on internet dating sites. Just because someone like Wild or Mage calls her out on her sometimes BS behavior doesn't mean they condone the dumbass FA's or abusive pricks' behavior as well.


----------



## Rebel (Mar 5, 2014)

The Orange Mage said:


> If anyone gave a crap you wouldn't have to link this shit here.



First I am stuck wondering how many fake profiles this Orange Mage person must have created to to have provided that much Rep to such an unpleasant foul-mouthed snot rag. If all those little ovals are a fair representation of what the collective membership of DIMENSIONS thinks of this person, I have seriously over-estimated our group as a whole.

Secondly, I believe that Monique has presented us with better, more interesting blogs in the past. I am sad to say that this one was really, really dull.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 5, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> *8 Types of Catfish on Catfish*
> By Lindsey Weber and Jeanette D. Moses
> http://www.vulture.com/2013/08/eight-types-of-catfish-the-tv-show.html
> 
> ...


There's a ninth type that seems fitting to include:

_9. Professes views or approach to life they don't really have in order to gain friends or develop relationships. 
Eventually their real views become known with a caustic effect on those who thought they knew the real person but are upset to find out they've been lied to._

This one is pertinent to our little community since so many webmodels are selling photos and videos touting a gainer lifestyle when they actually hate being fat, and in some cases are planning WLS. For some, they eventually go on to disparage the lifestyle they used to claim to support. That makes them like a drug pusher working on reforming themselves but who loudly complains about the drug users. At least some of these types of catfishers just quietly drift away without coming back to the catfished group to speak out against the views or lifestyle they used to appear to support.


----------



## Wild Zero (Mar 5, 2014)

I'm just glad that luminary posters like Supero and Monique have made dims a safe place to tell clueless fatties that they're going to drop dead. There aren't enough safe spaces on the internet for shaming the deathfats and I'm glad we've got this fun little community here.


----------



## lucca23v2 (Mar 5, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> I'm just glad that luminary posters like Supero and Monique have made dims a safe place to tell clueless fatties that they're going to drop dead. There aren't enough safe spaces on the internet for shaming the deathfats and I'm glad we've got this fun little community here.



Shaming is not a good thing. It may get the person to lose weight, but it can cause emotional and mental issues. 

Something that fixes one problem but creates more problems is not really a solution of a good thing.

Just my opinion


----------



## penguin (Mar 5, 2014)

Rebel said:


> First I am stuck wondering how many fake profiles this Orange Mage person must have created to to have provided that much Rep to such an unpleasant foul-mouthed snot rag. If all those little ovals are a fair representation of what the collective membership of DIMENSIONS thinks of this person, I have seriously over-estimated our group as a whole.



Seriously? There's so much wrong with this that I don't know where to start.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 6, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> There's a ninth type that seems fitting to include:
> 
> _9. Professes views or approach to life they don't really have in order to gain friends or develop relationships.
> Eventually their real views become known with a caustic effect on those who thought they knew the real person but are upset to find out they've been lied to._
> ...



i agree. that is a good one to add. there are a lot of people besides webmodels who are faking it though. they hate being fat and if there was a absolute skinny pill they'd take it right now today. but they are the very same people after folks who have WLS with a vengeance and always talking about how much they like being fat in public. some of that is slowing down because of Obamacare and they can also now suddenly spring for WLS too. 

you're right, there is a lot of desperation for attention at absolutely any cost. that is what we all have to watch out for. and that is why it's so important to steer clear of people with a lot of issues because no matter what they say today, tomorrow if they become dissatisfied they're going to make it all our fault no matter what. and, because we'll be dealing with someone who is probably not only dishonest with us but dishonest with themselves it might just be partially our fault because our attention will be what sends them down that road. the best thing is not to play that game at all. but saying so will not make sense to people whose fantasies get tweaked .

you know, i think that sometimes catfish is a mutually created thing and not one sided. if we are trying to find a person who will do/be whatever we tell them to we're already in trouble. control costs something. if anyone says it doesn't they are catfishing themselves. maybe the entire catfishing thing could be overcome if we just met people close by to face and got to know them without exposing them to our expectations and prescriptions so we could have a way to relax and find out who the real person is instead of wasting so much time online faking each other out. 

PS: i thought fetish was mainly fantasy? if it is why do web models have to gain weight for real and risk real health issues that might result? that isn't a fantasy. besides they aren't out there to have relationships with their customers. i think people here get confused a lot. that whole world is not real. it's not supposed to be. real people in real situations are real. real is not created in studios with lighting and marketing. real does not follow all your sexual fantasies to a T. that's where the trouble starts right there.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 6, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> I'm just glad that luminary posters like Supero and Monique have made dims a safe place to tell clueless fatties that they're going to drop dead. There aren't enough safe spaces on the internet for shaming the deathfats and I'm glad we've got this fun little community here.




but you can absolutely shame and name call anybody who dares to out someone doing something absolutely wrong or has the audacity to disagree with your own personal opinion and say some of the worst most nasty fat shaming things ever said here about BBWs and BHMs we've ever seen. who knew?


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 6, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> i agree. that is a good one to add. there are a lot of people besides webmodels who are faking it though. they hate being fat and if there was a absolute skinny pill they'd take it right now today.


NAAFA conducted a survey in the early 90's asking its members if there was a "skinny pill" if they would take it. About 80% to 90% responded "yes". That's why I'm not too surprised at the number of folks getting WLS. (Just the number seeking sympathy when the known complications actually happen to _THEM_.)



superodalisque said:


> you know, i think that sometimes catfish is a mutually created thing and not one sided. if we are trying to find a person who will do/be whatever we tell them to we're already in trouble. control costs something. if anyone says it doesn't they are catfishing themselves. maybe the entire catfishing thing could be overcome if we just met people close by to face and got to know them without exposing them to our expectations and prescriptions so we could have a way to relax and find out who the real person is instead of wasting so much time online faking each other out.



Careful, some will accuse you of blaming the victim. (But you're right.) If you replace "catfish" with "abuse", the issue becomes much clearer. 



superodalisque said:


> PS: i thought fetish was mainly fantasy? if it is why do web models have to gain weight for real and risk real health issues that might result? that isn't a fantasy. besides they aren't out there to have relationships with their customers. i think people here get confused a lot. that whole world is not real. it's not supposed to be. real people in real situations are real. real is not created in studios with lighting and marketing. real does not follow all your sexual fantasies to a T. that's where the trouble starts right there.


A fetish usually starts as a fantasy but over time it can become a goal to make it reality. That has gone on for most of the history of mankind. And I think fetish can be applied beyond sexual issues. Look at the fetish so many people have to be "average" weight, to conform to the herd - while proclaiming to be unique. 

I do think there are some of the web models who go get sexual gratification from being fatter, but I believe they are in the minority. I certainly celebrate them since it's that attitude that is the most appealing to a real FA. Having a fat partner who hates being fat is a dead end street for both people. Having a fat partner that celebrates their fatness _with you_ is deeply erotic. I just wish the ones that weren't really happy with their weight would just stop modeling. Web modeling never produces enough money for the model to offset the expenses. It's just not worth it unless you're just recording something you were already doing anyway for your own enjoyment. Then it becomes a hobby that helps offset _some_ of the expenses. Then the challenge is knowing when to say "when", and to have no regrets if you waited a little too long. 

We live in an era of artificial reality. Most people see audiovisual material as reality and not the property of a media company protected by copyright as it actually is. (It's one reason I object to the rich visual simulations used in court trials. I think most people see that as reality, at least as real as what they believe is reality, and not a simulation of what someone is suggesting happened.) The material web models produce is probably just as real to some of the viewers as whatever they watch on TV at the evening news. Add in the isolation some experience (both FAs and BBWs alike) and it is more desirable than their reality. And being a fantasy, it's custom fitted to _their_ fantasy without having to deal with the "annoying realities" of a partner with their own desires and needs. 

I'm actually somewhat surprised that there aren't more stalkers of web models being reported. After having been "stalked" by a BBW after my appearance on the Donahue show years ago, I suspect it's everywhere but underreported. (My "stalker" was very low key, she just tracked me down through the Donahue show and they contacted me by forwarding her letter with her phone number, which I did call. Looking back, it's a shame she didn't come across very well since she exhibited a lot of moxie by finding me. She couldn't hold up her end of the conversation and it was all over in less than five minutes. I guess she blew her energy on catching me but hadn't thought ahead to what to do with me once she caught me. It would be ironic if she was on Dims and was one of the more loquacious posters.)


----------



## Marlayna (Mar 6, 2014)

Any 200 pound men volunteering to carry around a 300 pound suitcase with them where ever they go, so they can see how much fun it is to weigh 500 pounds? People actually live that reality, not just fap to it.

Perhaps, some would be thrilled to have all of the Mo's rejects, a real live "man" is a terrible thing to waste, right? How dare she call out the liars and creeps, when some are starving for attention?


----------



## swordchick (Mar 6, 2014)

Maybe these situations in Monique's blog wouldn't be considered a catfish, those guys are lying creeps for sure. I am sure that I blocked the first guy years ago. I wish he would've told me to "fuck off". I would still be cussing his ass out right now.


----------



## tonynyc (Mar 6, 2014)

swordchick said:


> Maybe these situations in Monique's blog wouldn't be considered a catfish, those guys are lying creeps for sure. I am sure that I blocked the first guy years ago. I wish he would've told me to "fuck off". I would still be cussing his ass out right now.



*Getting back to Yakatori question and subsequent comments posted by Wrestlingguy- would you have started a Blog? 

As for me , I wouldn't have the time for blogging. Those that can and do find the time more power to them*


----------



## swordchick (Mar 6, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> *Getting back to Yakatori question and subsequent comments posted by Wrestlingguy- would you have started a Blog?
> 
> As for me , I wouldn't have the time for blogging. Those that can and do find the time more power to them*



No, I think it is time-consuming. Also, I do not want just anyone to have access to my life.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 6, 2014)

I had to look Catfish up. I don't watch TV so I'm not completely clear on the concept. I would imagine though if someone were going to Catfish they would claim to be a rich lonely oil tycoon looking to hide $1 million with a God fearing girlfriend or he's a rock guitarist for Nine Inch Nails. Not "hai baybee, ars yu?" Someone like that it seems clear we have nothing at all in common, I wouldn't even write back. Seems they are just guilty of being losers. Do we really have to fear people this lame? 

By the way, I was robbed at gunpoint in Singapore and had my wallet stolen. I need one of you to wire me $5000 via Western Union immediately. I promise I'll pay you back double when I return to the US.


----------



## cinnamitch (Mar 6, 2014)

Lilly, I will be happy to send you the money. I have some mysterious benefactor who named me in their will and as soon as I send them 2500 they will send me my money.



LillyBBBW said:


> I had to look Catfish up. I don't watch TV so I'm not completely clear on the concept. I would imagine though if someone were going to Catfish they would claim to be a rich lonely oil tycoon looking to hide $1 million with a God fearing girlfriend or he's a rock guitarist for Nine Inch Nails. Not "hai baybee, ars yu?" Someone like that it seems clear we have nothing at all in common, I wouldn't even write back. Seems they are just guilty of being losers. Do we really have to fear people this lame?
> 
> By the way, I was robbed at gunpoint in Singapore and had my wallet stolen. I need one of you to wire me $5000 via Western Union immediately. I promise I'll pay you back double when I return to the US.


----------



## Wild Zero (Mar 7, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> Any 200 pound men volunteering to carry around a 300 pound suitcase with them where ever they go, so they can see how much fun it is to weigh 500 pounds? People actually live that reality, not just fap to it.
> 
> Perhaps, some would be thrilled to have all of the Mo's rejects, a real live "man" is a terrible thing to waste, right? How dare she call out the liars and creeps, when some are starving for attention?



So the only way a partner can empathize with their significant other is by having the exact same body as them? You realize how foolish and insulting that sounds to couples feedist or not who are in mixed size relationships not to mention people who do weigh 500lbs that you're holding up as a misery fatty threshold. 

Oddly enough when I incorporate ruck hikes into my exercise routine I'm carrying 75-100lbs more than my wife weighs over several miles. It's a fun, challenging workout; I go to a town forest, climb a few hills and when I get back to my car I put the bag in the trunk and my body feels so light I feel like float away. 

Does the experience make me empathize with fatter people? Not really, I've already had that empathy thanks to years with my wife and all the friendships I've made thanks to the good place Dimensions used to be before most of the decent people moved onto Facebook and fat hating trolls with their arbitrary limits on acceptable fatness such as yourself, Bigmac, Monique and Supero took over.


----------



## Marlayna (Mar 7, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> So the only way a partner can empathize with their significant other is by having the exact same body as them? You realize how foolish and insulting that sounds to couples feedist or not who are in mixed size relationships not to mention people who do weigh 500lbs that you're holding up as a misery fatty threshold.
> 
> Oddly enough when I incorporate ruck hikes into my exercise routine I'm carrying 75-100lbs more than my wife weighs over several miles. It's a fun, challenging workout; I go to a town forest, climb a few hills and when I get back to my car I put the bag in the trunk and my body feels so light I feel like float away.
> 
> Does the experience make me empathize with fatter people? Not really, I've already had that empathy thanks to years with my wife and all the friendships I've made thanks to the good place Dimensions used to be before most of the decent people moved onto Facebook and fat hating trolls with their arbitrary limits on acceptable fatness such as yourself, Bigmac, Monique and Supero took over.


I'm not "fat-hating", I'm MORON hating. C-ya!


----------



## Wild Zero (Mar 7, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> I'm not "fat-hating", I'm MORON hating. C-ya!



From your affiliation with a pro-ana forum I always knew you were inclined to self-hatred.


----------



## Marlayna (Mar 7, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> From your affiliation with a pro-ana forum I always knew you were inclined to self-hatred.


I don't have an "affiliation" with those who choose to starve themselves for an aesthetic they find beautiful. I read there occasionally, just like I do all sorts of places on the internet. Don't assume I hate myself, I don't. I do hate when I can't get down on the floor without pain, and can't get up without pulling myself up...but that's neither here nor there.

Since you like to hike and be big and strong, I suggest you help your wife with leg-lifts to build her thigh strength once her knees give out eventually, and will find walking painful. That's it, think what you like. I like the cat in your avvy, and I'm saying that to leave on a positive note. C-ya!


----------



## Wild Zero (Mar 7, 2014)

Ana-Shitheel, I've put you on ignore because if you're going to reply to someone engaging you on your bullshit fat hatred with pithy banter you're obviously not here for anything but trolling. If you've got a hurt in your feels over being called a self-loathing, moronic piece of shit troll hit the report button on my posts.


----------



## Marlayna (Mar 7, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> Ana-Shitheel, I've put you on ignore because if you're going to reply to someone engaging you on your bullshit fat hatred with pithy banter you're obviously not here for anything but trolling. If you've got a hurt in your feels over being called a self-loathing, moronic piece of shit troll hit the report button on my posts.


Thanks, I did. You have definite anger problems, find someone else to try to bully.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 7, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> Any 200 pound men volunteering to carry around a 300 pound suitcase with them where ever they go, so they can see how much fun it is to weigh 500 pounds? People actually live that reality, not just fap to it.
> 
> ...



Nicely put. Size acceptance doesn't require that we ignore the realities very large people face.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 7, 2014)

Taking both *Marlayna* and *Wild Zero* as _hipsters_ or _scene-kids_, fiercely (but without too-too much effort) guarding or defending "_a scene_" from whatever interlocuters or passersby. Not so unlike the dynamics between skiers and snowboarders. Or the innate rivalry of skateboarders versus stunt-bicyclists. Where each group's vitality necessarily depends on occupying all of the same space at the same time. Drawing upon the same limited pool of the most important resource (membership).

And-so each is quite sincere in making the same (even just by itself) paradoxical claim against the other:
That it's (primarily) "_the other_" which is still killing or destroying the once-vibrant "_scene._"
That "_the scene_" was, in fact, long-dead before they ("the other") invaded.
That they-personally (the "_hipster_" or "_scenester_") are somehow above all of this ("_I don't belong here_"/'_Well, I'll just take my wife with me & go back to facebook, where they don't have people like *YOU*_") and were-themselves never actually in "_the scene_" to begin-with or don't really care anyway.



LillyBBBW said:


> I had to look Catfish up....


Well, it disappoints me to hear that, since I did put a lot of effort into this post. Which also begs the question:

Do we really need this many different threads specific to the topic of "Catfish?" What, is "Catfish" the Benghazi of Dims-beyond-Hyde-Park?

Guys-seriously, just a quick topic-search before opening a new thread. A little respect for those of us who do so much to make this a destination of choice. 

Just for the sake of continuity, allowing these comments to reflect a deeper insight as part of a larger & ongoing thread. One necessarily inclusive of a wider range of participation and diverse viewpoints. To track a contiguously evolving progression of consensus and dissent as different events unfold over time. Instead of the random and seemingly infinite scattering of litter-encrusted cat-turds (of threads) we now have in its place. And each of those nuggets, by themselves, little more than a disjointed string of snarky comments.

Certainly, as *supero*'s (_et al._) helped us all to see, Monique is going through something. So, we can fairly give her a pass on some things. However, it shouldn't also necessarily mean that "Anything Goes?" Amiritie?


----------



## bigmac (Mar 7, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> NAAFA conducted a survey in the early 90's asking its members if there was a "skinny pill" if they would take it. About 80% to 90% responded "yes". That's why I'm not too surprised at the number of folks getting WLS. *(Just the number seeking sympathy when the known complications actually happen to THEM.)*
> 
> ...



And why shouldn't they seek support when things go bad. Functional communities support their members. I question the motives of people who cannot sympathize with the tribulations (including botched WLS) endured by fat people.


----------



## Marlayna (Mar 7, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Nicely put. Size acceptance doesn't require that we ignore the realities very large people face.


Thank you, size acceptance is very important to me. I've been part of the movement since the old NAAFA days. It wasn't easy to find a good job or nice clothes back then, but thankfully, things have gotten a lot better.
Anyway, as far as getting romantically catfished, I would automatically assume the other person is fake, until proven otherwise. 
The television show is interesting, and it amazes me how many people are taken in for so long. They want to believe the fantasy, and it must be easy to be taken in when they say all the right things.
The catfishers that use people for money and wipe out women's life savings are particularly abhorrent.
As far as Mo goes, she knocks the fakers out so fast, they don't even know what hit them. Good for her!


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 8, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> Thanks, I did. You have definite anger problems, find someone else to try to bully.




i've noticed that he really seems to enjoy bullying fat folk


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 8, 2014)

bigmac said:


> And why shouldn't they seek support when things go bad. Functional communities support their members. I question the motives of people who cannot sympathize with the tribulations (including botched WLS) endured by fat people.



because there are a number of people who aren't around to help or support anybody at all but only around to get their fantasy stroked. people needing help get in their way.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 8, 2014)

Are you sure about that? Because I don't quite see how the two things (people providing meaningful help and/or support versus people "getting-off") are so mutually exclusive. Just the mechanics of that are worth exploring.

You also asked before about why web-models necessarily had to gain in reality to meet some fetish. But I would speculate that, beyond a certain weight, anyone's mobility would diminish. And, therefore, it would then tend to be even more of a challenge just to keep continuing from gaining more weight rather to even have to try at gaining-it. And so, maybe there's an even greater or more daunting challenge there; really, a broader & underlying issue of public health; aside from who's ever "_catfishing_" or encouraging others to gain. 



superodalisque said:


> "_...some nigerian trying to get women to send money. and, that is another type of catfishing_"


That's not what Catfishing is. Nor is it just any old form of deception and/or gullibility. And, I think this speaks to the resistance you're coming up against. It's not how anyone is rejecting the basic substance of what you're trying to say, nor that they're trying to discredit Monique's story. It's the hucksterism. It's the disingenuous latching onto of whatever catchphrase-of-the-day to grab people's attention. The fear-mongering.

You can't have it both ways. You can't, out of one side of your mouth, warn people about something. Then, from the other, tell them to receive your point of view uncritically. It's not how things work. Its not effective. 

And, here, I would remind you of how you've also made the comparison of Size Acceptance to other subcultures dealing with a serious health crisis. But, in the examples you cited, was it always, necessarily such smooth transition? Have we yet imported all of the lessons necessary to be successful in that respect?

How would you compare your approach here to the types of approaches which have proven more successful in that respect?


----------



## tonynyc (Mar 8, 2014)

guess this thread has morphed into other "stuff"


----------



## KHayes666 (Mar 8, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> guess this thread has morphed into other "stuff"



yup, now apparently internet email scams to send money to foreign countries are FA's fault too. What's next?


----------



## lucca23v2 (Mar 8, 2014)

KHayes666 said:


> yup, now apparently internet email scams to send money to foreign countries are FA's fault too. What's next?



lol......you know that fat people and those that love them are responsible for everything that is wrong in the world.


----------



## Wild Zero (Mar 8, 2014)

KHayes666 said:


> yup, now apparently internet email scams to send money to foreign countries are FA's fault too. What's next?



Human trafficking? Oh wait...


----------



## shy guy (Mar 8, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> Human trafficking? Oh wait...



The falling us dollar?


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 8, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> Are you sure about that? Because I don't quite see how the two things (people providing meaningful help and/or support versus people "getting-off") are so mutually exclusive. Just the mechanics of that are worth exploring.
> 
> You also asked before about why web-models necessarily had to gain in reality to meet some fetish. But I would speculate that, beyond a certain weight, anyone's mobility would diminish. And, therefore, it would then tend to be even more of a challenge just to keep continuing from gaining more weight rather to even have to try at gaining-it. And so, maybe there's an even greater or more daunting challenge there; really, a broader & underlying issue of public health; aside from who's ever "_catfishing_" or encouraging others to gain.
> 
> ...



in this case the two are mutually exclusive in the way they work themselves out IRL. one group preferring something insisting that their fantasy become reality in ways that exact too much of a price from another group. one group accepting all of the risk while the other only watches. 

it does not benefit web models enough materially to actually gain the amount of weight that many expect. firstly being a web model cannot support someone in having a decent life. it is only something that could perhaps augment someone's income. so that means if they did become even somewhat disabled by their weight it would make it extremely difficult to support themselves.

of course anyones mobility could diminish beyond a certain size, but that does not stop the fact that people say they are in that for the fantasy. people gaining for real is not a fantasy. the webmodel involved would be gaining for real to suit them. the impact of that gain would be real. i find the fact that has to be explained at all pretty odd.

when it's not enough for people to engage in role playing and talk they have taken their fetish out of the realm of fantasy. people often say "it's JUST a fantasy". expecting real gain and being angry when it's not accomplished is NOT just a fantasy. it's an act of avoidance to say that it is. it would not matter at all whether weight gain was the model's or the customer's responsibility if and there was no baiting blaming grumbling or criticism if web models are not gaining weight IRL. after all if one model is not big enough another is --right?

women who are not web models are also subjected to that kind of criticism and push even when they aren't trying to gain and make it clear it's not and never will be their intention. i can speak to that myself, complete with people assuming you don't already have a relationship and that they are holding one out to you as bait but only if... people have to understand appropriate boundaries. and the boundary between fantasy and reality is constantly being pushed even against the wishes of the people who are unwilling objects of that fetish. being cognizant of what is real and what isn't and the difference between the two avoids even the feeling of being catfished. 

as to the person i was responding to i think you might just have it a bit backward. some people tend to think that their attentions will make people like their fat bodies. somebody fat might think that in the beginning. but actually nobody can make you feel anything about yourself. that is a journey you have to take on your own. it comes from the inside and not the outside. some people are meant to be fat and like it and some people are not. it's just that simple. and no level of wishfishing is going to change that. he would be a lot less disappointed if he took the time to find out how someone really feels. after all a woman can be trying really hard to like who she is fat--especially in a community that literally threatens them with expulsion if they even talk about dieting or WLS an ill literally unfriend or shun you even if you want to lose just a small percentage of your weight to physically enable yourself. so actually the community is helping to catfish itself by enforcing a silence that would keep someone's true feelings secret or suppressed. after all we do know that a huge percentage of fat people would take the skinny pill. that alone should inform someone about the real state of affairs and that they should be careful in an environment that officially doesn't foster honesty or tolerance and where support and friendship are for the most part conditional. 

but in defense i know it must be hard for folk who have spent their entire lives wishing for the kinds of relationships or sexual experiences they've always dreamed of, so it can be easy to delude themselves. that's only human. but you're faking yourself out if you think your love or attraction can change how someone thinks about themselves. they might feel that for a minute, until the endorphins wear off. a sixteen year old might believe that but an adult should know better.

actually the nigerian scam is the ultimate catfish. the payoff does not have to be just emotional or sexual it can be financial. and actually some of that catfishing is sexual because something not discussed in the media is how they get people to act out on cam sexually but no one wants to hear that about grandma and she is definitely not going to tell it. even though they may not use the possession of those occurrences as an overt threat it's used as a way to embarrass a victim so that they are less likely to seek legal recourse. catfishing occurs for all kinds of reasons in lots of different ways. the main thing is that there is a person misrepresenting themselves in one sense or another and using romance as a means or an end. it may not even matter if it does meets some narrow arbitrary definition of catfishing. all that really matters is that somebody feels wronged or used by someone who is purposefully or maybe even subconsciously deceptive in an online attempt at a relationship of some type. but on the whole the entire fat community is ripe for catfishing both intentional and unintentional because it has a hard time facing reality of any kind. 

i'm not saying people have to accept my point of view uncritically at all. but i also don't have to ignore the holes in their argument just because they want me to. if they want to criticize fine but at least try to make it make sense. tantrums don't make sense. 

and yes i have compared these groups to BDSM etc... and yes it was a rocky path. but they did not get there by suppressing criticism. the fact that it's not there yet doesn't mean there should be tolerance of issues that can be not only unrealistic but hurtful to both parties. as far as i know fat acceptance doesn't mean have to accept the bullshit


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 10, 2014)

bigmac said:


> And why shouldn't they seek support when things go bad. Functional communities support their members. I question the motives of people who cannot sympathize with the tribulations (including botched WLS) endured by fat people.


Would you similarly support someone who engages in self-mutilation with razor blades, then complains about getting infections? How about someone who downs six to eight drinks at a bar in a couple of hours then drives home and causes a wreck. WLS is an extension of that self-abuse mindset. They chose that action with negative outcomes that are statistically certain. Their bad situation is a result of their choices. It's not a random chance event that happened to a person innocently living their life.

I support anyone who wants to take the journey of self discovery required for weight loss, especially if it helps them overcome emotional issues born of abuse or sexual molestation. All too often WLS is seen as a fix by itself (vs. only the tool that is really is) and is putting the cart before the horse when underlying emotional issues still remain after WLS. In it's own way, WLS is just a continuation of their history of abuse since so many additional co-morbidities are being added in to the person's life in addition to the weight related ones. Let me state this clearly: I hate fat people being abused. I still suffer from the medical abuse (heart damage) I was subjected to as an adolescent (prescribed thyroxin, known to cause tachycardia) to help me lose weight. I see WLS as being no different and actually much worse.

I question the motives of those on a fat acceptance (or even a size acceptance) board who support WLS. The list of possible complications from WLS isn't a "win one from this list". It's a warning that you're extremely likely to get several of these complications from you choosing this as a solution. WLS is just like having an abusive partner implanted into your GI tract in order to be your food police so you can change your body. That's the antithesis of acceptance.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 10, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> it does not benefit web models enough materially to actually gain the amount of weight that many expect. firstly being a web model cannot support someone in having a decent life. it is only something that could perhaps augment someone's income. so that means if they did become even somewhat disabled by their weight it would make it extremely difficult to support themselves.
> 
> of course anyones mobility could diminish beyond a certain size, but that does not stop the fact that people say they are in that for the fantasy. people gaining for real is not a fantasy. the webmodel involved would be gaining for real to suit them. the impact of that gain would be real. i find the fact that has to be explained at all pretty odd.


And that's why I'm trying to get the idea across that they shouldn't gain unless it directly satisfies their personal interest. Otherwise it's an asymmetric relationship and it ends poorly for them. Unless they are a catfishing BBW model (one who says they love gaining and being fat, when they really don't), living the feedee lifestyle has costs that are too great unless they are getting gratification from the accumulation of fat. If it's to get approval, money or other indirect benefits it's just not worth it to them in the long run.

And if they are a catfishing BBW webmodel that eventually reveals their true colors of hating to be so fat, they shouldn't be surprised if some of their former fans turn on them. People don't take kindly to being lied to. Being lied to in a sexual situation (even if a fantasy) carries much greater risks. They should remember that no matter how badazz they are, there are more fans than them and they should ask themselves do they want to risk battles in their life for years afterwards for misrepresenting themselves. The underlying message is to be yourself online. Don't catfish.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Mar 10, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> I question the motives of those on a fat acceptance (or even a size acceptance) board who support WLS. The list of possible complications from WLS isn't a "win one from this list". It's a warning that you're extremely likely to get several of these complications from you choosing this as a solution. WLS is just like having an abusive partner implanted into your GI tract in order to be your food police so you can change your body. That's the antithesis of acceptance.



With that said, can I ask if you also question the motives of those on a size acceptance board who support intentional weight gain?

Let me be more clear with my question. This isn't a knock on Dimensions, more a descriptor, but there is a big difference between fat & size acceptance, and Dims isn't about size acceptance, at least to me. I don't think it was the intention when the site was started to have it support bodies of all sizes, not because those sizes were perceived as inferior, just because there was little in the way of fat positive by way of the internet when this site was launched.

Some of the leaders in the size acceptance movement are quick to make the distinction between fat & size acceptance, and many of them feel that feederism can't fit into size acceptance the same way that WLS can't, as there is an assumption that the person involved hasn't accepted their body.

So, from a size acceptance standpoint, would you feel the same way about those engaging in feederism as you do about those who seek WLS?


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 10, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> And that's why I'm trying to get the idea across that they shouldn't gain unless it directly satisfies their personal interest. Otherwise it's an asymmetric relationship and it ends poorly for them. Unless they are a catfishing BBW model (one who says they love gaining and being fat, when they really don't), living the feedee lifestyle has costs that are too great unless they are getting gratification from the accumulation of fat. If it's to get approval, money or other indirect benefits it's just not worth it to them in the long run.
> 
> And if they are a catfishing BBW webmodel that eventually reveals their true colors of hating to be so fat, they shouldn't be surprised if some of their former fans turn on them. People don't take kindly to being lied to. Being lied to in a sexual situation (even if a fantasy) carries much greater risks. They should remember that no matter how badazz they are, there are more fans than them and they should ask themselves do they want to risk battles in their life for years afterwards for misrepresenting themselves. The underlying message is to be yourself online. Don't catfish.



I once had a loyal fan who wanted me to post pictures of myself sticking my butt out while eating a pizza. I didn't do that because I didn't really want to, but there is something to be said for a person who is trying to keep the customer satisfied and fulfilling requests. I'm tending to disagree with you on the notion that a paysite model who is giving the customer what they want is somehow being dishonest if she suddenly decides to quit and make Zumba the way to go. There are models who are feedees but don't display that part of themselves in their brand because it's a private thing she wants to keep between her and her significant other. Some women generally tend to lose and gain through life's changes. She's put on a few pounds, probably doesn't like it but knows the customer will so she shares it. Modeling is a business. A model should be able to draw the line for herself but if the customer is happy I think that's as honest as you can expect really.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 10, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> Would you similarly support someone who engages in self-mutilation with razor blades, then complains about getting infections? How about someone who downs six to eight drinks at a bar in a couple of hours then drives home and causes a wreck. WLS is an extension of that self-abuse mindset. They chose that action with negative outcomes that are statistically certain. Their bad situation is a result of their choices. It's not a random chance event that happened to a person innocently living their life.
> 
> ...



Being human means people make less than perfect choices. Since humans live in a world of imperfect information their choices are even less perfect. Also, the course a person's life follows is often set while they are still a child or adolescent -- abuse and adversity often push people down wrong paths. 

So yes I would and do have compassion for damaged people. I'm grateful that for the most part my life's been pretty good. I'm aware of the relative privilege I've enjoyed. I don't expect everyone to make reasonable rational decisions all the time. Indeed given the deficiencies and pathologies of our country I expect that many many people will make bad decisions. What I do expect is that all people be afforded dignity and compassion.

Fat people who put their faith in the medical establishment cannot be faulted for that. Turning one's back on such people and screaming I told you so is mean spirited in the extreme.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 10, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> Thank you, size acceptance is very important to me. I've been part of the movement since the old NAAFA days. It wasn't easy to find a good job or nice clothes back then, but thankfully, things have gotten a lot better.
> Anyway, as far as getting romantically catfished,* I would automatically assume the other person is fake, until proven otherwise. *
> The television show is interesting, and it amazes me how many people are taken in for so long. They want to believe the fantasy, and it must be easy to be taken in when they say all the right things.
> The catfishers that use people for money and wipe out women's life savings are particularly abhorrent.
> As far as Mo goes, she knocks the fakers out so fast, they don't even know what hit them. Good for her!



People do indeed need to be prudent. However, most people with personal adds on reputable sites are indeed sincere. I did online dating for a few years and can say that the vast majority of people were -- for better or worse -- truthful and honest. The ones that did lie did so about trivial things (e.g. posting only old photos).

My advice is to meet IRL as soon as possible. A catfish is out of his or her element at the local coffee shop. Don't waste your time with anyone how refuses to meet IRL.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 10, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> Would you similarly support someone who engages in self-mutilation with razor blades, then complains about getting infections? How about someone who downs six to eight drinks at a bar in a couple of hours then drives home and causes a wreck. WLS is an extension of that self-abuse mindset. They chose that action with negative outcomes that are statistically certain. Their bad situation is a result of their choices. It's not a random chance event that happened to a person innocently living their life.
> 
> I support anyone who wants to take the journey of self discovery required for weight loss, especially if it helps them overcome emotional issues born of abuse or sexual molestation. All too often WLS is seen as a fix by itself (vs. only the tool that is really is) and is putting the cart before the horse when underlying emotional issues still remain after WLS. In it's own way, WLS is just a continuation of their history of abuse since so many additional co-morbidities are being added in to the person's life in addition to the weight related ones. Let me state this clearly: I hate fat people being abused. I still suffer from the medical abuse (heart damage) I was subjected to as an adolescent (prescribed thyroxin, known to cause tachycardia) to help me lose weight. I see WLS as being no different and actually much worse.
> 
> I question the motives of those on a fat acceptance (or even a size acceptance) board who support WLS. The list of possible complications from WLS isn't a "win one from this list". It's a warning that you're extremely likely to get several of these complications from you choosing this as a solution. WLS is just like having an abusive partner implanted into your GI tract in order to be your food police so you can change your body. That's the antithesis of acceptance.



is this the same reason the fat community does not support people who gain enough weight to become immobile ?


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 10, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> And that's why I'm trying to get the idea across that they shouldn't gain unless it directly satisfies their personal interest. Otherwise it's an asymmetric relationship and it ends poorly for them. Unless they are a catfishing BBW model (one who says they love gaining and being fat, when they really don't), living the feedee lifestyle has costs that are too great unless they are getting gratification from the accumulation of fat. If it's to get approval, money or other indirect benefits it's just not worth it to them in the long run.
> 
> And if they are a catfishing BBW webmodel that eventually reveals their true colors of hating to be so fat, they shouldn't be surprised if some of their former fans turn on them. People don't take kindly to being lied to. Being lied to in a sexual situation (even if a fantasy) carries much greater risks. They should remember that no matter how badazz they are, there are more fans than them and they should ask themselves do they want to risk battles in their life for years afterwards for misrepresenting themselves. The underlying message is to be yourself online. Don't catfish.



how can anyone catfish if it is a fantasy as a business? models of any kind do not have real relationships with customers, hence no catfishing is possible. any catfishing in that case is in the "fans' imagination because they are well aware to begin with what a model is and that she is selling something and not out there trying to have an actual relationship with fans just because she has a website. if that were true she'd be having a relationship with every last guy who ever fantasized over her photos. 

i think we should stop encouraging this blurring of real with fantasy. it's emotionally unhealthy for fans and it creates undue business pressure for women to actually gain. in a business you are not required to actually like or use your product as long as it is presented well. it's time for people consuming BBW porn to get a grip on reality. IT IS A BUSINESS. there should be not battles surrounding creating a sellable personae and trying to match them up to a models real life. a model's real life is actually absolutely none of your business. modeling is about taking a picture or making a video and being a muse to someone's imagination. it is not about actually becoming a fantasy character in reality in any way shape or form. 

there is something really wrong with somebody who expects them to have to BE the person they portray in character. it's like getting mad at an actor for not actually being the character. i know people do it all of the time but that doesn't make it any less weird to expect that. i think we need to stop making it okay for guys to be socially maladjusted by creating situations where they feel they have more rights over a woman's body than they do. these women are not a science experiment. i think you need to think about your position and exactly how strange the whole thing is. absolutely no one is owed that kind of control over anyone else AT ALL.

the only time i ever have a problem with what a webmodel does is when she tries to play sexual expert and shame other fat women with something she knows is a lie. that is going beyond the pale when engaging with people who aren't even customers and being disingenuous and influencing them to do things that are totally unrealistic and wholly based in fantasy mythology instead of on any kind of practical reality. it's sick to try and force things on people that are totally unsolicited and unwanted.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 11, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Being human means people make less than perfect choices. Since humans live in a world of imperfect information their choices are even less perfect. Also, the course a person's life follows is often set while they are still a child or adolescent -- abuse and adversity often push people down wrong paths.
> 
> So yes I would and do have compassion for damaged people. I'm grateful that for the most part my life's been pretty good. I'm aware of the relative privilege I've enjoyed. I don't expect everyone to make reasonable rational decisions all the time. Indeed given the deficiencies and pathologies of our country I expect that many many people will make bad decisions. What I do expect is that all people be afforded dignity and compassion.
> 
> Fat people who put their faith in the medical establishment cannot be faulted for that. Turning one's back on such people and screaming I told you so is mean spirited in the extreme.



this is worth reading at least a couple of times for sure


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 11, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Being human means people make less than perfect choices. Since humans live in a world of imperfect information their choices are even less perfect. Also, the course a person's life follows is often set while they are still a child or adolescent -- abuse and adversity often push people down wrong paths.
> 
> So yes I would and do have compassion for damaged people. I'm grateful that for the most part my life's been pretty good. I'm aware of the relative privilege I've enjoyed. I don't expect everyone to make reasonable rational decisions all the time. Indeed given the deficiencies and pathologies of our country I expect that many many people will make bad decisions. What I do expect is that all people be afforded dignity and compassion.
> 
> Fat people who put their faith in the medical establishment cannot be faulted for that. Turning one's back on such people and screaming I told you so is mean spirited in the extreme.



I agree with this, however how long are we supposed to keep this triage up? My friends husband died 9 years ago and she still posts wedding videos and when we go to lunch or dinner it's manages to be the main topic of conversation with her. I truly and honestly feel bad for her and yes, I know one day I will experience death and know what it's like but come on. If there was something I could *actualy* do besides drop everything and listen to another story I would do it if it would honestly help but there isn't anything I can do. At this point she needs a counselor, a doctor, a self help group. Maybe I'm a bad friend but I think any friend would have to finally say, "Look Mary, it's time to go seek grief counseling." I think a real friend would have to risk being an enemy and say some things that Mary doesn't want to hear.


----------



## moniquessbbw (Mar 11, 2014)

I left the thread to see where it would go. It went south before we got to the end of page one. I was accused of being a fat hater. I am fat so I don't see how that is possible. Then someone accused me of trying to be the victim in all of this and the messages from the catfish dudes. The fact that I had weight loss surgery came up and of course it was all negative comments pointed at me. I have no idea why my surgery was even apart of this thread. Then it went onto web modeling which I have been retired from for many years. Lies were told and made up about me and why I write my Blog. People think I need attention, which I don't. My Blog is for me and if I can help anyone by what I write then it is all worth it. I have proven that you don't have to gain the weight back and that you can survive WLS. These facts seem to really piss people off. I think they would rather see me dead because I didn't help myself. It is truly pointless trying to have a conversation with some people here. You are full of hate and bigotry towards me and my choices. Just remember they are my choices and it is my life not yours in any way. It makes me sick how some of you behave and just come out swinging before you even have the facts. If you don't like me that's your problem not mine. I am sure you will be thrilled for me that I am about to have my 8th year post WLS. By now I would think the haters would learn to deal with the facts. That is a long time to be mad that I had surgery. Get over yourselves and have a nice day.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 11, 2014)

wrestlingguy said:


> With that said, can I ask if you also question the motives of those on a size acceptance board who support intentional weight gain?
> 
> Let me be more clear with my question. This isn't a knock on Dimensions, more a descriptor, but there is a big difference between fat & size acceptance, and Dims isn't about size acceptance, at least to me. I don't think it was the intention when the site was started to have it support bodies of all sizes, not because those sizes were perceived as inferior, just because there was little in the way of fat positive by way of the internet when this site was launched.
> 
> Some of the leaders in the size acceptance movement are quick to make the distinction between fat & size acceptance, and many of them feel that feederism can't fit into size acceptance the same way that WLS can't, as there is an assumption that the person involved hasn't accepted their body.


As you've indicated, Dimensions didn't start as a Size Acceptance board. It started as an online presence of Dimensions Magazine, the publication of the NAAFA Fat Admirer SIG. At that time the main issue was fat sexuality and Fat Acceptance was the philosophy. Size Acceptance really didn't enter the scene until the 90's when a lot of people were loudly opposing the use of "fat" in the name and the philosophy. They were pushing the wonderfully egalitarian term of "Size Acceptance". A lot of those same people went on to eventually have WLS which showed their true level of fat acceptance. They hated it. I see it as a litmus test. 

Whether enough people can fundamentally shift Dimensions to officially becoming a size acceptance board in an _ad hoc_ democratic process remains to be seen. I look at the drift away from fat acceptance as willfully giving up in the mistaken belief that we'll gain something of bigger value. It's a foolish attempt to try to join into the newer "Body Acceptance" philosophy which I wonder whether it was trying to hitch its wagon to Fat Acceptance since it came along decades afterwards.



wrestlingguy said:


> So, from a size acceptance standpoint, would you feel the same way about those engaging in feederism as you do about those who seek WLS?


I can only offer a viewpoint from a Fat Acceptance perspective. Most of the people I knew that engaged in frequent binging for years are now dead. They all died before their mid fifties. One died at about age 40, but he already had heart problems. Unless you personally get sexual gratification from binging and weight gain, I strongly recommend against it. Even then you need to seriously educate yourself about the dangers inherent to the lifestyle. If you're a feedee trying to satisfy a feeder in the hope that you'll keep him/her, you're kidding yourself. It will end badly, probably for you. If you see food as a friend, realize it's double crossing you in evil ways. Food is only a tool to help nourish your body. Use in any other way is a mistake. Try to not make food mistakes too often. 

Do I object to feedee actions as strongly as I do WLS? No. I see one as a behavior that is usually a transient behavioral phase or can be corrected and the other as an uncorrectable self-inflicted assault with the assistance of people that represent the ultimate in body biogotry - a bariatric surgeon. They take advantage of the emotional state of desperate fat people, relying on their desperation to overlook or discount the warnings of WLS complications seeing them as something they _might_ have vs a list containing several they will have. 

Wrestlingguy, as someone supporting size acceptance, do you support those who like body modifications like tats, piercings? How about those who like "more body" as their modification?


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 11, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> I once had a loyal fan who wanted me to post pictures of myself sticking my butt out while eating a pizza. I didn't do that because I didn't really want to, but there is something to be said for a person who is trying to keep the customer satisfied and fulfilling requests. I'm tending to disagree with you on the notion that a paysite model who is giving the customer what they want is somehow being dishonest if she suddenly decides to quit and make Zumba the way to go. There are models who are feedees but don't display that part of themselves in their brand because it's a private thing she wants to keep between her and her significant other. Some women generally tend to lose and gain through life's changes. She's put on a few pounds, probably doesn't like it but knows the customer will so she shares it. Modeling is a business. A model should be able to draw the line for herself but if the customer is happy I think that's as honest as you can expect really.


"There's no business like show business."

Show business involving sexual fantasy is actually very dangerous. It connects with the consumer at a different level than regular show business. Even regular show business has their share of dangerous stalkers. BBW web models probably have more stalkers than they realize since it connects with a more limited but probably more fervent audience. All it takes is a few customers that don't see it as fantasy but as a possible reality, if only they can contact you and win you over. I've watched a few of these guys at NAAFA conventions. Some of them just don't take "no" for an answer. I'd hate to think how much worse it must be at the bashes.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 11, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Being human means people make less than perfect choices. Since humans live in a world of imperfect information their choices are even less perfect. Also, the course a person's life follows is often set while they are still a child or adolescent -- abuse and adversity often push people down wrong paths.
> 
> So yes I would and do have compassion for damaged people. I'm grateful that for the most part my life's been pretty good. I'm aware of the relative privilege I've enjoyed. I don't expect everyone to make reasonable rational decisions all the time. Indeed given the deficiencies and pathologies of our country I expect that many many people will make bad decisions. What I do expect is that all people be afforded dignity and compassion.


Compassion is appropriate for the first few dozen times until it's obvious the person doesn't want to change. They've become comfortable with the pain. Beyond that point, you're just enabling their self destructive behavior.



bigmac said:


> Fat people who put their faith in the medical establishment cannot be faulted for that. Turning one's back on such people and screaming I told you so is mean spirited in the extreme.


Some choices in life are just so bad they just don't warrant sympathy.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 11, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> how can anyone catfish if it is a fantasy as a business? models of any kind do not have real relationships with customers, hence no catfishing is possible. any catfishing in that case is in the "fans' imagination because they are well aware to begin with what a model is and that she is selling something and not out there trying to have an actual relationship with fans just because she has a website. if that were true she'd be having a relationship with every last guy who ever fantasized over her photos.


That's a nice philosophical viewpoint most of the time.

Look at the bad feelings left over from the first catfishing BBW model, Kelli. She disappeared from modeling decades ago and some still hate her for what she did. (And no, she's just another name to me.) How many would stalk her and get even? Probably too many. There's both the sexual and financial aspect to her catfishing, not a good combination.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 11, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> is this the same reason the fat community does not support people who gain enough weight to become immobile ?


I've only seen those who supposedly support Size Acceptance turn on those who express an interest in immobility.

I'd recommend against immobility as a life choice for a variety of reasons. (Bedsores, hygiene issues, dependency, loss of muscle, reduced lifespan, inability to count on timely support of others, lack of sufficient income, and many more.) It's one of those issues where the fantasy is much better than the reality.

If someone simply finds themselves immobile due to self-medicating with food for years, I support helping them work through their issues to help them lose weight and regain their mobility. That to me is an appropriate fat accepting way to help.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 11, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> "There's no business like show business."
> 
> Show business involving sexual fantasy is actually very dangerous. It connects with the consumer at a different level than regular show business. Even regular show business has their share of dangerous stalkers. BBW web models probably have more stalkers than they realize since it connects with a more limited but probably more fervent audience. All it takes is a few customers that don't see it as fantasy but as a possible reality, if only they can contact you and win you over. I've watched a few of these guys at NAAFA conventions. Some of them just don't take "no" for an answer. I'd hate to think how much worse it must be at the bashes.



You don't need to be a model for this to happen. I have to fight off the same guy every year at the Vegas bash. Every year he acts like he didn't meet me last year and starts up that stuff again, and this started way before I was a model. If he even knows I was a model he keeps it very well hid. Even so, he'll get the same black eye. It's exhausting but should I stay home?

HereticFA I am still at present undecided about how I feel about this issue. On the one hand I hold the feminist view that I'm against victim blaming. I should be able to walk down the street and not have to worry about people giving me shit. Then on the other hand I know that it is mental-fucking-illness that makes some of these people revere/revile us. All the reasoning in the world isn't going to do any good with people like this and our society is too gung ho about protecting their rights to give a shit about what happens to us. Sure go on outside with your red dress on but learn judo, knuckle your keys, check the back seat, carry a whistle. Some of us are more visable than others but unless you're going to stay home with the blinds drawn and pet the cats, we all have to be careful within our allowable threshold.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 11, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> That's a nice philosophical viewpoint most of the time.
> 
> Look at the bad feelings left over from the first catfishing BBW model, Kelli. She disappeared from modeling decades ago and some still hate her for what she did. (And no, she's just another name to me.) How many would stalk her and get even? Probably too many. There's both the sexual and financial aspect to her catfishing, not a good combination.




and wrestling is real. really now, it's time for a lot of people to grow up. if people are that angry with her and are stalking her for doing a job well after all of these years and can't appreciate the fantasy creation specifically for their pleasure they probably should be arrested.


----------



## Saoirse (Mar 11, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> and wrestling is real. really now, it's time for a lot of people to grow up. if people are that angry with her and are stalking her for doing a job well after all of these years and can't appreciate the fantasy creation specifically for their pleasure they probably should be arrested.



actually a lot of wrestling IS real, so your analogy sucks. but other than that, props.


----------



## moniquessbbw (Mar 11, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> As you've indicated, Dimensions didn't start as a Size Acceptance board. It started as an online presence of Dimensions Magazine, the publication of the NAAFA Fat Admirer SIG. At that time the main issue was fat sexuality and Fat Acceptance was the philosophy. Size Acceptance really didn't enter the scene until the 90's when a lot of people were loudly opposing the use of "fat" in the name and the philosophy. They were pushing the wonderfully egalitarian term of "Size Acceptance". A lot of those same people went on to eventually have WLS which showed their true level of fat acceptance. They hated it. I see it as a litmus test.
> 
> Whether enough people can fundamentally shift Dimensions to officially becoming a size acceptance board in an _ad hoc_ democratic process remains to be seen. I look at the drift away from fat acceptance as willfully giving up in the mistaken belief that we'll gain something of bigger value. It's a foolish attempt to try to join into the newer "Body Acceptance" philosophy which I wonder whether it was trying to hitch its wagon to Fat Acceptance since it came along decades afterwards.
> 
> ...



This has nothing to do with the topic of Catfish. Why does it always lead back to weight loss surgery? I know, it's because I had it and no one can forget about it for one minute to stay on track. The haters always come out and mention WLS in a thread which was about Catfish. The thread had nothing to do with feeders, feedees, or WLS. What someone chooses to do to their own body is up to them. Get off the judgement soapbox. The thread also had nothing to do with web models and how men treat them. The topic is Catfish and the creepy things men are doing on line. Bravo has a new show about it and the first episode last week was spot on. They serial date to get laid and one guy was looking for love. I wish I could have a conversation that stays on track here. But your personal feelings about me always come out.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 11, 2014)

Also I believe he may be referring to the legend Kellygirl who charged people in advance for her pending new site that never happened. She lured them in then ran off with their money. She's real.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Mar 11, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> Wrestlingguy, as someone supporting size acceptance, do you support those who like body modifications like tats, piercings? How about those who like "more body" as their modification?



I'm a size acceptance supporter. I'm also a supporter of body autonomy. With that said, body modifications (if elective) are great.

When you refer to "more body" as modification, are you referring to intentional gain? This is where I struggle, since I believe in body autonomy. If someone wants to grow their body, and is doing it voluntarily, that's great.

My fear (and I won't concern troll those that engage in this practice) is that we don't know the long term effects of major weight gains. While I've lost many friends & acquaintances over the years who gained massive amounts of weight, there is in fact no clinical study that connects massive weight gain as a direct cause of death. In fact, most studies that I've seen are far more critical of yoyo dieting.

That doesn't meant that I don't pray for those who engage in the practice every night when my head hits the pillow & it's just me and my God.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 11, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> This has nothing to do with the topic of Catfish. Why does it always lead back to weight loss surgery? I know, it's because I had it and no one can forget about it for one minute to stay on track. The haters always come out and mention WLS in a thread which was about Catfish. The thread had nothing to do with feeders, feedees, or WLS. What someone chooses to do to their own body is up to them. Get off the judgement soapbox. The thread also had nothing to do with web models and how men treat them. The topic is Catfish and the creepy things men are doing on line. Bravo has a new show about it and the first episode last week was spot on. They serial date to get laid and one guy was looking for love. I wish I could have a conversation that stays on track here. But your personal feelings about me always come out.



Yes but is that really a catfish? Isn't a catfish a well spoken con artist who says he's a 45 year old College professor when really he's a 65 year old unemployed sanitation worker who lives with his mom? The people in your post looked like run of the mill losers online. They didn't even try to make themselves attractive at all. I'm asking because I don't know.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 11, 2014)

Saoirse said:


> actually a lot of wrestling IS real, so your analogy sucks. but other than that, props.



thank you. you made me giggle


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 11, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> Also I believe he may be referring to the legend Kellygirl who charged people in advance for her pending new site that never happened. She lured them in then ran off with their money. She's real.



yep 14.95 must have ruined all their lives forever


----------



## bigmac (Mar 11, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> ...
> 
> I can only offer a viewpoint from a Fat Acceptance perspective. Most of the people I knew that engaged in frequent binging for years are now dead. *They all died before their mid fifties.* One died at about age 40, but he already had heart problems. Unless you personally get sexual gratification from binging and weight gain, I strongly recommend against it. Even then you need to seriously educate yourself about the dangers inherent to the lifestyle. If you're a feedee trying to satisfy a feeder in the hope that you'll keep him/her, you're kidding yourself. It will end badly, probably for you. *If you see food as a friend, realize it's double crossing you in evil ways.* Food is only a tool to help nourish your body. Use in any other way is a mistake. Try to not make food mistakes too often.



The highlighted parts of your post are spot on. One has only to read the RIP notices on this board to know that very large people die young. Also, its been my experience that many very large people do look to food for solace -- I was once told by a SSBBW that "chocolate cake never lets you down."

Fat acceptance does not mean acceptance of destructive behavior. 




HereticFA said:


> Do I object to feedee actions as strongly as I do WLS? No. I see one as a behavior that is usually a transient behavioral phase or can be corrected and the other as an uncorrectable self-inflicted assault with the assistance of people that represent the ultimate in body biogotry - a bariatric surgeon. They take advantage of the emotional state of desperate fat people, relying on their desperation to overlook or discount the warnings of WLS complications seeing them as something they _might_ have vs a list containing several they will have.



WLS does indeed have very serious side effects and potential complications. WLS is indeed over sold. Desperate fat people are indeed taken advantage of by the weight loss industry including bariatric surgeons. However, for some people WLS is a legitimate option. People -- like the ones you referenced -- who would have lost all quality of life in their 40's and died in their 50's have been given new leases on life by WLS.

That said IMO all reasonable steps should be taken to minimize the number of people in desperate need of WLS. Far better to go through life as a healthy moderately fat person than to eat your way to supersize and then require WLS to reclaim your life. In this respect WLS is like abortion -- the procedures should be safe, available, and rare.


----------



## moniquessbbw (Mar 12, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> Yes but is that really a catfish? Isn't a catfish a well spoken con artist who says he's a 45 year old College professor when really he's a 65 year old unemployed sanitation worker who lives with his mom? The people in your post looked like run of the mill losers online. They didn't even try to make themselves attractive at all. I'm asking because I don't know.



It can be any of the things you listed above and much more. The convo just always takes a turn onto things that have nothing to do with the topic because they want to jab at me. As in now it's all about models, WLS and changing your body. None of which has anything to do with the origin of the blog post. Kelly Girl was real and it was said she took men's money and never opened a site. I am sure that happens all the time buyer beware. Not sure why you would pay in advance, but some people are just inpatient I guess. 

I would like to be able to have a convo here where it doesn't run the train off the tracks. Yet anything I post ends up about WLS and it isn't me bring it up unless I post something on the WLS board. I like the people who are real. Like you're real we have met a bunch of times at social events all over the east and west coast. These creepers and catfish are people trying to play games with people and there emotions. They as we all know are also scam artists. Sigh I give up on this one once you start to compare WLS to abortion in another post above. Now that is just sad.


----------



## Tracyarts (Mar 12, 2014)

" Fat acceptance does not mean acceptance of destructive behavior. "

It shouldn't. 

But it has been my experience that unless you look the other way while people eat themselves to illness, disability, and even death, you get accused of "concern trolling", "fat bigotry", and promoting the whole ridiculous "Da DEATH-Fatz" thingie that people like to bleat and squeal so much about.

Seriously, that's why I stopped going to fat events. I couldn't deal with being around so much food dysfunction any longer, and the encouragement, enablement, and denial of the problem was beyond disturbing at times. Not only did it feel yucky to be around, it hurt to watch some people I considered friends do serious damage to their bodies with food. And I knew that in order to get in a good place with food myself, I had to step far away from it so that I could re-learn normal again. 

I can't accept that people have a right to destroy themselves. I just can't. I have known two people who killed themselves in one way or another directly with food so it's a very personal issue for me. 

Tracy


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 12, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> It can be any of the things you listed above and much more. The convo just always takes a turn onto things that have nothing to do with the topic because they want to jab at me. As in now it's all about models, WLS and changing your body. None of which has anything to do with the origin of the blog post. Kelly Girl was real and it was said she took men's money and never opened a site. I am sure that happens all the time buyer beware. Not sure why you would pay in advance, but some people are just inpatient I guess.
> 
> I would like to be able to have a convo here where it doesn't run the train off the tracks. Yet anything I post ends up about WLS and it isn't me bring it up unless I post something on the WLS board. I like the people who are real. Like you're real we have met a bunch of times at social events all over the east and west coast. These creepers and catfish are people trying to play games with people and there emotions. They as we all know are also scam artists. Sigh I give up on this one once you start to compare WLS to abortion in another post above. Now that is just sad.




I do notice that. When people become upset with what you have to say that becomes the first thing they reach for, no matter what ice cream flavor you bring up. I'm not sure what everybody else was thinking. I know when I read your blog, particularly the first guy, I felt like he was just some guy. It didn't appear to me that he had some intent to mislead. The others I don't know and I don't care. Assholes cloaked up like that you never know, but the first guy made me feel like, "Lets beat up on easy targets," time. I thought maybe that was why people had the kneejerk to say that mean ol' Momo is all mean and stuff. Maybe I should look at it again but that first guy made me wonder what in particular distinguishes a catfish from some guy who doesn't express himself well online.

Also in the intrest of full disclosure, I was raised in a soup kitchen. My mother worked there as a cook and for years me and my sister would be there with her hanging out and eating with homeless people, outcasts and the disenfranchised. I probably have a much grayer threshold than most people when it comes to judgment and yes, it has gotten me into trouble at times. It's possible that there is something to that first guy that I'm missing.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 12, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> This has nothing to do with the topic of Catfish. Why does it always lead back to weight loss surgery? I know, it's because I had it and no one can forget about it for one minute to stay on track. The haters always come out and mention WLS in a thread which was about Catfish. The thread had nothing to do with feeders, feedees, or WLS. What someone chooses to do to their own body is up to them. Get off the judgement soapbox. The thread also had nothing to do with web models and how men treat them. The topic is Catfish and the creepy things men are doing on line. Bravo has a new show about it and the first episode last week was spot on. They serial date to get laid and one guy was looking for love. I wish I could have a conversation that stays on track here. But your personal feelings about me always come out.


It's called a segue. It usually happens in a lengthy thread of posts. I pointed out in post #25 a 9th point I thought should be included in characteristics of Catfishing and a couple of people tentatively agreed later in the thread.

The fact that you had WLS is only mildly pertinent to the tangential discussion. You're just one of a couple of million that have had it. (One of my friends that's 15 years post-op and having serious problems with pernicious anemia is an issue to me, you're not.) It's not all about you here on Dimensions. If you wanted a thread just bashing men and their behavior you should have specified that at the beginning. Most of us would have respected that thread criteria.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 12, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> These creepers and catfish are people trying to play games with people and there emotions.


And that's what I was illustrating with my additional point #9 in post #25. Webmodels don't realize how emotionally vested some customers are with the fantasy of the webmodel. No, I'm not referencing any for myself. But I've known guys who were so loosely connected to reality it was a little scary to work with them. It's why I would encourage webmodels to reconsider their "acting" career. Fantasy modeling (actually a form of catfishing in the way they portray themselves) can trigger an avalanche of bad outcomes with the wrong person.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 12, 2014)

It bears mentioning straight-away that there does seem to be some legitimate debate or at least confusion on the term itself. *monique*, *superodalisque*, & *Heretic* alike (& probably others as well, that I've somehow missed) have each expanded on the definition of _*Catfish*_ in ways largely unique from each other. That, I feel, go beyond what we all collectively understand & concede to be part of what anyone might be talking about when they use it. And have similarly pushed back on each others' respective amendments.

This is, necessarily, political. In that each person or interest wants to be able to wield it for their own ends. But-yet, it's also, dare I say, a real philosophical difference. In as much as each seems to come to these apparently sincere arguments on some reflection. And defend them quite capably.



LillyBBBW said:


> "_...Isn't a catfish a well spoken con artist who says he's a 45 year old College professor when really he's a 65 year old unemployed sanitation worker who lives with his mom?_"


I think it depends: If you met him in a nightclub and decided to take him home anyway, that doesn't really feel like what we'd all recognize as such. Also, I don't think you have be either particularly well-spoken or the opposite of that or anywhere in between to qualify for how most people would be able recognize a true _Catfish_. 



LillyBBBW said:


> "_the first guy made me feel like...that first guy made me wonder what in particular distinguishes a catfish...It's possible that there is something to that first guy that I'm missing._"


I had a somewhat similar experience. Although, maybe, like you, or any of us, I'm just projecting my own preconceptions or experiences onto wholly unique situation. I'm thinking to myself: _Wha? Is this some sort of "hipsterism?" Is this, like, a "bit?" Is he joking...with-her...or at-her? What about me? Am I supposed to laugh? Or is the joke on me as well? I don't know...I don't get-it._"

So, if that is yet another new type of _*Catfish*_, perhaps Yaniv can better feature it in season 3.


----------



## ScreamingChicken (Mar 12, 2014)

Tracyarts said:


> " Fat acceptance does not mean acceptance of destructive behavior. "
> 
> It shouldn't.
> 
> ...



I can't rep...ugh!


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 12, 2014)

Tracyarts said:


> " Fat acceptance does not mean acceptance of destructive behavior. "
> 
> It shouldn't.
> 
> ...



everything in that post is a big TRUE

this also made me think about the fact that one of the weirdest things is that fat events are one of the worst places ever to get a decent meal. it's rubber chicken old frozen veggies and nasty desserts. some people's idea of good eating is a billion stale boxes of lil debbies stacked in a corner. as many people who claim they love food and are foodies in the community you'd think at least once they'd have a decent buffet with actual delicious food made from fresh ingredients. when i used to go away to a weekend event i would end up coming home starving because there as nothing decent to eat.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 13, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> everything in that post is a big TRUE
> 
> this also made me think about the fact that one of the weirdest things is that fat events are one of the worst places ever to get a decent meal. it's rubber chicken old frozen veggies and nasty desserts. some people's idea of good eating is a billion stale boxes of lil debbies stacked in a corner. as many people who claim they love food and are foodies in the community you'd think at least once they'd have a decent buffet with actual delicious food made from fresh ingredients. when i used to go away to a weekend event i would end up coming home starving because there as nothing decent to eat.


It's very true, for some of the people.

A lot of people initially define quantity as quality. Some people simply never had real quality food so they don't know any better. Over time, they understand that quality food is based on selection, composition and delivery, not quantity. It's often a wisdom that comes with age.

The food at fat events was not that different from the Democratic Convention I attended. It's just typical of institutional food. Comedians used to have comedic segments on food at events in their acts. At some of the fat events in the early 2000's the opposite began to occur. They did serve nice fresh veggies. But they were so _al dente_ I think I could have still snapped the green beans that were served as full length pods, with tips and stems. If they spent _any_ time on the stove, it was just sitting _beside_ the burner.

Lil' Debbies, the diabetics worst friend, are problematic. I like to think of Debbie on the box with the face of the evil doll "Chucky" trying to get people to buy her. I was amazed at the size of the snack bars a lot of people set up in their rooms. but it was usually just a few of the people who did that and they were usually party center for several room parties that didn't make it to the event's hospitality suite.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 13, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> It's very true, for some of the people.
> 
> A lot of people initially define quantity as quality. Some people simply never had real quality food so they don't know any better. Over time, they understand that quality food is based on selection, composition and delivery, not quantity. It's often a wisdom that comes with age.
> 
> ...



i understand what you're saying but it's just waaay incongruent to have fat events have such horrible food. and it goes on to show that if food ignorance is a bad as you say these events should be a gastronomical nutritional forefront since the whole event is even possible because of food itself. in other words food is in one way or another the king and queen of all fat events that aren't being paid tribute to. people keep saying that it's too expensive to have a good buffet etc... but you know what, if you can eat it they will come. i would like to at least see somebody try and have a true foodie event for once. then maybe we would have more than what a male friend of mine says amounts to a BBW trailer park mentality. but that is another thread altogether.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 13, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> It bears mentioning straight-away that there does seem to be some legitimate debate or at least confusion on the term itself. *monique*, *superodalisque*, & *Heretic* alike (& probably others as well, that I've somehow missed) have each expanded on the definition of _*Catfish*_ in ways largely unique from each other. That, I feel, go beyond what we all collectively understand & concede to be part of what anyone might be talking about when they use it. And have similarly pushed back on each others' respective amendments.
> 
> This is, necessarily, political. In that each person or interest wants to be able to wield it for their own ends. But-yet, it's also, dare I say, a real philosophical difference. In as much as each seems to come to these apparently sincere arguments on some reflection. And defend them quite capably.
> 
> ...



I think what I was getting at was I thought a Catfish was something a bit more awful than your run of the mill online liar. I imagined more espionage to it. It was some sort of online pen pal that you fall head over heels for, mainly because they romanced you while misleading you as to who they really were. I think of what happeded to that football player from Hawaii last year who thought he was in a relationship with a woman who died. But he was actually been conned the whole time by someone who did their research as to what he would like and he was open to believe. This guy was a bit more gullible than I could get my head around actually, but similar things have happened. They tell you just enough to lure you in and then you kind of project on to them as you grow addicted to the relationship. I get now that the definition is much broader than I thought but that's what I was thinking, hence why I was confused by the thread. I sensed maybe a few people were thinking along the same lines. Or maybe not hence why I asked.


----------



## HereticFA (Mar 14, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> i understand what you're saying but it's just waaay incongruent to have fat events have such horrible food. and it goes on to show that if food ignorance is a bad as you say these events should be a gastronomical nutritional forefront since the whole event is even possible because of food itself. in other words food is in one way or another the king and queen of all fat events that aren't being paid tribute to. people keep saying that it's too expensive to have a good buffet etc... but you know what, if you can eat it they will come. i would like to at least see somebody try and have a true foodie event for once. then maybe we would have more than what a male friend of mine says amounts to a BBW trailer park mentality. but that is another thread altogether.


Maybe because: 
1) The sponsors were specifically trying to distance themselves from the stereotype of fat people and food. Making the food the focus of the event was at extreme odds with the image that was trying to be presented to the occasional media rep that would show up. Plus, for some it would have been like having an open bar at an Alcoholics Anonymous convention. It would have been disrespectful in the extreme. 

2) A focus was being made on workshops and seminars at the event to help fat people develop new skills. The last thing anyone needed was an audience of people in a collective food coma from irresistible foods.

3) Attendees complained about every extra dollar charged for attending the event and that would have probably added _at least_ $15/day. It would have put the event out of reach for at least 10% of the attendees. A lot of the folks saved a couple of years (or more) and still had to share a room with four others to be able to attend.

4) Most larger cities and quite a few smaller ones in the US already have similar functions with a selection of better restaurants from the area. They are usually named "Taste of ...." or something synonymous or sometimes even at county fairs. It's very doubtful a simple fat oriented event could come close to comparing with that level of foodie event. (In the North Texas area, there are probably at least 20 such events each year.)

5) Not all fat people put that much value on food quality, selection, or variety. It's just not a big issue with them, especially those who have worked through their food issues-if they had any.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 14, 2014)

HereticFA said:


> Maybe because:
> 1) The sponsors were specifically trying to distance themselves from the stereotype of fat people and food. Making the food the focus of the event was at extreme odds with the image that was trying to be presented to the occasional media rep that would show up. Plus, for some it would have been like having an open bar at an Alcoholics Anonymous convention. It would have been disrespectful in the extreme.
> 
> 2) A focus was being made on workshops and seminars at the event to help fat people develop new skills. The last thing anyone needed was an audience of people in a collective food coma from irresistible foods.
> ...



For a few years there was an anti-fat group that would routinely seek data from one of the hotels that regularly host size acceptance groups for bashes and conventions. They were collecting specifically from the catering staff in an effort to compare how much and what types of foods are consumed at these events in comparison to other groups of similar size that book events there. The inquirers stopped coming after a while and their findings were never published but the hotel manager didn't expect them to. He says that their own internal inventory indicates that consumption at size acceptance events is about the same as the others. If it weren't, hosting these types of events would be cost prohibitive.


----------



## The Orange Mage (Mar 14, 2014)

So anyone purporting to like being fat and like getting fatter doesn't have a sexual fetish, just a eating disorder? That's freakin' rich. 

(Not that there aren't folk who fake being feedist but actually would take that skinny pill. Why? Who knows.)

Feedism exists completely outside of fat acceptance. Mainly because the movement fucking abhors it, and whenever it gets any media attention I completely understand, but the fact of the matter is that feedism has no bearing on the Fat Acceptance movement in its Societal sense. In the Self aspect of Size Acceptance...having a fetish for being fat and/or gaining weight can make that part easy.

Not sure where I was going with this. Oh well.

Never been to a bash and probably won't. Ain't part of that clique or whatever.


----------



## KHayes666 (Mar 14, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> For a few years there was an anti-fat group that would routinely seek data from one of the hotels that regularly host size acceptance groups for bashes and conventions. They were collecting specifically from the catering staff in an effort to compare how much and what types of foods are consumed at these events in comparison to other groups of similar size that book events there. The inquirers stopped coming after a while and their findings were never published but the hotel manager didn't expect them to. He says that their own internal inventory indicates that consumption at size acceptance events is about the same as the others. If it weren't, hosting these types of events would be cost prohibitive.



So by my refusal to order room service during my bash stays, I helped the cause. Good to know lol


----------



## Saoirse (Mar 14, 2014)

The Orange Mage said:


> So anyone purporting to like being fat and like getting fatter doesn't have a sexual fetish, just a eating disorder? That's freakin' rich.



If someone were to say they liked being super-skinny and wanted to get skinnier, Im sure 99% of people would label that an eating disorder.


----------



## Dromond (Mar 15, 2014)

This topic got threadcrapped hard and fast.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 15, 2014)

The Orange Mage said:


> Not sure where I was going with this...


Actually, I found that quite succinct. I, too, find myself at odds with some of the more studied opinions here, & maybe just for coming at it with a fresh set of eyes.



LillyBBBW said:


> ...I thought a Catfish was something a bit more awful than your run of the mill online liar....It was some sort of *online pen pal* that you fall *head over heels for*, mainly because they* romanced you while misleading you as to who they really were.* I think of what happeded to that football player from Hawaii last year who thought he was in a relationship with a woman who died. But he was actually been conned the whole time by someone who did their research as to what he would like and *he was open to believe*. This guy was a bit more gullible than I could get my head around actually, but similar things have happened. They tell you just enough to lure you in and then you kind of *project on to them as you grow addicted to the relationship.* I get now that the definition is much broader than I thought but that's what I was thinking, hence why I was confused by the thread. I sensed maybe a few people were thinking along the same lines. Or maybe not hence why I asked.


Maybe, now, you're over-correcting: The definition ISN'T (necessarily) MUCH broader... I mean, I think, it's just about where you thought it was. (I was kind of joking in the very last sentence of my previous post) Because, as far as I know, it's only the few people who are really pushing on what I believe most of us understand it to mean. And, as I've stated, I think it really has to do with some larger points at issue that each of those posters are legitimately trying to bring to light. 

So, point being, they're not so much bullshitting as....you can't just throw the term out there like they are, in the way that they're using it, and expect like people will automatically understand (or accept) what you mean.

Manti T'eo's story, on the other hand, is a very good, almost archetypal, example of what (I think) most of us are talking about. Excluding, of course (or maybe?), the fame aspect, the possibility of his being a target just his because of his fame or any fall-out associated with that. So, to clarify, here are the characteristics that seem to jump out about both that particular relationship and the phenomenon on the whole:
somewhat long term
ongoing & contiguous
regular, if not daily, contact
exclusively remote (email, chat, phone, facebook, etc..) 
romantic in nature
fraudulent basis, at least one person isn't who they say they are.
a demonstrably strong emotional investment, in most cases that is somehow mutual
a manifested or at least bona-fide desire from at least one participant, to somehow either escalate or consumate the relationship, if not just "discover the truth," ultimately leading to:
a _denouement_, of sorts, leaving both parties with mixed emotions

Maybe there is some room for variation on one or two of these. The Munchausen's case described in the previous thread, for one example in particular, had me wanting to make an exception for its inclusion despite the lack of a romantic element. Just intuitively, I felt like that somehow "belonged." But now I'm kind of second-guessing myself. I don't want to fall into the trap of 'noticing a pattern,' only to paint over it with a broad-brush. 

The ending is another tricky spot. And possibly where I depart from a lot of the rest of you in terms of how I've come to think about this. Because, from my reading of the stories described in both the film (which I have not actually seen in its entirety) and the show (which I've also watched only some of), there is very noticeable & typical pattern strongly articulated there as well. And not just for Yaniv's intervention, but which speaks to the very basis of what _a true Catfish_ is.

That is, to begin with, a person is in a sort of doldrum. A point in life where, maybe, they're not particularly unhappy, per se; but yet they don't feel much motivation to change anything. There is nothing to look forward to. Not too much excites them.

Then, as if out of nowhere, this thing appears. And, suddenly, it's as if they're tapping into a whole new set of emotions, a part of them that they'd either believed was long-dead or never even existed. They are now seeing everything in front of them through lens of the possibility of this dream. This fantasy.

So, once the illusion is shattered, does it really even make sense to go just go back to life (thinking & being) as it once was? As the very same forces and pressures are at work on them throughout the whole process, indeed they are likely to; that is, eventually.... But, in the meantime, they're simultaneously pulled in at least two directions: lamenting the 'loss' of what they once believed could've been, 'jilted,' for sure. But yet, underlying that, the still too real sense of the power of its possibility.

So, what's truly most 'awful' is necessarily the deception itself, as in the scope and severity of it. Not so much in any kind of material outcome or any other reality of the situation. The person was being lied to all along, never any more or less so than at the very start. But-now, they know better, & in more ways than one.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 15, 2014)

@Dromond: I know you don't mean me! But-seriously, I don't look at it that way. I really do think this is just one of those areas where, as superodalisque has kind of caught onto, a lot of different & competing ideas are intersecting. So, it does sort of make sense that seemingly unrelated topics (such as WLS or Paysite models cheating their customers) might come into it. And not, necessarily, from a place out outright intellectual-dishonesty.


----------



## vardon_grip (Mar 19, 2014)

moniquessbbw said:


> I left the thread to see where it would go. It went south before we got to the end of page one. I was accused of being a fat hater. I am fat so I don't see how that is possible. Then someone accused me of trying to be the victim in all of this and the messages from the catfish dudes. The fact that I had weight loss surgery came up and of course it was all negative comments pointed at me. I have no idea why my surgery was even apart of this thread. Then it went onto web modeling which I have been retired from for many years. Lies were told and made up about me and why I write my Blog. People think I need attention, which I don't. My Blog is for me and if I can help anyone by what I write then it is all worth it. I have proven that you don't have to gain the weight back and that you can survive WLS. These facts seem to really piss people off. I think they would rather see me dead because I didn't help myself. It is truly pointless trying to have a conversation with some people here. You are full of hate and bigotry towards me and my choices. Just remember they are my choices and it is my life not yours in any way. It makes me sick how some of you behave and just come out swinging before you even have the facts. If you don't like me that's your problem not mine. I am sure you will be thrilled for me that I am about to have my 8th year post WLS. By now I would think the haters would learn to deal with the facts. That is a long time to be mad that I had surgery. Get over yourselves and have a nice day.



You stayed away from the thread on purpose? That doesnt seem kosher to me. You planted a seed, but refused to water it and now you are disappointed that it didnt grow into what you imagined. That is your fault. You didnt facilitate a discussion. You posted a link to your blog and said it would be entertaining. I dont think lying or fraud is very entertaining, but maybe I'm different. There wasnt much to discuss in your blog; it was just you arguing with internet creeps. Its difficult to not see it as, look at what I did! As you said before, the blog is all about you so you really cant blame people from making this thread about you. 

There is great merit in discussing ways to not get fooled by people on the internet. From 419 scams and credit card phishing to catfishing, the more information we have to combat fraud, the better. The blog didnt do that.

From reading your posts and some of your blog it seems like there are only 2 groups of people, supporters or haters. My personal feeling is that just because someone isnt a friend, doesnt automatically make them an enemy. It seems like no one is allowed to disagree or criticize without being called a hater and according to you, you have a lot of haters. Its a bit melodramatic like the TV show Dynasty, where Krystal says, Blake, they are all out to destroy me! There is also a lot of condescension and anger towards people who disagree with you. It may be another reason that people take issue with you and not your topic.

I think you need to decrease your online exposure. Youve been busting on internet creeps for a while now and you havent found your nirvana. For someone who hates the creeps she meets in dating/chats/IM/whateveryou would think that you would stop doing it. After all this time, dont you think you could find a way to avoid them? Maybe you could close whatever groups you have, unfriend or decline strangers/people with incomplete profiles, dump your dating profiles and change your email addressunless you need the negative attention? Attention is nice and in the absence of positive attention, negative attention can sneak in and take its place quite easily.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 19, 2014)

There's something I forgot to mention in my previous list. But maybe that's somewhat telling in that: if there was any one very important criteria most likely to be omitted, wouldn't it tend to be something less noticeable for its absence than anything else? Like, just something that, with all of the other characteristics in place, you would still probably recognize the general catfishiness of it all without really needing to come into direct contact with this one particular flavor-note. But yet, just the lightest scent of it would remove all doubt. 

Like the oregano in a really good pizza sauce. I mean, you can make a perfectly decent pizza without it, but...

So, I'm talking about the element of tragedy. Personal tragedy. Things like serious or terminal illnesses. Death. Family circumstances. Or practically anything that could, on one hand, engender some level of sympathy or report between two otherwise strangers; but yet also serve as either an obstacle or excuse, beyond physical distance, for as to why two people can't or shouldn't more fully realize their mutual attraction.

Which, of course, further helps to imbue it all with that tragic quality, that whole sense of "_but, for this..._ life could just on wonderfully.

As such, I might think quintessential Catfish film of the later 20th century is something like _Sleepless in Seattle_. But then, as I now recall, that actually references & draws upon an even better example, _An Affair to Remember._ Not that I would even consider spoiling the ending of either for anyone, but it is worth pointing out how the plot seems to undermine any sense of agency for either of the players. Relegating the outcome for either to the serendipitous hands of fate.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 20, 2014)

vardon_grip said:


> I think you need to decrease your online exposure. Youve been busting on internet creeps for a while now and you havent found your nirvana. For someone who hates the creeps she meets in dating/chats/IM/whateveryou would think that you would stop doing it. After all this time, dont you think you could find a way to avoid them? Maybe you could close whatever groups you have, unfriend or decline strangers/people with incomplete profiles, dump your dating profiles and change your email addressunless you need the negative attention? Attention is nice and in the absence of positive attention, negative attention can sneak in and take its place quite easily.



She has a plus-size clothing business that she has to promote. The things you listed would not be good for her business. They go through her business pages, looking for love, also. At some point, they need to be told off. It is a great way to let them know that you are serious.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 20, 2014)

The online store and the blog are not the same thing. Actually, from a certain point of view, the two things compete with one another (i.e. you give someone two different destinations, you'll be lucky if they stick with even one).

She could promote the store as much as she wants here and wherever else and just keep writing the blog for herself. And remove unwanted comments or make it only viewable to certain subscribers she allows. Or, if the real purpose of the blog is to, somehow, promote the store; then she'd probably be better off doing a vlog on YouTube and then, through google+, delete whatever comments or subscribers she doesn't want. (Actually, come to think of it, I think you can even make content only viewable to a select group within your total number of subscribers. Please correct me any you who know better) Or she could just disable all comments. Either way, any of those things would make for a better handle on customers than just having the open door of a blog where anyone can just say anything. 

But this isn't really about her. The thread topic as stated is Catfish, right?


----------



## swordchick (Mar 20, 2014)

I was referring to this blog entry:_here_.


----------



## penguin (Mar 20, 2014)

If the comments they leave are inappropriate, then it's best to delete them, not reply. Posting them like that is about garnering attention.


----------



## vardon_grip (Mar 20, 2014)

swordchick said:


> She has a plus-size clothing business that she has to promote. The things you listed would not be good for her business. They go through her business pages, looking for love, also. At some point, they need to be told off. It is a great way to let them know that you are serious.



Its often said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. The men from her blog have been told off...and told off...and told off. There will always be a new crop of internet creep to take the last groups place. It will never, ever end if nothing changes in her. Why would someone do something that gives them pain/anger over and over again? Maybe responding to internet creeps gives her pleasure? Maybe it promotes empowerment where there was none was before? You can run an online business and not engage internet creeps on Facebook. No one has to respond to a "business" IM that starts with, "Hey baby." When the result is bitterness, anger and mistrust a change needs to be made if one wants to live happily. 

Dr. Phil likes to use a gem of a saying, "You can be right or you can be happy."


----------



## swordchick (Mar 20, 2014)

Yeah, you'll get a new batch. But the old batch will change their email addresses & screen names and contact you again. They either forget they that tried you before or they just want you. Some will continuously contact you until you respond to them. The same advice that everyone wants to give her, creepers are using it, too. I used to get some of the same shit years back until I began cussing them out, exposing them & blocking them.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 20, 2014)

swordchick said:


> Yeah, you'll get a new batch. But the old batch will change their email addresses & screen names and contact you again. They either forget they that tried you before or they just want you. Some will continuously contact you until you respond to them. The same advice that everyone wants to give her, creepers are using it, too. I used to get some of the same shit years back until I began cussing them out, exposing them & blocking them.



i agree. i had been always very pleasant agreeable and conflict avoidant. the only thing that works for the worst is to tell on them and show everybody what they are doing. it's the only thing that shuts them up and keeps them from even trying to ruin your reputation. not only that, if something comes up legally you'll have more proof and other people contacting you to give you proof or info you might even need to protect yourself with. 

and the main reason lots of them don't stop is because the community keeps secrets for them so they can also get access to other unassuming people who aren't even as public. for me, Monique is doing people a service. everybody is protecting these stooges. some of them have been around for the entire 14 yrs i've been around the community getting worse and worse the entire time continuing to lie about who and what they are. quite a number of them are actually felons. there is one who always comes on dims whining about custody of his child etc...to try and get sympathy and attract interest from newbies but what he doesn't say is that he was arrested and convicted for assault of his ex wife. we know it's true because we found the court info including mugshots after talking to one another off dims. the only times i have ever seen people like that stop is when they are finally confronted.

i'm very tired of the community keeping secrets for people like this. even psychologists say it's better to out these kinds of people because the more you let them go with it the more dangerous in different ways they can become. they can become dangerous financially, physically or emotionally if they already aren't. this isn't harmless stuff. something is really wrong with someone if they can continually try to contact you over a period of 14 years under fake guises even after you've told them you aren't interested. i don't think a lot people really quite understand the extent people go to. people are talking like these are some nice innocent harmless guys, but they aren't.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 22, 2014)

Exactly! You can't make this shit up. It is very sickening. I refuse to be nice or even ignore them. I will report them over & over again until they go away. I don't deserve the harassment, nor do my friends. I haven't gotten any stupid messages in a long time.

One of the first parties I went to in the fat community, there was a registered sex offender in attendance. Unfortunately for him, the person he had to contact at the Sheriff's Department to get permission to attend the party & to make sure that there were no children in the area, she was at the party, too. She told me because she knew me. But she felt that the person in charge of the party should have warned the guests. They get contacted as well as their neighbors. He was married to one of the BBW. He was treating her like pure garbage in front of everyone. No one stopped him at all. My friend never went to any other of the events in the fat community. She said it was like a freak show & worse than the correctional facility. That was over ten years ago.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 26, 2014)

How did the organizers of the party know of his status, if he *DIDN'T* contact who he was supposed to before hand? Or are you saying that he *DID* contact them? In which case, how is it unfortunate (for him) that she was there? This was at a hotel, right?


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 26, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> How did the organizers of the party know of his status, if he *DIDN'T* contact who he was supposed to before hand? Or are you saying that he *DID* contact them? In which case, how is it unfortunate (for him) that she was there? This was at a hotel, right?



the officer they had to get permission from was AT the party. you'll find a lot of registered sex offenders around but unfortunately in many cases you aren't allowed to say so formally either on forums or at events. even when you go to the state websites and their names and pictures are there for anyone to see overwhelmingly absolutely nothing is done. so the only place we would be able to out anyone is on or own blog or personal page. this is why Monique is doing it as she is. it is the ONLY way to be heard regarding these issues and to keep other people safe.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 26, 2014)

From what I recall there was a children's affair going on simultaneously in this hotel. I'm surprised this sex offender got the ok to attend.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 26, 2014)

2^I understood a lot of that implicitly, but:



superodalisque said:


> "_...in many cases you aren't allowed to say so formally...at events._"


This might have something to do with why some organizers would be reluctant to throw someone out once arrived & paid for. Whereas, if formally notified beforehand, I can't see why they wouldn't just refuse to guarantee that there wouldn't be any minors present. Especially if either the food or alcohol is sold through the hotel's license. Or just work out some sort of arrangement with the venue itself to the effect that they see to it. 

Either way, I tend to think there's got to be a more over-arching type of solution for cases like this, one that could be lobbied for by an organized group of 'regulars' to be attempted by one of the bigger or more professional organizing outfits. And then, depending on how much $upport seems to result from that, could eventually spread into more of a standard practice. To me, that seems like a more viable and pragmatic and engaging approach; if it can somehow attempt to speak to the organizers' bottom line, than just depending on individuals to speak up here or there.

But I do see what you guys mean. At least in how that puts a bit of a damper on the whole theme. Like, for some reason, I'm now thinking about the pool-scene from _Caddy-Shack_.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 26, 2014)

swordchick said:


> ...
> 
> One of the first parties I went to in the fat community, there was a registered sex offender in attendance.
> 
> ...




I have no idea why this guy has to register -- however, people should be aware that sex offender registries are full of people most wouldn't consider dangerous (or even sex offenders for that matter). For example guys who got caught having sex with their underage girl friends when they were only a year or two older themselves.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 26, 2014)

bigmac said:


> I have no idea why this guy has to register -- however, people should be aware that sex offender registries are full of people most wouldn't consider dangerous (or even sex offenders for that matter). For example guys who got caught having sex with their underage girl friends when they were only a year or two older themselves.



maybe, but MOST of them are out and out criminals not boys who just had sex with their willing gfs. don't confuse the issue by playing naive.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 26, 2014)

It was a house party. That is why the neighbors had to be contacted as well.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 26, 2014)

I hate when people try to play naive. But my friend told me what he did. Then I went home and looked up his name on the State of Florida Corrections website. He had a list of offenses, including exactly what my friend told me.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 26, 2014)

I thought you guys were talking about the Bashes...


----------



## bigmac (Mar 26, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> maybe, but MOST of them are out and out criminals not boys who just had sex with their willing gfs. don't confuse the issue by playing naive.



Again I'm going to have to disagree with you. True sex predators are a minority of registrants. Keep in mind I've read hundreds (might even be a thousand by now) police reports involving allegations of all types of alleged sexual impropriety.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 26, 2014)

It does not matter if it is a house party or a bash. If they have bad intentions, they will figure out a way to put them out there. There is a reason why I do not warn non-friends about this kind of shit because it is a huge waste of time. They are not your friends for a good reason. 

It is easy to find anyone's true identity these days. So these creeps aren't safe at the bashes anymore.



Yakatori said:


> I thought you guys were talking about the Bashes...


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 27, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Again I'm going to have to disagree with you. True sex predators are a minority of registrants. Keep in mind I've read hundreds (might even be a thousand by now) police reports involving allegations of all types of alleged sexual impropriety.



bullshit! i check the sex offenders in my area whenever i move because i tend to deal with children and young women. i know better. my friends are DAs and public defenders in my area. allegations and police reports are waaay different from convictions where facts have proven something out within a court of law. i think by now you should know the difference between and allegation a police report and a conviction. this kind of attitude is why so much abuse continues to happen. people keep falling for the same old line these practiced professional liars and manipulators shell out every time. if you believe everything they say of course none of them ever did anything wrong. they were always convicted in a court of law because of circumstances. it doesn't even matter that they've been convicted for the same things over and over again by different judges, in different courts in every city and state where they've ever live. as far as i'm concerned there should be zero tolerance as far as convicted sex offenders are concerned. people need to err on the side of caution. his/her ability to party is nowhere near as important as somebody's else's safety.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 27, 2014)

swordchick said:


> It does not matter if it is a house party or a bash. If they have bad intentions, they will figure out a way to put them out there. There is a reason why I do not warn non-friends about this kind of shit because it is a huge waste of time. They are not your friends for a good reason.
> 
> It is easy to find anyone's true identity these days. So these creeps aren't safe at the bashes anymore.



exactly. the main reason people don't say anything is because you get a whole lot of doofuses always defending people who've already been convicted by judges and/or juries or have pled guilty and confessed in a court of law. not only that they've done the very same thing to people they know personally. a victim could be bleeding all over them and they'd still deny it. and that is why we still have so much victimization that never gets stopped in the community.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 27, 2014)

swordchick said:


> "_they have bad intentions, they will figure out a way to put them out there._"


This I can basically agree with. But: 



swordchick said:


> "_It does not matter if it is a house party or a bash._"


I think there's big difference, actually. At least in terms of how to meaningfully address the issue. 



superodalisque said:


> "_...the main reason people don't say anything is because you get a whole lot of doofuses always defending people.._"


Uh...I don't think that's the reason. If even 'a' reason, definitely not "_the *main* reason_," for sure:



swordchick said:


> "_There is a reason why I do not warn non-friends about this kind of shit because it is a huge waste of time. They are not your friends for a good reason._"





bigmac said:


> "_...are a minority of registrants... police reports involving allegations of all types of...._"


Put aside momentarily the issue of danger. Think back to when you were a single guy. Except, now, you're the female version of you. Not like when you were right out of the Army, but pretty fat. Can you honestly see yourself shelling out >$100 per night or >$5 per beer/drink to hang out with a bunch of convicts? 

It's not a 'good look.' It would probably discourage more people from attending than otherwise might. If they knew about...


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 27, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Again I'm going to have to disagree with you. True sex predators are a minority of registrants. Keep in mind I've read hundreds (might even be a thousand by now) police reports involving allegations of all types of alleged sexual impropriety.



I've know someone who had to register as a sex offender for taking a piss in public after the night club closed and wouldn't let her use the ladies room. Even so, she had to register as a level 1 which is vastly different than a level 3. I don't know if there are different types of rules that apply for which level offender you are. Would neigbors have to be alerted for a level 1, for example.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 27, 2014)

Ding! There is a way to get your point across. I have plenty of friends who will get it across to that person. You can't make someone listen, just as you can't make someone do the right thing. Oh, yeah, some people just need to be ignored. If a person have an extensive criminal record, they most likely did that shit.



superodalisque said:


> exactly. the main reason people don't say anything is because you get a whole lot of doofuses always defending people who've already been convicted by judges and/or juries or have pled guilty and confessed in a court of law. not only that they've done the very same thing to people they know personally. a victim could be bleeding all over them and they'd still deny it. and that is why we still have so much victimization that never gets stopped in the community.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 27, 2014)

No, the neighbors wouldn't be alerted. If she didn't do anything to another person, there is no need for it. It doesn't sound like something that happened in the state of Florida. 



LillyBBBW said:


> I've know someone who had to register as a sex offender for taking a piss in public after the night club closed and wouldn't let her use the ladies room. Even so, she had to register as a level 1 which is vastly different than a level 3. I don't know if there are different types of rules that apply for which level offender you are. Would neigbors have to be alerted for a level 1, for example.


----------



## Azrael (Mar 27, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> it doesn't even matter that they've been convicted for the same things over and over again by different judges, in different courts in every city and state where they've ever live. as far as i'm concerned there should be zero tolerance as far as convicted sex offenders are concerned. people need to err on the side of caution. his/her ability to party is nowhere near as iimportant as somebody's else's safety.



I'm mainly going to deal with this part right here....

You see, you mention that people are convicted over and over again wherever they live but if you look at the numbers that's not entirely the case.

Here is Canada's sexual recidivism rates, here is the rather important factor.



> Sexual recidivism rates
> 
> Table 2 summarises the recidivism estimates for three distinct time periods, five years, ten years, and fifteen years, for each of the subgroups examined. The overall recidivism rates (14% after 5 years, 20% after 10 years and 24% after 15 years) were similar for rapists (14%, 21% and 24%) and the combined group of child molesters (13%, 18%, and 23%). There were, however, significant differences between the child molesters, with the highest rates observed among the extrafamilial boy-victim child molesters (35% after 15 years) and the lowest observed rates for the incest offenders (13% after 15 years).
> 
> Offenders with a prior sexual offence conviction had recidivism rates about double the rate observed for first-time sexual offenders (19% versus 37% after 15 years). Age also had a substantial association with recidivism, with offenders older than age 50 at release reoffending at half the rate of the younger (less than 50) offenders (12% versus 26%, respectively, after 15 years). As expected, those who have remained offence free in the community were at reduced risk for subsequent sexual recidivism. Whereas the average 10 year recidivism rate from time of release was 20%, the 10 year recidivism declined to 12% after five years offence-free and to 9% after 10 years offence-free. The five year recidivism rate for those who had been offence-free for 15 years was 4%. Offence-free was defined as no new sexual or violent non-sexual offence, and no non-violent offences serious enough that they are incarcerated at the end of the follow-up period.



You mention of people being convicted over and over again but 25% are reconvicted over a period of 15 years.

The remaining 75% have not been.

A similiar number is also found in the United States as well.

Now, while I think it is perfectly reasonable to be very skeptical of people on the sex offender registry, I don't believe it's very beneficial for us to remain with the notion of "once a sex offender always a sex offender" as the reality clearly does not match up to that notion.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 27, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> This I can basically agree with. But:
> 
> I think there's big difference, actually. At least in terms of how to meaningfully address the issue.
> 
> ...



from what i've seen it isn't always the organizers. many have no problem putting even a slightly questionable person out at all. they understand liability. and you are right, a lot of guys don't like the creepy associations. it's another reason a lot of good guys won't go anymore though. sometimes as long as the guy isn't causing any actual problems at the event they are allowed to stay anyway. since it's when they get people home... i've seen that happen too. 

also some women who have a sense of desperation or bad judgment and will believe anything and have little or no experience with men or socializing will be protective of them for the attention. they exert a lot of unwarranted pressure on other women to keep quiet about what they know. some of them want you to keep quiet because it's a customer and they don't want their other customers scared away. then you have the guys who have their own little secrets they are paranoid about getting out that might not quite meet the level of felony but definitely meet the test for being unethical or cruel who are harshly against any outing of any kind.

i had a little group that was hacked. the guy i thought actually hacked it is a jerk but he didn't do it. the guy who did hack it was paranoid i'd tell what i knew about him. actually what he did wasn't very important to me at all. he was never even really on my radar. he also was not that unusual. but that didn't stop him because these guys are so very sure that they are the center of every fat girl's desperate universe and you have absolutely nothing else going on. little inept incidents can't possibly just be forgettable.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 27, 2014)

Azrael said:


> I'm mainly going to deal with this part right here....
> 
> You see, you mention that people are convicted over and over again wherever they live but if you look at the numbers that's not entirely the case.
> 
> ...



so what. this is a moot point for an individual woman and her personal safety. a 25% chance that the person will reoffend with you personally is not a chance most sane women want to take. to an individual woman with any common sense this would be a dumb risk to take especially with all the men around who would never hurt anyone ever that we could have in our lives. besides that i am speaking of people who we know had ALREADY reoffended inside of the community. so that fact alone completely blows your stat right out of the water.

true sex offenders are not curable. we are not psychologists. we don't need to analyze each one personally. we don't have a duty to reform or rehabilitate criminals just because we want to go out. whether or not the person is a vicious criminal or not at the very least it proves that where socializing is concerned that person has very bad judgment and there are lots of people who don't want to incorporate people like that into their social life. your reasoning is unfortunately extremely bogus in this case and a prime example to Yakatori of the completely nonsensical stuff we are up against.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 27, 2014)

swordchick said:


> Ding! There is a way to get your point across. I have plenty of friends who will get it across to that person. You can't make someone listen, just as you can't make someone do the right thing. Oh, yeah, some people just need to be ignored. If a person have an extensive criminal record, they most likely did that shit.



unfortunately we do have people strange enough that they'd even believe it was an accident that someone stabbed somebody forty times because he fell on them forty times with a knife in his hand lol. that is the kind of logic at work.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 27, 2014)

swordchick said:


> No, the neighbors wouldn't be alerted. If she didn't do anything to another person, there is no need for it. It doesn't sound like something that happened in the state of Florida.



yep, here in Florida it has to be a crime against somebody. anyway what makes people think that fat women are any more likely to WANT to date a felon of any type than other women?


----------



## Wild Zero (Mar 27, 2014)

I've been to dozens of Heavenly Bodies bashes/dances and Heather and her staff do an excellent job removing problematic people (male and female, creeps and people who've hit their limit with booze) from the events discreetly and with respect to other patrons. 

Looking forward to seeing friends at Jersey Bash in a few weeks too.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 27, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> bullshit! i check the sex offenders in my area whenever i move because i tend to deal with children and young women. i know better. my friends are DAs and public defenders in my area. allegations and police reports are waaay different from convictions where facts have proven something out within a court of law. i think by now you should know the difference between and allegation a police report and a conviction. this kind of attitude is why so much abuse continues to happen. people keep falling for the same old line these practiced professional liars and manipulators shell out every time. if you believe everything they say of course none of them ever did anything wrong. they were always convicted in a court of law because of circumstances. it doesn't even matter that they've been convicted for the same things over and over again by different judges, in different courts in every city and state where they've ever live. as far as i'm concerned there should be zero tolerance as far as convicted sex offenders are concerned. people need to err on the side of caution. his/her ability to party is nowhere near as important as somebody's else's safety.



Once a again you've got swept up in an overblown moral panic.

We live in the safest and least violent period ever yet people still succumb to moral panic after moral panic. What's BS is any claim that we're living in the home of the brave (or land of the free for that matter).


----------



## bigmac (Mar 27, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> Put aside momentarily the issue of danger. Think back to when you were a single guy. Except, now, you're the female version of you. Not like when you were right out of the Army, but pretty fat. Can you honestly see yourself shelling out >$100 per night or >$5 per beer/drink to hang out with a bunch of convicts?
> 
> It's not a 'good look.' It would probably discourage more people from attending than otherwise might. If they knew about...




One of the coolest people I ever hung out with was a bank robber.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJkNstUF3GA


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2014)

i doubt it's any fat woman's purposeful goal to go to a party a bash etc... to meet up with a felon. get real.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Once a again you've got swept up in an overblown moral panic.
> 
> We live in the safest and least violent period ever yet people still succumb to moral panic after moral panic. What's BS is any claim that we're living in the home of the brave (or land of the free for that matter).



nope i'm just not a fool with my life.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 28, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Once a again you've got swept up in an overblown moral panic.
> 
> We live in the safest and least violent period ever yet people still succumb to moral panic after moral panic. What's BS is any claim that we're living in the home of the brave (or land of the free for that matter).



I would not consider myself the type of person who is hyperventilating over boogeymen waiting to snatch my pearls. I will say though that in my experience, there just simply aren't enough people in jail right now. Generally speaking I find that many men, in the general sense and not aimed at FAs in particular, get away with doing all kinds of ridiculous crap and will do so with impunity unless you are willing to go way out of your way get them off the street. You have to take a day off work to go to court, file police reports, collect incidents, allow yourself to be bullied and harassed repeatedly, etc. The system is slanted towards protecting their rights and this is why you catch drunk drivers behind the wheel a 3rd and 4th time, men who beat their wives over an over before finally killing them, etc. I don't think we're in the least violent period at all. I think that the levels at which one would measure violence are too high, and at times tragicly so. The laws don't go far enough to protect people from panty sniffers and window peeping whackos out there. I don't agree with the idea that we should engage them or shame them when they don't have those sensibilities to begin with. I'm starting to lean towards the idea that we should all be armed or offered tax breaks on certified self-defense classes. It's not a trivial matter.


----------



## Blackjack (Mar 28, 2014)

Wild Zero said:


> I've been to dozens of Heavenly Bodies bashes/dances and Heather and her staff do an excellent job removing problematic people (male and female, creeps and people who've hit their limit with booze) from the events discreetly and with respect to other patrons.
> 
> Looking forward to seeing friends at Jersey Bash in a few weeks too.



But the house party that I was at once had a salsa that was made with bad tomatoes and made people sick so that means that everything at bashes is E. Coli!


----------



## bigmac (Mar 28, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> I would not consider myself the type of person who is hyperventilating over boogeymen waiting to snatch my pearls. I will say though that in my experience, *there just simply aren't enough people in jail right now*. ...



AUFKM!!! America locks up more people than any other country. Many states spend more on jails and prisons than they do on colleges and universities. Your statement is particularly jarring in that you're an African American and its Americans who suffer most from our out of control prison industrial complex.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2014)

bigmac said:


> AUFKM!!! America locks up more people than any other country. Many states spend more on jails and prisons than they do on colleges and universities. Your statement is particularly jarring in that you're an African American and its Americans who suffer most from our out of control prison industrial complex.



there is a prison industrial complex alright. but there aren't more African Americans in prison than in college so don't nebulously bring that bullshit stat into the discussion. stereotyping black people's association with prisons is wrong because white people who are felons still outnumber black ones in huge amounts no matter what the intra racial ratios are. the average person on the street including black people are much more likely to come into contact with a white felon. it wouldn't hurt to remember that. in other cases you haven't done your research. also my friends who are black males and in the community will tell you that they are treated with much more suspicion than those white males who are actually felons. and i do know that people are much more likely to spread and entertain rumors about them even though the ones i know are all college educated ad have NEVER been arrested. 

the fact that there is a prison industrial complex does not in ANY WAY mean women have to put their safety at risk. one has absolutely nothing to do with the other. most people do go to prison for non violent drug charges. some of us don't want to be involved with men who either do drugs or sell drugs. some of us definitely don't want to be involved with people dumb enough to be caught at it even if they do. some of us don't want to be caught up in people who might be controlled by their addictions either. some of us prefer grown ass men who have an emphasis elsewhere altogether. that group may be very different from people who are convicted sex offenders anyway. but it still doesn't mean a fat woman wants or has to have to want that in her life either. some of us assume that neither fit into our idea of the kinds of people we want to invite into our personal life. a lot of them might be good or nice people but it's okay if MY life or MY FRIENDS lives ARE MORE IMPORTANT to me than a stranger with a felony.

everybody keeps asking women to put their own best interests aside. that is exactly why we entertain so much abuse, why we and our children are more likely to be impoverished. i'm tired of women being asked to entertained grown ass men who can't handle their business. we don't have to. we don't need to. just because a woman is fat it doesn't mean she has to throw all of her personal standards out the window. it's not moralizing. it's taking personal control of the kind of life you want to have as a grown woman and who and what you want in it. we don't need to make ourselves available to just any old body.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2014)

bigmac said:


> AUFKM!!! America locks up more people than any other country. Many states spend more on jails and prisons than they do on colleges and universities. Your statement is particularly jarring in that you're an African American and its Americans who suffer most from our out of control prison industrial complex.



as far as people who commit violence against women, which is what we are talking about, there are not. people aren't punished at very high rates or serve very much jail time at all for crimes aimed at women. there is a huge disparity in punishment meted out in crimes against women and children versus crimes against men.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 28, 2014)

bigmac said:


> AUFKM!!! America locks up more people than any other country. Many states spend more on jails and prisons than they do on colleges and universities. Your statement is particularly jarring in that you're an African American and its Americans who suffer most from our out of control prison industrial complex.



My position is, people are too busy arbitrarily frisking blacks and hispanics to notice that the joker has gotten away once again. Every time I see some slick assed person abusing the system that favors them I'm reminded that if that guy were black his jaw would have been broken and he would have been dragged off to jail years ago. The idea that a particular person or place is tough on crime is code for we harass minotrities for stupid crap while letting that white guy take a photo up your skirt on the bus.


----------



## tonynyc (Mar 28, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> My position is, people are too busy arbitrarily frisking blacks and hispanics to notice that the joker has gotten away once again. Every time I see some slick assed person abusing the system that favors them I'm reminded that if that guy were black his jaw would have been broken and he would have been dragged off to jail years ago. The idea that a particular person or place is tough on crime is code for we harass minotrities for stupid crap while letting that white guy take a photo up your skirt on the bus.



Pretty much this - trouble with the law is that there are many "grey" areas and Justice can be blind in many fronts. I can only think of the Charles Stuart case in Boston. Charles killed his pregnant wife back in 1989 and blamed it on an African American Male. 

The police did a massive manhunt of the Roxbury Section which led to the arrest of an innocent man- William Bennett. 

I often wondered what became of Mr. Bennett - was there any updates or news.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 28, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> Pretty much this - trouble with the law is that there are many "grey" areas and Justice can be blind in many fronts. I can only think of the Charles Stuart case in Boston. Charles killed his pregnant wife back in 1989 and blamed it on an African American Male.
> 
> The police did a massive manhunt of the Roxbury Section which led to the arrest of an innocent man- William Bennett.
> 
> I often wondered what became of Mr. Bennett - was there any updates or news.



I admit to having a fuzzy concept of the whole thing but from my vantage point it seems the laws are well meaning. It's the people charged with interpreting the law that are the problem. Your outcome on a particular case can vary dramatically depending on the lawyer, judge or the jury you get and unfortunately justice is very rarely blind. There are days (very much like today actually) where I just feel like we should just take everybody and put them all the fuck in jail. I'm sick of them.

As for Bennett, I believe he filed a law suit and they settled. No one was allowed to talk about the terms but word on the street is it wasn't enough.


----------



## swordchick (Mar 28, 2014)

It just means they don't have the goods that a felon or anyone else wants.



superodalisque said:


> nope i'm just not a fool with my life.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 28, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> as far as people who commit violence against women, which is what we are talking about, there are not. people aren't punished at very high rates or serve very much jail time at all for crimes aimed at women. *there is a huge disparity in punishment meted out in crimes against women and children versus crimes against men.*



Yes there is a huge disparity -- but its the opposite of your supposed reality. If I punch another man its a misdemeanor with a maximum punishment of six months in county jail. If I punch my wife its a felony with a maximum punishment of four years in state prison.

I really have no idea where you come up with this stuff.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 28, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Yes there is a huge disparity -- but its the opposite of your supposed reality. If I punch another man its a misdemeanor with a maximum punishment of six months in county jail. If I punch my wife its a felony with a maximum punishment of four years in state prison.
> 
> I really have no idea where you come up with this stuff.



laws are subject to the application of those laws and judges have sentencing latitude. what happens in law books can be very different than what actually happens in the legal system. 

American Civil Liberties Union
BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF

https://www.aclu.org/womens-rights/words-prison-did-you-know

*Words From Prison - Did You Know...?*

Women receive harsher sentences for killing their male partners than men receive for killing their female partners.
The average prison sentence of men who kill their female partners is 2 to 6 years.
Women who kill their partners are sentenced on average to 15 years, *despite the fact that most women who kill their partners do so to protect themselves from violence initiated by their partners*.[xliii]

this is another reason women should never risk being around people who could potentially ever put her in the position of having to defend herself. not only would she have to fight off abuse but even if she is only defending herself she can end up being punished severely and unfairly for that.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 29, 2014)

Azrael said:


> "_...that people are convicted over and over again wherever they live but if you look at the numbers...I don't believe it's very beneficial for us to remain with the notion of...as the reality clearly does not match up to that notion._"


She never even mentioned _recidivism_ though. So, I took it as people who were convicted on multiple counts in more than just one jurisdiction before release. Which is probably more common than you might think, since one type of case can uncover evidence to be used in another.

Either way, measuring recidivism in just arrests or convictions is obviously problematic. Just because anyone going through the system at whatever level will tend to adapt to the very mechanisms designed to hold them accountable. Yeah, part of that is reflecting on their own behavior, the entire chain of consequences proceeding from whatever triggers or root causes of their own disfunction. But not so much to the exclusion of _outsmarting_, _not getting caught_. Naturally, these two tracks are competing with each other in a sense, but also running concurrently.

So, to look at it another way: Just because a person is a little bit older, smarter, wiser, etc or just more experienced or careful in continuing to commit crimes, it doesn't necessarily make them less any less dangerous? Its more just like a better refined, more nuanced predisposition towards it. 

In that sense, a person with a proven abusive disposition is not so much said to be reformed by the criminal justice system; but, in varying degrees, contained. Isolated from the mainstream of society in such a way that they pose no bigger threat to anyone else than the very people they will come to depend upon the most for their survival outside of the system, their own family. 



bigmac said:


> "_...America locks up more people than any other country...._"


Ah...this old chestnut, that gets tossed out there like spaghetti thrown against the wall.

One of the basic problems of the times we're living in (post-modernity) is how it sets-up all of these comparisons that probably do little more than just take us yet further from the truth.

Yeah, the US imprisons lots of people. So what? How many countries around the world can you really meaningfully compare it to? Yes, there some are countries with a large tax base/economic development, some degree of hetereogeneity/immigration, and a good deal of both political & economic freedom (France?), but they're all much smaller. A country like India certainly stands-out, both for being a very large democracy and having a long-stranding & deeply ingrained democratic & secular political culture. Along with a lot of cultural diversity some economic development. But it's also very poor (GDP _per capita_) and over-populated. So, what do you suppose is going to happen to its relative # of prisoners (per pop100,000) as it begins to temper its overall population growth and its civil service gains more access to the kind tools & training of a modern police force? 

Yeah, there is a prison industrial complex. But so is there also an educational industrial complex. A medical industrial complex. (_Dare I say it?_) A legal & political industrial complex, as well. And, to mention, 'the original industrial complex' that lots of Americas seem to like perfectly fine. That's capitalism. The profit motive is not so much a problem to solve, but something that has to be _managed_, _regulated_; continuously & persistently without end. That's the real solution, not lamenting 'how things are.' 



LillyBBBW said:


> "_...there just simply aren't enough people in jail right now...get away with doing all kinds of ridiculous crap and will do so with impunity ...The system is slanted towards protecting their rights and this is why you catch *drunk drivers behind the wheel a 3rd and 4th time, men who beat their wives over an over before finally killing them, etc*. I don't think we're in the least violent period at all. I think that the levels at which one would measure violence are too high, and at times tragicly so...._"


You know, my knee-jerk reaction to this would've been to berate your lack of appreciation for how violent things once were, less than a couple hundred years ago. But then I quickly realized how long past we are from the economic boom of the 90's, the 20 year anniversary of Roe Vs. Wade, etc... 

Truly, it was a great time. Certainly, I can't argue the point that we weren't all so much better off then. 

But, nowadays, nothing really is going to change for the better, either by just jailing a much higher number of people or even just more proportionally adjusted for things like race or gender or even income or _educational opportunity_ (however you want to measure that). Or just more exclusively targeting 'the violent offenders.' Because, as any Libertarian should realize, there's an equal & opposite reaction for every large-scale type of action. As you well-know, based on your "guns & self defense" speculation, there is at least some degree to which a significant amount of crime & mayhem is deterred by a rational fear of personal retribution. Or the more wide-spread social support for the propriety of such impulses. 

To stab at a zoological metaphor: If you rid the oceans of too large a portion of the largest animals (sharks, swordfish, sturgeon, sea turtles, etc..) it might carry with it the unintended consequence of too great of an environmental advantage to some other type of organism (e.g. jelllyfish) that are, maybe, less intimidating but, en mass, an even greater threat to the entire ecosystem.

And so, I feel like we really need to begin with a better appreciation of the true social costs of putting people away for however long that needs to be, and how to better mitigate whatever comes about from that. Better-crafted and more strongly supported strategies to support that population (the most 'at risk' families) in the ways which will hold everyone to some degree of accountability. And allow (almost) everyone to earn ever-increasing opportunities to contribute more directly towards the ultimate repair of what's broken down.

And maybe that means it's actually more difficult for the average person out there to maintain their license to drive. (Such that it requires a more substantial investment in public transportation) Or acquire a firearm. (Such that it's totally impractical for most) Or even maintain just partial custody/visitation of their kids. (To where we further empower grandparents, aunts, uncles, siblings, & even neighbors to be the one to step-up and say...) 

Because, fundamentally, that's the real difference, _the social fabric_. Or, perhaps, just a deeper more underlying one, that's not as as readily pointed towards if at all accessible as topics like _guns_ or _this type of medicine_ or _that type of social safety-net_. That's why (I think so, anyway) in a country like Japan, you can buy panties in a vending machine. And yet, there's very little in the way of street crime.


----------



## daddyoh70 (Mar 29, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> Pretty much this - trouble with the law is that there are many "grey" areas and Justice can be blind in many fronts. I can only think of the Charles Stuart case in Boston. Charles killed his pregnant wife back in 1989 and blamed it on an African American Male.
> 
> The police did a massive manhunt of the Roxbury Section which led to the arrest of an innocent man- William Bennett.
> 
> I often wondered what became of Mr. Bennett - was there any updates or news.



Tony, this, understandably, left some deep wounds. The most recent thing I could find was a 2011 article. Can't say I blame him for his attitude towards Stuart's death.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...05/stuart_death_brings_no_relief_to_bennetts/


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 29, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> ..... You know, my knee-jerk reaction to this would've been to berate your lack of appreciation for how violent things once were, less than a couple hundred years ago. But then I quickly realized how long past we are from the economic boom of the 90's, the 20 year anniversary of Roe Vs. Wade, etc...
> 
> Truly, it was a great time. Certainly, I can't argue the point that we weren't all so much better off then.
> 
> ...



These sentiments are often the types of things mostly said by people who are the comfortable beneficiaries of the hierarchy. 'Now wait a minute, wait a minute. Don't upset the apple cart because it might adversely effect something that is so far looks like it's working. At least for me it is.' This is what it sounds like you are saying to women, minorities - anyone who is smothered under the boot this systemic problem. I can't be troubled to look up the numbers but at last viewing, blacks make up only a small percentage of the population. Like 13%, 19%, or something like that. We're filling up the damned jails for offenses that Miley Cyrus can do openly on stage as part of her hideous act. Oh but lets not complain, we're living in awesome times. Says you.

ETA: By the way, I know this isn't Hyde Park, but I like this thread.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Mar 29, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Yes there is a huge disparity -- but its the opposite of your supposed reality. If I punch another man its a misdemeanor with a maximum punishment of six months in county jail. If I punch my wife its a felony with a maximum punishment of four years in state prison.
> 
> I really have no idea where you come up with this stuff.



We've made some pretty decent progress in some areas I think. The thing is, by the time we get to the point where an abuser is going to face serious consequences for their crimes they've already worn the victim down with aggravated offenses time and time again that the justice system simply doesn't acknowledge as a big deal. I find that a major portion of people in law making positions are completely disconnected from the reality in which most women live. Just look online for example. The sheer numbers of irritating baboons that live on the thrill of harassing women translates well in to real life. Man, I'm 428 pounds and not even considered attractive to main stream appeal and I've had to deal with it. This kind of harassment, there are no consequences to it except towards the person it's aimed at. It disrupts their lives, sometimes for prolonged periods before their complaints about it will be taken seriously rather than being shrugged off as another hysterical woman afraid of something that is nothing. I agree that furious action is taken when a woman has been assaulted but many times a woman has to wait for this to happen before anyone will do anything. We've got to take the punch and I don't think that's cool.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 29, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> laws are subject to the application of those laws and judges have sentencing latitude. what happens in law books can be very different than what actually happens in the legal system.
> 
> American Civil Liberties Union
> BECAUSE FREEDOM CAN'T PROTECT ITSELF
> ...



Sorry but the quoted statistics are BULL SHIT! To get the sentences you describe the male perpetrators couldn't be sentenced to anything more egregious than voluntary manslaughter -- and even then the judge would have to not sentence the perpetrator to the maximum. THIS IS NOT REALITY.

Reality:

If your a first time offender and the victim did not need medical attention (i.e. nothing worse than a bruise) you'll likely be put on probation (but will likely have served 5 or 6 weeks in jail before sentencing.

If the victim needed minor medical treatment (i.e. stitches) you'll likely need to do at least 180 days in the county jail before you're put on probation.

If you have a significant but not violent history and the victim needed nothing more than minor medical treatment you'll do a "county year" (i.e. 365 days in the county jail) and then be put on probation.

If you have a violent history and victim needed nothing more than minor medical treatment you're going to state prison for two years.

If you have a strike in your criminal history and victim needed nothing more than minor medical treatment you're going to state prison for four years (and your time credits will be greatly reduced).

If the victim suffered serious injury you're going to prison for at least two years (even if its your first offence). Three or four years if you have a criminal history. At least six years if you have a prior strike.

If the victim suffered great bodily injury you're going to prison for at least 5 years (even if its your first offence). Seven years if you have a criminal history. At least nine years if you have a prior strike.

*If the victim died its going to take some damned unusual circumstances to avoid a life sentence.*

The foregoing are the sentence ranges I've actually see imposed upon the several hundred domestic violence perpetrators I've personally represented as well as the several hundred more I've personally observed sentenced.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 29, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Sorry but the quoted statistics are BULL SHIT! To get the sentences you describe the male perpetrators couldn't be sentenced to anything more egregious than voluntary manslaughter -- and even then the judge would have to not sentence the perpetrator to the maximum. THIS IS NOT REALITY.
> 
> Reality:
> 
> ...



sorry but i trust the ACLU stats more than your opinion post


----------



## bigmac (Mar 29, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> sorry but i trust the ACLU stats more than your opinion post



It wasn't the ACLU's number. It was quoted by an ACLU writer without thought or analysis. Anyone who actually believes that murders are being sentenced to only 2 to six years is incredibly gullible.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 29, 2014)

Haven't been able to find the source of the men only get two to six years for murdering women statistic (although its does seem to be making the rounds on the internet). However, official statistics indicate that the median prison sentence for women who commit violent crimes is 60 months (5 years) while the median prison sentence for men who commit violent crimes is 72 months (6 years).

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/wo.pdf

_See page ten of the linked United States Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics article._


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 30, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Haven't been able to find the source of the men only get two to six years for murdering women statistic (although its does seem to be making the rounds on the internet). However, official statistics indicate that the median prison sentence for women who commit violent crimes is 60 months (5 years) while the median prison sentence for men who commit violent crimes is 72 months (6 years).
> 
> http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/wo.pdf
> 
> _See page ten of the linked United States Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics article._



actually this doesn't really matter. what does matter though is the fact that no one should have to be exposed to people like that. one is too many and when they do show up something should be done. not just for safety but to protect the reputations by association of the other people involved.


----------



## CleverBomb (Mar 30, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> I would not consider myself the type of person who is hyperventilating over boogeymen waiting to snatch my pearls. I will say though that in my experience, there just simply aren't enough people in jail right now.





bigmac said:


> AUFKM!!! America locks up more people than any other country. Many states spend more on jails and prisons than they do on colleges and universities.


You might both be right, actually.

What that implies is that there are a lot of people in jail right now that shouldn't be, and there are many who should be that aren't.


----------



## tonynyc (Mar 30, 2014)

daddyoh70 said:


> Tony, this, understandably, left some deep wounds. The most recent thing I could find was a 2011 article. Can't say I blame him for his attitude towards Stuart's death.
> http://www.boston.com/news/local/ma...05/stuart_death_brings_no_relief_to_bennetts/



*
Thanks for the update- what a twist as far as the outcome of that case and it seems as if those wounds will always be there for Bennett and his family
*



CleverBomb said:


> You might both be right, actually.
> 
> What that implies is that there are a lot of people in jail right now that shouldn't be, and there are many who should be that aren't.



*
The law is a complex issue for sure
*


----------



## bigmac (Mar 30, 2014)

CleverBomb said:


> You might both be right, actually.
> 
> What that implies is that there are a lot of people in jail right now that shouldn't be, and there are many who should be that aren't.



Maybe if we didn't spend all our time and effort responding to the latest moral panic we'd be able to catch and punish more real criminals.


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 31, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Maybe if we didn't spend all our time and effort responding to the latest moral panic we'd be able to catch and punish more real criminals.



maybe if people didn't preach tolerance of the people who do behave badly to fat women they wouldn't even have a chance to become felons or real criminals.


----------



## CleverBomb (Mar 31, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> maybe if people didn't preach tolerance of the people who do behave badly to fat women they wouldn't even have a chance to become felons or real criminals.


Well, that's entirely possible. 

I suspect that bigmac, Tony, Lilly, Daddyoh and I went a bit wider than just the topic at hand in the last few posts -- and where that went is probably more suited to Hyde Park than directly relevant to this particular discussion. 

If there's interest, I'll drag the "are we locking up the right people?" sidebar over there for continued discussion.


----------



## tonynyc (Mar 31, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> maybe if people didn't preach tolerance of the people who do behave badly to fat women they wouldn't even have a chance to become felons or real criminals.



*I don't see any specific post where someone is preaching for the excuse of bad behavior. 
*


CleverBomb said:


> Well, that's entirely possible.
> 
> I suspect that bigmac, Tony, Lilly, Daddyoh and I went a bit wider than just the topic at hand in the last few posts -- and where that went is probably more suited to Hyde Park than directly relevant to this particular discussion.
> 
> If there's interest, I'll drag the "are we locking up the right people?" sidebar over there for continued discussion.



*
that also returns back to the question you posted earlier (sometimes you lock up the right folks and sometimes you don't )
*


----------



## superodalisque (Mar 31, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> *I don't see any specific post where someone is preaching for the excuse of bad behavior.
> *
> 
> 
> ...



maybe so but wrangling over who is truly a felon is a distraction from the fact that there are felons and proven abusers among the regular folk in the community with a freedom they shouldn't have. the emphasis on who is a felon and why is irrelevant when it comes to someone who has already been a bad actor with many people and it is known. for instance someone whose abusive emails i have seen that have been sent to several different people, some of who don't even know each other or about the other's experiences, and whose rap sheet i have seen that contains weapons charges and domestic abuse charges and who self admittedly has serious mental issues that are sometimes out of his control involving violence. this guy is pretty much an Adam Lanza waiting to happen. but he is still going just about everywhere in the community. people do turn up their noses because many are aware but he is still allowed in. 

sure there are innocent people in the justice system but i would hazard a guess that when it comes to violent crime most of them are not. when i talk about felons coming around the community i'm not referring to people busted with a bag of weed. and if anyone believes every last sob story criminals tell especially if they are involved in the justice system they have a serious judgment problem and i'd be very afraid for them.


----------



## bigmac (Mar 31, 2014)

A lot of people who get busted with a bag of weed are indeed convicted of felonies [i.e. they get busted after a traffic stop -- or riding their bicycle after dusk without a light (that's a favorite one in Fresno) -- and are charged with trafficking, a felony, rather than simple possession). It doesn't take much to get a felony record these days -- especially if you're poor and dark skinned.


----------



## Yakatori (Mar 31, 2014)

How big of a bag are we talking about?


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

bigmac said:


> A lot of people who get busted with a bag of weed are indeed convicted of felonies [i.e. they get busted after a traffic stop -- or riding their bicycle after dusk without a light (that's a favorite one in Fresno) -- and are charged with trafficking, a felony, rather than simple possession). It doesn't take much to get a felony record these days -- especially if you're poor and dark skinned.



yeah but most felons aren't dark skinned and as far as i know a bag of weed isn't all that violent unless you're a fridge


----------



## bigmac (Apr 1, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> How big of a bag are we talking about?



It can be a single joint. If its moving its transportation. This loophole gives cops and DAs discretion that they abuse on a regular basis. Middle class white kids get charged with simple possession of under 28 grams (an infraction, not even a misdemeanor, that carries only a $100 fine). Poor and/or dark skinned kids get charged with felony transportation for doing the exact same thing (i.e cruising around town with a tiny bit of weed).

_Note: California law -- law in other states will vary._


----------



## bigmac (Apr 1, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> yeah but most felons aren't dark skinned and as far as i know a bag of weed isn't all that violent unless you're a fridge



White people facing felony charges are few and far between in the counties I've worked in. And any way you slice the statistics dark skinned people are grossly over represented.

_According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics non-Hispanic blacks accounted for 39.4% of the prison and jail population in 2009, with whites 34.2%, and Hispanics 20.6%. *The incarceration rate of black males was over 6 times higher than that of white males*, with a rate of 4,749 per 100,000 US residents_

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

bigmac said:


> It can be a single joint. If its moving its transportation. This loophole gives cops and DAs discretion that they abuse on a regular basis. Middle class white kids get charged with simple possession of under 28 grams (an infraction, not even a misdemeanor, that carries only a $100 fine). Poor and/or dark skinned kids get charged with felony transportation for doing the exact same thing (i.e cruising around town with a tiny bit of weed).



people arrested for having a joint aren't the ones we're talking about who ARE coming around and threatening women at bashes who also have records for doing that and more to others. don't confuse the issue. 

even with the racism in sentencing etc.. there are still a whole lot more white male felons than anybody else. a black male is more likely to be in college than in prison so a felon is NOT the norm for the black males.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 1, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> people arrested for having a joint aren't the ones we're talking about who ARE coming around and threatening women at bashes who also have records for doing that and more to others. don't confuse the issue.
> 
> even with the racism in sentencing etc.. there are still a whole lot more white male felons than anybody else. a black male is more likely to be in college than in prison so a felon is NOT the norm for the black males.




According to the NAACP: _One in six black men had been incarcerated as of 2001. If current trends continue, one in three black males born today can expect to spend time in prison during his lifetime._

http://www.naacp.org/pages/criminal-justice-fact-sheet

These numbers should both scare you and piss you off.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-43

here are 2011 stats for crimes divided by type that does not lump in marijuana selling etc... even though black men are overly represented due to systemic bias, as is often proven by newly the applied DNA analysis when they can get it, that a lot of states are fighting, white males are still *numerically *more likely to be the person who'll victimize someone. note the differences in Sex offenses , white males 38,422 black males 13,189 ; Property crime white males 861,756 black males 372,993 ; Vandalism white males,132,850 black males 45,055. also a lot of black crime, especially violent crime is gang related. i don't know of any fat gangs.

but the real issue to a potential victim isn't whether someone is black or white but whether they are more likely to be guilty.* so actually what you are arguing is that white felons are more likely to be guilty of the crimes they are convicted of which also isn't good. i doubt a lot of white male attendees would appreciate that sentiment. *

so rather than getting into the race of the thing it would probably be more effective to just *do something about a particular person no matter their race who is not only a known felon but also someone who has done things that make people suspect enough bother look it up through previously shown behavior that is harmful or aggressive toward other people. how hard is that?*


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 1, 2014)

bigmac said:


> "_Note: *California* law -- law in other states will vary._"


This kind of makes a big difference. Since anyone can get a Medical Card. Which, actually, provides a significant discount.

Kind of makes you wonder why someone who smokes regularly and is carrying around a bag on a bicycle doesn't have one? I mean, could it be that they are actually...._trafficking_?


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> This kind of makes a big difference. Since anyone can get a Medical Card. Which, actually, provides a significant discount.
> 
> Kind of makes you wonder why someone who smokes regularly and is carrying around a bag on a bicycle doesn't have one? I mean, could it be that they are actually...._trafficking_?



exactly. and what would make anyone think any BBW wants to deal with a drug trafficker of any level, small time or not?


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 1, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-43
> 
> here are 2011 stats for crimes divided by type that does not lump in marijuana selling etc... even though black men are overly represented due to systemic bias, as is often proven by newly the applied DNA analysis when they can get it, that a lot of states are fighting, white males are still *numerically *more likely to be the person who'll victimize someone. note the differences in Sex offenses , white males 38,422 black males 13,189 ; Property crime white males 861,756 black males 372,993 ; Vandalism white males,132,850 black males 45,055. also a lot of black crime, especially violent crime is gang related. i don't know of any fat gangs.
> 
> ...



What are you suggesting people should do? Just curious.


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 1, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-43
> 
> here are 2011 stats for crimes divided by type that does not lump in marijuana selling etc... even though black men are overly represented due to systemic bias, as is often proven by newly the applied DNA analysis when they can get it, that a lot of states are fighting, white males are still *numerically *more likely to be the person who'll victimize someone. note the differences in Sex offenses , white males 38,422 black males 13,189 ; Property crime white males 861,756 black males 372,993 ; Vandalism white males,132,850 black males 45,055. also a lot of black crime, especially violent crime is gang related. i don't know of any fat gangs.
> 
> ...


Nothing is hard depends how much you want to simplfy and ignore the obvious


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 1, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> What are you suggesting people should do? Just curious.



Well Lilly this is my take and One could look at these possible choices.

1. Do nothing
2.Try to gain awarness of the current laws
3. Try to gain awarenes of one's option for self protection
4. Try to gain awarenesd of self defense options that works for yourself and what is available in your area


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> What are you suggesting people should do? Just curious.



as some of the more responsible members of various groups that are commercial have done, and as has even been done here at times. just keep them out. after all they are also exposing business owners to liability if something happens under their watch.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 1, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> Well Lilly this is my take and One could look at these possible choices.
> 
> 1. Do nothing
> 2.Try to gain awarness of the current laws
> ...



all of that puts owness on victims alone instead of people who've already committed acts. it sounds very similar the psychology of rape culture. it's simpler to just keep them out when a person is made aware. there is nothing about keeping them away that is in any way illegal and many people will be perfectly happy not to have to associate with them anyway.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 1, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> exactly. and what would make anyone think any BBW wants to deal with a drug trafficker of any level, small time or not?



From what I've seen guys with drugs can be very popular. I've been to quite a few bashes and BBW clubs and have to say BBWs partake in the use of illicit substances at least as much as the general population. And lets not forget that many women find bad boys quite attractive -- its been my experience that this is especially true of BBWs.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 1, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> This kind of makes a big difference. Since anyone can get a Medical Card. Which, actually, provides a significant discount.
> 
> Kind of makes you wonder why someone who smokes regularly and is carrying around a bag on a bicycle doesn't have one? I mean, could it be that they are actually...._trafficking_?



A medical marijuana card is not going to save you in central California. Local cops and district attorneys can always find a way to charge you with a felony. Indeed having a card just pisses them off and makes them try harder.


----------



## Marlayna (Apr 1, 2014)

bigmac said:


> From what I've seen guys with drugs can be very popular. I've been to quite a few bashes and BBW clubs and have to say BBWs partake in the use of illicit substances at least as much as the general population. And lets not forget that many women find bad boys quite attractive -- its been my experience that this is especially true of BBWs.


Gee, nobody ever offered me any illicit substances. Wonder what I was doing wrong.:really sad:


----------



## bigmac (Apr 1, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> Gee, nobody ever offered me any illicit substances. Wonder what I was doing wrong.:really sad:



No one shared with me either -- I'm thinking its because I kind of look like a cop whose had a few too many donuts.


----------



## Marlayna (Apr 1, 2014)

bigmac said:


> No one shared with me either -- I'm thinking its because I kind of look like a cop whose had a few too many donuts.


Like Mike from Mike & Molly?


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 2, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> Gee, nobody ever offered me any illicit substances. Wonder what I was doing wrong.:really sad:



me either. i have never even seen anybody doing anything except drinking. ifeel left out too


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 2, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> all of that puts owness on victims alone instead of people who've already committed acts. it sounds very similar the psychology of rape culture. it's simpler to just keep them out when a person is made aware. there is nothing about keeping them away that is in any way illegal and many people will be perfectly happy not to have to associate with them anyway.



Unfortunately that's simply the structural nature of our society, most especially here in the US. Just ride the public bus one day, they're everywhere. You can't just take special people and lock them away or throw them out of the hotel like in the old days, they have rights and they know it. People like that are not unaware of their nature and relative or counselor has armed them with with an astonishing knowledge of what their rights are and what they should recite to cops and people in authority while they are being detained for being assholes. Also a felon's record in Biloxi won't read in Pheonix unless a cop is willing to go the extra mile to dig deeper which usually doesn't happen unless the suspect looks like Henry Louis Gates. The bottom line is the world is a wretched hive of scum and villainy and in the end the onus still falls upon us. I can't carry pepper spray without a permit in MA and if I use it to protect myself I could be charged with a felony while my attacker goes free unless I let him hit me. It's a sick sad world.



bigmac said:


> No one shared with me either -- I'm thinking its because I kind of look like a cop whose had a few too many donuts.



I get approached a lot at these parties, mostly by new friends who brought their own stuff or some shady figure loitering in the lobby. Apparently I look like I'm down.


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 2, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> Unfortunately that's simply the structural nature of our society, most especially here in the US. Just ride the public bus one day, they're everywhere. You can't just take special people and lock them away or throw them out of the hotel like in the old days, they have rights and they know it. *People like that are not unaware of their nature and relative or counselor has armed them with with an astonishing knowledge of what their rights are and what they should recite to cops and people in authority while they are being detained for being assholes*. Also a felon's record in Biloxi won't read in Pheonix unless a cop is willing to go the extra mile to dig deeper which usually doesn't happen unless the suspect looks like Henry Louis Gates. The bottom line is the world is a wretched hive of scum and villainy and in the end the onus still falls upon us. I can't carry pepper spray without a permit in MA and if I use it to protect myself I could be charged with a felony while my attacker goes free unless I let him hit me. It's a sick sad world.



*Lilly* it is an imperfect sick world and to bring your public bus comment further - We have no idea as to whom we interact with on a daily basis (it could be the civil servant that provides services - the parishioner that sits next to us at church)...

And to echo the sentiment - when it comes to self defense nothing is clear cut- one cannot carry pepper spray or stun guns in NYC either.




superodalisque said:


> all of that puts owness on victims alone instead of people who've already committed acts. it sounds very similar the psychology of rape culture. it's simpler to just keep them out when a person is made aware. there is nothing about keeping them away that is in any way illegal and many people will be perfectly happy not to have to associate with them anyway.



It's not about putting the blame on the victim - it's important to have that conversation on what ALL options are. What options are you offering


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 2, 2014)

for a relatively short & predetermined amount of time. And being civil towards that person as a simple means to an end, getting from point A to point B.

Versus choosing to socialize with someone whose personal values, attitudes, & habits are largely incompatible with your own. 

For something like personal self-defense to even be on your radar, you're probably not, at that point, in a social setting as much as more of tactical type of theater. That doesn't really match-up with how most people like to '_get to know_' each other.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 2, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> *Lilly* it is an imperfect sick world and to bring your public bus comment further - We have no idea as to whom we interact with on a daily basis (it could be the civil servant that provides services - the parishioner that sits next to us at church)...
> 
> And to echo the sentiment - when it comes to self defense nothing is clear cut- one cannot carry pepper spray or stun guns in NYC either.
> 
> .....snipped.......



It would be great if shady people were more easily identifiable but they aren't always. The ones that look the part are often times the perfect distraction from the ones you truly need to be keeping an eye on. They're not nearly as obvious.


----------



## Yakatori (Apr 2, 2014)

I'm thinking of the opening montage of _Monk_.



LillyBBBW said:


> "_...the world is a wretched hive of scum and villainy... It's a sick sad world._"


Have you always felt this way? I'm asking in all seriousness, especially as you think back to 20 years ago or so.

I live out in the burbs. And I admit this might have something to do with my outlook; just because of how I can remember, when living in a more urban environment, that I would occasionally get annoyed with stuff like you're describing. For one case, especially going to a public library, before things like Wifi allowed everyone to to spread out a little more. Or having to take the bus a lot.

Which, by the way, I think it's buses, most precisely, where a lot these types of issues come to head. After all, on a subway, you can just go to another car. And, actually, most of the time when I'm traveling through NYC, I find myself trying to anticipate (with some success) which car will give me the best opportunity to really relax & spread out on my seat. Even if that means having to walk a bit further both on boarding and at the arrival platform. 

Although, to be fair, I've always considered the fact that I could (so cheaply) take a bus (and at least just cab my way back) to so many different kinds of places at whatever time of the day or night a major convenience, regardless of what might come with that.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 2, 2014)

Yakatori said:


> I'm thinking of the opening montage of _Monk_.
> 
> Have you always felt this way? I'm asking in all seriousness, especially as you think back to 20 years ago or so.
> 
> ...



Yakatori, I honestly do feel that way and have for quite some time. It does have a whole lot to do with where I live and the circles I must travel through. I take public transportation exclusively and I tell you, DAILY I exchange stories with a co worker of mine about the kinds of people we encounter on the travel route. I changed jobs some months ago and travel at a more populated rush time and it's incredulous to me just how many unhinged people are just out there walking around, foaming at the mouth, unbathed, talking in the faces of strangers, hurling obscenities, pushing pregnant women out of the way to get to the empty seats first. They don't have any social intelligence at all and they're just out there - taking advantage, being taken advantage of, etc. It really is kind of a mess here and this is not a unique problem. We don't have good track records as to how we deal with the mentally ill in the United States. Boston in particular is known to be a very difficult place to make friends and it is because of this problem. No one talks to anyone else and if someone talks to you, you are instantly on high alert about that person. You want to get away from them, and this is not an altogether irrational reaction.  People from elsewhere notice this right away about this city and it doesn't take long for them to figure out why. Some of the behaviors I see online are reminiscent of these encounters. I see people taking up arguments with these online trolls and think to myself, if they could only see who they're arguing with they would stop.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 3, 2014)

tonynyc said:


> *Lilly* it is an imperfect sick world and to bring your public bus comment further - We have no idea as to whom we interact with on a daily basis (it could be the civil servant that provides services - the parishioner that sits next to us at church)...
> 
> And to echo the sentiment - when it comes to self defense nothing is clear cut- one cannot carry pepper spray or stun guns in NYC either.
> 
> ...



as i said before, when it's reported and looked into--which isn't very hard these days, don't tolerate their presence.


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 3, 2014)

man it's so depressing thinking that absolutely everyone is out to get you. most people are minding their own business and living their life. they don't have time to do anything to anybody.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 3, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> man it's so depressing thinking that absolutely everyone is out to get you. most people are minding their own business and living their life. they don't have time to do anything to anybody.




Actually everyone is not out to get you. We're living in the safest era ever. At no time in human history has it been safer to walk the streets (or ride the buses) of our towns and cities.


http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...013-marks-a-historic-low-for-many-cities.html


----------



## Marlayna (Apr 3, 2014)

superodalisque said:


> me either. i have never even seen anybody doing anything except drinking. ifeel left out too


I've been to lots of BBW parties, and almost always had a good time. I've only been to a few bashes where people came from out of town and the bashes were held at hotels. I heard from a friend that there were wild sex orgies going on in some of the rooms. Is it true?:blush:


----------



## superodalisque (Apr 3, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> I've been to lots of BBW parties, and almost always had a good time. I've only been to a few bashes where people came from out of town and the bashes were held at hotels. I heard from a friend that there were wild sex orgies going on in some of the rooms. Is it true?:blush:



I haven't seen one yet, but then again that's me. I'm not the orgy type anyway. there might be some kernel truth to some of it but just like in high school much of it is talk. I did see a few things that were taped at bashes. they were pretty sad and limp as far as sex goes.


----------



## swordchick (Apr 3, 2014)

LOL, how many times do you need say "oh yeah", if the sex is good? Hello, world of phony fake fucks!


superodalisque said:


> I haven't seen one yet, but then again that's me. I'm not the orgy type anyway. there might be some kernel truth to some of it but just like in high school much of it is talk. I did see a few things that were taped at bashes. they were pretty sad and limp as far as sex goes.


----------



## bigmac (Apr 3, 2014)

Marlayna said:


> I've been to lots of BBW parties, and almost always had a good time. I've only been to a few bashes where people came from out of town and the bashes were held at hotels. I heard from a friend that there were wild sex orgies going on in some of the rooms. *Is it true?*:blush:



Guess it depends upon your definition of _wild orgie_. If you mean multiple people sharing a hotel room and many of them having sex, then yes. If you mean passing around the virgin and sacrificing a goat, then no.


----------



## Tracyarts (Apr 3, 2014)

" I've only been to a few bashes where people came from out of town and the bashes were held at hotels. I heard from a friend that there were wild sex orgies going on in some of the rooms. Is it true? "

I did all my bash-going back in the 1990's. There was always a certain amount of hooking up going on throughout the weekend, but I really don't know about any wild sex orgies. One event did have a BBW/FA swinger group in attendance that held a private room party. I got invited but had to decline because the guy I was dating at the time would NOT have been cool with my so much as setting foot in that room. So I don't know whether it was just a party or a play party. One of my biggest regrets. Not finding out what was going on behind that door. LOL! 

I was, however, present at a BDSM scenario that took place in a suite during a bash. No sex though, just lots of kinky playtimes. It was very private, planned out in advance because some of the people involved happened to be participating in the bash and it worked out for the rest, logistic-wise.

Some crazy things that supposedly went down at events really did happen. But much of what you hear is exaggeration or the product of an active rumor mill. 

The fat scene has actually been one of the tamer "scenes" I've been involved with over the years.

Tracy


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 4, 2014)

bigmac said:


> Actually everyone is not out to get you. We're living in the safest era ever. At no time in human history has it been safer to walk the streets (or ride the buses) of our towns and cities.
> 
> 
> http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...013-marks-a-historic-low-for-many-cities.html



Ha! The rent is cheap in my neigborhood for a reason.  We've got a big problem with meth around here. Also there are lots of assisted living facilities that cater to people with special needs. This is just a wacky area altogether and a lot of what goes on here comes as a result of people who simply can't help it. 

My original point was, where police and other authority figures can't keep order there is still an onus on us to not dismiss practical advice about personal safety out of hand as though it's a form of victim blaming. Safety comes from everyone doing their part and it's important to know what that part is according to where you live.


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 4, 2014)

LillyBBBW said:


> Ha! The rent is cheap in my neigborhood for a reason.  We've got a big problem with meth around here. Also there are lots of assisted living facilities that cater to people with special needs. This is just a wacky area altogether and a lot of what goes on here comes as a result of people who simply can't help it.
> 
> *My original point was, where police and other authority figures can't keep order there is still an onus on us to not dismiss practical advice about personal safety out of hand as though it's a form of victim blaming.* Safety comes from everyone doing their part and it's important to know what that part is according to where you live.



Very true - it's important to look at all angles as the police cannot be "everywhere"... one cannot live in constant paranoia -but, it's good to try to have an awareness of your surroundings.


----------

