# FA's views of FAs :preference, fetish, 'alt.' lifestyle?



## zanza (May 5, 2009)

i guess i have been wondering what other FAs viewpoint on their 'FAism', it seems like there are different terms thrown around here and there to describe it, so i wanted to see what others think is the best term to describe their interest in a larger partner.


i guess my own view is that is a preference as simple as for some people like blondes over brunettes.


----------



## Durin (May 5, 2009)

I think this experience is different for each FA so it is hard to catagorize us as a group. 

I believe being an FA is a genuine sexuality. It has certain aspects that only apply to FA's. I have never thought that preference or fetish describe things all that well.


----------



## CCC (May 5, 2009)

I'd say preference. Like Durin said, even that word doesn't accurately capture everything there is to it, but when compared to "fetish" or "alternative lifestyle"... yeah. It's a preference.

That has always seemed to be the easiest way to explain it to others, anyway. I haven't gotten many arguments after bringing up the "it's like liking blonds over brunettes" point.


----------



## James (May 5, 2009)

I would label my FA-ism as an *orientation*. Its not particularly fetishistic because I'm not super-precise regarding the fatness range. That said, my aesthetic doesn't include thin...


----------



## Jon Blaze (May 5, 2009)

CCC said:


> I'd say preference. Like Durin said, even that word doesn't accurately capture everything there is to it, but when compared to "fetish" or "alternative lifestyle"... yeah. It's a preference.
> 
> That has always seemed to be the easiest way to explain it to others, anyway. I haven't gotten many arguments after bringing up the "it's like liking blonds over brunettes" point.



I agree.

I've had this sort of love/hate relationship with the concept that it could be a fetish, but I use the term preference or "Other", because it can be as strong as a fetish, or much weaker. It depends on the person. I don't really want to throw the fetishists to the dogs, even though it annoys me that people think that's me. But that's there fault: Not the fetishists themselves (Unless they claim I am one .

For me as its very most it's a preference. I don't need it, and I won't always pick it over its alternative, but that doesn't mean I don't find larger women attractive.


----------



## mergirl (May 5, 2009)

For me, its a sexuality which is just as strong, if not more than my gender sexuality which no-one seems to ever question is a sexuality.


----------



## The Orange Mage (May 5, 2009)

To me, calling it a sexuality is just saying it's a less-narrow version of a fetish.


----------



## James (May 5, 2009)

The Orange Mage said:


> To me, calling it a sexuality is just saying it's a less-narrow version of a fetish.



If a non-fa has a range of preferences that is say +/- 30 lbs around a socially 'normal' weight... and an FA hypothetically has a range of preferences that are +/- 100 lbs or +/- 200 lbs then I would say that 'normal' non-fas are the ones with the narrow version of a fetish. However, we don't call it a 'thinness fetish'... we just think of it as standard heterosexuality. FAs are 'differently heterosexual', but I don't particularly see us as fetishists by definition.


----------



## mergirl (May 5, 2009)

The Orange Mage said:


> To me, calling it a sexuality is just saying it's a less-narrow version of a fetish.


hmm.. well i suppose its just a definition, so it doesnt really matter as feelings are subjective anyway. To me, sexuality is more encompassing and part of your identity whereas a fetish is a sexual act that is focused on one thing. Being gay i dont just like female sex organs but love women and being an Fa..its not just 'fat' i identify, lust after or love but it is fat people themselves. It seems more than just a body fetish, more of a way of life somhow, but then thats just my definition. I'm sure there is a pretty wide Fa spectrum.


----------



## Tad (May 5, 2009)

I think depending on the person it can be a fetish, a sexuality, a preference, or even an 'alt.lifestyle.' For me I think 'sexuality' fits best, so I voted 'other.' It is not a fetish for me in that I don't think it is an absolute requirement, it is certainly a preference but at the same time I think it is more pervasive in my phych than just that. And I don't make it a lifestyle.


----------



## blackghost75 (May 6, 2009)

I look at being an FA as a preference. To me a fetish is something thats is part-time. Is where a preference is full-time.


----------



## wrench13 (May 6, 2009)

I didn't see a check box for "I just feel fat women are sexyest" so I didn't vote.


----------



## Fangs (May 6, 2009)

"any object or nongenital part of the body that causes a habitual erotic response or fixation." 

I went with fetish. I must be in the more extreme cases where I just won't orgasm unless there's fat involved.
I can't say preference because I've tried thinking of a slender couple together and it does nothing for me. High school was rather confusing for a bit. I thought I was a lesbian since I couldn't see the appeal of the slender male form.

Oddly enough, it's a preference that the guy be fat. I technically could date a slender guy, but the focus on fat would have to be on me. Odd, no? Either way, the FA part is most definitely a fetish for me.


----------



## jakub (May 6, 2009)

I don't really understand what "lifestyle" means in context of being FA.


----------



## disconnectedsmile (May 6, 2009)

jakub said:


> I don't really understand what "lifestyle" means in context of being FA.


i hear that. i don't really understand what it means in the context of sexual orientation, either. 
nor do i get the term "preference" when used in this context. i don't prefer fat women... fat women are the only women to who i am sexually attracted.
i don't "prefer" fat women - i want them exclusively!


----------



## marlowegarp (May 6, 2009)

disconnectedsmile said:


> i hear that. i don't really understand what it means in the context of sexual orientation, either.
> nor do i get the term "preference" when used in this context. i don't prefer fat women... fat women are the only women to who i am sexually attracted.
> i don't "prefer" fat women - i want them exclusively!



Hear, hear! 

Could someone define "alt. lifestyle"? Because when I hear that I think of the Simpsons episode where Dr. Hibbert says:

"Hillbillies like to be called "sons of the soil". But it ain't gonna happen!(A-he-HEE-HEE!)"


----------



## undrcovrbrothr (May 6, 2009)

blackghost75 said:


> I look at being an FA as a preference. To me a fetish is something thats is part-time. Is where a preference is full-time.



Repped. This is plain as can be.

I chose preference because it is who I am. I did not choose "alt" because I am not in a small "fringe" minority (whatever word is best to describe it), and it most certainly isn't like an orientation, because if it was then I could not be with a thinner woman at all, or not like it at all, which is unrealistic as I am still male.

A preference is perfect to explain a biological and/or permanent desire as an FA that gravitates me towards beautiful women, except that society in general wants me to believe that I am wrong for it.


----------



## The Fez (May 6, 2009)

wiki said:


> Sexual fetishism, or erotic fetishism, is the sexual arousal brought on by objects, situations or body parts not conventionally viewed as being sexual in nature.



with that in mind, being an FA _is_ a fetish


----------



## wrestlingguy (May 6, 2009)

blackghost75 said:


> I look at being an FA as a preference. To me a fetish is something thats is part-time. Is where a preference is full-time.



I dunno. I PREFER milk in my coffee. That doesn't mean I won't drink it black.

Same with women, at least for me. I prefer them with milk.

Seriously, the reason I dated thinner women as well before I met my wife was simply because the person inside has always weighed more heavily (pun intended) than the person outside. Fortunately, my wife has both qualities, and I win.


----------



## mergirl (May 7, 2009)

I like my men like i like my coffee. 
I don't. 

I am with you on this though. I would say 'preference' doesnt describe something you want all the time, where as 'sexuality' does. I think this is why i describe My Fa side as a sexuality because fat is not something i prefer over thin it is something i have no control over loving exclusively.


----------



## undrcovrbrothr (May 7, 2009)

wiki said:


> Sexual fetishism, or erotic fetishism, is the sexual arousal brought on by objects, situations or body parts not conventionally viewed as being sexual in nature.





Freestyle Fez said:


> with that in mind, being an FA _is_ a fetish



"not conventionally viewed" is subject to interpretation, and with the sheer number of those who are FA, use subjects in their works, promote it in the public, etc, it cannot be considered a fetish. The sexual attraction between a man and a women, in a general, normal sense, could never be considered a fetish- if so, you could change the genders and call other orientations fetishes. That's a wrong-headed approach to me.


----------



## mergirl (May 7, 2009)

undrcovrbrothr said:


> "not conventionally viewed" is subject to interpretation, and with the sheer number of those who are FA, use subjects in their works, promote it in the public, etc, it cannot be considered a fetish. The sexual attraction between a man and a women, in a general, normal sense, could never be considered a fetish- if so, you could change the genders and call other orientations fetishes. That's a wrong-headed approach to me.





James said:


> If a non-fa has a range of preferences that is say +/- 30 lbs around a socially 'normal' weight... and an FA hypothetically has a range of preferences that are +/- 100 lbs or +/- 200 lbs then I would say that 'normal' non-fas are the ones with the narrow version of a fetish. However, we don't call it a 'thinness fetish'... we just think of it as standard heterosexuality. FAs are 'differently heterosexual', but I don't particularly see us as fetishists by definition.



Well, THIS really. If Fa's have a broader range of body types/shapes/weights that they find pleasing than Non Fa's then it is the Non Fa's who are more fetishistic.
There are fetishistic aspects conected to being an Fa. Maby some people can 'only' get turned on by thinking about weight gain or 'only' get turned on when looking at a 'belly hang' but i dont think people like this are any more or less prevailant than they are outside of an Fa context.


----------



## undrcovrbrothr (May 7, 2009)

mergirl said:


> There are fetishistic aspects conected to being an Fa. *Maby some people can 'only' get turned on by thinking about weight gain or 'only' get turned on when looking at a 'belly hang'* but i dont think people like this are any more or less prevailant than they are outside of an Fa context.



Ahh, but if a *BBW or BHM has no real belly hang or has absolutely no desire to gain weight, and then the stronger sexual feelings are absent, then I'd wonder if you could call it a general preference- that is a totally different matter, for now we're talking about specific, narrow topics.


----------



## mergirl (May 7, 2009)

undrcovrbrothr said:


> Ahh, but if a *BBW or BHM has no real belly hang or has absolutely no desire to gain weight, and then the stronger sexual feelings are absent, then I'd wonder if you could call it a general preference- that is a totally different matter, for now we're talking about specific, narrow topics.


hmm.. i would say if you can live without something sexually, then it is not something you fetishisize.


----------



## undrcovrbrothr (May 7, 2009)

mergirl said:


> hmm.. i would say if you can live without something sexually, then it is not something you fetishisize.



EXACTLY. I just can't live without BBWs, plain and simple.. I just cannot  :wubu:


----------



## mergirl (May 7, 2009)

undrcovrbrothr said:


> EXACTLY. I just can't live without BBWs, plain and simple.. I just cannot  :wubu:


I think though 'fetish' is more about objectification. You Never hear about people who have a boobs fetish or an average sized women fetish. I think because liking boobs is deemed as the normal and if you fancy average sized women it is deemed as nothing unusual. I guess its just about semantics though and if you want to identify with having a fetish i dont think anyone will argue with you about your feelings just maby about definition, which in itself can change depending on who is doing the defining.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (May 7, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I guess its just about semantics though and if you want to identify with having a fetish i dont think anyone will argue with you about your feelings just maby about definition, which in itself can change depending on who is doing the defining.



Bingo! Reading this thread reminds me of the parable of the blind men and the elephant -- everyone describes a part of "it" but no one description captures the reality. The map is not the terrain, the definition is not the thing being defined, and I don't care whether you call FA-ism a preference, a fetish, or, for that matter, a religion (Mergirl for Archbishopess of Canterbury! :bow: it is whatever you experience it as, because your own experience is truer than any verbal definition.


----------



## mergirl (May 7, 2009)

I shall accept the post of archbishopess of Canterbury if asked and make an 11th comandment 'Thou shalt worship fatties'. It would just make going to church a wee bit more appealing! 
Actually, i'm not sure archbishops are allowed to change the bible..i would need to look into the job description!


----------



## Tad (May 7, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I shall accept the post of archbishopess of Canterbury if asked and make an 11th comandment 'Thou shalt worship fatties'. It would just make going to church a wee bit more appealing!
> Actually, i'm not sure archbishops are allowed to change the bible..i would need to look into the job description!



If you cant do that, perhaps you could replace the communion wafers with nice big chocolate chip cookies? Cookies are sort of like bread, arent they?


----------



## mergirl (May 7, 2009)

hmm..due to catholic guilt and all, i'm not sure if the body of christ is allowed to be so tasty!


----------



## The Fez (May 7, 2009)

Honestly, I'm not sure how this is up for debate. By _definition_ it's a fetish, that's just how it is. It isn't my opinion, it's just fact.

I will concede, however, that it could apply in different variance depending on your situation as an FA. If you can only sexually function with a fat girl, and your attraction is primarily to such (which, for the most part, it is; that's why alot of FA's are here) then yes, it's a fetish.


----------



## mergirl (May 7, 2009)

By whose definition?


----------



## Jon Blaze (May 7, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I think though 'fetish' is more about objectification. You Never hear about people who have a boobs fetish or an average sized women fetish. I think because liking boobs is deemed as the normal and if you fancy average sized women it is deemed as nothing unusual. I guess its just about semantics though and if you want to identify with having a fetish i dont think anyone will argue with you about your feelings just maby about definition, which in itself can change depending on who is doing the defining.




That's always a good point. Partialisms tend to get thrown under the rug as "Sexual Preferences," even though they can exist on many levels too. I don't know. It just irks me that some would consider me fetishist when again I don't need it, and I don't always pick it over its alternative when foot fetishism is a "Sexual Preference." Whatever. 

And I think most FAs as said many times can't get off on a bag of fat, which represents the *Non human aspect* associated with fetishism.


----------



## undrcovrbrothr (May 7, 2009)

Freestyle Fez said:


> Honestly, I'm not sure how this is up for debate. By _definition_ it's a fetish, that's just how it is. It isn't my opinion, it's just fact.



The definition is NOT, as it is worded, clear when it comes to the choice to be an FA. Your interpretation differs than mine, and I can respect that. However, I am not going to accept that one interpretation is the end all, be all, for that would be disingenuous.




Freestyle Fez said:


> If you can only sexually function with a fat girl, and your attraction is primarily to such (which, for the most part, it is; that's why alot of FA's are here) then yes, it's a fetish.



You used the word PRIMARILY and the words MOST PART, and not the word ONLY, making it not 100%. That being the case, you have suddenly changed the definition of fetish through the argument.

It all goes back to before- if you are part time, you have a fetish. If you are full time, it is a preference. That's why I LOVED that explanation, and I still do!


----------



## The Fez (May 7, 2009)

edit: nevermind


----------



## James (May 7, 2009)

there appears to be shame associated with the word 'fetish', to the extent that people are generating elaborate theories to avoid being labeled as such.

Frankly, I wouldn't be offended to be labeled a 'fetishist'. However, I think that if the simple fact that I'd only date a fat woman makes me a 'fat fetishist' then non-FAs are 'thin fetishists' by comparison. Perhaps the only true non-fetishists are bisexual bisizuals? 

For what its worth though, Fat Admiration is indeed on the fetish map... and (IMO) seems rather tame in relation to many others!


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (May 7, 2009)

James said:


> there appears to be shame associated with the word 'fetish', to the extent that people are generating elaborate theories to avoid being labeled as such.
> 
> Frankly, I wouldn't be offended to be labeled a 'fetishist'. However, I think that if the simple fact that I'd only date a fat woman makes me a 'fat fetishist' then non-FAs are 'thin fetishists' by comparison. Perhaps the only true non-fetishists are bisexual bisizuals?
> 
> For what its worth though, Fat Admiration is indeed on the fetish map... and (IMO) seems rather tame in relation to many others!


Robot doll fetishists are my favorite on that map.  I must admit, as one of the admitted fetishists around here, I am jealous of "furverts." Why don't weight gain fetishists have anything cool like that to call ourselves?

Seriously, I answered other. I am a fetishist, but I consider that a sub category of my fat admiration. I tend to agree with those who see it as a sexuality, so I put other.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (May 7, 2009)

Fangs said:


> High school was rather confusing for a bit. I thought I was a lesbian since I couldn't see the appeal of the slender male form.



I had this same confusion for a while.


----------



## Blockierer (May 7, 2009)

*fetish*, cause I cannot f... skinnies? 
*preference*, cause I adore larger women?
*alternative lifestyle*, cause it's a great turn on for me holding hands with the fattest woman on the beach?
*other*, cause there are thousands of reasons to have a fat gf or wife or simply to desire a fattie?

I think it's a little bit of all of these. What we FAs should do is to show that we are as mad or normal as all the other lovers in the world. 
We love fatties unlimited that's all.


----------



## Jon Blaze (May 7, 2009)

James said:


> there appears to be shame associated with the word 'fetish', to the extent that people are generating elaborate theories to avoid being labeled as such.
> 
> Frankly, I wouldn't be offended to be labeled a 'fetishist'.* However, I think that if the simple fact that I'd only date a fat woman makes me a 'fat fetishist' then non-FAs are 'thin fetishists' by comparison. Perhaps the only true non-fetishists are bisexual bisizuals? *
> 
> For what its worth though, Fat Admiration is indeed on the fetish map... and (IMO) seems rather tame in relation to many others!




Bold is for the win. Another good point.


----------



## zanza (May 7, 2009)

i am sorta shocked by the attention it got

i never thought this would become a rather in depth discussion about this

i do think that is a sorta broad spectrum of interest and desire that is tied to being a FA or part of said community, i was just wondering how people might describe their own view on it

i guess my only real regret for this was not giving more options for the poll, or defining things better


----------



## mergirl (May 8, 2009)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> Robot doll fetishists are my favorite on that map.  I must admit, as one of the admitted fetishists around here, I am jealous of "furverts." Why don't weight gain fetishists have anything cool like that to call ourselves?
> .



I used to have the 'fetish map' as my screen saver because i love it so much! (Also i was co-writing a fetish story book at the time.) I am always jealous of furverts because i think i am a furhag and i love them but it doesnt turn me on.. i so WISH it did though. My favorite is 'hand in quicksand' fetish because it is so specific!! haha Though i think if my partner was into that there would be a lot of roleplay involved, in sand pits of the non-quick kind.. its kinna like an X-treme fantasy.
hmm..what about growverts? hmm nah..the w and v make it look clumsy. Expandoverts? Hmm i kinna like that one because it reminds me of the word spandex which amuses me. :happy:


----------



## mergirl (May 8, 2009)

James said:


> there appears to be shame associated with the word 'fetish', to the extent that people are generating elaborate theories to avoid being labeled as such.
> 
> Frankly, I wouldn't be offended to be labeled a 'fetishist'. However, I think that if the simple fact that I'd only date a fat woman makes me a 'fat fetishist' then non-FAs are 'thin fetishists' by comparison. Perhaps the only true non-fetishists are bisexual bisizuals?
> 
> For what its worth though, Fat Admiration is indeed on the fetish map... and (IMO) seems rather tame in relation to many others!


I dont have a problem if people want to define me as a fetishist either, as you say 'fat fetish' is a far cry from 'shagging dead puppy fetish' so on the whole its seems a pretty tame 'fetish' if that is what you want to call it. I think maby you can describe something as a 'fetish' if it is only sexual and i dont think fat admiration is. For me Fa really is on a level with being gay, which is, that is inexorably connected to my psychy and really is a part of who i am as much as my personality, emotions are. I think it is only on the 'fetish map' because people find it unusual. You will notice there are no 'blowjob fetish' sections or no 'average weight fetishists' or 'same sex fetish'. I'm sure had that map been in existence 50 years ago the first and last would be on the map. Anyway, my point is, i really dont care how people define me, it is how i define myself that is the important thing.


----------



## SoliloquyOfaSiren (May 8, 2009)

Definitely prefference for me....I preffer my guys to be at least stocky...But I must say when it comes to the fetish spectrum.....I am a sucker for big bellies...and moobs. I LOVE MOOBS.

I say its prefference bc my more serious relation ships have been with thinner individuals (and the one bodybuiler *shudder* never again....)

But plump boyfriends treat a girl better. Plain and simple...Just from my own expirience of course....


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (May 8, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I used to have the 'fetish map' as my screen saver because i love it so much! (Also i was co-writing a fetish story book at the time.) I am always jealous of furverts because i think i am a furhag and i love them but it doesnt turn me on.. i so WISH it did though. My favorite is 'hand in quicksand' fetish because it is so specific!! haha Though i think if my partner was into that there would be a lot of roleplay involved, in sand pits of the non-quick kind.. its kinna like an X-treme fantasy.
> hmm..what about growverts? hmm nah..the w and v make it look clumsy. Expandoverts? Hmm i kinna like that one because it reminds me of the word spandex which amuses me. :happy:



I think it's clear that the furverts have it all. I should not be pointing fingers, I know, but.....hand stuck in quick sand fetish? Wow, that IS specific and no doubt tough to have. OK, done derailing thread now. Carry on.:bow:


----------



## wrestlingguy (May 9, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I like my men like i like my coffee.
> I don't.
> 
> I am with you on this though. I would say 'preference' doesnt describe something you want all the time, where as 'sexuality' does. I think this is why i describe My Fa side as a sexuality because fat is not something i prefer over thin it is something i have no control over loving exclusively.



I agree with that it is something that you have no control over loving exclusively.

That said, I think that most of the theory here goes out the window when any of these relationships become emotional. I know this board is best suited to explore the sexual side of what we like, but we are human, and we date, and fall in love, and the emotional part of us often takes over in a loving relationship.

One of the questions I think make us all squirm is, what if the person you loved suddenly lost a significant amount of weight?

We've seen many come to the boards to lament their partner's weight loss. Some want to shove food in front of them, others want to secretly feed them, others argue with them, and others fantasize about some of those in our community who post.

While the sexuality of what we want is specific, I think in some cases it gets shoved to the back of the bus when emotion is involved.

Anyone else agree with this?


----------



## mergirl (May 9, 2009)

wrestlingguy said:


> I agree with that it is something that you have no control over loving exclusively.
> 
> That said, I think that most of the theory here goes out the window when any of these relationships become emotional. I know this board is best suited to explore the sexual side of what we like, but we are human, and we date, and fall in love, and the emotional part of us often takes over in a loving relationship.
> 
> ...


Absolutely. Get ye all to the Fa guilt thread and dont pass go! I think no matter what our 'sexuality' is, humans are beautifully emotional beings and can love, sometimes it seems limitlessly. Some people stick together being friends and soulmates and can spend their lives together without it ever getting sexual. Love is more powerful than lust in the long run. I think we forget this sometimes on here when we can scrutinize those with thin partners who enjoy looking at the models or the people who post here. Physically, we are attracted to fat, though 'fat' by itself would not enrich and move us if it were attached to someone we had nothing in common with. We fall in love with the person, who happens to be fat. Even if their bodies were the initial thing that made us attracted to them in the first place, this is usually the way of things. It is bodies we desire and people we desire and love.


----------



## wrestlingguy (May 10, 2009)

mergirl said:


> It is bodies we desire and people we desire and love.



This is so much more eloquent than what I've told my wife in the past. I told her that her ass got her here, but who she is keeps her here.

Can I borrow yours?.............:bow:


----------



## mergirl (May 10, 2009)

wrestlingguy said:


> This is so much more eloquent than what I've told my wife in the past. I told her that her ass got her here, but who she is keeps her here.
> 
> Can I borrow yours?.............:bow:


Well, i think your way of putting it is just as good. Maby we can swap!?


----------



## collared Princess (May 10, 2009)

James said:


> I would label my FA-ism as an *orientation*. Its not particularly fetishistic because I'm not super-precise regarding the fatness range. That said, my aesthetic doesn't include thin...



Id say that being a f.a is a preference..then if you are a feeder,or into squashing or anything similar to that then that makes the fetish part..


----------



## superodalisque (May 10, 2009)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> Bingo! Reading this thread reminds me of the parable of the blind men and the elephant -- everyone describes a part of "it" but no one description captures the reality. The map is not the terrain, the definition is not the thing being defined, and I don't care whether you call FA-ism a preference, a fetish, or, for that matter, a religion (Mergirl for Archbishopess of Canterbury! :bow: it is whatever you experience it as, because your own experience is truer than any verbal definition.



exactly. it think there is a lot of technical talk about what people like that misses the entire mark. preference fetish etc... i think it diminishes the thing entirely. its the modern tip toe around something people would have been happy to call love, desire, or passion in the past. but the problem is that now we think of ourselves as machines that only needs a button pushed. FA FFA in a sense is no better at describing whats really happening between people than describing someone as a breastman/woman, a boob man/woman, or a leg man/woman. mainly because none of these attributes disembodied are enough alone to move anyone. no wonder some fat people are angry because they feel they only need to be fat in order to attract an FA or FFA. like average folk, they have felt misled by a lot of this kind of talk once they learn the reality. the reality is that an FA or an FFA is a person like any other. they are people that society often forgets have an attraction that includes the soul veering toward something. what is the something? its a feeling. and i think that feeling comes in different guises for people depending on the orientation of the mind, life expereinces, personal sensibilities and many undefineable elements. in a way, i think, the lack of appreciation for how deep the aesthetic draw is diminishes the entire idea at times. no wonder a lot of people refuse the FA and FFA stamp. they feel that their feelings and desires are more than just that. they need more than to only have a button pushed because they are in touch with who they are. i think that its true they have a sensual appreciation for people who are fat but they are more than just that. so what draws an FA or an FFA is as different as the person themselves. i don't think they can be lumped in one big inadequate ball. i think the souless think and technical terminology kinda takes all of the real oomphf and power out of the possibilities that FAs and FFAs represent. i hope a lot of people penciled in none of the above. other doesn't quite seem to cut it.


----------



## Elfcat (May 11, 2009)

OK, this is a little technical, but I tend to think of these things in terms of category, activity, specific body parts, etc.

I have a preference for fat women. This is a preference because this is a general category.

Now obviously many people have fetishes, which to me are usually having to do with specific locations of the body or with types of clothing. Some are more likely to happen in those who prefer fat partners, but others are more general. Like, you could have two foot fetishists. One likes to suck on fat toes, other one on skinny toes. One guy likes the look of a skinny gal in a french maid getup, another likes the look of a fat gal in the same kind of wear. Skinny leather chick, fat leather chick. Same fetish, different preference. Now probably belly worship happens more often with FAs than with SAs, but who knows, one specimen could go just as crazy over a girl with a sixpack as some of us do over a girl with the cascade of rolls.

And then there are kinks, which I usually think of as specific activities, BDSM scenes or the like. Once again, two people got a cat-o-nine in their hands. One wants to lash a skinny, one wants to do it to a chubby.

So that's what my take is, preferences and fetishes and kinks can all happen together in the same person, but they refer to different parts of the story.


----------

