# FA myths thread # 7



## James (Dec 7, 2009)

_*"Being an FA is mutable ('not set in stone'**). Correspondingly an FA can change to become a non-FA and vice versa"*_




> *(Please read the following before posting a response)*
> 
> This is the seventh topic for discussion in relation to the FA board project "FA Myths and Misconceptions". It will be discussed for 2 weeks in this thread before being edited and ultimately posted to the FA Myths and Misconceptions sticky.
> 
> ...


----------



## MrRabbit (Dec 8, 2009)

I can only speak from my experience, but for me it is not. This preference has been there for as long as I can remember and no matter how hard I try, I cannot feel the same attraction for a skinny/normal woman as for a big woman. I do believe that just like there are bi-sexual people, there are bi-sizual people (a word that I've learnt here on Dimensions) but unfortunately I am not one of them.


----------



## Blockierer (Dec 8, 2009)

James said:


> _*"Being an FA is mutable ('not set in stone'**). Correspondingly an FA can change to become a non-FA and vice versa"*_


Several times in my younger days I tried to become a non-FA , but all the efforts were unsuccessful.  I am what I am!


----------



## Webmaster (Dec 8, 2009)

James said:


> _*"Being an FA is mutable ('not set in stone'**). Correspondingly an FA can change to become a non-FA and vice versa"*_



Personally, I don't think so. I've been a FA for as far back as I can remember, back into childhood. I think it's a strong, built-in preference.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Dec 8, 2009)

I have a problem with this line of thinking, only because it does not take into account the dynamic and unexact nature of human sexuality. I'd self ascribe as a heterosexual female FFA. That having been said, I've had fulfilling and enjoyable sexual encounters both with females and with skinny males. I would not say that changes who I am. 

I used to work with a guy who only went for the "Barely Legal" types. One day I saw him on a date with a woman who was well into her thirties, but I can't say I thought "Oh, he just became a MILF Hunter overnight", I just thought "For some combination of reasons, tangible or intangible, he is attracted to that particular woman."

Fat women on here have said they've been with men for whom they were their first or only fat partner. However that would not make the partners FAs, it would just mean that they were men who did not typically like fat women but who, again, for some combination of reasons were attracted to that one woman. I'd say it's the same idea if an FA did find himself attracted to a smaller woman; he did not stop being an FA, he just got attracted to a particular man or woman.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Dec 8, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> I have a problem with this line of thinking, only because it does not take into account the dynamic and unexact nature of human sexuality. I'd self ascribe as a heterosexual female FFA. That having been said, I've had fulfilling and enjoyable sexual encounters both with females and with skinny males. I would not say that changes who I am.
> 
> I used to work with a guy who only went for the "Barely Legal" types. One day I saw him on a date with a woman who was well into her thirties, but I can't say I thought "Oh, he just became a MILF Hunter overnight", I just thought "For some combination of reasons, tangible or intangible, he is attracted to that particular woman."
> 
> Fat women on here have said they've been with men for whom they were their first or only fat partner. However that would not make the partners FAs, it would just mean that they were men who did not typically like fat women but who, again, for some combination of reasons were attracted to that one woman. I'd say it's the same idea if an FA did find himself attracted to a smaller woman; he did not stop being an FA, he just got attracted to a particular man or woman.



That's something to consider. I don't think it's true for everyone, but it can take credit for some I'm sure.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Dec 8, 2009)

I'm not at all saying it's true, or can be true for everyone, just that there is a difference between somebody being attracted to a fat person and self ascribing as an FA, and somebody who self ascribes as an FA being only able to ever be turned on by a fat partner no matter what the circumstances.

I've always thought there was, or should be, some sort of FA Continuum along the lines of the Kinsey Continuum relating to homo/heterosexuality. This would mean that on one end, you'd have FA who under NO circumstances could be turned on by a thin person and on the other, somebody who could under no circumstances ever be turned on by a fat person. It's likely that most of us fall somewhere in the middle.


----------



## Teleute (Dec 8, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> I'm not at all saying it's true, or can be true for everyone, just that there is a difference between somebody being attracted to a fat person and self ascribing as an FA, and somebody who self ascribes as an FA being only able to ever be turned on by a fat partner no matter what the circumstances.
> 
> I've always thought there was, or should be, some sort of FA Continuum along the lines of the Kinsey Continuum relating to homo/heterosexuality. This would mean that on one end, you'd have FA who under NO circumstances could be turned on by a thin person and on the other, somebody who could under no circumstances ever be turned on by a fat person. It's likely that most of us fall somewhere in the middle.



Heh... I think you're exactly right on the FA continuum.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Dec 8, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> I'm not at all saying it's true, or can be true for everyone, just that there is a difference between somebody being attracted to a fat person and self ascribing as an FA, and somebody who self ascribes as an FA being only able to ever be turned on by a fat partner no matter what the circumstances.
> 
> I've always thought there was, or should be, some sort of FA Continuum along the lines of the Kinsey Continuum relating to homo/heterosexuality. This would mean that on one end, you'd have FA who under NO circumstances could be turned on by a thin person and on the other, somebody who could under no circumstances ever be turned on by a fat person. It's likely that most of us fall somewhere in the middle.



That's totally fair. I think a lot more people in this world have ranges than taken credit for.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Dec 8, 2009)

The thing is, I'm not sure everyone knows s/he has a range until confronted with a particular situation. You might have a checklist of what turns you on, and then one day you get hit between the eyes by somebody who has some characteristic you never thought you'd like or lacks something you thought you needed, and you can't figure out why you're all hot and bothered but you just are.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Dec 9, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> The thing is, I'm not sure everyone knows s/he has a range until confronted with a particular situation. You might have a checklist of what turns you on, and then one day you get hit between the eyes by somebody who has some characteristic you never thought you'd like or lacks something you thought you needed, and you can't figure out why you're all hot and bothered but you just are.



I was going to say something like that.

Technically that's where I began with FA-dom too. My preferences began in my teens: Not in my childhood. I was almost exclusively into thin hourglass shaped girls. Then there was a girl with the right shape for me at the time, but she was bigger than what I tended to go for. From there it just kept growing in a multiple number of ways.


----------



## Adrian (Dec 9, 2009)

Blockierer said:


> Several times in my younger days I tried to become a non-FA , but all the efforts were unsuccessful.  I am what I am!


Welcome to the real world. I tried once to be more dynamic in my taste for women but, while I tried to like the women mid-size BBWs and smaller, that is all I did was to try and failed.
I married a full size BBW and over the next nine years watched her grown (pregnancy, time, etc.) to become a gorgeous SSBBW. Up to a dress size #32 from a size #24. Previously, I did not know I would have loved SSBBWs.... I guess it was some capitulation to some peer pressure. Once my wife grew, my eyes opened wide and have stayed that way. Since then my number one preference is for the SSBBW!


----------



## Durin (Dec 9, 2009)

This Myth is busted.


----------



## musicman (Dec 9, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> I've always thought there was, or should be, some sort of FA Continuum along the lines of the Kinsey Continuum relating to homo/heterosexuality. This would mean that on one end, you'd have FA who under NO circumstances could be turned on by a thin person and on the other, somebody who could under no circumstances ever be turned on by a fat person. It's likely that most of us fall somewhere in the middle.



That's a very astute observation. I think it explains a lot of the arguments I see among FAs on this and other boards, and in particular, the responses to the "face or figure" poll that we had earlier.


----------



## kieran1394 (Dec 10, 2009)

MrRabbit said:


> ]there are bi-sizual people (a word that I've learnt here on Dimensions) but unfortunately I am not one of them.



What do you mean by unfortunately ?

I can't even begin to imagine not having my preference. It is who I am, and I fucking love it ^_^

I can remember one time when I was younger though, my brother busted in on me looking up some SSBBW stuff :| . He was closed minded enough to think that I only had this preference because of low self esteem or something, and tried to get me to not like fat chicks, and gave me a stack of shitty pornos with non-BBW's. That worked so well, that they are still where he left them that time lol.

Its sort of like those hardcore Christians that "Cure" homosexuals. It never works.


----------



## kioewen (Dec 10, 2009)

LoveBHMS said:


> I've always thought there was, or should be, some sort of FA Continuum along the lines of the Kinsey Continuum relating to homo/heterosexuality. This would mean that on one end, you'd have FA who under NO circumstances could be turned on by a thin person and on the other, somebody who could under no circumstances ever be turned on by a fat person. It's likely that most of us fall somewhere in the middle.



I don't think the two are all that comparable. True, there is, likely, an FA continuum, but when it comes to sexuality I think for the majority it's pretty firmly either/or, with very few people falling in the middle.

At any rate, the original myth was about change, not degree, and I think it's utterly false. You can't reason yourself into a different attraction. Attraction is hardwired.


----------



## Teleute (Dec 10, 2009)

LOL... Um, that is so not true about sexuality.

I think you're absolutely right about the myth, though.


----------



## James (Dec 11, 2009)

(_The following has been posted to all current threads for informational purposes only. Please refrain from replying to this post in this thread. If you have questions please PM me. These rule changes have been brought about following significant deliberation between Dimensions moderators and are effective immediately in relation to all future posts._)




> The rules of this forum have been updated. I would encourage forum users to read the full text but in short, the main changes are the following
> 
> Threads or posts considered to be outside of the FA/FFA forum remit will be edited or deleted. Threads will not be moved to other forums. Please consider this before posting. Contact me via PM if you are unsure before posting.
> Discussion of sexual topics must not contain identities other than your own. Excessive objectification or crudeness will also be edited or removed. Keep things respectful.
> ...


----------



## rollhandler (Dec 12, 2009)

My experience is thus; I always maintain that a person should try everything twice. Once to find out and the second to be sure. As a result, I have dated one thin woman in my life, as a teen, and tried to have a one night stand with one other. What I found was that in order for me to perform sexually with either I was able to get it up but not able to maintain the erection regardless of what she was doing without fantasizing about her somewhere around 200lb heavier, lights out or eyes closed, concentrating entirely on the fantasy and the sensations. When the relationship broke up I had my mind made up that regardless of how much a thinner woman connected with me on other levels I would not be repeating history sexually with a thinner woman, yet I tried again with the same result.

I find myself in conversations with thin women where sensuality and sexual innuendo is part of the conversation, what I also find is that when an innuendo is made my mind automatically places into the mental picture a fat woman performing the act being alluded to.

The only masturbatory fantasy that has ever worked for me involving a thin woman has her gorging and gaining, or talking about how fat she is going to get etc. This is something that has stayed constant from as far back as I can remember.

I have never had erection issues with fat women nor have I ever had to supplement a sexual experience with fantasy in any situation involving a fat woman as was necessary with thinner ones. I can still find skinny women attractive, I can be aroused minimally and fleetingly by them, I can connect with them on various levels, but where sexuality is concerned a skinny woman just can't get the job done for me. This is not something that I feel can change. 

I remember being attracted to and giving attention to and having crushes on the fat girls in school growing up going back as far as 2nd grade. I remember liking my fat female relatives before that. So while experimenting with sexuality as a pubescent teen finding out that skinny women couldn't satisfy me without supplementing the sexual experience with fat fantasy I would say that my love of fat figures is hardwired into my sexuality and not a mutable part of who I am.

Rollhandler


----------



## jakub (Dec 12, 2009)

James said:


> _*"Being an FA is mutable ('not set in stone'**). Correspondingly an FA can change to become a non-FA and vice versa"*_



No but...

....serious brain damage probably can change that.


----------



## Weirdo890 (Dec 14, 2009)

James said:


> _*"Being an FA is mutable ('not set in stone'**). Correspondingly an FA can change to become a non-FA and vice versa"*_



I have only one thing to say: BULLSHIT!


----------



## mergirl (Dec 16, 2009)

Hmm..i have a friend who only ever dated thin women and then all of a sudden he found a woman who ticks most of the right boxes for him and she is also fat. Perhaps he wasn't attracted to fat to begin with but he loves her body as he loves her. I doubt he ever thought he had a thin 'fetish' but he had never been attracted to any fat women before her. I think this can happen to Fas too but in reverse. I don't see why not. Its not all about 'the fat' for everyone. Some people can fall in love with someone and then fall in love with their bodies. If it happened to my friend who never was attracted to fat women before then i cant see why the same thing couldn't happen to a staunch Fa. I don't think we can ever truly know who we are capable of loving until we do so and we will never be able to say never till we are on our death beds.


----------



## CleverBomb (Dec 16, 2009)

mergirl said:


> Hmm..i have a friend who only ever dated thin women and then all of a sudden he found a woman who ticks most of the right boxes for him and she is also fat. Perhaps he wasn't attracted to fat to begin with but he loves her body as he loves her. I doubt he ever thought he had a thin 'fetish' but he had never been attracted to any fat women before her. I think this can happen to Fas too but in reverse. I don't see why not. *Its not all about 'the fat' for everyone. Some people can fall in love with someone and then fall in love with their bodies*. If it happened to my friend who never was attracted to fat women before then i cant see why the same thing couldn't happen to a staunch Fa. I don't think we can ever truly know who we are capable of loving until we do so and we will never be able to say never till we are on our death beds.



True. The question is whether once "converted" by personal experience, this generalizes to an appreciation of other larger folks' appearance. I'd assume that it does, but have only anecdotal evidence for support. 

-Rusty


----------



## Lastminute.Tom (Dec 16, 2009)

In an effort to be objective I think it depends on the person and is not exclusive to just faness, I think people experiment before they find out what really drives them, some people get it first time some people never find out, it's all subjective, but I would think for the majority at least of fas that once your in your in.

to qualify the myth you'd have to say that it's the same with any preference


----------



## Gspoon (Feb 10, 2010)

For some it is set in stone, for others it is not. The fact of the matter is that being an FA is either a preference or a fetish. Where as some men or women may love a person being big more than that over a thinner person, some men and women are completely aroused by having a partner that is that large.

So, to what degree does being an FA mean you are set in stone? Some people love blondes, or people with green eyes. Couldn't that also mean that people may or may not like a partner with a little meat on their bones? Are these people shallow or not, as a result? Who is to say? One's own vision of beauty is their own.

But as a fetish, being an FA is much easier to believe that their love for a large partner IS set in stone. People are neither born into what they love sexually, or fork off into a different path due to a past experience. But the sheer fact that someone has a fetish over this person of surplus weight is not really a preference either, it could indeed be coded in their very being...


Like me


----------

