# Male sexual fantasy and a real fat woman



## katherine22 (Jun 21, 2009)

The following quote best describes what has been my experience of what it has been like to be on this site as a fat woman. I am wondering if other women have felt the same way. There seems to be a conflict between a male idolized version of fat femininity "as at once infinitely pliable (soft,plush,giving) and so-out-of-this-world larger -than-life- that women become images "goddesses" to be forced into molds of perfection that no real woman can be comfortable in." Every conversation in fat sexuality is reduced to the immature compartmentalization of various body parts analysis of a male 15 year old.

Have I missed the point of what is really going on here at Dimensions? 


__________________


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 21, 2009)

Stop trying to ruin hard-ons with real discussion about reality Katherine......


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 21, 2009)

How so?

Do you have any examples in mind?


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 21, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Stop trying to ruin hard-ons with real discussion about reality Katherine......



So my goal here is to sustain hard on illusion? Is that all there is?


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 21, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> So my goal here is to sustain hard on illusion? Is that all there is?



I think that green eyed fairy was trying to employ sarcasm/humor, as indicated by her sticking-tongue-out smiley face.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 21, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> How so?
> 
> Do you have any examples in mind?



What typically passes for commentary in the Pay site board. I want to make sure that I am more than just fodder for the male imagination if I should be so presumptuous.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 21, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> I think that green eyed fairy was trying to employ sarcasm/humor, as indicated by her sticking-tongue-out smiley face.



I took it as humor, and so much truth can be revealed in humor, n'est pas?


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 21, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> So my goal here is to sustain hard on illusion? Is that all there is?



Wha????? That's not enough? Living your life to be sexually attractive to others is not THE fulfillment on a site that supposedly is not about fetishes, dating or being fap material to strangers?

I don't know Katherine....I feel really down about some of the shit I read on these boards myself sometimes....and the 'entitlement" of some.....and the idea that I should stfu, do what is expected without question because that's what fat women are all about for some people. 
Don't know where you even got that "goddess" idea myself........I see us more as quick, easy, readily available, unquestioning, grateful fap material sometimes....with lip service about loving fat women. They claim to love fat women....as in we are "apart" from other women....then it's a splash of cold water in the face that their idea of "different" is actually more along the lines of "less". 

It's been hashed before with some people saying it best by pointing out that "True FAs" aren't guys that fap to fatties- but men that respect women that happen to be fat.


----------



## StarWitness (Jun 21, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> How so?
> 
> Do you have any examples in mind?



I don't know if it was on the Weight Board, but someone started a topic asking where the best beaches were to find pear-shaped women, or something along those lines. You could chalk it up to naivete (or confusing "beach" with "produce section"), but in my perspective, it betrays an over-emphasis on a woman's specific body parts, instead of viewing them as complete people. Last time I checked, you didn't need a big ass to go to the beach.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 21, 2009)

Why it's just FANTASY....FUCKING FANTASY.....LET ME HAVE MY GODDAMN FANTASY......cause dating a real life fat woman is too fucking hard....and requires that I act like a grown up instead of a child always hiding my true self and desires.... and m eans that I have to leave my home....and go out in the real world.......and don't get IMMEDIATE GRATIFICATION. 

Goddamn it.....don't expect me to participate in the real world and care about other people. WTF do you think you are?


Women...you aren't worth the effort. Just post me some pics....if you're lucky, I will fap.



Yeah.....I really don't know what you are talking about Katherine


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 21, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> What typically passes for commentary in the Pay site board. I want to make sure that I am more than just fodder for the male imagination if I should be so presumptuous.



Presume away. 

I think that a person tends to become part of other people's sexual fantasies when they create a website for the express purpose of presenting sexual fantasies. 

I don't see how comments, which you have still not outlined any *specific* examples of, as in, quoted stuff, actual words, instead if general implication, on the paysite forum, pertaining to paysite models, mean that the whole board is degrading. 



> Have I missed the point of what is really going on here at Dimensions?



I don't know. Have you?

What is the point of Dimensions forums? I don't recall seeing a mission statement anywhere.


----------



## StarWitness (Jun 21, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Don't know where you even got that "goddess" idea myself........I see us more as quick, easy, readily available, unquestioning, grateful fap material sometimes....with lip service about loving fat women.



A lot of the rhetoric revolves around "goddesses" being "worshiped," though. 

If you'll allow me a very rudimentary experiment:

Searching for forums for "goddess," in thread titles alone, got 114 hits. 95 of those hits are on the paysite board.
Searching thread titles for "women" got 167 hits, 7 of which are on the paysite board.

Now, a lot of those times it's the models referring to themselves as a "goddess," but I'm sure they wouldn't use that marketing strategy if it wasn't effective.


----------



## Teleute (Jun 21, 2009)

I was thinking of that thread too, starwitness. And the pm's I get from guys saying "hi wat do u weight wat is the #?" I HAVE NEVER TALKED TO YOU BEFORE. I AM A PERSON, NOT A NUMBER. CHRIST.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 21, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Wha????? That's not enough? Living your life to be sexually attractive to others is not THE fulfillment on a site that supposedly is not about fetishes, dating or being fap material to strangers?
> 
> They claim to love fat women....as in we are "apart" from other women....then it's a splash of cold water in the face that their idea of "different" is actually more along the lines of "less".
> 
> ...


----------



## furious styles (Jun 21, 2009)

basing your opinion of this forum on browsing the paysite board is like basing your opinion of a city on touring it's red light district.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 21, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> I think that a person tends to become part of other people's sexual fantasies when they create a website for the express purpose of presenting sexual fantasies.
> 
> 
> What is the point of Dimensions forums? I don't recall seeing a mission statement anywhere.



If you haven't seen a mission statement, then why do you seem to presume that the site is solely about "other people's" fantasies?

How about some people fantasizing about a a better reality? 



StarWitness said:


> A lot of the rhetoric revolves around "goddesses" being "worshiped," though.
> 
> If you'll allow me a very rudimentary experiment:
> 
> ...



All that goddess talk kind of reminds me of how so many rap stars used to call themselves "gangstas".
Don't believe the hype.......


P.S. It seems to me that posting numbers and eating probably gets more hits than titles, btw.......


----------



## StarWitness (Jun 21, 2009)

Teleute said:


> And the pm's I get from guys saying "hi wat do u weight wat is the #?" I HAVE NEVER TALKED TO YOU BEFORE. I AM A PERSON, NOT A NUMBER. CHRIST.



Heh, that's one of the reasons I haven't posted a(n in-focus) photo of myself. I don't have any illusions about being irresistibly gorgeous, but it seems like so many other women have gotten unwanted advances after posting photos, it's not worth indulging my desire to hear non-creepy compliments.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 21, 2009)

I don't tend to look at the paysite boards that often myself......my opinions/perceptions were formed from the many places I tend to "drift" around here.....


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 21, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> They claim to love fat women....as in we are "apart" from other women....then it's a splash of cold water in the face that their idea of "different" is actually more along the lines of "less".
> 
> 
> 
> I have been wondering what I have been signing on for. Is Dimensions an online place to support male fat fantasy as the primary purpose of engaging here? Maybe I am experiencing the birth pains of some rite of passage Help me out, GEF.




You have to take the bad with the good, Katherine, just like any place else. Some of this place isn't the great wonder some tout it to be ...... it has it's dark side. 
Just find something good to hold onto....like friendship, intelligence and having fun. 

You will find that not taking most of it too seriously helps.....


Spending too much time on the weight board is pretty damn depressing, too, at certain times. If you find that it's too heavy as in you feel the human factor of things is being choked out, go to another board where there are more humans engaging.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 21, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> If you haven't seen a mission statement, then why do you seem to presume that the site is solely about "other people's" fantasies?
> 
> How about some people fantasizing about a a better reality?
> 
> ...


----------



## Teleute (Jun 21, 2009)

furious styles said:


> basing your opinion of this forum on browsing the paysite board is like basing your opinion of a city on touring it's red light district.



I agree, but those pm's I get and some of the chatter in non-paysite threads indicates that the attitude is spilling out - there seem to be a lot of guys who maybe don't quite know how to separate the fantasy land of the paysite board from the human beings of the rest of Dims. And I do grate a little when I see fap fantasy in disguise as "size acceptance", because that really isn't what size acceptance means to me.

As far as the "mission statement" thing, I think it's a little silly to go all semantics on this issue. There is a sense from the main board, which has "size acceptance issues" as a subtitle, and from bits of the FAQ like this:

Is Dimensions just a social thing?

It would seem that way, but it is much more. We've always viewed Dimensions as a size-activist place as well as a lifestyle place. While there is plenty of sexually oriented material, Dimensions is about size politics, acceptance, and mutual respect as much as it is about celebrating the larger figure. 

that the overall point of Dims is to be more than a porn/fantasy site; it's meant to be an open, accepting community where fat men and women are respected as people. And many men certainly do respond intelligently and engage in actual conversation; however, the level of "omg ur fat is hot" is fairly significant.


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 21, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> If you haven't seen a mission statement, then why do you seem to presume that the site is solely about "other people's" fantasies?



I was not referring to the site Dimensions, but to the individual paysites. I apologize for my lack of specificity.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 21, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> I was not referring to the site Dimensions, but to the individual paysites. I apologize for my lack of specificity.




In that case, then we agree. The paysite board pretty much is "fantasy"...in exchange for money. *shrugs*


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 21, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> All that goddess talk kind of reminds me of how so many rap stars used to call themselves "gangstas".
> Don't believe the hype.......



Don't believe the hype indeed. I checked and found that many of the "goddesses" on the paysite lacked any sort of temple or structured clergy, and most of the guys posting on the forum failed to make any sort of burned offering or blood sacrifice. 



> Somehow real women are getting lost in these fantasies.



Please cite specific examples. Do you have any particular real women in mind?


----------



## Teleute (Jun 21, 2009)

StarWitness said:


> Heh, that's one of the reasons I haven't posted a(n in-focus) photo of myself. I don't have any illusions about being irresistibly gorgeous, but it seems like so many other women have gotten unwanted advances after posting photos, it's not worth indulging my desire to hear non-creepy compliments.



I was a little surprised at how many I got - I thought the numbers fetishists were more into the supersized gals. You're probably pretty safe if you keep it to GLBTQ or one of the less-frequented boards - I didn't get any after the librarian pics, and I was totally steeling myself for it too because I thought those were better tardvark bait than the wedding pics. I guess those guys probably stay the hell away from GLBTQ board, haha.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 21, 2009)

Please cite specific examples. Do you have any particular real women in mind?[/QUOTE]

The real women that I have in mind would have a self-definition beyond the male appraisal of her various body parts.


----------



## Teleute (Jun 21, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> Please cite specific examples. Do you have any particular real women in mind?




I am a real woman (occasionally irrational, but never imaginary - take that, &#8730;-1) and you would need to call out the saint bernards with neck-barrels to find me anywhere near the question "hi wat do u weight wat is the #?"


----------



## MissToodles (Jun 21, 2009)

while this website does deal with very important issues, when sexuality and a so called singles scene is thrown into the mix, critical analysis seems to be thrown out the window. it is important to own your own sexuality, I'm not anti sex or sex negative by any means, it just seems like a crazy mix and I'm not sure if it really can work in the long run. I mean hugh hefner likes to tout playboy as liberating women and being a forerunner of the sexual revolution. there seems to be similar parallels here as well. this website likes to tout the beauty of the fat form, but many of the ideas about women here are not too different from the mainstream.

I'm not attacking anyone personally, there is a lot of good here, but I feel people who try to point out some issues especially re: the treatment of women are given the old '''shut up yer being so pc'' routine.


----------



## Tooz (Jun 21, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> The following quote best describes what has been my experience of what it has been like to be on this site as a fat woman. I am wondering if other women have felt the same way. There seems to be a conflict between a male idolized version of fat femininity "as at once infinitely pliable (soft,plush,giving) and so-out-of-this-world larger -than-life- that women become images "goddesses" to be forced into molds of perfection that no real woman can be comfortable in." Every conversation in fat sexuality is reduced to the immature compartmentalization of various body parts analysis of a male 15 year old.
> 
> Have I missed the point of what is really going on here at Dimensions?
> 
> ...



Don't forget huge thighs, butt, breasts, but tiny gut.


----------



## Santaclear (Jun 21, 2009)

Katherine, my advice is to weed out the bad and take what good you can from this site. It's obviously not a place where people are necessarily any more enlightened than in the general populace. I do love it here tho and find the place wonderfully subversive despite all the eye-rolling that might have to be done in order to get through a given thread.


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 21, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> The real women that I have in mind would have a self-definition beyond the male appraisal of her various body parts.



Are you referring to yourself? Certain posters? 

I just have a problem because you keep speaking in hypothetical states and broad generalities.


----------



## Teleute (Jun 21, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> Are you referring to yourself? Certain posters?
> 
> I just have a problem because you keep speaking in hypothetical states and broad generalities.



I just have a problem because you completely ignored the specific example I gave so that you could continue to poke smugly at katherine's statements. It's a wee bit confusing, you see, because I can't tell if you actually disagree with anything she's saying, or if you just have an issue with her or the way she presented it. Either way, your points would come across a lot more clearly if you responded to the several other people who are also involved in this discussion instead of latching on to minor wording issues in katherine's posts. So far all you've said is a) you think the paysite models are setting themselves up for sexual fantasies, and b) you think katherine is being unclear. Oh, and c) the  smiley frequently indicates humor. What are your thoughts on the issues we've mentioned about non-paysite-model female posters receiving a high level of unsolicited sexual comments and the lack of supportive response to such complaints?


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 22, 2009)

You responded to that, but she still did not. I therefor don't know if you where among the people she was referring to or not.

I'm having a hard time picking out exactly what the OP is saying so I can respond to her statements.

I think it's bad that non-paysite female members are recieving a high level of unsolicited sexual comments. Who have you been addressing the complaints to, or are you just speaking about the lack of support in response to those complaints inside this thread?


----------



## CleverBomb (Jun 22, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> Green Eyed Fairy said:
> 
> 
> > If you haven't seen a mission statement, then why do you seem to presume that the site is solely about "other people's" fantasies?
> ...


----------



## Teleute (Jun 22, 2009)

Ah, I see now. Thanks for clarifying your position.

I apologize, I wasn't clear there - in talking about lack of supportive response I was referring to misstoodles' statement:



> I'm not attacking anyone personally, there is a lot of good here, but I feel people who try to point out some issues especially re: the treatment of women are given the old '''shut up yer being so pc'' routine.



It's less about admin/mod support, and more about the community response, which I've seen a few places on the board when people speak up about the women here being objectified. I can try to dig up some threads for examples.

Regarding people making unsolicited sexual comments, we can deal with each individual who's doing it, but I think that's a bit of a band-aid. The actual issue seems more pervasive, in that an atmosphere has developed which makes the individuals feel like it's okay to pester women and to view them as targets for fantasies rather than as real people. Unfortunately, things as nebulous as "atmosphere" are difficult to change, but I think discussing it and making people aware of how much this really affects the women of the community is a good start.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 22, 2009)

MissToodles said:


> while this website does deal with very important issues, when sexuality and a so called singles scene is thrown into the mix, critical analysis seems to be thrown out the window. it is important to own your own sexuality, I'm not anti sex or sex negative by any means, it just seems like a crazy mix and I'm not sure if it really can work in the long run. I mean hugh hefner likes to tout playboy as liberating women and being a forerunner of the sexual revolution. there seems to be similar parallels here as well. this website likes to tout the beauty of the fat form, but many of the ideas about women here are not too different from the mainstream.
> 
> I'm not attacking anyone personally, there is a lot of good here, but I feel people who try to point out some issues especially re: the treatment of women are given the old '''shut up yer being so pc'' routine.


 
You said what I was trying to say. As a woman contributing to this site, I feel as if I am up against a subtle and pervasive male fat fantasy that is more about soft fat flesh preferably young than encompassing anything real or complex about women beyond flesh appeal.


----------



## Imp (Jun 22, 2009)

Teleute said:


> I was thinking of that thread too, starwitness. And the pm's I get from guys saying "hi wat do u weight wat is the #?" I HAVE NEVER TALKED TO YOU BEFORE. I AM A PERSON, NOT A NUMBER. CHRIST.



And a cute one, at that.

What's your weight? What's the number? :bounce:


----------



## nikola090 (Jun 22, 2009)

Katherine has finded an interesting point. However I think the truth is on the middle....i know that many guys here are fascinated from 'numbers' world...so there is a great difference beetween loving a real fat girl, or a virtual fat girl.

But it's also true that FA world is maden also by the 'fantasy' concept.
Think it's impossible being an FA without having a bit of fantasy in our mind.
I agree with Teleute....but as in the community, as in the real life there is educate people and not, you can find friends and gooda dmirers and find 'pm people' that's interested only exciting himself...that' not a nice thing.
Want to think that the community is maden principally by true Fa that respect girls!
Hope that someone has unterstood what I want to say!


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jun 22, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> You said what I was trying to say. As a woman contributing to this site, I feel as if I am up against a subtle and pervasive male fat fantasy that is more about soft fat flesh preferably young than encompassing anything real or complex about women beyond flesh appeal.



Katherine, the internet has and likely always will have a disproportionate number of what I refer to as "refugees from reality". This is not at all exclusive to Dims. Selfish and self-indulgent people are, by definition, obsessed with their own needs and desires. Their vocal ego-centricity makes them seem more prevalent and pervasive than they really are (I hope). They bounce thoughtlessly around like pinballs hoping to bump into their ideal fap fodder. Just ignore them and they go away. _Any_ attention just encourages them.

Emotionally healthy and self-aware (vs, self-absorbed) adults are more concerned with others. They're less visible in some respects but worth looking for. I think you're acquainted well enough with the darker end of the spectrum here? Take some time getting to know the rest. Please don't let a few bad apples spoil the whole barrel for you.


----------



## braindeadhead (Jun 22, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> The real women that I have in mind would have a self-definition beyond the male appraisal of her various body parts.



I'm a little confused by this post. How can I set your "self-definition"? Shouldn't a person's definition of self come from them self and not from an internet forum? 

As I read this thread your asking if this forum is serves any purpose other then allowing men to express sexual fantasies about fat women? (Please correct me if I'm wrong) Well, this the Weight Board, a weight gain/feeder-ee/sexual based forum... It is by its nature more sexually focused and part of this community is "numbers" focused (which is a different issue). If a women chooses to be involved in that conversation, or any sexual conversation, that is her right, just as it is yours to ignore it. 

Just as Hyde Park servers a particular audience of Dimensions so does the Weight Board. I think the the trick is to find the place that makes you the most comfortable and allow others to do the same. So if you find the conversation here disrespectful or lacking depth (and it generally is) feel free to ignore it.

Just my $0.02.


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 22, 2009)

CleverBomb said:


> Keep in mind that the guys who post on the paysite board are a self-selecting subset (gah, I think I overdid the alliteration there) of FAs, and not a representitive sample.



Rusty, to be fair... I don't think a person needs to post regularly on the paysite board in order to be deeply invested in his/her fantasies. In fact, I would say that fantasy (along with idealized visions of what a "real," "desirable" woman is) guides a lot of the interaction that takes place here. Look at the stories forum. Look at the Weight Board. And look also at a large percentage of threads on the Main Board. With so much talk about ideals, it's easy for an ordinary woman to feel like she's fading into the background. We're often told we're special and beautiful and worthwhile by virtue of being fat, almost to the point where it's the fat that matters, and not the person. The more a woman is willing to expose her fat body for inspection, the more attention she is likely to receive. What's more, the discourse here is so often polarizing, casting fat as a feisty antagonist to everything that is wrong with the skinny world. I'm sorry to say that this is dehumanizing and alienating, no matter which way the blubber bounces, and that it tends to "getthoize" fat in a way that is not always constructive.

This does not deny that there are many wonderful people here. Along with many of those folks, I enjoy celebrating the beauty of fat, which is so often maligned in the mainstream. But I want an ordinary life, grounded in reality. I don't want fat belittled, but I also don't need it so publicly glorified or focused on so intensely that all else falls by the wayside. It does say something about us here that we allow ourselves to be so preoccupied with protecting the pleasure (there's your shot of alliteration) we feel we've been denied in the "normal" world that we leave precious little room to celebrate the ordinary (sometimes boring) humanity of fat people... not just what makes us nifty fatties, but what makes us regular folks.


----------



## CleverBomb (Jun 22, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> It does say something about us here that we allow ourselves to be so preoccupied with protecting the pleasure (there's your shot of alliteration) we feel we've been denied in the "normal" world that we leave precious little room to celebrate the ordinary (sometimes boring) humanity of fat people... not just what makes us nifty fatties, but what makes us regular folks.


Indeed. 
We're all remarkably ordinary. That's what makes us special. 

-Rusty


----------



## Tad (Jun 22, 2009)

One thing that might (Im not sure) be relevant to this discussion is that it seems to me that a lot of new posters go through a phase of thinking that this is the place that theyve always fantasized about, filled with people who share their fantasy, whatever that fantasy is. Now, there are surely people who have been here for a long time who are here totally for the fantasy aspect, but I think that a good number of the more clearly fantasizing posts come from fairly new posters. People eventually tend to either get a little more clued in, or stop posting (or maybe just post on the paysite board?).

From my perspective, while I enjoy the community here and there are lots of people here that I care about, I dont know how much Id keep coming around if the fat eroticism aspect of things was suddenly taken from the site. I have lots of other places in my life where I can talk politics, cute kid stories, music, and lots of other things, but this is the only place where I can explore fat eroticism, which for better or worse is something that matters to me.

Im pretty sure that none of this is an answer for what Katherine was asking, but to be honest Im not entirely clear on what she was asking or stating. That she is not overly happy with the site comes through, but Im not quite sure what sort of response she hoped to get.


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 22, 2009)

edx said:


> I have lots of other places in my life where I can talk politics, cute kid stories, music, and lots of other things, but this is the only place where I can explore fat eroticism, which for better or worse is something that matters to me.



Ed, do you see eroticism and "other things" as mutually exclusive?

I know I don't. Part of what I've always strived for as a fat person is to not have eroticism denied to me simply because I'm fat. Normalizing fat for me is about reclaiming eroticism and incorporating it into my life. And I'm just not sure that a Dimensions that is overwhelmingly about erotics to the exclusion of other stuff serves that goal for me. I'd clamor for a vision of what it means to be fat that covers the full spectrum of being human, sex and the rest of it.


----------



## Tad (Jun 22, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Ed, do you see eroticism and "other things" as mutually exclusive?



Of course not. And in general all parts of who and what we are intertwine. Despite which many people, me amongst them, focus certain parts of their nature on certain times, places, or activities. I let my competitive side out when playing cards with friends and suppress it at home with wife and son. I let a lot of my nerdiness out in certain other on-line discussion groups. I get to exercise my creative side when making up stories for my son at night. And I talk about matters of fat eroticism on Dimensions (and occasionally by email or IM with people I've met through Dimensions).



Fascinita said:


> I know I don't. Part of what I've always strived for as a fat person is to not have eroticism denied to me simply because I'm fat. Normalizing fat for me is about reclaiming eroticism and incorporating it into my life. And I'm just not sure that a Dimensions that is overwhelmingly about erotics to the exclusion of other stuff serves that goal for me. I'd clamor for a vision of what it means to be fat that covers the full spectrum of being human, sex and the rest of it.



There are sites on-line that almost solely about fat eroticism. I don't take part in them (although I have poked around one of them). Neither do a lot of other people, based on membership levels, forum posting levels, and so on.

I'm certainly not looking for Dimensions to be all about fat eroticism, I was just saying that _for me_ fat eroticism is an important component of Dimensions, and that _for me_ it would be far less interesting without that component.

For you it may be very different. It is possible, and even likely, that what we want most from Dimensions is not the same thing. That will be the case for any place that is largely community defined, that it will be pulled in all sorts of different directions. When that works well, the tension between those pulls makes a place fascinating, broad in scope, and strong. When that doesn't work you end up with mini civil wars or simple collapse. Or, I suppose, you end up with in-between results, where you have places that function, but which don't have much dynamic tension, which are smaller and more narrow in intent.

I encourage you to pull towards what you want, it is the only way to stretch things in that direction. I don't promise to pull in the same direction, however :bow:


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 22, 2009)

edx said:


> I'm certainly not looking for Dimensions to be all about fat eroticism, I was just saying that _for me_ fat eroticism is an important component of Dimensions, and that _for me_ it would be far less interesting without that component.



I think the gist of it is, would you find it a _more_ interesting place if other aspects of what it means to be fat were more integral to Dimensions. When fat eroticism is increasingly isolated from other aspects of fat humanity, there is less and less room for the kind of vibrant fat community you describe to grow, less room for a dialogue that includes different voices. It's kind of a spiraling thing.

Encouraging me to pull toward what I want is like encouraging the Pope to be Catholic, for the record. 

Thanks for your input, Ed.


----------



## mossystate (Jun 22, 2009)

Seeing how Dimensions was not founded as a place for fat people to exchange recipes, the erotic/sexual element will never be erased...nor should it be erased.

What many fat women here are expressing is that there should be more for those of us who are not here to post pictures all the time, or to open a paysite, and for those who do participate in those things. 

It's not as if Dims does not have the forums that are anything but about sex. This tells me that Dimensions DOES want to be ( or at least claims ) a full service salon for fat people and admirers, and that fat women are more than bait. The one group that still has no place, and can get the feeling of not being more than belly/butt/boobs...bbw's. Yes, I am saying, once again, that it is imperative that fat women have an official place to talk about being...us...normal...us, and not be ripped into for not being smiling fantasies, 24/7. We can then participate in things like the erotic part of our beings ( if we choose ) in a way that feels healthy, and do it on our terms, with the strength and knowledge that we are officially thought of as more than just parts. I think a lot of the unrest comes from...the missing pieces of the puzzle. How can those looking for a more complete experience and exchange, not feel like " what the hell? ".


----------



## MisterGuy (Jun 22, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> The following quote best describes what has been my experience of what it has been like to be on this site as a fat woman. I am wondering if other women have felt the same way. There seems to be a conflict between a male idolized version of fat femininity "as at once infinitely pliable (soft,plush,giving) and so-out-of-this-world larger -than-life- that women become images "goddesses" to be forced into molds of perfection that no real woman can be comfortable in." Every conversation in fat sexuality is reduced to the immature compartmentalization of various body parts analysis of a male 15 year old.
> 
> Have I missed the point of what is really going on here at Dimensions?
> 
> ...



No, in fact, this post is the essence of Dimensions. That is to say, an endless shouting match between a cadre of embittered scolds who feel this site should be their personal feminist snarking ground by divine right, and a legion of masturbating, socially inept dimwits. Or, rather, the scolds do the shouting and the socially inept dimwits just keep right on masturbating.


----------



## Tad (Jun 22, 2009)

mossystate said:


> The one group that still has no place, and can get the feeling of not being more than belly/butt/boobs...bbw's. Yes, I am saying, once again, that it is imperative that fat women have an official place to talk about being...us...normal...us, and not be ripped into for not being smiling fantasies, 24/7. We can then participate in things like the erotic part of our beings ( if we choose ) in a way that feels healthy, and do it on our terms, with the strength and knowledge that we are officially thought of as more than just parts. I think a lot of the unrest comes from...the missing pieces of the puzzle. How can those looking for a more complete experience and exchange, not feel like " what the hell? ".



Eloquently put....and I'm out of rep, darn it! 

Nothing I can think of in response, other than that I hope you get that place, and that it turns out to be the missing piece.


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 22, 2009)

MisterGuy said:


> the scolds do the shouting



Yes, you do.

That makes you a feminist, right?


----------



## mossystate (Jun 22, 2009)

I'm not changing that diaper.


Wow.


----------



## mossystate (Jun 22, 2009)

edx said:


> Eloquently put....and I'm out of rep, darn it!
> 
> Nothing I can think of in response, other than that I hope you get that place, and that it turns out to be the missing piece.



I think it will say a lot, and then what is placed there can feel proud, thankful, and, powerful. Those are always beautiful things. Yup.


----------



## Mies (Jun 22, 2009)

How do endless snark and sarcasm encompass anything real or complex about women? Is that what makes women feel proud, thankful, and, powerful? Is that truly all there is? 

I can understand how some women who post here would have a legitimate gripe, but some others seem to demand respect without realizing that they might have to give some once in a while. This is a place that I would like to feel good about too, but the constant barbs make that difficult.


----------



## Tad (Jun 22, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> I think the gist of it is, would you find it a _more_ interesting place if other aspects of what it means to be fat were more integral to Dimensions. When fat eroticism is increasingly isolated from other aspects of fat humanity, there is less and less room for the kind of vibrant fat community you describe to grow, less room for a dialogue that includes different voices. It's kind of a spiraling thing.



I don't have a comprehensive reply at the moment, but three quick thoughts:

1) I absolutely agree that isolating eroticism from the rest of life (no matter what the preceding adjective) is counter productive, for both sides of the divide.

2) My definition of what is erotic when it comes to fat may well be broader than that of many people....or maybe it is that the term erotic is not the right one (but I'm not sure what is). I have a suspicion that we are may not be that far apart here, but looking at things from a different perspective.

3) Where we may well be fundamentally further apart in that for me, Dimensions is closer to escapism than it is to being an essential. Escapism is *very* important to me, but fundamentally if Dimensions ever becomes more of a chore than a pleasure I don't imagine I'd be here much. I like hearing what is happening with people here, I like the exchanges of views on various topics, I like that people will disagree with me and will occasionally call me out if they think I'm talking crap, and yes I like that there are people here who view fat as a positive thing and take joy in it. It is only the last of those things that, to me, is unique about Dimensions. Whether or not I'm part of Dimensions I'll still carrying on in my quiet way of trying to trying to support size acceptance. 



Fascinita said:


> Encouraging me to pull toward what I want is like encouraging the Pope to be Catholic, for the record.
> .



Well, yes, but I think it is important to encourage the pope to be catholic if you are a Presbyterian (figuratively speaking) but want to encourage a mulit-faith community.


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 22, 2009)

edx said:


> 3) Where we may well be fundamentally further apart in that for me, Dimensions is closer to escapism than it is to being an essential. Escapism is *very* important to me, but fundamentally if Dimensions ever becomes more of a chore than a pleasure I don't imagine I'd be here much.



I understand and identify with this thinking, Ed. I think most people go online to find something that they don't find in real life. That's classic escapism, and there ain't nothing wrong with it as such. I would only add that there are many who are drawn to the good things about Dimensions, and would like it to be a place where they, too, can find a kind of escapism that feels really great. I think it's about people getting a taste of something good and then saying, "Hey, I want a full piece of the pie, too."


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 22, 2009)

Another way of putting it, Ed, is that it's about expanding our idea of what is pleasurable, so that everyone who wants to participate constructively has a shot at getting hers. This is accomplished by making room for different voices and needs, even if we can't always support one another expressly. For a model that seems to be working well, see the GLBTQ Forum.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 22, 2009)

MisterGuy said:


> No, in fact, this post is the essence of Dimensions. That is to say, an endless shouting match between a cadre of embittered scolds who feel this site should be their personal feminist snarking ground by divine right, and a legion of masturbating, socially inept dimwits. Or, rather, the scolds do the shouting and the socially inept dimwits just keep right on masturbating.



Well, I don't see any typos scattered about in this tastefully written bit of female-loving insight, so I guess by default you're in scold mode.


----------



## Elfcat (Jun 22, 2009)

Fantasy is of course of component of psychological reality. And I think most of us here recognize that views on the big picture of reality are constantly evolving.

But yes, hopefully that evolution takes one beyond the strange idea that intentionally misspelling sentences to the point of looking barely literate is going to be a turn on to any woman to speak of.

And I do think it's a little funny for someone to ask what "good beaches" are for finding women who look a particular way. That would seem to be a "you burn your fuel, you take your chances" kind of thing. Unless there's a "fat beach" next to "muscle beach" these days....


----------



## Teleute (Jun 22, 2009)

misstoodles said:


> I'm not attacking anyone personally, there is a lot of good here, but I feel people who try to point out some issues especially re: the treatment of women are given the old '''shut up yer being so pc'' routine.





MisterGuy said:


> No, in fact, this post is the essence of Dimensions. That is to say, an endless shouting match between a cadre of embittered scolds who feel this site should be their personal feminist snarking ground by divine right, and a legion of masturbating, socially inept dimwits. Or, rather, the scolds do the shouting and the socially inept dimwits just keep right on masturbating.



Hmmmmm.....  
You just go right on proving our point there, sparky.



mies said:


> How do endless snark and sarcasm encompass anything real or complex about women? Is that what makes women feel proud, thankful, and, powerful? Is that truly all there is?
> 
> I can understand how some women who post here would have a legitimate gripe, but some others seem to demand respect without realizing that they might have to give some once in a while. This is a place that I would like to feel good about too, but the constant barbs make that difficult.



Of course that's not all there is, though I'm guessing (given all the non-snarky posts from women in this thread) that was intended more as a comment directed toward one woman than a comment on any general tendency for women here to snark. I totally agree with you that each person - no matter what their gender - has to give as well as receive in this area. However, I feel I've been generally quite respectful of others on these forums, and yet my posts talking about inappropriate pm's I've received have somehow been lumped under the "feminist" category and therefore instantly classified as "bad". That is... less than encouraging.

Fascinita and Ed, you guys are both awesome and have said some fantastic things. Unfortunately I am not really equipped to respond to them right now as I'm in semi-coherent post-work blargh state. But seriously: You guys get major points for understanding stuff. That made sense, right?


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 22, 2009)

edx said:


> Eloquently put....and I'm out of rep, darn it!
> 
> Nothing I can think of in response, other than that I hope you get that place, and that it turns out to be the missing piece.



Indeed.........still waiting to hear back. Still.......



Fascinita said:


> Yes, you do.
> 
> That makes you a feminist, right?



If a woman is alone in the woods and says something, is she still wrong?



Mies said:


> How do endless snark and sarcasm encompass anything real or complex about women? Is that what makes women feel proud, thankful, and, powerful? Is that truly all there is?
> 
> I can understand how some women who post here would have a legitimate gripe, but some others seem to demand respect without realizing that they might have to give some once in a while. This is a place that I would like to feel good about too, but the constant barbs make that difficult.



Who disrespected you? You only have 22 posts in 2 years....and at least one of those is to complain about other posters. 
How much positive input have you added to the mix? If you feel it's best to remain silent, why only come out to criticize? Who snarked you? And did you miss all the positive things being said....some of it by women?
Why not mention that guy having a tantrum since you want to talk about the evils of snark.......


----------



## mossystate (Jun 22, 2009)

Mies said:


> How do endless snark and sarcasm encompass anything real or complex about women? Is that what makes women feel proud, thankful, and, powerful? Is that truly all there is?
> 
> I can understand how some women who post here would have a legitimate gripe, but some others seem to demand respect without realizing that they might have to give some once in a while. This is a place that I would like to feel good about too, but the constant barbs make that difficult.




I am going to assume you were directing that bit of stuff at me, seeing how you found your snark voice and used some of my words.


I have contributed close to 9000 posts on this board. I have posted on many of the forums. 


I have posted silly things...I have posted when someone is feeling like shit and needs a kind word...I have posted pictures of myself...I have shared very personal things about myself...I have fought against sexist, racist and homophobic shit when I have seen it out here...I have posted what I had for dinner...I have passionately taken to task, people and things I think needed it...I have gotten mad, sad, glad, happy, angry, sweet, ornery, and a million 
other emotions. Seems you have a hot button, and you choose to ignore a lot.

Even if I had not been out here...contributing...as long as I have, I would still have the right to expect certain things. What have you earned? I would love to know. I cannot really form much of an opinion, as you have 22 posts...since 2007. I guess you have been too afraid to join the group?

I can't think of one woman out here who ' snarks ', who does not contribute a buttload of good. Maybe you refuse to see it. That is not my problem. Oh, and, like GEF said...why didn't you go after MisterGuy? This is not his first snark rodeo. Pardon the Dr. Philism. Damn.


----------



## voidhead (Jun 22, 2009)

Not sure if this has been said but this is situation is really not specific to fat admiration. But it might be obvious here because the online detachment of the board gives it a fantasy aspect that allows horny males like myself to be more honest and indulge their fetish far more than they would in reality, coupled with the visual and physical nature of the fat fetish to begin with. 

But think of Tomb Raider for a second where "normal" non-FA men have created a video game character that is completely disproportionate and has enormous tits, and they find her hot. Or a lot of the women these normal men are fantasizing about like Pam Anderson with huge breast implants. These normal men are objectifying too. 

Fantasy and reality are inherently different. It might be more obvious here where the dominant fantasy is by nature so physical because it is weight-based, and by nature so far from reality because mobility/health issues are ignored. 

But really there is always that dichotomy between men and women where women want to know more about a guy: what does he do for a living? where does he live? etc. They are more deep when it comes to attraction and it's more about the person as a whole whereas a man will fuck a woman he does not respect simply because she is hot. 

There was some study where they showed women pictures of the same guys but dressed the guys up differently. They were all attractive guys but in some pictures they were dressed in a fast food uniform, in others in a nice suit etc. The women invariably said they were attracted to the ones wearing nice clothes, even when it was the same guy just dressed differently. 

Men were different. They thought the same girls were attractive regardless of the context (outfit).

I think there are a lot of young guys here who are still in that stage where they are more into fantasy conceptions of women. They might not have had a lot of relationships and don't realize the practical side of a relationship beyond just sex fantasy, and this is exaggerated because we're online and more or less anonymous.

Not to mention that the models on these paysites are totally playing into the sexual fantasies, eating, rubbing their belly, wearing clothes that don't fit, showing how out of shape they are, getting stuck it tight places they know what turns FA's on and they are thereby encouraging the kind of commentary that's bothering the OP. 

Sometimes you just want to get laid or at least fantasies about getting laid without all the reality of relationships, enduring all the whining and baggage, having limited freedom, spooning her after sex when all you want to do is go drink a beer elsewhere etc. because you have to satisfy her animal craving for security from every guy for the unborn baby in every woman's womb waiting to emerge like the Alien. (Guys you know what I mean) I don't think that's just an FA thing.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 22, 2009)

I don't fap to photos of guys in uniforms or suits......and I do tend to be polite enough to treat others like humans at all times....no matter what they wear or don't wear.


What that study really shows is something most of us have had figured out for a while now anyway.....some women think "long term" in attraction......while some men only care about immediate gratification. (Hence the interest in how well he can take care of his potential offspring since he wants to put his joystick into the usb port......)

Just like your implication might be that some women "miss out on some great guys" because of how they are dressed....some menfolk miss out on some really great ladies because they didn't give two shits to take the time to get to know her because using her to scratch an itch was more important to them.


And yeah, I know we are online and some things are "different" here...however, people getting used and tossed off for sexual gratification was happening long before these here intranets.....


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 23, 2009)

QUOTE "Sometimes you just want to get laid or at least fantasies about getting laid without all the reality of relationships, enduring all the whining and baggage, having limited freedom, spooning her after sex when all you want to do is go drink a beer elsewhere etc. because you have to satisfy her animal craving for security from every guy for the unborn baby in every woman's womb waiting to emerge like the Alien. (Guys you know what I mean) I don't think that's just an FA thing."


Yes- some men want to fantasize about getting laid without all the "baggage," and some women feel demeaned when they are perceived exclusively as fodder for a male fantasy and nothing else of value. Oh the crap we have to put up with to get what we want from each other.


----------



## Tania (Jun 23, 2009)

MissToodles said:


> this website likes to tout the beauty of the fat form, but many of the ideas about women here are not too different from the mainstream.
> 
> I'm not attacking anyone personally, there is a lot of good here, but I feel people who try to point out some issues especially re: the treatment of women are given the old '''shut up yer being so pc'' routine.



Yes and yes! Some of the pro-fat rhetoric is basically a flipped version of the usual thincentric, afeminist noise. In fact, sometimes I think it may even be more harmful, because a few people are so caught up in all the self-congratulation that they fail to see the hypocrisy. 

To echo Mossy's sentiments, a community cannot legitimately consider itself to be a "full service" size/fat acceptance resource unless the poster children for the movement - the fat women - have the opportunity to fully express the many facets of their fat identities. Fatness has a dark side that must be acknowledged and cannot be silenced - opening Pandora's Fat Box means that you have to deal with the not-so-cool stuff that comes with the funtime. People are definitely entitled to their rich fantasy lives, but they are not entitled to discount, talk down, or muzzle the objects of those fantasies should the objects take issue, fail to live up to the fantasy (ie, "you're not confident enough to be a *real* BBW"), or bring up bonerkill subjects like eating disorders, sexual abuse, and suicide which figure prominently in their fat experiences. As Toodles says, we all need to "own" our sexuality. In order to do that, we need to be able to define our sexual selves FOR ourselves at our OWN pace without interference or expectation from others. 

Further, if the fat girls are ever going to reach that mythic state of "happy, fat, and confident" that everyone seems to wish for, they must have a place where they can safely hash through these pertinent issues, even if (perhaps especially if) the men can't quite understand why.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 23, 2009)

Im pretty sure that none of this is an answer for what Katherine was asking, but to be honest Im not entirely clear on what she was asking or stating. That she is not overly happy with the site comes through, but Im not quite sure what sort of response she hoped to get.[/QUOTE]



Ed, I hope I didn't suggest that I am unhappy with the site. I wanted to share my experience of how it feels to be on the site. I am not anti-sex or anti-erotic, and there are other dimensions to people worth exploring. There are different levels of conversation going on here, and I have noticed that any conversation that has a whiff of feminist concerns can soon be snarked and discounted. Men have benefited from the feminist movement in its freeing a lot of women to emerge from Victorian and puritanical sexual repression to consciously own their sexuality. Men have benefited from feminism in that a lot of women are comfortable having sex outside of marriage. Men have benefited from feminism since many women are well educated and can get good jobs to help pay the mortgage. People come to Dimensions for different reasons some of which are diametrically opposed.


----------



## Imp (Jun 23, 2009)

Tania said:


> Yes and yes! Some of the pro-fat rhetoric is basically a flipped version of the usual thincentric, afeminist noise. In fact, sometimes I think it may even be more harmful, because a few people are so caught up in all the self-congratulation that they fail to see the hypocrisy.
> 
> To echo Mossy's sentiments, a community cannot legitimately consider itself to be a "full service" size/fat acceptance resource unless the poster children for the movement - the fat women - have the opportunity to fully express the many facets of their fat identities. Fatness has a dark side that must be acknowledged and cannot be silenced - opening Pandora's Fat Box means that you have to deal with the not-so-cool stuff that comes with the funtime. People are definitely entitled to their rich fantasy lives, but they are not entitled to discount, talk down, or muzzle the objects of those fantasies should the objects take issue, fail to live up to the fantasy (ie, "you're not confident enough to be a *real* BBW"), or bring up bonerkill subjects like eating disorders, sexual abuse, and suicide which figure prominently in their fat experiences. As Toodles says, we all need to "own" our sexuality. In order to do that, we need to be able to define our sexual selves FOR ourselves at our OWN pace without interference or expectation from others.
> 
> Further, if the fat girls are ever going to reach that mythic state of "happy, fat, and confident" that everyone seems to wish for, they must have a place where they can safely hash through these pertinent issues, even if (perhaps especially if) the men can't quite understand why.



Yeah, yeah.

Instead maybe the fat girls should listen more instead of talking so much, like maybe to this...

...Happy Birthday!


----------



## Tania (Jun 23, 2009)

Imp said:


> Yeah, yeah.
> 
> Instead maybe the fat girls should listen more instead of talking so much, like maybe to this...
> 
> ...Happy Birthday!



Hahaha! Thank you very much.


----------



## Mies (Jun 23, 2009)

Some short answers to a couple of things posted in response to mine...

"Who disrespected you?" - No one directly, thank goodness, at least not up until now. My opinion is that there is too much snark on these boards. Respect that, please. It is my opinion. I don't have to have 9000 posts to earn the right to have one.

"You only have 22 posts in 2 years....and at least one of those is to complain about other posters." - Some people post too much. I don't feel that I have to post an "Amen" to every post that I agree with. 

"How much positive input have you added to the mix?" - Admittedly, not much. But then, regarding the woman who posted about her husband making a hurtful remark, can anyone say that the immediate chorus of "Divorce him!" was all that constructive? 

That's not to say that I haven't enjoyed what others have posted. But then along comes someone who feels that they absolutely have to shit on a thread that I really enjoy, like "The Fat Girl Who Came to Dinner". What was that about?

"If you feel it's best to remain silent, ..." - I do. I don't like getting into these board fights. And they break out with such regularity. But I'm weak, so sometimes I get pulled in and wish that I hadn't. Like now. Another poster said: "Seems you have a hot button, and you choose to ignore a lot." That's very true, although, in reading the boards, I tend more to ignore the neanderthal stuff that some people enjoy getting so pissed off about. 

"And did you miss all the positive things being said....some of it by women?" - This attitude is exactly what pushed my hot button. What is your assumption here? What do you think you know about me? That I don't think women have much worth saying? I find that to be very offensive. 

"Why not mention that guy having a tantrum since you want to talk about the evils of snark......." I thought that MisterGuy made a very good point. Stop hectoring the men here. What if a man was to make a post slamming female sexuality, like the one that started this thread? 

Frankly ladies, I find the pandering by the women on the Paysite Board ("What typically passes for commentary in the Pay site board.") to be an insult to MY intelligence. I am more than just a dick and a credit card. But I recognize that the paysite board is what it is. Someone made the point that the women who post there are real people, and their activity on the paysite board is just a part of who they are. Here's a bit of news: the same goes for the men too. 

No man is telling the women here to shut up and just look pretty. No woman has ever been criticized for posting something positive and intelligent. So why the demands and the negativity?


----------



## mergirl (Jun 23, 2009)

Teleute said:


> I was a little surprised at how many I got - I thought the numbers fetishists were more into the supersized gals. You're probably pretty safe if you keep it to GLBTQ or one of the less-frequented boards - I didn't get any after the librarian pics, and I was totally steeling myself for it too because I thought those were better tardvark bait than the wedding pics. I guess those guys probably stay the hell away from GLBTQ board, haha.


Shhh.. don't tell everyone about our plethora of queer porn we have hidden away!! Soon we will have all the guys there asking to watch! 

I think you get out of Dimensions what you put into it. There are enough funny, intelligent and engaging people here that you can discuss a whole host of things not just fantasy based or even fat based. I generally don't post much on the weight board unless i see something that grabs my attention, so generally stick to the main board and now the lgbt board. If you don't want to engage in the 'fantasy' side of things, then you just make it clear that its not for you. Fat sexuality obviously means a lot of different things to different people. i wouldn't want to deny anyones right to fap off to unrealistic goddesses any more than i wouldn't want to deny people the right to assert their realism and their real experiences of fat sexuality.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 23, 2009)

Tania said:


> Yes and yes! Some of the pro-fat rhetoric is basically a flipped version of the usual thincentric, afeminist noise. In fact, sometimes I think it may even be more harmful, because a few people are so caught up in all the self-congratulation that they fail to see the hypocrisy.
> 
> To echo Mossy's sentiments, a community cannot legitimately consider itself to be a "full service" size/fat acceptance resource unless the poster children for the movement - the fat women - have the opportunity to fully express the many facets of their fat identities. Fatness has a dark side that must be acknowledged and cannot be silenced - opening Pandora's Fat Box means that you have to deal with the not-so-cool stuff that comes with the funtime. People are definitely entitled to their rich fantasy lives, but they are not entitled to discount, talk down, or muzzle the objects of those fantasies should the objects take issue, fail to live up to the fantasy (ie, "you're not confident enough to be a *real* BBW"), or bring up bonerkill subjects like eating disorders, sexual abuse, and suicide which figure prominently in their fat experiences. As Toodles says, we all need to "own" our sexuality. In order to do that, we need to be able to define our sexual selves FOR ourselves at our OWN pace without interference or expectation from others.
> 
> Further, if the fat girls are ever going to reach that mythic state of "happy, fat, and confident" that everyone seems to wish for, they must have a place where they can safely hash through these pertinent issues, even if (perhaps especially if) the men can't quite understand why.





katherine22 said:


> Ed, I hope I didn't suggest that I am unhappy with the site. I wanted to share my experience of how it feels to be on the site. I am not anti-sex or anti-erotic, and there are other dimensions to people worth exploring. There are different levels of conversation going on here, and I have noticed that any conversation that has a whiff of feminist concerns can soon be snarked and discounted. Men have benefited from the feminist movement in its freeing a lot of women to emerge from Victorian and puritanical sexual repression to consciously own their sexuality. Men have benefited from feminism in that a lot of women are comfortable having sex outside of marriage. Men have benefited from feminism since many women are well educated and can get good jobs to help pay the mortgage. People come to Dimensions for different reasons some of which are diametrically opposed.




Excellent posts and good points from both of you  :bow:



Mies said:


> "Who disrespected you?" - No one directly, thank goodness, at least not up until now. My opinion is that there is too much snark on these boards. Respect that, please. It is my opinion. I don't have to have 9000 posts to earn the right to have one.



You have every right to your opinion- just like all the women here do, too. You make a post to bash the women on the boards with a blanket statement, yet don't want to be addressed for your opinion? Slink back to silence if you didn't really want your post to be read...people have the right to respond to your opinions when you make them public.
It's part of living in the world- EVERYONE has an opinion and no one has to agree with yours. We can also question the opinions of others. 



Mies said:


> "You only have 22 posts in 2 years....and at least one of those is to complain about other posters." - Some people post too much. I don't feel that I have to post an "Amen" to every post that I agree with.



So don't. Still, to make a few posts....and one to insult other posters doesn't seem like the positive influence you seem to be asking for....

"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi

Don't come out and snark to call others snarky..... 



Mies said:


> "How much positive input have you added to the mix?" - Admittedly, not much. But then, regarding the woman who posted about her husband making a hurtful remark, can anyone say that the immediate chorus of "Divorce him!" was all that constructive?



And.........once again, how about the other women in the thread (myself included) that said don't......?

Seems like you have selective reading skills.....



Mies said:


> That's not to say that I haven't enjoyed what others have posted. But then along comes someone who feels that they absolutely have to shit on a thread that I really enjoy, like "The Fat Girl Who Came to Dinner". What was that about?



Not sure what a blog about having dinner with people has to do with the more serious subject at hand in this thread......

And I don't think it was all women that "disagreed" or "protested" in that thread.....

Oh yeah, you only read the negative ones from women. 



Mies said:


> "If you feel it's best to remain silent, ..." - I do. I don't like getting into these board fights. And they break out with such regularity. But I'm weak, so sometimes I get pulled in and wish that I hadn't. Like now. Another poster said: "Seems you have a hot button, and you choose to ignore a lot." That's very true, although, in reading the boards, I tend more to ignore the neanderthal stuff that some people enjoy getting so pissed off about.



Post or don't post....no skin off of my nose. Just don't make insults and blanket accusations if you don't wish to "engage".....
Most people realize that what they are about to say might stir the pot....



Mies said:


> "And did you miss all the positive things being said....some of it by women?" - This attitude is exactly what pushed my hot button. What is your assumption here? What do you think you know about me? That I don't think women have much worth saying? I find that to be very offensive.



That was a legitimate question...that you didn't really answer. Just deflected with another question and feigned victimhood. 
You find me asking you if you noticed positive posts from other posters insulting? That's kind of a big leap there, methinks.....




Mies said:


> "Why not mention that guy having a tantrum since you want to talk about the evils of snark......." I thought that MisterGuy made a very good point. Stop hectoring the men here. What if a man was to make a post slamming female sexuality, like the one that started this thread?




So a man slamming a woman's questioning of male sexual behavior patterns- no matter what they are or what they do- is hectoring? 
This is a legitimate discussion.....men are disagreeing and have tossed some insults. You keep accusing people of some e-crime on the boards....yet that same e-crime is okay if you are someone other man does it. 

And when men don't even bother to give two shits about female sexuality or what we really prefer and instead prefer to use us, that's worse than any E-slam.....

You seem to have a slanted viewpoint of things....



Mies said:


> Frankly ladies, I find the pandering by the women on the Paysite Board ("What typically passes for commentary in the Pay site board.") to be an insult to MY intelligence. I am more than just a dick and a credit card. But I recognize that the paysite board is what it is. Someone made the point that the women who post there are real people, and their activity on the paysite board is just a part of who they are. Here's a bit of news: the same goes for the men too.



Well, you know that the paysite really isn't about your dick but more about your credit card, right? 

If the menfolk want to be known as more than just dicks with credit cards, then they need to do like some of the other well-known and liked paysite board inhabitants do.............come to the other boards, interact and show people who they really are. 

You are what you choose to be.......



Mies said:


> No man is telling the women here to shut up and just look pretty. No woman has ever been criticized for posting something positive and intelligent. So why the demands and the negativity?



I have seen lots of positive and intelligent in this very thread...from women. You have acknowledged none of it. You even said you can't be bothered to say positive things when you agree with other posters. 
Some people here choose to participate more than yourself. Don't see why you feel the need to insult them if you really just feel like looking more than anything else....


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jun 23, 2009)

Can somebody please rep Caroline (GEF) for me?

Srsly tho, I'm grateful for guys like Mies who aren't afraid to say exactly what's on their minds. How else can a guy like me feel so sensitive, caring and evolved, except in contrast?  It's one of the main reasons I come here. 






"Every hun serves a purpose, even if only as a bad example." Wes Roberts. _Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun_


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 23, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Can somebody please rep Caroline (GEF) for me?



Done, plus a creepy marriage proposal!


----------



## mossystate (Jun 23, 2009)

Mentioning a couple of recent threads ( although, his aim is not that great ), I now know, without a doubt, that someone is simply pissed off at certain women. It's a personal thing. Ok, gotcha. As for bringing up that the paysite board is about pandering...ummmm...those women are not there to give it away for free, and, like when you go into a 7-11 for a corn dog, sometimes, the clerk does not _really _care if you have a good day. Anyway...this is now just silly. Not the OP...just...this.


----------



## Weeze (Jun 23, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Can somebody please rep Caroline (GEF) for me?
> 
> Srsly tho, I'm grateful for guys like Mies who aren't afraid to say exactly what's on their minds. How else can a guy like me feel so sensitive, caring and evolved, except in contrast?  It's one of the main reasons I come here.
> "Every hun serves a purpose, even if only as a bad example." Wes Roberts. _Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun_




Got her for you. Sexually inappropriate comment and all.

speaking of sexually inappropriate, anyone wanna fill me on in this thread? It sorta looks like a big mash up of generalizations....


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 23, 2009)

krismiss said:


> Got her for you. Sexually inappropriate comment and all.
> 
> speaking of sexually inappropriate, anyone wanna fill me on in this thread? It sorta looks like a big mash up of generalizations....



OK, here goes:

OP expressed a fabulously articulated opinion.

Lots of agreement. Some disagreement. Snark ensued. Thread degenerated. 

Bonus Irony Alert: Some of the male participants expressed a rather overt desire, weaved between the lines of what was actually said, that the lovely ladies of Dims are best seen & not heard.


----------



## Tau (Jun 23, 2009)

voidhead said:


> Sometimes you just want to get laid or at least fantasies about getting laid without all the reality of relationships, enduring all the whining and baggage, having limited freedom, spooning her after sex when all you want to do is go drink a beer elsewhere etc. because you have to satisfy her animal craving for security from every guy for the unborn baby in every woman's womb waiting to emerge like the Alien. (Guys you know what I mean) I don't think that's just an FA thing.



OMG! Did you just say that??


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

Mies said:


> "If you feel it's best to remain silent, ..." - I do. I don't like getting into these board fights. And they break out with such regularity. But I'm weak, so sometimes I get pulled in and wish that I hadn't. Like now. Another poster said: "Seems you have a hot button, and you choose to ignore a lot." That's very true, although, in reading the boards, I tend more to ignore the neanderthal stuff that some people enjoy getting so pissed off about.



If you feel like this place is so awful that you don't want to participate, what claim do you have against those of us who do participate but would like to see some changes? You're essentially saying that the person who contributes least has more of a right to expect respect.

Your criticism of what goes on here is not valid if you don't care enough to invest yourself in what goes on here. Honestly, you're standing on a losing proposition.



> No man is telling the women here to shut up and just look pretty. No woman has ever been criticized for posting something positive and intelligent. So why the demands and the negativity?



You're wrong about this. You think this is about men vs. women. Some of us have been trying exactly to reframe the assumption that men and women have such radically different needs--that men are this and women are that and that out interests are mutually exclusive--so that there's more room for valuing what makes each of us individual humans, rather than flat, idealized versions of people, based on outdated ideas of gender. Many people are criticized here for posting what they regard as positive and intelligent commentary, simply because that commentary doesn't adhere to notions of what's acceptable. Case in point, your critique of what's basically an intelligent set of points about a desire for positive change, and your choosing to describe this dialogue as "demands and... negativity."

Please, if you have nothing positive to contribute, yourself, why get involved?


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

mergirl said:


> I generally don't post much on the weight board unless i see something that grabs my attention, so generally stick to the main board and now the lgbt board.



Mer, I'm glad you enjoy the GLBTQ board and that the fappers have theirs. Wunderbar! And I'd like a BBW board, myself, please. Yes?


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 23, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Mer, I'm glad you enjoy the GLBTQ board and that the fappers have theirs. Wunderbar! And I'd like a BBW board, myself, please. Yes?



And I would like a sushi board too, because that's just how I roll. 

Ernest Nagel ... are you proud of me?


----------



## mossystate (Jun 23, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> And I'd like a BBW board, myself, please. Yes?



If I get my own forum, I am so going to love being in charge of who gets in. :happy:


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> And I would like a sushi board too, because that's just how I roll.
> 
> *Ernest Nagel* ... are you proud of me?



That punster's incorrigible punniness has seeped into one of our driest wits. Swim for the hills, y'all!


----------



## Mies (Jun 23, 2009)

I couldn't figure out how to make that quote thingy work, so I tried this. I hope it reads well:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
"Who disrespected you?" - No one directly, thank goodness, at least not up until now. My opinion is that there is too much snark on these boards. Respect that, please. It is my opinion. I don't have to have 9000 posts to earn the right to have one. 

You have every right to your opinion- just like all the women here do, too. You make a post to bash the women on the boards with a blanket statement, yet don't want to be addressed for your opinion? Slink back to silence if you didn't really want your post to be read...people have the right to respond to your opinions when you make them public.
It's part of living in the world- EVERYONE has an opinion and no one has to agree with yours. We can also question the opinions of others. 

OK - so here's my first post: 

"How do endless snark and sarcasm encompass anything real or complex about women? Is that what makes women feel proud, thankful, and, powerful? Is that truly all there is? 

I can understand how some women who post here would have a legitimate gripe, but some others seem to demand respect without realizing that they might have to give some once in a while. This is a place that I would like to feel good about too, but the constant barbs make that difficult."​
How does that bash the women on the boards with a blanket statement? Some women here do post an awful lot of sarcasm. I bashed them. And how does this: "Every conversation in fat sexuality is reduced to the immature compartmentalization of various body parts analysis of a male 15 year old." (from the original post in this thread) not bash men with a blanket statement?​

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
"You only have 22 posts in 2 years....and at least one of those is to complain about other posters." - Some people post too much. I don't feel that I have to post an "Amen" to every post that I agree with. 

So don't. Still, to make a few posts....and one to insult other posters doesn't seem like the positive influence you seem to be asking for....

Back to my first post, quoted above - where do I insult other posters? I didn't call anyone names. I did question why some posters feel that snark and sarcasm were necessary, and then feel that they are somehow standing up for women by posting such. I made a distinction between those who snark, and those who don't. I asked for respect. I asked that some posters tone down the sarcasm. Just because it isn't directed at me doesn't mean that I don't feel the sting. Please point out where I got it wrong.​
"Be the change you want to see in the world" Ghandi

Don't come out and snark to call others snarky..... 


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
"How much positive input have you added to the mix?" - Admittedly, not much. But then, regarding the woman who posted about her husband making a hurtful remark, can anyone say that the immediate chorus of "Divorce him!" was all that constructive? 

And.........once again, how about the other women in the thread (myself included) that said don't......?

Seems like you have selective reading skills.....

Again with the snark. My reading skills are just fine. I didn't say that all women piled on with the divorce thing. (I counted them up: two women said divorce him, one said she would leave without divorcing him, and a guy quoted something that might imply that she should divorce him. I couldn't tell.) I pointed out that those who advocated divorce weren't adding anything useful to the woman who was hurt. You said that you agree with that statement.​
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
That's not to say that I haven't enjoyed what others have posted. But then along comes someone who feels that they absolutely have to shit on a thread that I really enjoy, like "The Fat Girl Who Came to Dinner". What was that about? 

Not sure what a blog about having dinner with people has to do with the more serious subject at hand in this thread......

Snark is snark. It doesn't matter if the subject was serious. Tall Fat Sue seemed to become defensive after some of those posts. I'm only guessing that she was hurt by the snark.​
And I don't think it was all women that "disagreed" or "protested" in that thread.....

Oh yeah, you only read the negative ones from women. 

No, you just think I do. I never said that women were the only ones who post negative things.​

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
"If you feel it's best to remain silent, ..." - I do. I don't like getting into these board fights. And they break out with such regularity. But I'm weak, so sometimes I get pulled in and wish that I hadn't. Like now. Another poster said: "Seems you have a hot button, and you choose to ignore a lot." That's very true, although, in reading the boards, I tend more to ignore the neanderthal stuff that some people enjoy getting so pissed off about. 

Post or don't post....no skin off of my nose. Just don't make insults and blanket accusations if you don't wish to "engage".....
Most people realize that what they are about to say might stir the pot....

Again, point out the insults and blanket accusations, please.​

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
"And did you miss all the positive things being said....some of it by women?" - This attitude is exactly what pushed my hot button. What is your assumption here? What do you think you know about me? That I don't think women have much worth saying? I find that to be very offensive. 

That was a legitimate question...that you didn't really answer. Just deflected with another question and feigned victimhood. 
You find me asking you if you noticed positive posts from other posters insulting? That's kind of a big leap there, methinks.....

For the record: No, I did not miss all the positive things being said...some of it by women.​

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
"Why not mention that guy having a tantrum since you want to talk about the evils of snark......." I thought that MisterGuy made a very good point. Stop hectoring the men here. What if a man was to make a post slamming female sexuality, like the one that started this thread? 


So a man slamming a woman's questioning of male sexual behavior patterns- no matter what they are or what they do- is hectoring? 
This is a legitimate discussion.....men are disagreeing and have tossed some insults. You keep accusing people of some e-crime on the boards....yet that same e-crime is okay if you are someone other man does it. 

Not sure if there is a typo here, or maybe I'm not reading this correctly.​
And when men don't even bother to give two shits about female sexuality or what we really prefer and instead prefer to use us, that's worse than any E-slam.....
OK, I won't consider that to be a blanket statement. (You owe me for that). Or do you just mean some men? Please point out what you are referring to.​
You seem to have a slanted viewpoint of things....

My chair is missing a wheel.​

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
Frankly ladies, I find the pandering by the women on the Paysite Board ("What typically passes for commentary in the Pay site board.") to be an insult to MY intelligence. I am more than just a dick and a credit card. But I recognize that the paysite board is what it is. Someone made the point that the women who post there are real people, and their activity on the paysite board is just a part of who they are. Here's a bit of news: the same goes for the men too. 

Well, you know that the paysite really isn't about your dick but more about your credit card, right? 

It couldn't be about the one without the other, could it?​
If the menfolk want to be known as more than just dicks with credit cards, then they need to do like some of the other well-known and liked paysite board inhabitants do.............come to the other boards, interact and show people who they really are. 

You are what you choose to be.......




Quote:
Originally Posted by Mies 
No man is telling the women here to shut up and just look pretty. No woman has ever been criticized for posting something positive and intelligent. So why the demands and the negativity? 

I have seen lots of positive and intelligent in this very thread...from women.

(Edx?)​
You have acknowledged none of it. You even said you can't be bothered to say positive things when you agree with other posters. 
Some people here choose to participate more than yourself. Don't see why you feel the need to insult them if you really just feel like looking more than anything else....

I spoke up because I felt insulted. Lurking does seem to be more fitting for me.​


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

mossystate said:


> If I get my own forum, I am so going to love being in charge of who gets in. :happy:



Let's face it, if you get your own forum, _Javier Bardem_ is going to be in charge of who gets in. 

(You still into him?)


----------



## Mies (Jun 23, 2009)

"Woman represents the totality of what there is to know."

'Nuff said. I'm outta here.


----------



## mossystate (Jun 23, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Let's face it, if you get your own forum, _Javier Bardem_ is going to be in charge of who gets in.
> 
> (You still into him?)



He will be my right foot man. I think he would look purty at my feet.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jun 23, 2009)

Look, it's unfortunate but men are kinda hardwired to mark our territory. We draw boundaries and presume detailed definitions/roles for ourselves and others. Boundaries constitute a sort of pacifier or security blanket to shield us from fear and uncertainty. Boundaries afford us an illusion of control which we desperately believe we need. Some of us eventually figure out that the boundaries close us off from too many possibilities and destroy the chance to really create something that works. Some never do.

Before that realization occurs we feel threatened when someone challenges boundaries we believe are inviolable. An aggressive (uppity, snarky, scolding, bitchy...) woman is a huge threat to the world view and the certitude men like to wrap ourselves in. The more confusing and precarious our lives the more we cling to that illusion of control. Because of feminism, technology, economics and myriad other variables the age at which most men can achieve some form of enlightenment has been slowly but steadily falling. It's easier for us to cast off the machismo and false bravado and still be respected as real men with real confidence in ourselves, not the cultural conventions we cower behind. 

It's by no means a slam dunk. Testosterone is the mortar that helped build the sexist walls we're trapped behind. It's powerful, addictive stuff, easy to get stupid-drunk on. Without a good woman most of us never get the macho-monkey off our back, we stay bunkered in our lonely, paternalistic purgatories forever. I think a lot of women understand this implicitly? You don't _find_ many "good" men, you help them become one (as mothers, sisters, friends and partners). You persuade him that you're worth it. You make him earn your respect. It's a powerful inducement we want even more than control. Trust me on this. 

I've sworn off being an apologist for my gender but I'm still sorry for what we often put women through. Catherine's issue is something we all deal with on one level or another. I've written this mostly for the sake of the ladies. I believe in the engineering axiom that "any problem well-stated is half solved." You may take exception to my assessment, as I'm sure many will, but it's just a theory. A theory is nothing more than a tool for understanding things better and understanding is the only sure route to change. JMO. :bow:


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

Mies said:


> "Woman represents the totality of what there is to know."
> 
> 'Nuff said. I'm outta here.



Relax. It's a quote from a scholarly article about the work of Joseph Campbell. If you weren't so quick to exit all the time, we could talk about how Campbell sees that axiom about women as driving the male mythical hero quest. 

Not every utterance is an attack, you know.


----------



## Teleute (Jun 23, 2009)

Guys, this was quite an interesting discussion before Team Misogyny jumped on board. What say we go back to it, as they've well proven some of our points already?


----------



## katorade (Jun 23, 2009)

I think a large part of the problem is the giant elephant in the room everyone seems to ignore most of the time.

Saying the Paysite board is like the red light district of a city is kind of backwards. It generates a lot of traffic for this site. BBW porn ads I'm sure make up a lot of revenue to even keep this place running. Sex sells. Me talking about my love of cheese, unfortunately, does not.

Problem is, reality and fantasy mix like oil and water, and by fantasy I do NOT mean sexuality. The sexuality portrayed on the Paysite board only marginally represents the very thin surface of what sex is to men *and* women. It's masturbation fodder with a fee. It's what paint-by-numbers is to art. 

There's absolutely nothing wrong with that, except that it just clashes with a lot of the ideals that many, many patrons of this site agree with. The people that are here for discussion about size acceptance, and politics, and cooking, and Oprah, and the NRA. You know, the stuff they're trying to discuss to get AWAY from the vast pornocopia of the rest of the internet. It's been made plainly and painfully clear before that the rest of this board is a favor. A consolation prize. If we get too mouthy and too nitpicky about it, it can be taken away like a bratty child's popsicle and it won't affect the profitability of the site.

What the board needs is a virtual split, but we all know there won't be any funds to keep the discussion side afloat.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 23, 2009)

Ernest Nagel, hush your pretty little head and don't think so much. All I really want from you is a thumbs up for my punny.

I keed, I keed 



Ernest Nagel said:


> Look, it's unfortunate but men are kinda hardwired to mark our territory. We draw boundaries and presume detailed definitions/roles for ourselves and others. Boundaries constitute a sort of pacifier or security blanket to shield us from fear and uncertainty. Boundaries afford us an illusion of control which we desperately believe we need. Some of us eventually figure out that the boundaries close us off from too many possibilities and destroy the chance to really create something that works. Some never do.
> 
> Before that realization occurs we feel threatened when someone challenges boundaries we believe are inviolable. An aggressive (uppity, snarky, scolding, bitchy...) woman is a huge threat to the world view and the certitude men like to wrap ourselves in. The more confusing and precarious our lives the more we cling to that illusion of control. Because of feminism, technology, economics and myriad other variables the age at which most men can achieve some form of enlightenment has been slowly but steadily falling. It's easier for us to cast off the machismo and false bravado and still be respected as real men with real confidence in ourselves, not the cultural conventions we cower behind.
> 
> ...


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jun 23, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> The following quote best describes what has been my experience of what it has been like to be on this site as a fat woman. I am wondering if other women have felt the same way. There seems to be a conflict between a male idolized version of fat femininity "as at once infinitely pliable (soft,plush,giving) and so-out-of-this-world larger -than-life- that women become images "goddesses" to be forced into molds of perfection that no real woman can be comfortable in." Every conversation in fat sexuality is reduced to the immature compartmentalization of various body parts analysis of a male 15 year old.
> 
> Have I missed the point of what is really going on here at Dimensions?
> 
> ...



I can honestly say speaking only for myself that I have not felt this at all. Or at least from a standpoint of what I think you are talking about. I come here with a pretty bloated opinion of myself as a person and as a woman. Though I'm not perfect I've done much to perservere over a lot of things in my life. I neither need nor seek validation from anyone, let alone the men here on the board. The men here talk of their fantasies and I merely find them interesting or dull, no more no less. I don't internalize them in any way or take them personally unless it's someone I've a secret crush on who claims he prefers redheads or something. Otherwise it's all just chatter and conversation. There are plenty of intersting topics on the board to cut your teeth on, less now that Hyde Park is gone but that's a whole other rant.

There are great men here who've been willing to engage in discussion and discourse as equals, there are some real dummies and knuckle draggers that come here too. They don't engage in discussions with us as equals because they are not equals. They are knuckle draggers and dummies. You're not going to get any golden nuggets from them. I don't feel it's fair to go so far as to say the whole board is an atmosphere of muck and misogyny towards women just because they are provided a refuge here to swing from vines and say what they want. At best I merely find them annoying but that's just my take on it.


----------



## Poncedeleon (Jun 23, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Look, it's unfortunate but men are kinda hardwired to mark our territory. We draw boundaries and presume detailed definitions/roles for ourselves and others. Boundaries constitute a sort of pacifier or security blanket to shield us from fear and uncertainty. Boundaries afford us an illusion of control which we desperately believe we need. Some of us eventually figure out that the boundaries close us off from too many possibilities and destroy the chance to really create something that works. Some never do.
> 
> Before that realization occurs we feel threatened when someone challenges boundaries we believe are inviolable. An aggressive (uppity, snarky, scolding, bitchy...) woman is a huge threat to the world view and the certitude men like to wrap ourselves in. The more confusing and precarious our lives the more we cling to that illusion of control. Because of feminism, technology, economics and myriad other variables the age at which most men can achieve some form of enlightenment has been slowly but steadily falling. It's easier for us to cast off the machismo and false bravado and still be respected as real men with real confidence in ourselves, not the cultural conventions we cower behind.
> 
> ...



I've read this post a couple times and I was hoping you could clarify what you're arguing. Are you claiming that men are innately inferior to women? It seems that you're saying that all men are brutish, stupid, drooling cretins until one of the superior beings (women, of course) deigns to reach down from on high to enlighten us. If that's the case then I think you're being sexist and I disagree. I don't think that misandry is the answer to misogyny.


----------



## Tad (Jun 23, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> There are different levels of conversation going on here, and I have noticed that any conversation that has a whiff of feminist concerns can soon be snarked and discounted. Men have benefited from the feminist movement in its freeing a lot of women to emerge from Victorian and puritanical sexual repression to consciously own their sexuality. Men have benefited from feminism in that a lot of women are comfortable having sex outside of marriage. Men have benefited from feminism since many women are well educated and can get good jobs to help pay the mortgage. People come to Dimensions for different reasons some of which are diametrically opposed.



First, to be entirely clear, Im speaking here just for myself, in response to the above quote. This is not me speaking for the male part of the human race, or telling all women what to do. It is just my feelings and my thoughts, which Katherine or any other reader is free to ignore, disagree with, tear apart, or whatever else. Just because Im giving my opinion here does not mean that I expect anyone else to accept it, or that Im not open to other opinions. For that matter, by tomorrow I may have read or heard or thought of something that leads me to revise this opinion (men too can be fickle!)

There is lots of snarkiness to go around. It shows up on a variety of topics. To be honest I try to skim past it, or else I just give up on those threads (some threads I just figure are doomed and give up on them ahead of time). I dont think the snarking is always towards women expressing feminist feelings, but given that I try to ignore all of it Im really not much of an expert. Oh, although I do for sure know Ive been targeted by snarking at times, so I know of at least a few instances that were for sure not targeted at women!

Maybe it is because Im an engineer (or maybe I became an engineer because of this?), or maybe it is more typically a male trait, but I tend to worry more about the practical than the theoretical. In theory could everyone treat everyone else well? Yes. In practice will that happen? No. Given which, I then move on to the question of which people are most apt to practice ill treatment of others, and try to figure out how to discourage them, limit them, or avoid them.

One of the real challenges of a public forum like this is that no matter how well you explain, educate, squelch, or purge people, new people will always arrive who havent been through any of that. Were you to somehow take every poster here and bring them up to a fine level of respect for women and feminist theory, next week there will be somebody saying U R pretty but U should gain another 100 pounds then Id do U. And when they get taken to task for it theyll respond U say that cause Ure ugly and cant get laid. In other words, even in theory you cant make a public forum meet any particular philosophical standard in any consistent way. I call this the barbarian newcomer theory, for ease of reference.

Of course it is not possible to bring all of most groups around to any one way of looking at things, so in practical terms you cant even approach the barbarian newcomers situation of the theoretical case. By the standards of almost anyone on the board, some of the barbarians will be your figurative neighbours, and some of them will even be people that you may agree with on some topics. Maybe there are some places where those who are the barbarians to you are less apt to go, but youll never avoid them entirely, because sometimes theyll be bored and wander into unfamiliar territory, or some of those that you share certain interests with will be a barbarian to you on other topics.

Which doesnt mean it isnt worth it to try-- Im not saying that at all. Im saying that lack of total success doesnt mean that nobody is listening or caring what you say. Im also saying that there will always be some outrageous cases, in which case there is quote (I think from the Dogbert character in the Dilbert cartoons, but Im not positive) that I think applies: Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience. Or to look at it another way, if you kind of ignore about ten percent of posts, the other ninety percent generally dont look so bad in my experience.

Again, all of this is my POV. Feel free to disagree with me, but please dont ask me to defend what any other man has or has not done or said.


----------



## Tania (Jun 23, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> I think a lot of women understand this implicitly? You don't _find_ many "good" men, you help them become one (as mothers, sisters, friends and partners). You persuade him that you're worth it. You make him earn your respect. It's a powerful inducement we want even more than control. Trust me on this.



I think I understand.

Men and women need to help each other, but sometimes we're so battlescarred, wary, and blinded by circumstance that it's tough for us to venture out past our reaction-boundaries to the middle. 

I'm not sure I understand what women are supposed to do to "persuade guys we're worth it," though, and I suppose that's the crux of the matter. I mean, shouldn't "being ourselves" be enough? If you like her, you like her and feel that it's worth giving it a go. If you feel it's not right, then don't step in her puddle and confuse matters. You know?

There are guys out there who'll willingly, honestly, and with tremendous love, care, and committment take chances on people they feel have potential, but there are also guys who seem to use this "persuade me" kind of thing as an excuse to find fault or "something missing" with just about everyone they date. It's heartbreaking to go out on limbs for people who won't do the same for you, you know? What's extra frustrating is that sometimes they don't even know (or can't admit) what's really wrong. 

I don't know. Maybe women self-sabotage by often assuming that there's another shoe out there, ready to drop. But, I think that GEF is on to something when she discusses men who are so wrapped up in the physical that they blow through women before they've gotten the chance to really know them. It's happened to me, and it broke my heart. 

I wish life and love could be simpler. 



> ...that axiom about women as driving the male mythical hero quest.



I want to drive a Mythical Hero Quest. Mine shall be a sparkly red. Odysseus edition. I'll call her Penelope and add sweet racing stripes!


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

katorade said:


> the profitability of the site.



I don't know that the board is profitable. It's my understanding, from reports around Dimensions, that the board runs largely on Conrad's initial vision for a place where men who are attracted to fat women, and the fat women they are attracted to, could meet. I do agree that the Paysites generate a lot of traffic at Dimensions, but you don't see a lot of ads here, so I have to imagine that ad revenue is minimal. 

In truth I think many people are happy to take what they find here and ignore what they don't like. I think that's a good model for any discussion board where there is a lot of diversity. Dimensions is at this time a site where there is, in fact, a lot of diversity, so that it no longer includes just the male admirers and female admirees of the original vision.

I think that as a place like this grows in membership, it's only natural that its members will occasionally ask for change. You bring up some good points about why fantasy is never a one-size-fits-all proposition. Given that it's not, I think some of us wonder how to express our perspectives without having to hear that we're just too demanding or unreasonable or negative. Many women here have been taken to task for having "too many" opinions, for "complaining" too much, when all they've been doing is expressing their views. One of the worst insults at Dimensions is "feminist," and one is called a feminist if one is a woman and is not quick to back down from one's position. This can lead to an atmosphere in which a person understands that her role is to be nice and well-behaved and never ask for more than what approval is given. It's no wonder that some anger is expressed, especially in cases of those who try their darndest to make positive contributions, to celebrate what it means to be fat and human actively in ways that maybe diverge somewhat from the original vision of male admirer and female admiree, yet find frequent open hostility for their perspectives.

I think, ideally, that tolerance for all perspectives--especially where concerns a group of interesting people who obviously have lots to contribute--is something to work toward.


----------



## katorade (Jun 23, 2009)

Profitability was a bad choice of words. What I meant was money the site earns to keep itself running.

Also, trying to work on tolerance between two groups that see things veeeery differently, even though we're all seemingly under the same roof, is just an age old battle that's never, ever, going to get solved. At least not in our lifetime, and especially not on an internet forum.

It'd be really nice, though, don't get me wrong. I just don't see it happening. When forums grow in membership numbers, there's no way to keep any kind of unity. Forums are about specifics. You go to car forums to talk about cars, football forums to talk about football, knitting forums to talk about knitting. They're all their own singular communities. The problem with Dims is that it's trying to blend too many opposing views under one roof. 

For instance, I used to be a member of Curvage before I knew this place was even here. I was literally angrily pushed out because of my views. I was so flabbergasted by the behavior there that I just never went back. I had tried suggesting that they have a sub-forum for the girls to discuss...well...being girls, and crap guys didn't want/need to know about. I was pissed off that they thought it was a stupid idea, and not what the site was about, but they were ultimately right. I was just in the wrong place. Period.

I came over here and it's definitely an improvement as far as discussion goes, but it's basically the same shit in disguise. It's literally two different message boards co-existing under one roof. How many people stick to one side or the other of Dims? How many people can honestly say they contribute to both the porn AND discussion side of the boards _evenly_? There's a few, I'm sure, but that's a pretty thin thread holding the two together.


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

edx said:


> One of the real challenges of a public forum like this is that no matter how well you explain, educate, squelch, or purge people, new people will always arrive who haven’t been through any of that. Were you to somehow take every poster here and bring them up to a fine level of respect for women and feminist theory, next week there will be somebody saying “U R pretty but U should gain another 100 pounds then Id do U.” And when they get taken to task for it they’ll respond “U say that cause Ure ugly and cant get laid.” In other words, even in theory you can’t make a public forum meet any particular philosophical standard in any consistent way. I call this the barbarian newcomer theory, for ease of reference.



I think this is true. But what happens when someone bristles at that neanderthal response? To be taken to task, jumped on, told that you're too demanding, for choosing to speak up... No. It's too much to ask of anyone to accept that she must be silent when she doesn't like what she hears. It's even worse when that imperative is communicated in barking tones, worse than a drill sergeant trying to tear you down so the army can build you back up... as though certain people really had run of things and others just needed to be put in their place.

What's funny is how many complain about "strident" women at Dimensions, but when a male poster some months back casually let slip that a man should "make that bitch spit teeth," I saw precious few voices speak up to call that out.


----------



## mergirl (Jun 23, 2009)

Fascinita said:


> Mer, I'm glad you enjoy the GLBTQ board and that the fappers have theirs. Wunderbar! And I'd like a BBW board, myself, please. Yes?



YES! I have no idea why there is not a bbw board already!! I think here really needs one.



TraciJo67 said:


> And I would like a sushi board too, because that's just how I roll.
> 
> Ernest Nagel ... are you proud of me?



not punny..
well yeah.. totally punny!! You are swell.


----------



## mergirl (Jun 23, 2009)

Mies said:


> I couldn't figure out how to make that quote thingy work, so I tried this. I hope it reads well:
> 
> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Mies
> ...


Blah blah???


----------



## Tad (Jun 23, 2009)

Hmmm, Fascinata, my observations don't seem to match up with your observations all that well. Might be what posts we read, might be what sticks with us, I don't know. I won't disagree with what you are seeing, just state that I don't notice nearly as much of the same thing.


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 23, 2009)

edx said:


> Hmmm, Fascinata, my observations don't seem to match up with your observations all that well. Might be what posts we read, might be what sticks with us, I don't know. I won't disagree with what you are seeing, just state that I don't notice nearly as much of the same thing.



I think that's fair: It leaves room for two different realities to co-exist and intermingle without one having to negate the other, either way.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jun 23, 2009)

Poncedeleon said:


> I've read this post a couple times and I was hoping you could clarify what you're arguing. Are you claiming that men are innately inferior to women? It seems that you're saying that all men are brutish, stupid, drooling cretins until one of the superior beings (women, of course) deigns to reach down from on high to enlighten us. If that's the case then I think you're being sexist and I disagree. I don't think that misandry is the answer to misogyny.



First, you have no idea how challenging it is for me to be even that brief. If you read that twice it was once more than me and twice as much as anyone else. If I thought anyone was going to actually read my posts that go over two sentences I'd take longer thinking them through, LOL 

I'm not suggesting women are better so much as that they have certain advantages in overcoming the limitations inherent to the acculturation of most patriarchal societies. Evolution has also endowed them with emotional predilections better suited to coping in contemporary social environments.

Women generally have to learn certain behaviors to overcome their traditional gender boundaries (i.e., assertiveness). Men on the other hand have to unlearn societal training in what it is to be a male. In my experience unlearning is harder than learning, especially when there's a lot of built in reinforcement for what needs to be unlearned. Top that off with a hormone that predisposes us to aggression and men aren't inferior to women, just less well adapted to a civilized society where relatively few of us need to procure food from the wild or defend our tribes from predators. I have no doubt we'll catch up, eventually. Until then I think collaboration and better mutual understanding are the ticket to satisfying coexistence and continued evolution. :bow:

I could say a good deal more but I think I'd just be digressing further from the OP's original inquiry which I think was quite astute. If you want to start a thread called "Are Women Better Than Men?" I'd love to see how that goes. It's a question we seem to dance around a lot here even though it makes no sense.:doh:

As a completely irrelevant side note I found it amusing that the Dims spellchecker recognized the word misogyny but not misandry. Sexism indeed!


----------



## mergirl (Jun 23, 2009)

We have a spell check? Hmm..goodbye dyslexia.... from the outside...where?? Actually, dont tell me..i need the humiliation to force me to read 8 hours a day!!!


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jun 23, 2009)

Tania said:


> I think I understand.
> 
> Men and women need to help each other, but sometimes we're so battlescarred, wary, and blinded by circumstance that it's tough for us to venture out past our reaction-boundaries to the middle.
> 
> ...



Tania, I don't think a lot of women realize how much power they have over us? More than getting laid most of us want to be heroes in someone's eyes. If we decide we have no chance of that or don't have what it takes sometimes getting laid is all that's left. You can try to make us heroes for providing the things you need. A good man will welcome that opportunity. One that doesn't probably wasn't a good bet to begin with. JMO. YMMV.

I'm sorry if that makes men sound like ego-driven puppets? It's more complicated than that but what it comes down to is sex signifies approval. That's something most of us, male or female, never get enough of. Although it seems that some of the people who crave attention and approval the most deserve it the least you can find something to admire about _almost_ everyone. 

I'm sorry for your heartbreak too, btw.


----------



## Captain Save (Jun 23, 2009)

I have noticed in my time here that there does seem to be an atmosphere of 'worship', for lack of a more accurate word. I have seen individuals post who zealously express admiration in somewhat coarse terms, and be confronted with disapproval by other posters who desire to promote an atmosphere of human decency, courtesy, and respect instead of crudity (one such poster was even told to take a cold shower.) Unsuprisingly, these admirers express their displeasure and confusion for being called out for their behavior, and gender-related insults become commonplace. 

I have also noticed that the lack of respect, the snark, led to the untimely demise of Hyde Park; in its wake we are left with the electronic equivalent of board games. Please don't misunderstand me; *I am not criticizing the lounge*. If civil intellectual discourse is to be had, however, it must be crafted from scratch, and unfortunately not everyone is able to remain civil. I personally enjoy thought provoking discussions; thank you Katherine, for providing the opportunity to indulge in one.


----------



## Tania (Jun 23, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Tania, I don't think a lot of women realize how much power they have over us? More than getting laid most of us want to be heroes in someone's eyes. If we decide we have no chance of that or don't have what it takes sometimes getting laid is all that's left. You can try to make us heroes for providing the things you need. A good man will welcome that opportunity. One that doesn't probably wasn't a good bet to begin with. JMO. YMMV.
> 
> I'm sorry if that makes men sound like ego-driven puppets? It's more complicated than that but what it comes down to is sex signifies approval. That's something most of us, male or female, never get enough of. Although it seems that some of the people who crave attention and approval the most deserve it the least you can find something to admire about _almost_ everyone.
> 
> I'm sorry for your heartbreak too, btw.



Dang. You're right, we probably don't know our own strength.

See, I think many women would really like a hero to help take care of their needs, but they learn to be stoic about their vulnerabilities because they want to be (or at least seem) strong, confident, emotionally independent, and un-clingy. If what you say is true of most good men, then we've kinda been allowing the douchebag minority to mess it up for the awesome ones who really do want to add to our lives.  SORRY. 

(Oh, and TY.  )


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jun 23, 2009)

Tania said:


> Dang. You're right, we probably don't know our own strength.
> 
> See, I think many women would really like a hero to help take care of their needs, but they learn to be stoic about their vulnerabilities because they want to be (or at least seem) strong, confident, emotionally independent, and un-clingy. If what you say is true of most good men, then we've kinda been allowing the douchebag minority to mess it up for the awesome ones who really do want to add to our lives.  SORRY.
> 
> (Oh, and TY.  )



Well, actually heroes are a pain-in-the-ass too; just more useful and tolerable, LOL. The ideal on both sides would be a truly self-actualized, trusting and respectful _partner_. Unfortunately physics, genetics, karma or just the universes famously perverse sense of humor seems to dictate that no two such people ever find themselves in the same relationship.


----------



## olwen (Jun 23, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> The following quote best describes what has been my experience of what it has been like to be on this site as a fat woman. I am wondering if other women have felt the same way. There seems to be a conflict between a male idolized version of fat femininity "as at once infinitely pliable (soft,plush,giving) and so-out-of-this-world larger -than-life- that women become images "goddesses" to be forced into molds of perfection that no real woman can be comfortable in." Every conversation in fat sexuality is reduced to the immature compartmentalization of various body parts analysis of a male 15 year old.
> 
> Have I missed the point of what is really going on here at Dimensions?
> 
> ...



So, haven't read the other posts yet, but thought I'd throw in my two cents.

If I understand you correctly, you're appalled at the way some men express their desire for fat women, yes? If so, then I'd say it probably isn't all that much different from the way men express their desire to thin women. You know how some guys are. They make lewd comments in the most inappropriate moments or talk to your boobs instead of your face, or try to touch you in your no no places and then act like it was an accident, or get in your personal space and pretend to not notice it bothers you or act defensive if you tell them to step off. It happens to me every once in a while, but that kind of stuff happens to my thin friends all the time. So nothing new really. There's an idealized version of femininity (and masculinity for that matter) no matter what size you are, as women, we just have to deal with it somehow.

Plus, well there's a paysite board that I'm sure a lot of people visit to the exclusion of all the other boards, and when they venture out of that board, it may take some time for them to realize the rest of the site isn't all about fapping or sex. You just gotta let em know that isn't always the case, when they do venture out and say ridiculous things. If they get scared off or just limit themselves to the paysite board then that's one less ridiculous comment we all have to deal with. The models who do post their pics there know the guys are going to say some outrageous stuff, but as far as I'm concerned, those comments are appropriate in that board whether or not we like what they sometimes say.

Also, I'm not really sure what you mean about what's really going on around here. Not sure what you were expecting when you joined. We've had discussions about how shocked some people are when they join and don't realize there is a sexual component to the site. I can't remember the names of all the threads, but it's a topic that comes up often so....yeah....

Again, I'm not sure what you were expecting but, from some comments you've made in other threads, I get to feeling like maybe you expect the majority of us to be militant SA activists. That may be true of some, but that's just not going to be everyone's style. If I'm way off base, please let me know. 

Anyway, there are just as many really good folks around here as there are jerks. I've met quite a few people that I like and have become friends with in my time here, and I'm sure you will too if you stick around. 

I do think tho that if we ever get a bbw only board that it would limit those kinds of inappropriate and unwanted comments, and be like a safe space for the women here who just don't want to deal with it. Time will tell I suppose.


----------



## voidhead (Jun 23, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I don't fap to photos of guys in uniforms or suits......and I do tend to be polite enough to treat others like humans at all times....no matter what they wear or don't wear.



Well my point was that women are actually more deep in terms of who they are attracted to. They want to know the whole picture about a guy. What he does for a living, what he's into etc. and it's not as visual and physical as male attraction. 

As for "fapping" to guys in uniforms, I would venture to guess it's common knowledge that most women don't actual masturbate _to_ an image like men do. Another study I remember learning about was that men would masturbate to a cutout picture of just a woman's torso and breasts. Even if it's a completely disconnected image, we can find sexual gratification in it because we are so visually charged in terms of attraction. 

When women masturbate, it is more common for them to imagine scenarios in their head or to get turned on reading erotic fiction. This stimulates them because it constructs complex scenarios in which a man's personality also comes into play. It's not just "oh look huge his cock is" but it's more about the total package of a man and it can involve exotic environments and situations in which the man maybe displays some positive charateristic. 



Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Just like your implication might be that some women "miss out on some great guys" because of how they are dressed....some menfolk miss out on some really great ladies because they didn't give two shits to take the time to get to know her because using her to scratch an itch was more important to them.



Wasn't implying that at all. In fact, I feel quite the opposite. I think men's obsession with immediate visual attraction can lead down bad paths where a guy will stick with a girl he doesn't like or respect just because she is hot. Also having a hot girl increases social status.

As far as women, they _should_ be looking for guys with a nice job and lifestyle. That is a reflection of what`kind of person he is. I was not by ANY means standing up for the poor guy with the heart of gold. Fuck that! I'm a libertarian. I think everyone should be off their ass working. I agree with the way women evaluate men and I think it's far more realistic and smart in the long term. 




Green Eyed Fairy said:


> And yeah, I know we are online and some things are "different" here...however, people getting used and tossed off for sexual gratification was happening long before these here intranets....



Totally agree. My point was it was also happening long before BBWs and FAs came to be defined as such. What this thread is really getting at is a basic difference between men and women in terms of what attracts them, which is magnifide on this forum because we are online and anonymous and because the fetish that this forum is centered around is by nature so visual and physical.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 23, 2009)

voidhead said:


> As far as women, they _should_ be looking for guys with a nice job and lifestyle. That is a reflection of what`kind of person he is. I agree with the way women evaluate men and I think it's far more realistic and smart in the long term.



I don't agree with this at all. A man with a good job and lifestyle is just that ... a man with a good job and lifestyle, and nothing more. That isn't an objective way to measure someone's worth, I think no more than it is to go by a woman's cup size. I know some men who have fantastic jobs, and I wouldn't set them up with Ann Coulter. Well, OK. Maybe I would, but not as a favor to her  I'm not single, but if I were, I'd look more for signs of maturity and depth, not the size of the wallet. I make plenty of money on my own accord. Not riches, but more than enough to meet my own (rather modest) needs. I think that as women are becoming equals on college campuses and in the workplace, they aren't looking so much into a man's net worth anymore. They don't need that kind of security.


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 23, 2009)

I must spread rep around before giving it to olwen. ;-;

Voidhead: I'm really rather offended by your assertion that women are more pure and righteous in the way the desire men, and that because one study showed that women reacted more favorably to pictures of well-dressed men, they are somehow more in tune with the true person.

I don't see how the study suggests that women respond to a true understanding of what a many is. It just suggests that people have a knee-jerk aesthetic response which will be triggered when you flash an image in front of them for a few seconds.


----------



## mossystate (Jun 24, 2009)

jdbvsjbdvjsdbvjsdb


----------



## mossystate (Jun 24, 2009)

I just wish that the man ( from Dimensions ) I ' thought about ' a week or so ago, would post more pictures of himself...would make things easier for me.


----------



## olwen (Jun 24, 2009)

voidhead said:


> ..............Not to mention that the models on these paysites are totally playing into the sexual fantasies, eating, rubbing their belly, wearing clothes that don't fit, showing how out of shape they are, getting stuck it tight places they know what turns FA's on and they are thereby encouraging the kind of commentary that's bothering the OP.
> 
> Sometimes you just want to get laid or at least fantasies about getting laid without all the reality of relationships, enduring all the whining and baggage, having limited freedom, spooning her after sex when all you want to do is go drink a beer elsewhere etc. because you have to satisfy her animal craving for security from every guy for the unborn baby in every woman's womb waiting to emerge like the Alien. (Guys you know what I mean) I don't think that's just an FA thing.



What the what?!? So if a woman does things that turn you on, it's her fault you have a reaction? Way to own up to your own sexual urges. 

If all you want to do is roll over and have a beer after sex, then seriously, start paying for it. Wanting to actually bond with your partner and actually satisfy them is what happens in a relationship. Because you know, you're there to actually be with another person, not just bust a nut and go. 

That every woman is just itching to birth a baby is just patently ridiculous. Then again, maybe there's an alien inside me with a big toothy grin waiting to eat - penises.  Chomp chomp.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 24, 2009)

LillyBBBW said:


> There are great men here who've been willing to engage in discussion and discourse as equals, there are some real dummies and knuckle draggers that come here too. They don't engage in discussions with us as equals because they are not equals. They are knuckle draggers and dummies. You're not going to get any golden nuggets from them. I don't feel it's fair to go so far as to say the whole board is an atmosphere of muck and misogyny towards women just because they are provided a refuge here to swing from vines and say what they want. At best I merely find them annoying but that's just my take on it.



I agree with this, and I love how forthrightly you said it. I think that there are a lot of really wonderful men who post here, many who are seeking the same things that I am ... friendship, interesting conversations, and an easy camaradarie with people who celebrate many of the same things that they do. I'd feel a little put off, if I were them, viewing this thread and seeing some of the blanket assertions being made here. I don't seek validation from anyone here, or anywhere else in my personal life, and that colors how I perceive my interactions with them. I'm just not overly concerned with their motives, so long as I'm treated fairly and respectfully, as I'm then not prompted to look any further. Having said that, I can understand where Katherine is coming from ... some of the participation in this very thread is a prime example of what she was talking about. I do not believe that it was her intention to scold, or anyone else's, for that matter. It's all just a matter of perception, and to some extent, what areas of the board are visited. What I do often wish, though, is that the mouth-breathers wouldn't have free reign to bleat about how "hawt" someone is, in threads where the discussion has been about serious, even sobering, topics. But then, for every wish I had that so-and-so would be slapped with a brief yet forever time-out, I'm sure that someone, somewhere, has wished the same thing about me. It becomes pointless to worry about feeling offended, when it's just as easy to stumble on by that which actually disturbs, rather than simply provokes or elicits a reaction from me.


----------



## olwen (Jun 24, 2009)

Poncedeleon said:


> I've read this post a couple times and I was hoping you could clarify what you're arguing. Are you claiming that men are innately inferior to women? It seems that you're saying that all men are brutish, stupid, drooling cretins until one of the superior beings (women, of course) deigns to reach down from on high to enlighten us. If that's the case then I think you're being sexist and I disagree. I don't think that misandry is the answer to misogyny.



Not speaking for Scott, but I read his comment as, (and this might be an oversimplification) men often need women to define who they are (or are not) as men, which I think is true. So often masculinity is defined as what femininity is not. Men don't wear dresses, men don't cry, men don't do women's work. Instead of men are responsible, men are strong, men are nurturing, men are caring, ect. 

Of course, if he's already responded to your post and I haven't gotten to it yet, feel free to ignore me.


----------



## Captain Save (Jun 24, 2009)

I believe that both men and women have fantasies about the other, and often make life altering decisions based on those fantasies. Some of the fantasies are extreme and harmful (he's the greatest man in the world and truly loves me; otherwise he wouldn't get so mad and violent at times) while others are unwise (she's so hot, I'll let her have my whole paycheck just to keep her) or just naieve (our romantic love will automatically last forever; I just know it!) Deep inside I think we all have things we expect and sometimes even demand, and when that demand is unsatisfied the relationship is in trouble. Deal breakers, anyone?

Ultimately, much as we'd like to, we can't change mouth breathers and knuckle draggers; as with most vegetables all we can do is keep the soil well fertilized and watered and hope they grow on their own. It is my hope that, given time, they will begin to think about what draws an attack from the so-called feminists all the time, and alter their behavior on their own.


----------



## katherine22 (Jun 24, 2009)

katorade said:


> I think a large part of the problem is the giant elephant in the room everyone seems to ignore most of the time.
> 
> Saying the Paysite board is like the red light district of a city is kind of backwards. It generates a lot of traffic for this site. BBW porn ads I'm sure make up a lot of revenue to even keep this place running. Sex sells. Me talking about my love of cheese, unfortunately, does not.
> 
> ...



This is an interesting point in that there are a variety of needs being met at Dimensions with the paysite and other discussions. My point is how do we reconcile our ideals, our fantasy of the opposite sex with the reality and complexity of being human. Does an attachment to fantasy interfer with the ability to apprehend another person fully. In this case, can fat fantasy seem stifling and limiting to fat women. There have been many interesting ideas expressed in this thread, and I have learned so much from all of you, and I appreciate it.


----------



## bigmac (Jun 24, 2009)

I don't see any need to reconcile fantasy with reality so long as you remember fantasy is just that. Fantasy girls never grow old, never sag, and never say no. So long as you don't expect this from an all to real significant other I'm not seeing any downside.


----------



## Russ2d (Jun 24, 2009)

This is the same thread as before-

There is nothing wrong with men, our fantasies, or with the women who fulfill them. Adults are usually capable of distinguishing pure fantasy from reality. No one's fantasy prevents other people from finding mates. Men and women are different and these differences are a good and complimentary thing (sad but I feel the need to state this). If you don't like something move on. I do, I usually avoid this board like the plague. 

For me Dimensions is the erotic weight board, the sexuality and the paysite and maybe the FA forum, haven't checked it out yet but we'll see


*To _some _of my fellow FAs, stop the damn pandering already- my god it's obvious and it makes you look like such schmucks


----------



## Fascinita (Jun 24, 2009)

Russ2d said:


> my god



You believe in god?! Wow! 

Hehehe. Just kidding, Russ2d. Welcome aboard! Now come on in and get a move on laying down the law around here. We've been absolutely lost without you.

PS - By the way, I'm trading rep for souls. You interested in hading over your soul for some reppie rep?


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Jun 24, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> This is an interesting point in that there are a variety of needs being met at Dimensions with the paysite and other discussions. My point is how do we reconcile our ideals, our fantasy of the opposite sex with the reality and complexity of being human. Does an attachment to fantasy interfer with the ability to apprehend another person fully. In this case, can fat fantasy seem stifling and limiting to fat women. There have been many interesting ideas expressed in this thread, and I have learned so much from all of you, and I appreciate it.



Fantasy provides some people with a needed vacation from the real world. Others choose to move in there. I've always been curious how many of the paysite fans maintain successful LTR's? I've not been able to maintain a happy LTR and I've never explored fantasy with any real enthusiasm so possibly there's some value to it. I can't really say. I was attempting to speculate on the recurring disconnect between men and women which I felt want at the root of Katherine's inquiry. Sorry if that became a distraction?



Russ2d said:


> This is the same thread as before-
> 
> There is nothing wrong with men, our fantasies, or with the women who fulfill them. Adults are usually capable of distinguishing pure fantasy from reality. No one's fantasy prevents other people from finding mates. Men and women are different and these differences are a good and complimentary thing (sad but I feel the need to state this). If you don't like something move on. I do, I usually avoid this board like the plague.
> 
> ...



I've tried to make some general assertions for the purpose of stimulating conversation. I don't suggest that any of them are "the truth" but hoped they might afford some fresh insights or perspectives I'm not one to pander or mince words. The majority of posters here who identify as chronic fanta-sizers occur for me as immature, self-indulgent twits. I generally just keep that to myself but since you were so generous with your opinion of someone you've never met... If choosing to admire and respect women in more than a sexual context makes me a schmuck I'll gladly wear that title as well as the much maligned here term, feminist. 

Yes, clearly men and women are different but does that mean nothing can change? We can't create something more gratifying and mutually fulfilling? For primarily economic and political reasons men dominated and controlled womens lives for most of recorded history. I'm dismayed that you feel speaking for a little better understanding and maybe even some affirmative action on their behalf is pandering though. I've worked for civil and gay rights since I could drive. I'll speak for womens rights, especially their right to respect, whenever the hell I feel like it.


----------



## mergirl (Jun 24, 2009)

Fuzzy Necromancer said:


> I must spread rep around before giving it to olwen. ;-;
> 
> Voidhead: I'm really rather offended by your assertion that women are more pure and righteous in the way the desire men, and that because one study showed that women reacted more favorably to pictures of well-dressed men, they are somehow more in tune with the true person.
> 
> I don't see how the study suggests that women respond to a true understanding of what a many is. It just suggests that people have a knee-jerk aesthetic response which will be triggered when you flash an image in front of them for a few seconds.


Ahh..i just repped her.. before i even read this. You can take the rep as i realised after i repped her that she had a typo so was not infact worthy of my rep! 



mossystate said:


> jdbvsjbdvjsdbvjsdb


Yes..my feelings exactly! "jdbvsjbdvjsdbvjsdb" is usually the first thing that comes into my head when a man starts a sentence with "When a woman masturbates......blah blah blah...." 




TraciJo67 said:


> I make plenty of money on my own accord. .


Oh Traci.. your so...your so... Opulant!!! See if i ever become single can you take me out on a date please? GEF said she would take me to Wallmart for a shake (that sounds both American AND erotic!) but i feel i deserve more than this!! thanking you.. xx


----------



## MisterGuy (Jun 24, 2009)

Ernest Nagel said:


> I'm not suggesting women are better so much as that they have certain advantages in overcoming the limitations inherent to the acculturation of most patriarchal societies. Evolution has also endowed them with emotional predilections better suited to coping in contemporary social environments.
> 
> Women generally have to learn certain behaviors to overcome their traditional gender boundaries (i.e., assertiveness). Men on the other hand have to unlearn societal training in what it is to be a male. In my experience unlearning is harder than learning, especially when there's a lot of built in reinforcement for what needs to be unlearned. Top that off with a hormone that predisposes us to aggression and men aren't inferior to women, just less well adapted to a civilized society where relatively few of us need to procure food from the wild or defend our tribes from predators. I have no doubt we'll catch up, eventually. Until then I think collaboration and better mutual understanding are the ticket to satisfying coexistence and continued evolution. :bow:



Just want to point out (since no one else has) that this post is a flaming garbage heap of conjectural pseudoscience.



> If choosing to admire and respect women in more than a sexual context makes me a schmuck I'll gladly wear that title as well as the much maligned here term, feminist.



Choosing to talk constantly about how much you admire and respect women in more than a sexual context makes you at the very least a kiss-ass and at worst guilty of protesting too much. 

I will plead guilty to maligning feminism on these boards, which was rhetorically lazy of me. My problem is not with feminism, capital F, inasmuch as it seems beyond obvious to me that men and women have equal value as humans, should be treated equally, paid equally, etc. My problem is with what passes for feminism (for lack of a better word--misandry, I guess?) around here, which to my ears is consistently shrill, one-note, and exceedingly unpleasant.


----------



## mossystate (Jun 24, 2009)

MisterGuy said:


> I will plead guilty to maligning feminism on these boards, which was rhetorically lazy of me. My problem is not with feminism, capital F, inasmuch as it seems beyond obvious to me that men and women have equal value as humans, should be treated equally, paid equally, etc. My problem is with what passes for feminism (for lack of a better word--misandry, I guess?) around here, which to my ears is consistently shrill, one-note, and exceedingly unpleasant.




You best put us shrill and unpleasant types on ignore, because I doubt any of us are going to give a flying fuck, the condition of your ears. Seeing how you yourself swoop into threads to scold, and to be all " here is the truth...eat it, people "...I take what you say with a huge block of salt. I am also happy that you don't have a problem with capital F feminism...we thank you for your support.:kiss2:


----------



## MisterGuy (Jun 24, 2009)

mossystate said:


> You best put us shrill and unpleasant types on ignore, because I doubt any of us are going to give a flying fuck, the condition of your ears. Seeing how you yourself swoop into threads to scold, and to be all " here is the truth...eat it, people "...I take what you say with a huge block of salt. I am also happy that you don't have a problem with capital F feminism...we thank you for your support.:kiss2:



You're welcome.


----------



## mossystate (Jun 24, 2009)

MisterGuy said:


> You're welcome.



:wubu:.................


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 24, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> I don't agree with this at all. A man with a good job and lifestyle is just that ... a man with a good job and lifestyle, and nothing more. That isn't an objective way to measure someone's worth, I think no more than it is to go by a woman's cup size. I know some men who have fantastic jobs, and I wouldn't set them up with Ann Coulter. Well, OK. Maybe I would, but not as a favor to her  I'm not single, but if I were, I'd look more for signs of maturity and depth, not the size of the wallet. I make plenty of money on my own accord. Not riches, but more than enough to meet my own (rather modest) needs. I think that as women are becoming equals on college campuses and in the workplace, they aren't looking so much into a man's net worth anymore. They don't need that kind of security.



Speak for yourself....we all know you have money......I needs me a man with a job myself......employed men are my new standard......:batting: 



Russ2d said:


> This is the same thread as before-
> 
> There is nothing wrong with men, our fantasies, or with the women who fulfill them. Adults are usually capable of distinguishing pure fantasy from reality. No one's fantasy prevents other people from finding mates. Men and women are different and these differences are a good and complimentary thing (sad but I feel the need to state this). If you don't like something move on. I do, I usually avoid this board like the plague.
> 
> ...



I laugh at your posts sometimes....because I imagine you quite proud of yourself....but I just can't figure out why :blink:

P.S. All you fatties quit pandering to "manly men" because they are THE schmucks.....

Christ....... you are definitely not



mergirl said:


> Oh Traci.. your so...your so... Opulant!!! See if i ever become single can you take me out on a date please? GEF said she would take me to Wallmart for a shake (that sounds both American AND erotic!) but i feel i deserve more than this!! thanking you.. xx



So now you are turning me down for chance to go out with TraciJo....just because we all know...........SHE HAS MONEY????? 

:doh:


----------



## Captain Save (Jun 24, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> I don't agree with this at all. A man with a good job and lifestyle is just that ... a man with a good job and lifestyle, and nothing more. That isn't an objective way to measure someone's worth, I think no more than it is to go by a woman's cup size. I know some men who have fantastic jobs, and I wouldn't set them up with Ann Coulter. Well, OK. Maybe I would, but not as a favor to her  I'm not single, but if I were, I'd look more for signs of maturity and depth, not the size of the wallet. I make plenty of money on my own accord. Not riches, but more than enough to meet my own (rather modest) needs. I think that as women are becoming equals on college campuses and in the workplace, they aren't looking so much into a man's net worth anymore. They don't need that kind of security.





Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Speak for yourself....we all know you have money......I needs me a man with a job myself......employed men are my new standard......:batting:



While I agree that looking at the size of the wallet is hardly a criteria for finding a rewarding relationship of any kind, it's been my experience that the ladies who don't require a man to at least be 'gainfully employed' are extremely rare, and aren't looking for anything that can't be measured with a ruler, scale, or tape. The instances I've seen involving men who can't at least take care of themselves in this department, let alone afford to romance a woman, usually end in a serious blow to his ego: she finds someone who has his own money. This I learned at a fairly early age, and certainly does not cover everyone; the exceptions, though, are rare.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 24, 2009)

Captain Save said:


> While I agree that looking at the size of the wallet is hardly a criteria for finding a rewarding relationship of any kind, it's been my experience that the ladies who don't require a man to at least be 'gainfully employed' are extremely rare, and aren't looking for anything that can't be measured with a ruler, scale, or tape. The instances I've seen involving men who can't at least take care of themselves in this department, let alone afford to romance a woman, usually end in a serious blow to his ego: she finds someone who has his own money. This I learned at a fairly early age, and certainly does not cover everyone; the exceptions, though, are rare.



I wouldn't want to be with someone who can't take care of himself. Damn tootin' I wouldn't be the one caretaking, nor would I expect that of him.

And GEF? Mer? Both of y'all can just eat my ass. With a heaping side of ass


----------



## olwen (Jun 24, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> This is an interesting point in that there are a variety of needs being met at Dimensions with the paysite and other discussions. My point is how do we reconcile our ideals, our fantasy of the opposite sex with the reality and complexity of being human. Does an attachment to fantasy interfer with the ability to apprehend another person fully. In this case, can fat fantasy seem stifling and limiting to fat women. There have been many interesting ideas expressed in this thread, and I have learned so much from all of you, and I appreciate it.



There are people who believe all the ridiculous social tropes about fatness and then sexualize them. There are some who don't believe the social tropes but still sexualize them. In either case, I'm sure that for most, the reality of seeing a partner struggle with stuff that turns them on cause one to struggle, in which case, their fantasies can't be easily reconciled. Not much to do about that but learn to cope I suppose. 

I think some fantasies can only be stifling if you begin to see yourself thru those fantasies, rather than in whatever way you already see yourself. It's like if you know who you are, then what difference do other people's fantasies make - as long as they don't try to force them on you, or project them onto you without asking you how you feel about it first. 

In other words, "Noboby puts Baby in a corner." LOL


----------



## Captain Save (Jun 24, 2009)

I would imagine that without male sexual fantasy, men would simply become a part of the landscape to the real life fat woman. The reality of a serious relationship of any kind with a fat woman is like any other relationship; it has its challenges. Maybe a jog through the local park is not a good idea for spending an afternoon together. Finding nice clothing becomes a little difficult in the gift giving season; the man who's serious about her will hit the internet and produce results instead of excuses. People who disrespect his feelings about her become history. 

I think the only tangible issue still on the table is the lack of respect for any lady in general as a human being. There's been a lot of examples of it in this very thread; men who go to bat for the ladies' interests here seem to get put on 'male chauvanist probation,' for lack of a better term. Insensitive individuals who draw constant attacks from the ladies should consider the fact that the overall quality and number of ladies will simply decline if they are made to feel powerless and unwelcome, and I don't think the majority of us want this place to become a sausage party.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 24, 2009)

Captain Save said:


> While I agree that looking at the size of the wallet is hardly a criteria for finding a rewarding relationship of any kind, it's been my experience that the ladies who don't require a man to at least be 'gainfully employed' are extremely rare, and aren't looking for anything that can't be measured with a ruler, scale, or tape. The instances I've seen involving men who can't at least take care of themselves in this department, let alone afford to romance a woman, usually end in a serious blow to his ego: she finds someone who has his own money. This I learned at a fairly early age, and certainly does not cover everyone; the exceptions, though, are rare.



Lol, expecting a grown ass man to act like a grown ass man and take care of himself isn't me looking for anything. It's me protecting myself from being used. Men can be money-grubbers themselves. 
I have ran into a lot of irresponsible, lazy, childlike, excuse-making men in my lifetime....that just look to hook onto a lifelong mother...except they want to be able to have sex with this one. Have kids with him? He wants to be one of the kids....with the right to boss people around cause he's called "Daddy", yet isn't really interested in knowing/understanding the responsibility that title entails....
Nah.....nothing wrong with a man taking care of himself....or his children. 

What's wrong is if a woman doesn't expect him to...and enables him in these behaviors. 

Women have children often time.....we have these children with men. There is something wrong with us for wanting a man to be responsible?

How many men want a lazy, irresponsible, excuse making woman to live their lives with? Why should it be any different in the reverse?

Looking for a responsible, grown man isn't the same as "looking for money". I hear that twisted way too much.....and I don't believe the hype. 

In my experience, the only "men" that actually say "she just wants me for my money" are the very assholes that can't hold down a decent job or pay their own rent, owe everyone they know money, have no established credit of their own, waste what little money they have on utter bullshit and complain about having nothing and live with their mommas....when they are 45 years old. My impression of this type of guy isn't shiny....

This subject....I won't be moved. A hard working handy man is about the only type of male that moves..or impresses me.. anymore....believe that. 



TraciJo67 said:


> And GEF? Mer? Both of y'all can just eat my ass. With a heaping side of ass



Are you SURE you want me talking about your ass? I talk about ass....or rather not getting it...enough as it is, don't I? 


On the other hand....a MerJo sammich..........:smitten:


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 25, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> This subject....I won't be moved. A hard working handy man is about the only type of male that moves..or impresses me.. anymore....believe that.



In other words, GEF ... you're more impressed by what's loaded in the FRONT pocket than you are the back pocket, eh? 

And yes ... I agree ... the kind of man who thinks that a woman is only after him for his money is quite likely a man who doesn't have any in the first place (hence, if she refuses to date him or dumps his ass, it's because he didn't have ENOUGH money to satisfy the gold digger). 

I just hate the notion that women are looking for a breadwinner. That is so 50 years ago. How long have you been supporting your household, GEFFIE? Off the top of my head, I can't think of one woman who doesn't work herself, if we include the more-than full-time job of child rearing. Even then, a huge percentage are still bringing money into the household, either through self or part-time employment.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 25, 2009)

TraciJo67 said:


> In other words, GEF ... you're more impressed by what's loaded in the FRONT pocket than you are the back pocket, eh?
> 
> And yes ... I agree ... the kind of man who thinks that a woman is only after him for his money is quite likely a man who doesn't have any in the first place (hence, if she refuses to date him or dumps his ass, it's because he didn't have ENOUGH money to satisfy the gold digger).
> 
> I just hate the notion that women are looking for a breadwinner. That is so 50 years ago. How long have you been supporting your household, GEFFIE? Off the top of my head, I can't think of one woman who doesn't work herself, if we include the more-than full-time job of child rearing. Even then, a huge percentage are still bringing money into the household, either through self or part-time employment.



I have supporting four people for that past 3.5 years by myself. I supported five for the first two years of my twins life. Yeah, I love it when I hear men start this tripe about women after them for money.
I made more money than my ex-husband for many years before the twins. I managed to do this by working 45-53 hours a week while going to night school for four years. This enabled me to get better paying work. My ex complained the whole time I was doing those night classes because I wasn't there to cook him dinner every night....so I left it on plates in the fridge to be warmed up. During the summer, I didn't get home until 11 p.m. some nights after classes- I started my day at 6 a.m. and I can remember doing laundry and hanging it up at 11:30 at night. 

I have worked my ass off for what little I have.....and no man handed it to me....even the two I was married to. 

P.S. I know/have known many woman who are the breadwinners in their households. They don't go around saying their husband just wants them for money.....


----------



## Fuzzy Necromancer (Jun 25, 2009)

katherine22 said:


> This is an interesting point in that there are a variety of needs being met at Dimensions with the paysite and other discussions. My point is how do we reconcile our ideals, our fantasy of the opposite sex with the reality and complexity of being human? Does an attachment to fantasy interfer with the ability to apprehend another person fully?



Short Answer: Nope. =o 

Long answer: I have not percieved any inverse correlation between my tendency to fantasize and my ability to apprehend another person fully. I also put forth that it is nigh impossible to truly apprehend another person fully, being as we humans are complex and ever-changing entities, and we are inherently limited by the gaps of personal experience and temperament that divide us from one another. 

I still have only the vaguest understanding of what you originally set out to assert in this thread. As near as I can tell, you were saying that somewhere, in some parts of the forum, some men are rude, and that somehow the fact that guys crank their yanks to very fat women in revealing clothes on the paysite forum leads to fat women being marginalized or demeaned and said guys diminishing in the capacity to function as human beings. 

I don't know if this is an accurate assessment or not, because I have been frustrated in attempts to interpret your prose by the levels of generality, implication, and lack of explicit examples, which I find essential to clear communication.




PS: I'd like to direct attention to the quote in my sig, as I feel it has particular relevance to this conversation.


----------



## Captain Save (Jun 25, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Lol, expecting a grown ass man to act like a grown ass man and take care of himself isn't me looking for anything. It's me protecting myself from being used. Men can be money-grubbers themselves.
> I have ran into a lot of irresponsible, lazy, childlike, excuse-making men in my lifetime....that just look to hook onto a lifelong mother...except they want to be able to have sex with this one. Have kids with him? He wants to be one of the kids....with the right to boss people around cause he's called "Daddy", yet isn't really interested in knowing/understanding the responsibility that title entails....
> Nah.....nothing wrong with a man taking care of himself....or his children.
> 
> ...



My post on this was not an insult or a criticism on any woman who looks at a man and sizes up his ability to provide; it's the way I was raised, that grown men had better be responsible, and that means keep a job, pay your bills, support your children.

I quoted you because that's what my parents taught me, that's what I hear the ladies saying, that's why the assholes you mentioned get no respect from either men or women. This isn't about women getting rich off their men; it's about making a life together, and handling their problems together. If he's not a part of the solution, he's a part of the problem, and a woman taking care of the kids as well as making her way in the world doesn't need a man adding to her problems.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Jun 25, 2009)

Captain Save said:


> My post on this was not an insult or a criticism on any woman who looks at a man and sizes up his ability to provide; it's the way I was raised, that *grown men had better be responsible, and that means keep a job, pay your bills, support your children.*
> 
> I quoted you because that's what my parents taught me, that's what I hear the ladies saying, that's why the assholes you mentioned get no respect from either men or women. *This isn't about women getting rich off their men; it's about making a life together, and handling their problems together. If he's not a part of the solution, he's a part of the problem, and a woman taking care of the kids as well as making her way in the world doesn't need a man adding to her problems.*



Sorry if my venting came off as me being angry at you. I'm not nor was I. I just thought of your post as a sounding board is all  

Thanks for summing it all up so eloquently  :bow:


----------



## Captain Save (Jun 25, 2009)

My pleasure. I'm just glad we're on the same page.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jun 25, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> I managed to do this by working 45-53 hours a week while going to night school for four years. This enabled me to get better paying work. My ex complained the whole time I was doing those night classes because I wasn't there to cook him dinner every night....so I left it on plates in the fridge to be warmed up. During the summer, I didn't get home until 11 p.m. some nights after classes- I started my day at 6 a.m. and I can remember doing laundry and hanging it up at 11:30 at night.



Damn. I want to marry you. A mom, a maid, a cook, a breadwinner, AND an edumacated gal who can multi-task like Donald Trump on crack? What's not to love? 

Sadly, your experience is more mainstream than ever, GEF. Women always seem to find some miraculous way to pack 25 hours into a 24-hour day, because they are carrying their full load plus part (if not all) of their "significant" other's. At least your story has a happy ending ... they are your EXes


----------



## mergirl (Jun 25, 2009)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> Speak for yourself....employed men are my new standard......:batting:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



lmao!!!! To be honest a shake is worth more than a million pounds to me! :wubu:
Actually, i was thinking about it and GD is the first one of my gf's to have a job!! haha..I have been out with students, artists, musicians, a single mother.. Hmmmm..I hadn't actually thought about that before but i guess that means i'm kinna not shallow. Though, i must admit, it is nice to be with someone who earns money and can buy me lots of shakes, turkee etc.. The finer things in life basically..


----------

