# FA Roll Call. Would you like to form a FA special interest group?



## stan_der_man (Apr 15, 2008)

Tossing this out here. Are you a FA and would you be interested in starting some sort of FA discussion group here? Just floating the idea at this point, nothing specific yet. I'll definitely follow up soon and post more.


I'm curious about the numbers of FAs interested and your gender. Please post if you are interested!



Interested

fa_man_stan

male FA


----------



## Ample Pie (Apr 15, 2008)

I'm a female fat admirer. Interested to a degree.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Apr 15, 2008)

FFA here. I would be interested if it was for general male and female FA topics. I can also understand if the male FAs felt the need for a special interest group unique to them, though.


----------



## Ample Pie (Apr 15, 2008)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> FFA here. I would be interested if it was for general male and female FA topics. I can also understand if the male FAs felt the need for a special interest group unique to them, though.


yeah, this is what I meant when I said "interested to a degree." It's just late and I couldn't make the words.


----------



## ThatFatGirl (Apr 15, 2008)

Forgive me for asking, but isn't that what we have here? Or is the idea that you'd have a place exclusive to those only claiming the title FA and those of us who only identify with the bbw/ssbbw title are out? Then the FA group could be divided further into subgroups of FA and FFA, the FFA group into average sized FFA and bbw sized FFA, and furthermore it would seem from the other thread that some of those in the FA group might also want a group for those 400+.. or is that simply a SSBHM board? Seems like we'd be asking Conrad and his volunteer crew of mods to potentially take on an awful lot, then I wonder why all the division in the first place or is this still bad feelings over the creation of the ssbbw board?


----------



## Tad (Apr 15, 2008)

Many years ago I did run a yahoo group along these lines (actually specifically aimed at FA who were in relationships), and while there was some interesting discussions it was very hard to keep momentum up, and it gradually faded away.

For better or worse, and possibly as much because of the tension it generates, having both sides of the coin in on discussions seems to keep things livelier.

Having said all that, if there was such a thing created, I'd participate. I'm just not sure (and I really mean not sure, lots of doubts both ways) whether or not it is actually a good idea in the long run :blink: Generally more linkages make for a stronger system, so I'm a bit wary of dividing things up into too many silos. But at the same time.....yah, I see the appeal.


----------



## wrench13 (Apr 15, 2008)

Good idea and I would participate. Men need a place to talk about things, LIKE MEN.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 15, 2008)

I agree with Laura. This board is a place for FAs to discuss FA related matters.

Nobody is stopping you from having guy talk. In fact i've often seen threads where a mod posted immediately that discussion on particular topic needed to stay aboveboard (i.e. don't tease this person, don't jump into a discussion with the intent of being rude, only contribute in a positive manner.)


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 15, 2008)

If the women can have a private board - why not the men?


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 15, 2008)

I'm not a man but I'm in favor of the idea. Why must we see into everything in your head? A private forum. 

*Just don't say anything bad about me please. I'm fragile.


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Apr 15, 2008)

I can think of a few reasons that such a forum should exist but I don't feel comfortable saying them with all you women folk around ..


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 15, 2008)

BothGunsBlazing said:


> I can think of a few reasons that such a forum should exist but I don't feel comfortable saying them with all you women folk around ..



You posted a photo with spooge in a plastic bag grasped in your mouth. There can't be too many things on that list.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 15, 2008)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> If the women can have a private board - why not the men?



They can, at Conrad's discretion. It's not up to me or anyone else. I only question the need for/interest in it.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 15, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> They can, at Conrad's discretion. It's not up to me or anyone else. I only question the need for/interest in it.



I don't think its fair to ask them to dance around naked in front of us so we can all nod and say OK. Let them answer their own question. We should allow them the same courtesy we expect in return.


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Apr 15, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> They can, at Conrad's discretion. It's not up to me or anyone else. I only question the need for/interest in it.



Yeah, but see .. I have always dreamed of a forum where I could make a thread such as "How do I hide my constant erection when I am at the Heavenly Bodies Bash" and not feel ashamed.

or maybe not so much that, but well, you know, guuuuyy sttuuuuffff *whines*


----------



## mossystate (Apr 15, 2008)

I also agree with Laura. Seems that the ' brother board ' to the SSBBW board ( private ), would be a SSBHM board ( private ). If a general FA board were to be private, does that mean we get a private BBW board ( all BBW, to talk about how it is to be a BBW in this world ). I am not saying I am clamoring for such a place, just don't know how we exclude a really big number of women out here, if talking about a need to have ' a place of ones own '. Oof.


----------



## LalaCity (Apr 15, 2008)

I'm not saying I'm against the idea, but will a separate FA board mean that we women who want to learn more about the FA mentality will just be in the dark, from now on? I never knew FAs existed until I came here and it's been a great learning experience...

I never meet FAs in real life...reading these boards is all I have..


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Apr 15, 2008)

I think is a great idea as well!


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 15, 2008)

LalaCity said:


> I'm not saying I'm against the idea, but will a separate FA board mean that we women who want to learn more about the FA mentality will just be in the dark, from now on? I never knew FAs existed until I came here and it's been a great learning experience...
> 
> I never meet FAs in real life...reading these boards is all I have..



I doubt the creation of a private forum will prevent these fellas from raising cane in all the other threads like they usually do. 'specially if somebody posts a photo.


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Apr 15, 2008)

LillyBBBW said:


> I doubt the creation of a private forum will prevent these fellas from raising cane in all the other threads like they usually do. 'specially if somebody posts a photo.



Worried that it would become like a frat home?


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 15, 2008)

EtobicokeFA said:


> Worried that it would become like a frat home?



I would be shocked and maybe even somewhat disappointed in you if there weren't at least ONE element of that in there.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 15, 2008)

I doubt it would be like a frat house, i don't think Conrad would allow the moderators to accept any frat-house like behaviour. I'm fairly certain any gossip or talk about other posters would not be allowed.

Ed and Stan have already stated that attempts to start these groups have not worked. Not to say it won't work now, but clearly has not in the past.

I don't care if there is such a board, nor would i get annoyed at being an "excluded FA" for being female. I can understand the argument about guys needing a special place for guy talk. I just don't see the need for it on a message board.


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Apr 15, 2008)

LillyBBBW said:


> I would be shocked and maybe even somewhat disappointed in you if there weren't at least ONE element of that in there.



You know the male condition, very well! 

Of course, knowing the male condition, I don't know if a FA forum can last very long, being a buttoned down affair.


----------



## Tad (Apr 15, 2008)

LalaCity said:


> I'm not saying I'm against the idea, but will a separate FA board mean that we women who want to learn more about the FA mentality will just be in the dark, from now on? I never knew FAs existed until I came here and it's been a great learning experience...
> 
> I never meet FAs in real life...reading these boards is all I have..



LaLa--I think you can be confident that there where the BBW go, the FA will always show up too (barring unlisted addresses or locked doors). The thing that interests most FA the most strongly is BBW, so.....talking with other FA may be cool and all, but not as cool as mingling with BBW.

At least, that is my experience.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 15, 2008)

I support it, but that's just semantics. If there is enough common interest, webmaster approval, and someone to moderate the private board, it's not really up to me to stamp a seal of approval on the idea.

I do, however, subscribe to the "What's good enough for the goose" theory


----------



## imfree (Apr 15, 2008)

LalaCity said:


> I'm not saying I'm against the idea, but will a separate FA board mean that we women who want to learn more about the FA mentality will just be in the dark, from now on? I never knew FAs existed until I came here and it's been a great learning experience...
> 
> I never meet FAs in real life...reading these boards is all I have..



LalaCity does have a good point.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 15, 2008)

TraciJo67 said:


> I do, however, subscribe to the "What's good enough for the goose" theory



we know how you like to gander


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Apr 15, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> I don't care if there is such a board, nor would i get annoyed at being an "excluded FA" for being female. I can understand the argument about guys needing a special place for guy talk. I just don't see the need for it on a message board.



I don't have a single real life FA friend beyond this message board and if I did ever hang out with 'em it'd be at a bash or something most likely .. so I think for a lot of people the message board is all they have.

and it definitely wouldn't keep me from posting on the main board about all my stuff, but uh .. as Lilly said, I also posted a picture of me with a bag of alleged spooge hanging out of my mouth so I don't really count apparently!


----------



## EtobicokeFA (Apr 15, 2008)

BothGunsBlazing said:


> I don't have a single real life FA friend beyond this message board and if I did ever hang out with 'em it'd be at a bash or something most likely .. so I think for a lot of people the message board is all they have.



As for having friends that are FAs, I am in the same boat.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 15, 2008)

mossystate said:


> we know how you like to gander



Well, I *do* enjoy quacking like a duck, it is true.


----------



## Littleghost (Apr 15, 2008)

I'm not sure it's necessary for it to be private, but that's all up to general consensus. I do think it's kinda inherent for anybody to need their "-----'s Night Out" type of thing; where you can be more open or just be more of an idiot.


----------



## Littleghost (Apr 15, 2008)

EtobicokeFA said:


> As for having friends that are FAs, I am in the same boat.



Yeah, it's way easier for fat girls to find each other or an FA than FAs to find out FAs. I think that makes sense.....


----------



## James (Apr 15, 2008)

I have some mixed feelings about this. 

My gut feeling is that I'm marginally in favour of the idea of having an FA board. Although, I would say that to a large extent we already have this here and I'm not 100% sold on its necessity...

So thats a 'yes' Stan. I'm intrigued to see what might come out of it so put my name on the list...

Thats not to say I'm not without a reservation or two. For instance, I don't know if any more fuel to the fire of division or mistrust between FAs and the fat people they are attracted to needs to be added? Would an FA-only board add to that or would it lessen FA ignorance and promote better understanding?

I think that when it comes down to it, there are essentially two ideologies that dominate here at dims. Over the last year or two I think that one of these has been on the wane and the other has been on the rise somewhat (this could just be my interpretation so please correct me if I'm wrong here...) 

The first view advocates a fat-positive, sometimes pro-fantasy, occasionally "fantasy fatty-land" where, loosely, the 'goal' is to demonstrate and accept unreserved fat positivity from both fat admirer the fat person. 

The second is a somewhat more reality-based call for sympathy and normality that has its roots in self acceptance. In comparison to the first viewpoint, it might appear negative and self-hating as it can incorporate the more negative aspects of esteem and health issues that are size-linked.

Neither view seems like a desirable or sustainable direction for fat-acceptance. Something different is needed in order to unify the cause. Some kind of balanced 'third way' between the two groups needs to be forged and I think the time to do that is now... My interpretation of Conrad's intentions, is that he has been championing the idea of finding this 'balance' since he set up Dimensions back in the eighties. 



Webmaster said:


> See, ever since the early 1980s I've been fighting against this very perception: there's size acceptance, and there's those pesky men who want fat women. One side pursues noble civil rights issues, the others are disreputable fetishists.
> 
> Dimensions' whole reason for coming into being was showing that the men who so happen to prefer fat women are an integral part of the picture, and to help the two sides learn about each other. Fat people and those who support and admire them are one. We fight for the same things. We complement each other. Sure, men and women are different and express their desires in different ways, but as far as pursuing size acceptance and showing the world that fat people are human beings just as valuable, sexy, and deserving of respect as anyone else, we seek the same.
> 
> There is no room for a bunker mentality on any side. We need to open up to one another and learn and appreciate. The stakes can be high, but the rewards higher.


 
20-odd years later, it appears that we are still facing this same problem. Finding the balance is critical. It is the critical bridge between fat admiration and size acceptance that needs to be built and I think its our responsibility to build it if we want to move the community forward.


----------



## Emma (Apr 15, 2008)

I know exactly what is going on here. Stan is posting this because he wants people to get up arms about it then he can say, "Now you know how I feel about the SSBBW board" or something along those lines. But as Mossy said (I think it was her anyway) the brother board to the SSBBW board would be a SSBHM board. 

FA's have:
The main board
The weight board
The fat sexuality board. 

And depending on what they're into the feeding/gaining board and FFAs have the BHM board. 

I've said board so many times now that it has stopped making sense to me.


----------



## Rowan (Apr 15, 2008)

BothGunsBlazing said:


> Yeah, but see .. I have always dreamed of a forum where I could make a thread such as "How do I hide my constant erection when I am at the Heavenly Bodies Bash" and not feel ashamed.
> 
> or maybe not so much that, but well, you know, guuuuyy sttuuuuffff *whines*



I cannot tell you HOW MUCH you sound like someone I know lol

side note....you are going to Memorial Day right? lol


----------



## Jack Skellington (Apr 15, 2008)

A private BHM and or male health forum would make sense. A private FA hangout not so much in my opinion. I'm not against the idea. Just not interested in participating.


----------



## Waxwing (Apr 15, 2008)

never mind.


----------



## Risible (Apr 15, 2008)

I think there's room for an private, men-only FA board, as well as a private, female-only FFA board.

I don't see this as a petulant "well, I just want what _they_ have" whine so much as a perceived need; Conrad saw this need decades ago, and Stan sees it now. It's not complicated; the concept of it doesn't need to be overanalyzed.

So, some of the guys here want a place where they can talk about things out of reach of the ladies; remember this thread and what a clusterfuck it became? I don't believe that some female, indignant about something posted and/or needing to set the record straight according to her POV, is going to just keep quiet and let it go in a forum here for men and about men.



CurvyEm said:


> I know exactly what is going on here. Stan is posting this because he wants people to get up arms about it then he can say, "Now you know how I feel about the SSBBW board" or something along those lines. ...



Huh? Since when has Stan become a troublemaker? While there are people here who machinate and instigate (), Stan isn't one of them.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 15, 2008)

Yeah, sure, I'd play. Here's a compromise idea though; we let the girls watch but they can't talk or discuss anything they see in Da Men's Room? Nah, I guess that'd just be mean?

One other incidental issue, other than The Chief there are no boy mods that I'm aware of? I'm guessing somebody would have to step up for that to make this work? Does anyone know for sure?


----------



## Ample Pie (Apr 15, 2008)

The slight difference here being that THAT thread had a loophole where women could post things they wished women knew right along side the guys.




Risible said:


> I think there's room for an private, men-only FA board, as well as a private, female-only FFA board.
> 
> I don't see this as a petulant "well, I just want what _they_ have" whine so much as a perceived need; Conrad saw this need decades ago, and Stan sees it now. It's not complicated; the concept of it doesn't need to be overanalyzed.
> 
> ...


----------



## Risible (Apr 15, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Yeah, sure, I'd play. Here's a compromise idea though; we let the girls watch but they can't talk or discuss anything they see in Da Men's Room? Nah, I guess that'd just be mean?
> 
> One other incidental issue, other than The Chief there are no boy mods that I'm aware of? I'm guessing somebody would have to step up for that to make this work? Does anyone know for sure?



Oh, I forgot to add this to my post, Ernest. Observer is the only male mod at this time, and he has already given the nod to modding an all-male forum. Conrad can set it up so that all other mods are excluded, if I'm not mistaken. Or we'd (us female mods) would be on the honor system.


----------



## rainyday (Apr 15, 2008)

Risible said:


> So, some of the guys here want a place where they can talk about things out of reach of the ladies; remember this thread and what a clusterfuck it became? I don't believe that some female, indignant about something posted and/or needing to set the record straight according to her POV, is going to just keep quiet and let it go in a forum here for men and about men.



Ditto. I wish the idea for a private men's forum hadn't gotten tangled up in discussion about the SSBBW forum. It's been talked about long before now, and I think it's a needed addition.


----------



## TotallyReal (Apr 15, 2008)

I don't know about this one. While there's certainly some merit in it if done with the right intentions, I can see it turning in to a "Battle of the Sexes" thing really quickly, and we guys don't fair too well in those when they aren't based around things like pulling ropes or lifting weights or declaring wars. Also, what -- really -- would we even say in such a forum that couldn't be said elsewhere? "Man, I totally _dig _fat girls! ::bro grab::"? What's the purpose of having a "fat admiration" forum where the fat to be admired is verboten? As a secondary also, the term "FA" is pretty lame, even if it is helpful. As a tertiary also, having more forums just spreads posts/members thinner, and even though this certainly isn't a forum that has to worry about thin, I just think that it would take away discussion that would be better suited to (and more interesting in) the main or Weight Board forums.

To end the post on a more positive note: aren't fat girls _great_? ::bro grab::


----------



## mossystate (Apr 15, 2008)

Wanting to talk out of the reach of..whomever..I totally understand this..and agree...big time. I would hope that the general population of BBW here would be given the same opportunity. There is a need for everyone to have such a place, to let our hair down, to discuss things things without having to always be judged....especially issues that affect, most immediate, either BBW..or..FA's. To only give a nod to one group ( and like I have said, a SSBHM area would help them with very unique challenges and issues out side of some of them being FA's ) seems to be counterproductive, to the community, in the long run.


----------



## liz (di-va) (Apr 15, 2008)

I would definitely support an FA board. I've said so many times before. I think especially it could be a good place for FAs who are just coming out to find a place to talk about that. I think it could also be a good place to talk about the nature of some specific FA issues without feeling like you're being disloyal or unfair. We all Got Stuff.

**I would hope the FA board would exist in the *same way* that the SSBBW board already exists. It's not a place to diss others, it's not a place to hide from the rest of the boards, it's not a secret club, it's just a place to talk about incredibly personal SSBBW issues in private. It's not siphoning off crucial broader conversations from other boards.**

I am still in the middle of feeling pretty hurt from the fracas of the SSBBW board thread that spawned this thread. The fact that the discussions there even went on the way they did has hurt my feelings and challenged my sense of the support to be found here. It feels a little rough to be asked for my fair-minded support when it feels like in some cases the same was not offered to me. 

But it's okay. Nothing changes the fact that in order for this to be a more unified place, I think it's good to have closed-door places to talk about things. Has always made sense to me. We all deserve that.


----------



## Ruby Ripples (Apr 15, 2008)

liz (di-va) said:


> I would definitely support an FA board. I've said so many times before. I think especially it could be a good place for FAs who are just coming out to find a place to talk about that. I think it could also be a good place to talk about the nature of some specific FA issues without feeling like you're being disloyal or unfair. We all Got Stuff.
> 
> **I would hope the FA board would exist in the *same way* that the SSBBW board already exists. It's not a place to diss others, it's not a place to hide from the rest of the boards, it's not a secret club, it's just a place to talk about incredibly personal SSBBW issues in private. It's not siphoning off crucial broader conversations from other boards.**
> 
> ...



Gosh, you were ASKED to support this? Interesting...


----------



## biodieselman (Apr 15, 2008)

I support Stan 100%, because Stan is The Man.

We need a place where men can talk about trucks, motorcyles, chainsaws, power tools, and duct tape, as well as FA stuff, of course.


----------



## Sandie_Zitkus (Apr 15, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> They can, at Conrad's discretion. It's not up to me or anyone else. I only question the need for/interest in it.



I dont thin questioning it is any of the women's place here. JMO


----------



## Bagalute (Apr 15, 2008)

Right now I can't really think of anything that would be of interest to me (but that's just me - different FA, different interests and needs, I guess ) on a FA-only board - neither as a reader or a poster. But it might very well be that something interesting comes up so if it's there I'd probably have a look...
I understand the feeling for the need for a SSBBW-only board and while I can't think of similar reasons for a FA-board in order to play fair I think us guys should have the same opportunity.


----------



## Tina (Apr 15, 2008)

Risible said:


> I think there's room for an private, men-only FA board, as well as a private, female-only FFA board.


Okay then, the only ones left out would be regular BBW women.

We have the SSBBW forum, but there are women who would have liked to have participated in a women-only forum but who aren't fat enough. So, I think it's important that there be fairness all around, and the FA board was originally brought up as a BHM board. Just seems that (as I wrote in an earlier post here but deleted it) the purpose, and who could post there, would need to be well defined. Would the FA board also encompass FFAs? What about BHMs who would like to discuss their issues in private? And so then it begs the question: what about the women who would like to discuss female-type things around other females, but who don't qualify for the SSBBW forum?


----------



## exile in thighville (Apr 15, 2008)

can we please stop this retarded shit? without waiting until we're done compartmentalizing everyone and bored out of our minds. ssbbws want privacy to discuss private issues, that makes sense. what private issues do fas have? the point of a board is to get together, not to keep separating everyone into boring little factions. i want to hear three plausible thread titles for this board.

the paysite board _is_ the fa board as far i'm concerned.


----------



## Ample Pie (Apr 15, 2008)

Sandie_Zitkus said:


> I dont thin questioning it is any of the women's place here. JMO


well stan did open this thread (and the idea behind it) up to all FAs--male and female, so....


----------



## OfftoOtherPlaces (Apr 15, 2008)

I think the FA board is a wonderful idea and have come up with some titles:

-FA Board
-The Fat Admiration Board
-Cigar Lounge


----------



## ekmanifest (Apr 15, 2008)

Say Hello to the Angels said:


> I think the FA board is a wonderful idea and have come up with some titles:
> 
> -FA Board
> -The Fat Admiration Board
> -Cigar Lounge



Let's throw in a martini bar while we're at it. Appletini, anyone?


----------



## FreeThinker (Apr 15, 2008)

exile in thighville said:


> What private issues do fas have?



My question also.

SSBHM board? Good idea.


----------



## ThatFatGirl (Apr 15, 2008)

Tina said:


> Okay then, the only ones left out would be regular BBW women.
> 
> We have the SSBBW forum, but there are women who would have liked to have participated in a women-only forum but who aren't fat enough. So, I think it's important that there be fairness all around, and the FA board was originally brought up as a BHM board. Just seems that (as I wrote in an earlier post here but deleted it) the purpose, and who could post there, would need to be well defined. Would the FA board also encompass FFAs? What about BHMs who would like to discuss their issues in private? And so then it begs the question: what about the women who would like to discuss female-type things around other females, but who don't qualify for the SSBBW forum?



That was my point earlier... how many groups can we break ourselves down into? It's endless really. The reality is, we could learn a whole lot from eachother if we'd quit worrying about all these labels and where we fit in and share our experiences as human beings. The SSBBW board is a whole other animal though because I don't wish to share my difficulties with personal hygiene with the entire Dims community. I understand the desire/need for a SSBHM board as well. 

All that being said, if everyone wants a private board with a label they can identify with and Conrad's up for the task, then great. I think there's more to be lost there than gained.



exile in thighville said:


> can we please stop this retarded shit? without waiting until we're done compartmentalizing everyone and bored out of our minds. ssbbws want privacy to discuss private issues, that makes sense. what private issues do fas have? the point of a board is to get together, not to keep separating everyone into boring little factions. i want to hear three plausible thread titles for this board.



I owe you rep.


----------



## Ample Pie (Apr 15, 2008)

exile in thighville said:


> can we please stop this retarded shit? without waiting until we're done compartmentalizing everyone and bored out of our minds. ssbbws want privacy to discuss private issues, that makes sense. <snip> the point of a board is to get together, not to keep separating everyone into boring little factions.



I also owe you rep.


----------



## mossystate (Apr 15, 2008)

got him....


----------



## Chimpi (Apr 15, 2008)

I think something that others aren't noticing is that this alleged "Fat Admirers Special Interest Group" is, as of right now, up for including _both_ genders. That pretty much rids a lot of the discussion that might go on of "bro talk" and any sort of frat house talk that might go on, and leaves pretty much just a sort of "coming out Fat Admirers" as it were.
As of right now, I don't see the aim or need of such a special interest group. If it might be dedicated more for a "coming out Fat Admirers" group, maybe a forum for that specific purpose might be good in one of the existing special forums, such as The Weight Board and/or the BHM/FFA Board. Also as of right now, I cannot come up with any other topics of discussion that might be talked about in such a "Fat Admirers Special Interest Group." I think The Weight Board is plenty sufficient enough and needs to be monitored more closely, needs to aim for success when it comes to following the "Positive only discussion", and needs more leadership of some fashion.
I'll support it if/when a good idea of the type of interest that it might pertain to. But as of now, I think anything that can or would be said in that forum already has a place in other forums. The contributors in the thread just need to either have more control or be moderated appropriately.
Another concern of mine for the forum is how do we determine who's allowed in? If this forum is going to be for men only, how do we know that new users are in fact "Fat Admirers", men, and not participating females that go by other names? (I'm not saying it will happen, but anything is possible) If it's dedicated to a sort of "coming out Fat Admirers" forum, not only do I think female input is healthy and needed for those discussions, but how do we direct those new "Fat Admirers" into such a forum? If there's going to be a 'minimum posts' rule, it seems to me that such a rule might choke off a lot of the newer members to Dimensions that might be interested in such a forum.

I just think the "Fat Admirers Special Interest Group" forum needs a specific direction before any support is looked for.
I don't think separation is what Dimensions needs.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 15, 2008)

Got him too.



> I think something that others aren't noticing is that this alleged "Fat Admirers Special Interest Group" is, as of right now, up for including both genders.



The initial post did ask for input from both genders. But notice a lot of the responses have been about how 'the guys' need a special place.


----------



## furious styles (Apr 15, 2008)

i'm behind an fa-centric discussion group.

i am AGAINST a private forum. can we please take a step back and look at this for a moment? that would only be driving the wedge in further. there's an air of paranoia going around here lately that's practically disturbing.


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Apr 15, 2008)

mfdoom said:


> i'm behind an fa-centric discussion group.
> 
> i am AGAINST a private forum. can we please take a step back and look at this for a moment? that would only be driving the wedge in further. there's an air of paranoia going around here lately that's practically disturbing.



PARANOIA? LIKE WHAT? LIKE SCROLLING OVER EVERY SINGLE POST TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY HIDDEN MESSAGE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TALKING SHIT ABOUT BGB OR SOMETHIN' LIKE THAT N' SUCH. FOR .. REAL ..




seriously. it's my new thing.


----------



## furious styles (Apr 15, 2008)

BothGunsBlazing said:


> PARANOIA? LIKE WHAT? LIKE SCROLLING OVER EVERY SINGLE POST TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY HIDDEN MESSAGE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TALKING SHIT ABOUT BGB OR SOMETHIN' LIKE THAT N' SUCH. FOR .. REAL ..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I scrolled over this post. and was let down. :[


----------



## mossystate (Apr 15, 2008)

Now I must go rep Chimpi and mfdoom. 

I think having, like mf said, a fa-centric discussion group is a great idea. I would also say having one for bbw would be wonderful as well. No secret societies, just places set aside for very particular discussions. 

Chimpi mentioned the needing a place where closeted FA's might feel comfortable talking about their struggles, and for young men, that's very valid. BBW sometime need a place to talk about our struggles with confidence and also dealings with FA's..etc..etc.. Trust me, that is not easy to do the way things are now, so, I think both BBW and FA's are in the same boat.

After the Weight board added on the sub groups, I rarely go to the gaining part, because it's not my thing. When I do, I do not go there to rain on anybodys parade ( I am pretty sure I stopped doing that..maybe I should go back and check..lol ).


----------



## Santaclear (Apr 15, 2008)

I would probably read and participate although personally I don't see the need for a new group. I'm not one to wax philosophical for very long about being an FA. I respect that Stan and others might want one so to that I say go ahead, knock yourselves out. 

I love the mix of viewpoints and personalities at Dimensions. To me, this whole place already is a BBW and FA forum (Dan says as much in his post above.) I don't feel marginalized at all and don't really get the "FA angst" we hear about on the forums. But that's something that can be talked about in an FA SIG.


----------



## olwen (Apr 15, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> They can, at Conrad's discretion. It's not up to me or anyone else. I only question the need for/interest in it.



I can understand sort of understand need for it, but I also question the need for it too. I remember coming across this site way back in 1999/2000 and part of the reason I didn't participate was because it seemed so skewed towards FA's and their needs that it didn't interest me then. I'm glad to see now how different it is and I'm starting to feel like I'm part of this community and am grateful to have come back to it. I think too much division would put a wedge into the active and lively discussions that go on here. Having other people's points of view has helped me expand my own definitions of what it means to be not only a bbw, but also an FA.


----------



## BLUEeyedBanshee (Apr 15, 2008)

Ok, I can see where the FA's out there would want a board to talk about guys stuff from a guy's perspective and not get judged by us wimmin folks. I think it's great.

I also think that a SSBHM board could be awesome too...a place where they can talk about specific issues that only they face and might be a bit of an embarrassment. 


I don't think it'll detract from anything here if there can be a "safe haven" ya know?


----------



## liz (di-va) (Apr 15, 2008)

mfdoom said:


> i'm behind an fa-centric discussion group.
> i am AGAINST a private forum.


cool - that's great. whatever y'all want. I'm sorry I helped muddy the waters (if I did), all I'm sayin is, is up to y'all.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Apr 15, 2008)

fa_man_stan said:


> Tossing this out here. Are you a FA and would you be interested in starting some sort of FA discussion group here? Just floating the idea at this point, nothing specific yet. I'll definitely follow up soon and post more.
> 
> 
> I'm curious about the numbers of FAs interested and your gender. Please post if you are interested!
> ...



I'm a FA, don't feel the need for a private area. I do think that a guys only area would be pretty cool though. Guys need a place where they can just be guys...


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 15, 2008)

I think the idea of an FA forum is a great idea. Not only can this serve as a central point to other great FA/FFA threads that have been posted-but, a place where one can discuss relevant topics that can be of concern to FA's. 

I think it needs to be an open forum-but, just an understanding upfront that it's not to become a place to argue and become a pissing war. Maybe a special thread for those that are coming out...

I think the one area where there is a difference is in the reactions to those that are not confidant in their "size" or "size acceptance" and they have discovered this site for the 1st time. Now minus the Trolls/Scammers...

Does being a BBW that lacks confidance brings more empathy than a FA who is over 30 and in the closet?

What are the best "size friendly" venues that FA can take their dates to?

How to handle things like going to a sporting event and requesting special seating? Most seating in sports arena are not BBW/SSBBW friendly.

There was even a great thread that Stan started earlier on a FA code of conduct and this would be nice to revisit, explore and expand.


----------



## Tina (Apr 15, 2008)

ThatFatGirl said:


> That was my point earlier... how many groups can we break ourselves down into? It's endless really.


Exactly. It's partly why I deleted the post I wrote earlier this afternoon. I think the aforementioned SSBHM board is a good idea, but after thinking about it, beyond that, you have this group and then that group, and what about this gender and that gender? I'm not against the guys having their own board, and I understand this thread was just to gauge interest, so there's no point arguing over it. Just something to think about.

Ultimately, it's up to Conrad to sort it out.


----------



## Bagalute (Apr 15, 2008)

ekmanifest said:


> Let's throw in a martini bar while we're at it. Appletini, anyone?



Sure but be easy on the 'tini, willya!?


----------



## Blockierer (Apr 16, 2008)

tonynyc said:


> .
> Does being a BBW that lacks confidance brings more empathy than a FA who is over 30 and in the closet?
> 
> What are the best "size friendly" venues that FA can take their dates to?
> ...



?????????????
Just a question!
Why can we not discuss these topics in an open board?
The *Main Dimensions Board* for example? 
Why shall we go in the closet?


----------



## Spanky (Apr 16, 2008)

The term is Balkanization. Leads to wars. Big wars. Lots of food being thrown instead of eaten. :eat1:

I heartily do not agree with this slippery slope. It will lead to all kinds of requests for private areas. 

If you want to have a private discussion, pee - emm it. Email. 

I understood and agreed with a lot of Stan's points about FAs in Dimensions but equating the SSBBW thread and a private FA section is not truly equal. 

Tina, dear? While we are at it, can we have a Married section?? I found out I like flirting heavily with other marrieds. The singles just don't do it for me. j/k


----------



## SparklingBBW (Apr 16, 2008)

I love the fact that so many people are so passionate about this place, how much they care about Dims and the people who are here. I know I am grateful for this site and the people I've met through this site in the real world and the cyber world. I've learned so much from the things people have shared hear, things that have also helped me learn about myself. On any given day when I come here I usually leave smiling, laughing and feeling good about life. If Dims were not available to me, I would surely miss it. 

These days though, I end up signing off in sad resignation. So much angst, dissention, disagreement and negative energy has been expended by so many over the issue of private discussion boards. What is especially troublesome is that people are getting their feelings hurt and emotional walls are being put up over hypothetical issues that just haven't been proven yet. When it comes right down to it, I really wonder if putting up a some cyber walls to enclose a few private groups might not be as big of an issue as a lot of us seem to think it will be. 

From looking at the front page of the forums, it appears that the SSBBW only forum is one of the smallest. There are only 5 discussion groups that are smaller, 2 in the library and 3 under events/communities. There really isn't a whole lot of action going on in the SSBBW discussion group. I realize it's still relatively new and not every one has access to it, but as a member of it, I really don't see posting going on there that could be posted elsewhere. The members are using it for its purpose; it is not distracting anyone from the main boards. I'm not a moderator (maybe one could speak to this), but I would guess that it isn't very difficult or time consuming to moderate. 

Why not just throw caution to the wind and just see what happens? Make private boards for SSBHMs, FFAs, and FAs, and general BBWs and just see what comes of it. I suspect that in the end, we might actually find that it only ADDs to the greatness of this community instead of taking anything away from it. 

And if it does happen to be more of a negative than a positive, if people start ignoring the main boards and nothing but hard feelings or separatism is happening, then Conrad can say, "Lesson learned. That was a bad idea, now let's try something different." All I know is that it feels like this ongoing arguement and debate is separating us NOW and causing more and more negative feelings surrounding these boards. And it's a damn shame because so far all we are really arguing about is what amounts to about 72 threads in the SSBBW forum out of the thousands that make up the totality of Dimensions. 

Gena


----------



## Emma (Apr 16, 2008)

By the way I support the want for a men only board, so long as there was a women only board. 

Who is going to be the person who adds the hundreds of men who want to join though? What would the guidelines be? How many posts would the men need to join? You know.. to make sure they are men? Would partners of the women who post here be allowed to see? Oooh what happens if a woman reads it on her husbands account? Does anyone here have the time to approve everyone that requests to join?

ETA: Yay, this thread has caused me to get my second yellow box


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 16, 2008)

BothGunsBlazing said:


> PARANOIA? LIKE WHAT? LIKE SCROLLING OVER EVERY SINGLE POST TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY HIDDEN MESSAGE THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE TALKING SHIT ABOUT BGB OR SOMETHIN' LIKE THAT N' SUCH. FOR .. REAL ..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This post gave me a seizure.



Santaclear said:


> I would probably read and participate although personally I don't see the need for a new group. I'm not one to wax philosophical for very long about being an FA. I respect that Stan and others might want one so to that I say go ahead, knock yourselves out.
> 
> I love the mix of viewpoints and personalities at Dimensions. To me, this whole place already is a BBW and FA forum (Dan says as much in his post above.) I don't feel marginalized at all and don't really get the "FA angst" we hear about on the forums. But that's something that can be talked about in an FA SIG.



I buy the FA angst story. Too many people carry on about it for it not to be somewhat real even if viewed as self inflicted. I'm all in favor of people trying to work it out but do we all really want to watch?


----------



## prickly (Apr 16, 2008)

.........i'm all for a special place for my privates..*snort


----------



## exile in thighville (Apr 16, 2008)

thanks d00dz


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 16, 2008)

Spanky said:


> Tina, dear? While we are at it, can we have a Married section?? I found out I like flirting heavily with other marrieds. The singles just don't do it for me. j/k



I enjoy flirting heavily with farm animals, and I demand equal consideration.


----------



## Spanky (Apr 16, 2008)

TraciJo67 said:


> I enjoy flirting heavily with farm animals, and I demand equal consideration.



Isn't there a private Furry Flirting Section just for all one of you. 

In the meantime, I wish to introduce you to "my leeetle friend"


----------



## TraciJo67 (Apr 16, 2008)

Spanky said:


> Isn't there a private Furry Flirting Section just for all one of you.
> 
> In the meantime, I wish to introduce you to "my leeetle friend"



Your leeeetle friend was damn inconsiderate, Sparkles. Squealed in a most(ly) unappealing manner, flung mud all over me, then bit my arm off when I tried to nudge him out of the way at the slop bin. 

On second thought, I hereby withdraw my application for a private Farm Animal Forum. An unwilling audience is better than none at all ... right? 

Right?

Is there an echo in here? Is this thing on?


----------



## Spanky (Apr 16, 2008)

TraciJo67 said:


> Your leeeetle friend was damn inconsiderate, Sparkles. Squealed in a most(ly) unappealing manner, flung mud all over me, then bit my arm off when I tried to nudge him out of the way at the slop bin.



Ready for child rearing? That is about how I would describe it on a typical day.


----------



## Tina (Apr 16, 2008)

Spanky said:


> Tina, dear? While we are at it, can we have a Married section?? I found out I like flirting heavily with other marrieds. The singles just don't do it for me. j/k


Ya don't need a special board for that, Sparky, it's going on all over the place.


----------



## Spanky (Apr 16, 2008)

Tina said:


> Ya don't need a special board for that, Sparky, it's going on all over the place.



I am sorry for the little jokes in the past couple of posts. It will stop. 

I understand the seriousness of what Stan is proposing and that Conrad and the mods have a difficult decision. 

Laughter is the best medicine. Or furry animals. Either way.


----------



## SocialbFly (Apr 16, 2008)

Spanky said:


> I am sorry for the little jokes in the past couple of posts. It will stop.
> 
> I understand the seriousness of what Stan is proposing and that Conrad and the mods have a difficult decision.
> 
> Laughter is the best medicine. Or furry animals. Either way.



I am glad you said that, cause i was feeling bad for Stan who is asking and trying to promote something he believes in, with jokes all over it...

Is this what the FA board would be to some? I hope not, and yeah, life is best handled with humor, but it is best placed humor and not when something as serious and as heartfelt as this has been for Stan...in MY opinion

thanks for saying that Spanky....


----------



## Spanky (Apr 16, 2008)

SocialbFly said:


> I am glad you said that, cause i was feeling bad for Stan who is asking and trying to promote something he believes in, with jokes all over it...
> 
> Is this what the FA board would be to some? I hope not, and yeah, life is best handled with humor, but it is best placed humor and not when something as serious and as heartfelt as this has been for Stan...in MY opinion
> 
> thanks for saying that Spanky....



I know Stan enjoys a joke here and there, and a little levity is what this board needs. I wanted to stop it because it didn't look right. Thanks for understanding Socialbfly. :bow:

I don't agree at all with his proposal and said so above. The jokes were only meant to show that it could REALLY get messy as soon as the first group huddles up. 

I don't imply to know what Stan thinks and would never ever speak for him. I felt his overall frustration. It seemed to manifest itself in a few places and in a few ways. Stan has been given a wide berth here because of his respect in the community. And it is well deserved. Stan knows what I think of him. In disagreement, I still respect the man totally.


----------



## Shosh (Apr 16, 2008)

Juz showing some support for Stano.
Or to use the tacky My Space lingo "Showin some love"

Good on ya Stan.


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 16, 2008)

*Here's an idea*


*BHM/FA (Chat) - A Sub Forum for FFA*


*Weight Forum - A Sub-Forum for FA*


----------



## Wild Zero (Apr 16, 2008)

I'm all set on the FAsig forum front.


----------



## William (Apr 16, 2008)

What!!!!!!

You mean take the FFA out of BHM/FFA (Chat)!!!!!!

William 




tonynyc said:


> *Here's an idea*
> 
> 
> *BHM/FA (Chat) - A Sub Forum for FFA*
> ...


----------



## tonynyc (Apr 16, 2008)

William said:


> What!!!!!!
> 
> You mean take the FFA out of BHM/FFA (Chat)!!!!!!
> 
> William



Thanks - that what i meant


----------



## MisticalMisty (Apr 16, 2008)

tonynyc said:


> *Here's an idea*
> 
> 
> *BHM/FA (Chat) - A Sub Forum for FFA*
> ...



It's not that black and white. First of all, there are FAs *guys* who are attracted to BHMs. I'm not certain that we have any that post here openly, but we know they exist. The other problem is that there are FFAs who are feeders and benefit from the interactions on the weight board.

I've read all the posts on this thread as well as the other thread and I am not sure that I have much to add. There are several that mentioned the fact that some FAs and/or feeders feel that they are attacked for their preferences on a continuing basis. I agree and I'm saddened that it happens. There seems to be the same 3 or 4 people who feel the need to be malicious and sarcastic on a board they state over and over again they are against. It really makes no sense to me, but some people just like to stir the pot.

As for the issue of the SSBBW thread, comparing that to a private space for FAs is really comparing apples and oranges. Our experiences, while some are shared, are mostly different in many ways.

As far as the comments regarding the toliet seats, I appreciate that you took the initative to aplogize Stan. I, along with others, just wish you would have voiced your frustrations instead of going on the defense with something so hurtful. We, being fat girls, hear that more often than you know. It seems those types of comments are favored when someone feels the need to lash out at a fat person. 

Do I think that FAs need a place for themselves? Maybe. I can see that sometimes an FA/FFA makes a comment about their preference/fetish/whatever it may be and it's immediately under attack. If those instances were to stop, I think the boards would benefit.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 16, 2008)

MisticalMisty said:


> It's not that black and white. First of all, there are FAs *guys* who are attracted to BHMs. I'm not certain that we have any that post here openly, but we know they exist. The other problem is that there are FFAs who are feeders and benefit from the interactions on the weight board.
> 
> I've read all the posts on this thread as well as the other thread and I am not sure that I have much to add. There are several that mentioned the fact that some FAs and/or feeders feel that they are attacked for their preferences on a continuing basis. I agree and I'm saddened that it happens. There seems to be the same 3 or 4 people who feel the need to be malicious and sarcastic on a board they state over and over again they are against. It really makes no sense to me, but some people just like to stir the pot.
> 
> ...



These are all great points. 

There are definitely gay men who read and post on the BHM board. It's pretty obvious who they are, and i do think it would be great if they thought they could be more open about it, although there are other boards geared specifically to the gay community.

Misty's last paragraph made the most sense. One thing i've participated in, and now regret, is the perennial bashing of men who come here and say something like "I like fat women but what will my friends/relatives say if i go out with one?" Those posts have always been met with teasing, ridicule, and 40 replies along the lines of "You're a shallow jerk who should stay away from women because you're immature and a loser." That's not helpful. Not everyone is at the same place in life or in being out about their sexuality. Not everyone is in the same social or professional circles. Not everyone even innately has the strength to deal with being mocked or being different or dealing with social or familial disapproval. I think it would be so much better if we could acknowledge this and try to help the newcomers rather than gang up on them for not being "Good Enough" FAs.


----------



## Fyreflyintheskye (Apr 16, 2008)

ThatFatGirl said:


> Forgive me for asking, but isn't that what we have here? Or is the idea that you'd have a place exclusive to those only claiming the title FA and those of us who only identify with the bbw/ssbbw title are out? Then the FA group could be divided further into subgroups of FA and FFA, the FFA group into average sized FFA and bbw sized FFA, and furthermore it would seem from the other thread that some of those in the FA group might also want a group for those 400+.. or is that simply a SSBHM board? Seems like we'd be asking Conrad and his volunteer crew of mods to potentially take on an awful lot, then I wonder why all the division in the first place or is this still bad feelings over the creation of the ssbbw board?



I'll have to chart a graph when you've calculated the permutations


----------



## Observer (Apr 16, 2008)

OK, as Risible has noted I’ve agreed to help, subject to approval of our Webmaster, with a special board such as Stan has proposed. My motivation has already been summarized in the following thoughts shared in the SSBBW 450 thread:

In my experience most FA issues are relationship,. not size, oriented. Like: how do I come out of the closet among my friends and relatives, how do I treat a BBW and let her know my preferences in a way that doesn't get me tossed into the weird freak dumpster? How do I deal with the health/clothing/diet/(name your issue) subject etc.

FA's COULD use a private forum to discuss such issues privately - most of us (especially those under 30) have had to deal with topics of this nature. But how much interest would there be? (Post #143)

I personally think that some FA's could stand to be encouraged to come out of the closet; others need to be mentored on their social graces towards women; still others need help in dealing with the weight issues of their SO (Significant Other &#8211; post 179).​
Obviously what I’m thinking of is a common area for *serious* discussion of FA/FFA issues. Such discussions have occurred before but rapidly get mixed in with and buried. The forum as I envision it would have possibly have a sticky or two with links to older relationship threads such as the “What do you look for in a man/woman” by Rainyday. Some of EDX's more thoughtful essays might find themselves referenced as well. And there would no doubt be others.

Such a forum as I envision it would also include essays on common FA/FFA issues. There would zero tolerance for frat (or sorority) house style wanking (as noted, we have the Weight, Paysite and BHM forums for that) but hopefully would feature some presence by successful couples of size.

Whether this board should be totally private, openly viewable but with posting restricted to members, or a subset of an existing forum or even exist at all is totally open to discussion. Its primary goal would not be to entertain but to help.

This topic is a serious proposal which is being evaluated by our moderators and Webmaster. Nothing, however, has been written in stone. We are by experiance probably going to see a period of time before the final product emerges. Further comments, especially as to format and desire to participate, from the community would be appreciated.


----------



## stan_der_man (Apr 16, 2008)

Wow Im a little behind on what all has transpired, I wrote this up last night, but I still think its relevant to the conversation

Since we are talking ideas I do agree with the skeptics of a separate board on a couple of points; a private board where us guys can divulge our inner thoughts, share our deepest secrets, confess fantasies, exchange digital hugs with each other and bond, might not be that popular. In all honesty, thats not necessarily my thing either. A private board is perfectly suited and justified for SSBBW issues as would be a possible SSBHM board, but I agree that this format might not necessarily work for male FAs. At least it might not be that popular. I also agree that compartmentalizing Dimensions to such a byzantine degree just separates us into camps and unnecessarily divides the community. But I think there is a need for a guys board, or a FA board. There is a good amount of uniquely guy or FA talk on Dimensions but it ends up getting scattered all over the different boards and just sinks into obscurity. We keep hearing that there arent enough of these types of guy / FA conversations to warrant a board of our own, but I think there are. Here are some examples of this:


- James  fa symbol thread
- Fatchicksrocks and I  talking about sturdy bicycles
- My thread - Things to consider about FAs
- Wrestlingguy The times when he is whipping misbehaving FAs into shape one a-hole at a time 
- Biodieselman and I talking about diesels and building stuff.
- Freethinkers Motorcycle thread (which by the way is the most testosterone Ive ever felt pumping through Dimensions in one place)
- Rainydays threads about  What women should know about men / men about women.

 and numerous other serious discussions directly relating to FA issues & experiences.


How many of you know about these threads? How easily could you find these threads if you wanted to? A newbee almost certainly would not know these threads ever existed. Even if there isnt much conversation in a potential Male / FA board, we could use it as a place to link these sorts of scattered FA / male specific threads and put them into one easy to find location.

As an older married male, besides my interest in promoting a positive image for FAs, there isnt really that much on Dimensions for us. We can sprinkle our little nuggets of wisdom here and there in threads with topics of discussion that weve seen rehashed over the years, or take late night peeks at the lovelies in the PaySite Board, but what more really is there for us in Dimensions? I think that is also one of the reasons many of the older males eventually just fade away and dont frequent Dims as often after a while (or eventually have meltdowns.  ) I certainly dont know what the precise answer to this is, and I dont know the intricacies of managing a website like Dimensions, but I do know of a place that influenced me in high school where a group of us guys used to hang out. Maybe this can be used as an analogy for what might work here

During my high school years a group of us guys always went over to the house of our friend named Pete. Mostly we would gather in his garage to build and work on our bicycles. It became known as Petes Garage. Whenever the garage door was open wed see Pete in there working on his bicycle. When we hung out, the door was always open and facing the street, we could see people walking by and they could see us. Generally about 5 to 6 of us met every evening. There was one older guy named Richard The Deek who always got us bike parts at really good prices he found them in places between San Dimas and Covina No point elaborating further. We all worked on our bikes, listened to the radio and talked the way guys talk. The conversations ranged from politics, to dance moves, to chicks or just outright BS Sometimes girls from the neighborhood would come in and even hang around for a while, we all had fun together but it was clearly a guys place. I remember one girl from the neighborhood came in and said, All you guys do is work on your stupid bicycles and practice wheelies all night! Pete replied, Aah shut-up and go play with your barbies. The girls were welcome, we had many good conversations with them, but it was clearly the guys place. Had Pete kept the garage door closed, it wouldnt have been as interesting of a place, certainly not as fun.

I recently exchanged PMs with someone whos opinion I very much respect I told her that there were times when the women here didnt make me feel that welcome, not outwardly so, but somehow excluded from their conversations. She said that she often didnt feel welcome amongst the males either. Whether it is the medium of cyberspace that is conducive to this or this was somehow just a perception from each of our perspectives as males and females, I dont really know. It probably was just the differences of how males and females communicate, more of an awkwardness than of not being welcome. The point Im trying to make is that I think a place for the males or FAs is needed, but not to the outright exclusion of others. Its important to learn from each other and have open dialog, but sometimes some conversations need a barrier against outright hostility, otherwise they simply wont happen, or will get lost in an sea of other topics.


----------



## Spanky (Apr 16, 2008)

Stan,

I understand your post more clearly now. Maybe you are talking about a section on the boards for FAs. FAs, men, women, anyone really can go there, but the topics, the posts, the new threads would be clustered and easy to find on the boards. They would be FA centered. 

I vote Yea for that. No walls, just an open garage, but one next door. Come on in if you would like. 

If I understand you right, I think it is a good idea.


----------



## olwen (Apr 16, 2008)

Thanks for this clarity Stan. This makes a lot of sense.


----------



## out.of.habit (Apr 16, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> *snip*
> 
> Misty's last paragraph made the most sense. One thing i've participated in, and now regret, is the perennial bashing of men who come here and say something like "I like fat women but what will my friends/relatives say if i go out with one?" Those posts have always been met with teasing, ridicule, and 40 replies along the lines of "You're a shallow jerk who should stay away from women because you're immature and a loser." That's not helpful. Not everyone is at the same place in life or in being out about their sexuality. Not everyone is in the same social or professional circles. Not everyone even innately has the strength to deal with being mocked or being different or dealing with social or familial disapproval. I think it would be so much better if we could acknowledge this and try to help the newcomers rather than gang up on them for not being "Good Enough" FAs.





Spanky said:


> Stan,
> 
> I understand your post more clearly now. Maybe you are talking about a section on the boards for FAs. FAs, men, women, anyone really can go there, but the topics, the posts, the new threads would be clustered and easy to find on the boards. They would be FA centered.
> 
> ...




I just wanted to put these two posts next to one another, because they were both very helpful to me in delineating a bottom-line in terms of the creation of a new section of Dimensions. I think that an open board would be awesome, but we're going to have to allow for some learning when new FAs come in with the inevitable questions about how to come to terms with some of the social and emotional difficulties they have when being open about Fat Admiration. As an extension of this, some of us will have to be mindful about giving FAs the space/respect they need and deserve to discuss issues related to being with bbws/bhms without piping up with the "WHAT NOW? It's embarrassing to have to ask for special seating?/You don't know what to say to your mother about your fat girlfriend? LET ME tell you why you're an insensitive bastard who will never understand the true plight of fat people!"

Not that it happens all the time, but it's important to allow the FA discussions to be productive and uncensored, as they are beat down for their frankness from time to time. The expectation around Dimensions in general is that we'll all be respectful to one another, and I'd like to think the locker room mentality wouldn't take over there, at least not in the mind-blowingly chauvinistic way. We're here for common (and if not exactly common, related) reasons. We just have to strike the right balance of privacy for comfort, and respect for people having productive conversations in the most sensitive way they can manage, especially regarding the varied controversial topics we will inevitably fall into.

Hope that was clear, I gave it a shot despite my hesitance to get involved in these threads. : )


----------



## mossystate (Apr 17, 2008)

I really think most people see that things can get out of hand, now and again. I would just like to remind/say that this happens for the BBW out here, as well. I have seen new BBW come here and start to try and put a toe in the pool that is DIMS, and, in the bigger picture, the whole thing of being ok with herself, and many times, when looking for support/advice, she will get " you look great..I would date you...wear some tight clothing..I would like to see your belly/ass/etc...are you gaining?... "..etc..when that is not what she is looking for. I think there is an interesting dynamic that ' we ' get so used to women being the ' viewed ', that, only when men are decended upon, can ' we ' see how negative such a thing..is.

Women are no different from men, in that we also need times/spaces where we don't have to worry about incoming bombs. Now, I could recommend that women always put in a started thread, " women, only, please " ( if that is what she wants/needs at that moment ), but, wouldn't it be easier to have a safe place for her?

So much of this is about moderating and personal responsibility, but, yes, it would be easier if certain concerns and needs were contained.

I just ' vote ' for fairness across the board, no matter how this will ultimately look.

I _do_ think most want very similar things.


----------



## prickly (Apr 17, 2008)

.............we each have our own little board and chatroom where we can talk to ourselves, post to ourselves, private messages ourselves....and all without a word of disagreement on anything! hell, gainer/feeders can talk to themselves about their shit for hours.....normal people can tell themselves how normal they are.....pissed off people can moan on and on and agree with themselves

.....i might be radical though and ask someone else into my little world so it's not too boring, and i then might ask others, and i'll encourage them to do the same......hold on though, there might be some disagreement amongst us?!!?!!? ok, fuck that! i think i'll stick to my self-chat room, and my me-board....yes. safe.


----------



## Tad (Apr 17, 2008)

I wonder if re-organisation of the boards might work as well as adding a new one? Or possibly more use of the sub-forums?

I don't think it is feasible to have boards capturing every combination of interests. At the minimum we tend to see the following divides, none of which are that black and white anyway:

- being fat versus admiring fat
- male versus female
- liking gain versus no-thank-you

Right there you see eight categories, without even looking at the more broad issues that don't break down these ways.

But just example of how things could be re-sliced and diced, we could have:

Size acceptance board
- exclusive SSBBW sub-board
- BHM/FFA sub-board
- Newbie sub-board

The Sexy Fat Board
- gaining and encouraging sub-board
- fat eroticism sub-board
- fat admirers only sub-board, exclusive or not

Community Board (=The Lounge)
- all the current regions boards
- Chat board
- Foodee board

Living Large zone
- Health Board
- Fashion Board
- WLS board
- Exclusive women's issues board

Library
- existing boards

So in that version, I've added to the total number of boards and sub-boards, but clumped things a bit to hopefully reduce overlap and how seperate teh communities get. The BHM/FFA community shares a lot of issues with the BBW/FA community, for example, but those things tend to get addressed seperately on the two boards sometimes. Maybe better to bring them closer in some respects? And so on. Or things could be rolled in more.

Really I don't think making new boards that go low amounts of specific traffic is much of a deal, so long as they don't make the site hard to navigate. For example, the regional boards are not taking traffic away from the main boards so far as I can tell, but they do make it easy to find regional information for those who care.

So likewise, having a limited sub-board for FA, or women, or men, or whatever is not much of a big deal, I think, if what goes on there really only is of much interest to that target audience, and doesn't overlap much with the other boards. By making it a sub-board, where you'll be seeing what is on the main board, maybe it makes it easier to stick to those targets?

Or I may be talking complete non-sense. That latter point is extremely possible


----------



## butch (Apr 18, 2008)

I wasn't going to read this thread, being that I thought it was just about the men FAs, but someone told me to give it a look see. After reading it all, I just feel more confused that ever. 

After all the angst that went into creating the SSBBW thread, I would never wish that on anyone else, so FAs, be sure of what you're asking for when you ask for your own board, because you're going to exclude people whether you realize it or not.

That is my problem with this, and this comes up all the time, people feel like they don't fit in, and think a board of their very own will fix that. It won't. The reality is, this site is too big, too diverse, for anyone to feel they comfortably fit in all the time. That is a good thing, imo, because it forces us to interact with people and it expands our minds a little bit.

There's a whole lot more I could say, but, eh, it doesn't need to be said. As an FA of sorts (of the fat woman and fat man variety), I don't have much need for a FA only board. If one happened and I was eligible to join, I would, but I would expect a sticky thread for the LGBT F(F)A on that board.


----------



## Observer (Apr 18, 2008)

EDX said:



> Or I may be talking complete non-sense. That latter point is extremely possible



which, being translated means "what I have to say is really worth considering, so I hope someone listens."

I personally have never seen EDX talk nonsense unless he was deliberately trying to be silly. But his outline illustrates the difficulty of doing to everyone's satisfaction the very thing he is advocating.

To illustrate, it would be my preference to put the FA Issues board in with the Community Group (note the use of the word Group rather than Forum because traditionally VB forums use the VB headers before going to sub-forums). Why? Because the objective of the FA issues board, in my view, would be to deal with socialization and relationship questions, not "sexy fat."

Incidentally, the "Sexy Fat" group should include the Plus Site Paysite Forum and the Community Group should certainly include Hyde Park! Both these are missing from the outline. Finally, there are IMHO just too many regions for them not to retain their Regions Group status.

The reshuffling of forums into new groups is not a nonsensical proposal at all -and with VB's flexibility not that difficult to do if our Webmaster wanted to do so. However, for the moment such a discussion is off the main topic of this thread, which is having an FA forum. I'd like to see more input on what anyone would regard as a need for privacy in such a FA forum. My own present inclination is to recommend a public "everyone is welcome" face until and unless the need for an additional private "invitation only" forum develops.


----------



## Angel (Apr 18, 2008)

edx said:


> The Sexy Fat Board
> - gaining and encouraging sub-board
> - fat eroticism sub-board
> - fat admirers only sub-board, exclusive or not



BBW and SSBBW aren't sexy unless they are into gaining; are encouragers; find their fat or another's fat erotic; or are fat admirers?  Woman who just happen to be fat but who don't necessarily fall under any of the sub catagories or have any of the mentioned proclivities aren't fat and sexy? 





I'd venture to say that the majority of the women here are in this group and I'd say they're both _Sexy_ and _Fat_! :batting:

you know I admire you, edx, and know you're trying to help iron out the differences.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 18, 2008)

Observer said:


> EDX said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'd have to disagree that the Paysite Board should be included in the "Sexy Fat" forum. I think of Sexy Fat stuff as issues pertaining to just what the Weight Board says they are, fat sexuality and other fetish issues such as feeding/gaining/encouraging/stuffing/squashing. I think the Paysite Board does not necessarily relate to sexuality issues. Yes it's adult oriented material, but I don't think it's geared more towards fetishists than FAs without particular fetishes.


----------



## ESPN Cutie (Apr 18, 2008)

*As a woman, I have no problem with a guys-only FA forum. As a FFA, I have no problem with a guys-only FA forum. People who feel like they are being excluded are mising the point that those guys need their own space. JMHO.*


----------



## Observer (Apr 20, 2008)

Glad to see you have no personal problem with an exclusive and private forum. But is there a need to go that far? Should it be private and should it be FAs only or FA/FFA oriented with open posting and participation?

Based upon the socialization and other practical issue I've heard about in the five decades since I first identifed my FA tendancies (which are not feeder or fantasy oriented) I trend to favor the latter.

More opinions? Stan and Ris return in two days and we'll likely be making a proposal soon after (and yes I take and respond to PMs).


----------



## wrestlingguy (Apr 20, 2008)

A while back, several of us guys were contacted about providing a seminar at one of the bashes to discuss what it is like to be a FA, and part of the discussion centered around giving lessons on how to be a FA. One of my questions, which was never answered, was should women be allowed to participate in this seminar? While it was nice to be placed in the company of "notable" FA's like Stan, Jon Blaze, and others, I wondered why WE were contacted. While our opinions may be more popular to some of the ladies who asked us to participate, I wondered if we really represented the majority of FA's. Furthermore, I didn't think that the guys who may need these seminars the most would have attended or participated.

I think the discussion of this new board mirrors what I talked about in the previous paragraph. Part of my learning curve here over the past 10+ years has been dialogue with women who were kind enough to share answers to MY questions about being a BBW, and their perceptions of what it takes to be a FA. I will always be grateful to ladies like Rosebud (aka Patty/Mercurial), to Heather Boyle & Ann Marie, to Mellissa (LargenLovely) and a few others for their understanding of my idiocy early on.

Do I think a FA only board could reduce the ramp up time for some of the newer FA's that come here? Quite possible, especially with some of the more articulate FA's like Stan and Zandoz around. I just can't help but think, however, that the way I learned was by talking with the ladies, and not most of the guys, whose conversations in Dims Chat often centered around conversations like:

*"Holy shit!!!! Did you see the ass on "------" on the sidebar?"
No, um.....I wasn't looking...
"Goddamn........you talk with all the chicks here....what do you know about her? Is she a feedee? How big does she want to get?"
Hey, do me a favor......fuckoff. I'm in a private with someone, okay?
"Jesus Christ, I was just making conversation!"*

I would have a hard time supporting a FA board if it *ONLY* centered around that type of conversation. My concern is that while the moderators can control the language & tone of discussion, they could not with the actual topics, meaning that it could potentially turn this into another BBW Chan, or even worse, the Thick BBW Forum. Since those already exist, it would be senseless to add to the confusion.

On the other hand, if a "new" FA posted about how to remain faithful to one's girlfriend, fiance, or wife whilst being attracted to curvy women, and got good constructive answers from the participants on that board, it could be invaluable.

I just don't want to see another "Boys Club" to discuss who has the best ass, fattest belly, or biggest tits, even if it were in private. They are already all over the net, and would serve no additional purpose.


----------



## Angel (Apr 20, 2008)

I sent this to our Webmaster:


04-13-2008, 04:44 PM 

*Start it*  

Open a forum for FAs.

You're the expert! 

Begin threads with the topics in your post.

It will take off from there.


I would advise a strict preamble type of warning that the forum is for FA type discussions and that there is to be absolutely NO bashing or ridiculing any male poster. (That does seem to be happeneing a lot lately).

I think it would be good if women could read what's posted simply so that it may open their eyes to the thinking of and how the mind of an FA works. It may even help the women to understand FAs better, be more accepting of them, and help them to eventually embrace those they don't seen to understand. 

Maybe women could be permitted to ask questions of the FAs. I know that I have always wanted to know and to understand what goes on in a FAs mind. 

If a woman becomes a problem, harrasses, or demeans any FA, she loses access to that forum. (I'm pretty sure I read that that can be done even in an open forum.)


I think we could all learn from such a forum, and it may very well help in getting Dimensions back to what you visualized/hoped it to be in the beginning.





04-20-08 
edited to add: If the forum is open to all, there would be no necessity of there being only male moderators. I believe the current female mods are also capable of watching for the possibility of any problems in the suggested FA Forum, and that they would be fair even if they are females.


----------



## UMBROBOYUM (Apr 21, 2008)

Quite an interesting thread I must say. I've always wondered about a group of FAs and what it should be about or if it should be exclusive to male Fas only..

Maybe when i can get to one of these bashes/meetings I can finally meet another FA...


----------



## Chimpi (Apr 22, 2008)

Angel said:


> I would advise a strict preamble type of warning that the forum is for FA type discussions and that there is to be absolutely NO bashing or ridiculing any male poster. (That does seem to be happeneing a lot lately).
> 
> I think it would be good if women could read what's posted simply so that it may open their eyes to the thinking of and how the mind of an FA works. It may even help the women to understand FAs better, be more accepting of them, and help them to eventually embrace those they don't seen to understand.
> 
> ...



Hi Angel! 
Here's my thoughts on this post as of right now.
If said forum has access for both men and women, what makes it any different than the Main Dimensions Board, The Weight Board, and/or the BHM/FFA Forum? I'm curious, because as far as I know, those types of threads are started in any of the above forums. The fact that there's already a place for such threads leads me to think there should not be another forum for yet more discussion of such type.

To be fair, and I'm not doing this JUST because the SSBBW forum is only accessible to women of "super" size, depending on the type of forum this forum may or may not be, why should women have access to it if only just to learn from it? I'd like to learn about the problems SSBBW's face (whatever they may be in that forum), but I'm not allowed. Why should this forum be any different? (I'm not patronizing, I'm just asking) I would like to be clear that I understand why the SSBBW Forum is private and I understand people saying they do not want to be learning tools. I believe some men that post in such a FA Forum might have the same opinion of their forum.

I, personally, continue to think that "Fat Admirer" oriented threads should go into one of the existing forums so that _all_ are able to not only learn from it, but post in those threads as well. Developing as a community is what I like to think this place is about.


----------



## Angel (Apr 22, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> Hi Angel!
> Here's my thoughts on this post as of right now.
> If said forum has access for both men and women, what makes it any different than the Main Dimensions Board, The Weight Board, and/or the BHM/FFA Forum? I'm curious, because as far as I know, those types of threads are started in any of the above forums. The fact that there's already a place for such threads leads me to think there should not be another forum for yet more discussion of such type.
> 
> ...




If there were to be a FA Forum it's defined purpose would be different from that of the Main Board, the Weight Board, and/or the BHM/FFA Board. It's purpose would be specifically to discuss issues pertaining to fat admirers and fat admiration. It would be a place where fat admirers could express their thoughts or questions relating to how they feel about being a fat admirerer. It would be specifically geared to the FA train of thought, if you will. Go to the main Dimensions Forums page. Read the Board titles and their respective purposes. When fat admirers discover Dimensions, each is at their own unique place as far as coming to terms with their preferences and may very well be just discovering that there is such a thing as the size acceptance movement. All they may know is that they find fat women and/or fat men attractive. They may not be ready to dive into the deeper size acceptance issues discussed on the Main Board. If they are attracted to fat women, the BHM/FFA board wouldn't meet their needs. Not every fat admirer is into erotic weight gain, fattening, feeding, or wants to openly discuss their sexuality, so the Weight Board wouldn't necessarily be for them either. Not every fat person finds the subject matter on the Weight Board appealing or pertaining to themselves. It would be fair to say that the same may apply to some fat admirers. 

There are fat admirers whom are simply humans that are attracted to fat men or fat women without having any fat kinks or fat fetishes. Honestly, I think they do get lost and pushed to a back burner and aren't as visible sometimes because a lot of the popular threads are of an outwardly sexual or controversial nature. As a woman, and desiring a certain type of man, I can certainly see the different types of personalities that exist here and which are more prolific and which seem to take center stage more often. Your average or plain (for lack of a better term) fat admirer, or those sometimes referred to as true fat admirers (meaning that they admire the woman who happens to be fat as opposed to only lusting after her fat; and are not a fetishist or a feeder or encourager secretly hiding behind or using the more acceptable identity of that of a fat admirer) seem to not always be as outspoken as others. They usually don't project or extrude a particularily exuberant or flamboyant attitude or demeanor. You usually won't see them attempting to force others to accept their preferences or their way of thinking, either. They don't have an agenda or anything to prove or to force on others. They are simply men or women who prefer the more abundant of the many physical forms that exist among us humans.


I really didn't want to discuss the women's SS Issues forum here (that has it's own thread). I wanted to be respectful of this thread's purpose. To answer you, Chimpi, I'll repost something I had previously posted in that thread. 



Angel said:


> I understand that being a FA may at times make you feel awkward, or even ashamed, or even alone. We all, regardless of orientation experience similar feelings at one time or another. Being an FA does not affect your physical body in a negative way. Being an FA does not affect your physical limitations or mobility. Being an FA does not make you stand out in a crowd, or make you the subject of insults or marginalization because of your physical appearance or physical limitations. Fat admirers can easily blend into society and do not require any special needs on a daily basis. Fat admirers can even hide their identity or orientation. SSBBW can't. Everyone can see that we are 'different'. In our society what makes us 'different' is not seen as a positive factor.
> 
> We have no place else to go to for information or for resources that could make our daily lives a bit more easier. In the super size forum we can share information with each other without being made spectacles and without being made to feel embarrassed even more than we may already be.



You want to know what the difference is plain and simple? One is about the physical limitations faced by a very select few whom face embarrassment and emotional and physical pain, and do not wish to have their pain and embarrasment objectified or made light of. The other is about fat admirers (probably thousands; and probably more than half who frequent this site) and about their thoughts and ideas. Try comparing existing as a normal active healthy human being vs chronic never ending physical pain and sometimes very extreme physical limitations. It is NOT comparable, and it is NOT fair to keep dragging the issue up. The common issues that the supersize face are all over the boards if anyone is curious, wants to be enlightened, or wants to fantasize about them. 

It's about purpose and desire. I think that fat admirers want to be understood and want a more positive reputation. Not all fat admirers want to be lumped in with fetishists or feeders or encouragers, and don't want the same reputations that those have. Hiding away or being secret when wanting to gain understanding from your counterparts, or when wanting to be viewed as a positive influence or example, or when wanting to dispell assumptions and myths, or when wanting to be seen as a respectful and positive force in this community would be defeating your desires. If fat admirers want a better reputation and want to be seen as different from those whom they don't wish to be catagorized with, then they are going to have to openly be examples of what it is they wish to be viewed as. If you want to hide and seclude and segregate yourselves like in-the-closet fat admirers do, how is that going to change anything? How will that better your reputation? If you want open dialogue and support, understanding, and acceptance from your counterparts, you won't get those results with a private FA only forum. 

If it's not apparent, the wedge was drove in because of how and where the proposed FA forum was brought up recently. If the 'we should have our private forum because they have their private forum' mentality continues to be expressed or implied, the division will only grow deeper, and it proves that the needs of the SSBBW are truly not understood or respected. Dimensions Forums as a whole should be about community, mutual respect, and mutual admiration, and not about division. We should be supporting each other.

PS: If you read this entire thread, most SSBBW support the addition of a FA Board. It seems that those who don't see a need are some of the fat admirers themselves.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Apr 22, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> I'd like to learn about the problems SSBBW's face (whatever they may be in that forum), but I'm not allowed.



That has been explained and explained over and over. So you’ll have to forgive me if I am starting to lose my very limited patience and come off a little blunt. 

So, let me sum up, because I really don’t want to take this off topic.

For the FAs that still seem not to get it.

The private SSBBW forum is a health forum for them to help each other with very personal issues. Issues that they need to discuss away from people that would get off on their suffering and issues that only SSBBWs can help with or relate to. 

Did you read what Rebecca posted in the previous thread? My heart goes out to her and women with similar issues, but they really need more practical help than that. I don’t have access, I do not need access and what they talk about in there is none of my business or yours.


----------



## Blackjack (Apr 22, 2008)

Jack Skellington said:


> That has been explained and explained over and over. So you’ll have to forgive me if I am starting to lose my very limited patience and come off a little blunt.
> 
> So, let me sum up, because I really don’t want to take this off topic.
> 
> ...



Yes, yes, yes, and yes.

ETA: I do think, though, that some of the topics that (I assume) are discussed on the SSBBW board might be useful knowledge for us FA's somewhere down the line; but I trust that such things would be brought up with us if necessary, and at a time _when we could actually do something to help _other than send good vibes.

ETA #2: I edited this post WAY too many times.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 22, 2008)

Angel said:


> >snip<
> It's about purpose and desire. I think that fat admirers want to be understood and want a more positive reputation. Not all fat admirers want to be lumped in with fetishists or feeders or encouragers, and don't want the same reputations that those have. Hiding away or being secret when wanting to gain understanding from your counterparts, or when wanting to be viewed as a positive influence or example, or when wanting to dispell assumptions and myths, or when wanting to be seen as a respectful and positive force in this community would be defeating your desires. If fat admirers want a better reputation and want to be seen as different from those whom they don't wish to be catagorized with, then they are going to have to openly be examples of what it is they wish to be viewed as. If you want to hide and seclude and segregate yourselves like in-the-closet fat admirers do, how is that going to change anything? How will that better your reputation? If you want open dialogue and support, understanding, and acceptance from your counterparts, you won't get those results with a private FA only forum.
> 
> If it's not apparent, the wedge was drove in because of how and where the proposed FA forum was brought up recently. If the 'we should have our private forum because they have their private forum' mentality continues to be expressed or implied, the division will only grow deeper, and it proves that the needs of the SSBBW are truly not understood or respected. Dimensions Forums as a whole should be about community, mutual respect, and mutual admiration, and not about division. We should be supporting each other.
> ...



Angel, thank you for your thoughtful and well reasoned post. I really don't know what the purpose of the FA board would be or what kind of discussions would take place there? I don't know if the same rules would apply as do on the larger boards? I can't think of any practical way, other than the honor system, to limit participation to "True FA's". I will say that I believe that there are many of us here who have spent our entire lifetimes coming to terms with our preferences. At the very least I suspect we might save a few young people several years of self-reproach? 

For me, the term FA does not inherently entitle me to any greater respect or understanding than a fetishist, feeder or encourager. We're just _different_. I want a place where I can be frank and open about that without being viewed as judgmental or moralistic. I accept that the policy of Dims is to be open to all factions of the size acceptance movement. I don't think it necessarily follows however that we all must graciously approve of one another? I accept that fetishists, feeders and encouragers can also be respectful of their partners health and admiring of their beauty as a human being but that respect and admiration is contingent. If their terms or requirements work for you then great, but let them come as no surprise (npi).

FA means unconditional affection for a person of size. It doesn't mean I'll care for you as long as you squash me, as long as you're gaining or as long as you stay above a certain weight. I like the package because of what's in it.

I readily and unequivocally grant that SSBBW are confronted with unique physical and emotional challenges that deserve to be discussed privately. The good news is they seldom have to worry about being misidentified. Just being here at Dims makes me suspect in the eyes of some. In the open forums I can't say I'm not a fetishist and not be snarked for dissing them. It may not sound as daunting but believe me, it's painful enough and it would be good to be able to talk about it with someone who can relate.


----------



## olwen (Apr 22, 2008)

You know, as I've been reading this thread my opinion keeps vacillating. And I've read it, but not all at once, so forgive me if I'm just whistling dixie or saying something that's already been said ad nauseum.

Now I'm starting to think that having a non-fetishist F/FA board _would _be very helpful all around. It would be nice to see the opinions of all those types of F/FA's both newly formed and the well seasoned ones, of all sexualities. I _know _It would help both the bbws and bhms here inform their opinions of F/FA's especially if they are new to the idea that men and women like bigger bodies and they haven't yet wrapped their brains around it. And maybe that's just what it should be - The Non-fetishist FA/FFA board, with stickys about what it isn't and a sort of FAQS for those (both admirers and admiress) just discovering this aspect about themselves and what to expect.
It wouldn't necessarily be discussions about sex but discussions about interpersonal relationships within this community.


----------



## butch (Apr 23, 2008)

Yes, I'm going to stir the pot a bit, but really, how does one define 'fat fetish,' especially when the term fetish is often misused both here at Dims and in the culture as a whole? For real, unless you're going to use the strict Freudian definition of 'fetish,' you have no usable and fair way to define who is a 'fat fetishist' and who is a non-'fat fetishist' FA.

To some people, I might be considered a fat fetishist because I get turned on by some things related specifically to fat and the 'fat experience.' But those things aren't the guiding principle in who I look for in a partner, and I never value the body above the person inside. 

I think its impossible to separate a fat fetishist from an FA because there is too much overlap. I would be willing to bet the most vociferous anti-fetishist FA derives some sort of pleasure from the materiality of their fat partner, because I've never heard of an FA who didn't talk about the joys of feeling the weight of their partner pressing on them, for example. Why is that not a fetish, but squashing or belly play is (according to some people)?


----------



## Tad (Apr 23, 2008)

butch said:


> Yes, I'm going to stir the pot a bit, but really, how does one define 'fat fetish,' especially when the term fetish is often misused both here at Dims and in the culture as a whole? For real, unless you're going to use the strict Freudian definition of 'fetish,' you have no usable and fair way to define who is a 'fat fetishist' and who is a non-'fat fetishist' FA.
> 
> To some people, I might be considered a fat fetishist because I get turned on by some things related specifically to fat and the 'fat experience.' But those things aren't the guiding principle in who I look for in a partner, and I never value the body above the person inside.
> 
> I think its impossible to separate a fat fetishist from an FA because there is too much overlap. I would be willing to bet the most vociferous anti-fetishist FA derives some sort of pleasure from the materiality of their fat partner, because I've never heard of an FA who didn't talk about the joys of feeling the weight of their partner pressing on them, for example. Why is that not a fetish, but squashing or belly play is (according to some people)?



Even using the rough definition of a sexual fetish being something without which its possessor cannot get off doesn't make a clear line. Because the same thing may be a preference for some, and a fetish for others. One FA may like seeing their partner in tight clothes, while another may require it to get turned on, or something like that. And really, it probably exists on a continuum, and where to put the line between preference and fetish is probably a bit like saying that the line between overweight and obese is at a BMI of 30.


----------



## Jack Skellington (Apr 23, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> The good news is they seldom have to worry about being misidentified. Just being here at Dims makes me suspect in the eyes of some.



Ernest I really think the women here can pick out what type of people the "FA" posters here are by how they conduct themselves which forums they frequent. 



> In the open forums I can't say I'm not a fetishist and not be snarked for dissing them.



I diss pervs all the time.


----------



## olwen (Apr 23, 2008)

butch said:


> Yes, I'm going to stir the pot a bit, but really, how does one define 'fat fetish,' especially when the term fetish is often misused both here at Dims and in the culture as a whole? For real, unless you're going to use the strict Freudian definition of 'fetish,' you have no usable and fair way to define who is a 'fat fetishist' and who is a non-'fat fetishist' FA.
> 
> To some people, I might be considered a fat fetishist because I get turned on by some things related specifically to fat and the 'fat experience.' But those things aren't the guiding principle in who I look for in a partner, and I never value the body above the person inside.
> 
> I think its impossible to separate a fat fetishist from an FA because there is too much overlap. I would be willing to bet the most vociferous anti-fetishist FA derives some sort of pleasure from the materiality of their fat partner, because I've never heard of an FA who didn't talk about the joys of feeling the weight of their partner pressing on them, for example. Why is that not a fetish, but squashing or belly play is (according to some people)?



I could make the argument that a guy who likes to be with waifs is a fetishist, because I'm sure there are things he could do with a waif that he couldn't do with a fat person and he would "derive some sort of pleasure from the materiality of their (thin) partner." We just don't say that because unfortunately thin is the default in our society.



edx said:


> Even using the rough definition of a sexual fetish being something without which its possessor cannot get off doesn't make a clear line. Because the same thing may be a preference for some, and a fetish for others. One FA may like seeing their partner in tight clothes, while another may require it to get turned on, or something like that. And really, it probably exists on a continuum, and where to put the line between preference and fetish is probably a bit like saying that the line between overweight and obese is at a BMI of 30.





Jack Skellington said:


> Ernest I really think the women here can pick out what type of people the "FA" posters here are by how they conduct themselves which forums they frequent.
> 
> 
> I diss pervs all the time.



To speak to all of the above points:

Well, this is part of what that sort of board would be for. F/FAs could suss out these issues (which parts are fetish, which aren't, where in the continuum do they fit, etc) thru discussion and over time the debate would help to devlop stickies and FAQs on the matter as a general guideline(s) about how F/FAs define themselves and interpret their own sexualities which would in turn inform everyone's opinions about the matter.

Jack, I think we can too. But having that difference be apparent and up front would help too. Let's be honest, if a person with a certain level of ignorance on the subject comes to this site (the entire site) they'd be inclined to think that all FA's are feeders/gainers, which those of us who are informed all know is not the case. 

So that is part of the reason I think having a Non-fetishist F/FA board would make sense. The stickies would have to be worked out so as to provide a must read sexuality manual of sorts for all parties involved.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 23, 2008)

> In the open forums I can't say I'm not a fetishist and not be snarked for dissing them. It may not sound as daunting but believe me, it's painful enough and it would be good to be able to talk about it with someone who can relate.



Bull. Nobody snarks on you for dissing them (us). What pisses people off is when you use the fact that you're not a fetishist as a way of describing what a good, decent person you are. The irony is that for all the assertions of the "Good Guy Non Fetish FAs", you're all still on a website devoted to fat people. If the "inside" was so overwhelmingly vital to you then it wouldn't matter what your partner looked like. The simple fact that you're not into feederism or squashing says nothing about the sort of person you are.

And I for one would be really _really_ offended at the idea having a "No Fetish People" allowed thread. Is anyone on an _adult web site_ that ridiculously delicate that they want to make sure they don't accidentally encounter a fetish person without warning? Does the fact that somebody has a fetish but may also be an FA or FFA or SSBBW/BBW/BHM mean that they should be careful to stay away from the non-fetish board because it might somehow adulterate the purity of the non-fetish good guys?

Nobody who comes to this board would think everyone is a feeder/feedee. Discussion about those topics is kept solely on the Weight Board and the WB has a sticky that explains just what these issues are, and the FAQ section of this site explains some of it as well.

Lastly, the idea that somebody is or isn't a fetishist is not cut and dry. Lilly pointed out that it's pretty easy to encounter somebody who says they're not "into that" only to find out that, yeah...they kind of are.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 23, 2008)

Thanks, Olwen. I'm curious how many FA's here don't feel they've been broad-brushed (oh, hell, double entendre intended. I can own it) at some point or another as an assumed feeder or fetishist? As an SSA I think women are even entitled to be a little suspicious of me. The truth is though I like a woman to be whatever size she's comfortable being. I subscribe to Robert Heinlein's statement that "Love is that condition wherein another person's happiness and well-being becomes essential to your own." I think maybe there's something in that that describes what some of us mean when we say "A True FA"? :bow:

Besides, I really want someone who doesn't need or want to change me. It'd be a bit hypocritical to feel I had to change her.


----------



## olwen (Apr 23, 2008)

LoveBHMS - Sure but how many people really really examine these issues in the way that we have? How do you know they wouldn't automatically think that? How do I know they would?... 

So many people just don't like to think deeply about their sexuality even if what they like challenges accepted norms. A lot of people don't want to think of themselves as having a fetish of any kind no matter what it is. Where do those people fit?

And to go back to the point I made earlier it wouldn't be about sexuality persay, but about interpersonal issues - ideally. It wouldn't be a closed thread, just an area that is distinctly different from the Fat Sexuality board, or an additional area of it that is only for F/FA related issues that don't have to do with what's already there.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 23, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> Bull. Nobody snarks on you for dissing them (us). What pisses people off is when you use the fact that you're not a fetishist as a way of describing what a good, decent person you are. The irony is that for all the assertions of the "Good Guy Non Fetish FAs", you're all still on a website devoted to fat people. If the "inside" was so overwhelmingly vital to you then it wouldn't matter what your partner looked like. The simple fact that you're not into feederism or squashing says nothing about the sort of person you are.
> 
> And I for one would be really _really_ offended at the idea having a "No Fetish People" allowed thread. Is anyone on an _adult web site_ that ridiculously delicate that they want to make sure they don't accidentally encounter a fetish person without warning? Does the fact that somebody has a fetish but may also be an FA or FFA or SSBBW/BBW/BHM mean that they should be careful to stay away from the non-fetish board because it might somehow adulterate the purity of the non-fetish good guys?
> 
> ...



My sole issue with fetishists/feeders, as I've stated plainly in several threads, is if they are inauthentic or duplicitous. It's no different than lying about whether you're married, young, gay, rich, tall, etc. Tell the truth and I'm down with it. Wanna "pass" until you think the time is right, I call BS. 

Re cut and dried; I can be accommodating of my partners needs, enjoy some kinks, variety, sure, but I have no requirements I'm hiding. Seems pretty black and white to me? You can have all the moral relativism you want around sexuality but integrity is either there or not. A lie is a lie even and sometimes especially when it's by omission.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Apr 23, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Thanks, Olwen. I'm curious how many FA's here don't feel they've been broad-brushed (oh, hell, double entendre intended. I can own it) at some point or another as an assumed feeder or fetishist? As an SSA I think women are even entitled to be a little suspicious of me. The truth is though I like a woman to be whatever size she's comfortable being. I subscribe to Robert Heinlein's statement that "Love is that condition wherein another person's happiness and well-being becomes essential to your own." I think maybe there's something in that that describes what some of us mean when we say "A True FA"? :bow:
> 
> Besides, I really want someone who doesn't need or want to change me. It'd be a bit hypocritical to feel I had to change her.



So by your definition, "A True FA" doesn't really even care if a woman is fat. How exactly are you a true FA if you dont' care about the "F" part? Now it's like "Hey, not only are some of us not fetishists, some of us don't actually care about size!" 



> LoveBHMS - Sure but how many people really really examine these issues in the way that we have? How do you know they wouldn't automatically think that? How do I know they would?...



Because i trust somebody who's a functionally literate adult who comes to this site to actually read the various threads and find out. As i said before, this site does not default to fetishism, the Main Board not only does not have discussions about it, but if one is started, the mods _move it to the Weight Board._



> A lot of people don't want to think of themselves as having a fetish of any kind no matter what it is. Where do those people fit?



They fit every place BUT the Weight Board. There is no fetish talk on other parts of this site.


----------



## olwen (Apr 23, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> So by your definition, "A True FA" doesn't really even care if a woman is fat. How exactly are you a true FA if you dont' care about the "F" part? Now it's like "Hey, not only are some of us not fetishists, some of us don't actually care about size!"
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But as far as I can tell, those relevant discussions are not all in one place they are scattered every which way. Pretend you never heard about fat acceptance or fat sexuality, but you know you have certain feelings and you don't know what to do with it? What do those people do? They post a question either in the main board or in the sexuality board and wait for responses? Over the years how often has that happened? Over the years where have they been scattered? Pretend you are that person. If there was a place where that stuff was upfront and apparent you wouldn't necessarily post first. You'd read first.


----------



## Sicilia_Curves (Apr 23, 2008)

I love my big men, why not?!:eat2:


----------



## stan_der_man (Apr 23, 2008)

I think for the overall the way Dimensions is divided up works fairly well. Having the Weight Board divided up into "no flog" zones as it was for the more risqué topics of discussion seems to have reinvigorated a board that was dying for the most part.

Maybe I'm naive, but how about this...



Remove the "FFA" title from the BHM/FFA Board (it would still be a gathering place for FFAs with or without the name for all practical purposes...) and divide the boards up like this:


*BHM Board*

*BBW Board*

*FA Board* (and subdivide the FA board into male and female topics if necessary...)


These boards could be the focus for "non-erotic" discussion, dedicated to the perspective groups...? Just an idea...


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 23, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> So by your definition, "A True FA" doesn't really even care if a woman is fat. How exactly are you a true FA if you dont' care about the "F" part? Now it's like "Hey, not only are some of us not fetishists, some of us don't actually care about size!"



Of course I have a strong preference. I said I like a woman to be whatever size she's comfortable with. As an FA it is my pleasure and privilege to make it clear that I'm both comfortable with and appreciative of a partners _physicality_, _whatever her size_. I can't fully enjoy a woman's body unless she does, too, but I'm not shy about expressing my enthusiasm for abundance. The women I enjoy most are quite substantial in many regards. If the size is diminished, for whatever reason, there's still a lot left. Is that really so hard to understand? 

I hope that addresses your issue with me, LoveBHMS? Would you kindly do me the courtesy of addressing my point re dishonesty by fetishists/feeders? Whatever "problems" I have with fetishists/feeders are generally resolved within the premise of "consenting adults". My issue with honesty in relationships is not even so much about moral/sexual matters as what works equitably for everyone in society in general and this community in particular.


----------



## James (Apr 23, 2008)

olwen said:


> But as far as I can tell, those relevant discussions are not all in one place they are scattered every which way. Pretend you never heard about fat acceptance or fat sexuality, but you know you have certain feelings and you don't know what to do with it? What do those people do? They post a question either in the main board or in the sexuality board and wait for responses? Over the years how often has that happened? Over the years where have they been scattered? Pretend you are that person. If there was a place where that stuff was upfront and apparent you wouldn't necessarily post first. You'd read first.


 
This is a good point. It leads onto something I've been thinking about and discussing quite a bit recently with friends both inside and outside fat acceptance spheres. 

The average FA who is beginning to realise their FA-ness (likely an unexperienced teen) is going to be like any other average teen when it comes to sexuality... (i.e primarily interested in the visual and sexual aspects of being attracted to what it is that they like.) Naturally such FAs will explore such things in the weight and paysite areas first as that is where they will find this sexual content. 

There's nothing wrong with this by itself of course. This imagery and fantasy is much like any other form of pornography in the sense that it is an exaggerated version of sexuality. However, unlike the majority preference for slim partners, most young FAs will not have many (if any) examples of real-world relationships around them, upon which they might base a frame of reference for reality-based FA expectations. 

This lack of perspective on what an average, normal, functional, long-term FA/BBW relationship might be, is not going to be helpful to the FA or to the women that they interact with. An FA forum or something similar could provide the sort of context to an FA preference with examples and role-models that non-FAs have a far greater chance of encountering as they grow up. 

I believe that some kind of public FA debate on what FA ethics should be deserves its own space somewhere. It could definitely be beneficial to FAs, especially new FAs, in terms of giving them context to their preference and some basic grounding in what realistic expectations from BBW relationships ought to be?


----------



## olwen (Apr 23, 2008)

Yes, James this is something like what I envisioned. How about this: We just call it
"FA/FFA Relationship Issues" or just "Relationship Issues" or something to that effect. It should be an open board because an open one would be more beneficial to _everyone_. 

Period.

ETA: Isn't this essentially what we've all been discussing in this thread? So much discussion...seems like the need for it is plain.


----------



## largenlovely (Apr 23, 2008)

lol lord knows you put up with some of mine too...as in "what the hell IS this place" ...you were there right from the beginning 



wrestlingguy said:


> I will always be grateful to ladies like Rosebud (aka Patty/Mercurial), to Heather Boyle & Ann Marie, to Mellissa (LargenLovely) and a few others for their understanding of my idiocy early on.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Apr 24, 2008)

butch said:


> ... how does one define 'fat fetish,' especially when the term fetish is often misused both here at Dims and in the culture as a whole? ...
> 
> I think its impossible to separate a fat fetishist from an FA because there is too much overlap. I would be willing to bet the most vociferous anti-fetishist FA derives some sort of pleasure from the materiality of their fat partner, because I've never heard of an FA who didn't talk about the joys of feeling the weight of their partner pressing on them, for example. Why is that not a fetish, but squashing or belly play is (according to some people)?



"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to butch again."

Thank you for saying this. Really.:bow: I was starting to think I might be crazy because I consider myself a "good" FA AND I freely admit to having certain turn ons, quirks and other things that would be considered fetishes by some of the others on the board. I like fat men. There are certain things fat men can do that thin men can't. Why does wanting to do something like that with someone make me a bad person? What if he wants to do it too? What if he is my partner because of who he is, but who he is includes being a fat man and therefore we can engage in certain activities. Does wanting to do so make me a bad FA? i know that's not what's being discussed here really, I just wanted to state those questions. To me, part of being an FA IS exploring your sexuality and things that fat partners can do or can be the focus of that thin partners can't. But that's just my opinion.

I'm about to do something I have been avoiding since this thread got started. I am going to go into detail about why if there was an FA forum that involved both genders, I would like to participate. I didn't say any of this earlier because I still thought we were talking male only and private. But the truth is if we're talking visible to all, but only for serious FA discussions and with the understanding that it will be a "safe" place where no one can be automatically attacked for expressing certain things, then I would be all for it and would love to participate. I don't think an FA centered space needs to be closed so that other people can't read it. But I do think that it should be like the Weight Board in terms of limitations on people saying unkind things simply because the FA is openly discussing some aspect of being an FA. 

Obviously this thread shows that not all FAs have the same experiences, attitudes and opinions about being an FA. I just know what my issues have been in my life and since coming to Dimensions. Yes, Dims has been a great place for me and has helped me in many ways. But the truth is, there are some things I would like to discuss or would have liked to, at various times along the way, that I simply never felt comfortable expressing out on the main boards. Yes, we all know the issues of coming out. And we also know the issues of people dealing with a partner losing weight or having WLS or things of that nature. And it seems in this thread people are starting to think that these topics aren't as cut and dried as once thought, so that is a good reason for a "safe" haven for newbies. But honestly, depending on who you are and what your preference in partner is, there can be issues well beyond these. There was a thread on FA guilt once, that was a very important thread in my personal opinion. The truth is a thread like that, well, I have a lot to add but never would feel comfortable because I would be afraid that in expressing the issues I personally felt guilty about (right or wrong, good or bad), people might jump to the wrong conclusions, or focus on one particular point and instead of getting support, I would be left feeling afraid that I had accidentally offended fellow Dimmers. And as hard as it may be for some people here to believe, I actually have fetishist guilt, too. Not because I think having any sort of fetish is wrong, but for me, in my head, the things that I consider sexually exciting, sometimes I feel guilty about that. Now where am I supposed to go to discuss something like that now? The Weight Board? That would just seem like an insult to my fellow fetishists who don't feel guilt (and who shouldn't feel guilt, I might add). See, this is why I can understand a special place. And I don't know if some men, or young men would feel more inhibited because everyone could read it or not, but I think we all would feel better if we just knew we could state our case and get what's on our minds or in our hearts out in the open and not immediately be told we are wrong, or don't understand, or don't love our partners. If I want to express struggles dealing with finding certain things about a SSBHM attractive, will people understand that I'm trying to deal with some part of me that just is what it is, or will they tell me I'm wrong to like it in the first place? See, this is where that subtle line comes into play. I think this might be where some of the FA frustration builds. There is a sense that you can only say certain things or else you're no longer one of the good guys or girls. It's understandable, of course, especially where fetishism and daily struggle meet for example. But for FAs who are still coming to terms with some aspects of their attraction, they may want to talk about it in a way that doesn't fit in on the Weight Board. There are many different issues FAs have that, when openly discussed in a blunt manner, might come across a little insensitive at first or even offensive to some. Especially when the FA is just dealing with the issue or is new to the realization that they are an FA. But the fact is if we don't express these things and reach out to each other, several negative things happen. Newbie FAs have trouble finding their way, FAs wrestling with issues become frustrated, BBW and BHM miss out on an opportunity to understand us better. There are other things as well, I'm sure. It is a shame that this topic was brought up in a different thread about a thread for different issues. They're not the same. They are apples and oranges. The BBW and BHM issues are often physical and about day to day life in the real world. The FA issues are mostly in our own heads and hearts. They are very different, of course, but the FAs still have a lot to come to terms with. This is not, nor should it be a comparison. It is simply true that some FAs do have issues and they need to deal with them or they well up inside and everyone suffers. Especially if the FA has a BBW or BHM in their life. That person as the partner will have to deal with the FA issues one way or another. These are the types of things I think about when this type of FA board is brought up. And why I think it's a good idea.

I think it could be a relief to have a place where there is an extra level of understanding by the entire community that a person may be a proud FA or pro size acceptance or love fat people, but still has issues and struggles to deal with in their own mind sometimes and that admitting that is not a betrayal of the BBW/BHM community, but just the reality of the legitimate things F/FAs go through. After all, if we have a better support system and we can learn more and deal with our issues better, it will overall make us happier, mentally healthier, more well adjusted people and in the long run, that makes us better partners for the BBW and BHM out there. So really, it benefits us all to let us F/FAs work through these things together with the support of the community even if it means only F/FAs can post. Those are just my ridiculously long thoughts, though. And yes, I'm afraid I have probably offended someone with this post.:doh:


----------



## wrestlingguy (Apr 24, 2008)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> I think it could be a relief to have a place where there is an extra level of understanding by the entire community that a person may be a proud FA or pro size acceptance or love fat people, but still has issues and struggles to deal with in their own mind sometimes and that admitting that is not a betrayal of the BBW/BHM community, but just the reality of the legitimate things F/FAs go through. After all, if we have a better support system and we can learn more and deal with our issues better, it will overall make us happier, mentally healthier, more well adjusted people and in the long run, that makes us better partners for the BBW and BHM out there. So really, it benefits us all to let us F/FAs work through these things together with the support of the community even if it means only F/FAs can post. Those are just my ridiculously long thoughts, though. And yes, I'm afraid I have probably offended someone with this post.:doh:



I'm going to be late for work this morning, but I felt the need to respond to the most articulate post in this thread. First, I've only included the last paragraph, but I feel that this summary gets to the heart of the matter.

In my previous post in this thread, I spoke about several other people who brought me along the road to FA - dom. Their understanding, and answers to my many questions helped me become the FA that I am today. That, along with my family upbringing, which included large doses of manners, and respect for others.

As I stated before, one of my concerns has been the potential for danger on this newly created forum. What danger, you ask? Well, the same danger that occurs in private chat between FA's what disrepect and degrade the subject fat person. The question then becomes, if the subject fat person doesn't know about it, how are they hurt by it?

The answer is simple. While they are not directly hurt by the comments that they don't see/hear, this type of discussion becomes the more common type, which IMO, then spills over into private discussion with the object of fat desire, and possibly could become public.

I'm a little further down the road than some of you on my FA journey. I have many people to thank for that, most are still here. If you ask any of them, however, none of my DUMB questions about fat, or being a BBW or FA ever had even a hint of disrespect in them.

We live in a world today where empathy, consideration, and manners are virtually nonexistent. I've been asked the same dumb questions I asked early on by others over the years, and I have to say, most of my discussions with others have been productive for all of us. The exceptions to this are the issues that I'd have in a forum as described. My fear is that even more of the "back room" disrespectful talk will take place, and ultimately carry over to other parts of the forums here.

So, while I laud Dr. P Marshall as someone I'd like to enter into discussion with, I worry about the unknown FA (hoggluvr69) who stumbles into the forum, likes to discuss his preference by calling his object of desire a PIG, not because he gets off on it during sex, but because he is a rude idiot. THOSE are the folks that I am concerned will taint this newly created forum. I will always be concerned about the difference between ideality and reality, and I'm afraid that the reality will be that the forum will become "moar" of what's already out there.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Apr 24, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> I'm going to be late for work this morning, but I felt the need to respond to the most articulate post in this thread. First, I've only included the last paragraph, but I feel that this summary gets to the heart of the matter....



I'm referencing your entire post, but I wanted to save space. I'm not challenging what you're saying, I think it is a good point, but I wonder, do you think those types of disrespectful people would post as rudely if the forum was open for all to view? That's where I thought the idea was heading, that it would be available for all to read, just with restrictions either on who posts or with solid rules about attacks the way they do it on the Weight Board. Or did I misunderstand? 

*and thank you for saying I'm articulate.


----------



## butch (Apr 24, 2008)

Let me second wrestlingguy: great post, Dr. P. If I could, I just wanted to jump off of your post a bit and say that it is crucial for FAs of all genders/sexualities/sizes have a place to talk about FA guilt and FA struggles. 

As silly as it still sounds to me, I've been conflicted my whole life about my attraction to fat people and the fat specific things I find a turn on, and I say this as someone who has been fat their entire life. In fact, I've always been more able to talk about my bisexuality than my fat attraction. Sort of like wrestlingguy's experience, its taken the help of some very kind and patient fat women here at Dims to help me finally begin to accept my FA-ness with out feeling conflicted about it. 

If I can have feelings of shame and guilt to some degree over my FA preferences as a fat, bi woman, I can only imagine how much harder it can be for some thin, straight FAs. Sex is a weird and wonderful thing, and for those of us in the US, we live in a culture saturated with both sex and puritan messages that sex is bad, any enjoyment of bodily pleasures is bad, and so no wonder so many of us need guidance when it comes to sexual relationships.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 24, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> <snipped>..........
> 
> So, while I laud Dr. P Marshall as someone I'd like to enter into discussion with,* I worry about the unknown FA (hoggluvr69) who stumbles into the forum, likes to discuss his preference by calling his object of desire a PIG, not because he gets off on it during sex, but because he is a rude idiot. *THOSE are the folks that I am concerned will taint this newly created forum. I will always be concerned about the difference between ideality and reality, and I'm afraid that the reality will be that the forum will become "moar" of what's already out there.



I worried about that too. There are a lot of knuckle draggers out there however forums somehow manage to regulate themselves. Knuckle draggers soon have to move on because people don't want to put up with their crap. They get shouted down or the moderators kick them out. 

On the other hand I say let the knuckle draggers have their say. Unlike most FAs Phil you have the unique and unfortunate opportunity to come into contact with these clods regularly. It would be an eyeopener for people to realize just how many of these beasts are out there or possibly even eye opening for you to see how very little there are and that the constant contact has exaggerated things somewhat. A check from reality might not be such a bad thing. Either way I feel that knowledge of such things is power and ignorance merely breeds more.


----------



## Observer (Apr 24, 2008)

Glad to see the ongoing depth of discussion continuing! It shows that there is both need and interest.

As for rude and boorish comments by insensitive newbies creeping in, I'm sure they will happen. However, they would not last long under the suggested format because they would violate the principles of civility and decorum that would be expected of all participants.

Great posts WG and Ms Marshall! Hopefully others will chime in.


----------



## Tad (Apr 24, 2008)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> I'm about to do something I have been avoiding since this thread got started. I am going to go into detail about why if there was an FA forum that involved both genders, I would like to participate.



Well, that would be a good argument for a forum right there  OK, not just that Dr. P Marshall would participate, although that is certainly an incentive, but that someone that thoughtful, classy, and articulate says they they think that place would let them say things they aren't comfortable saying elsewhere, then its pretty guaranteed that others feel likewise. And it says that such a board would have appeal beyond male FA feeling they need a boys club house.

The rest of her points make great sense too, but I won't quote them all because my response would be " uh hunh, yup, yes, what she said" 

As to the issue of whether the pool would be poisoned by crude knuckledraggers, I think that if you have people who really do want it to be a place for respectful discussion, that automatically reduces the chance of it degenerating, because they have incentive to keep the community standards up. Yes, there will always be a few people who are unrepentant jerks, but that is what mods are for. The clueless, ill-informed, and poorly mannered can mostly be educated, or at the least will quickly find out that their line is not making friends and influencing people.

So I've gone from kind of on the fence, to for it.

-Ed


----------



## Tad (Apr 24, 2008)

fa_man_stan said:


> I
> Maybe I'm naive, but how about this...
> 
> Remove the "FFA" title from the BHM/FFA Board (it would still be a gathering place for FFAs with or without the name for all practical purposes...) and divide the boards up like this:
> ...



Not disagreeing, but just offering up, maybe:

Big folk board
- BBW specific sub-board
- BHM specific sub-board

rather than wholly seperate BBW and BHM boards. Because there is a lot of overlap of issues....dealing with family criticism of size, worried about fitting into places when travelling, how to deal with rude comments, etc. There is a minority of posts that are more gender specific.

Probably the biggest change this might cause is that right now the BHM board is home to most pictures of BHM (and a thread or two for FFA too). The fat sexuality board has lots of picture threads, but most are dedicated to BBW (and a few to 'FA' in a general sense). There has never been an effort to push those off of the BHM board, like there has been with the main board. I think that it is de facto understood that the weight board and its sub-boards are mostly about BBW and male FA. The only thing pushed from the BHM board to the weight board are gaining specific threads. I don't see this as good or bad, it just _is_ at the moment.


----------



## olwen (Apr 24, 2008)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to butch again."
> 
> Thank you for saying this. Really.:bow: I was starting to think I might be crazy because I consider myself a "good" FA AND I freely admit to having certain turn ons, quirks and other things that would be considered fetishes by some of the others on the board. I like fat men. There are certain things fat men can do that thin men can't. Why does wanting to do something like that with someone make me a bad person? What if he wants to do it too? What if he is my partner because of who he is, but who he is includes being a fat man and therefore we can engage in certain activities. Does wanting to do so make me a bad FA? i know that's not what's being discussed here really, I just wanted to state those questions. To me, part of being an FA IS exploring your sexuality and things that fat partners can do or can be the focus of that thin partners can't. But that's just my opinion.
> 
> ...



Wow. Dr. P, This was a really powerful response for me. I'm quoting all of it because this post will be on a new page and is worthy of repetition. 

I've understood and been angry about the shame aspects F/FA's sometimes feel, but I never ever thought about guilt. Had you not said this, I would never have understood that and so I thank you for it. It makes me angry that we live in a society where you have to feel guilty for your desire and where bbws/bhms have at times felt confusion, bewilderment, and shame about being the object of that desire...

This post is indeed a good reason to have a separate but openly accessible area for such discussion. I'm sure the mods will keep out the creeps, jerks, and weirdos and so will the participating posters. I don't worry about that. Should this happen, I'm sure the mods will figure it out in a way that works for all. Hopefully we'll all learn something. I already have.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Apr 24, 2008)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> I'm referencing your entire post, but I wanted to save space. I'm not challenging what you're saying, I think it is a good point, but I wonder, do you think those types of disrespectful people would post as rudely if the forum was open for all to view? That's where I thought the idea was heading, that it would be available for all to read, just with restrictions either on who posts or with solid rules about attacks the way they do it on the Weight Board. Or did I misunderstand?
> 
> *and thank you for saying I'm articulate.



Let me answer your question with a question. Is there ever a time when it is acceptable to be rude? I think this is the only area that we disagree on. I was not raised to be rude to anyone, privatley, or in public. Can the "knuckle draggers", as my pal Lilly calls them, still learn from this forum without being rude? I think it may take some time, and some correction, but yes, I think it can be constructive for them as well. I welcome them, only I'm holding a baseball bat in my hands as I do so.........

Lilly, you're right. It's because of my wife's OTHER job that I am on the receiving end of the worst of the worst. We knew that going in, so I only whine about it every now and then. That being said, though, I keep hoping that this new forum doesn't turn into some of the other places that I have to frequent, in order to protect the integrity of Carla's (and others) websites.

*****and Dr. P. I admire (and take the time to read) all of your posts. I have learned much from you about an area that I've known little about. It is appreciated.


----------



## David Bowie (Apr 24, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> Let me answer your question with a question. Is there ever a time when it is acceptable to be rude? I think this is the only area that we disagree on. I was not raised to be rude to anyone, privatley, or in public. Can the "knuckle draggers", as my pal Lilly calls them, still learn from this forum without being rude? I think it may take some time, and some correction, but yes, I think it can be constructive for them as well. I welcome them, only I'm holding a baseball bat in my hands as I do so.........




I agree whole heartedly

just because it's the internet you should still act the same as you would anywhere else.

but hey I guess there are assholes everywhere:doh:


----------



## stan_der_man (Apr 24, 2008)

butch said:


> ...
> I think its impossible to separate a fat fetishist from an FA because there is too much overlap.
> ...



No doubt that any sexual preference has an element of fetish in it. There will certainly be overlap in discussions that are specifically FA focused, but I think saying there is "too much overlap" to separate is a bit of an overstatement in my opinion. Is conversation amongst FAs about which cars to purchase to make their partners comfortable fetish? Is conversation on how to scout out places with comfortable chairs for fat partners fetish? Is conversation on how FAs should learn to be sensitive about body issues of fat partners fetish? I think a lot of these topics have never been discussed in detail (or they have and vanished into the din of other threads...) because there is not a specifically designated place to discuss them.



Dr. P Marshall said:


> ...
> 
> Obviously this thread shows that not all FAs have the same experiences, attitudes and opinions about being an FA.
> ...



One thing I also find interesting... I think a lot of male and female FAs have many things in common too. I can relate to a lot of the posts you've written Dr. M... I recall some of your posts off hand, but I don't remember if they were posted on the Main Board or in the BHM board. Personally I think a FA board that includes males and females would work and could be a very interesting place.


----------



## butch (Apr 24, 2008)

fa_man_stan said:


> No doubt that any sexual preference has an element of fetish in it. There will certainly be overlap in discussions that are specifically FA focused, but I think saying there is "too much overlap" to separate is a bit of an overstatement in my opinion. Is conversation amongst FAs about which cars to purchase to make their partners comfortable fetish? Is conversation on how to scout out places with comfortable chairs for fat partners fetish? Is conversation on how FAs should learn to be sensitive about body issues of fat partners fetish? I think a lot of these topics have never been discussed in detail (or they have and vanished into the din of other threads...) because there is not a specifically designated place to discuss them.
> 
> 
> 
> One thing I also find interesting... I think a lot of male and female FAs have many things in common too. I can relate to a lot of the posts you've written Dr. M... I recall some of your posts off hand, but I don't remember if they were posted on the Main Board or in the BHM board. Personally I think a FA board that includes males and females would work and could be a very interesting place.



Stan, I must not have been clear in my original post-I said there was too much overlap between FA and so-called 'fat fetishists' because we are not agreeing here at Dims as to what 'fetish' really means. To you and I, I'm guessing, a fat fetishist isn't someone interested in the non-sexual aspects of being with a fat partner, and so yes, the examples you give aren't at all about fat fetishism,and yes, no overlap.

But it isn't that easy when we're talking about a board that some want to keep all the 'fetishists' out of. Some of the people who have posted to this board, including myself, are afraid we may be classified as fetishists when before no one dared to label us as such, and so I think it is a very sensitive and important issue to consider if anyone thinks it will be easy to weed out the 'upstanding' FAs from the 'icky feeders.' 

I say this as someone who is in no way a feeder, and it sucks that I have to defend myself by taking the 'anti feeder pledge' because I think fetish is a term not to be thrown around lightly here or at any other sexually-oriented web site.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Apr 24, 2008)

wrestlingguy said:


> Let me answer your question with a question. Is there ever a time when it is acceptable to be rude? I think this is the only area that we disagree on. I was not raised to be rude to anyone, privatley, or in public. Can the "knuckle draggers", as my pal Lilly calls them, still learn from this forum without being rude? I think it may take some time, and some correction, but yes, I think it can be constructive for them as well. I welcome them, only I'm holding a baseball bat in my hands as I do so.........
> 
> Lilly, you're right. It's because of my wife's OTHER job that I am on the receiving end of the worst of the worst. We knew that going in, so I only whine about it every now and then. That being said, though, I keep hoping that this new forum doesn't turn into some of the other places that I have to frequent, in order to protect the integrity of Carla's (and others) websites.
> 
> *****and Dr. P. I admire (and take the time to read) all of your posts. I have learned much from you about an area that I've known little about. It is appreciated.



I agree there's never a time to be rude. But I do think a forum that everyone can read has a better chance of keeping that type of poster in line. At least I hope there would be enough of us who would step up and I'm sure that the moderator would also do a good job of keeping them in line as well.

I had another thought. I know Hyde Park has the sticky about the rules. Would it be possible to do something similar that gave examples of things that would not be tolerated (certain words, outright denigration of women, etc) with the explanation that to break the rules would result in suspension from the FA board? It was just a thought.

To clarify about my use of the term insensitive, I wasn't trying to state is was OK to be rude. I was actually thinking of something like the following example. If an FA had guilt about possible health issues, they may find on the main board that everyone wants to jump in and state that a person can be healthy at any size. And while that may be true, that is not what that particular FA is really talking about. They are talking about how to deal with their own fears and concerns about their partner's health and possible problems or about the guilt they feel because society tells them every day their partner is unhealthy. I think if an FA posted that on the main boards, the actual issue might get over run with a debate on health at any size, not the guilt he or she really wanted to address. That was the sort of thing I meant that could be offensive to some, but not actually rude. I hope I explained that correctly, so I don't seem insensitive now.


----------



## stan_der_man (Apr 24, 2008)

butch said:


> Stan, I must not have been clear in my original post-I said there was too much overlap between FA and so-called 'fat fetishists' because we are not agreeing here at Dims as to what 'fetish' really means. To you and I, I'm guessing, a fat fetishist isn't someone interested in the non-sexual aspects of being with a fat partner, and so yes, the examples you give aren't at all about fat fetishism,and yes, no overlap.
> 
> But it isn't that easy when we're talking about a board that some want to keep all the 'fetishists' out of. Some of the people who have posted to this board, including myself, are afraid we may be classified as fetishists when before no one dared to label us as such, and so I think it is a very sensitive and important issue to consider if anyone thinks it will be easy to weed out the 'upstanding' FAs from the 'icky feeders.'
> 
> I say this as someone who is in no way a feeder, and it sucks that I have to defend myself by taking the 'anti feeder pledge' because I think fetish is a term not to be thrown around lightly here or at any other sexually-oriented web site.



We are probably saying the same thing, but in different ways. I know I may sound like a hypocrite saying this considering my past rants that could be construed as anti-feeder. As I've said in the past, personally I'm not "anti-feeder" by virtue of letting each to his own as long as whatever activity people engage in is mutually agreed upon. I've never taken an "anti-feeder" pledge and I never will. I agree with you (if this is what you are alluding to...) that creating a new FA board shouldn't be regarded as a means of separating the "upstanding FAs" from the "icky feeders", that wouldn't be my motive for something like this if it does in fact transpire. There is a blurred line between "fetish" and "preference", I do see that. Is a person's grandma who always tries to feed her grand children food an "icky feeder"... of course not. Arguably there is a "feeder" in many people, many "average" people in fact. Like anything, there are people in the middle, and people at the extremities. Nobody should have to take an "anti-feeder pledge", it really isn't anybodies business in my opinion. It's the term "icky" where the passing of judgment lies whether one is describing "feeders" or whatever group, and besides, why would anybody need to be "weeded out"? We are in agreement if that is what you are saying Butch.

I think words like "fetish", "pornography", "feeder", etc have become so loaded with negative connotations that they are almost useless as descriptors in many ways, and for all practical purposes are mostly used as words of insult or judgment. But I think this is (or at least should be) unrelated to creating a new board that is focused on not necessarily sexual (fantasy) discussion (practical matters of being a FA, FA activism, etc...)

You are making an important point Butch, if I understand you correctly... I agree with you that this board shouldn't be created as a means of separating the "good FAs" and the "bad FAs". Creating a board with a focus on (perhaps this is a better term...) "non-fantasy" (as in sexual nature) topics doesn't necessarily create this sort of separation, at least it shouldn't. There naturally would be overlap and the topics would stray into discussions of a sexual nature, trying to draw a firm line as to what topics of discussion would be the focus wouldn't be easy, some overlap would and should happen.


----------



## olwen (Apr 24, 2008)

butch said:


> Stan, I must not have been clear in my original post-I said there was too much overlap between FA and so-called 'fat fetishists' because we are not agreeing here at Dims as to what 'fetish' really means. To you and I, I'm guessing, a fat fetishist isn't someone interested in the non-sexual aspects of being with a fat partner, and so yes, the examples you give aren't at all about fat fetishism,and yes, no overlap.
> 
> But it isn't that easy when we're talking about a board that some want to keep all the 'fetishists' out of. Some of the people who have posted to this board, including myself, are afraid we may be classified as fetishists when before no one dared to label us as such, and so I think it is a very sensitive and important issue to consider if anyone thinks it will be easy to weed out the 'upstanding' FAs from the 'icky feeders.'
> 
> I say this as someone who is in no way a feeder, and it sucks that I have to defend myself by taking the 'anti feeder pledge' because I think fetish is a term not to be thrown around lightly here or at any other sexually-oriented web site.



This fetish issue _is_ a serious one. One I've been thinking about it a lot lately too since I've been learning so much about the F/FA point of view already. 

Whatever definitions or preconceived notions we all have or don't have for the term were brought in before we even got to Dims, so whether or not you think no one ever dared to label you a fetishist or me a fetish object - if they could even formulate thoughts of fat sexuality at all - you're wrong. Surely people have thought so, but just didn't want to say so. Some of us may not like the idea of being labeled with the other other F word, but there it is. 

Feeders are still FA's (could I be wrong about that?). I'm sure they still would have questions about the non-sexual aspects of being with a fat partner that don't have to do with gaining/feeding. Why shouldn't they be allowed to join the discussion? There would just have to be a sticky about keeping very specific questions related to feeder sexuality in the weight board.

Having an F/FA board would be a good place to suss out definitions (inclusive or exclusive) that would make sense to us all. Of course this is not a topic that will be decided overnight or even in one thread, and people will get offended, angry, and hurt, and there will be clashes of opinions. After all these feelings run very very deep; even beyond a level of understanding for some. But in the end it's got to be worth it if at the very least it helps us all come closer to understanding our shared sexuality.

So so far we've got an open board mostly for the benefit of F/FA's that would be dedicated to non-sexual issues about dating/being with fat people. Potential topics would involve (in no particular order):

1. Dealing with issues of sexual guilt and shame for F/FA's and bbws/bhms of all sexualities.

2. Dealing with a partner with self-confidence issues and how to be sensitive to that or how to let that not drive you crazy.

3. Whether or not F/FA's are fetishists and whether or not their partners are fetish objects.
3a. Just what is a fetish anyway?
3b. Does the Dims community have an official definition for the term or at the very least a guideline to go by?
3c. How does the word make you feel about yourself and how do you deal with it?
3d. Markers on the fetish spectrum (preference vs. outright fetish) 
3e. The practicality/need for such definitions
3f. This should probably be first but, Just what exactly is a fat admirer really?

4. Practical issues dealing with day to day challenges when dating such as, how to find comfortable seating in public and how to make your lady/guy/other feel special/comfortable without embarrassing them or getting frustrated yourself.

5. Potential definitions of sexual identity within this community: for example trying to answer the question in depth: Just what is fat sexuality anyway? or Where do I fit in the fat sexuality spectrum?

5a. How to behave and what to do when you're new to the whole fat sexuality thing and have no clue where to start.

6. Practical advice from the successfully married F/FA's who have navigated these waters and asked themselves these questions and whose input would be invaluable.


This is a lot of meat to chew on (pun intended). Surely it deserves it's own plate. But to be fair and for clarity here is a list of Practical Objections/potential problems:

1. Whether or not it should be a private or public area.
2. Where to put it
3. Who should participate
4. What to call it
5. How to keep the rude beasties and creepy wank-holes out. 
6. Most of the other boards are already places to discuss these issues. (even tho they aren't in one place)


----------



## butch (Apr 25, 2008)

Stan and Olwen, great posts.

Stan, it does look like we are on the same wavelength-thanks for discussing this with me.

Olwen, I think your break down of topics is spot on, and I'd really want to have those topics here for reference purposes, no doubt.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 25, 2008)

Maybe we could just go with the stock definition in the DSM? I don't agree with it but it's how it would be decided both medically and probably legally if it came to that.

BehaveNet® Clinical Capsule:
DSM-IV & DSM-IV-TR:
Fetishism

This paraphilia is characterized by sexual fantasies, urges, or behaviors involving use of non-human objects to produce or enhance sexual arousal with or in the absence of a partner.
Diagnostic criteria for 302.81 Fetishism 
(cautionary statement) 

A. Over a period of at least 6 months, recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving the use of nonliving objects (e.g., female undergarments). 

B. The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. 

C. The fetish objects are not limited to articles of female clothing used in cross-dressing (as in Transvestic Fetishism) or devices designed for the purpose of tactile genital stimulation (e.g., a vibrator).

Reprinted with permission from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision. Copyright 2000 American Psychiatric Association


----------



## James (Apr 25, 2008)

fa_man_stan said:


> As I've said in the past, personally I'm not "anti-feeder" by virtue of letting each to his own as long as whatever activity people engage in is mutually agreed upon. I've never taken an "anti-feeder" pledge and I never will. I agree with you (if this is what you are alluding to...) that creating a new FA board shouldn't be regarded as a means of separating the "upstanding FAs" from the "icky feeders", that wouldn't be my motive for something like this if it does in fact transpire.


 
I agree totally. Like you Stan, I've probably made some posts in the past (largely borne out of frustration at a total lack of understanding for certain aspects and outcomes, physical and psychological, of feederism) where I've come off as anti-feeder. Like you though, I'm not anti-feeder and I certainly dont endorse any NAAFA-esque separation of feederism from the overall realm of fat acceptance. 

The little ideological war that seems to perpetually rage between fat-acceptance and feederism limits the progress of our common goals to normalise fat sexuality and fat rights. I think an FA forum could help work through a lot of the underlying issues and perceptions involved. So yeah, feeders should definitely be involved in such a forum, they might even gain the most (no pun intended) from it...


----------



## olwen (Apr 25, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Maybe we could just go with the stock definition in the DSM? I don't agree with it but it's how it would be decided both medically and probably legally if it came to that.
> 
> BehaveNet® Clinical Capsule:
> DSM-IV & DSM-IV-TR:
> ...



I had been wondering what the DSM-IV said about this. I was actually going to go to the bookstore to look. Of course it would be on the internet - :doh:

I don't agree with this definition either. It seems vague - probably purposefully vague. Perhaps we could emphasize that this only applies if what you like sexually severely impairs one's ability to function in daily life and/or involves a non-consenting party. Wikipedia's definition is more comprehensive.

...This is tough.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 25, 2008)

olwen said:


> I had been wondering what the DSM-IV said about this. I was actually going to go to the bookstore to look. Of course it would be on the internet - :doh:
> 
> I don't agree with this definition either. It seems vague - probably purposefully vague. Perhaps we could emphasize that this only applies if what you like sexually severely impairs one's ability to function in daily life and/or involves a non-consenting party. Wikipedia's definition is more comprehensive.
> 
> ...This is tough.



Yes, I agree Olwen; very challenging. I am more than clear that fetishism runs a broad spectrum from benign to toxic and even pathological deviation. Frankly, those that most objectify and debase their partners are not people I seek to keep company with. I know I should be willing to evaluate people as individuals, the same way I'm asking to be evaluated as an FA. Unfortunately it seems the "dark" fetishists are never (seldom?) open to scrutiny. That's my issue, transparency, and I think I'm just going to resolve it as best I know how on my own. I hope it'll be clearer for me if/when the FA board is started?


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Apr 25, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Yes, I agree Olwen; very challenging. I am more than clear that fetishism runs a broad spectrum from benign to toxic and even pathological deviation. Frankly, those that most objectify and debase their partners are not people I seek to keep company with. I know I should be willing to evaluate people as individuals, the same way I'm asking to be evaluated as an FA. Unfortunately it seems the "dark" fetishists are never (seldom?) open to scrutiny. That's my issue, transparency, and I think I'm just going to resolve it as best I know how on my own. I hope it'll be clearer for me if/when the FA board is started?



I understand what you're saying Ernest, I do, and I understand what you're afraid of. The thing is, I think that if the topics on an FA board are going to be the sort of serious discussions of a more emotional/relationship nature that everyone in this thread seems to imagine will take place, that someone who only wants to discuss hard core fetishism probably won't even be interested in the board. They would see what the topics are and they would probably move on to the weight board. And if someone did post a reply in a thread that was way off base, I imagine the moderator would take care of it. I'm also guessing that if some people tried to start threads that belonged on the weight board, they would just get moved to the weight board. This sort of thing happens on the BHM board all the time. We have a lot of gainers on that board and some of them only want to post about gaining. Those threads get moved to the weight board and often, over time, we even end up "losing" a lot of those gainer/BHM to the weight board entirely since that is a place that better reflects their interests and they figure that out once they see that the threads keep getting moved to that board.

But it is also possible that someone who has only posted on the weight board might find some of the topics on an FA board to be things they want to discuss too. Maybe they just never felt comfortable out on the main boards at all, for example. They may be individuals who are capable of discussing being an FA or even a fetishist in a thoughtful way, they may even have guilt issues or things about relationships that they want to discuss. Just because they are a fetishist, doesn't mean they aren't capable of having a thoughtful and meaningful discussion if the opportunity arises. Some won't but some will and I think the board will separate them out just by the nature of the topics discussed. There are going to be fetishists who want to discuss emotional and relationship issues too because most fetishists have emotions and many have relationships.


----------



## olwen (Apr 25, 2008)

Exactly Dr. P. I'll even take this a step further and say that I'm sure a great many Dimmers (posters and lurkers alike) will have a vested interest in the topic. Some will decide that there's nothing to think about and not give it another thought, but some will wonder and if they see that other F/FA's have posted something that resonates with them they will post something that contributes to the discussion. I'm sure that the topics that have come up in this thread are all things that some F/FA somewhere on Dimms or on the interweb has thought about. How can the fetish issue _not _be something an F/FA has thought about even if only in passing?

To see that there are other people who are going thinking about things that you have been thinking about and putting those thoughts out there WILL help.

ETA: I was just thinking that the weight board seems like a good place for it to go. It could just be another sub section of it. Like maybe all the thoughtful threads could be separated from all the ones about random clothing/body part/what-do-you-like/show-us-your-blank type minutiae. Things would have to be renamed maybe, I don't know.


----------



## olwen (Apr 26, 2008)

This came to me in a dream and jolted me out of my sleep at the crack of dawn. I mean seriously, it's 6 o'clock in the damn morning. I NEVER get up this early unless I have to catch a plane.

Anyway, it should be called the *FA/FFA Handbook* I think calling it that will be a very good way to keep the area on topic and it probably belongs on the weight board, but no matter where it is people will be drawn to it. This is what we've all been going on about. Not only would it be a place to engender camaraderie between FAs ad FFAs it would be a place where BBWs and BHMs can go to learn about what makes F/FAs tick, and BBW/BHM can ask F/FAs any questions we might have that only you can answer. 

The FA/FFA handbook could cover all the topics we've already mentioned plus who knows all what else as it grows. I see it as kind of a store house of all the information all of you have gathered over the years by painful trial and error. Why not pass all that knowledge and wisdom down to all?

And now I'm wide fracking awake. Yeesh.


----------



## wrestlingguy (Apr 26, 2008)

olwen said:


> This came to me in a dream and jolted me out of my sleep at the crack of dawn. I mean seriously, it's 6 o'clock in the damn morning. I NEVER get up this early unless I have to catch a plane.
> 
> Anyway, it should be called the *FA/FFA Handbook* I think calling it that will be a very good way to keep the area on topic and it probably belongs on the weight board, but no matter where it is people will be drawn to it. This is what we've all been going on about. Not only would it be a place to engender camaraderie between FAs ad FFAs it would be a place where BBWs and BHMs can go to learn about what makes F/FAs tick, and BBW/BHM can ask F/FAs any questions we might have that only you can answer.
> 
> ...



Excellent dream, though.....I kinda like the way this sounds. If this thread is any indication of the type of discussion all of us can expect, then I say I am in as well.

I've BEEN awake, but Olwen's post was worth being up to read.


----------



## Observer (Apr 26, 2008)

5:00 on a Saturday is a tad soon even for this early riser, but the suggested title, FA/FAA Handbook, definitely captures the sense of what I'm hoping we might see. 

However, placing it as a sub-forum of the Weight Board is not something I'd favor. Why? It associates the Handbook Forum with weight gain and other weight related "special interests" (note the politically correct parsing to avoid the fetish controversy). While there is certainly some overlap I would hope to attract a more broadly-based audience.

I see the proposed Handbook as a resource on a par with the Clothing, Food, and Health forums. I realize that in making tis association I may be getting ahead of the game - it implies that the issues of whether this should be a public forum and open to both genders haven't been officially resolved, which they haven't.

Is it the consensus that the Handbook should be both pubic and open to both genders? And is there a need for there to be any screening criteria at all? As to the last point private PMs have argued that we really don't need it with good guidelines and dedicated mods.


----------



## olwen (Apr 26, 2008)

Observer said:


> 5:00 on a Saturday is a tad soon even for this early riser, but the suggested title, FA/FAA Handbook, definitely captures the sense of what I'm hoping we might see.
> 
> However, placing it as a sub-forum of the Weight Board is not something I'd favor. Why? It associates the Handbook Forum with weight gain and other weight related "special interests" (note the politically correct parsing to avoid the fetish controversy). While there is certainly some overlap I would hope to attract a more broadly-based audience.  it _would _have a better potential for growth that way.
> 
> ...



I for one would benefit greatly from an F/FA handbook. Knowing that POV would go really far in helping me figure out my own sexuality and related body/confidence issues in a positive way. I would hope that it would help others.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 26, 2008)

olwen said:


> I for one would benefit greatly from an F/FA handbook. Knowing that POV would go really far in helping me figure out my own sexuality and related body/confidence issues in a positive way. I would hope that it would help others.



Olwen, when you say "FA _hand_book" you should include the postscript <NPI> (No Pun Intended) or your post may be moved to the paysite board. FA's here are all assumed to be wankers until proven definitively otherwise. I know you're a girl but they can get snarked for ignoring the reproachable male predispositions as well. At Dims men are Pigs or Cabana Boys; no in between! 

I'm kidding, of course. There are probably some very general guidelines that may be discovered when/if the F/FA board opens? Collectively though we exist in such a multi-dimensional continuum there may be very few things that can be said accurately about even a handful of us? It seems about as reasonable that one could have a Black Person's Handbook, Gay Handbook or BBW Handbook? 

Being an FA makes one thing true about _me_: Given a choice between two equally desirable partners I would tend to choose the larger. In 51 years and more relationships and opportunities than I'll admit the situation of "two equally desirable partners" has NEVER even come close to happening. FA is a preference, imo. It's not a lifestyle, sexual aberration, philosophy or political statement. There is no FA POV. It's all hugely <NPI> subjective.

It reminds me a little of what Will Rogers once said - "I don't belong to any organized political party; I'm a Democrat" Well, I don't belong to any unusual sexual orientation or fetish; I'm an FA. I can enjoy a good squashing, buying a sumptuous meal for my partner, being dommed a bit now and then if my partner enjoys those things too, but they are neither expectations nor necessities. Sorry, just a wee rant.

PS Love your posts, Olwen. Thanks for playing here!


----------



## olwen (Apr 26, 2008)

Ernest, how many FA's really do believe what you do about being an FA or who have the benefit of experience to undertand that belief? No, not all FA's are the same, but there is something about being fat and loving fat that we all share.... 

I have to wonder if there really isn't an FA POV when I'm asked every time I date someone - it happens every fucking time - the question comes up of "Why are you still single?" I know this question could be applied to a thin woman as well, but my feeling is well, hey guy, if you like big girls and you've been with big girls before why can't you as an FA understand the answer to this question. Why can't you know why the answer ought to be obvious? What is it that you don't understand? I wonder about the FA POV when I see how all my fat female friends save one have never been in a relationship and it's not for lack of trying and it's not because they are bad people. They're wonderful people but still...they get asked the same effing question.

I think about all the potential mates I've talked to who seem to have some sort of disconnect when it comes to relating to me as a BBW. I don't know if that disconnect is because of gender differences or class differences or racial differences, or if it's something about fat that they understand that I don't, but I know it's there and the only thing all those guys have in common is that they like fat. That is an accurate fact. And it's as good a place as any to be a jumping board for discussion of shared experiences and anxieties. 

If I understood better where FA's are coming from maybe I would understand why they feel the need to ask that question.


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (Apr 26, 2008)

olwen said:


> Ernest, how many FA's really do believe what you do about being an FA or who have the benefit of experience to undertand that belief? No, not all FA's are the same, but there is something about being fat and loving fat that we all share....
> 
> I have to wonder if there really isn't an FA POV when I'm asked every time I date someone - it happens every fucking time - the question comes up of "Why are you still single?" I know this question could be applied to a thin woman as well, but my feeling is well, hey guy, if you like big girls and you've been with big girls before why can't you as an FA understand the answer to this question. Why can't you know why the answer ought to be obvious? What is it that you don't understand? I wonder about the FA POV when I see how all my fat female friends save one have never been in a relationship and it's not for lack of trying and it's not because they are bad people. They're wonderful people but still...they get asked the same effing question.
> 
> ...



I think sometimes we're just completely oblivious. I know for me personally when I am with a bigger girl I'll have the tendency to ask questions like these. Possibly because I am stupid but I like to think it's because if I am with a girl who I am attracted to and well, she'll most likely be bigger but I don't actually see her as that sometimes and I know I should be more conscience of it as to avoid what you just said, but well, when you're an FA and you've got this preference you stop separating between fat and thin and you just see a woman and you're thinking, damn, you're really good looking and smart and funny and blah blah blah and how on earth has no one snatched you up by now?

Not sure if I made any sense of that.


----------



## olwen (Apr 26, 2008)

It makes perfect sense BGB. This is the kind of stuff I need to know about. Now that I know this, next time I'm asked this question I'll know how to answer it without getting hella pissed, snarky or sarcastic especially when asked this by someone over 30 years old. Thanks.

ETA: You know it's interesting. I know this is going to sound weird but I just realized this. 

I never thought that an FA would see a BBW as just a regular person. All my life I've been told so often by so many various groups how different I am from thin people that somewhere along the way I've stopped seeing myself as the kind of person that a thin person would relate to in the same way a thin person relates to other thin people. You know what I mean? It's very strange.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (Apr 26, 2008)

olwen said:


> Ernest, how many FA's really do believe what you do about being an FA or who have the benefit of experience to undertand that belief? No, not all FA's are the same, but there is something about being fat and loving fat that we all share....
> 
> I have to wonder if there really isn't an FA POV when I'm asked every time I date someone - it happens every fucking time - the question comes up of "Why are you still single?" I know this question could be applied to a thin woman as well, but my feeling is well, hey guy, if you like big girls and you've been with big girls before why can't you as an FA understand the answer to this question. Why can't you know why the answer ought to be obvious? What is it that you don't understand? I wonder about the FA POV when I see how all my fat female friends save one have never been in a relationship and it's not for lack of trying and it's not because they are bad people. They're wonderful people but still...they get asked the same effing question.
> 
> ...





BothGunsBlazing said:


> I think sometimes we're just completely oblivious. I know for me personally when I am with a bigger girl I'll have the tendency to ask questions like these. Possibly because I am stupid but I like to think it's because if I am with a girl who I am attracted to and well, she'll most likely be bigger but I don't actually see her as that sometimes and I know I should be more conscience of it as to avoid what you just said, but well, when you're an FA and you've got this preference you stop separating between fat and thin and you just see a woman and you're thinking, damn, you're really good looking and smart and funny and blah blah blah and how on earth has no one snatched you up by now?
> 
> Not sure if I made any sense of that.





olwen said:


> It makes perfect sense BGB. This is the kind of stuff I need to know about. Now that I know this, next time I'm asked this question I'll know how to answer it without getting hella pissed, snarky or sarcastic especially when asked this by someone over 30 years old. Thanks.



Yeah, Olwen, I've stepped on that landmine a few times. Maybe not that blatantly but it's gonna be a background question for anyone meeting someone they find comprehensively attractive who's never been in an LTR after a certain age. What is she hiding? Size has NOTHING to do with it. Seriously. Poll some desirable 30+ single skinny friends. Guys are really that clueless. ALL guys! Far from just FA's. 

The alternative is almost worse, btw. If she's NOT hiding anything it means she's probably not one to settle for less than she wants. Past a certain age most men find themselves considering apparently lovely women who are either A) hiding something or B) out of their league. Yup, life is just a big, 'ol manure fertilized bed 'o' roses for all parties involved.

For me I am attracted to women who are not just physically big but intellectually and emotionally well above average, too. The question I'm more likely to ask women like that is "Do you know how intimidating most men find you?" If she can answer "Yes" without missing a beat I'm _very_ encouraged. Just curious; what's your reflexive response to that question? Be honest, please.


----------



## olwen (Apr 26, 2008)

My reflexive response at first was always a few beasts of silence then an explosive "WHAT DO YOU _MEAN _*WHY*?? Hello, I'm fat." Followed by a rolling of the eyes and or an exasperated breath. The last two times I was asked that question I got annoyed as usual but managed not to explode and said rather calmly, "I don't know dude, I've been trying to figure that out."


----------



## LillyBBBW (Apr 26, 2008)

I'm always flumoxed when somebody asks me that question. Once I responded with, "It might have something to do with my weight?" There was this awkward stutter silence, I think I really embarassed him. I don't know what to say when somebody says that. "Just haven't found the right guy," doesn't put the subject to rest very well either.


----------



## Tina (Apr 26, 2008)

Ernest Nagel said:


> BehaveNet® Clinical Capsule&#8482;:
> DSM-IV & DSM-IV-TR:
> Fetishism
> 
> ...


That's all I need to see, and is what I've known to be the true definition, which is why I've never liked the term fat-fetish. I am no one's fetsh. I'm a living, breathing woman and not a 'thing.' "Paraphilia" would also be a misnomer.

What the heck ever happened to "preference"?


----------



## stan_der_man (Apr 26, 2008)

olwen said:


> ...
> Anyway, it should be called the *FA/FFA Handbook* I think calling it that will be a very good way to keep the area on topic
> ...



Great idea! The name "FA/FFA Handbook" is fitting, maybe with the idea of questions, discussions and FAQs relating to FAs and FFAs added somewhere into the topic guidelines. I like the idea of a non-judgmental place where the old timers and the noob FA / FFAs can get together and discuss things.

This is just a silly matter of semantics... but why do we have to distinguish "FA" (presumably male FAs) and "FFA" (female FAs). If this is for all FAs, isn't just the term "FA" all that is needed? This would be a cross-gender board for "fat admirers" (FAs), I would think that term alone is adequate and encompasing of both genders. To be more clear, maybe we should start saying "MFAs" (male FAs) and "FFAs" (female FAs)? A small point I know, but I have always found these terms somewhat confusing because the term "FA" gets interchangably used for males and for all fat admirers.




Tina said:


> ...
> What the heck ever happened to "preference"?



I completely agree Tina. Sometimes things get analyzed to a point where the humanity of it all gets completely lost.


----------



## Observer (Apr 27, 2008)

Call me just being politically correct if you wish, but using the term FFA as well as FA just seems more inclusive. 

We've come a long way in the Dimensions Weight Related Stories Library from the days when one authoress timidly posted wondering if articles by women would even be welcome. Now we even have a separate BHM archive with largely female authors. I'm happy about that.

Notice that I carefully parsed Weight Related, not Weight Gain or Weight Fetish. Selection of words conveys specific meanings to some, and we have art, essays, and even stories where weight gain per se is not even present. Although the male gender (mankind for instance) is commonly used to include the female, utilizing acronyms which include both I think extends a certain additional welcome mat.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Apr 27, 2008)

Tina said:


> Okay then, the only ones left out would be regular BBW women.
> 
> We have the SSBBW forum, but there are women who would have liked to have participated in a women-only forum but who aren't fat enough. So, I think it's important that there be fairness all around, and the FA board was originally brought up as a BHM board. Just seems that (as I wrote in an earlier post here but deleted it) the purpose, and who could post there, would need to be well defined. Would the FA board also encompass FFAs? What about BHMs who would like to discuss their issues in private? And so then it begs the question: what about the women who would like to discuss female-type things around other females, but who don't qualify for the SSBBW forum?




Thank You :bow:


----------



## Jack Skellington (Apr 27, 2008)

Tina said:


> And so then it begs the question: what about the women who would like to discuss female-type things around other females, but who don't qualify for the SSBBW forum?



That's a very good point. Maybe private female and male health forums to include people of all sizes would be better? Otherwise there are probably going to be just too many sub forums.


----------



## stan_der_man (Apr 27, 2008)

Observer said:


> Call me just being politically correct if you wish, but using the term FFA as well as FA just seems more inclusive.
> ...


Perfectly reasonable, that makes sense. Just curious mostly...


----------



## mossystate (Apr 27, 2008)

Health issues are not the only thing women might need to talk about,and have a safe haven. Some of it has to do with just being a fat woman on this planet ( relationships with family/friends/lovers..etc ) the same as some of the fat admirers are talking about.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Apr 27, 2008)

Observer said:


> However, placing it as a sub-forum of the Weight Board is not something I'd favor. Why? It associates the Handbook Forum with weight gain and other weight related "special interests" (note the politically correct parsing to avoid the fetish controversy). While there is certainly some overlap I would hope to attract a more broadly-based audience.



The other problem with putting it as a sub forum of the Weight Board, in my opinion, is that it makes it harder to find. And since many of the people who would benefit from it would be theoretically new or newer to the boards, they may not be familiar with the Weight Board or even think to look there. For example, it took me several months as an FFA here at Dims to venture beyond the BHM board. That also is another good argument for putting FFA as well as FA in the title (assuming the decision is both genders), many FFAs would look twice at a heading with the extra F in the title. I know it seems silly, but I think it's true. Especially if you're newer and not sure where you fit in yet.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Apr 27, 2008)

Sorry for the double post, but I just saw these posts.



BothGunsBlazing said:


> ...when you're an FA and you've got this preference you stop separating between fat and thin and you just see a woman and you're thinking, damn, you're really good looking and smart and funny and blah blah blah and how on earth has no one snatched you up by now?



That's it exactly BGB. When you're confronted with someone who is everything you've ever dreamed of in a partner, that tends to be the primary thoughts in your mind, how you see them, not how non fat admirers see them. In that way, I think we're like anyone else who meets a man or woman of their dreams.




olwen said:


> ETA: You know it's interesting. I know this is going to sound weird but I just realized this.
> 
> I never thought that an FA would see a BBW as just a regular person. All my life I've been told so often by so many various groups how different I am from thin people that somewhere along the way I've stopped seeing myself as the kind of person that a thin person would relate to in the same way a thin person relates to other thin people. You know what I mean? It's very strange.




I find it really eye opening to see you say this. This also relates to what I said about BGB's post. We just see a person we find really attractive in all ways. And I think we automatically assume there are other people who would feel as strongly about such a BBW or BHM. When I first came to Dims I was amazed to read on the BHM board about how many of the men there felt shy and didn't want to approach girls they liked. It had never occurred to me that some of the BHM I had found attractive in the past might be that way. I just assumed they weren't interested in me.(I'm sure many weren't but still, you see my point.) I think because I think so highly of BHM, I have a tendency to assume everyone else does as well, even though I know intellectually and from things I read here that that is not their experience. Still, in my head, because of how I view them, I always assume they can have any girl they want. I know that may sound strange, but I think that is just automatic when you are talking about people you find attractive. 

*Sorry to be off topic, but I thought this was an interesting point and it illustrates some of the things we can learn from each other.


----------



## saucywench (Apr 27, 2008)

olwen said:


> ...it should be called the *FA/FFA Handbook* I think calling it that will be a very good way to keep the area on topic...no matter where it is people will be drawn to it. This is what we've all been going on about. Not only would it be a place to engender camaraderie between FAs ad FFAs it would be a place where BBWs and BHMs can go to learn about what makes F/FAs tick, and BBW/BHM can ask F/FAs any questions we might have that only you can answer.
> 
> The FA/FFA handbook could cover all the topics we've already mentioned plus who knows all what else as it grows. I see it as kind of a store house of all the information all of you have gathered over the years by painful trial and error. Why not pass all that knowledge and wisdom down to all?


 


olwen said:


> I for one would benefit greatly from an F/FA handbook. Knowing that POV would go really far in helping me figure out my own sexuality and related body/confidence issues in a positive way. I would hope that it would help others.


Until now I had not chimed in on this thread because I was reading all of the input and waiting to see where it was going. 

I love your idea, olwen. I was thinking a couple of days ago along these same lines, but as a sort of FAQ. Your idea encompasses that but so much more.


BothGunsBlazing said:


> ...when you're an FA and you've got this preference you stop separating between fat and thin and you just see a woman and you're thinking, damn, you're really good looking and smart and funny and blah blah blah and how on earth has no one snatched you up by now?


You illustrate a very good point, Justin. I can only speak for myself, but it seems apparent, just by the few who have responded, that many of us fat folk have, over time, and precisely _because_ we are fat (and have had that point driven in over and over by others that we are different [and read into that whatever negative connotations that engenders]) developed a certain disconnect or warped sense of our attractiveness to others. 



olwen said:


> ETA: You know it's interesting. I know this is going to sound weird but I just realized this.
> 
> I never thought that an FA would see a BBW as just a regular person. All my life I've been told so often by so many various groups how different I am from thin people that somewhere along the way I've stopped seeing myself as the kind of person that a thin person would relate to in the same way a thin person relates to other thin people. You know what I mean? It's very strange.


Yes. I know exactly what you mean. Yes, it is very strange.

It isn't because I'm fat that I remain unmarried. It's because I look for very specific things in a life partner. What makes me different in that sense is not my fatness but, rather, the specificity of that which I seek. Few people--fat, thin, or otherwise--seem to want or be concerned with the same things that I do in this regard. I have the patience to wait to find this whereas most people might go ahead and marry someone with whom they feel a reasonable connection with.

Although I have been in long-term, live-in relationships (one lasting 3 years, one lasting 10), neither of those men were FAs. However, they did love me for me. Having been a part of this community for close to 10 years now, though, I recognize that having an FA for a partner is an additional thing that I seek. Although the men in my life were wonderful in many ways, well...my fatness is a fundamental part of who I am. In not incorporating my fatness as an aspect in a relationship, a large part of who I am is not being addressed. I know that now, in hindsight, and I am determined that it not happen again. However, because I have never had an FA as an intimate partner, there remains a great deal of mystery to it all, and this is very frustrating from my point of view. I know that there is a certain magic, if you will, to be found within such a relationship, but until I realize it myself, it will only exist in abstract form. It is this reason that an FA handbook of sorts would be beneficial to someone like me.



Dr. P Marshall said:


> That's it exactly BGB. When you're confronted with someone who is everything you've ever dreamed of in a partner, that tends to be the primary thoughts in your mind, how you see them, not how non fat admirers see them. In that way, I think we're like anyone else who meets a man or woman of their dreams.
> 
> I find it really eye opening to see you say this. This also relates to what I said about BGB's post. We just see a person we find really attractive in all ways. And I think we automatically assume there are other people who would feel as strongly about such a BBW or BHM. When I first came to Dims I was amazed to read on the BHM board about how many of the men there felt shy and didn't want to approach girls they liked. It had never occurred to me that some of the BHM I had found attractive in the past might be that way. I just assumed they weren't interested in me.(I'm sure many weren't but still, you see my point.) I think because I think so highly of BHM, I have a tendency to assume everyone else does as well, even though I know intellectually and from things I read here that that is not their experience. Still, in my head, because of how I view them, I always assume they can have any girl they want. I know that may sound strange, but I think that is just automatic when you are talking about people you find attractive.
> 
> *Sorry to be off topic, but I thought this was an interesting point and it illustrates some of the things we can learn from each other.


I don't think your comments are off topic at all; on the contrary, I think they are most representative of why Dimensions exists and what it stands for. It may be just that, as Dimensions (these forums in particular) has grown, it has at times taken tangential turns from the main focus. Perhaps a newly created forum to discuss such issues would steer us back to the heart of what it's all (OK, mostly ) about.


----------



## olwen (Apr 27, 2008)

Tina said:


> That's all I need to see, and is what I've known to be the true definition, which is why I've never liked the term fat-fetish. I am no one's fetsh. I'm a living, breathing woman and not a 'thing.' "Paraphilia" would also be a misnomer.
> 
> What the heck ever happened to "preference"?



I don't like the idea of being somebody's fetish either, but that's how I've always thought of myself. I just accepted it as sexual law. It wasn't until coming here that I've started to think about the difference between fetish and preference. But, I don't think either of those words quite fits either....Personally, I'd hate for this to be ambiguous especially since this determines how I think of myself sexually. Ultimately it's up to each individual to determine which fits best for their individual situation...



fa_man_stan said:


> ...This is just a silly matter of semantics... but why do we have to distinguish "FA" (presumably male FAs) and "FFA" (female FAs). If this is for all FAs, isn't just the term "FA" all that is needed? This would be a cross-gender board for "fat admirers" (FAs), I would think that term alone is adequate and encompasing of both genders. To be more clear, maybe we should start saying "MFAs" (male FAs) and "FFAs" (female FAs)? A small point I know, but I have always found these terms somewhat confusing because the term "FA" gets interchangably used for males and for all fat admirers....





Observer said:


> Call me just being politically correct if you wish, but using the term FFA as well as FA just seems more inclusive.
> 
> We've come a long way in the Dimensions Weight Related Stories Library from the days when one authoress timidly posted wondering if articles by women would even be welcome. Now we even have a separate BHM archive with largely female authors. I'm happy about that.
> 
> Notice that I carefully parsed Weight Related, not Weight Gain or Weight Fetish. Selection of words conveys specific meanings to some, and we have art, essays, and even stories where weight gain per se is not even present. Although the male gender (mankind for instance) is commonly used to include the female, utilizing acronyms which include both I think extends a certain additional welcome mat.



I've never ever thought about female fat admirers till I came to Dimensions. Seriously, if only because it seemed less of a big deal for women to be attracted to big men, but now I know better. 

The default when talking about sexuality is always male because the male point of view always takes precedence over the female pov in every day society. It just does. A lot of money is spent catering to it in all it's various forms. Women (in everyday society) just don't get the same consideration. When we talk about female sexuality we have to say "female sexuality." 

The term FA tho accurate doesn't automatically include women for that reason and as Dr. P stated, if you're new and a woman you wouldn't know that the term FA included you as well. So I agree with Observer. Using both terms is indeed more inclusive.



Dr. P Marshall said:


> The other problem with putting it as a sub forum of the Weight Board, in my opinion, is that it makes it harder to find. And since many of the people who would benefit from it would be theoretically new or newer to the boards, they may not be familiar with the Weight Board or even think to look there. For example, it took me several months as an FFA here at Dims to venture beyond the BHM board. That also is another good argument for putting FFA as well as FA in the title (assuming the decision is both genders), many FFAs would look twice at a heading with the extra F in the title. I know it seems silly, but I think it's true. Especially if you're newer and not sure where you fit in yet.



Good point. I just figured that since we were all talking about sexuality that it should go there, but having it be a separate board - if it happens - is better. (I think there was another post that echoed this sentiment earlier, and I'd quote it but it's not in front of me right now so I can't remember who said it.)



Dr. P Marshall said:


> ...That's it exactly BGB. When you're confronted with someone who is everything you've ever dreamed of in a partner, that tends to be the primary thoughts in your mind, how you see them, not how non fat admirers see them. In that way, I think we're like anyone else who meets a man or woman of their dreams.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm glad you made this post because seeing it from the female point of view makes me see the humanity in all of this. I guess this IS a universal experience, not just a fat thing. It doesn't sound strange at all.


----------



## Tina (Apr 28, 2008)

Hi Olwen. 

I guess "preference" works for me because a preference could be for any thing or any one: "I prefer skinny guys," or "I prefer fat girls." Oh, okay. Just a regular, normal kinda thang, rather than being 'special.' I don't need or want to be special when it comes to that. The sooner a preference for fatter people is normalized like the preference for thinner people is, the better, IMO. I don't like the special category, because, in my mind, it's still set apart and in some ways, "other."


----------



## olwen (Apr 28, 2008)

Other posters in this thread have said they like that word better but your explanation Tina, your explanation makes sense to me. I like that, especially the politicized aspect of it. I'm gonna go with "preference" from now on. Maybe if we didn't use or misuse the word "fetish" at all. Instead we could just say "kinks" when referring to "uncommon" sexual practices - whatever they are. It's all relative anyway.


----------



## William (Apr 28, 2008)

I vote for 

"The flavor we savor"

William 




olwen said:


> Other posters in this thread have said they like that word better but your explanation Tina, your explanation makes sense to me. I like that, especially the politicized aspect of it. I'm gonna go with "preference" from now on. Maybe if we didn't use or misuse the word "fetish" at all. Instead we could just say "kinks" when referring to "uncommon" sexual practices - whatever they are. It's all relative anyway.


----------



## Duniwin (May 5, 2008)

Ok, I've just finished reading all the posts in this thread, and I want to say that I agree with everything olwen, fa_man_stan, Dr. P, edx, and everyone else just said in the last few pages (yes, even the contradictory viewpoints). I also realized that as the pages went on, fewer and fewer off-topic and inflammatory posts showed up. It seems the key to stop the "knuckle draggers" from posting is to carry on a conversation so long they lose interest and wonder off, or become enlightened enough to participate meaningfully.

As an FA myself and someone new to Dimensions, I've been kind of shy about posting and have been looking for a "FA handbook" board of sorts to read and post in. I was looking for a place to explain my preference for fat women and how it plays into my life, a place to listen to others describe qualms and challenges, and just relationship advice in general.

One thing in particular that I think should be discussed in the FA handbook is the subject of guilt as Dr. P mentioned. What she said really struck home with me, and made me realize that I had this guilt bottled up inside me.
I guess you could say that I feel guilty about the asymmetry of the relationship between BBWs and thin male FAs, although the same could be true of BHMs and thin female FAs. 
The guilt stems from the fact that I find BBWs attractive, but I know that I am not built the way they are. While I can choose to not reveal my preference for them, they cannot choose to hide the fact that they are large. I feel guilty that they may be ostracized or inconvenienced on a daily basis, but I am not.
I know it's not my fault that am not visually identifiable as an FA. Sometimes I wish I were. Then I wouldn't have to struggle with "coming out" to people, and I wouldn't feel guilty about having the choice to be know as an FA or not, while the larger members of this community do not have a choice when it comes to the first impressions they present.

Anyway, it is getting wicked late, but I just couldn't get to sleep without putting pen to paper, so to speak. I hope this doesn't look like nonsense when I look at it in the morning.


----------



## LillyBBBW (May 5, 2008)

Duniwin said:


> Ok, I've just finished reading all the posts in this thread, and I want to say that I agree with everything olwen, fa_man_stan, Dr. P, edx, and everyone else just said in the last few pages (yes, even the contradictory viewpoints). I also realized that as the pages went on, fewer and fewer off-topic and inflammatory posts showed up. *It seems the key to stop the "knuckle draggers" from posting is to carry on a conversation so long they lose interest and wonder off, or become enlightened enough to participate meaningfully.*
> As an FA myself and someone new to Dimensions, I've been kind of shy about posting and have been looking for a "FA handbook" board of sorts to read and post in. I was looking for a place to explain my preference for fat women and how it plays into my life, a place to listen to others describe qualms and challenges, and just relationship advice in general.
> 
> One thing in particular that I think should be discussed in the FA handbook is the subject of guilt as Dr. P mentioned. What she said really struck home with me, and made me realize that I had this guilt bottled up inside me.
> ...



OR start a brawl someplace else as a diversion and they all bum rush to that thread to watch the show.  I'm glad to see that "knuckle draggers" is still being batted around. 

I'll date anyone I truly like and who likes me in return. I've dated some men who were physically smaller than I am in both height and stature and freely admit that at times I felt self concous about it in public when we were out. I always felt that people were looking at us or that the stark contrast would make me look like a float being pulled along in the Rose Bowl parade next to him. I notice I feel a bit more at ease when the guy I'm dating is really tall or large in some way though I liked both of them just the same. I've heard other BBW's mention the same feeling that causes them to lean more towards dating bigger guys than someone whom they deem too small. It seems to draw more attention to their size, something that they are self concious about anyway without a contrast making it more apparent. It seems to be something we all have to stare down at one point or another.


----------



## olwen (May 5, 2008)

Great post Duniwin. I would like to know what other FA's would like to have in an FA Handbook too.


----------



## BothGunsBlazing (May 5, 2008)

olwen said:


> Great post Duniwin. I would like to know what other FA's would like to have in an FA Handbook too.



You can buy a copy if you'd like. It's all in there.


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (May 5, 2008)

OMFGJFXARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.....GAWD SOMEBODY PLEASE REP HIM FOR "He'll Get You Laid" FOR ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :doh:











Come to think of it......*I* need to read that book........


----------



## olwen (May 5, 2008)

BGB that's awesome. For $14.95 I'll buy it.


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (May 5, 2008)

Green Eyed Fairy said:


> OMFGJFXARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.....GAWD SOMEBODY PLEASE REP HIM FOR "He'll Get You Laid" FOR ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :doh:



I'm starting a support group for people suffering rep frustration because BGB posts faster than we can rep him. Why must we suffer in silence GEF?


----------

