Fetishes, sexual repression, polyamory vs monogamy etc. discussion
 

.

.

i have a tristan fetish

Talking about female zoophilia (beastiality) still taboo subject.

Tristan, I'm sorry but this is an incredibly bigoted and self-righteous thing to say, and a huge over-over-overgeneralisation. Many people have fetishes which do not in any way end up as or come from sexual disorders, and frankly, to equate fetishism with paedophilia is so ignorant I can't even begin to tell you. Paedophilia is not a fetish, it's a sickness. You can't say to any person in the street, do you understand people who fiddle with kids? The very best they'll say is that they need help, most will just say they're evil and scum, which I would agree with.

If you take someone who, for instance, is into dressing as a woman, or a man, or a goddamn furry even, or someone who is into bukkake or spanking or foot play or whatever the hell - there's a huge spectrum out there (fire play? Blood play? Knife play?) and compare them to a kiddy fiddler, well it's just ignorant, wrong and totally uninformed.

@tristan there's been very little research on the subject due to the taboo nature of it, so it is difficult to really know the source of paedophilia. I personally don't think that most fetishes would lead someone down that path, but I guess that it is possible.

@TH I understand your side but I also think you're holding a double standard here. Not all paedophiles are child molesters and despite the horrible nature of it, it is quite plainly a fetish. That doesn't delegitimize any other fetishes in any way.

I wish Urban hadn't closed the bestiality thread. That was epic.

http://www.musicbanter.com/current-e...w-animals.html

Outed.

Noncery generates so much hatred (understandably so) in society people often forget this.

lol at Charles's post :laughing:

This is mainly my point. While he may (and I'm sure does) not mean to, Tristan makes a definite connection between all fetishes and paedophilia. It's just not the same thing.
I would wonder about that. If you're a paedophile isn't it endemic that you molest children? They can't (legally) consent, so surely it's molestation either way, at least in the eyes of the law. Did you see Broadchurch? As for the last sentence, well perhaps what I mean is it's not as accepted or understood a fetish as some of the more mainstream ones. Maybe. I certainly would not consider it a legitimate fetish, and would never want to see it being given any kind of legitimacy.

Inned. :)

A paedophile has a sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Doesn't have to do any actual noncing to be a paedophile.

No. You can have urges that you never act on. These are the people that researching and understanding paedophilia will help.

Sounds like a double standard to me.

I see. I was not aware of that.
I really don't care what it sounds like to you. I have no time for paedophilia in any way, just as I would have no time for necrophilia. If they are fetishes, they're a whole lot different than dressing up as a squirrel and calling yourself Nutkin.

Whatever the case is, whatever your view, I still maintain it's ignorant (intentional or not) to equate all fetishes with sexual disorders and blindly link them to paedophilia. It's not just a vanilla world you know.

What is the distinction between a fetish and a sexual disorder for you? Personally, I think that there is some overlap but again, that absolutely does not mean that every fetish is good or bad or otherwise. Each thing should be considered on its own account, because duh. I consider paedophilia to be both a fetish and a disorder. I don't think that the amount of repulsion I have to something changes what it's called.

I'm sure there are pedophiles who never touch children because their morality trumps their sexual desires. How many pedos are like this I have no idea, and I suspect nobody does, cause the only way anyone ever really gets outed is if they get caught diddling. No one with common sense is ever going to admit it, so it's kind of difficult to study.

I obviously can't answer that. I don't really consider anything a sexual disorder, because what do you base it against? Missionary position, is this the starting point? Or man with woman? Or sex without any kind of violence even if consensual? I don't know. "What is normal" is I suppose the real question?

But I just have zero tolerance for paedophiles, like I think a lot of people. Sure, maybe there are those who will never act on their desires, but if, for instance, you knew one of these people were that way inclined and you knew them personally, and had kids, do you not think you would be careful/uncomfortable around them? On the other hand, if you know someone is into some sort of bedroom fun, be it dressing as Spiderman, using handcuffs, dressing as a baby, whatever, would you be as repulsed?

Going back to my main point: Tristan should not I believe have said "paedophilia and other sexual disorders", implying that all fetishes, no matter how harmless or how much they're kept private, are related to this, nor indeed that they're sexual disorders. Just because someone feels differently or likes non-mainstream things, are they then suffering from a sexual disorder? If you like Beefheart and I like Genesis, is either of us, in the eyes of the other, suffering from a musical disorder? No; we simply like different things, and we're free to do that. So it should be with sex. Who the hell wants to be normal anyway? ;)

I believe that is because you're harboring a double standard. Paedophilia isn't a fetish because you think it's yucky? I'm gonna need better reasoning than that.

Maybe you just suck at inferring :wave:.

Maybe TH is just a creepy perv in hiding.

No, you completely missed my point. I said how can ANYTHING be a sexual disorder? What do you measure it against? What IS normal? Over to you...

Edit: actually it would be fair to say paedophilia is not a fetish because it doesn't involve consent. BDSM is a fetish but without consent it's abuse/violence.
No maybe about it...
:shycouch:
Why do you think I'm always hiding behind here?

sexual disorder
1 any disorder involving sexual functioning, desire, or performance.
2
Etymology: DSM-IV
any such disorder that is caused at least in part by psychologic factors. Such a disorder characterized by a decrease or other disturbance of sexual desire is called a sexual dysfunction, and that characterized by unusual or bizarre sexual fantasies, urges, or practices is called paraphilia. Also called psychosexual disorder, psychosexual dysfunction.

I guess I'll ask you more directly: why is paedophilia not a fetish?

hmm methinks that consent, while obviously very important, is not relevant to whether or not something is a fetish.

The only fetish you mentioned is blood play and even that is questionable. They are kinks. Fetishes focus on specific object: feet, breasts, inanimate objects..

In my experience people who use fire, blood, and knives are not turned on by those objects. Arsonists can have fire fetishes, not your average kinky person. That is just another facet of sub/dom relationships. I'm not even sure I'd consider pedophilia a fetish, it seems more like a taboo sexual preference.

I'm from sf. I saw all this **** when I was a child, idgaf about any of it. But you know. Have consenting fun.

Let's do this:

My a nswer to both questions is that I very much think consent is an important factor in whether or not something is a fetish. If you like cutting people up with a chainsaw, is that a fetish? Hardly, as there is no consent. If you like punching or slapping people who don't want to/agree to be punched or slapped, is that a fetish? No, because again lack of consent. If you like punching or slapping people who WANT to or AGREE to be punched or slapped, is that a fetish? Yes, because there is consent.

A child cannot (legally or otherwise) give consent to sex. Depending on what we're talking about here, you can have a baby up to a fifteen or seventeen-year old (given different state laws I assume), and whereas a "child" of fourteen or fifteen might be well-informed enough and sexually mature and aware enough to agree to have sex, they are not legally allowed to, therefore there is no consent, as seen in the eyes of the law. Therefore having sex with an underage person is rape, or as you guys put it, statutory rape, and so no fetish by any stretch. For much younger children the question does not even arise, as they have no idea what's going on when a man says he "wants to give them a treat" or "show them something". Urgh.

So consent is most definitely important, and I believe separates a fetish from an illegal act.

Also, I should add that your contention that I dislike paedophilia and don't consider it a fetish because it's "yucky" (your word) is frankly ridiculous and also wrong. I have I believe outlined my reasons above, and they hinge on the concept and importance of consent. Plenty of things are "yucky" - bukkake, corprophagia, bestiality etc - but that doesn't mean I don't consider them fetishes.
I have no idea where this came from. BDSM and so forth are fetishes, but I don't know what the difference is between that and a kink or kinks I must admit. I've always assumed the one to be the same as the other. I think that's more a case of semantics. I'm not enough in the know to be sure, but I've always found them to be more or less interchangeable. Also, I'm not so sure the OP was making a distinction between the two, but I'd have to re-read the post.

Edit: okay I re-read it: you're right. She is making a specific case for fetishes as opposed to kinks. My bad.

.

TH, you are wrong.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fetish

It's like you didn't even read my explanation.. I just gave you a clear cut distinction of why kinks and fetishes are different. It's not semantics.

Fetish = sexual desire derived from an object
Kink = non-vanilla sexual practice or fantasy

Do people who enjoy bondage get aroused by ropes? Most likely not. Kinks don't even have to involve sex. People go to play parties all the time and do not participate in sex. You are just making uninformed opinions.

You just love those words, don't you? :rolleyes:

Only when they're true. So, always.

Fair enough. I wasn't aware of the distinction. Now I am.

Now you know :D Paddle on.

Meh, at least you resisted saying "Have a spanking good time"....
:shycouch:

So I know 3 members besides myself who have FetLife accounts, anyone else wanna out themselves? Not asking you to share your info, just curious who else goes there.

And no I'm not revealing who the other members are.

I used to, but I shut it down (as I noticed a lot of my coworkers at the time were on there..)
I think CollarMe is another similar site?

Ive only heard bad things about it, but never checked myself.

I still use fet to chat with a few friends i had before i moved. It was crazy the amount of people i knew that i found on there though. I went to a TNG munch one time and discovered a guy iused to play magic the gathering with was one of the organizers haha.

My friend mentioned once that people are wildly paranoid there, and that it's more geared toward 24/7 dom/sub relationships (as opposed to being a place for kinky types in general)

What's fetlife like nowadays? Is it worthwhile? I barely spent any time there before.

Idk, with school and work and being single I really don't use it anymore other than to remain in contact with a few of the nice people I met when I was more active. I was never into the whole play party/munch thing. I discovered that kink was more of a personal thing for me and not something I wanted to share with others.

MB/instagram provide me with more than enough social media.

That makes sense. I feel a play party would be incredibly awkward to attend. (But I think going to one of those fancy dungeon balls could be interesting) And is it just me or do a LOT of people on those sites tend to be polyamorous goth pagans? Nothing wrong with it, just odd is all. In terms of using it as a dating site, I think it would still be just as difficult to find someone compatible (sexually) as it would on a regular dating site. Only difference is you know all their kinks and/or fetishes beforehand.

I think it's kind of a confusing and unclear distinction. There are certainly a lot of poly people, but there are also a lot of people in monogamous relationships who are allowed to "play" with others.. I don't understand it myself. Never met any goth pagans though. There is also a metric **** ton of drama because of it, which I made sure to steer clear of..

I only went to 2-3 munches and had my fill. For those that don't know, a munch is just a meet up for kinky people. My group did bubble tea in a liberal college town, so it was chill. 20+ people the times I attended, sitting around talking openly about kink stuff and never bothered.