NAAFA and Feederism

This is very exciting news! I will admit that as a former Board member I was hoping this would come to pass. Now that it has, I couldn't be more delighted.

Interesting. While I have accidentally stumbled across such fantasy sites while searching for fanfiction (one of my hobbies is writing fiction for various fandoms, including Star Trek, Forever Knight, and Lois & Clark), my impression was that it was something that wasn't actually done in RL. It seems to me that anyone who would force someone to change their physical appearance for any reason is practicing conditional love, not true love. And I would definitely agree that saying "I'll only love you while you're fat" is just as bad as saying "I'll only love you while you're thin." True love is unconditional, regardless of weight or appearance. Everyone's appearance changes as they age (wrinkles, gray hair/losing hair, etc.). Real love is about loving someone for the rest of their lives, no matter what, IMHO.

I think that there are a lot of relationships based on feederism that are not self-consciously so. I know of one, in which the husband was/is very abusive and controlling and manipulated his somewhat fat wife into eating a lot; throwing tantrums if she left food on her plate. He claimed it was because he needed to see her eat what he cooked, and that he can't enjoy food if she isn't eating it too. However, she went from fat to close to immobile and it gave him security that she would be enslaved to him. He was insanely jealous and convinced she was conspiring to cheat on him, and making her gain weight helped relieve his fears. It is a terrible, terrible situation and I pray she gets help to leave him. He literally will not let her eat normal, healthy foods. He literally insists she eat junk all day, yet I doubt he would recognize the term "feederism" or know there is even a name for his control/abuse. He probably thinks it is a no0rmal way for a man to behave : /

The practice of feederism is not very common, but it is quite real. Unfortunately some people have associated NAAFA with feederism, and understandably so, because the former chairman of NAAFA owned and maintained a website (as well as other publications) in which the practice was promoted. However, NAAFA is obviously taking steps to distance themselves from this behavior because they apparently recognized it is not a practice compatible with true size acceptance.

Oh, and for reference, I wrote about the problems with NAAFA back in February.

I must admit, I certainly fit into the NAAFA definition of 'encourager/feeder'. I do think that what they've written is very good, and certainly agree that NAAFA's number one goal should be self acceptance. I didn't realise it was a big deal to some people, but now I do. The anecdote cited above by Michelle is certainly not something I'd like to be included in!

I am so sorry for that lady you know, Michelle, & I hope that that lady gets out. That man is very dangerous, & totally insane. It does indeed happen in real life, Emily, just as the phenomenon of someone nagging a partner to lose weight or sometimes literally taking food out of his/her hands happens, & either way, it is about control, not love. Speaking of which, this discussion reminds me of a disgusting commercial I caught some of recently, for a camera, I THINK, which shows a wife taking photos & drawing arrows, pointing her finger, labeling things, putting it in the fridge, calling her husband "piggie" or saying that something is forbidden, apparently to make him stay on his diet while she is away on a business trip. More & more companies, including the ones whose products do not have a damn thing to do with weight, are jumping on the bandwagon. Behavior such as this wife's is also just as disrespectful, controlling, & unloving as feederism.

good for NAAFA!

I'm glad to hear NAAFA is finally taking a stand against this practice. This is the kind of action a successful civil rights movement must make in order to move forward and become truly effective.

I agree, Butch. It's not that people can't have sex or fetishes, or whatever they choose to do in their private lives, but it's important to separate that from the cause a civil rights organization like NAAFA supports. I'm thrilled that they've take this stand and think it will make a substantial difference in the way the organization is perceived by people who have become familiar with it over the years.

I wonder how this applies to people that would like to be fat themselves....

I can't imagine _wanting_ to be fat. Its kind of like wanting to be poor. Why in the world would somebody WANT to be marginalized, discriminated against, hated, lampooned, unable to find adequate health care, unable to find a job commensurate with their education and experience, etc., etc., etc. (???) ... Oh nevermind. (SIGH)

It IS hard to imagine, 2Day, but I have run across one or two. There was a young man who used to post in the Gabcafe who wanted to be bigger. He went away to college & I haven't heard anything about him for some time, so I don't know how he is.

I weigh 215 pounds on purpose--I used to weigh 135 pounds. I've always been physically attracted to fat guys. Usually the only guys in the 300s and 400s who either flaunt their fat or carry it in a way that says, "I like the way I look. If you don't, tough! Deal with it." are straight bikers or drag queens (or someone who simply acts REALLY feminine)--and I have no interest at all in someone feminine. This pattern of having absolutely no chance of getting with anyone I was physically AND emotionally attracted to got old after 10 years of meticulously looking, so I decided to gain weight myself and have the attitude about it that I admire in those that I could never be with. The last two comments prove once again that most fat people--especially straight women or gay men--even in the "fat acceptance" movement, just can't imagine why someone would specifically be attracted to fat people unless it was for some sort of control thing.

Excuse me -- I must have accidentally miscommunicated something. I believe I (in one of "the last two comments") specifically mentioned "marginalized, discriminated against, hated, lampooned, unable to find adequate health care" and "unable to find a job commensurate with their experience and education." Did I say anything about dating? I didn't think I did. And frankly -- who knows, maybe ny hung-up sexuality is showing, but I consider the things I did mention far more important than being "attractive" to a (potential) partner. Maybe I'm just deluded and only think I'm typing English sentences that mean something, when I'm actually not. In that case I apologize.

I can't imagine weighing at a certain level on purpose. I don't think I could gain more than thirty pounds if I tried. I also don't think I could lose thirty pounds. As far as being attracted to a fat partner, I certainly can imagine it. However, as a woman who is happily married to a man who happens to be thin, I like to think I have more interest in the person on the whole than the body size that person has.

So many comments I see on BigFatBlog and NAAFA discourage people from looking at someone for the way they physically appear: how far should this go before it starts sounding unrealistic like a Care Bears episode? What's with the mindset that says that physical appearance is a taboo thing to base one's attraction on? Except for people who feel that nobody could possibly be attracted to them, physical appearance will FOREVER be the main factor in which attraction is based on. Anyone (I'm not saying it's anyone posting in this thread--it's just a general statement) who feels physical attraction should be taboo should go write a romance novel, watch Dr. Phil, and also try to ban Tom Lykus while they're at it.

Hmmm, I've never seen an episode of the Care Bears so I'm not sure what you're referring to there. My personal belief is that way too much jugement--- including whether or not one is considered "attractive"--- is heaped on people because of their appearance. That's not to say that appearance isn't or shouldn't be a factor in who we find appealing, but if you want to find true happiness with a partner, or have the most skilled people working for you, the decision on who that person is will need to be based on something more than whether or not they have a nice butt, are slim, etc.. Part of my opinion on this has certainly come from the way I have been treated in the past because of my size. A boyfriend broke up with me and told me it was because of my weight. An employer hired me but explained to me when they offered me the job that I didn't fit their "global image requirements" because of my size. Another company refused to allow me to teach aerobics for them because, and only because of my size. It just doesn't seem fair to me that decisions on who can participate and who cannot participate in life are based on this criteria. And as long as I see it happening I'm going to speak up about it.

Well for one thing kizzume, physical appearance -- I guarantee you -- WON'T LAST. No matter what you do, people DO age. Have you ever seen an 80 year old who could genuinely be mistaken for a 20 year old? Neither have I. I suppose if you're looking for a "Trophy Wife(/partner)" or a 1-night stand perhaps appearance might be a more important factor (I don't know - I've never wanted or sought a "Trophy Wife(/partner)" OR a 1-night stand, so I honestly don't know what factors go into those decisions). OTOH, if you are looking for a life partner with whom you expect to spend the rest of your life, I don't care whether your partner is gay, straight, male, female, fat, thin, purple or green, one thing that is guaranteed is that he or she will definitely NOT look the same in 40 years as s/he does now. What is going to happen if s/he becomes fatter, thinner, injured, sick, disabled, bald, older...? Will you love him/her less because of it? I would question whether that is the kind of love a person would expect from a life partner (though perhaps it would suffice for a 1-night stand). Personally what I care about in a life partner (as opposed to an art object) is the person's more permanent human qualities ... not those that are superficial and temporary. But then again, perhaps I just have terminal sexual hang-ups or something. You never know.

I don't agree with guys doing the whole "trophy" wife thing--I think it's a terrible thing. Guys that have that attitude deserve women that look at men the same way--as trophies--unfortunately those guys always get with really innocent women and abuse them the entire time one way or the other. It's pathetic. Women put with too much crap from most men. In my other posts in this thread I'm not talking about the "trophy" aspect-- The aspect I'm talking about all depends on if you're looking to get married and everything that comes with it or not. Whether or not someone wants to have sex with a person because they can't get aroused anymore has nothing--directly--to do with whether a person has a caring lasting relationship with someone or people they spend the rest of their lives with. Once people become sexually incompatable, it'd be nice if more could handle the idea of having agreed upon sex partners instead of turning into what most marriages end up being after 10 years--sex less than once a year--or some women expect their husbands to wave a magical wand and they'll suddenly be aroused again. But I suppose that's "healthy", and those are the rules that come with marriage. If you can't separate love from sex, I guess this whole issue is a real problem and abstinance will eventually be the answer. If someone decides to change from a biker to a businessperson or vice-versa and everything that goes with it--or any other extreme appearance and attitude change, I suppose someone should just have some sort of made-up character in their mind when they are trying to have sex--or just refrain from sex completely. If people can't get aroused, they can't get aroused--if they're incompatable with sex, they're incompatable with sex--and nobody should be made to feel guilty over the whole thing. If you're able to be abstinant and happy, more power to ya. Yes, people age, and someone should only expect to find sex partners that are around their age unless they meet someone with a blatant preference for someone older than them, and if that person breaks off their long-term relationship to be with the younger person, it's a real shame--not only has that person ruined one life, they've probably committed themselves to a relationship that will probably only last 2 years or less--so I guess in the end those a**holes get their just desserts--karma sometimes works. Not everybody is married or wants to get married. But--99.999% of people would like to have a person or people to care about and have care about them in their lives.

Well, I am currently in my sixth decade of life, and I can tell you that, old wives' tales to the contrary, its not true that older people don't have sex.

Older people do indeed have sex, & sometimes hot & frequent sex. Older people can & do fall deeply, passionately in love with someone whom they desire & are desired by, & build a lifetime together & grow together, in all ways, including the sexual. This can also happen if one is disabled, or does not match the culture's ideal of "beauty", &, amazingly enough, it can happen for a woman with a man who is younger & thinner than she is & much more "beautiful" according to cultural standards than she is. Whom you love, & whom you desire, does not necessarily depend on looks, though of course we are attracted to those whom we deeply love on some level. Different people are attracted to different things. No, indeed, not all people want to marry or have permanent, committed relationships. However, many of us do, & people of all ages, sizes, shapes, races, & types of looks can find real love & happiness, just as it is possible for some "stunningly beautiful" people to be alone, lonely, & unhappy.

I couldn't agree more with you turtlegrrl. However, 2DayIs4Me's comment is true for only the rare couples. I think it's great when couples still are sexual as well as loving after many years, and that type of relationship is something to be very proud of--but again, it's very RARE. The unfortunate truth is that guys can't just "turn it on or off" at will. --And most guys, myself included, don't have a healthy enough of a sexuality to be able to adapt or change what it is that turns them on.

How sad, that important decisions in life seem to be dictated by what does and doesn't give men an erection.

Well, I guess it also depends on whether someone has ever actually been in love or not, which I apparently have not. The day after I typed that last response, I met someone that has changed my entire outlook on life. I've never felt anything like this before. And sex isn't just sex, it's more--something I don't know how to describe without sounding cheesey and people who have felt this before like many here would be bored. Man, I want to go on and on about it, but I must refrain. When I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I guess I did not understand. I am sorry.