|
|
Post by darthoso on Jan 20, 2016 1:52:23 GMT -5
Based ion my conversations with a few devs, especially younger devs, this is definitely the case. I've only talked to one (maybe two) young devs (18 to 24ish) who were really into being a dev. The others it was (is?) just a curiosity, one they weren't interested in exploring further. Whereas older devs (I'm not calling you girls old, put the pitch forks down), 25+, tend to more openly own being a dev and know exactly what they want.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Jan 20, 2016 1:54:42 GMT -5
I think that's an interesting question Brace. Part of me thinks that those devs who say they are dev-curious have not accepted that they are a dev and once they try it out they may be convinced that they are sexually turned on by the guy. ****I'm assuming that being sexually turned by disability is the defination of a dev. Soooo part of me also thinks that there are people interested/intrigued in disability that aren't specifically turned buy a guys disability, but may really be into them as a whole (disability, ability to overcome, lifestyle and everything else). Then also there are the nurses or other people in medical fields who just are okay with whatever comes with the guy they are into.
I think for me, I was dev curious initially. I remember telling others that I was turned on by both AB guys and amputees. Initially I just wanted to try it out. I wasn't ready to commit to solely looking for a disabled guy and also not ready to live my life with one at that time. Once I tasted it a bit with my first guy, I still wasn't convinced. While that was a great first experience, it came with a lot f issues; I wasn't really into his disability, he wasn't all that into me physically (he liked latino women) and I was very not into his lack of independence. So from that I learned that I was not just looking for any disabled guy; I was looking for an amputee who needed to be the right match for me, not just any hot disabled guy.
Now that I have found that guy I feel like its more of a lifestyle/sexual preference and not something I can go without.So I guess I'm saying that I think it can be an evolution for some devs.
|
|
|
|
Post by strawberrybubblegum on Jan 20, 2016 7:36:46 GMT -5
Before I found PD, I was totally just "dev-curious". I only had a sexual interest in SCI. No knowing everything about the disability, no fantasy SCI boyfriend, no books or movies, no obsessing, etc. A loooot of the things other devs from here do or think at some point in their dev-lives didn't even cross my mind. And my thoughts were exactly as you put it: "If I ever meet a para, I would totally want to be with him", either sexually or in a relationship.
Then I found PD one year ago and my devness went full on mode. I started reading and learning about SCI, devness and other devs. I wanted to know everything. I was also on a huuuuge dev high. In retrospect it feels as if my devness was finally released to the full. And I realized that I would probably never meet a cute para guy who I'd also hit it off with, so I started looking for him online. When I started my search I was looking for something NSA, but a relationship wasn't out of question. I "met" a couple of guys I could have met to just explore my devness, but at the same time I also met my now boyfriend, who wowed me so much, I just had to meet him even though he's a high quad, so not exactly what I was looking for (but still devy to me). I chose him over the para guys and the relationship over the NSA thing and that's both had a huge impact on my devness. Of course a lot of it is still a sexual thing, but I've discovered many other "layers" to it, too. I still find things that are "common" amongst devs that I can't really relate to, but then again we're all different, too, aren't we? I +1 what Emma said, to me a dev is someone who is sexually attracted to and turned on by disability, so I definitely am a dev and I also will probably date other guys with SCI if things don't work out with my current guy (which hopefully won't be the case!).
Now that I think about it, if you define a dev as someone who is sexually attracted to disability, my theory is that there's just a wide spectrum of devness and there's those of us who are just somewhat sexually intrigued by disability on one end and those whose devness is much broader, including also other things and also affecting other life aspects than only the sexual one on the other.
|
|
ben10
New Member
Posts: 23 
Gender: Male
Dev Status: Disabled Male
Relationship Status: Single
|
Post by ben10 on Jan 20, 2016 9:06:13 GMT -5
i agree on the wide spectrum but something about the "dev high" sounds exactly like bi-curious where the person normally wouldn't be normally into it, but while riding the high is def about it. i cant dig too deep as im not a dev nor bi-curious, but just an observation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Clair deLune on Jan 20, 2016 12:11:04 GMT -5
I think there are definitely people out there who do not see disability as a negative when it comes to choosing a partner, merely a variation, like oh I've never been with a redhead before, or I've never been with someone who's six and a half feet tall, wonder what that's like? This guy plays guitar, wonder how talented his fingers are? This guy is in a wheelchair, what a great upper body, wonder how that works in bed? To be "dev-curious" I'd say that person has to have always wanted, specifically, to have an experience with a PWD. Maybe they're on the other side of the dev spectrum from most of us here at PD? That's assuming that the dev spectrum doesn't go from "a little bit of a dev" to "100% completely a dev" just like the kinsey scale does not go from "a little bit attracted to humans" to "very attracted to humans." Everyone on the kinsey scale has an attraction to humans, and the slider goes between an attraction to men and an attraction to women. Maybe the dev spectrum has sexual interest on one side and intellectual interest on the other, and the slider goes between the two. Everyone on the scale has an attraction to disabilities, and I think those of us who have made it to PD all fall somewhere in the center: for all of us, it's something sexual, and for all of us, there is also an intellectual aspect where we all tell the same story of hoarding dis-centric movies and books, devouring websites and forums and etc. But there are certainly other people on the spectrum. There are those who work in the medical and health field, specifically with dis-related stuff. They've got a pretty pronounced intellectual interest for sure, but next to no specific sexual interest (unless they are devs, but I'm sure not everyone who, say, works in rehab is a dev). Then there are all the people who just LOVE disabled characters on TV, for ex Dr House, and then all the people who are particularly drawn to fanfiction with disabled characters (those are always wildly popular compared to everything else) but all these people don't think of themselves as anything different, don't do disability research, and would never end up here or feel like they belonged here. The other end of the spectrum is maybe those for whom it is purely sexual, who consider disability, or specific disabilities, to be particularly desirable, probably among a whole slew of other things that are desirable, and it goes no deeper than that. I don't know. This is an interesting idea. I'm bisexual but I was never bi-curious. I never wanted to "try out" being with another girl, just to see what it was like. I just wanted to be with someone, and considered both girls and guys to be an option. So it's hard for me to imagine that. What Emma and strawberrybubblegum describe seem to be a pretty close parallel though, always being curious but not being sure, and then after an experience knowing for sure that it's the real thing. |
|
|
|
Post by lucretia on Jan 20, 2016 13:09:01 GMT -5
I think there are definitely people out there who do not see disability as a negative when it comes to choosing a partner, merely a variation, like oh I've never been with a redhead before, or I've never been with someone who's six and a half feet tall, wonder what that's like? This guy plays guitar, wonder how talented his fingers are? This guy is in a wheelchair, what a great upper body, wonder how that works in bed? To be "dev-curious" I'd say that person has to have always wanted, specifically, to have an experience with a PWD. Maybe they're on the other side of the dev spectrum from most of us here at PD? That's assuming that the dev spectrum doesn't go from "a little bit of a dev" to "100% completely a dev" just like the kinsey scale does not go from "a little bit attracted to humans" to "very attracted to humans." Everyone on the kinsey scale has an attraction to humans, and the slider goes between an attraction to men and an attraction to women. Maybe the dev spectrum has sexual interest on one side and intellectual interest on the other, and the slider goes between the two. Everyone on the scale has an attraction to disabilities, and I think those of us who have made it to PD all fall somewhere in the center: for all of us, it's something sexual, and for all of us, there is also an intellectual aspect where we all tell the same story of hoarding dis-centric movies and books, devouring websites and forums and etc. But there are certainly other people on the spectrum. There are those who work in the medical and health field, specifically with dis-related stuff. They've got a pretty pronounced intellectual interest for sure, but next to no specific sexual interest (unless they are devs, but I'm sure not everyone who, say, works in rehab is a dev). Then there are all the people who just LOVE disabled characters on TV, for ex Dr House, and then all the people who are particularly drawn to fanfiction with disabled characters (those are always wildly popular compared to everything else) but all these people don't think of themselves as anything different, don't do disability research, and would never end up here or feel like they belonged here. The other end of the spectrum is maybe those for whom it is purely sexual, who consider disability, or specific disabilities, to be particularly desirable, probably among a whole slew of other things that are desirable, and it goes no deeper than that. I don't know. This is an interesting idea. I'm bisexual but I was never bi-curious. I never wanted to "try out" being with another girl, just to see what it was like. I just wanted to be with someone, and considered both girls and guys to be an option. So it's hard for me to imagine that. What Emma and strawberrybubblegum describe seem to be a pretty close parallel though, always being curious but not being sure, and then after an experience knowing for sure that it's the real thing. I see myself as "bi-curious" because while I've always had relationships with guys, I've certainly had crushes on girls when I was younger, and later with women. I just don't see myself wanting to have sex with a woman... but then I'm not super sexual anyway, except with a PWD partner. My daughter self-describes as asexual/bi-romantic. (I think I have that right) And I really do think if I had had language as a teen, that would have been MY self-description. In fact, if it weren't for my attraction to male PWD (specifically my partner), I think I would STILL self-describe as asexual/bi-romantic (again, apologies for any incorrect terminology...) As for being dev-curious, I think I was always a dev, and never only curious. But I really do credit (blame? LOL) PD for brining the possibility of an actual relationship into my life. I was always more along the lines of a "what if" person. I expressed my devness through movies and books and my own writing. PD brought it from fantasy to possible reality. So in THAT sense, PD is certainly the catalyst for my actually LOOKING for a PWD partner. I wonder sometimes, if this (my experience) could all be written down as some sort of social experiment... |
|
|
|
Post by lucretia on Jan 20, 2016 13:15:13 GMT -5
I would also add that for me, my devness is definitely a sexual orientation. I could count on one hand the times I was actually sexually aroused by anyone, male or female. While for AB people, I've had that intense sexual attraction (in person) to one guy and one girl. With PWD, it's happened twice. Once with an amputee and then with my current partner.
So while I'm not super sexual in GENERAL, I've had sexual attraction in person far less than in online situations.
I'm not sure what this even means.... I've gotten off-track in my own head...
But back to topic, for me I describe fetish as a sexual thing, and my devness was never sexual until I was a late teen. It wasn't until PD that I even had the language to describe myself, and then it made so much sense for me to liken it to being gay- an orientation rather than a sexual urge or lifestyle choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by Justagirl on Jan 21, 2016 0:16:06 GMT -5
I agree with Clair's idea of the dev-spectrum- where everyone on it is a dev, some keep it in fantasy, some don't, but one side is purely sexual and the other side is intellectual. And yes, there are others who may be curious about being turned on by disability, but they are not on the dev spectrum. Not yet anyways. Let's call these people "dev-curious". I think it is fair to compare them to those that are bi-curious. Bi-curious people may not have an overwhelming desire to have a same sex encounter, but would do so if the right situation presented itself. Or maybe their curiosity grows until they actually do seek out an experience. So what happens after bi-curious people have had experiences and are not curious anymore? Personally, I think they either choose to like it or they don't. And if they do, then they become bi and enter the bi-spectrum (this may be a term I just made up). If they exclusively choose same sex, then they jump to the gay/lesbian spectrum. I guess what I am trying to say is that yes, I believe there are dev-curious people out there, but as soon as they have that curiosity satisfied, (which may take one encounter, or perhaps a few), then they become either a dev or non-dev. No more curiosity. If they do turn out to be a dev, was this simply repressed up until this point? Who knows. Evolution vs. creation. I also think there can be disability-curious folk as well; ones who want to know what it is like to have sex with a PWD, but are not necessarily MORE turned on by the idea. Simply curious.
|
|
|
|
Post by hail on Jan 21, 2016 0:38:55 GMT -5
My experience with alleged "non-devs" is that having sex/relationships with a disabled person has never crossed their minds. Especially if they've never before encounter disability besides meeting me. I feel like the curiosity isn't just there waiting to be activated but I feel like the idea can be planted and hopefully it'll grow. One of my attendants always suggested I plant that seed early with new people. Like saying hey I just signed up for online dating, any tips? Just anything to introduce the idea that I'm sexually active and interested. Just a different take on things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Justagirl on Jan 21, 2016 0:46:11 GMT -5
Ah yes, then there is the majority of society. Not curious what-so-ever. And on the opposite (wrong) end, those that feel it is a turn-off. But we won't talk about THOSE people.  |
|
|
|
Post by audrewsmith on Jan 21, 2016 4:23:35 GMT -5
My experience with alleged "non-devs" is that having sex/relationships with a disabled person has never crossed their minds. Especially if they've never before encounter disability besides meeting me. I feel like the curiosity isn't just there waiting to be activated but I feel like the idea can be planted and hopefully it'll grow. One of my attendants always suggested I plant that seed early with new people. Like saying hey I just signed up for online dating, any tips? Just anything to introduce the idea that I'm sexually active and interested. Just a different take on things. One can educate others about disability and to be open minded but cannot plant the idea of dating or having sex with PWD! This is an absolutely sneaky idea. Calling it sneaky actually cannot justify my feeling. What is the next 2 steps further down? You gonna kidnap a young girl, lock her in your dungeon and wait for her to be your wife or worse?!! Why I cannot stop feeling that I am looking at a seed of the psychopath tree?! |
|
|
|
Post by farfaraway on Jan 21, 2016 8:10:21 GMT -5
What?  0.o |
|
|
|
Post by Justagirl on Jan 21, 2016 9:05:34 GMT -5
@braced4impact , I would never condone judging ANYone. I don't think my comment was implying that....and it was made in jest- haha.  audrewsmith , wow. Your reaction seems a little extreme to me. But that's just my point of view.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 13:14:33 GMT -5
I have a super weird question...did some content of this discussion get deleted?
|
|
|
|
Post by audrewsmith on Jan 21, 2016 14:13:44 GMT -5
One can educate others about disability and to be open minded but cannot plant the idea of dating or having sex with PWD! This is an absolutely sneaky idea. Calling it sneaky actually cannot justify my feeling. What is the next 2 steps further down? You gonna kidnap a young girl, lock her in your dungeon and wait for her to be your wife or worse?!! Why I cannot stop feeling that I am looking at a seed of the psychopath tree?! How is it any different than any other guy flashing their peacock feathers in women's faces?? AB men give women innuendo ALL THE TIME. Why do AB men get to corner the market on this? So a Hail can't necessarily flex his biceps in the direction of a women hoping to lure her in... So he has to use words to get his innuendo across, doesn't make it creepy or pathetic. Letting someone know that you're also a sexual being and you want to be noticed isn't doing anymore than what any other beefcake is doing at a pub on a Saturday night. In the end, it's still a "hey, look at me!" maneuverer. IMO.
I actually think it's a decent idea, hail, because if nothing else, it opens conversation.
Regardless you are AB or PWD, you can always try to open a conversation with 'new people' like... Hey, I am trying online dating and do you have any trips to offer? Let the counter party decide you are creepy or not. |
|
0.o
