Devoteeism vs fetish.

[crippledcuriosity]

So I'm curious and want to hear the thoughts of devs on this to learn more. I have seen devoteeism listed as a fetish. But do you consider it that? To me a fetish is something that solely turns you on, like you need that and only that to get off. I think that's partly why the idea of devs bothered me at first because I thought they would only be interested in my stump and not me as a person.

But what I have picked up from here is devoteeism isn't a fetish, it is just a preference like people prefer blondes or big breasts, and just because someone is disabled doesn't mean you would be attracted to them. So I am wondering what you think about it being categorized as a fetish?

Hope this makes sense, been typing this at work in between customers so was kinda rushed.

[Kid A]

Ugh. I hate that "devoteeism" is lumped in with such terms as "paraphilia" and "fetish". It's what draws me in, not what keeps me there. By the same token, like gender, I find it to be on a spectrum and not static. This community is large, diverse and cannot be easily defined. You'll come to make your own conclusions about it over time.

[Emma]

I don't think of my attraction as a fetish. I think it mostly has to do with the negative connotation I feel the term fetish has. I think of my attraction as a sexual orientation instead.

Oh and maybe I'm the only one but I don't like the word Devoteeism. I am a devotee and I talk about my devness. Maybe tha'ts not grammatically correct but I don't care. I don't like the -ism attached to the word.

[mike]

The problem I have with either term (devotee or fetish), is that:

1. If you prefer blue eyes or blond hair, that's not a fetish, simply a preference. Likewise with many dev's, it's simply a preference.

2. As others have noted, the preference is dynamic, sometimes strong, other times not. Everyone fits into a different place on the spectrum, from simple curiosity to strong attraction, but from day to day will fit into a different place.

3. There may be some dev's whose attraction falls into the definition of a fetish, but I have never met one who describes herself that way. It wouldn't bother me if she felt that way, but I am not aware of anyone who fits that description.

4. The term 'devotee' lacks definition, therefore could be (mis)applied to almost any situation. I really like my cat, does that make me a 'devotee'?

[BA]

I abhor the term devotee simply because it is a word that conjures up "fetish" and or "paraphilia", neither of which I feel I represent. I don't require being with a disabled guy in orde to get off. There is no object (stumps, brace, wheelchair) separate from the person that I would get excited by. Neither is the person an object. I am just more attracted to an otherwise attractive disabled guy. Why? Who knows. Rather than withdraw from an individual with a disability I find myself drawn, curious and interested. Sometimes I have felt that people with disabilities are somehow "better" than non-disabled people by virtue of their experiences. (Of course I found that this is not really true. There is good and bad everywhere).

We are all different. I am sure some of us devs are fetishistic and some aren't. Some have fetishes that fall outside of the whole dev thing (BDSM etc.). It appears your ex loved you and your body and likely first was attracted to your physical appearance. Then as he got to know you it became both physical and emotional. The physical was heightened by his attraction to your being an amputee. Like me I doubt very much that he could separate you from your disability. You were a whole package. People will categorize us the way they want to because people like to fit things into neat little descriptive boxes. They have a long way to go to define what a devotee realy is.

[devogirl]

Being a devotee is NOT just a preference. A guy may prefer redheads, but chances are he doesn't obsess over them, seek out fiction/films with them, or join a message board to talk about them. A lot of women will downplay how strong the attraction is when a guy asks them about it directly, because they don't want to seem creepy.

I prefer the term fetish. I think it's much more honest and direct. I understand why women don't like to use the term fetish, because it has negative connotations of being creepy and weird. Women are not supposed to express any sexual preferences, especially not any outside the norm. But I think it is important to advocate for more sex-positive thinking. What is wrong with having a fetish, any fetish at all? It doesn't make you a bad person, or mean that you will objectify your partner.

Many women on here have said that they can only feel happy and fulfilled with a disabled partner. That implies a lot more than a preference, but not in a negative or objectifying way. I said that once myself, but as it turned out, it wasn't true--I am happy with my AB husband. So it seems a bit different than an orientation as well. Most gay guys I know would not be happy married to women.

This has been discussed here a lot in the past, but I can't find the relevant threads. They've gotten lost over time, and I think the best ones on this topic were several years ago. Can anyone find it? Maybe we should compile a list or sticky of some of the best threads on questions like this that come up repeatedly. Any suggestions?

[Peony]

So...I have to agree with Devogirl. I remember a really good older thread about it, but have no idea when and where it was. Actually, Devogirl's contribution to said thread is what convinced me that being a dev, or whatever you like to think about it, is in fact a fetish. I am still a little uncomfortable with the term 'fetish', because it seems like an incredibly cold and clinical way to describe the most primal and organic thing that is a person's sexuality. I also used to convince myself that it wasn't a fetish because it's not a particular assistive device that I'm attracted to, but the person, obviously. Like Emma, I'm not really that fond of 'devotee' either!

But, it is so much more a fetish than it is a preference, for me at least, and I say that as someone is completely happy with my AB partner. As DG mentions, there is no way a preference could fuel the long and often fruitless search for movies, books etc, not to mention romantic partners. While I do think there are scary devs out there, who just don't even see the person, and seem to lack a lot of empathy, but it's like anything, of course...there's a scale, in terms of it's intensity, and people's behaviours around it.

Aside from totally flippant relationships/flings, I do think it's a rare person that can be sexually attracted to someone without loving their personality, quirks, what they're like when they first wake up etc etc. There's absolutely no substitute for chemistry!

[Cake]

Coming out of lurking mode to agree stronly with Devogirl and Peony.

Honestly, I think the only reason why so many Devs call it a preference is because they feel so uncomfortable when it comes to the so-called kinky stuff in the world of sexuality, which includes fetish and paraphilia, which for most people is creepy, weird, sick and just all over negative (correct me if I' wrong).
So we call it a preference because besides feeling sexual feelings for disabled guys, we also see the person, don't want to be with just the next guy etc. This is definitely true, it is more than pure sexual turn-on.

BUT, like Devogirl said, it is ridiculous to compare it to liking redheads. Every dev knows this if she's being honest. We all know the immense, strong urge when in a Dev high, we all know just how MUCH the wheelers turn us on. And I've talked to non-dev friends: They don't feel that huge, weird kind of turn-on, EVER.

Maybe fetish is not the spot-on correct term for our attraction, but preference is even less accurate.
I think we just are afraid to "own it" like Devogirl said. We are afraid to be seen as 'sickos'. Which is understandable, but the problem doesn't lie with what a fetish is but with the wrong perception people have of these things. They call it sick, but it is not. It's just DIFFERENT. I think many devs have a huge problem with just being different though...

I never had a problem with calling it a fetish, I also use that term when explaining it to people, and I don't think that I'm different in my attraction from most devs here. I'm neither obsessed with wheelchairs as objects, nor is the emotional component missing in my attraction - quite the opposite in fact.
But to me there's no question that this attraction is sexual, extremely sexual, and that goes for all devs.

There's nothing obsessive with liking blondes, there's no urge that has to be put to rest, there's no "high".
Imagine a guy preferring blondes sitting in front of his laptop all night reading fanfic about girls with blond hair. In the fanfic there would be sentences like "Her blond hair was so blond and it shone in the sun." or "She took the comb and combed her blond hair." And the guy on the laptop gets a hard-on just from reading this. And he keeps doing that all night.

Is that realistic? What would you say about a guy who did that? Exactly: This is more than just liking blondes, the way he gets off on it, he's got some kind if FETISH.

Guys who prefer blondes don't usually do the thing I just described, and if they do, they more than 'prefer' blondes.

Now devs however, they, we do that thing with the laptop, everyone of us.

[devogirl]

A while ago, Ruth linked to a map of fetishes:
www.bentblog.com/art41782126.htm/The-Great-Big-Chart-of-Fetishes
It was created by anthropologist Katherine Gates in 2002, just after she wrote a study of fetishes called Deviant Desires.
We discussed the map here: paradevo.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=3471&page=1

I don't agree with everything on the chart, but I think it's useful to see all these things mapped out. Yes, there are some bad things on that map under the "non-consensual" box. But with the consensual ones, which is most of them, people are still able to have mutually respectful relationships.

Like I said, I think the problem is the negative connotations of the word fetish. Having this desire doesn't mean I will objectify a partner, or that I only want keep it to a fantasy. It doesn't mean that it's somehow separate from my real self.

Unfortunately a lot of people still think that having a fetish makes you a bad person, or that it's even a mental illness. It's a lot easier to act disgusted or make jokes if you think it's something far away from your reality. Most people who have fetishes keep it secret, even from the people closest to them, so the vanilla people don't realize how widespread it really is. I know it's scary to make that leap to acceptance, especially if you are worried about alienating the person you are attracted to. But just think how recently homosexuality was considered a mental illness. If that can change, maybe we can start to let go of some other negative stereotypes, that sex should only be one way. Rather than twisting ourselves in knots trying to explain how devoteeism isn't a fetish, I'd rather see us say, "Yes it is, but that's not a bad thing."

[crippledcuriosity]

Yea I was just curious how you guys described it. Thanks everyone for answering and sharing you feelings about it, definitely gave me more of an understanding and changed my perception on things for the better. Hope no one was offended by the question or anything.

[paulbe]

Ok, here is my reply to dev or fetish. When I see a man in a wheelchair or some guy with crutches, i go bananas, I get a great feeling and like to be with that man . Thats an overall feeling I can nor explain. Is that beeing a dev or is it fetish I dont know and I really dont care . This is how I am , Paul. I hope I dont hurt any body, able or disable. Take care and as so many I feel really at "home" on this board.

[vancityippy]

Ya...I'll have to agree with peony, Lucretia, Cake, devogirl...and others. And like others point out, every person is different.
For me, it is more than a preference... I can't explain it either (paulbe). But simply put, for me, it's a strong desire to be in an intimate and sexual relationship with a quadriplegic male.
"Fetish" is more accurate in my case...But this word implies objectification
And I have never seen another human being, or a body part as an object separate from the person.
And my attraction is not solely on the body. I am only interested in pursueing a relationship with a person who I am compatible with on a number of levels. Not just physical.

What I say, and how I feel in my heart, is "I am into guys in wheelchairs" If people wish for a more accurate description...welcome to my ramblings on paradevo. It's complex and multifaceted.

[BA]

There you go, Curiosity. Devoteeism floats in the limbo of sexual orientation, fetish, desire and in the eyes of general society, a paraphilia (b/c our society finds this attraction very abnormal). Someone can be just as into triple F sized boobs, watch porn about boobs, masturbate to boobs and obsess about boobs, but that is treated as a pretty normal interest. I am a 'devotee' for lack of a better word, with a disability 'fetish', for lack of a better word and between the two words lies my personal reality.

[Kid A]

Aug 25, 2012 6:56:35 GMT -5 lucretia said:

ok... I am gonna break the rules here. So sue me. But this came up in devs only first, and I don't believe for one second that the thread here started out of the blue and had nothing to do with guys reading the last 10. So first and foremost, I'm mentioning the elephant in the room.

Secondly, and this is where you can sue me, I have spent a lot of time on thinking and writing about this over the years, and see no reason why I need to paraphrase or re-type my answers for two different audiences, as my response is the same in both places.

I don't think all of us agree that it IS a fetish. Certainly not in the sense that an object or body part is necessary for sexual gratification. I see devoteeism as a continuum, like sexuality. There are a lot of grey areas between ''straight'' and ''gay'', and I think there are a lot of grey areas within the dev spectrum. I also think it is so complex, that there may be those of us who have changed how we view it since coming to this community, as well.

For some women, it is strictly fetish. For some women, being a dev is strictly fantasy. It lives in their heads, but has nothing to do with their ''real'' life, other than reading, writing and this board. For some, being a dev is so integrated into their sense of self, that it is part of everything in their lives... a facet of their core personality. Saying that their dev-ness is a fetish is like saying breathing is a fetish... if that makes any sense. Most of us are not at either extreme, but I daresay no two of us are in exactly the same place.

I think it is perfectly ok to own the word fetish. It is an easy word, and easily explainable. I see nothing wrong with the word, or the label. I have used it, because using it makes it easy to explain... Most of the time, many of us say things like, ''Just like some men prefer big boobs, or red hair, I prefer guys in chairs.'' Saying that takes some of the sexual stuff out of the equation, it creates a distance between sexuality and something safer. ''I get off on it,'' on the other hand, is almost taboo for ANY woman to say... about ANYTHING. Being able to say that can be freeing...

So in that sense, calling devoteeism is a fetish is a good definition... but I also think it is a limited definition, incomplete. It leaves out so much that for many women, overshadow the sexual nature of the word. Like many of you have said, I ALSO have come to hate the term ''devoteeism''. Sometimes, I feel like it is also limiting. Yes, I am a dev. I absolutely explore and embrace my devness... but making it an ''ism'' also creates that space- that distance that makes this thing we are discussing ''safe''.

Being a dev is NOT safe. Acknowledging that yes, I am a devotee... that is not safe. It is not safe even here, because so many people think they are ok with it, and say they are ok with it... but when it comes to the actuality of it, when a woman says she likes paralyzed limbs, for example... people get ''squirmy''. And rightly so. It is never easy to go that deep within our selves, to accept that someone else can love, admire, ''get off on'', that thing about us that we have not also come to love, admire, and yes... see as sexy. Going there, having that level of awareness, and then being able to discuss it in a space that does not judge, that supports curiosity and openness... (and this is not often that space) that is scary. And that is why many of us, over time and with experience over the years, have watered down this thing, this dev-ness, because we don't want to go to that place over and over again, with often less than positive results.

So while I am a huge proponent of ''owning'' the term fetish, I do so with the knowledge that it is also so much more.

+159371639506087362

Very well-said, Lucretia. I think describing [insert preferred term here] as something that lies on a spectrum is most accurate and is fair to all those who "fall under" the term. I consider myself very sex-positive, yet using loaded terms like "fetish" and "paraphilia" to describe my sexual nature doesn't capture how I feel and certainly doesn't fairly define what drives me into any relationship, whether it be for love or lust.

Labels always place us in this dilemma. How do you attempt to put walls around something that means something so different to so many of us and which can evolve over time? I say use whatever term or description makes you most comfortable. I know we're often concerned about how we define ourselves because we frequently are in the position of defending the community in the face of criticism from the general public, but it is my hope that doing so doesn't become divisive. Personally, I embrace our diversity and though I don't agree with the views of everyone, I respect their space to express themselves freely (and hopefully, respectfully).

I know this board, historically, hasn't always been a safe haven for free expression, but I hope that we continue to work toward that goal. I am so grateful for everything this board has given me and I hope to return the favor in kind. Maybe this sounds naive, but I think it's possible to achieve such a goal with enough mutual respect amongst our members. Thank you to everyone who continues to contribute thoughtfully.

[alf]

Being a ‘dev’ or ‘devoteeism’ or whatever we choose to call it is what I would term a ‘bent’. I refuse to use the term ‘fetish’ for a variety of reasons, the main one being that there is such a wide spectrum of devs out there – even on this board – and fetish doesn’t really fit any (or at least not many) of the ones I’ve ever known.

To some being a dev is a curious part of their sexual fantasies where they ‘get off’ on different disability aspects when they read about it or look at different kinds of pictures or whatever, to others it’s an all consuming part of their life and they can’t imagine having a fulfilling relationship unless it’s with at disabled partner of a particular kind. And to most it is something in between the two extremes, and probably even something totally different from what I have tried to express here.

As a professional (psychologist) I would use the word ‘paraphilia’ as an overarching term but I understand that many find this term offensive as they look upon it as equal to ‘weird’ or ‘abnormal’ or ‘sick’ in some regard. I don’t see it that way since virtually every sexual orientation is deemed a paraphilia and has some kind of snooty Latin name attached to it. And to the best of my knowledge we all have certain preferences that could be called by one of those names, which makes us all ‘paraphiliacs’ so then what is the norm?

No matter what term we use it will inevitably create a distance between that which is termed ‘normal’ and the way our attraction is being perceived by ourselves and others. Now, the interesting thing is that what is deemed ‘normal’ is only being taken for granted without being defined. There is some kind of consensus understanding that anything outside of “missionary, 1-2-3, wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am” is in some way deviant, but when it comes to a definition of what is ‘normal’ it is sorely lacking both amongst scholars and in a more informal setting, which is also why it is so easy to deem the things we don’t understand for ‘weird’, ‘sick’ or ‘abnormal’ in some sense.

Therefore I will propose that whatever consensual attraction anyone might have is within the realm of the acceptable and therefore to a certain extend ‘normal’ whether we call our particular attraction a bent, a fetish or a paraphilia or any other moniker we can come up with.

I, for instance, prefer young, pretty, skinny women just like most men do, however there aren’t many of those around – especially not if they also have to be devs (and I have a certain penchant for devs, they happen to float my boat, so to speak) So aside from my attraction to devs I am pretty boringly vanilla. Therefore I might also be the 'wrong' kind of person to even discuss these issues but I am giving it my best shot anyways - I do have a few well-spoken and very intelligent devs as my close friends after all (you all know who you are )

I think the underlying issue in this discussion is what BA said, namely:

our society finds this attraction very abnormal

And why is this attraction so abnormal? It is abnormal because the object of the attraction is abnormal. We all know how to pick on the ugly duckling but when someone wants to take it under their wings they are viewed as screwy, bad or at least a little off.

The problem is that it is not acceptable to be attracted to someone who in the eyes of society is unattractive by definition, someone who has some characteristics that are lacking or undesirable on one sense or another – and to me that is what is so difficult to get across to others outside of our circle, be it friends, family or strangers.

There seems to be a fear of others thinking something along these lines: “How can you be attracted to someone who has these obvious physical flaws? It must be a reflection of some character flaw of your own”

These are the sort of inherent assumptions that make us afraid of our own shadow and they are far from true – as known by virtually all of the devs I know and speak to. How many times have I heard the opposite argument? There’s an attraction based on the particular strength that the disabled person has or is perceived to have, at least. I know there is a plethora of reasons for the attraction just like there are multitudes of physical attributes that different devs find attractive.

There is nothing ‘wrong’ ‘abnormal’ or ‘weird’ about this attraction, there is but a beautiful inclination towards men with a certain body type that may not live up to the standards as they are agreed upon by the majority and a perceived prejudice against this attraction – a prejudice that might or might not be founded in actual reality.

A while ago I agitated for a virtual ‘crip pride parade’ so now I beseech the devs here to come out of the closet, embrace their devness and show some ‘dev pride’. To me, that is the first step in an acceptance of who you are and an acceptance of your sexual preferences, whether it be purely a fantasy or a physically lived experience or something in between.

So the problem is not so much in what we call this attraction, fetish, bent or any other name. The real problem is one of acceptance and that is something we all have to work together to overcome, both devs and disabled and the ones we love.