|
|
Post by Inigo Montoya on May 19, 2015 22:22:56 GMT -5
This post/thread is inspired by DG's post over in the blind guy's thread.
Why do we try to distance ourselves from the word "fetish"?
I have noticed that I easily use the word "fetish" when talking to some people about devoteeism. As in, "I, um, kind of have this fetish thing..." But I have, in the past, been one of the people who pushed back against the use of the word for our thing.
Stuff like, "It's not reeeaaallllyyy a fetish because I don't absolutely have to have it to get off... " "It's not reallly a fetish because I still see and value the PERSON." Etc., etc., blah, blah, blah.
Since I'm not looking for a mate here any more, I find that I don't mind the word so much. Which kinda leads me to believe that my objection was rooted in my fear that guys here would think that... if I had a fetish... I was objectifying them.
I also think that I don't necessarily understand the word, and/or concept as well as I could. So, I'm going to start with the question... what IS a fetish? I know what Mirriam-Webster says. But I'd like additional thoughts and/or information.
Also, if you object to devoteeism being called a fetish, why do you object?
*This is not the first time this conversation has happened...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 22:43:53 GMT -5
I'm just pasting what I said in another thread recently first:
"In my opinion being a dev is not a fetish, it's a sexuality like being gay.
I've spent a lot of time talking to devs about dev stuff and it just does not come off as a fetish to me.
I have a fetish, it gets me going sexually but it's not really who I am. It doesn't occupy my thoughts, I don't need to join a forum to discuss it with others with the same fetish, I can feel fulfilled sexually without indulging in it.
Are there disability fetishists? Definitely. They however are not the same as devs.
Hence my thinking it's a sexuality."
I'm not against the term fetish, or discussing them here BUT the term fetish is wholly inadequate to describe y'all. Honestly, I'd hate to start attracting a bunch of disability fetishists here.
|
|
|
|
Post by hail on May 19, 2015 22:47:08 GMT -5
Alright, I'll throw this out there. I have a fetish for dominant female devs. Yeah baby. You know where to find that PM link. Bring on the athletic ones! Always wanted to be thrown around a bit too! The irony is I would actually break.. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 22:47:25 GMT -5
First and foremost, it's the guy that gets me off, not the hardware. I feel like I need to say that to ward off the bombardment of accusatory objectification. I have no issue at all calling it a fetish. It's my kink, and I'm learning to embrace it. I've found that as I've slowly come out to my non-dev friends, using the word "fetish" makes it easier to explain. I know for me, I used to shy away from calling it a fetish, because I associated that word with deviant things, and for no good reason. I refuse to let words define me, or who I am. If someone can relate to me when I explain it as a fetish, and someone else when I say kink, and y'all here when I say dev, then it really doesn't matter what term I use.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 22:51:02 GMT -5
Alright, I'll throw this out there. I have a fetish for dominant female devs. Yeah baby. You know where to find that PM link. Bring on the athletic ones! Always wanted to be thrown around a bit too! The irony is I would actually break.. Not if you were getting thrown around just right.  |
|
|
|
Post by hail on May 19, 2015 22:52:12 GMT -5
Bring on the athletic ones! Always wanted to be thrown around a bit too! The irony is I would actually break.. Not if you were getting thrown around just right. Thank you! Why do ya have to be taken?!? |
|
|
|
Post by Emma on May 19, 2015 23:38:07 GMT -5
Ok, I'm one of the devs here who doesn't like or use the term fetish for my attraction to men who are amputees.
I need some time to think about my response and I'm not in a good thinking space right now since I have a lot on my plate, but I'll throw out a quick response.
I really think for me its a lifestyle and more like a sexual orientation than just a fetish. I guess I think the word fetish makes it seem smaller than it is. Maybe I don't know enough about people with other fetishes. I guess I assume that a fetish is just something sexual when its' so much more than that for me. Do people with balloon fetishes seek out situations where there are balloons popping often? If you are into feet as a sexual turn on, is it more common for you to have a profession that involves feet?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 23:55:39 GMT -5
Actually..I hate the word.
For me, it is not even physical, let alone sexual.
So how can it be a fetish? This really hurts me as it reduces me to a one-track-minded person with only sex on my mind. Which is NOT the case as many who know me can say that.
Besides, how can it be a fetish when it starts at the age of 4 or younger?
Please. This is so disturbing for me to be thought of this way.
And it is also the reason why devs do not readily confess it in real life, and some spend their entire lives wondering if they are alone in this world or even normal.
Would a person with a fetish feel this way?
|
|
|
|
Post by rebel6842 on May 20, 2015 0:55:34 GMT -5
Maybe I've spent too much time here, but y'all are so far from a fetish that it's not even funny. I'm not so much against the term as I am perplexed by why y'all just don't say "We're REALLY into PWD's", and let that be that. Sure, some people won't get it, but I'd be willing to bet there would be MUCH more acceptance if y'all stopped worrying about what other people MIGHT think...
|
|
|
|
Post by devogirl on May 20, 2015 7:38:02 GMT -5
Are there disability fetishists? Definitely. They however are not the same as devs. I disagree. This is a false dichotomy, imagining that there are "good" devs (who see the whole person, only want an LTR) and "bad" fetishists (objectify/abuse/stalk/harass PWDs). That's not the way it works. What matters is not our innate desires, but how we choose to act on those desires. Honestly, I'd hate to start attracting a bunch of disability fetishists here. News flash, but they/we are already here. We don't have good terms to talk about these kinds of desires. The dictionary definition of fetish is not going to get you very far, because the dictionary is reflective, not proscriptive (for example you also won't find "devotee" in the dictionary in the sense we use it here, but we use it anyway). While fetish was originally used to describe a form of sexual dysfunction, it's being used in BDSM and other kink communities in a more general way to describe a huge spectrum of non-standard sexual desires. And by the way, when I brought up Freud a few weeks ago here, a lot of you were quick to say "Fuck that guy and his outmoded ideas" so I don't know why you cling so tightly to his definition of fetish. It's already being used in a broader, more sex positive way that can benefit all of us, for example in this article: www.thefrisky.com/2013-01-18/fetishes-101-all-the-basics-about-having-a-sexual-fetish-or-paraphilia/So many of the comments in this thread and whenever this topic comes up rely on disavowal and ignorance: take all those negative things you worry about (objectifying the guy you are interested in, for example) and heap it on some imaginary category (fetishists). But I guarantee you, people with other kinds of kinks and fetishes think of themselves as just as normal and well-adjusted as you are. Please read this article arguing for kink as a sexual orientation: www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2014/08/18/is_kink_a_sexual_orientation.htmland another along the same lines: www.thefrisky.com/2014-08-18/on-making-the-case-for-kink-as-a-sexual-orientation/Thinking that there is some evil fetishist out there who treats people as objects is a fantasy. Sure, some BDSMers are abusive assholes, but so are plain vanilla people. Whether or not you treat a partner with respect has nothing to do with being kinky or vanilla. Ditto whether or not you are looking for an LTR or a quick hookup. As women especially we are strongly socialized not to have sexual agency, and having a fetish, kink or paraphilia is taking agency in a bold, even rebellious way. So why do I keep banging on about this? Why not just say I accept myself as a dev and who cares about what we call it (orientation or preference or whatever). Why bother to go to bat for the diaper fetishist? I mean, that's like the grossest fetish there is, there can't possibly be anything more objectively disturbing and sick (/sarcasm). It's because there are people on other boards right now saying the exact same thing about us. Think about how it feels to be the butt of cheap shots and ignorant assumptions and generalizations (ew, amputee porn, gross!). So fine, don't call it a fetish if you don't want to, but please stop with the assumption that only the devs are good and pure, and all the other fetishists and kinksters are sickos. You shouldn't have to put someone else down to feel better about being a dev. We talk a lot here about how we want to be accepted by society, but we can't be free unless we are all free. |
|
|
|
Post by Cake on May 20, 2015 8:05:56 GMT -5
Actually..I hate the word. Please. This is so disturbing for me to be thought of this way. And it is also the reason why devs do not readily confess it in real life, and some spend their entire lives wondering if they are alone in this world or even normal. Would a person with a fetish feel this way? A person with a fetish feels exactly this way, if society defines them as: a one-track-minded person with only sex on my mind That image is so wrong, I don't even know where to begin with this, but devogirl has explained it quite well. Besides, how can it be a fetish when it starts at the age of 4 or younger? Sexuality starts to build at that age, so ALL forms of sexual preferences/orientations can be rooted in early childhood. If you don't want to identify your devness as fetish, that's totally fine by me. But please don't judge the people who do. Sexually motivated interest is NOT a bad thing. It's just horrible that we (especially women) are taught that it is. I agree that devness is probably not accurately described with "fetish", but, like Inigo Montoya, I use that expression all the time when talking about my attraction. Also, like has been discussed many times, there are definitely different layers to being a Dev. For some it's a lifestyle, for some it's a sexual orientation, and for some it's just a sexual turn on. And between those we should never judge. One thing I have a hard time believing though... when Devs claim their attraction is not sexual at all. Come on.... But that's for another discussion. |
|
mags0528
Junior Member
Posts: 59 
Gender: Female
Dev Status: Devotee
Relationship Status: Single
|
Post by mags0528 on May 20, 2015 9:47:02 GMT -5
Woah Cake and devogirl, I could not have did it better myself!! I have no idea what else to add, just wanted to say I agree. I can relate to Inigo Montoya that I use the term fetish to explain it and I always will...not only to help people relate to it, but because that's what it is to me. I can separate the person from the fetish, yes, but it doesn't mean I'm exploitative or that I won't use my fetish to bring myself closer to a PWD. Aaaaaand, to be honest, though calling it a fetish is not bad and though the word is terribly stigmatized, I have referred to it in the past as a fetish in a self-deprecating way. But I'm really lucky bc even when I did so, people were not judgey and pretty cool about it. Yes there are creeper weirdo devs...we all fall into the same category! Who is to say I'm not a closet creeper weirdo dev...I may be respectful, but I'm no angel...I just hide it better |
|
|
|
Post by killercupcake on May 20, 2015 10:37:52 GMT -5
I'm just pasting what I said in another thread recently first: "In my opinion being a dev is not a fetish, it's a sexuality like being gay. I disagree with this. (No offense) I'll explain. Sexuality is the way you're born, how you identify as a sexual being. It defines who you chose to share your bed with. That gender (or multiple genders) that turn you on. People who identify as homosexual are only attracted to the person of the same gender. Now, going on with my point. I am sexually attracted to both men and women, however, I find men in wheelchairs more attractive than ones that are not. This is not my sexuality, it's a sexual preference. I would greatly prefer to be with a man in wheelchair, however, I am also perfectly okay with and still turned on by a man who is not. So, if all of that makes sense, this is why I feel my "devness" falls more into the attraction/fetish category rather than sexuality. |
|
|
|
Post by Maurine on May 20, 2015 16:39:27 GMT -5
I don't bother arguing about definitions that can never be unambiguous. Besides, obviously devness doesn't mean the same for all devs. For me, it's not like being gay. It is more than that and different in nature. It has occupied my mind since early childhood and has shaped me in many ways. It's inextricably intertwined with other interests and preferences of mine, some of which I wouldn't refer to as sexual.
|
|
|
|
Post by LaMara on May 21, 2015 14:19:56 GMT -5
I've been thinking about the whole concept of "fetish" for a while now and in my opinion it is a misused term that is still surrounded by a negative aura. As it happens often, it is a word that has become a label and as such, limited and in some cases completely off target. I believe fetish and sexual orientation are separated from a thin line, or even just different positions in a continuum; someone might be mildly attracted by something (anything), only sexually attracted, or completely involved, sexually and emotionally and intellectually. None of these positions are bad or wrong. A dev could be in any position on this continuum and still be a dev. I understand the necessity to label things, and the desire to distance oneself from a label that, for prudery or ignorance, is still quite negatively perceived, but at the end, does it really matter if being a dev is a kink, a fetish, a sexual orientation, an interest? There are no two devs who are the same, and none of us probably falls in the same spot in that continuum I was talking about. When I explain to people who I am, I describe devness as a fascination, an interest, that is both sexual and much more. I don't feel the need to call myself a fetishist, nor to deny I might be.  |
|
